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

, an English divine of the seventeenth century, and rector of Batecombe in Somersetshire, was author of “Thesaurus Biblicus,” a laborious work formerly much used by way of concordance. He was also author of an “Abstract and Epitome of the Bible.” In 1627 he published “A guide to grand jurymen with respect to Witches,” the country where he lived being, if we may believe Glanville, formerly much infested with them. He died in 1641, and was succeeded by the famous nonconformist Richard Allein, of whom there is an account in vol. I. p. 479, of this work. Mr. Bernard, of whom we have no farther biographical memoirs, was also the author of an allegorical work, entitled “The Isle of Man, or legal proceeding in Man-shire against sin” the tenth edition of which was published in 1635. This work has been lately reprinted, from a conjecture that Bunyan might have taken from it the plan of his “Pilgrim’s Progress.” The two authors agree, however, in our opinion, only in the personification of graces and sins, or virtues and vices, which is of higher origin than either; and, if the comparative merits of the two works be examined, no reader can hesitate a moment in giving the preference to Bunyan.

, an opulent financier of France, was the son of Samuel Bernard, an engraver (mentioned by^trutt), whodied in 1687. He was born in 1651, but how educated, or by what means he raised his fortune, we are nor told Under the ministry of Chamillard he became a farmer general, and accumulated a capital of thirty-three mi i lions, of which he made a very liberal use, but seems to have been proudly aware of the superiority of lender 0ver borrower. When Louis XIV. wanted supplies, Bernard grained them, but always in consequence of his majesty’s applying to him in person. Louis XV. when in need of similar help, sent certain persons to Bernard, whose answer was, that “those who wanted his assistance might at least take the trouble to apply themselves.” He was accordingly presented to the king, who said many flattering things to him, and ordered the courtiers to pay him every mark of respect. Bernard was now called the saviour of the state all the courtiers entertained him in succession he dined with the marshal Noailles, and supped with the duchess of Tallard, and played and lost what they pleased. They sneered at his manners, which were citizen-like, and he lent the millions which they demanded. Bernard, however, was of a benevolent turn the poor of the military order were particularly the subjects of his bounty, and, frequently as they might apply, they never were refused, On his death it was found that he had lent ten millions, of which he never received a farthing in return. In his speculations he was both bold and successful. One day he had asked a person of distinction to dine with him, and had promised to treat him with some excellent mountain, not knowing at that time that his stock was exhausted. After dinner his servant announced this lamentable deficiency, and Bernard, not a little hurt at the unseasonable discovery, immediately dispatched one of his clerks to Holland, with instructions to purchase every drop of mountain in the port of Amsterdam, by which he afterwards gained an immense sum. Of his family, so little was known, that he was supposed to be of Jewish descent, but without any reason. He used to say, that if they would make him a chevalier, his name would no longer hurt their delicate feelings, and accordingly, he received letters of nobility. He then purchased several estates with titles, and among others, those of the counts of Coubert; and during the last years of his life, he was generally called the chevalier Bernard. One of his sons, president of one of the chambers of inquiry in parliament, bore the name of Rieux another was called the count de Coubert, and his grandson, Anne-Gabriel-Henry Bernard, assumed the title of marquis de Boulainvilliers. He married his daughter to Mole, first president, and thus became grandfather to the duchess de Cosse-Brissac and his family, by these revolutions, became allied to the great names of Biron, Duroure, and Boulainvilliers. Bernard was the friend of the keeper of the seals, Chauvelin, and remained faithful to him when disgraced. It is said that he was, or in his old age became superstitious, and fancied his life connected with that of a black fowl, of which he took great care, convinced that its death would be the prelude to his own. He lived, however, to the advanced age of eightyeight, dying in 1739. Another account informs us, that the greater part of his thirty-three millions was dissipated within ten years after his death, and that one of his sons, who was president of the parliament of Paris, died a bankrupt. Such vicissitudes are too common in all ages to excite much surprize.

, usually called major Bernardi, an adventurer of whom there is a very prolix, but not very interesting account in the Biographia Britannica, was born at Evesham, in 1657, and was descended from an honourable family which had flourished at Lucca in Italy, from the year 1097. His grandfather Philip, a count of the Roman empire, lived in England as resident from Genoa twenty-eight years, and married a native of this country. His father Francis succeeded to this office but, taking disgust at some measures adopted by the senate of Genoa, resigned, and retiring to Evesham, amused himself with gardening, on which he spent a considerable sum of money, and set a good example in that science to the town. John, his son, the subject of this article, of a spirited and restless temper, having received some harsh usage from his father, at the age of thirteen ran away to avoid his severity, and perhaps without any determinate purpose. He retained, notwithstanding, several friends, and was for some time supported by them, but their friendship appears to have gone little farther for soon after he enlisted as a common soldier in the service of the prince of Orange. In this station he showed uncommon talents and bravery, and in a short time obtained a captain’s commission in the service of the States. In April 1677, he married a Dutch lady of good family, with whom he enjoyed much conjugal happiness for eleven years. The English regiments in the Dutch service being recalled by James II. very few of them, but among those few was Bernard!, would obey the summons, and of course, he could not sign the association, into which the prince of Orange wished the regiments to enter. He thus lost his favour, and having no other alternative, and probably wishing for no other, he followed the abdicated James II. into Ireland who, soon after, sent him on some commission into Scotland, from whence, as the ruin of his master now became inevitable, he once more retired to Holland. Venturing, however, to appear in London in 1695, he was committed to Newgate March 25, 1696, on suspicion of being an abettor of the plot to assassinate king William, and although sufficient evidence could not be brought to prove the fact, he was sentenced and continued in prison by the express decree of six successive parliaments, with five other persons, where he remained for more than forty years. As this was a circumstance wholly without a precedent, it has been supposed that there must have been something in his character particularly dangerous, to induce four sovereigns and six parliaments to protract his confinement, without either legally condemning or pardoning him.

His works were first published by Peter Rodolphus, bishop of Sinigaglia, 1591, Venice, 4 vols. 4to, and father de Lahaye published a new edition at Paris, 1636, 5 vols, fol. which has been followed by one of the same number of volumes, at Venice, 1745. The edition of 1591 is thus analyzed Volume I. contains his “Quadragesimale de Religione Christiana” including sixty-one Lent sermons. The second contains “Quadragesimale de Evangelio aeterno,” or a course of Lent sermons upon the everListing gospel. The third contains two “Adventualia,” one concerning the life of Christ, according to Mr. Wharton, in his appendix to Dr. Cave’s Historia Literaria, or concerning the Beatitudes, according to Du Pin the other concerning Inspirations. The same volume likewise includes two “Quadragesimalia,” one concerning the Spiritual Combat, and the other entitled the Seraphim, or of Love several sermons upon the four last things, and others entitled Extraordinary, to the number of twenty-five “A treatise upon Confession” the “Mirror of Sinners” a discourse upon the precepts of the rule of the Minorite friars, or a “Tract concerning the Precepts of a Religious” a letter to the monks of his order in Italy, concerning several regulations; “Holy Breathings to God, for every day” a dialogue concerning Obedience, Father de la Haye is not of opinion the two Quadragesimalia in this volume are the genuine productions of our author, because they are written in a different style, and with less elevation and learning than the other works of 5>t. Bernardine. The last volume contains his sermons upon several other Sundays of the year, and the festivals of our Saviour and the Saints, with a “Commentary upon the Apocalypse.” We have not now extant his treatise of the “Conception of the blessed Virgin,” mentioned by'Trithemius and other authors. The sermons of St. Bernardino are not written in a very pure style but they contain a great deal of solid morality, and he does not fall so frequently into false conceits and puerilities, as the other preachers of that age.

, on account of her being one of the earliest female writers in England, is entitled to some notice in this work, although the most painful research has discovered very little of her personal history. She is frequently called Juliana Barnes, but Berners was her more proper name. She was an Essex lady, and, according to Mr. Ballard, was probably born at Roding in that county, about the beginning of the fifteenth century being the daughter of sir James Berners of Berners Roding, and sister of Richard lord Berners. If, however, as is generally agreed, sir James Berners was her father, her birth could have been very little after 1388 for in that year sir James Berners was beheaded, as an enemy to the public, together with other favourites and corrupt ministers of king Richard the second. The education of Juliana seems to have been the very best which that age could afford, and her attainments were such, that she is celebrated by various authors for her uncommon learning and her other accomplishments, which rendered her every way capable and deserving of the office she bore which was that of pfioress of Sopewell nunnery. This was a cell to, and very near St. Alban’s, -end a good part of the shell of it is still standing. Here she lived in high esteem, and flourished, according to Bale, Tanner, and Ballard, about the year 1460 but if what we have said concerning her birth be the true account, she must have flourished somewhat earlier. She was a very beautiful lady, of great spirit, and loved masculine exercises, such as hawking, hunting, &c. With these sports she used to recreate herself, and so thoroughly was she skilled in them, that she wrote treatises of hawking, hunting, and heraldry. “From an abbess disposed to turn author,” says Mr. Warton, “we might more reasonably have expected a manual of meditations for the closet, or select rules for making salves, or distilling strong waters. But the diversions of the field were not thought inconsistent with the character of a religious lady of this eminent rank, who resembled an abbot in respect of exercising an extensive manerial jurisdiction, and who hawked and hunted in common with other ladies of distinction.” So well esteemed were Juliana Berners’s treatises, and indeed so popular were the subjects on which they were written, that they were published in the veryinfancy of the art of printing. The first edition is said to have been printed at St. Alban’s, in 1481. It was certainly printed at the same place in 1486, in a small folio; and again, at Westminster, by W. de Worde, in 1496, in 4to. Among Cryne’s books in the Bodleian library, there is a black letter copy of this work, “imprynted at London in Paul’s Churchyarde by me Hary Tab.” It was again printed, with wooden cuts, by William Copland, without date, and entitled, “The boke of Hawkyng, Hunting, Fishing, with all the properties and medecynes that are necessary to be kept.” Here the tract on Armory is omitted, which seems to have been first inserted that the work might contain a complete course of education for a gentleman. The same title is in W. Powel’s edition, 1550. The last impression of it was in 4to, at London, in 1595, under the following title, “The gentleman’s academic or the book of St. Albans containing three most exact and excellent books; the first of Hawking, the second of all the proper terms of Hunting, and the last of Armory; all compiled by Juliana Barnes, in the year from the incarnation of Christ, 1486. And now reduced into better method by G. M.” This editor is certainly mistaken in saying that the whole work was composed in 1486. Juliana Berners could scarcely have been living at that time and even if she was not then dead, the book must have been written by her in a more early period of life. It is said, indeed, in the Colophon at the end of the St. Alban’s edition, “And here now endith the Boke of blasyng of armys, translatyt and compylyt togedyr at Saynt Albons the yere from thyncaruacyon of our Lorde Jhesu Crist MCCCCLXXXVI.” But all we can justly infer from hence is, that that part of the work which relates to heraldry was not drawn up by Juliana Berners. It is observable, that though the whole treatise is usually ascribed to her, her name is only subjoined to the book on hawking and hunting and that what relates to the biasing of arms contains no more than abstracts from a performance of Nicholas Upton, written about 1441. It is highly probable, therefore, that this latter part, if it was compiled so late as in 1486, was added by another hand and, indeed, if Juliana Berners was the daughter of sir James Berners, there can be no doubt about the matter. That part of our abbess’s work which relates to hunting, is written in rhyme. It is spoken in her own person in which, being otherwise a woman of authority, she assumes the title of Uame. Mr. Warton suspects the whole to be a translation from the French or Latin. The barbarism of the times strongly appears in the indelicate expressions which Juliana Berners often uses, and which are equally incompatible with her sex and profession. The book on armory begins with the following curious piece of sacred heraldry “Of the offspring of the gentilman Jafeth, come Habraham, Moyses, Aron, and the profettys and also the kyng of the right lyne of Mary, of whom that gentilman Jhesus was borne, very God and man; after his manhode kynge of the land of Jude and of Jues, gentilman by his modre Mary, prince of cote armure, &c.” The most diligent inquirers have not been able to determine the exact period of Juliana Berners’s decease but from what is mentioned above, it is probable that she died sooner than lias commonly been imagined.

The public have been recently gratified with a fac-simile reprint of Juliana Berners’s curious work, as printed by Wynkyn de Worde, preceded by a biographical and bibliographical dissertation, so copious and correct, as to render all subsequent attempts superfluous. Joseph Haslewood, esq. the editor, has left no sources unexplored, and no means untried, by which light might be thrown upon the work or its supposed authoress. He is of opinion that the only, parts of the work which can safely be attributed to her pen, are: 1. A small portion of the treatise on Hawking. 2. The treatise upon Hunting. 3. A short list of the beasts of chase and, 4. Another short one of beasts and fowls. This fac-simile edition, of which one hundred and fifty copies only were printed, is executed with uncommon accuracy and fidelity, and does high credit to the taste, minute attention, and perseverance (for all are necessary in an attempt of this kind) displayed by the printer, Mr. Joseph Harding. At the late sale of the library of the duke of Roxburgh, an imperfect copy of Wynkyn de Worde’s edition [an erratum changes Wynkyn do Worde’s to the St Alban’s] was sold for 147l.

, called by some writers Berna or Bernia, was one of the most celebrated Italian poets of the sixteenth century. He was born about the conclusion of the fifteenth, at Lamporecchio, in that part of Tuscany called Val-di-Nievole, of a noble but impoverished family of Florence. In his nineteenth year he went to Koine, to his relation cardinal Bibiena, who according to his own account, did him neither good nor harm. He was then obliged to take the office of secretary to Giberti, bishop of Verona, who was datary to pope Leo X. On this he assumed the ecclesiastical habit, in hopes of sharing some of that prelate’s patronage, but the mean and dull employment of his office of secretary, and for which he was ill paid, was very unsuitable to his disposition. There was at Rome what he liked better, a society or academy of young ecclesiastics as gay as himself, and lovers of wit and poetry like himself, who, no doubt in order to point out their taste for wine, and their thoughtless habits, were called Vignajuoli, vinedressers. To this belonged Mauro, Casa, Firenzuola, Capilupij and many others. In their meetings they laughed at every thing, and made verses and witticisms on the most grave and solemn subjects. The compositions Berni contributed on these occasions, were so superior to the others, that verses composed in the same style began to be called “La poesia Bernesca.”

Berni’s character was in all respects a singular one, but in few deserving imitation. His morals as well as his writings were of the licentious cast, and as to his manners, indolence seemed to predominate. He had no pleasure in music, dancing, gaming, or hunting: his sole delight was, in having nothing to do, and stretching himself at full length on his bed. His chief exercise was to eat a little, and then compose himself to sleep, and after sleep to eat again. He observed neither days nor almanacks and his servants were ordered to bring him no news whether good or bad. That he was not, however, so entirely devoted to indolence, as we might, from the character which he has chosen to give of himself, be induced to believe, sufficiently appears from his numerous writings, and particularly from his having reformed and new-modelled the extensive poem of “Orlando Innamorato” of the count Bojardo. This work he is said to have undertaken in competition with the “Orlando Furioso” of Ariosto, which has given occasion to accuse Berni of presumption and of ignorance; but Berni was too well acquainted with the nature of his own talents, calculated only for the burlesque and ridiculous, to suppose that he could rival Ariosto. He has, however, both in this and in other parts of his writings, shewn that he could occasionally elevate his style; and the introductory verses to each canto of the Orlando Innamorato, which are generally his own composition, are not the least admired nor the least valuable parts of the work. That the alterations of Berni raised the poem of Bojardo into more general notice, may be conjectured from the various editions of the reformed work, which issued from the press soon, after its first appearance, and which are yet sought after with avidity. Some of these editions are, that of Venice, 1541,4to; of Milan, 1542, 8vo and Venice, with additions, 1545, 4to which last is in great request. There are two very correct modern editions that of Naples, but dated Florence, 1725, and that by Molini, Paris, 1768, 4 vols. 12mo. Berni’s other works are, 1. “Rime burlesche,” often reprinted with those of Casa, Mauro, Molza, and other poets of the same class. The first edition is that of Venice, 1538, 8vo. Another valuable edition is that of Grazzini, called Lasca, in 2 vols. Florence, 1548, and 1555, 8vo. This last volume is the most rare, being printed only once, and the other twice. 2. “La Catrina, atto scenico rusticale,” Florence, 1567, 8vo, written in the common dialect of the peasantry of Tuscany, like the “Nencia” of Barberhio, the “Cecco” of Varlongo, &c. It “was afterwards printed in a collection of comedies of the sixteenth century, Naples, 1731, 8vo. 3.” Carmina,“or Latin poems, to be found in the” Carmina quinque Etruscorura poetarum,“Florence, 1562, 8vo, and in the” Carmina illustrium poetarum Italorum," ibid, 1719, 8vo.

One of Bernini’s first works was a portrait in marble of the prelate Montajo, a likeness so striking, that it was said to be Montajo petrified. He afterwards made busts of the pope, some of the cardinals, and some large figures after nature; a St. Laurence, a groupe of ^neas and Anchises, and David about to sling the stone at Goliath, of which our great artist sir Joshua Reynolds observes, that Bernini has given a very mean expression to David, representing him as biting his under lip, which is far from being a general expression, and still farther from being dignified but Bernini, who was as yet young, might have seen it in one or two instances, and mistook accident for generality. He was but in his eighteenth year when he executed his Apollo and Daphne, a work, from which, as sir Joshua remarks, the world justly expected he would rival the best productions of ancient Greece, but this was not ultimately the case. We are told, however, that when, about the close of his life, he surveyed this groupe, he allowed that since that time he had made very little progress. In truth his style was now more pure, and had less of manner in it than afterwards.

It would be perhaps tedious to enumerate all the productions of Bernini’s genius at this time, but the following are the principal the Barberini palace the campanile of Su Peter the model of the tomb of the countess Matilda, which was executed by his pupils and that of his benefactor pope Urban VIII. When his reputation reached England, Charles I. was desirous of having a bust of himself by an artist of such eminence, and sent him three portraits by Vandyke of different positions. By this means Bernini was enabled to make an excellent likeness, with which the king was so pleased that he took from his finger a diamond ring valued at six thousand crowns, and sent it to Bernini to adorn the hand that could perform such wonders. About the same time an Englishman came to Italy, and had his bust executed by our artist, for which he also paid six thousand crowns. The bust of Charles I. was originally placed in Greenwich hospital, but is now in Westminster hall, in a circular recess over the stairs, leading to the chancellor’s chamber, between the court of chancery and that of the king’s bench, yet it is doubted whether this be really Bernini’s celebrated bust, or only one taken from it. Vertue was of opinion that the bust now existing was of an earlier date, and that Bernini’s was 'destroyed during the civil war.

Although he had refused to come to France, Louis XIV. was still desirous to avail himself of his talents, as well as to pay him a compliment, by consulting him on the restoration of the Louvre. His minister, Colbert, accordingly sent him the plans of that palace, and requested him to put upon paper “some of those admirable thoughts which were so familiar to him.” Bernini immediately made a sketch for the new building, which afforded so much satisfaction to the king, that he wrote to inform him of the very great desire he had to see, and become acquainted, with so illustrious a character, provided this did not interfere with his engagements to the pope, or his personal convenience. Such condescension our artist could no longer resist; and although now in his sixty-eighth year, departed from Rome, in 1665, with one of his sons, two of his pupils, and a numerous suite. No artist ever travelled with so much pomp or pleasure. All the princes through whose dominions he passed loaded him with presents. In France he was received and complimented by the magistrates at the gates of each city, and that even at Lyons, where it was customary to restrict such a compliment to princes of the blood only. As he approached Paris, the king’s maitre d'hotel was sent to meet him, with instructions to do the honours of receiving him and conducting him every where. This gentleman, M. de Chautelon, was so sensible of the importance of his commission, that he wrote a joutnal of all his proceedings while in company with Bernini, a curious work still preserved in manuscript. On his arrival, our artist was conducted to a hotel prepared for him, and where Colbert visited him as representative of the king, to whom he was afterwards introduced at St. Germains, received with great honour, had a long conversation with the king, and, as well as his son, was admitted to the minister’s table.

Bernini, however, was not wholly reconciled to his errand here. The“great work for which he came was not carried on after his designs, and he is said to have met with some disgust, which inclined him to return to Rome. Accordingly, on pretence that the pope required his presence, he took leave of the king, who made him a present of ten thousand crowns, and settled a pension on him of two thousand, and another of four hundred on his son. The expenses of his return were also defrayed by his majesty, who, with a view to immortalize the visit, caused a medal to be struck, with a portrait of the artist, and on the reverse the muses of his art, with this inscription,” Singularis in singulis, in omnibus unicus." Before his departure, Bernini engaged to make an equestrian statue of Louis XIV. in marble, and of colossal proportion, which he finished in four years but whether from its having no resemblance of the king, or from some fault found with the composition, it was, soon after its arrival, changed into Curtius leaping into the gulph, and is now in the gardens at Versailles.

, count of Lyons, and a cardinal and statesman of France, was born at MarceJ de l'Ardeche, May 22, 1715, of a noble and ancient family, but not very rich which circumstance induced his friends to bring him up to the church, as the most likely profession in which he might rise. In this they were not disappointed, as he gradually attained the highest ecclesiastical dignities. When young he was placed at the seminary of St. Sulpice in Paris, and after remaining there some years, he appeared in the world with every personal accomplishment that could introduce him into notice; but his morals appear to have been for some time an obstruction to promotion. The cardinal de Fleury, then prime-minister, who had the patronage of all favours, and who had promised him his countenance, thinking him of a spirit too worldly for the church, sent for him and gave him a lecture on his dissipated conduct, concluding with these words “You can have no expectations of promotion, while I live,” to which the young abbé“Bernis, making a profound bow, replied,” Sir, I can wait" Some think this bon mot, which became very current, was not original but it is certain that Bernis remained for a long while in a state not far removed from poverty, and yet contrived, by means of strict parsimony, to make a decent figure at the houses to which he was invited. Being a writer of verses, and consequently a dealer in compliments, he was always acceptable, and at length by madame Pompadour’s interest, was introduced to Louis XV. The good effects of this, at first, were only an apartment in the Tuileries, to which his patroness added the furniture, and a pension of fifteen hundred livres yet it soon led to greater matters. Having been appointed ambassador to Venice, he was remarked to have acquired the good opinion and confidence of a state rather difficult to please in appointments of this description, and of this they gave him a strong proof, in a contest they had with pope Benedict XIV. who appointed Bernis as his negociator. On this occasion the state of Venice approved the choice, the consequence of which was, that Bernis effected a reconciliation to the entire satisfaction of both parties. On his return, he became a great favourite at court, acquired considerable influence, and at length, being admitted into the council, was appointed foreign minister. But in this situation he was either unskilful or unfortunate the disasters of the seven years war, and the peace of 1763, were laid to his charge but according to Duclos, he was less to blame than his colleagues, and it is certain that in some instances he has been unjustly censured. It was said, in particular, that he argued for a declaration of war against Prussia, because Frederick the Great had ridiculed his poetry in the following line,

As a poet, the cardinal was very early noticed, and his poems were so highly esteemed as to procure his being admitted into the French academy long before he had risen in the world. They have not, however, preserved their reputation, and no person perhaps could judge more severely of them than the cardinal himself, of whose talents they certainly were not worthy, nor did he like to hear them mentioned. After his death a poem of his composition was published, “Religion vengee,” which was at least more becoming his rank than his juvenile effusions. It contains some spirited passages and excellent sentiments, but has too much of the coldness and philosophy of age. His early poems were censured for being overloaded with gorgeous figures andflowers. Voltaire used to call him Eabet-la-Bouquetiere, the name of a fat nosegay woman, who used to ply at the door of the Opera. In other respects, Voltaire had a high opinion of Bernis 1 s talents, as appears from their correspondence (published in 1799, 8vo.) in which Bernis appears to great advantage, and very superior to the flippant freedoms of his correspondent’s style. In 1790, a volume of Bernis’ letters to M. Paris du Verney, was published at Paris but these are not very interesting, unless as exhibiting some agreeable features in his character. The cardinal’s works, in prose and verse, have been often printed, and form 2 vols. 8vo. or 18mo. His poem on Religion was magnificently printed by Bodoni in fol. and 4to. and Didot printed a beautiful edition of his complete works in 1797, 8vo.

, the brother of the preceding, and a celebrated mathematician, was born at Basil the 7th of August 1667. His father intended him for trade; but his own inclination was at first for the belles-lettres, which however, like his brother, he left for mathematics. He laboured with his brother to discover the method used by Leibnitz, in his essays on the Differential Calculus, and gave the first principles of the Integral Calculus. Our author, with messieurs Huygens and Leibnitz, was the first who gave the solution of the problem proposed by James Bernoulli, concerning the catenary, or curve formed by a chain suspended by its two extremities.

John Bernoulli had the degree of doctor of physic at Basil, and two years afterward was named professor of mathematics in the university of Groningen. It was here that he discovered the mercurial phosphorus or luminous barometer; and where he resolved the problem proposed by his brother concerning Isoperimetricals. On the death of his brother James, the professor at Basil, our author returned to his native country, against the pressing invitations of the magistrates of Utrecht to come to that city, and of the university of Groningen, who wished to retain him. The academic senate of Basil soon appointed him to succeed his brother, without assembling competitors, and contrary to the established practice: an appointment which he held during his whole life.

, the grandson of the preceding John, was born at Basil Nov. 4, 1744, and died at Berlin July 13, 1807. He studied at Basil and Neufchatel, attaching himself chiefly to philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy. At the age of nineteen, he was invited to the place of astronomer in the academy of Berlin, and some years after, having obtained permission to travel, he visited Germany, England, and France, and in his subsequent travels, Italy, Russia, Poland, &c. From the year 1779, he resided at Berlin, where he was appointed head of the mathematical class of the academy. He was also a member of the academies of Petersburg^ and Stockholm, and of the royal society of London. Like all the other branches of his family, he was a laborious writer. The following are the principal productions of his pen, 1. “Recueil pour les Astronomes,” 1772 76, 3 vols. 8vo. 2. “Lettres sur diflPerents sujets, ecrites pendant le cours d‘un voyage par PAllemagne, la Suisse, la France meridionale, et I’ltalie,in 1774 and 1775,” 3 vols. 8vo. 1777—79. 3. “Description d'un Voyage en Prusse, en Russie, et en Pologne, en 1777 et 1778,” first published in German, 1779, 6 vols. but afterwards in French, Warsaw, 1782. 4. “Lettres Astronomiques,” 1781, according to our authority but he published a work under this title about 1772, after he had made a literary excursion in 1768 to England, France, and Germany, containing his observations on the actual state of practical astronomy at Gottingen, Cassel, and other parts of Germany, and at Greenwich, Oxford, Cambridge, London, and Paris. 5. “A collection of voyages,” in German, 16 vols. 1781—1785. 6. “The Archives, or records of History and Geography,” in German, 8 vols. 1783 1788. 7. “De la reforme politique des Juifs,” translated from the German of Dohm, 1782, 12mo. 8. “Elemens d‘Algebre d’Euler,” from the German, Lyons, 1785, 2 vols. 8vo. 9. “Nouvelles litteraires de divers pais,” Berlin, 1776 79, 8vo. He edited also, in conjunction with professor Hindenburg, for three years, the “Mathematical Magazine,” and wrote many papers in the Memoirs of the Berlin Academy, and the Astronomical Ephemerides, published in Berlin.

Amidst so much study and so many employments, Beroaldo had his relaxations, which do not add so much to his reputation. He was fond of the pleasures of the table, and passionately addicted to play, to which he sacrificed all he was worth. He was an ardent votary of the fair sex; and thought no pains nor expence too great for accomplishing his wishes. He dreaded wedlock, both on his own account and that of his "mother, whom he always tenderly loved. But at length he found a lady to his mind, and all those different passions that had agitated the youth of Beroaldo were appeased the moment he was married. The mild and engaging manners of his bride inspired him with prudence and oeconomy. Beroaldo was from that time quite another man. Regular, gentle, polite, beneficent, envious of no one, doing no one wrong, and speaking no evil, giving merit its due, unambitious of honours, and content with humbly accepting such as were offered him. He had scarcely an enemy, except George Merula, whose jealousy was roused by Beroaldo’s admiration of Politian, whom himself once admired, and afterwards took every opportunity to traduce as a scholar. Beroaldo’s weak state of health brought on premature old age, and he died of a fever, which was considered as too slight for advice, July 7,1505. His funeral was uncommonly pompous; the body, robed in silk and crowned with laurel, was followed by all persons of literary or civic distinction at Bologna.

Beroaldo’s chief merit was his publication of good editions of the ancient Roman authors, with learned commentaries. His own style, however, some critics think, is affected, and more like that of his favourite Apuleius than that of Cicero, and his judgment is rather inferior to his learning. Among his publications we may enumerate, (referring to Niceron, vol. XXV. for the whole), 1. “Caii Plinii historia naturalis,” Parma, 1476, Trevisa, 1479, and Paris, 1516, all in fol. He was not more than nineteen when he wrote the notes to this edition of Pliny, whom he afterwards took up and meant to have given more ample illustrations, but the copy on which he had written his notes being stolen at Bologna, be expressed at his dying hour his regret for the loss. 2. “Annotationes in commentaries Servii Virgilianos,” Bologna, 1482, 4to. 3. “Propertii opera cum commentariis,” Bologna, 1487, Venice, 1493, Paris, 1604, all in fol. 4. “Annotationes in varies authores antiques,” Bologna, 1488, Venice, 1489, Brescia, 1496, fol. 5. “Orationes,” Paris, 1490, Lyons, 1490 and 1492, Bologna, 1491, &c. 6. A second collection, entitled “Orationes, prefationes, praelectiones, &c.” Paris, 1505, 15C7 (or 1508), 1509, 1515, 4to. There are in this collection some small pieces of other authors, but near thirty by Beroaldo, both in prose and verse. Besides these, our authority states, that there have been six more editions, and yet it is ranked among the rare books. 7. “Declamatio ebriosi, scortatoris, et aleatoris,” Bologna, 1499, Paris, 1505, 4to, &c. According to the title of a French translation, for we have not seen this work, it is a debate between a drunkard, gallant, and gamester, which of them, as the worst character, ought to be disinherited by his father. The French have two translations of it, one a sort of paraphrase, Paris, 1556, 12mo, the other versified by Gilbert Damalis, Lyons, 1558, 8vo. Besides these, Beroaldo edited Suetonius, Apuleius, Aulus Gellius, Lucan, and some other classics, with notes. He had a son, Vincent, who is ranked among the Bolognese writers, only for having given an explanation of all the words employed by Bolognetti in his poem “II Constante.” Bolognetti was his uterine brother, and he wrote these explanations from the poem when in manuscript, and when it consisted of twenty cantos, but as it consisted of sixteen when published in 1566, his friend Mai tacheti, to whom he bequeathed his explanation, published only what related to these sixteen, under the title of “Dichiarazione di tutte levoci proprie del Constante, &c.” Bologna, 1570, 4to.

, a gentleman of Artois, and a man of great learning, was burnt for being a Protestant, at Paris, 1529. He was lord of a village, whence he took his name, and for some time made a considerable figure at the court of France, where he was honoured with the title of king’s counsellor. Erasmus says, that his great crime was openly professing to hate the monks and hence arose his warm contest with William Quernus, one of the most violent inquisitors of his time. A charge of heresy was contrived against him, the articles of his accusation being extracted from a book which he had published, and he was committed to prison, but when the affair came to a trial, he was acquitted by the judges. His accusers pretended that he would not have escaped, had not the king interposed his authority; but Berquin himself ascribed it entirely to the justice of his cause, and went on with equal courage in avowing his sentiments. Some time after, Noel Beda and his emissaries made extracts from some of his books, and having accused him of pernicious errors, he was again sent to prison, and the cause being tried, sentence was passed against him; viz. that his books be committed to the flames, that he retract his errors, and make a proper submission, and if he refuse to comply, that he be burnt. Being a man of an undaunted inflexible spirit, he would submit to nothing; and in all probability would at this time have suffered death, had not some of the judges, who perceived the violence of his accusers, procured the affair to be again heard and examined. It is thought this was owing to the intercession of madame the regent. In the mean time Francis I. returning from Spain, and finding the danger his counsellor was in from Beda and his faction, wrote to the parliament, telling them to be cautious how they proceeded, for that he himself would take cognizance of the affair. Soon after Berquin was set at liberty, which gave him such courage, that he turned accuser against his accusers, and prosecuted them for irreligion, though, if he had taken the advice of Erasmus, he would have esteemed it a sufficient triumph that he had got free from the persecution of such people. He was sent a third time to prison, and condemned to a public recantation and perpetual imprisonment. Refusing to acquiesce in this judgment, he was condemned as an obstinate heretic, strangled on the Greve, and afterwards burnt. He suffered death with great constancy and resolution, April 17, 1529, being then about 40 years of age. The monk, who accompanied him on the scaffold, declared, that he had observed in him signs of abjuration which Erasmus however believes to be a falsehood. “It is always,” says he, “their custom in like cases. These pious frauds serve to keep up their credit as the avengers of religion, and to justify to the deluded people those who have accused and condemned the burnt heretic.” Among his works are, 1 “Le vrai moyen de bien et catholiquement se confesser,” a translation from the Latin of Erasmus, Lyons, 1S42, 16mo. 2. “Le Chevalier Chretien,” 1542, another translation from Erasmus. Of his other writings, we have some account in the following extract from Chevillier’s History of Printing. “In 1523, May 23, the parliament ordered the books of Lewis de Berquin to be seized, and communicated to the faculty of divinity, for their opinion. The book” De abroganda Missa“was found upon him, with some others of Luther’s and Melancthon’s books and seven or eight treatises of which he was the author, some under these titles” Speculum Theologastrorum“” De usu & officio Missae, &c.“” Rationes Lutheri quibus omnes Christianos esse Sacerdotes molitur suadere,“” Le Debat de Pieté & Superstition.“There were found also some books which he had translated into French, as” Reasons why Luther has caused the Decretals and all the books of the Canon Law to be burnt“” The Roman Triad,“and others. The faculty, after having examined these books, judged that they contained expressly the heresies and blasphemies of Luther. Their opinion is dated Friday, July 26, 1523, and addressed to the court of parliament. After having given their censure upon each book in particular, they conclude that they ought all to be cast into the fire that Berquiu having made himself the defender of the Lutheran heresies, he ought to be obliged to a public abjuration, and to be forbidden to compose any book for the future, or to snake any translation prejudicial to the faith.”

, a pious and learned English divine, was born in London, September 24, 1688. His father, John Berriman, was an apothecary in Bishopsgatestreet; and his grandfather, the reverend Mr. Berriman, was rector of Bedington, in the county of Surrey. His grammatical education he received partly at Banbury, in Oxfordshire, and partly at Merchant-taylors’ school, London. At seventeen years of age he was entered a commoner at Oriel college, in Oxford, where he prosecuted his studies with great assiduity and success, acquiring a critical skill in the Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, Arabic, and Syriac. In the interpretation of the Scriptures, he did not attend to that momentary light which fancy and imagination seemed to flash upon them, but endeavoured to explain them by the rules of grammar, criticism, logic, and the analogy of faith. The articles of doctrine and discipline which he drew from the sacred writings, he traced through the primitive church, and confirmed by the evidence of the fathers, and the decisions of the more generally received councils. On the 2d of June, 1711, Mr. Berriman was admitted to the degree of master of arts. After he left the university, he officiated, for some time, as curate and lecturer of Allhallows in Thames-street, and lecturer of St. Michael’s, Queenhithe. The first occasion of his appearing in print arose from the Trinitarian controversy. He published, in 1719, “A seasonable review of Mr. Whiston’s account of Primitive Doxologies,” which was followed, in the same year, by “A second review.” These pieces recommended him so effectually to the notice of Dr. Robinson, bishop of London, that in 1720, he was appointed his lordship’s domestic chaplain and so well satisfied was that prelate with Mr. Berriman’s integrity, abilities, and application, that he consulted and entrusted him in most of his spiritual and secular concerns. As a further proof of his approbation, the bishop collated him, in April 1722, to the living of St. Andrew-Undershaft. On the 25th of June, in the same year, he accumulated, at Oxford, the degrees of bachelor and doctor in divinity. In 1723, Dr, Berriman lost his patron, the bishop of London, who, in testimony of his regard to his chaplain, bequeathed him the fifth part of his large and valuable library. In consequence of the evidence our learned divine had already given of his zeal and ability in defending the commonlyreceived doctrine of the Trinity, he was appointed to preach lady Moyer’s lecture, in 1723 and 1724. The eight sermons he had delivered on the occasion, were published in 1725, under the title of “An historical account of the Trinitarian Controvery.” This work, in the opinion of Dr. Godolphin, provost of Eton college, merited a much greater reward than lady Moyer’s donation. Accordingly, he soon found an opportunity of conferring such a reward upon Dr. Berriman, by inviting him, without solicitation, to accept of a fellowship in his college. Our author was elected fellow in 1727, and from that time he chiefly resided at Eton in the Summer, and at his parsonage-house in the Winter. His election into the college at Eton was a benefit and ornament to that society. He was a faithful steward in their secular affairs, was strictly observant of their local statutes, and was a benefactor to the college, in his will. While the doctor’s learned productions obtained for him the esteem and friendship of several able and valuable men, and, among the rest, of Dr. Waterland, it is not, at the same time, surprising, that they should excite antagonists. One of these, who then appeared without a name, and who at first treated our author with decency and respect, was Dr. Conyers Middleton but afterwards, when Dr. Middleton published his Introductory Discourse to the Inquiry into the miraculous powers of the Christian church, and the Inquiry itself, he chose to speak of Dr. Berriman with no small degree of severity and contempt. In answer to the attacks made upon him, our divine printed in 1731, “A defence of some passages in the Historical Account.” In 1733, came out his “Brief remarks on Mr. Chandler’s introduction to the history of the Inquisition,” which was followed by “A review of the Remarks. His next publication was his course of sermons at Mr. Boyle’s lecture, preached in 1730, 1731, and 1732, and published in 2 vols r 1733, 8vo. The author, in this work, states the evidence of our religion from the Old Testament; vindicates the Christian interpretation of the ancient prophecies; and points out the historical chain and connection of these prophecies. In the preface, he asserts the authority of Moses, as an inspired historian and law-giver, against his old antagonist Dr. Middleton who, in a letter to Dr. Waterland, had disputed the literal account of the fall, and had expressed himself with his usual scepticism concerning the divine origin of the Mosaic institution, as well as the divine inspiration of its founder. Besides the writings we have mentioned, Dr. Berrimaii printed a number of occasional sermons, and, among the rest, one on the Sunday before his induction to his living of St. Andrew Undershaft, and another on Family Religion. He departed this life at his house in London, on the 5th of February, 1749-50, in the 62d year of his age. His funeral sermon was preached by the rev. Glocester Ridley, LL. B. containing many of the particulars here noticed. Such was Dr. Berriman’s integrity, that no ill usage could provoke him, no friendship seduce him, no ambition tempt him, no interest buy him, to do a wrong, or violate his conscience. When a certain right reverend prelate, unsolicited, and in pure respect to his distinguished merit, offered him a valuable prebend in his cathedral church of Lincoln, the doctor gratefully acknowledged the generosity of the offer, but conscientiously declined it, as he was bound from accepting of it by the statutes of his college. The greatest difficulty of obtaining a dispensation was from himself. In the year of his decease, forty of his sermons were published, in two volumes, 8vo, by his brother, John Berriman, M. A. rector of St. Alban’s, Wood-street, under the title of” Christian doctrines and duties explained and recommended." In 1763, nineteen sermons appeared in one volume, under the same title. With respect to Dr. Berriman’s practical discourses, it is allowed that they are grave, weighty, and useful and well fitted to promote pious and virtuous dispositions, but belong to a class which have never been eminently popular.

, a celebrated French writer, of the order of Jesus, was born at Rouen in Normandy, Nov. 7, 1681. He was designed for the pulpit, but the weakness of his frame not allowing him to declaim, he gave himself up to the quiet but severe studies of the closet, and produced some critical works of importance, which his countrymen in their spirit of intolerance thought fit to suppress and the reading of his “Histoire du peuple de Dieu” was forbid by the archbishop of Paris, which the Sorbonne were six years reviewing. The first part of this work made its appearance in 8 vols. 4to, with a supplement, 1728, reprinted in 1733, 8 vols. 4to, and 10 vols. 12mo; this ends with the times of the Messiah: the second part came out in 1753 in 4 vols. 4to, and 8 vols. 12mo; and the third part in 2 vols. 4to, or 5 vols. in 12mo, containing a literal paraphrase of the epistles, was printed in 1758, notwithstanding it was censured and condemned by the pope and clergy as containing abominable errors. Abominable absurdities it certainly contained, the history of the Jews being detailed with all the affectation of sentimental romance. The author died at Pans, Feb. 18, 1758.

The impulse of genius, however, got so far the better of prudential considerations, that he executed, during the course of his life, ten or twelve heads, any one of which would have been sufficient to insure him immortal fame among judges of excellence in this department. Among these were the heads of Thomson the poet, Mary queen of Scots, Oliver Cromwell, Julius Caesar, a young Hercules, and Mr. Hamilton of Bangour, the poet. Of these onlytwo copies were from the antique, and they were executed in the finest style of those celebrated entaglios. The young Hercules in particular, which, if we mistake not, belongs to the earl of Findlater, possessed that unaffected plain simplicity, and natural concurrence in the same expression of youthful innocence through all the features, conjoined with strength and dignity, which is, perhaps, the most difficult of all expressions to be hit off by the most faithful imitator of nature.

Mr. Berry possessed not merely the art of imitating busts, or figures set before him, in which he could observe and copy the prominence or the depression of the parts, but he possessed a faculty which presupposes a much nicer discrimination; that of being able to execute a figure in relievo, with perfect justness, in all its parts, which was copied from a drawing or a painting upon a flat surface. This was fairly put to the test in the head he executed of Hamilton of Bangour, a person he never saw: it was not only one of the most perfect likenesses that could be wished for, although he had only an imperfect sketch to copy, but there was a correctness in the outline, and a truth and delicacy in the expression of the features, highly emulous of the best antiques, which were indeed the models on which he formed his taste.

Besides the heads above named, he also executed some full length figures both of men and other animals, in a style of superior elegance. But that attention to the interests of a numerous family, which a man of sound principles, as Mr. Berry was, could never allow him to lose sight of, made him forego these amusing exertions, for the more lucrative, though less pleasing employment, of cutting heraldic seals, which may be said to have been his constant employment from morning to night, for forty years together, with an assiduity that has few examples in modern times. In this department, he was without dispute the first artist of his time but even here, that modesty which was so peculiarly his own, and that invariable desire to give full perfection to every thing he put out of his hands, prevented him from drawing such emoluments from his labours as they deserved. Of this the following anecdote will serve as an illustration, and as an additional testimony of his very great skill. A certain noble duke, when he succeeded to his estate, was desirous of having a seal cut with his arms, &.c. properly blazoned upon it. But as there were no less than thirty-two compartments in the shield, which was of necessity confined to a very small space, so as to leave room for the supporters, and other ornaments, within the compass of a seal of an ordinary size, he found it a matter of great difficulty to get it executed. Though a native of Scotland himself, the duke never expected to find a man of the first-rate eminence in Edinburgh but applied to the most eminent seal-engravers in London and Paris, all of whom declined it as a thing beyond their power. At this time Berry, of whom he had scarcely heard, was mentioned to him in such a manner that he went to him, accompanied by a friend, and found him, as usual, sitting at his wheel. Without introducing the duke, the gentleman showed Berry an impression of a seal that the duchess dowager had got cut a good many years before by a Jew in London, who was dead before the duke thought of his seal, and which had been shewn to the others as a pattern, asking him if he would ciu a seal the same with that. After examining it a little, Mr. Berry answered readily that he would. The duke, pleased and astonished at the same time, cried out, “Will you, indeed” Mr. Berry, who thought this implied some sort of doubt of his abilities, was a little piqued at it; and turning round to the duke, whom he had never seen before, nor knew; “Yes (said he,) sir; if I do not make a better seal than this, I shall take no payment for it.” The dukej highly pleased, left the pattern with Mr. Berry, and went away. The pattern seal contained, indeed, the various devices on the thirty-two compartments, distinctlyenough to be seen, but none of the colours were expressed. Mr. Berry, in a proper time, finished the seal; on which the figures were not only done with superior elegance, but the colours on every part so distinctly marked, that a painter could delineate the whole, or a herald blazon it, with the most perfect accuracy. For this extraordinary exertion of talents, he charged no more than thirty- two guineas, though the pattern seal had cost seventy-five. Thus it was, that, notwithstanding he possessed talents of the most superior kind, and assiduity almost unequalled, observing at all times a strict economy in his family, Mr. Berry died at last, in circumstances that were not affluent, on the 3d of June, 1783, in the 53d year of his age, leaving a numerous family of children. Besides his eminence as an artist, he was distinguished by the integrity of his moral character, and the strict principles of honour which on all occasions influenced his conduct.

, a learned Jesuit, was born at Tarascon in Provence, Feb. 24, 1622. Possessed of a remarkable memory, he made great proficiency in ancient and modern languages, and acquired much fame as a teacher of humani r y, philosophy, and divinity in the various colleges of his order. He also engaged in public disputations at Lyons, with the clergy of Geneva and Grenoble, but was dismissed from the Jesuits by order of Louis XIV. for having bad the weakness or curiosity to consult a prophetess who made a noise among the credulous at Paris. He then entered among the Benedictines, and died at their college at Otilx, in 1692. He published, 1. “Traite de la presence reelle.” 2. “Traite historique de la charge de grand aumomer de France,” a very curious work. 3. “TraiUi sur la chapelle cles dues de Bourgogne.” He wrote also several other pieces on the Tuetonic order, the abbey of Cluni, the rights of the king to Avignon and Venaissin, the East Indies, the Italian language, and chronology some of which still remain in manuscript; and various Latin, French, Italian, and Provencal pieces of poetry. His correspondence with men of learning both in France and foreign countries was very extensive.

, a French philosopher, a native of Lyons, who died in 1799, was first distinguished at Montpelier, as professor of natural philosophy, an office established by the states of Languedoc, and afterwards as professor of history at Lyons. He was a man of mild manner, communicative and accommodating, and, of great industry. He was the friend of Dr. Franklin, and according to his plan, was employed to erect a great number of conductors, to preserve buildings from lightning, in Paris and at Lyons. Few writers on subjects of natural philosophy, &c. have been so successful, scarce a year passing without two or three prizes being adjudged to him by the academy, for the best dissertation on the subject proposed. The month of August, in which the prizes are usually distributed, he used familiarly to call his harvest. His principal works are, 1. “Moyen de determiner ie moment ou le vin en fermentation a acquis toute sa force,” 1781, 4to, a prize essay at Montpelier. 2. “De l'electricité du corps humain en etat de sauté et de maladie,” 1781, 8vo, a prize dissertation at Lyons. 3. “De I'electricité des vegetaux,” Paris, 1783, 8vo whicii the Monthly Reviewer terms “a new conquest added to the empire which electricity is assuming over the natural world.” 4. “Preuves de l'efficacité des paratonneres,” 1783, 4to. 5. “Des avantages que la physique et les arts peuvent retirer des aerostats,” 1784, 8vo. 6. “Memoires sur les moyens qui ont fait prosperer les manufactures de Lyon,” c. 1782, 8vo. 7. “De l'electricité” des meteores,“1787. 8. Theorie des incendies, &c.” 1787, 4io. 9. “De l'eau la plus propre a la vegetation,” 1786, 4to. Bertholon was also for some years editor of the Journal of natural history, begun in 1787, and of the “Journal de sciences miles,” begun in 1791.

, a famous Augustine monk, born May 28, 1696, at Serravezza, a small village in Tuscany, was called to Rome by his superiors, and obtained the title of assistant-general of Italy, and the place of prefect of the papal library. His great proficiency in theological studies procured him these distinctions, and appeared to advantage in his grand work, “De disciplinis theologicis,” printed at Rome in 8 vols. 4to. He here adopts the sentiments of St. Augustine in their utmost rigour, after the example of Bellelli his brother- monk. The archbishop of Vienna [Salmon], or rather the Jesuits who managed him, published under his name in 1744, two pieces against the two Augustine theologues, inveighing against them as being too severely Augustine. The first is entitled, “Ba'ianismus redivivus in scriptis pp. Bellelli et Berti,” in 4to. The second bore this title “Jansenismus redivivus in scriptis pp. Bellelli et Berti,” in 4to. At the same time father Berti was accused to pope Benedict XIV. as a disciple of Ba'ius and of Jansenitis. The prudent pontiff, without returning any answer to the accusers, advised Berti to defend himself; which he accordingly did in a work of two vols. 4to, 1749. In this apology, rather long, though learned and lively, he laid down the difference there is between Jansenism and Augustinianism. After this piece Berti brought out several others, the principal of which is an ecclesiastical history in Latin, in 7 vols. 4to: it made however but little way out of Italy, by reason of the dryness of the historian, and of his prejudices in favour of exploded tenets. He speaks of the pope, both in his theology and in his history, as the absolute monarch of kingdoms and empires, and that all other princes are but his lieutenants. Berti wrote also dissertations, dialogues, panegyrics, academical discourses, and some Italian poems, which are by no means his best productions. An edition in folio of all his works has been printed at Venice. He died at the age of 70, May 26, 1766, at Pisa, whither he had been called by Francis I. grand duke of Tuscany.

, earl of, a descendant of the preceding, was born in 1740, anoV succeeded his father William, the third earl, in 1760. His lordship was educated atGeneva, where he probably imbibed some of the democratic principles of the philosophists in that republic. He generally opposed the measures of administration with declamatory vehemence, and his frequent speeches in the house of peers were singularly eccentric, but added little weight or dignity to the cause he supported. The editor, however, of Mr. Wilkes’s speeches (in all probability Mr. Wilkes himself) characterises this noble earl “as one of the most steady and intrepid assertors of liberty in this age. No gentleman was ever more formed to please and captivate in private life, or has been more deservedly, more generally, esteemed and beloved. He possesses true honour in the highest degree, has generous sentiments of friendship, and to superior manly sense joins the most easy wit, with a gaiety of temper which diffuses universal cheerfulness it is impossible not to be charmed with the happy prodigality of nature in his favour; but every consideration yields with him to a warm attachment to the laws and constitution of England.” Much of this character may be just, yet his lordship was less respected as a public character or partizan than he himself thought he deserved. He had, in particular, a very high opinion of his speeches, and that the public might not lose the benefit of them, he sent copies to the different newspapers with a handsome fee, which ensured that prominence in the debate which might not otherwise have been assigned to them. This custom was no doubt gratifying to himself and his friends, but it proved on one occasion peculiarly unfortunate. Having made a violent attack on the character of an attorney belonging to the court of king’s bench, and sent the speech containing it, as usual, to the papers, he was prosecuted and sent to prison for some months, as the publisher of a libel.

In 1777 he published a pamphlet which excited much attention, entitled, “Thoughts on the letter of Edmund Burke, esq. to the sheriffs of Bristol, on the affairs of America,” Oxford, 8vo. This went through six editions, from that time to 1780. An anonymous reply was published, much admired for its force of irony and major Cartwright addressed a letter to the earl, discussing a position relative to a fundamental right of the constitution, 1778: this induced his lordship to add a dedication to his sixth edition, “To the collective body of the people of England.” He is also the reputed author of “A Letter to lady Loughborough, in consequence of her presentation of the colours to the Bloomsbury and Inns of Court Association with a public letter to the university of Oxford,” 1798 a rhapsodical epistle, which the influence of his lordship’s name operating on curiosity, carried through eight or nine editions. His lordship died in 1799.

, an eminent French anatomist, was born at Tremblay in Britanny, Sept. 21, 1712. At the age of three he was left an orphan, yet learned Latin almost without a master, and was sent afterwards to Rennes to complete his education. He then went to Paris, and studied medicine with such success, that, in 1737, he took his doctor’s degree at Rheims, and in 1741 was admitted a regent member of the faculty of Paris. About the end of that year he accepted the place of physician to the prince of Moldavia, but after two years returned to France. The academy of sciences which had in his absence chosen him a corresponding member, now, in 1744, admitted him to the honour of being an associate without the intermediate rank of adjunct. The fatigues, however, which he had encountered in Moldavia, and his assiduous application to anatomical studies, had at this time impaired his health, and, joined to a nervous temperament, threw him into a state of mental debility which interrupted his studies for three years. He was afterwards recommended to travel, and it was not until the year 1750 that he recovered his health and spirits, and was enabled to resume his studies at Gahard, a retired spot near Rennes. There also he employed some part of his time in the education of his children, and his reputation brought him extensive practice. On Feb. 21, 1781, he was seized with a complaint in his breast, which carried him off in four days. Before and after his long illness, he had furnished several valuable papers to the memoirs of the academy of sciences, particularly three on the circulation in the foetus. His principal publications were, 1. “Traite d'Osteologie,” 1754, 4 vols. 12mo, a very popular work at that time, and still deserving of perusal. It was intended as the first part of a general course of anatomy. 2. “Lettre au D sur le nouveau systeme de la Voix,” Hague, 1745, 8vo. This being answered by Ferrein, or his pupil Montagnat, our author, without putting his name to it, defended his doctrine in “Lettres sur le nouveau systeme de la Voix, et sur les arteres lymphatiques,” 1748. 3. “Consultation sur la legitimite' des naissances tardives,” 1764 and 1765, 8vo. His chief argument here seems to be the simple position that if there are early births, there may also be late births. 4. “Memoire sur les consequences relatives a la pratique, deduites de la structure des os parietaux,” inserted in the Journal de Medicine, 1756. He left in manuscript Memoirs on Moldavia, which his son Rene Joseph, an eminent physician of Paris, intends to publish.

Bertius was the author of a great many works, which may be divided into two classes, theological and geographical the former, which were the cause of all his misfortunes, are now forgotten, but the latter are still read or consulted. The most in demand is his “Theatrum Geographic veterum,” 2 vols. fol. 1618 and 1619, yet this collection, of which Bertius was only the editor, and not a very careful editor, seems to have enjoyed more reputation than it deserves. The first volume is entirely composed of Ptolomey’s Geography, in Greek and Latia, reprinted from an edition published about fourteen years before by Montanus, and commonly called Mercator’s edition, and Bertius has only added some various readings from a manuscript in the Palatine library, with which Sylburgius had furnished him; but on the other hand, he has neglected to correct a great many errors in Montanus’s edition. The second volume contains Antoninus’s Itinerary, and the works of other geographers, without a single note from his own pen. His other geographical works are, 1. “Commentariorum rerum Germanicarum libri tres,” Amsterdam, 1616, 4to, and 1635, 12mo. 2. “Notitia ehorographica episcopatuum Gallix,” Paris, 1625, fol. 3. “Breviarium orbis terrarum,” Leipsic, 1662, 12mo. This is added at the end of Cluverius’s Introduction to universal Geography, Amst. 1676, 4to. 4. “Imperium Caroli M. et vicinae regiones, Paris, fol. a map, which has been since added to Hondius’s Atlas. 5.” Variae orbis universae et ejus partium tabula?, &c.“oblong 4to. 6.” De aggeribus et pontibus hactenus ad mare extructis digestum novum,“Paris, 1629. Bertius was also editor of” Illustrium et clarorum virorum epistolae selectiores," Leyden, 1617, 8vo, and wrote prefaces to various editions of books.

, an Italian antiquary of the last century, was born of a noble family, at Mereto inthe Frioul, March 13, 1676, and after studying at Venice, was ordained a priest in 1700. The same year he became canon -coadjutor of the patriarchal church of Aquileia, and soon after titular. He had already acquired a decided taste for the study of antiquities, and was in a country abounding with objects to gratify it, most of which, however, had been greatly neglected, and even destroyed by the ignorant inhabitants, who converted every remains of antiquity in stone to the common purposes of building. To prevent this for the future, Bertoli formed a society of men of learning and similar taste, who began with purchasing every valuable relic they could find, and placed the collection in the portico of the canons’ house, where it soon became an object of curiosity, not only to travellers, but to the Aquileians themselves. At the same time he copied, or caused to be copied, all the monuments in the town, and in the whole province, and entered into an extensive correspondence with many eminent characters, particularly Fontanini, to whom he liberally communicated his discoveries, in hopes they might be useful to that learned prelate; but he having deceased in 1736, Bertoli resolved to take upon himself what he had expected from him, and was encouraged in this design by Muratori and Apostolo Zeno. Accordingly he began to publish a series of memoirs and dissertations on subjects of antiquity, which he wrote at his native place, Mereto, where he resided for such periods as his official duties at Aquileia permitted. In 1747 he was elected a member of the Columbarian society of Florence, and next year of that of Cortona, and died a few years afterwards, but the date is not ascertained in either of our authorities. His principal publication is entitled “Le Aritichita di Aquileja profane e sacre,” Venice 1739, fol. He had made preparations for a second and third volume, but did not live to complete them. Several of his letters and dissertations relative to this work, and to various subjects of antiquity, are printed in Calogera’s valuable collection, vols. XXVI. XXXIII. XLIII. XLVII. XLVIII. &c. others are inserted in the Memoirs of the Columbarian Society of Florence, and in similar collections.

, minister, and professor of Hebrew at Geneva, at Frankenthal, and at Lausanne, was born at Thouars in Poitou, in 1531, of a reputable family, allied to the house of la Trimouille, and escaped the massacre of St. Bartholomew by flying to Cahors and afterwards to Geneva. He died at Lausanne in 1594. He gave to the world, 1. “A dissertation on the Republic of the Hebrews,” Geneva, 1580 again at Leyden in 1641, 8vo, written with precision and method. 2. “A revision of the French Bible of Geneva, according to the Hebrew text,” Geneva, 1588. He corrected that version (by Calvin and Olivetan) in a great number of places; but in others he has too closely followed the authority of the Rabbins, and not sufficiently that of the old interpreters. It is the Bible still in use among the Calvinists. 3. A new edition of the “Thesaurus linguae sanctae” of Pagninus. 4. “A parallel of the Hebrew Tongue with the Arabic.” 5. “Lucubrationes Frankendalenses,” 1685, or expJanations on difficult passages of the New Testament, so called because written at Frankenthal.

, an eminent lawyer, and law-professor at Ingolstadt, was born at Tubingen in 1577, and was professor of law in 1635, when he turned Roman catholic, and left his place to become counsellor at the court of Austria, whence he went to Ingolstadt, and died there Sept. 15, 1638. At this juncture the pope was about to have offered him a professor’s chair at Bologna, with a pension of four thousand ducats. He was the author of a great many works on subjects of law and history, all which shew that he had accumulated a greater stock of learning than he had time or judgment to methodize. 1. “Synopsis rerum ab orbe condito gestarum, usque ad Ferdinandi imperium,” Franeker r 1698, 8vo. 2. “Synopsis doctriiwe politico.” 3. “Historia imperil Constantinopolitani et Turcici.” 4. “Series et succinqta narratio rerum a regibus Hierosolymarum, Neapoleos et Siciliae gestarum.” 5. “Dissertationes philologies,” 1642, 4to. One of these, on the history of printing, may be seen in Wolf’s “Monumenta typographical' 6.” Prodromus vindiciarum ecclesiast. Wirtenbergicarum,“1636, 4to. 7.” Documenta rediviva monasteriorum Wirtemb.“Tubing. 1636, 4to. These two works, although surreptitiously printed at Vienna in 1723 and 1726, fol. are uncommonly rare, as they were suppressed along with the following articles. 8.” Virginum sacrarum monumenta, &c.“9.” Documenta concernentia ecclesiam collegiatarn Stuttgardiensem.“10.” Documenta ecclesise Backhenang.“These last five, which the Germans enumerate among their rarest bibliographical curiosities, are all in 4to, and printed at Tubingen, 1636. Saxius mentions a work omitted in the above list, and probably Besold’s first production,” Discussiones quaestionum aliquot de usuris et annuis reditibus," Tubing. 1598, 4to.

, one of the revivers of literature in the fifteenth century, was born, not at Constantinople, as some writers assert, but at Trebisond, in 1389, a date which is ascertained by his epitaph written by himself, but as all the copies of this epitaph do not agree, Bandini, one of his biographers, gives 1395, as the time of his birth. He entered into the order of St. Basil, and passed twentyone years in a monastery of Peloponnesus, employed in the study of divinity and polite literature. The philosopher Gemistus Pletho was one of his masters. In 1438, when the emperor John Paleologus formed the design of going to the council of Ferrara, to re-unite the Greek with the Latin church, he drew Bessarion from his retirement, made him bishop of Nice, and engaged him to accompany him into Italy with Pletho, Marcus Eugenius, archbishop of Ephesus, the patriarch of Constantinople, and several other Greeks eminent for talents or rank. In the sittings of this council, the archbishop of Ephesus distinguished himself by his powers of reasoning, and Bessarion by the charms of his eloquence, but unfortunately from being rivals in talents, they soon became enemies. Eugenius was not favourable to the scheme of uniting the Greek and Latin churches; and Bessarioii, after having been of a contrary opinion, declared for the Latins, which was the side the emperor took. The union was accordingly announced, and in December 1439, pope Eugenius IV. to reward the zeal of Bessarion, created him a cardinal priest. ‘ Being now, in consequence of his new dignity, fixed in, Italy, a step which was at the same time rendered necessary by the commotions in Greece, where he was very unpopular, and the union universally rejected, Bessarion returned to the studious and simple life he had led in his convent in the Peloponnesus. His house became the resort of the learned, and when he appeared abroad, his train was composed of such men as Argyropulus, Philelphus, Valla, Theodore Gaza, George of Trebisonde, and Calderino. He obtained the confidence and friendship of several popes. Nicholas V. appointed him archbishop of S’ponto, and cardinal-bishop; and Pius II. in 1463, conferred upon him the title of Patriarch of Constantinople. On the death of Nicholas V. the college of cardinals would have elected him his successor, but this purpose was defeated by the intrigues of cardinal Alain. Some years after, Bessarion, was likely to have succeeded Paul II. but to accomplish this, it was necessary to secure the vote of the cardinal Orsini by an act of injustice, which he refused. Orsini, however, tendered his vote on the same terms to the cardinal de Rovere, who had none of Bessarion’s scruples, and was elected. Paul Jovius tells a foolish story of Bessarion’s having lost this election, by the blundering reply of his servant; and Gibbon, credulous enough when the object of belief is worth nothing, has repeated it after him, nor knowing that our countryman Hody had amply refuted it.

Bessarion was employed on four embassies of a delicate and difficult kind. Three of them he conducted with success, but the fourth was less fortunate. Being sent into France by Sixtus IV. to reconcile Louis XI. with the duke of Burgundy, and obtain assistance against the Turks, he not only failed in these undertakings, but it is said that the king, in full court, offered him the grossest personal indignities. Bessarion on this set out on his way to Rome, and died at Ravenna, Nov. 19, 1472, of chagrin, according to some authors, but more probably from age and infirmity, being now eighty-three years old, or at least, according to Bandini’s calculation, seventy-seven. His body was brought to Rome, and the pope attended the funeral, an honour never bestowed before on any cardinal. He was celebrated in Latin by Platiua, and in Greek by Michael Apostoiius. Of PJatina’s eloge there have been many editions, but that of Aposiolius was not published until 1793, by M. Fulleborn. Bessarion bequeathed his library to the senate of Venice. It was particularly rich in manuscripts, which he collected at a great expence from all parts of Greece. Tomasini drew up a catalogue of the whole.

an English divine, received his education at Eton, of which seminary he was a distinguished ornament; was elected from thence to King’s college, Cambridge, in 1728, of which he became a fellow in 1731; was some time bursar, and by the provost and fellows, when senior fellow, was presented to the living of Greenford in Middlesex. He was also one of the Whitehall preachers. In 1771 the provost and fellows of Eton elected him to a vacant fellowship in that society. So unexceptionable was his life, that he may truly be said to have made no enemy in the progress of it. His fortune was not large, yet his liberality kept more than equal pace with it, and pointed out objects to which it was impossible for his nature to resist lending his assistance. In his lifetime he gave 2,000l. for the better maintaining the botanical garden at Cambridge, thereby encouraging a study which did peculiar honour to his taste, and materially benefited mankind. So humane was his disposition, that in 1780 he founded and endowed a charity school in his own parish and this most nobly in his life-time, when avarice might have forbid it, or the fear of want might have excepted against it. Having previously built a school-house, he gave, by a deed in chancery, the sum of 1600l. bankstock, of which he appropriated 30l. a-year to a master and mistress to instruct thirty boys and girls thirty shillings for coals for the school and the remainder of the interest, except 10l. to clothe such aged men and women as should frequently attend the sacrament, is appropriated to clothe the children, buy books, and keep the school in repair. As in his life he indicated the most extensive liberality, so at his death he exhibited a lasting record of his gratitude. Impressed with the highest sense of the muni-! ficence of the royal founder of Eton, within whose walls he had imbibed the first seeds of education, he by his will directed a statue of marble, in honour of Henry VI. to be erected at the expence of 700l. And, in Order infallibly to carry his purpose into execution, he contracted a few months before his death with Mr. Bacon. This statue was accordingly executed by that excellent artist, and is in the chapel, with the inscription “Posuit Edvardus Betham, collegii hujusce socius.” The founder holds a model of Eton college in his hand. Mr. Bethatn also gave a bust of the king to the college library, and placed some ancient painted glass in the chancel windows of his church at Greenford. He died in 1783.

, a celebrated English actor, was born in Tothill-street, Westminster, 1635; and, after having left school, is said to have been put apprentice to a bookseller. The particulars, however, relating to the early part of his life, are not ascertained. It is generally thought that he made his first appearance on the stage in 1656, at the opera-house in Charter-house-yard, under the direction of sir William Davenant, and continued to perform here till the restoration, when king Charles grained patents to two companies, the one called the king’s cornpa ly, and the other the duke’s. The former acted at the theatre royal in Drury-lane, and the latter at the theatre in Lincoln’s-Inn-fields. Betterton went over to Paris, at the command of king Charles II. to take a view of the French scenery, and at his return made such improvements as added greatly to the lustre of the English stage. For several years both companies acted with the highest applause, and the taste for dramatic entertainments was never stronger than whilst these two companies played . The two companies were however at length united; though the time of this union is not precisely known, Gildon placing it in 1682, and Cibber in 1684. But however this may be, it was in this united company that Mr. 'Betterton first shone forth with the greatest degree of lustre for, having survived the famous actors upon whose model he had formed himself, he was now at liberty to display his genius in its full extent. His merit as an actor cannot now be very accurately displayed, and much of the following passage from Gibber’s Apology, seems to be mere stage-cant and declamation. Cibber says, “Betterton was an actor, as Shakspeare was an author, both without competitors, formed for the mutual assistance and illustration of each other’s genius! How Shakspeare wrote, all men who have a taste for nature may read and know; but with what higher rapture would he still be read, could they conceive how Betterton played him! Then might they know the one was born alone to speak what the other only knew to write! Pity it is that the momentary beauties, flowing from an harmonious elocution, cannot, like those of poetry, be their own record! that the animated graces of the player can live no longer than the instant breath and motion that present them, or at best can but faintly glimmer through the memory or imperfect attestation of a few surviving spectators! Could how Betterton spoke be as easily known as what he spoke, then might you see the muse of Shakspeare in her triumph, with all her beauties in her best array, rising into real life, and charming her beholders. But alas! since all this is so far out of the reach of description, how shall I shew you Betterton? Should I therefore tell you that all the Othellos, Hamlets, Hotspurs, Macbeths, and Brutuses, you have seen since his time, have fallen short of him, this still would give you no idea of his particular excellence. Let us see then what a particular comparison may do, whether that may yet draw him nearer to you? You have seen a Hamlet perhaps, who, on the first appearance of his father’s spirit, has thrown himself into all the straining vociferation requisite to express rage and fury; and the house has thundered with applause, though the misguided actor was all the while (as Shakspeare terms it) tearing a passion into rags. I am the more bold to offer you this particular instance, because the late Mr. Addison, while I sat by him to see this scene acted, made the same observation asking me, with some surprise, if I thought Hamlet should be in so violent a passion with the ghost, which, though it might have astonished, had not provoked him? For you may observe, that in this beautiful speech, the passion never rises beyond an almost breathless astonishment, or an impatience, limited by a filial reverence, to inquire into the suspected wrongs that may have raised nim from his peaceful tomb and a desire to know what a spirit so seemingly distrest might wish or enjoin a sorrowful son to execute towards his future quiet in the grave. This was the light into which Betterton threw this scene; which he opened with a pause of mute amazement! Then rising slowly to a solemn, trembling voice, he made the ghost equally terrible to the spectator as to himself. And in the descriptive part of the natural emotions which the ghastlyvision gave him, the boldness tit‘ his expostulation was still governed by decency manly, but not braving his voice never rising into that seeming outrage, or wild deli an ce, of what he naturally revered. But, alas to preserve this medium between mouthing, and meaning too little, to keep the attention more pleasingly awake by a ’tempered spirit, than by mere vehemence of voice, is, of all the master strokes of an actor, the most difficult to reach. In. this none have equalled Betterton. He that feels not himself the passion he would raise, will talk to a sleeping audience. But this was” never the fault of Be item n. A farther excellence in him was, that he could vary iiis spirit to the different characters he acted. Those wild impatient starts, that fierce and flashing fire which he threw into Hotspur, never came from the unruffled temper of his Brutus (for I have more than once seen a Brutus as warm as Hotspur): when the Betterton Brutus was provoked in his dispute with Cassius, his spirits flew out of his eyes his steady looks alone supplied that terror which he disdained an intemperance in his voice should rise to. Thus, with a settled dignity of contempt, like an unheeding rock, he repelled upon himself the foam of Cassius; not but in some part of this scene, where he reproaches Cassius, his temper is not under this suppression, but opens into that warmth which becomes a man of virtue; yet this is that hasty spark of anger, which Brutus himself endeavours to excuse. But with whatever strength of nature we see the poet shew at once the philosopher and the hero, yet the image of the actor’s excellence will be still imperfect to you, unless language could put colours in our words to paint the voice with. The most that a Vandyck can arrive at is, to make his portraits of great persons seem to think a Shakspeare goes farther yet, and tells you what his pictures thought; a BetU-rton steps beyond them both, and calls them from the grave to breathe, and be themselves again in feature, speech, and motion, at once united and gratifies at once-your eye, your ear, your understanding. From these various excel lenci s, Betterton had so full a possession of the esteem and regard of his auditors, that, upon his entrance into every scene, he seemed to seize upon the eyes and ears of the giddy and inadvertent. To have talked or looked another way, would have been thought insensibility or ignorance. In all his soliloquies of moment, the strongest intelligence of attitude and aspect drew you into such an impatient gaze and eager expectation, that you almost imbibed the sentiment with your eye,' before the er could reach it."

En lowed with such excellences, it is no wonder that Bettertcrti attracted the notice of his sovereign, the protection of the nobility, and the general respect of all ranks of people. The patentees, however, as there was now only one theatre, began to consider it as an instrument of accumulating wealth to themselves by the labours of others; and this had such an influence on their conduct, that the actors had many hardships imposed upon them, and were oppressed in the most tyrannical manner. Betterton endeavoured to convince the managers of the injustice and absurdity of such a behaviour which language not pleasing them, they began to give away some of his capital parts to young actors, supposing this would abate his influence. This policy hurt the patentees, and proved of service to Betterton for the public resented having plays ill acted, when they knew they might be acted better. The best players attached themselves wholly to Betterton, urging him to turn his thoughts on some method of procuring himself and them justice. Having a general ao quaintance with people of fashion, he represented the affair in such a manner, that at length, by the intercession of the earl of Dorset, he procured a patent for building a new playhouse in Lincoln’s-inn-fields, which he did by subscription. The new theatre was opened in 1695. Mr. Congreve accepted a share with this company, and the first piay they acted was his comedy of Love for Love. The king honoured it with his presence when Betterton spoke a prologue, and Mrs. Bracegirdle an epilogue on the occasion. But notwithstanding all the advantages this company enjoyed, and the favourable reception they at first met with, they were unable to keep up their run of success, above two or three seasons. Vanbrugh and Gibber, who wrote for the other house, were expeditious in their productions and the frequency of new pieces gave such a turn in their favour, that Bctterton’s company, with all their merit, must have been undone, had not the “Mourning Bride” and the “Way of the World” come to their relief, and saved them at the last extremity. In a few years, however, it appearing that they could not maintain tneir independence without some new support from their friends, the patrons of Betterton opened a subscription for building a theatre in the Haymarket, which was finished in 1706. Betterton however being now grown old, and his health being much impaired by constant application, declined the management of this house, resigning it entirely to sir John Vanbrugh and Mr. Congreve; but from the decay of Betterton, many of the old players dying, and other accidents, a re-tmion of the companies seemed necessary, and accordingly took place soon after.

Betterton got by this benefit 500l. and a promise was given him, that the favour should be annually repeated as long as he lived. Sept. 20, in the succeeding winter, he performed the part of Hamlet with great vivacity. This activity of his kept off the gout longer than usual, but the fit returned upon him in the Spring with greater violence, and it was the more unlucky, as this was the time of his benefit. The play he fixed upon was, the “Maid’s Tragedy,” in which he acted the part of Melanthns and notice was given thereof by his friend sir Richard Steele in the Tatler but the fit intervening, that he might not disappoint the town, he was obliged to submit to external applications, to reduce the swelling of his feet, which enabled him to appear on the stage, though he was obliged to use a slipper. “He was observed that day to have a more than an ordinary spirit, and met with suitable applause but the unhappy consequence of tampering with his distemper was, that it flew into his head, and killed him.” He died April 28, 1710, and was interred in Westminster-abbey. Sir Richard Steele attended the ceremony, and two days after published a paper in the Tatler to his memory. Mr. Booth, who knew him only in his decline, used to say, that he never saw him off or on the stage, without learning something from him; and frequently observed, that Betterton was no actor, that he put on his part with his clothes, and was the very man he undertook to be till the play was over, and nothing more. So exact was he in following nature, that the look of surprise he assumed in the character of Hamlet, astonished Booth (when he first personated the ghost) to such a degree, that he was unable to proceed in his part for some moments. The following dramatic works were published by Mr. Betterton, 1. a The Woman made a justice,“a comedy. 2.” The Unjust judge, or, Appius and Virginia,“a tragedy, written originally by Mr. John Webster, an old poet, who. fiourisiied in the reign of James I. It was only altered by Mr. Betterton. 3.” The Amorous widow, or the wanton wife," a play written on the plan of Moliere’s George Dandin.

, one of the most eminent Italian scholars of the last century, was born at Mantua, July 18, 1718. After having studied among the Jesuits in his own country and at Bologna, he entered that society as a noviciate in 1736. He then commenced a new course of studies, including the belles lettres, from 1739 to 1744, at Brescia, where cardinal Quirini, count Mazzuchelli, count Duranti, and other learned men, formed an illustrious academy, and there he became first noticed by some poetical compositions for scholastic exercises. When sent to Bologna to pursue his theological course, he continued to court his muse, and wrote for the theatre of the college, his tragedy of “Jonathas.” The number of literary characters in this city surpashed that which he had found at Brescia. The Institute recently founded by count Marsigli, the Clementine academy of design, the school of the astronomical poet Manfredi, and the growing reputation of his learned and ingenious pupils Zanotti, Algarotti, &c. contributed to fix the attention of the literary world on Bologna. In this society Bettinelli completed his education, and attained the age of thirty. In 1748, he went to Venice to teach rhetoric, and was frequently employed in a similar manner in other places. His superiors intended him for a display of his oratorical talents, but the weakness of his lungs obliged him to decline this. In 1751, he was appointed director of the college of nobles at Parma, and remained here superintending "their poetical and historical studies for eight years, occasionally visiting the principal vines of Italy, on business, or for health. In 1755, ne travelled through part of Germany, to Strasburgh and Nancy, and returned through Germany to Italy, bringing with him two young princes, the sons or nephews of the prince of Hohenlohe, who had intrusted him with their education. The following year he took a trip to France with the eldest of these princes, and resided at Paris, in the college of Louis-le-Grand. It was during this trip that he wrote the celebrated letters of Virgil which were printed at Venice with those of Frugoni and Algarotti. The opinions, and we may add, the literary heresies, very ingeniously urged in these letters against the reputation of the two great luminaries of Italian poetry, and especially against Dante, created him many enemies, and what gave him most uneasiness, involved him with Algarotti. (See Algarotii). From Paris he made several excursions into Normandy, Lorraine, &c. and paid a visit to Voltaire. From Geneva he went to Marseilles, &c. and arrived at Parma in 1759. The same year he went to Verona, where he resided until 1767, and resumed his offices of preaching and education. He was afterwards for some years at Modena, and when the order of the Jesuits was suppressed, he was appointed professor of rhetoric. On his return to his own country, he applied to his literary pursuits with fresh ardour, and published many works, and having regretted that he had published so much without writing any thing to please the fair sex, doubtless owing to his ecclesiastical character, he afterwards endeavoured to make up for this. in some respect by publishing his correspondence between two ladies, his letters to Lesbia, and lastly, his twenty-four dialogues on love. These he published in 1796, when the war raged in all parts of Italy, and when the siege of Mantua by the French obliged him to leave it. He then removed to Verona, but in 1797, after the surrender of Mantua, he returned again, and although now almost in his eightieth year, resumed his literary labours with his accustomed spirit. In 1799, he began a new edition of his works, which was completed at Venice in 1801, in 24 vols. 12mo. He still preserved his usual gaiety and health at the age of ninety, until Sept. 13, 1805, when he died after fifteen days illness, with the firmness, says his biographer, of a philosopher and a Christian.

His principal works, according to his own arrangement in the edition above mentioned are, 1. “Ragionamend filosofici” con anuotazioni,“a work both religious, moral, and philosophical. 2.” Dell' entusiasmo delle belle arti“the professed design of which was to maintain and revive the studies of imagination; but Bettinelli was not himself a decided enthusiast, and instead of the fire of imagination, we have here much of the coldness of method. 3. Eight” Dialoghi d'amore,“in which he expatiates on the influences which imagination, vanity, friendship, marriage, honour, ambition, science, &c. produce on that passion. In this work is an eloge on Petrarch, one of his most happy compositions. 4.” Risorgirnento negli stucii, nelle arti e ne' costumi dopo il mille.“This in Italy is considered as a superficial view of the revival of arts and sciences after the tenth century, and as interfering with Tiraboschi, who was then employed on the same subject, but to those who may think Tiraboschi’s work, what it certainly is, insufferably tedious, this will afford much useful information in a shorter compass. The dissertation on Italian poetry is particularly valuable. 5.” Delle lettere e delle arti Mantovane lettere ed arti Modenesi,“an excellent work as far as regards the literary history of Mantua, which was now, if we mistake not, written for the first time. 6.” Lettere dieci di Virgilio agli Arcadi.“Of these letters we have already spoken, and his attack on Dante and Petrarch, although not altogether without such a foundation as strict and cold criticism may lay, will not soon be forgiven in Italy. 7.” Letters on the Fine Arts from a lady to her friend, &c.“8. His” Poetry,“containing seven small poems, or” poemetti,“six epistles in familiar verse, sonnets, &c. In all these he is rather an elegant, easy, and ingenious poet, than a great one. His” Raccolte“is a spirited satire on the insipid collections of verses so common in Italy. 9.” Tragedies,“entitled Xerxes, Jonathan, Demetrius, Poliorcetes, and Rome saved, with some French letters, and an Italian dissertation on Italian tragedy. The” Rome saved“is a translation from Voltaire, indifferently performed. He also wrote three other tragedies, but inferior to the former, in which there is an evident attempt at the manner of Racine. 10.” Lettere a Lesbia Cidonia sopra gli epigrammi,“consisting of twenty-five letters, with epigrams, madrigals, and other small pieces, some translated and some original. 11. An” Essay on Eloquence,“with other essays, letters, miscellanies,” &c. As a poet, critic, metaphysician, and historian, Bettinelii’s merit is esteemed by his countrymen as of the first rate and with respect to the art of composition, they account him one of the purest and most elegant writers of the last century, one of the few who laboured to preserve the genuine Italian idiom from any foreign mixture.

, an eminent physician in the seventeenth century, was son of Mr. Edward Betts by his wife Dorothy, daughter of Mr. John Venables, of Rapley in Hampshire. He was born at Winchester, educated there in grammar learning, afterwards elected a scholar of Corpus Christ! college in Oxford, in February 1642, and took the degree of bachelor of arts, February 9, 1646. Being ejected by the visitors appointed by the parliament in 1648, he aplied himself to the study of physic, and commenced doctor in that faculty, April 11, 1654, having accumulated the degrees. He practised with great success at London, but chiefly among the Roman catholics, being himself of that persuasion. He was afterwards appointed physician in ordinary to king Charles II. The time of his death is not certainly known. Dr. Belts wrote two physical treatises, the first, “De ortu et natura Sanguinis,” Lond. 1669, 8vo. Afterwards there was added to it, “Medicinse cum Philosophia natural i consensus,” Lond. 1662, 8vo. Dr. George Thomson, a physician, animadverted upon our author’s treatise “De ortu et natura Sanguinis,” in his tl True way of preserving the Blood in its integrity,“Dr. Bett’s second piece is entitled” Anatotnia Thomse Parri annum centesimum quinquagesimurn secundum et novem menses agentis, cum clarissimi viri Gulielmi Harvaei aliorumque adstantium medicorum regiorum observationibus." This Thomas Parr, of whose anatomy, Dr. Bctts, or rather, according to Anthony Wood, Dr. Harvey drew up an account, is well known to have been one of the most remarkable instances of longevity which this country has afforded. He was the son of John Parr of Winnington, in the parish of Alberbury, in Shropshire, and was born in 1483, in the reign of king Edward the Fourth. He seems to have been of very different stamina from the rest of mankind, and Dr. Fuller tells us that he was thus characterised by an eyewitness,

At an hundred and twenty (or, more probably, an hundred and two), he married Catherine Milton, who had a child by him and after that sera of his life he was employed in threshing, and other husbandry work. When he was above an hundred and fifty-two years of age, he was brought up to London, by Thomas, earl of Arundel, and carried to court. The king said to him, “You have lived longer than other men, what have you done more than other men” He replied, “I did penance when I was an hundred years old.” He slept away most of his time while he lived in London, which was only two months. He died in the Strand, on the 15th of November, 1635, and was buried in Westminster-abbey. His death is thought to have been accelerated by the change of his place and mode of living, and by the troublesome concourse of visitors and spectators. There is said to be a portrait of him in Belvoir castle, and another in Ashmole’s museum. The most valuable was in the collection of the duchess of Portland. The fullest account of him extant, is in his “Life,” by Taylor, in the Harleian Miscellany.

, an Italian scholar of considerable celebrity, was born about the beginning of the sixteenth century, at Bassano. In his early years he shewed a taste for polite literature, and published some poems that were read as very extraordinary productions, but unfortunately he took for his guide the famous, or rather infamous, Peter Aretin, both in his studies and his morals. Under such an instructor, we are not to wonder that his irregularities obstructed his advancement in life. For some time he earned a subsistence at Venice in the printing-office of Giolito, and afterwards wandered over Italy and even France, in quest of better employment, which his misconduct always prevented. At length he was recommended as secretary to a person of rank, and is said to have gone to Spain in 1562, in this character, but on his return to Italy, he resumed his irregularities, and lived as usual on precarious supplies. The time of his death is not ascertained, but according to a letter of Goselini, a contemporary writer, he was living in 1565. His works are, 1. “Dialogo amoroso e rime di Giuseppe Betussi e d'altri autori,” Venice, 1545, 8vo. This dialogue is in prose and verse; and the speakers are Pigna, Sansovino, and Baffa, a poetess of his time. 2. “II Raverta, dialogo, &c.” Venice, 1544, 1545, &c. 8vo. 3. Italian translations of Boccaccio’s three Latin works, “De casibus Virorum etFoerninarum illustrium” “De claris Mulieribus;” and “De Genealogia deorum” the first, Venice, 1545^, 8vo the second, with the addition of illustrious ladies from the time of Boccaccio to his own, ibid. 1S47, 8vo; and the third, same year, 4to. Of this last there have been at least thirteen editions, and many of the others. 4. “An Italian translation of the” Seventh book of the Eneid,“Venice, 154G, 8vo, which afterwards made part of an entire translation of that poem by different hands. 5. li La Leonora, Ragionamento sopra la vera bellezza,” Lucca, 1557, 8vo, noticed by Mazzuchelli and Fontanini among the rarest books. 6. “Ragionamento sopra il Catajo, luogo del signor Pio Enea Obizzi,” Padua, 1573, 4to, Ferrara, 1669, with additions. If this description of a magnificent villa was published by Betussi himself, it proves that he was alive much later than we have before conjectured. 7. “L‘Immagine del tempio di Dorina Giovanna d’Aragona, dialogo,” Venice, 1557, 8vo. 8. “Letters” and “Poems” in various collections.

, LL. D. an eminent scholar and civilian, was born at Mortimer in Berkshire in 1725, and educated at All Souls’ college, Oxford, where he took the degree of bachelor of law, July 3, 1753, and that of doctor, April 5, 1758, and was also a fellow of his college. In 1762, with the permission of the vice-chancellor, and with the approbation of the regius professor of civil law, whose ill state of health had at that time deprived the university of the fruits of his abilities, he gave a course of lectures in the same school where Blackstone had delivered his celebrated commentaries, and sometimes, when the class ef pupils was small, at his own chambers in All Souls’ college. In 1760, he published “A discourse on the study of Jurisprudence and the Civil Law, being an introduction to (the above) course of lectures,” 4to, but we presume had not sufficient encouragement to publish the whole. He was admitted into Doctors’ Commons, Nov. 21, 1758, and was afterwards promoted to be judge of the Cinque Ports, and chancellor of Lincoln and Bangor. In 1751, he published “The history of the Legal Polity of the Roman state and of the rise, progress, and extent of the 'Roman Laws,” Lond. 4to, a work in which he has made deep researches into the constitution of the Roman state, and displays an extensive fund of learning, connected with the investigation of the civil law. It is much to be lamented that he did not live to complete his plan: but by his will he expressly forbade any part of his Mss. to be printed, as not being in a fit state for the public eye. Dr. Coote says he committed the sequel of this work to the flames in his last illness. He adds that “he was a better scholar than writer, and a better writer than pleader.” His private character is represented as truly amiable. As a relation he was affectionate and attentive and as a friend active and disinterested. His patronage of unprotected genius was a constant mark of the benevolence of his heart. The late Mr. Hindle, and other adepts in music, of which Dr. Bever was a devoted amateur, attracted his esteem. Sherwin, the celebrated engraver, owed also the greatest obligations to him his grateful sense of which he testified by his valuable present of an unique painting (the only one Sherwin ever executed), of Leonidas taking leave of his wife and infant son, now or lately in possession of Sam. Bever, esq. of Mortimer in Berkshire, the doctor’s younger brother. Dr. Bever died at his house in Doctors’ Commons, Nov. 8, 1791, of an asthma, which probably would not then have been fatal, if he had suffered himself to be removed from London to a less turbid air, but in what concerned his health, he was reluctant to take advice. He was interred in Mortimer church, Berkshire, and a mural monument erected, in the chancel, to his memory.

, a learned divine in the seventeenth century, and bishop of St. Asaph, was born at Barrow in Leicestershire (where his grandfather, father, and brother, were vicars) in 1636-7. On the 24th of May, 1653, he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, and took his degrees of bachelor of arts in 1656, master of arts in 1660, and of doctor of divinity in 1679. At his coming to the university, he closely applied himself to the study of the learned languages and, by his great diligence and application, soon became so well skilled, particularly in all Oriental learning, that when he was not above eighteen years of age, he wrote a treatise of the excellency and use of the Oriental tongues, especially the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, and Samaritan, with a Syriac Grammar, in three books; which he published when he was about twenty years of age. He also distinguished himself, at the same time, by his early piety and seriousness of mind, and by his exemplary sobriety and integrity of life, all which procured him great esteem and veneration. January 3, 1660-1, he was ordained deacon in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, by Robert, bishop of Lincoln and priest, in the same place, the 31st of that month. About this time, Dr. Sheldon, bishop of London, collated him to the vicarage of Ealing in Middlesex. On the 22d of November, 1672, he was chosen, by the lord-mayor and aldermen of London, rector of St. Peter’s, Cornhill, London, and then he resigned the vicarage of Ealing. He now applied himself, with the utmost labour and zeal, to the discharge of his ministry, and so instructive was he in his discourses from the pulpit, so warm and affectionate in his private exhortations, so regular and uniform in the public worship of the church, and in every part of his pastoral function, and so remarkably were his labours crowned with success, that as he himself was justly styled “the great reviver and restorer of primitive piety,” so his parish was deservedly proposed, as the best model and pattern, for the rest of its neighbours to copy after. His singular merit having recommended him to the favour of his diocesan, bishop Henchman, he was collated by him, on the 22d of December, 1674, to the prebend of Chiswick, in the cathedral of St. Paul’s, London and, by his successor bishop Compton, he was also, on the 3d of November, 1681, collated to the archdeaconry of Colchester. In this dignity he behaved, as he had done before in every station of life, In a most regular, watchful, and exemplary manner and not satisfied with the false, or at least imperfect, reports given in by church-wardens at visitations, he visited everjr parish within his archdeaconry in person. November the 5th, 1684, he was installed prebendary of Canterbury, and became also chaplain to king William and queen Mary. In 1691, he was offered, but refused the see of Bath and Wells, then vacant by the deprivation of Dr. Thomas Kenn, for not taking the oaths to king William and queen Mary. liut though he refused that see, because, probably, being a man of a tender conscience, he would not eat Dr. Kenn’s tread, adtording to the language of those times, he afterwards accepted of that of St. Asaph, vacant by the translation of Dr. George Hooper to Bath and Wells, and was consecrated July 16, 1704. Being placed in this eminent station, his care and diligence increased in proportion as his power in the church was enlarged and now when his authority was extended to larger districts, he still pursued the same pious and laborious methods of advancing the honour and interest of religion, by watching over both clergy and laity, and giving them all necessary direction and assistance, for the effectual performance of their respective duties. Accoruingly, he was no sooner advanced to the episcopal chair, but in a pathetic letter to the clergy of his diocese, he recommended to them the “duty of catechising and instructing the people committed to their charge, in the principles of the Christian religion to the end they might know what they were to believe and do in order to salvation” and told them, “he thought it necessary to begin with that, without which, whatever else he or they should do, would turn to little or no account, as to the main end of the ministry.” And to enable them to do this the more effectually, he sent them a plain and easy “Exposition upon the Church Catechism.” This good man did not enjoy his episcopal dignity above three years seven months and twenty days for he died at his lodgings in the cloisters in Westminster- abbey, March 5, 1707-8, in the seventy-first year of his age, and was buried in St. Paul’s cathedral. He left the greatest part of liis estate to the societies for propagating the gospel, and promoting Christian knowledge. To the curacy of MountSorrel in particular, and vicarage of Barrow in the county of Leicester, in a thankful remembrance of God’s mercies vouchsafed to him thereabouts, he bequeathed twenty pounds a year for ever, on condition that prayers be read morning and evening every day, according to the Liturgy of the church of England, in the chapel, and parish church aforesaid; with the sum of forty shillings yearly, to be divided equally upon Christmas-eve, among- eight poor housekeepers of Barrow, as the minister and churchwardens should agree, regard being had especially to those who had been most constantly at prayers, and at the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, the foregoing year. And if it should so happen, that the Common- Prayer could not be read in the church or chapel aforesaid, his will then was, that what should have been given in either place for that, be in each place allowed to one chosen by the vk-ar of Barrow to teach school, and instruct the youth in the principles of the Christian religion, according to the doctrine of the church of England. His works were many, and full of great variety of learning. Those published by himself were a? follows: 1. “De Linguarum Orientalium, praesertim HeIpraicce, Chaldaica?, Syriacae, Arabicae, et Samaritans, praestantia et usu,” &c. mentioned above. Loud. 1658, 8vo. 2- “Institutionum Chronologicarum libri duo, una cum totidem Arithmetices Chronoiogicae libellis,” Loud. 1669, 4to. 3. “Swvo'&Kov, sive Pandectse Canonum Ss. Apostolorum, et Conciliorum ab Ecclesia Graeca receptoium necnon Canonicarum Ss. Patrum Epistolarum una cum Scholiis antiquorum singulis eorurn annexis, et scriptis aliis hue spectantibus quorum plurima e Bibliothecae Bodleianae aliarumque Mss. Codicibus nunc primum edita reliqua cum iisdem Mss. summa fide et diligentia collata,” Oxonii, 1672, 2 vols. fol. 4. “Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Primitivae vindicatus et illustratus,” Lond. 1679, 4to. 5. “The Church Catechism explained, for the use of the diocese of St. Asaph,” Lond. J 704, 4to, reprinted several times since. Next follow bishop Beveridge’s works, published after his decease by his executor Mr. Timothy Gregory 1. “Private Thoughts upon Religion, digested into twelve articles, with practical resolutions formed thereupon.” Written in his younger years (when he was about twenty-three years old), for the settling of his principles and conduct of life, Lond. 1709. 2. “Private Thoughts upon a Christian Life or, necessary directions for its beginning and progress upon earth, in order to its final perfection in the Beatific Vision,” part II. Lond. 1709. 3. “The great necessity and advantage of Public Prayer and frequent Communion. Designed to revive primitive piety with, meditations, ejaculations, and prayers, before, at, and after the sacrament,” Lond. 1710, These have been reprinted several times in 8vo and 12mo. 4. “One hundred and fifty Sermons and Discourses on several subjects,” Lond. 170S, &c. in 12 vols. 8vo, reprinted at London, 17iy, in 2 vols. fol. 5. “Thesaurus Theologians or, a complete system of Divinity, summed up in brief notes upon select places of the Old and New Testament; wherein the sacred text is reduced under proper heads; explained and illustrated with the opinions and authorities of the ancient fathers, councils, &c.” Lond. 1711, 4 vols. 8vo. 6. “A defence of the book of Psalms, collected into English metre by Thomas Sternhold, John Hopkins, and others with critical Observations on the New Version, compared with the Old,” Lond. 1710, 8vo. In this book he gives the old version the preference to the new. 7. “Exposition of the XXXIX Articles,” Lond. 1710, 1716, fol. Bishop Beveridge’s character is in general represented in a most advantageous light. He was a person of the strictest integrity, of true and sincere piety, of exemplary charity, and of great zeal for religion, and so highly esteemed, that when he was dying, one of the chief of his order deservedly said of him, “There goes one of the greatest and of the best men that ever England bred.” He is also celebrated as a man of extensive and almost universal learning; furnished, to a very eminent degree, with all useful knowledge; and much to be admired for his readiness in the scriptures, which he had thoroughly studied, so that he was able to produce suitable passages from them on all occasions, and happy in explaining them to others. Mr. Nelson says, that he cannot forbear acknowledging the favourable dispensation of Providence to the present age, in blessing it with so many of those pious discourses, which our truly primitive prelate delivered from the pulpit; and that he the rather takes the liberty to call it a favourable dispensation of Providence, because the bishop gave no orders himself that they should be printed, but humbly neglected them, as not being composed for the press. But that this circumstance is so far from abating the worth of the sermons, or diminishing the character of the author, that it raises the excellency of both, because it shews at once the true nature of a popular discourse which is to improve the generality of hearers, and for that purpose to speak to them in a plain and intelligible style. Dr. Henry Felton says, that our learned and venerable bishop delivered himself with those ornaments alone, which his subject suggested to him, and wrote in that plainness and solemnity of style, that gravity and simplicity, which gave authority to the sacred truths he taught, and unanswerable evidence to the doctrines he defended. That there is something so great, primitive, and apostolical, in his writings, that it creates an awe and veneration in our mind that the importance of his subjects is above the decoration of words and what is great and majestic in itself looketh most like itself, the less it is adorned. The author of one of the Guardians, having made an extract out of one of the bishop’s sermons, tells us, that it may for acuteness of judgment, ornament of speech, and true sublime, compare with any of the choicest writings of the ancients, who lived nearest to the apostles’ times. But the author of a pamphlet published in 1711, entitled “A short view of Dr. Bevericlge’s Writings,” passes a very different judgment upon bishop Beveridge’s works, in order to stop, as he says, the mischief they are doing, and that which the publication of his Articles may do. With regard to the bishop’s language, he observes, that he delights in jingle and quibbling; affects a tune and rhyme in all he says, and rests arguments upon nothing but words and sounds, &c. &c. But perhaps this animadverter will “by some be ranked among the persons, of whom Dr. Lupton gives the following character” Those who are censorious enough to reflect with severity upon the pious strains, which are to be found in bishop Beveridge, &c. may possibly be good judges of an ode or essay, but do not seem to criticise justly upon sermons, or express a just value for spiritual things.“After all, whatever faults may be found in bishop Beveridge’s posthumous works, must be charged to the injudiciousness of his executor. He must himself have been an extraordinary man who, with all the faults pointed out by the author of” The short view," could have conciliated the good opinion and favour of men of all principles, and the most eminent patrons of the church and the estimation in which his works continue to be held to this day, prove how little he was injured by the captious quibblings of a writer who was determined to find fault with' that, into the spirit of which he could not enter. The life of bishop Beveridge, prefixed to the folio edition of his works, was written by Mr. Kimber, a dissenting minister of the Baptist persuasion, in London.

, born at Midclleburgh in Zealand, in 1653 or 1654, was a man of genius, but prostituted his talents by employing them in the composition of loose and impious pieces. He took the degree of doctor of law, and became an advocate; but his passion for polite literature diverted him from any pursuits in that way. He was a passionate admirer of Ovid, Catullus, Petronius, and appears to have derived from them that corruption of morals which, more or less, appeared in the whole of his life and writings. Mr. Wood tells us, that Beverland was at the university of Oxford in 1672. In 1675, he published his treatise on original sin. It is entitled “Peccarnm orlginale we Eo%W, sic nuncupaturn philologice problem aticos elncubratum a Tiiemidis alunrmo. Vera redit facies, tiissimuluta pent. Eleutheropali. Extra plateum obscuram, privilegio authoris, absqtie ubi et quan Jo.” At the end of tue book are these words “In horto Hesperidum typis Ad ami Evse Terrae fiiii, 1673.” His design in this piece is to shew, that Adam’s sin consisted entirely in the commerce with his wife, and that original sin is nothing else but the inclination of the sexes to each other. For this he was summoned before the university of Leyden, sent to prison, and his name struck out of the list of students but he was discharged after he had paid a fine, and taken an oath that he would never write again upon such subjects. He then removed to Utrecht, where he led a most dissolute life, and boasted every where of his book, which had beeu burnt at Leyden. His behaviour at length obliged the magistrates to send him notice privately, that they expected he should immediately leave the city. He wrote a severe satire against the magistrates and ministers of Leyden, under the title of “Vox claaiantis in deserto,” which was dispersed in manuscript but finding after this, that it would not be safe for him to remain in Holland, he went over to England, where Dr. Isaac Vossius procured him a pension. His income was inconsiderable, yet he spent the greatest part of it in purchasing scarce books, indecent prints, pictures, medals, and strange shells. He seems afterwards to have repented of his irregular life: and as an atonement, he is said to have published his treatise “De Fornicatione cavenda,” in 1698. He tells us, in an advertisement prefixed to this book, that it was the result of his repentance and speaks of his loose pieces in the following terms “I condemn the warmth of my imprudent youth I detest my loose style and my libertine sentiments. I thank God, who has removed from my eyes the veil which blinded my sight in a miserable manner, and who would not suffer me any longer to seek out weak arguments to defend this crime. He has likewise inspired me with such a resolution, that I have burnt all that I have written upon this subject, and sent to the rector magniticus of the university of Leyden, the books `De Prostibulis Veterum.' I desire all persons who have procured any manuscript of my writing either privately, or in any other method, to return it to me, that I may burn it myself. And if any person should refuse this, I wish him all the misfortunes which use to happen to one who violates his trust.” Yet, notwithstanding these expressions, his sincerity has been suspected; and it has been alleged, that he wrote this last piece with no other view than to raise the curiosity of mankind, to inquire after the former. After Vossius’s death, he fell into extreme poverty, and incurred universal hatred from the many violent satires which he had written against different persons. Besides this misfortune, his reason began to be affected; and in the year 1712, he wandered from one part of England to another, imagining that two hundred men had confederated together to assassinate him. It is probable that he died soon after; for we hear no more of him from that time. In 1746, twelve Latin letters of Beverland were published, addressed to some learned men of his time; but our authority does not state where this publication made its appearance. While in England, he must at one time have been in some reputation, as sir Godfrey Kneller made a fine portrait of him, dated 1689, which is now in the picture gallery, Oxford.

, in Latin Beverlacius, archbishop of York in the eighth century, was born of a noble family among the English Saxons, at Harpham, a small town in Northumberland. He was first a monk, and afterwards abbot of the monastery of St. Hilda. He was instructed in the learned languages by Theodore, archbishop of Canterbury, and was justly esteemed one of the best scholars of his time. Alfred of Beverly, who wrote his life, pretends that he studied at Oxford, and took there the degree of master of arts; but bishop Godwin assures us this cannot be true, because such distinction of degrees was not then known at Oxford, nor any where else. Our abbot’s merit recommended him to the favour of Alfred, king of Northumberland, who, in the year 685, advanced him to the see of Hagustald, or Hexham, and, upon the death of archbishop Bosa in 687, translated him to that of York. This prelate was tutor to the famous Bede, and lived in the strictest friendship with Acca, and other AngloSaxon doctors, several of whom he put upon writing comments on the scriptures. He likewise founded, in 704, a college at Beverly for secular priests. After he had governed the see of York thirty-four years, being tired with the tumults and confusions of the church, he divested himself of the episcopal character, and retired to Beverly; and four years after died May 7, 721. The day of his death was appointed a festival by a synod held at London in 1416. Bede, and other monkish writers, ascribe several miracles to him. Between three and four hundred years after his death, his body was taken up by Alfric, archbishop of York, and placed in a shrine richly adorned with silver, gold, and precious stones. Bromton relates, that William the conqueror, when he ravaged Northumberland with a numerous army, spared Beverly alone, out of a religious veneration for St. John of that place. This prelate wrote some pieces, 1. “Pro Luca exponendo;” an essay towards an exposition of St. Luke, addressed to Bede. 2. “Homiliee in Evangelia.” 3. Epistolae ad Hildara Abbatissam.“4.” Epistolse ad Herebaldum, Andenum, et Bertinum.“- -Pits mentions another John of Beverly, so called from the place of his nativity, who was a Carmelite monk in the fourteenth century, and a very learned man, and doctor and professor of divinity at Oxford. He flourished about 1390, in the reign of Richard II. and wrote, 1.” Questiones in magistrum sententiarum“in four books. 2.” Disputationes ordinariae" in one book.

1652, 4to, each containing two discourses or harangues, and a Latin and Italian idyl. 2. “Rime,” Lucca, 1654, 12mo, reprinted at Rome 1666, with additions, and dedicated to queen Christina. 3. “Discorsi sacri,” Lucca,

, in Latin Beverovicius, was born at Dort, Sept. 17, 1594, of a noble family. He was brought up from his infancy under the eyes of Gerard John Vossius, and visited several universities for acquiring knowledge in the art of medicine, and took his doctor’s degree at Padua. He practised in the place of his nativity, where he likewise filled several civic posts with distinction. He died Jan. 19, 1647, aged 51 and though his course was not remarkably long, yet Daniel Heinsius, in the epitaph he made Oil him, calls him “ViUe artifex, mortis fugator.” His principal works are: 1. “De terra i no vitse, fatali an mobili” Rotterdam, 1644, 8vo and Leyden, 1651, 4to. This book made some noise at the time, and professes to discuss the question, Whether the term of life of every individual be fixed and immutable or, whether it may be changed. 2. “De excellentia sexus Fceminei,” Dordrecht, 1639, 8vo. 3. “Decalculo,” Leyden, 1638 41, 8vo. 4. “Introductio ad Medicinam indigenam,” Leyden, 1663, 12mo. This book, says Vigneul Marville, is a very small volume, but extremely well filled. Beverovicius proves in it, to every man’s satisfaction, that, without having recourse to remedies from foreign countries, Holland should be contented with her own in the practice of medicine. His entire works were printed in Flemish, at Amsterdam, 1656, 4to.

, a musician eminently skilled in the knowledge of practical composition, flourished towards the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign. He was of Welch extraction, and had been educated under Tallis, upon whose recommendation it was that in 1589 he was sworn in gentleman extraordinary of the chapel; from whence he was expelled in 1637, it being discovered that he adhered to the Romish communion. He was also organist of Bristol cathedral, but forfeited that employment at the same time with his place in the chapel. Child, afterwards doctor, was his scholar. He has composed sundry services, and a few anthems. Before Bevin’s time the precepts for the composition of canons was known to few. Tallis, Bird, Waterhouse, and Farmer, were eminently skilled in this most abstruse part of musical practice. Every canon, as given to the public, was a kind of enigma. Compositions of this kind were sometimes exhibited in the form of a cross, sometimes in that of a circle there is now extant one resembling a horizontal sun-dial, and the resolution, (as it was called) of a canon, which was the resolving it into its elements, and reducing it into score, was deemed a work of almost as great difficulty as the original compoition. But Bevin, with a view to the improvement of students, generously communicated the result of many years study and experience in a treatise which is highly commended by all who have taken occasion to speak of it. This book was published in 1631, 4to, and dedicated to Goodman bishop of Gloucester, with the following title: “A briefe and short instruction of the Art of Musicke, to teach how to make discant of all proportions that are in use; very necessary for all such as are desirous to attain to knowledge in the art; and may, by practice, if they sing, soone be able to compose three, four, and five parts, and also to compose all sorts of canons that are usuall, by these directions of two or three parts in one upon the plain song.” The rules contained in this book for composition in general are very brief; but for the composition of canons there are in it a great variety of examples of almost all the possible forms in which it is capable of being constructed, even to the extent of sixty parts.

, a learned divine and historian of the seventh century, was son of the preceding, and born in Northumberland, but educated almost from his infancy in the isle of Wight. He was a man of a very humane and mild disposition, a good historian, and well skilled in geometry. He gave an accurate description of the isle of Wight from his own observations, as well as from the accounts of Ptolemy and Pliny. Upon his return to his own country he studied under Elbode, a bishop eminent for his uncommon sanctity and learning, by whose instructions he made great progress both in profane and sacred literature. At last he applied himself to the study of the history of his nation, which he examined with the utmost accuracy, and wrote in Latin “Annotations upon Nennius,” an “History of the actions of king Arthur in Scotland,” and an “Historical Itinerary.” Leland is of opinion that he was a monk, since all the learning which. was then extant, was among those of that profession. He flourished in the year 640, according to Bale; or 650, according to Pits. He had a very intimate friendship with the famous Nennius, abbot of Bangor.

, a voluminous author, was born April 1578, at Antwerp, of a family originally of Bergeu-op-Zoom, and had his education among the Jesuits. He went afterwards to study philosophy at Louvain, and had scarcely assumed the ecclesiastic dress in order to pursue his divinity course in that university, when he was appointed professor of poetry and rhetoric in the college of Vaulx. He had, some time after, a living near Louvain, and taught philosophy in a house of regular canons in the same neighbourhood. In 1605 he was called to Antwerp, where he had the charge of the school, and some promotion in the church. He died there June 7, 1627. Foppen has given a long list of his works, the principal of which seem to be 1. “Apophthegmata Christianorum,” Antwerp, 1608, 8vo. 2. “Biblia sacra variarum translationum,” Antwerp, 1616, 3 vols. fol. 3. “Promptuaarium morale super evangelia communia, et particularia qusedam festorum totius anni,” 1613, 8vo, and often reprinted. 4. “Magnum Theatrum vitae humanae.” Referring our readers to Freytag for a more minute account of this vast compilation, it may be sufficient to add, that Conrad Lycosthenes left the materials for it, and Theodore Swinger or Zwinger having put them in order with some additions with which his course of reading had furnished him, published three editions of them the first in 1 vol. fol. 1565, the second in 3 vols. fol. 1571, and the third in. 4 vols. fol. all at Basil, 1586. James Swinger went on improving and adding to this work, which was at last taken up by Beyerlinck, whose edition appeared after his death, Cologne, 1631, enlarged to 8 vols. folio; and it was reprinted in the same form at Lyons, 1678, and at Venice, 1707. It is a mass of theology, history, politics, philosophy, &c. in alphabetical order, containing all the knowledge of the times upon the various subjects, and we may add, all the ignorance and superstitions.

, an eminent lawyer, was born at Dockum in Holland, in 1546, or according to Foppen, in 1539. After having studied law, and taken a licentiate’s degree at Orleans, he practised at Leuwarden, in Friesland, until, being suspected of Lutheranism, he was obliged to retire into Germany, where he taught law at Wittemberg, for ten years. The times becoming more favourable, he returned to his own country, and obtained the law chair in the university of Leyden. After having taught here with great success for fifteen years, he was, in 1596, invited to Franeker, in the same office, but after a year, he quitted the business of public instruction, being appointed a counsellor at the court of Friesland. He died in 1598, leaving a daughter, and two sons, who were both educated in their father’s profession. He wrote several dissertations on subjects of law, which were published in 1 vol. 4to, at Louvain, 1645. In 1598, the year of his death, a collection of theses maintained by Beyma and his friend Schotanus, appeared under the title “Disputationes juridicæ, sociata cum collega H. Schotano opera, editæ,” Franeker.

, one of the chief promoters of the Reformation, was born at Vezelai, a small town of Nivernais, in France, June 24, 1519. His father was Peter Beza, or cle Beze, bailiff of the town, and his mother Mary de Bourdelot. He passed his first years at Paris, with his uncle Nicholas, a counsellor of parliament, who sent him to Orleans, at the age of six, for education. His master, Melchior Wolmar, a man of greater learning, and particularly eminent as a Greek scholar, and one of the first who introduced the principles of the reformation into France, having an invitation to become professor at Bourges, Beza accompanied him, and remained with him until 1535. Although at this period only sixteen, he had made very uncommon progress in learning and in the ancient languages, and having returned to Orleans to study law, he took his licentiate’s degree in 1539. These four last years, however, he applied less to serious studies than to polite literature, and especially Latin poetry; and it was in this interval that he wrote those pieces which were afterwards published under the title of “Poemata Juvenilia,” and afforded the enemies of the reformation a better handle than could have been wished to reproach his early morals.

The following year he was appointed Greek professor at Lausanne, where he remained for ten years, and published several works which extended his reputation. His French tragedy of “Abraham’s Sacrifice,” was translated into Latin, and became very popular. In 1556, he published his translation of the New Testament, of which a number of editions afterwards appeared, with alterations and corrections; but, of all his works, while he was at Lausanne, that which was accounted the most remarkable, was his apology for, or defence of the burning of Servetus for heresy, in answer to a work apparently on the other side of the question by Sebastian Castalio, who took the liberty to doubt whether it was just or useful to put heretics to death. Beza’s answer was entitled “De haereticis a civili magistratu puniendis,” and as at that time the principles of the reformation were legal heresies, we cannot be surprised that the enemies of the reformation should wish to turn Beza’s arguments against him.

Beza did not return to Geneva when the conference ended: being a Frenchman, queen Catherine de Medicis would have him stay in his own country, where he preached frequently before the king of Navarre, and the prince of Conde, in Paris. The king of Navarre, though of the religion of the Protestants, declared himself against them, in order to preserve the title of viceroy; but the prince of Conde, the illustrious family of Coligny, and others, more zealous for the reformation, began to excite the Protestants to arm in their defence. Opposed to this party, was a league formed by the pope, the emperor, the king of Spain, and the catholic Swiss cantons. This soon brought on the civil war, in the course of which Beza attended the prince of Conde, and was at the battle of Dreux, in 1562, in which the generals of both armies were taken prisoners and during the imprisonment of the prince of Conde, Beza remained with admiral Coligny, and did not return to Geneva, until after the peace of 1563, when he Tesumed his place in the academy or college which Calvin bad founded. That celebrated reformer died in the following year, and Beza succeeded him in all his offices, and was now considered as the ostensible head and main support of the reformed party both in France and Geneva. In 1570 he returned again to France to be present at the synod of Kochelle. The queen of Navarre and the admiral Coligny had requested the council of Geneva to permit bim to take this journey, and when he arrived at Rochelle he was unanimously chosen president of the synod, which was a kind of general assembly of deputies from all the reformed churches in France. He was afterwards frequently interrupted in his academical business at Geneva, particularly in 1574, when sent on an important negociation to Germany, and he frequently assisted at conferences on religious points both in Germany and Swisserland.

Theodore Beza’s character has been variously represented, as might be expected from the age in which he lived, and the conduct which he pursued. His talents, his eminence, his important services in the cause of the reformation, must make his memory as dear to Protestants, as it was obnoxious to their enemies. In what follows, however, of his character, we shall chiefly follow an authority that will not be suspected of religious partiality at least. Beza’s reputation has been often attacked, and it is scarcely possible that it could have been otherwise. He had but just embraced the reformed religion, when he took a part in every dispute and every controversy. He wrote incessantly against the Roman catholics, against the Lutherans, and against all who were unfriendly to the character or opinions of his friend Calvin, and although such a disputant would be in any age exposed to frequent attacks, in his time religious controversies were carried on with peculiar harshness and strong resentments. Beza’s first writings, his poems, gave occasion for just reproach, and although he had long repented, and confessed his error in this respect, his enemies took the most effectual method to harass his mind, and injure his character, by frequently reprinting these poems. This measure, however, so unfair, and discreditable to his opponents, might have lost its effect, if he had not in some of his controversial pieces, employed his wit with too much freedom and extravagance. We cannot wonder, therefore, that such raillery should produce a corresponding sense of irritation in those who hated his principles, and felt the weight of his talents. It would be unnecessary to repeat all the calumnies, some of the most gross kind, which have been gravely advanced against him, because they now seem to be given up by the general consent of all modern writers but we may advert to one accusation still maintained by men of considerable note. Poltrot, who assassinated the duke of Guise, that merciless persecutor of the protestants, declared in his first examination that he was set on by Beza, and although this appeared at the time wholly groundless, and Poltrot retracted what he had said, and persisted to his last moments, to exculpate our reformer, yet Bossuet, while he does not accuse Beza of having directly encouraged the assassin, still endeavours to impute his crime to Beza’s preaching, and deduces Beza’s consent, from the joy he and his party expressed on hearing of the death of their implacable enemy, a consequence which it is surely unfair to draw from such premises. He has also been accused of having, on many occasions, excited the French protestants to take up arms, and to have thus had a considerable hand in the civil wars of France. But, although the oppressions suffered by the French protestants, then a very numerous body, had unquestionably excited his zeal in promoting resistance, the history of the times shew that these civil wars were not occasioned by this course only, far less by any desire the reformed had to propagate their principles by force. The Ablest writers are agreed that in those days there was more of discontent than protestantism in the case; “plus de malcontentement que de Huguenoterie.” It would be unjust, therefore, to consider Beza, and the other preachers of the reformation, as the sole cause of these commotions. It is much more probable that they were occasioned in a great measure by the rival contests of the Guises and the princes of the blood. Without, therefore, exculpating Beza from having that share in the civil wars which did not very well become a preacher of the gospel of peace, it may be safely affirmed that he was not one of the chief causes. The same assassin Poltrot, who accused Beza, accused also the admiral Coligny, whose character never was stained with a blemish, unless in the bigoted mind of Bossuet, who yet cannot bring a single circumstance in proof; and as far as regards Beza, we may add that the accusation never obtained any belief among his contemporaries.

Beza’s zeal was much tempered in his latter days and when, during an interview with Henry IV. in 1599, in a Tillage of Savoy near Geneva, that prince asked him what he could do for him, Beza expressed no wish but to see peace restored in France. His last will bears the same sentiments, with much expression of regret for his early errors. Beza was an elegant writer, and a man of great learning. His long life, and the enthusiasm with which he inspired his followers, made him be called the Phenix of his age. As a divine, controversialist, and on many occasions, as a negociator, he displayed great abilities, and a faithful adherence to his principles. His numerous writings are now perhaps but little consulted, and his translation of the Psalms into French verse, which was begun by Marot, are no longer in use in the reformed churches but as a promoter of literature, he still deserves high praise, on account of the great diligence and success with which he superintended the college of Geneva for forty years of his life. When on one occasion the misfortunes of the times rendered it necessary to dismiss two of the professors, for whose maintenance there were no longer any funds, Beza, then at the age of seventy, supplied both their places, and gave lectures for more than two years. He was in fact the founder of that college which for the last two centuries has produced so many eminent men; he prescribed its statutes, and left his successors an example which may be said to have descended to our own times. Bayle’s account of Beza, in his usual rambling style, is principally taken from the Latin life published in 1606 by Antonius Fayus, or La Faye. Noel Taillepied, Bolsec, and a doctor of the Sorbonne, named Lainge, or Laingeus, have also written lives of this reformer. Other authorities will be subjoined in the note.

Some notice yet remains to be taken of Beza’s principal works, and their different editions: 1. “Poemata juvenilia,” Paris, by Conrad Badius, 1548, 8vo, but we question whether this was the first edition. It is thought that a 12mo edition, without a date, “Ad insigne capitis mortui,” was long prior to this, and we suspect the only edition which Beza printed. Those of 156 1576, and 1594, the two former in 8vo, and the latter in 4to, contain only a part of these poems, the offensive ones being omitted. In 1599, an edition was printed at Geneva, 16mo, with his translation of the Song of Solomon. They were also reprinted with the poems of Muret and Jean Second, Paris, by Barbou, 1757, 12mo, and under the title of “Amoenitates Poeticae,” &c. 1779, 12mo. 2. “Tragedie Franchise du Sacrifice d' Abraham,” Lausanne, 1550, 8vo, Paris, 1553, and Middleburgh, 1701, 8vo, and often since; yet it gives no very favourable idea of Beza’s talent for French poetry. 3. “Confessio Christiana? fidei, cum Papisticis haeresibus, ex typ. I. Bonoe fidei,” 1560, 8vo. 4. “De haereticis a civili magistratu puniendis sub Oliva Rob. Stephani,” 1554. This is the original edition, but Colladon’s French translation, Geneva, 1560, 8vo, is, for whatever reason, in more request. 5. “Comedie du Pape malade, par Thrasibule Phenice,” Geneva, 1561, 8vo, 1584, 16mo. 6. “Traduction en vers Franais des Pseaumes omis par Marot,” Lyons, 1563, 4to, often reprinted with those of Marot, for the use of the Protestant churches. 7. “Histoire de la Mappemonde papistique, par Fragidelphe EscorcheMesses,” Luce-Nouvelle (Geneva), 1567, 4to. 8. “Le Reveilmatin des Francois et de leurs voisin, par Eusebe Philadelphe,” Edinburgh, 1574, 8vo. 9. De peste quaestiones duse explicate una, sitne contagiosa 1 altera, an et quatenus sit Christianis per secessionem vitanda?“Geneva, 1570, 8vo; Leyden, 1636, 12mo. This is one of the scarcest of Beza’s works. 10.” Histoire ecclesiastique des Eglises reformees au royaume de France, depols Tan 1521 jusqu'en 1563,“Antwerp (Geneva), 1580, 3 vols. 8vo. 11.” Icones Virorum Illustrium,“1580, 4to, translated into French, by Simon Goulet, under the title of” Vrais Pourtraits, &c.“Geneva, 1581, 4to. 12.” Tractatio de Repudiis et Divortiis accedit tractatus de Polygamia,“Geneva, 1590, 8vo. 13.” Epistola magistri Passavantii ad Petrum Lysetum," a satire on the latter. 14. His translation of the New Testament, with the original texts and notes, often reprinted. The best edition is that of Cambridge, 1642, fol. a work still in much estimation. He had also a share in the Geneva translation of the Bible, 1588, fol. Several of his controversial and practical tracts were translated into English, and printed here in the time of queen Elizabeth, of which the titles may be found in Ames. Among the Greek Mss. of the university of Cambridge, is one of the Four Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, presented by Beza, which is supposed to be of the third or fourth century at least, if not more ancient. In 1787, the university appointed the rev. Dr. Kipling, deputy regius professor of divinity, to superintend the publication of a fac simile of this valuable manuscript, which accordingly appeared in 1793, 2 vols. fol. a splendid and accurate work. The Latin epistle which Beza sent with this manuscript, and which is prefixed to it in his own hand-writing, may be seen in the note .

, an Italian scholar of the last century, was born at Parma, March 12, 1673. Aftertaking ecclesiastical orders, he was engaged in 1702 by the illustrious house of Sanvitali, both as domestic chaplain and tutor to the two young sons of that family, and at his leisure hours cultivated the study of history, chronology, and antiquities. One of his works was written while in this family, a very elaborate treatise, “Trattinemento Istorico e Chronologico,” &c. Naples, 2 vols. 4to, in which he endeavours to prove that Josephus’s history is neither false nor contrary to scripture, positions which had been denied in a treatise written on the subject by father Cæsar Calino, a Jesuit. When he had completed this work, the elder of his pupils, who by the death of his father bad succeeded to the estate, and was very much attached to the Jesuits, informed Biacca that the publication of it would not be agreeable to him. On this Biacca entrusted his manuscript to the celebrated Argelati, at Milan, and either with, or without his consent, it was printed at Naples in 1728. This provoked Sanvitali to forget his own and his father’s attachment to Biacca, who had resided twenty-six years in the family, and he ordered him to leave his house. Biacca, however, was received with respect into many other families, who each pressed him to take up his abode with them. After having lived at Milan for some years, he died at Parma, 8ept. 15, 1735. Being a member of the Arcadians, he, according to their custom, assumed the name of Parmindo Ibichense, which we find prefixed to several of his works. Besides his defence of Josephus, he wrote, 1. “Ortographia Manuale, o sia arte facile di correttamento Scrivere e Parlare,” Parma, 1714, 12mo. 2. “Notizie storiche di Rinuccio cardinal Pallavicino, di Pompeo Sacco Parmigiano, di Cornelio Magni, e del conte NiccoloCicognari Parmigiano,” printed in vols. I. and II. of the “Notizie istoriche clegli Arcadi morti,” Rome, 1720, 8vo. 3. “Le Selve de Stazio, tradotte in verso sciolto.” He translated also Catullus, and both make part of the collection of Italian translations of the ancient Latin authors, printed at Milan. In the poetical collections, there are many small pieces by Biacca.

, a native of Venice, deserves some notice in a work of this description, on account of his poems, which were the production of nature, without any aid from instruction or cultivation. He lived about the middle of the last century, and was a gondolier or waterman’s boy when he wrote, 1. “II Davide, re d'Israele, poema-eroico-sagro, di Antonio Bianchi, servitor di gondola Veneziano, canto XII.” Venice, 1751, fol. and reprinted the same year with an oratorio entitled “Elia sur Carmelo,” ibid. 8vo. In this, although we do not find a strict attention to the laws of the epic, nor the most perfect purity of language, yet there are many truly poetical, nervous, and highly animated passages. The same may be said of his, 2. “II Tempio owero il Salomone, canti X.” Venice, 1753, 4to, with historical and theological notes, which are believed to be from the same pen. In his first poem, he promised two others, one a heroi-comic, under the title of “Cuccagna distrutta,” the other “La Formica contro il Leone,” but it does not appear that either was published. He gave, however, a specimen of his critical talents, in a volume entitled “Osservazioni contro-critiche di Antonio Bianchi, sopra un trattato della commedia Italiana, &c. Venice, 1752, 8vo. Joseph Antony Costantini, the author of this treatise on Italian comedy, wrote an answer, and asserted that the” Observations“were not written by Bianchi, and that the poem of David was not his. Bianchi, however, in the preface to his second poem,” The Temple of Solomon," offered every kind of proof that he was the author of both. We have no farther account of this extraordinary young man, although it is probable from the merit and character of his poems, that he found patrons who procured him leisure and competence.

, called by Fabroni Blanchius, a religious of the order of the Minorites, was bora Oct. 2, 1686. For some years he taught philosophy and theology, and was afterwards provincial of his order in the Roman province, visitor of that of Bologna, one of the counsellors of the inquisition at Rome, and an examiner of the Roman clergy. He died Jan. 18, 1758. Amidst all these graver employments, he found leisure to indulge his taste for the belles lettres, and especially dramatic poetry, which procured him admission into the academy of the Arcadjans. His works were published under his assumed name of Farnabio Gioachino Annutini, a childish anagram of Fra Giovanni Antonio Bianchi. They are, principally, 1. “Tragedie sacre e morali,” four in number, one upon the history of sir Thomas More, and all in prose, Bologna, 1725, 8vo. 2. Other tragedies “La Dina,” “II Demetrio,” &c. published separately from 1734 to 1738. 3. “De‘ vizj e dei diflfeti del moderno teatro, e del modo di corregerli e d’emendarli, ragionamenti vi,” Rome, 17.53. In this, which he published under his academic name, Lauriso Tragiense, he defends the opinion of Maffei against that of Concilia, who had published a dissertation “De spectaculis theatralibus,” in which he maintained that dramatic exhibitions were unfriendly to religion and morals, an opinion which has not been confined, as usually said, to the puritans or methodists of England. 4. “Delia poteste e polizia deila Chiesa, trattati due contro le nuove opinion! di Pietro Giannone,” Rome, 1745 1751, 5 vols. 4to, a voluminous work in vindication of the temporal power of the pope, which had been attacked by Giannone in his History of Naples, and by Bossuet, whose principles Giannone adopted. He wrote some tragedies and comedies, which do not appear to have been printed, and left many other works in manuscript, which Fabroni has enumerated.

In 1686 he returned to his own country, and was very active in re-founding the academy of the Aletophili, or lovers of truth, recommending to them more attention to mathematical studies, and to assist them, he presented the society with the instruments which Montanari had bequeathed for him; but this academy entirely depended on his presence, and on his return to Rome two years after, gradually dissolved. Settled after this at Rome, he became connected with the most eminent men of his time, and enriched his stores of knowledge, by an acquaintance with Greek, Hebrew, and French. Antiquities likewise became one of his favourite pursuits. He often passed whole days among the splendid ruins of Rome, assisted at every research, and digging among them, visited all the museums, and made elegant and correct drawings of all the monuments of antiquity. On the death of Innocent XI. cardinal Ottoboni, his protector, being chosen pope by the name of Alexander VIII. continued to interest himself in the fortune of Bianchini, gave him a canonry in the church of St. Mary Rotunda, appointed him guardian and librarian to cardinal Peter Ottoboni his nephew, gave him two pensions, and would have promoted him yet farther, if he had lived, and if Bianchini would have taken orders but he had not made up his mind to take deacon’s orders until 1699, and never would proceed farther. On the death of Alexander VIII. in 1691, the cardinal, his nephew, continued his kindness, and besides bestowing a canonry on him in the cfiurch of St. Lawrence in Damaso, invited him to reside in his palace. Clement XI. who was elected pope in 1700, bestowed on him, the year following, the title of chamberlain of honour, authorized him to wear that dress of a prelate called the mantellone, and assigned him apartments in the palace of Monte-Cavallo.

Having, in 1703, been appointed president of antiquities, he exhibited to the pope, a plan for forming a collection of sacred antiques, or an ecclesiastical museum, intended to furnish materials for ecclesiastical history but as this, would have been attended with very great expence, and the papal treasury was at this time very low, the scheme was abandoned. The pope, however, to console Bianchini, who had it very much at heart, gave him a canonry in the church of St. Mary Maggiore, and, in 1712, sent him to Paris with a cardinal’s hat for Armand de Rohan-Soubise, who was promoted to that dignity. The object was trifling, but the journey was important, as serving to introduce Bianchini to the literati of France, who received him with the utmost respect. At Paris he was constant in his attendance at the sittings of the academy of sciences, who had many years betore elected him an honorary member, and he presented them witii a very ingenious improvement in the construction of the larger telescopes, to prevent those of uncommon length from, bending in the middle, an inconvenience which had been thought without remedy. Reaumur wrote a description of this, which is inserted in the memoirs of the academy for 1713. Before returning to Rome, Bianchini took a trip to Lorraine, Holland, and Flanders, and thence into England, visiting and examining every museum and place where objects of curiosity were to be seen, and was every where received with the respect due to his talents. During his residence at Oxford, it is said that the university defrayed the expenses of his lodging such is his biographer’s ao count, by which is probably meant that he was invited to lodge in one of the colleges.

On his return to Rome in the month of June, 1713, he resumed his astronomical and antiquarian pursuits. When in France he conceived the idea of tracing a meridian line through Italy, from sea to sea, in imitation of that of Cassini through the middle of France. He accordingly began his operations, and pursued the object at his own expence, ‘ for eight years, but other plans and employments occurring, he never completed the design. The papal favours, however, were still conferred on him, purely as a man of science. Innocent XIII. the successor of Clement XI. appointed him referendary of the pontifical signatures, and domestic prelate, and in the council held at Home in 1725, he filled the office of first historiographer. Next year, his love for antiquities was highly gratified, although at the same time checked by an accident which had serious consequences. Tnere was discovered near Rome on the Appian way, a magnificent marble subterraneous building of three large halls, whose walls consisted of a great number of little cells like those of our modern pidgeon -houses. Most of these cells contained, each, four cinerary urns, accompanied with inscriptions of the name and office of the person whose ashes they contained, who were all slaves or freed-men and women of the household of Augustus, especially that of Livk. There were also in this place some exquisite specimens of mosaic ornaments. Biauchini’s joy on this discovery may be easily appreciated by genuine antiquaries; but one unfortunate day, while he was examining one of the chambers or halls, and preparing to make a drawing, the ground on which he stood gave way, and although his fall was broken by some earth which had been dug, one of his thighs received such a serious injury, that he was lame for the remainde’r of his iif and although he found some relief at the baths of Vignona near Sienna, where he went the following year, his health was never completely re-established.

This accident, however, tfkd not interrupt his literary pursuits. He travelled to Florence, to Parma, and to Colorno, where, in the ducal palace, he traced a meridian, which does not now exist and on his return to Rome resumed his astronomical labours, particularly his observations on the planet Venus, whom he had been studying for a great many years. He set out by endeavouring to ascertain her parallax by the ingenious method invented by Cassini for the parallax of Mars. This method consists in comparing the motion of the planet, whose parallax is wanted, with some fixed stars very near it, and that for some considerable space of time, but a fair opportunity of doing it seldom happens. It was, however, signer Bianchini’s good fortune to meet with one in the beginning of July, 1716, when Venus and Regulus came to the meridian so nearly together, that he could discover them both in the same field of his refracting telescope. In observing the spots of Venus, he employed the instrument before ipentioned, which he presented to the academy of Paris. His observations, however, on this planet, although very interesting to the astronomers of his age, have not been confirmed by the more recent observations of Herschel and others, with instruments of much greater power than he possessed. What he published on this subject, in 1728, was among the last of his efforts for the promotion of science, as he now contracted a dropsical complaint of which he died March 2, 1729. He left his property to his nephew Joseph Bianchini, the subject of our next article, and the greater part of his books and ecclesiastical antiquities to the library of the chapter of Verona. Great honours were paid to his memory by a monument in the cathedral of Verona, voted by the city, and other public marks of esteem. He was a man of extensive knowledge, particularly in natural philosophy, mathematics, botany, agriculture, history, and antiquities. He also cultivated polite literature, oratory, and poetry. His manners, easy, elegant, and accommodating, were rather those of the world than of the schools, and he appears to have been beloved, or respected, wherever he went.

His works were numerous: the following list of the principal is arranged, rather according to the connexion of the subjects, than the chronological order, which in general it is convenient to preserve. 1. Three memoirs in the “Acta eruditorum,” of Leipsic, for 1685 and 1686, on a comet observed at Rome in 1684; on Cassini’s method of observing the parallaxes and distances of the planets, and on a total eclipse of the moon at Rome, Dec. 10, 1685. 2. A memoir on the comet seen at Rome in April 1702, with other astronomical observations inserted in the “Memoirs of the academy of Paris,” 1702, 1766, and 1708. All the preceding, if we mistake not, are in Latin. 3. “Relazione della Hnea meridiana orizzontale e della ellissi polarefabbricata in Roma l'anno 1702,” without his name in the Journal “de‘ Letterati d’ltalia,” vol. IV. 4. “Epistola de eclipsi soils die Maii, 1724,” Rome, 1724. 5. “Hesperi et Phosphori nova phenomena, sive observationes circa planetam Veneris,” Rome, 1728, fol. 6. “Fr. Bianchini astronomicæ et geographicæ observationes selectæ ex ejus autographis, &c. cura et studio Eustachii Manfredi,” Verona, 1737, fol. 7. “De emblemate, nomine atque instituto Alethophilorum, dissertatio publice habita in eorundem academia,” Verona, 1687. 8. “Istoria universale provata con monument! e figurata con simboli degli antichi,” Rome, 1697, 4to. This curious volume, the plates of which were engraven by himself, and from his own designs, was to have been followed by several others, completing the series of ancient history, but this proceeds no farther than the ruin of the Assyrian empire. He will perhaps be thought to deal in paradox, in asserting here that the Iliad is no more than a real history under the form of an allegory, each of Homer’s heroes or deities being a country or a king. 9. “De Kalendario et Cyclo Ciesaris ac de Paschali canone S. Hippolyti martyris, dissertationes dusc,” Rome, 1703, 1704, fol. This also contains an account of the gnomon he constructed, and the pope’s medal struck on that occasion. 10. Two papers explanatory of ancient sculptures, inserted in the “Memorie concernenti la citta d'Urbino,” Rome, 1724, fol. 11. “Camera et iscrizioni sepolcrali, &c.” the history of the discoveries he made in the sepulchral building before mentioned, Rome, 1727, fol. 12. “Del palazzo de' Cesari, opera postuma,” Verona, 1738, published by his nephew who had accompanied it with a Latin translation. 13. “Dissertatio posthuma de tribus generibus instrumentorum musicse veterum orgatiicse,” Rome, 1742, 4to. 14. An edieion of Anastasius Bibliothecarius’ history of the Popes, Rome, 1718, 1723, and 1728, 3 vols, fol. The fourth was added by his nephew. 15. “Opuscula varia,” Rome, 1754, 2 vols. 4to. To these may be added his Italian poems in the collection of those of the “Academici concordi,” of Ravenna, published at Bologna, 1687, )2mo. and many scientific letters, disertations, &c. in the Paris “History of the Academy of the Sciences,” for the years 1704, 1706—8, 1713, and 1718.

, nephew of the preceding, priest of the oratory of St. Philip de Neri, was also a learned antiquary. He was born at Verona Sept. 9, 1704, the son of John Baptist, brother to Francis Bianchini, and was educated under the eye of his uncle in the college of Montefiascone. Before 1725, he was promoted to a canonry in the cathedral, and a prebendal stall in St. Luke, and was soon after appointed librarian to the chapter: but in 1732 he resigned that and his benefices, and entered into the congregation of the oratory at Rome, where he divided his time between the pious duties of that order, and his literary researches, particularly in what related to history and ecclesiastical antiquities. His first publication was, 1. The fourth and concluding volume of his uncle’s edition of Anastasius Bibliothecarius, Rome, 1735, fol. 2. “Viridiciae canonicarum Scripturarum vulgatse Latinoe editionis,” Rome, 1740, fol. This volume, the only one published, was to have been followed by six others, the plan of which is sketched in the preface, which, with the preliminary dissertations, contains the history of all the different books of the bible, the manuscript copies in various libraries, the translations, &c. 3. “Evangeliarum quadruplex Latinse versionis antiquoe, seu veteris Italicte, nunc primum in lucem editum ex codd. Mss. aureis, argenteis, &c. aliisque plusquam millenariae antiquitatis,” Rome, 1749, fol. This may be considered as a part of the preceding. 4. “Demonstratio historiae ecclesiasticse quadripartitae monumentis ad fidem temporum et gestorum,” ibid, 1752, fol. A second volume was afterwards published of this elegant collection of fragments of antiquity, inscriptions, medals, vases, &c. found in the different churches, cemeteries, and museums of Rome, or elsewhere, beautifully engraven, and accompanied with explanations and chronological tables. It extends, however, no farther than the first two centuries of the Christian iera. 5. “Delle porte e mura di Roma, con illustrazioni,” ibid. 1747, 4to. 6. “Parere sopra la cagione della morte della sig. contessa Cornelia Zangari, esposto in una lettera,” Verona, 1731, and an improved edition, Rome, 1743, 8vo. This curious dissertation relates to a lady of rank who was found in her room reduced to ashes, except her head, legs, and one of her fingers. As this could not be ascribed to external fire, the room being no wise damaged, it excited much attention, and gave rise to a variety of opinions. Bianchini maintains in this tract, that it was the effect of an internal and spontaneous fire occasioned by the excessive use of camphorated brandy, to which the lady had been much addicted. The time of Bianchini’s death is not mentioned.

Bias is said to have composed above two thousand verses, containing prudential maxims, many of which may be found in Stanley, and other writers on the lives of the philosophers. The following have been selected by Brucker “It is a proof of a weak and disordered mind to desire impossibilities. The greatest infelicity is, not to be able to endure misfortunes patiently. Great minds alone can support a sudden reverse of fortune. The most pleasant state is, to be always gaining. Be not unmindful of the miseries of others. II you are handsome, do handsome things if deformed, supply the defects of nature by your virtues. Be slow in undertaking, but resolute in executing. Praise hot a worthless man for the sake of his wealth. Whatever good you do, ascribe it to the gods. Lay in wisdom as the store for your journey from youth to old age, for it is the most certain possession. Many men are dishonest; therefore love your friend with caution, for he may hereafter become your enemy.” This last, however, would have better become a Rochefoucault, or a Chesterfield. Bias happened to be at Priene, when it was taken and sacked, and when asked, why he did not, like the rest, think of saving something, answered, “So I do, for I carry my all with me.” The action by which his days were terminated was no less illustrious than those of h s former life. He caused himself to be carried into the senate, where he zealously defended the interest of one of his friends, but being now very old, it fatigued him much. He leaned his head on the breast of one of his daughter’s sons, who had accompanied him. When the orator, who pleaded for his opponent, had finished his discourse, the judges pronounced in favour of Bias, who immediately expired in the arms of his grandson.

, an eminent Protestant divine, whose real name was Buchmarij which he changed into Bibliander, according to a custom very prevalent in his time, was born in 1500, or rather 1504, according to D. Clement and Saxius, at Bischotfzel near St. Gall, and in 1532, succeeded Zwinglius in the divinity- chair at Zurick. This he rilled a considerable time, until having adopted some opinions on the subject of predestination, which were hostile to those generally received in the reformed church, he was gently dismissed by being declared emeritus, and his place supplied by Peter Martyr. He died of the plague at Zurich in 1564. He was a man of great reputation for learning, especially in the oriental languages. He wrote, 1. “Apologia pro edit. Aleorani^ edita à J. Fabricio, cum testamento Mohamedis,” Rostock, 1638, 4to. 2. “Machumetis Saraceriorum principis, ejusque successorum vitae, doctrina, ac ipse Alcoran,” &c. Basil, 1543, fol. This work is divided into three parts the first contains a Latin translation of the Alcoran the second, many pieces in refutation of the doctrines and errors of the Alcoran and the third, some parts of the works of Paul Jovius, and others, on the history and manners of the Turks. The whole was reprinted at Basil in 1550, but with considerable alterations in the second part, and the addition of some articles to the third. 3. “Quomodo oporteat legere sacras scripturas, praescriptiones Apostolorum, Prophetarum, &c.” ibid. 1550, 8vo. 4. “Amplior consideratio decreti synodalis Trident, de authent. doct. eccl. Dei, &c.” 1551, 8vo. 5. “Sermo divin, majest. voce pronunciatus, seu Comment, in Decalog. et Sermon. Dom. in monte Sinai,” Basil, 1552, fol. 6. “Concilium sacrosanctum eccl. cathol. in quo demonstratur quomodo possit pereunti populo Christiano succurri,” 1552, 8vo. 7. “Vita B. Marci evangelists,” Bale, 1552. 8. “De ratione temp. Christ. c. liber,” ibid. 1551, 8vo. 9. “Temporum a condito mundo usque ad ultim. ipsiiis aetat. supputatio,” ibid. 1553, fol. 10. “Evangelica historia,” ibid. 1551.

, a noted Socinian writer, was born in 1615, at Wotton-under-Edge, in Gloucestershire. He was educated at the free-school in that town and, being a promising youth, was noticed by George lord Berkeley, who made him an allowance of 10l. a year. While at this school, he translated Virgil’s eclogues, and the two first satires of Juvenal, into English verse, both which were printed at London in 1634, in 8vo. In 1634 he was sent to Oxford, and entered at Magdalen-hall. June 23, 1683, he took the degree of bachelor of arts, and soon after was invited to be master of the school of his native place, but declined it. May 20, 1691, he took his degree of master of arts; and the magistrates of Gloucester having chosen him master of the free-school of St. Mary de Crypt in that city, he went and settled there, and was much esteemed for his diligence. Falling, however, into some opinions concerning the Trinity, different from those commonly received, and having expressed his thoughts with too much freedom, he was accused of heresy: and being summoned before the magistrates, he exhibited in writing a confession, which not being thought satisfactory, he was obliged to make another more explicit than the former. When ha had fully considered this doctrine, he comprised it in twelve arguments drawn, as he pretended, froai the Scripture wherein the commonly-received opinion, touching the deity of the Holy Spirit, is attempted to be refuted . An acquaintance who had a copy of them, having shewed them, to the magistrates of Gloucester, and to the parliament committee then residing there, he was committed, Dec. 2, 1645, to the common gaol, till the parliament should take cognizance of the matter. However, an eminent person in Gloucester procured his enlargement, by giving security for his appearance when the parliament should send for him. June 1616, archbishop Usher, passing through Gloucester in his way to London, had a conference with our author, and endeavoured, but in vain, to convince him of his errors. Six months after he had been set at liberty he was summoned to appear at Westminster, and the parliament appointed a committee to examine him before whom he freely confessed, that he did not acknowledge the commonly-received notion of the divinity of the Holy Ghost, but, however, was ready to hear what could be opposed to him, and, if he could not make out his opinion to be true, honestly to own his error. But being wearied with tedious and expensive delays, he wrote a letter to sir Henry Vane, a member of the committee, requesting him either to procure his discharge, or to make a report of his case to the house of commons. The result of this was, his being committed to the custody of one of their officers, which restraint continued the five years following. He was at length referred to the assembly of divines then sitting at Westminster, before whom he often appeared, and gave them in writing his twelve arguments, which were published the same year. Upon their publication, he was summoned to appear at the bar of the house of commons; where being asked, “Whether he owned this treatise, and the opinions therein” he answered in the affirmative. Upon which he was committed to prison, and the house ordered, Sept. 6, 1747, that the book should be called in and burnt by the hangman, and the author be examined by the committee of plundered ministers. But Mr. Biddle drew a greater storm upon himself by two tracts he published in 1648, “A confession of faith touching the Holy Trinity according to the Scripture” and “The testimonies of Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Novatianusy Theophilus, Origen, also of Arnobius, Lactantius, Eusebius, Hilary, and Brightman, concerning that one God, and the persons of the Holy Trinity, together with observations on the same.” As soon as they were published, the assembly of divines solicited the parliament, and procured an ordinance, inflicting death upon those that held opinions contrary to the received doctrine about the Trinity, and severe penalties upon those who differed in lesser matters. Biddle, however, escaped by a dissension in the parliament, part of which was joined by the army; many of whom, both officers and soldiers, being liable to the severities of the ordinance above-mentioned, it therefore from that time lay unregarded for several years. Biddle had now more liberty allowed him by his keepers who suffered him, upon security given, to go into Staffordshire, where he lived some time with a justice of peace, who entertained him with great hospitality, and at his death left him a legacy. Serjeant John Bradshaw, president of the council of state, having got intelligence of this indulgence granted him, caused him to be recalled, and more strictly confined. In this confinement he spent his whole substance, and was reduced to great indigence, till he was employed by Roger Daniel of London, to correct an impression of the Septuagint Bible, which that printer was about to publish and this gained him for some time a comfortable subsistence.

In 1654 the parliament published a general act of oblivion, when Biddle was restored to his liberty. This he improved among those friends he had gained in London, in meeting together every Sunday for expounding the Scripture, and discoursing thereupon; by which means his opinions concerning the unity of God, Christ his only son, and his holy spirit, were so propagated, that the presbyterian ministers became highly offended. The same year he published his “Twofold scripture catechism,” which was ably answered by Dr. Owen in his “Vindicise Evangelicae,” Oxford, 1655; but a copy coming into the hands of some of the members of Cromwell’s parliament, meeting Sept. 3, 1654, a complaint was made against it in the house of commons. Upon this, the author being brought to the bar, and asked “Whether he wrote that book?” answered by asking, “Whether it seemed reasonable, that one brought before a judgment seat as a criminal, should accuse himself?” After some debates and resolutions, he was, Dec. 13, committed close prisoner to the Gatehouse. A bill likewise was ordered to be brought in for punishing him but, after about six months imprisonment, he obtained his liberty at the court of king’s bench, by due course of law. About a year after, another no less formidable danger overtook him, by his engaging in a dispute with one Griffin, an anabaptist teacher. Many of Griffin’s congregation having embraced Biddle' s opinions concerning the Trinity, he thought the best way to stop the spreading of such errors would be openly to confute his tenets. For this purpose he challenges Biddle to a public disputation at his meeting in the Stone chapel in St. Paul’s cathedral, on this question, “Whether Jesus Christ be the most high, or almighty God?” Biddle would have declined the dispute, but was obliged to accept of it and the two antagonists having met amidst a ifumerous audience, Griffin repeats the question, asking “if any man there did deny that Christ was God most high” to which Biddle resolutely answered, “I do deny it” and by this open profession gave his adversaries the opportunity of a positive and clear accusation, which they soon laid hold of. But Griffin being baffled, the disputation was deferred till another day, when Biddle was to take his turn of proving the negative of the question. Meanwhile, Griffin and his party, not thinking themselves a match for our author, accused him of fresh blasphemies, and procured an order from the protector to apprehend him, July the 3d (being the day before the intended second disputation), and to commit him to the Compter. He was afterwards sent to Newgate, and ordered to be tried for his life the next sessions, on the ordinance against blasphemy. However, the protector not chusing to have him either condemned or absolved, took him out of the hands of the law, and detained him in prison; till at length, being wearied with receiving petitions for and against him, he banished him to St. Mary’s castle, in the isle of Scilly y where he was sent Oct. 1655. During this exile, he employed himself in studying several intricate matters, particularly the Revelation of St. John, and after his return to London, published an essay towards explaining it. In 1658, the protector, through the intercession of many friends, suffered a writ of habeas corpus to be granted out of the king’s bench, whereby the prisoner was brought back, and, nothing being laid to his charge, was set at liberty. Upon his return to London, he became pastor of an independent meeting but did not continue long in town for, Cromwell dying Sept. 3, 1658, his son Richard called a parliament, consisting chiefly of presbyterians, whom, of all men, Biddle most dreaded he therefore retired privately into the country. This parliament being soon dissolved, he returned to his former employment till the restoration of king Charles the Second, when the liberty of dissenters was taken away, and their meetings punished as seditious. Biddle then restrained himself from public to more private assemblies, but, June 1, 1662, he was seized in his lodging, where he and some few of his friends had met for divine worship, and was, with them, carried before a justice of peace, who committed them all to prison, where they lay till the recorder took security for their answering to the charge brought against them at the next session. But the court not being then able to find a statute whereon to form, any criminal indictment, they were referred to the session following, and proceeded against at common law; each of the hearers was fined 20l. Biddle, 100l., and to lie in prison till paid. By his confinement, however, he contracted a disease which put an end to his life, Sept. 22, 1662, in the 47th year of his age. He was buried in the cemetery near Old Bethlem, in Moorfields and a monument was erected over his grave, with an inscription. His life was published in Latin at London, 1682, by Mr. Farrington, of the Inner Temple, who gives him a high character for piety and morals, and by the Rev. Joshua Toulmin, in 1789, 8vo, who styles him the Father of the English Unitarians.

, a very learned and voluminous German writer, was born at Naumberg, April 5, 1705, and studied at Wittemberg, where he was admitted to his master’s degree in 1717, and soon after made librarian to the city. In 1732 he returned to Naumberg, ancl was appointed co-rector of the public school, in which office he continued for nine years, and in 1741, on the death of John George Scutz, was promoted to be rector. In 1747, the place of rector of the school of Friedburg becoming vacant, he was invited to fill it, and accordingly, with the coiTsent of his patrons at Nauinberg, he removed thither, and added greatly to the reputation of' the school. He died there in 1772, leaving a vast number of works in Latin and German, published during his literary career, some of which involved him in controversies with his contemporaries, carried on in the German journals with a considerable degree of animosity. Harles enumerates above an hundred and fifty articles of his publication, separately, or in the literary journals, on subjects of sacred criticism, philology, the arts, poetical criticism, and some works of whim and imagination; the following selection will probably afford a sufficient specimen 1. “De insolentia titulorum librariorum,” Naumberg, 1743. 2. “De religione eruditorum,” ibid. 1744. 3. “Metelemata philologica,” ibid. 1746, with a continuation, 1748 50. 4. “Cur homines montani male audiant?” ibid. 1748. 5. “De Latinitate maccaronica,” ibid. 6. “De Isopsephis,” ibid. 7. “Fabulosa de septem dormientibus historia,” ibid. 1752. 8.“DearteObliviscendi,”ibid. 1752. 9.“De primis rei metallicae inventoribus,” ibid. 1763. 10. “De antiquitate sodinarum metallicarum,” ibid. 1764. 11.“Acta scholastica,” 1741, &c. 8 vols. a collection of programmes and academical dissertations, continued afterwards under the title of “Nova acta scholastica.” 12. “Selecta scholastica,” 1744 46, 2 vols. 13. “Otia litteraria,” Freiburgh, 1751. In a dissertation which he published in 1749, “De vita musica ad Plauti Mostellarium,” act III. sc. 2. v. 40, he has collected all that the ancients and moderns have advanced against music and musicians but, as this was founded on mistaking the sense of Plautus, it ocsasioned a long literary contest, in which Bidermann did not appear to the best advantage. Harles, indeed, allows that his judgment did not always keep pace with his learning.

, a famous anatomical writer, was born at Amsterdam March 12, 1649. After he had passed through his academical studies, he applied himself to physic and anatomy, and took his degree of M. D. He soon acquired considerable practice; in 1688 was made professor of anatomy at the Hague, which he quitted in 1694 for the professorship of anatomy and chirurgery at Leyden; and afterwards William III. of England appointed him his physician, which he accepted on condition of holding his professorship. The king died in 1702, and Bidloo returned to his former employments, in which he had been interrupted by his constant attendance upon that prince. He died at Ley den, April 1713, being 64 years of age. His chief work was his “Anatomia humani corporis,” in 105 plates drawn by Lairesse, Amst. 1685, fol. very beautiful, but not entirely correct, a circumstance which being pointed out by the celebrated Ruysch, drew from Bidloo a reply not very temperate, entitled “Vindiciae quorundam Delineationum Anatomicarum contra ineptasAnimadversionesF. Ruyschii, &c.” 1697,4to. Bidloo also published 1. “A letter to Anthony Leeuvvenhoek concerning the animals which are sometimes found in the liver of sheep or some other animals.” This was published in Low Dutch, Delft, 1698, 4to. 2. “Gulielmus Cowper criminis Literarii citatus coram tribunali nobiliss. ampliss. Societatis Britanno-Regiae,” Leyden, 1700, 4to, pagg. 4. This piece contains a very severe accusation against Mr. Cowper, a surgeon of London, and fellow of the royal society. Dr. Bidloo being informed that Mr. Cowper was engaged in translating his anatomy into English, had a conversation with him while he was at London, and offered him that in case he had such a design, he would communicate several additions and remarks, which he had made since the publication of that work. Mr. Cowper assured him, that he had no intention of that kind, as he did not understand Latin sufficiently to execute such a task. In the mean while he procured three hundred copies of the cuts of Dr. Bidloo’s book to be bought for him in Holland, upon which he caused the references to be written very artfully, in order to change, and add to, and frequently to spoil the doctor’s explication of the cuts. He had, likewise, an English title-page pasted upon the Latin one, in which, instead of the real author’s name his own was inserted, and he placed his own picture in the room of Dr. Bidloo’s. And although he occasionally mentioned our author in the preface, and added a few cuts at the end, Bidloo affirms, that the preface was inserted afterwards, when Mr. Cowper found that this piece of plagiarism would be resented. He observes, also, that the figures in the appendix were not drawn from the life, since there was no proportion observed in them, as is evident to those who understand the first principles of anatomy. Mr. Cowper wrote an answer to this piece, wherein he charged Dr. Bidloo likewise with plagiarism, and several mistakes, which he had committed; and this affair gave occasion to his publishing afterwards his great work upon the muscles. 3. “Exercitationum Anatomico-Chirurgicarum Decades dua”,“Leyden, 1708, 4to. 4. He published likewise a small piece upon the disease of which king William III. of England died. 5.” Letters of the Apostles who were martyred,“Amsterdam, 1698, 4to, in Low Dutch verse, of which, as well as of Latin, he was very fond, and was thought to have succeeded. He supposes jn this book, that the apostles wrote these letters before they suffered, martyrdom, and addressed them to their disciples, in order to inform them of their last desires, and to instruct them in what manner they ought to act after themselves were removed from this world. There was published at Leyden, 1719, a miscellaneous collection of our author’s poems in Low Dutch. His brother, Lambert Bidloo, an apothecary at Amsterdam, was the author of some Dutch poetry, and of a work” De re herbaria,“printed at the end of the” Catalogue of the Garden of Amsterdam," by Commelin, Leyden, 1709, 12mo. Lambert’s son, Nicholas, became first physician to the Czar Peter I., and inspector of the hospital of St. Petersburgh.

Another de Bie (Jacob or James), who was born at Antwerp, in 1581, was an eminent engraver of antiquities, coins, &c. and published, 1. “Imperatorum Roman. Numismata,” from Julius Caesar to Heraclius, Ant. 1615, 4to. 2. “Numismata Graecise,” ibid. foi. 3. “La France Metallique, &c.” Paris, 1636; also the portraits for Mezeray’s history, and other works of a similar kind. His style resembles that of the Collaerts, and he drew correctly, and executed his plates entirely with the graver, in a neat clear determined manner, and upon the whole, his prints may rank with those of the best early Flemish masters.

, and not de la Vigne, as he is generally called by writers who have occasion to name him [for it is thus he gives his own name in his “Roman des Oiseaux”], was born of a noble family of the diocese of Bayeux, about 1428. He was chaplain to king John, and followed that prince into England after the battle of Poletiers. Being at Rochefort in 1459, he began a poem on the chace, entitled “Le Roman des Oiseaux,” which he finished on his return to France. This he did at the command of the king for the instruction of his son Philip duke of Burgundy. The abbé Goujet attributes this poem to Gaston de Foix, from its being printed at the end of the “Miroir de la Chasse” by that prince, but greatly different from the manuscripts. Gaston’s work printed by Trepperel at Paris, fol. without a date, and again in 1520, consists of two parts, the first Gaston’s, and the second by Bigne. Bigne is supposed, from some passages in his work, to have been alive in 1475. The personages in this poem, or romance, are allegorical, and dispute which species of the chace has the pre-eminence, appealing to the king, who, after having advised with his counsellors, wisdom, reason, and truth, (not very usually called in) sends away the disputants perfectly satisfied. The style is easy, and the author’s quaintness will be agreeable to the lovers of early poetry.

, a counsellor of the presklial of Rheims, was born there in 1709, and died at Paris in 1775. He was well versed in ancient and modern, literature We have by him, 1. “A collection of Latin and French poems,” 1767, 12mo; which are short, and in an easy and natural style. His epigrams are very much in the manner of the chevalier de Cailli and he has one singularity in all his poetieal productions, that he has not one piece, either in Latin or French, that exceeds twenty lines. Some of his countrymen have compared them to those of Catullus, and several writers in the journals have extolled them as productions of extraordinary merit. But M. Bignicourt is best known for his 2. “Pensees et reflections philosophiques,” 1755, 12mo. This work, which was afterwards published under the title of “L‘homme du. Monde & L’homme de Lettres,” has, however, its admirers and its censurers, with respect to the method of writing set phrases, and giving them as thoughts and maxims.

, a learned writer, and bishop, in the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth century, was born in the city of Winchester, being the son of Harman Bilson, the same probably who was fellow of Merton-college in 1536, and derived his descent by his grandmother, or great-grandmother, from the duke of t>avaria. He was educated in Winchester school and in 1565 admitted perpetual fellow of New-college, after he had served two years of probation. October 10, 1566, he took his degree of bachelor, and April 25, 1570, that of master of arts; that of bachelor of divinity, June 24, 1579; and the degree of doctor of divinity on the 24th of January 1580. In his younger years, he was a great lover of, and extremely studious in, poetry, philosophy, and physic. But when he entered into holy orders, and applied himself to the study of divinity, which his genius chiefly led him to, he became a most solid and constant preacher, and one of the most accomplished scholars of his time. The first preferment he had was that of master of Winchester-school he was then made prebendary of Winchester, and afterwards warden of the college there. To this college he did a very important service, about the year 1584, by preserving the revenues of it when they were in danger of being swallowed up by a notorious forgery, of which, however, we have only an obscure account. In 1585, he published his book of “The true difference betweene Christian Subjection and unchristian Rebellion,” and dedicated it to queen Elizabeth a work, which, although it might answer her immediate purpose, was of fatal tendency to Charles I. few books being more frequently quoted by the mal-contents to justify their resistance to that prince. In 1593, he published a very able defence of episcopacy, entitled, “The perpetuall Government of Christes Church: wherein are handled, the fatherly superioritie which God first established in the patriarkes for the guiding of his Church, and after continued in the tribe of Levi and the Prophetes and lastlie confirmed in the New Testament to the apostles and their successors: as also the points in question at this day, touching the Jewish Synedrion: the true kingdome of Christ: the Apostles’ commission: the laie presbyterie: the distinction of bishops from presbyters, and their succession from the apostles times and hands: the calling and moderating of provinciall synods by primates and metropolitanes the allotting of dioceses, and the popular electing of such as must feede and watch the flock and divers other points concerning the pastoral regiment of the house of God.” On the 20th of April, 15y6, he was elected v confirmed June the llth, and the 13th of the same month consecrated bishop of Worcester and translated in May following to the bishopric of Winchester, and made a privy-counsellor. In 1599, he published “The effect of certaine Sermons touching the full Redemption of Mankind by the death and bloud of Christ Jesus wherein, besides the merite of Christ’s suffering, the manner of his offering, the power of his death, the comfort of his crosse, the glorie of his resurrection, are handled, what paines Christ suffered in his soule on the crosse together with the place and purpose of his descent to hel after death” &c. Lond. 4to. These sermons being preached at Paul’s Cross in Lent 1597, by the encouragement of archbishop Whitgift, greatly alarmed most of the Puritans, because they contradicted some of their tenets, but they are not now thought consonant to the articles of the church of England. The Puritans, however, uniting their forces, and making their observations, sent them to Henry Jacob, a learned puritan, who published them under his own name. The queen being at Farnham-castle, and, to use the bishop’s words, “taking knowledge of the things questioned between him and his opponents, directly commanded him neither to desert the doctrine, nor to let the calling which he bore in the church of God, to be trampled under foot by such unquiet refusers of trueth and authoritie.” Upon this royal command, he wrote a learned treatise, chiefly delivered in sermons, which was published in 1604, under the title of “The survey^of Christ’s sufferings for Man’s Redemption and of his descent to hades or hel for our deliverance,” Lond. fol. He also preached the sermon at Westminster before king James I. and his queen, at their coronation on St. James’s day, July 28, 1603, from Rom. xiii. L. London, 1603, 8vo. In January 1603-4, he was one of the speakers and managers at the Hampton-Court conference, in which he spoke much, and, according to Mr. Fuller, most learnedly, and, in general, was one of the chief maintainers and supports of the church of England. The care of revising, and putting the last hand to, the new translation of the English Bible in king James Ist’s reign, was committed to our author, and to Dr. Miles Smith, afterwards bishop of Gloucester. His last public act, recorded in history, was the being one of the delegates that pronounced and signed the sentence of divorce between Robert Devereux, earl of Essex, and the lady Frances Howard, in the year 1613 and his son being knighted soon after upon this very account, as was imagined, the world was so malicious as to give him the title of sir Nullity Bilson. This learned bishop, after having gone through many employments, departed this life on the 18th of June, 1616, and was buried in Westminsterabbey, near the entrance into St. Edmund’s chapel, on the south side of the monument of king Richard II. His character is represented to the utmost advantage by several persons. Sir Anthony Weldon calls him “an excellent civilian, and a very great scholler” Fuller, “a deep and profound scholar, excellently well read in the fathers” Bishop Godwin, “a very grave iman and how great a divine (adds he), if any one knows not, let him consult his learned writings” Sir John Harrington, “I find but foure lines (in bishop Godwin’s book) concerning him and if I should give him his due, in proportion to the rest, I should spend foure leaves. Not that I need make him better known, being one of the most eminent of his ranck, and a man that carried prelature in his very aspect. His rising was meerly by his learning, as true prelates should rise. Sint non modo labe mali sed suspicione carentes, not onely free from the spot, but from the speech of corruption.” He wrote in a more elegant style, and in fuller and betterturned periods, than was usual in the times wherein he lived. It is related of our prelate, that once, when he was preaching a sermon* at St. Paul’s Cross, a sudden panic, occasioned by the folly or caprice of one of the audience, seized the multitude there assembled, who thought that the church was falling on their heads. The good bishop, who sympathized with the people more from pity than from fear, after a sufficient pause, reassumed and went through his sermon with great composure.

, the writer of several tracts on theological subjects, and author of that laborious performance, “Origines ecclesiastic, or the Antiquities of the Christian church,” was the son of Mr. Francis Bingham, a respectable inhabitant of Wakefield in Yorkshire, where our author was born in September, 1668. He learned the first rudiments of grammar at a school in the same town, and on the 26th of May 1684, was admitted a member of University college in Oxford. There he applied with persevering industry to those studies which are generally considered as most laborious. Though he by no means neglected the writers of Greece or Rome, yet he employed most of his time in studying the writings of the fathers. How earnestly he devoted himself to these abstruse inquiries, he had an early opportunity of giving an honourable testimony, which will presently be mentioned more at large. He took the degree of B. A. in 1688, and on the 1st of July 1689 was elected fellow of the above-mentioned college. His election to this fellowship was attended with some flattering marks of honour and distinction. On the 23d of June, 1691, he was created M. A. about four years after which a circumstance occurred which eventually occasioned him to leave the university. Being called on to preach before that learned body, he would not let slip the opportunity it gave him of evincing publicly his intimate acquaintance with the opinions and doctrines of the fathers, and at the same time of displaying the zeal with which he was resolved to defend their tenets concerning the Trinity, in opposition to the attacks of men in much more conspicuous stations than himself. Having heard what he conceived to be a very erroneous statement of that subject delivered by a leading man from the pulpit at St. Mary’s, he thought it his duty on this occasion to point out to his hearers what the fathers had asserted to be the ecclesiastical notion of the term person. In pursuance of this determination he delivered a very long discourse on the 28th of October, 1695, from the famous words of the apostle, “There are three that bear record in heaven, &c.” This sermon, though containing nothing more than an elaborate defence of the term person, in opposition to the explanation which he had lately heard, drew a heavy censure on the preacher from the ruling members of the university, charging him with having asserted doctrines false, impious, and heretical, contrary to those of the catholic church. This censure was followed by other charges in the public prints, viz. those of Arianism, Tritheism and the heresy of Valentinus Gentilis. These matters ran so high, that he found himself under the necessity of resigning his fellowship, and of withdrawing from the university the former of which took place on the 23d of November 1695. How wholly unmerited these accusations were, not only appears from the sermon itself, now in the possession of the writer of this article, but also from the whole tenor of his life and writings, constantly shewing himself in both a zealous defender of what- is called the orthodox notion of the Trinity. However, that such a censure was passed, is most certain, as well from domestic tradition, as from the mention which is repeatedly made of it in the manuscript papers of our author but we are assured that no traces thereof are now to be found in the books of the university.

About this time our author was presented, without any solicitation on his part, by the famous Dr. Radcliffe, to the rectory of Headbourne- Worthy, a living valued at that time at about one hundred pounds a year situated near Winchester. Within a few months after his settling in this country, being called on to preach at a visitation held in the cathedral of Winchester, on the 12th of May, 1696, he seized that opportunity of pursuing the subject which he had begun at Oxford, and of exculpating himself from those charges which had been brought against him. How little our divine had deserved those imputations in the opinion of his brethren, before whom he preached, may in some degree be judged from his having been, at no greater distance of time than the 16th of September, 1697, again appointed to preach before them on a similar occasion. He then brought to a conclusion what he wished farther to say on that subject, his manner of treating which had exposed him to the censure of the university and having done so, he prepared to commit his three sermons to the press. Why this intention was not fulfilled cannot be gathered from any of his papers, though there exists among them a long preface to the sermon preached at Oxford, explaining and justifying his motives for having preached and published it; and a second preface annexed to the first of those preached at Winton, in which he dedicates the two visitation sermons to the clergy of the deanery before whom they were delivered; wherein he tells them, that he has been induced to do so not only from the subject contained in them being such as was their immediate concern, but also that he might have an opportunity of giving a more full account of the motives and circumstances which had occasioned him to write or to publish them.

The preface gives a very long and learned account of what Mr. Bingham had in his sermons asserted concerning the opinions of the fathers. To follow or repeat his observations on this subject would lead us into matter too prolix for an article of biography.

About six or seven years after our author had taken up his residence at Worthy, he married Dorothea, one of the daughters of the rev. Richard Pococke, at that time rector of Colmer in Hampshire. By this lady, before he had any other preferment than the small living above-mentioned, he became the father of ten children yet neither did he suffer the rapid increase of his family, nor the consequent narrowness of his finances, to depress his spirits, or impede the progress of his studies. On the contrary, he appears to have applied to his literary pursuits with a closer and more persevering industry; and by those means, in the course of what cannot be considered as a long life, he was enabled to complete in this country retirement, besides several other single volumes, a most learned and laborious work, closely printed in ten volumes in octavo, under the title of “Origines Ecclesiastics, or the Antiquities of the Christian Church,” the first volume of which he published in 1708. He committed the last volume to the press in 1722. Of the various difficulties with which our author had to contend in the prosecution of his labours, he frequently speaks in such pointed terms as cannot but excite both our sympathy and regret. He tells us that he had to struggle with an infirm and sickly constitution, and constantly laboured under the greatest disadvantages, for want of many necessary books, which he had no opportunity to see, and no ability to purchase. At the same time he does not omit to express his gratitude to Providence, which had so placed him, that he could have recourse to a very excellent library, that of the cathedral church of Winchester, left by bishop Morley though even that vyas deficient in many works to which he had occasion to refer; and yet when we turn to ^he Index auct^ruai at the end of his work, we shull perhaps be astonished at the vast number of books which he appears to have consulted. But to such straits was he driven for want of books, that he frequently procured imperfect copies at a cheap rate, and then employed a part of that time, of which so small a portion was allotted him, and which therefore could so ill be spared, in the tedious task of transcribing the deficient pages instances of which are slill in being, and serve as memorials of his indefatigable industry on all occasions.

In 1712, sir Jonathan Trelawny, at that time bishop of Winchester, was pleased to collate our learned divine to the rectory of Havant, near Portsmouth, as a reward for his diligence which preferment, together with the sums he was daily receiving from the sale of his works, seemed i n some measure to have removed the narrowness of his circumstances, and to promise a comfortable maintenance for his numerous family; but this pleasing prospect shortly disappeared he lost almost or quite the whole of his hardly earned gains in 1720, by the bursting of the wellknown South Sea bubble. Yet such was the tranquillity of his disposition, that he continued his studies without intermission almost to the very end of his life for though but a few months elapsed between the publication of the last volume of Origines and his death, yet that short time was employed in preparing materials for other laborious works, and in making preparations for a new edition of Origiaes. With this view he inserted many manuscript observations, in a set of the Antiquities which he preserved for his own use, and which are now in the possession of the furnisher of this article. But from this and all other employments he was prevented by death. His constitution, which was by nature extremely weak and delicate, could not be otherwise than much impaired by so unremitted a course of laborious studies, in a life wholly sedentary and recluse, which brought on at an early period all the symptoms and infirmities of a very advanced age. The approach of his dissolution being clearly visible both to himself and friends, it was settled between the then bishop of Winchester, Dr. Trimnell, and himself, that he should resign Havant to enable his lordship to appoint some friend of the family to hold it, till his eldest son, then about years of age, could be collated to it. As this however was not carried into execution, it is probable that his death came on more hastily than had been expected, and prevented Dr. Trimnell from giving him what he fully intended, the first vacant prebend in Winchester.

1. “The French church’s apology for the church of England or the objections of dissenters against the articles, homilies, liturgy, and canons of the English church, considered, and answered upon the principles of the reformed church of France. A work chiefly extracted out of the authentic acts and decrees of the French national synods, and the most approved writers of that church,” 1706, 8vo.

, the second son of the eminent writer before mentioned, was the last of his numerous family, and consequently extremely young at the time of his father’s death. Though he died in very early life, yet during the short period of his existence, he pursued his studies with such unremitting 'perseverance, and gave such early proofs of genius and sound understanding, and so strongly evinced his determination to tread in the footsteps of his father, as fully entitle him to a few lines from the pen of the biographer. This young man received his education on the foundation at the Charter-house, from whence he was at the usual age removed to Corpus college in Oxford. In the university he was a most exemplary and persevering student, and was preparing to give public proofs of his diligence, having actually printed every part, except the title-pruge and preface, of a very valuable edition of the Theban story, which was completed and published after his death by a gentleman, into whose hands his papers had fallen, as a security for a sum of money which had been borrowed to facilitate the publication. Whilst he was thus usefully employed, and just as he was on the point of being ordained, with every prospect of promotion from the patronage of archbishop Potter, he was suddenly brought to his grave, at the immature age of 22, by an illness wholly occasioned by -too sedentary a life, and too close an application to his studies. He lies buried in the cloisters of Corpus college, without either monument, inscription, or stone erected to his memory, though it might most truly be said of him, that he fell a martyr to application, industry, and learning.

Patronized by Mr. Potinger, his grandfather, who very early discovered his promising talents and amiable disposition, he was at 12 years of age sent to the king’s college at Westminster and by his unremitting industry so improved his abilities, that he was elected, before he had reached his 17th year, student of Christ-church in Oxford. Being here valued on account of his literary attainments, and justly beloved for the urbanity of his manners, he was within four years from his matriculation, elected fellow of All Souls’ college, where he had an opportunity of cultivating a sincere and unalterable friendship with many gentlemen of the most distinguished reputation and it has been justly remarked to'-his honour and credit, that he never made an acquaintance by whom he was not highly respected, or formed an intimacy that was not permanent. The late excellent judge, sir William Blackstone, who was his friend and contemporary, and whom he not a little assisted in his “Stemmata Chicheliana,” well knew his worth, and kept up a correspondence with him, with a sincerity and fervour unaltered and undiminished, to the last hour of his life. In 1745-6, when party ran high, and the Pretender had made incursions into England, he served the office of proctor in the university, and conducted himself in those troublesome times with a proper spirit and resolution, as became an upright magistrate and a good man. Being a few years after, on the death of the rev. Christopher Pitt, the excellent translator of Virgil’s Æneid, presented by George Pitt, esq. (the late lord Rivers) to the rectory of Pimpern, Dorset, he married a lady to whom he had been some time engaged, by whom he had three children, a daughter and two sons but his wife, whom he doated on, with the tenderest affection, was, after the death of her youngest child, seized with an illness which terminated in a dropsy, and brought her to the grave in the 36th year of her age. She was buried, in 1756, in the chancel of the parish-church of Pimpern.

, a Swedish traveller of considerable note, was born in the province of Sudermania, in 1731. After completing his studies at Upsal, he was engaged as tutor in the family of baron de Rndbeck, with whose son he travelled in England, France, Italy, Germany, &c. During his residence at Paris, he applied himself eagerly to the study of the oriental languages, for which he had always had a strong predilection. On his return, Gustavus III. employed him on a voyage to Greece, Syria, and Kgypt, and at the same time appointed him titular professor of the university of Lunden. He departed accordingly in 1776 for Constantinople, where he remained some time to acquire the Turkish language and was afterwards pursuing his journey, when he was seized with the plague, and died at Salonichi, or Salonica, July 12, '1779. His letters, containing an account of his travels, were published in Swedish at Stockholm, 1778, 3 vols. 8vo. They contain many curious particulars respecting medals, manuscripts, scarce books, and some interesting anecdotes of Voltaire, whom he visited, yet he is accused of inaccuracy in many points but it ought to be added, that these letters were not intended for publication.

, a late valuable historical and biographical writer, was born in the parish of St. John’s Clerkenwell, on the 23d of November, 1705. His parents were both of them quakers, and his father, Joseph Birch, was a coffee-mill maker by trade. Mr. Joseph Birch endeavoured to bring up his son Thomas to his own business; but so ardent was the youth’s passion for reading, that he solicited his father to be indulged in his inclination, promising, in that case, to provide for himself. The first school he went to was at Hemel-hempsted in Hertfordshire, kept by John Owen, a rigid quaker, for whom Mr. Birch afterwards officiated, some little while, as an usher, but at present he made very little progress. The next school in which he received his education was taught by one Welby, who lived near Turnbull-street, Clerkenwell, a man who never had above eight or ten scholars at a time, whom he professed to instruct in the Latin tongue in the short space of a year and a half, and had great success with Mr. Birch, who afterwards lived with him as an usher; as he also afterwards was to Mr. Besse, the famous quaker in George’s court near St. John’s lane, who published the posthumous works of Claridge. It is farther said, that he went to Ireland with dean Smedley; but in what year he passed over to that country, and how long he resided with the dean, cannot now be ascertained. In his removals as an usher, he always took care to get into a still better school, and where he might have the greatest opportunity of studying the most valuable books, in which he was indefatigable, and stole many hours from sleep to increase his stock of knowledge. By this unremitting diligence, though he had not the happiness of an university education, he soon became qualified to take holy orders in the church of England; and as his early connections were of a different kind, his being ordained was a matter of no small surprise to his old acquaintance. In 1728, he married the daughter of one Mr. Cox, a clergyman to whom he was afterwards curate and in this union he was singularly happy but his felicity was of a short duration, Mrs. Birch dying in less than twelve months after their marriage. The disorder which carried her off was a consumption accelerated by childbearing, and almost in the very article of her death she wrote to her husband the following letter:

Having related the more personal and private circumstances of Dr. Birch’s history, we proceed to his various publications. The first great work he engaged in, was “The General Dictionary, historical and critical” wherein a new translation of that of the celebrated Mr. Bayle was included and which was interspersed with several thousand lives never before published. It was on the 29th of April, 1734, that Dr. Birch, in conjunction with the rev. Mr. John Peter Bernard, and Mr. John Lockman, agreed with the booksellers to carry on this important undertaking; and Mr. George Sale was employed to draw up the articles relating to oriental history. The whole design was completed in ten volumes, folio; the first of which appeared in 1734, and the last in 1741. It is universally allowed, that this work contains a very extensive and useful body of biographical knowledge. We are not told what were the particular articles written by Dr. Birch but there is no doubt of his having executed a great part of the dictionary neither is it, we suppose, any disparagement to his coadjutors, to say, that he was superior to them in abilities and reputation, with the exception of Mr. George Sale, who was, without controversy, eminently qualified for the department he had undertaken. The next great design in which Dr. Birch engaged, was the publication of “Thurloe’s State Papers.” This collection, which comprised seven volumes in folio, came out in 1742. It is dedicated to the late lord chancellor Hardwicke, and there is prefixed to it a life of Thurloe but whether it was written or not by our author, does not appear. The same life had been separately published not long before. The letters and papers in this collection throw the greatest light on the pe'riod to which they relate, and are accompanied with proper references, and a complete index to each volume, yet was a work by which the proprietors were great losers. In 1744, Dr. Birch published, in octavo, a “Life of the honourable Robert Boyle, esq” which hath since been prefixed to the quarto edition of the works of that philosopher. In the same year, our author began his assistance to Houbraken and Vertue, in their design of publishing, in folio, the “Heads of illustrious persons of Great Britain,” engraved by those two artists, but chiefly by Mr. Houbraken. To each head was annexed, by Dr, Birch, the life and character of the person represented. The first volume of this work, which came out in numbers, was completed in 1747, and the second in 1752. Our author’s concern in this undertaking did not hinder his prosecuting, at the same time, other historical disquisitions: for, in 1747, appeared, in octavo,“His inquiry into the share which king Charles the First had in the transactions of the earl of Glamorgan.” A second edition ef the Inquiry was published in 1756, and it was a work that excited no small degree of attention. In 1751, Dr. Birch was editor of the “Miscellaneous works of sir Walter Raleigh” to which was prefixed the life of that unfortunate and injured man. Previously to this, Dr. Birch published “An historical view of the negociations between the courts of England, France, and Brussels, from 1592 to 1617; extracted chiefly from the ms State Papers of sir Thomas Edmondes, knight, embassador in France, and at Brussels, and treasurer of the household to the kings James I. and Charles I. and of Anthony Bacon, esq. brother to the lord chancellor Bacon. To which is added, a relation of the state of France, with the character of Henry IV. and the principal persons of that court, drawn up by sir George Carew, upon his return from his embassy there in 1609, and addressed to king James I. never before printed.” This work, which consists of one volume, in octavo, appeared in 1749; and, in an introductory discourse to the honourable Philip Yorke, esq. (the late earl of Hardwicke), Dr. Birch makes some reflections on the utility of deducing history from its only true and unerring sources, the original letters and papers of those eminent men, who were the principal actors in the administration of affairs; after which he gives some account of the lives of sir Thomas Edmondes, sir George Carew, and Mr. Anthorry Bacon. The “Historical View” is undoubtedly a valuable performance, and hath brought to light a variety of particulars relative to the subjects and the period treated of, which before were either not at all, or not so fully known. In 17.51, was published by our author, an edition, in two volumes, 8vo, of the “Theological, moral, dramatic, and poetical works of Mrs. Catherine Cockburn” with an account of her life. In the next year came out his “Life of the most reverend Dr. John Tillotson, lord archbishop of Canterbury. Compiled chiefly from his original papers and letters.” A second edition, corrected and enlarged, appeared in 1753. This work, which was dedicated to archbishop Herring, is one of the most pleasing and popular of Dr. Birch’s performances; and he has done great justice to Dr. Tillotsou’s memory, character, and virtues. Our biographer hath likewise intermixed with his narrative of the good prelate’s transactions, short accounts of the persons occasionally mentioned; a method which he has pursued in some of his other publications. In 1753, he revised. the quarto edition, in two volumes, of Milton’s prose works, and added a new life of that great poet and writer. Dr. Birch gave to the world', in the following year, his “Memoirs of the reign of queen Elizabeth, from the year 1581, till her death. In which the secret intrigues of her court, and the conduct of her favourite, Robert earl of Essex, both at home and abroad, are particularly illustrated. From the original papers of his intimate friend, Anthony Bacon, esq. and other manuscripts never before published.” These memoirs, which are inscribed to the earl of Hardwicke, give a minute account of the letters and materials from which they are taken and the whole work undoubtedly forms a very valuable collection in which our author has shewn himself (as in his other writings) to be a faithfnl and accurate compiler and in which, besides a full display of the temper and actions of the earl of Essex, much light is thrown on the characters of the Cecils, Bacons, and many eminent persons of that period. The book is now becoming scarce, and, as it may not speedily be republished, is rising in its value. This is the case, likewise, with regard to the edition of sir Walter Raleigh’s miscellaneous works. Dr. Birch’s next publication was “The history of the Royal Society of London, for improving of natural knowledge, from its first rise. In which the most considerable of those papers, communicated to the society, which have hitherto not been published, are inserted in their proper order, as a supplement to the Philosophical Transactions.” The twq first volumes of this performance, which was dedicated to his late majesty, appeared in 1756, and the two other volumes in 1757. The history is carried on to the end of the year 1687 and if the work had been continued, and had been conducted with the same extent and minuteness, it would have been a very voluminous undertaking. But, though it may, perhaps, be justly blamed in this respect, it certainly contains many curious and entertaining anecdotes concerning the manner of the society’s proceedings at their first establishment. It is enriched, likewise, with a number of personal circumstances relative to the members, and with biographical accounts of such of the more considerable of them as died in the course of each year. In 1760, came out, in one volume, 8vo, our author’s “Life of Henry prince of Wales, eldest son of king James I. Compiled chiefly from his own papers, and other manuscripts, never before published.” It is dedicated to his present majesty, then prince of Wales. Some have objected to this work, that it abounds too much with trifling details, and that Dr. Birch has not given sufficient scope to such reflections and disquisitions as arose from his subject. It must, nevertheless, be acknowledged, that it affords a more exact and copious account than had hitherto appeared of a prince whose memory has always been remarkably popular; and that various facts, respecting several other eminent characters, are occasionally introduced. Another of his publications was, “Letters, speeches, charges, advices, &c. of Francis Bacon, lord viscount St. AJban, lord chancellor of England.” This collection, which is comprised in one volume, 8vo, and is dedicated to the honourable Charles Yorke, esq. appeared in 1763. It is taken from some papers which had been originally in the possession of Dr. Rawley, lord Bacon’s chaplain, whose executor, Mr. John Rawley, having put them into the hands of Dr. Tenison, they were, at length, deposited in the manuscript library at Lambeth. Dr. Birch, speaking of these papers of lord Bacon, says, that it can scarcely be imagined, but that the bringing to light, from obscurity and oblivion, the remains of so eminent a person, will be thought an acquisition not inferior to the discovery (if the ruins of Herculaneum should afford such a treasure) of a new set of the epistles of Cicero, whom our immortal countryman most remarkably resembled as an orator, a philosopher, a writer, a lawyer, and a statesman. Though this, perhaps, is speaking too highly of a collection, which contains many things in it seemingly not very material, it must, at the same time, be allowed, that nothing can be totally uninteresting which relates to so illustrious a man, or tends, in any degree, to give a farther insight into his character. To this catalogue we have still to add “Professor Greaves’s miscellaneous works,” 1737, in two vols. 8vo. Dr. Cud worth’s “Intellectual System,” (improved from the Latin edition of Mosheim) his discourse on the true notion of the Lord’s Supper, and two sermons, with an account of his life and writings, 1743, in two vols. 4to. An edition of Spenser’s “Fairy Queen,” 1751, in three Vols. 4to, with prints from designs by Kent. “Letters between col. Robert Hammond, governor of the Isle of Wight, and the committee of lords and commons at Derbyhouse, general Fairfax, lieut.-general Cromwell, commissary general Ireton, &c. relating to king Charles I. while he was confined in Carisbrooke-castle in that island. Now first published. To which is prefixed a letter from John Ashburnham, esq. to a friend, concerning his deportment towards the king, in his attendance on his majesty at Hampton-court, and in the Isle of Wight,” 1764, 8vo. Dr. Birch’s last essay, “The life of Dr. Ward,” which was finished but a week before his death, was published by Dr. Maty, in 1766.

Mr. Ayscough has extracted, from a small pocket-book belonging to Dr. Birch, the following memoranda of some pieces written by him, of which he was not before known to be the author. 1726, “A Latin translation of Hughes’s Ode to the Creator.” 1727, “Verses on the General history of Printing” published in the General history of Printing. Collections for Smedley’s View. 1728, “Abelard to Philotas.” 1732, Began the General History. 1739, “Account of Alga,” published in the Works of the Learned for July. “Account of Milton,” published in the Works of the Learned. 1741, Wrote the letter of Cleander to Smerdis, in the Athenian Letters. 1742, Wrote an account of Orr’s sermon, in the Works of the Learned. 1743, Wrote the preface to Boyle’s works. 1760, By a letter from Dr. Stonhouse, it appears that Dr. Birch was the author of the Life of the rev. Mr. James Hervey, which is prefixed to that gentleman’s writings. He was employed, likewise, in correcting a great number of publications, and among the rest Murden’s State Papers. At the time, of the doctor’s death, he had prepared for the press a collection of letters, to which he had given the title of “Historical Letters, written in the reigns of James I. and Charles I. containing a detail of the public transactions and events in Great Britain during that period with a variety of particulars not mentioned by our historians. Now first published from the originals in the British Museum, Paper-office, and private collections.” These are all the separate publications, or intended works, of Dr. Birch that have come to our knowledge, excepting a Sermon on the proof of the wisdom and goodness of God, from the frame and constitution of man, preached before the college of Physicians, in 1749, in consequence of lady Sadlier’s will to which we may add, that he revised new editions of Bacon’s, Boyle’s, and Tillotson’s works. The lives of Boyle and Tillotson, though printed by themselves, were drawn up partly with a view to their being prefixed to these great men’s writings. It would swell this article too much, were we to enter into a detail of our author’s communications to the royal society, and of the papers transmitted by him to that illustrious body. Whoever looks into his history of the early proceedings of the society, will have no doubt of the assiduity and diligence with which he discharged his peculiar duty as secretary. But there is nothing which sets Dr. Birch’s industry in a more striking light than the vast number of transcripts which he made with his own hands. Among these, not to mention many other instances, there are no less than sixteen volumes in quarto, of Anthony Bacon’s papers, transcribed from the Lambeth library and other collections; and eight more volumes of the same size, relative to history and literature. Our author’s correspondence, by letters, was, likewise, very large and extensive; of which numerous proofs occur in the British Museum. What enabled Dr. Birch to go through such a variety of undertakings, was his being a very early riser. By this method, he had executed the business of the morning before numbers of people had begun it and, indeed, it is the peculiar advantage of rising betimes, that it is not in the power of any interruptions, avocations, or engagements whatever, to deprive a man of the hours which have already been well employed, or to rob him of the consolation of reflecting, that he hath not spent the day in vain. With all this closeness of application, Dr. Birch was not a solitary recluse. He was of a cheerful and social temper, and entered much into conversation with the world. He was personally connected with most of the literary men of his time, and with some of them he maintained an intimate friendship, such as sir Hans Sloane, Dr. Mead, Dr. Salter, Mr. Jortin, and Dr. Maty Daniel Wray, esq. Dr. Morton, Dr. Ducarel, Dr. William Watson, &c. &c. With regard to the great, though perhaps he stood well with many of them, his chief connection was with the earls of Hardwicke, and with the rest of the branches of that noble and respectable family. No one was more ready than Dr. Birch to assist his fellow- creatures, or entered more ardently into useful and laudable undertakings. He was particularly active in the Society for promoting literature by the printing of books, to which we are indebted for the publication of Tanner’s Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica, and some few other valuable works. In short, Dr. Birch was entitled to that highest praise, of being a good man, as well as a man of knowledge and learning. His sentiments with respect to subjects of divinity resembled those of bishop Hoadly.

, or Bryckinton, or Brickington, so called from Birchington, in the isle of Thanet, where he was born, was a Benedictine monk, belonging to the church of Canterbury, into which order he entered about the year 1382. He wrote a history of the archbishops of Canterbury to the year 1368, which forms the first article in the first volume of Wharton’s Anglia Sacra, who copied it from the ms. in the Lambeth library. Other historical Mss. in the same library are attributed to him, but remain unpublished. He is supposed to have died in 1407.

, an eminent musician and composer, was one of the children of the chapel in the reign of Edward VI. and, as asserted by Wood in the Ashmolean ms. was bred up under Tallis. It appears, that in 1575 Tallis and Bird were both gentlemen and also organists of the royal chapel but the time of their appointment to this latter office cannot now be ascertained with any exactness. The compositions of Bird are many and various those of his younger years were mostly for the service of the church. He composed a work entitled “Sacrarurn Cantionum, quinque vocum, printed in 1589 among which is that noble composition” Civitas sancti tui,“which for many years past has been sung in the church as an anthem, to the words” Bow thine ear, O Lord!“He was also the author of a work entitled” Gradualia, ac Cantiones sacrae, quinis, quaternis, trinisque vocibus conciunatae, lib. primus.“Of this there are two editions, the latter published in 1610. Although it appears by these works, that Bird was in the strictest sense a church musician, he occasionally gave to the world compositions of a secular kind and he seems to be the first among English musicians that ever made an essay in the composition of that elegant species of vocal harmony, the madrigal the” La Verginella“of Ariosto, which he set in that form for five voices, being the most ancient musical composition of the kind to be met with in the works of English authors. Of his compositions for private entertainment, there are extant,” Songs of sundry natures, some of gravitie, and others of myrth, fit for all companies and voyces, printed in 1589;' and two other collections of the same kind, the last of them printed in 1611. But the most permanent memorials of Bird’s excellences are his motets and anthems; to which may be added a fine service in the key of D with the minor third, the first composition in Dr. Boyce’s Cathedral Music, vol. III. and that well-known canon of his, “Non nobis, Dornine.” Besides his salaries and other emoluments of his profession, it is to be supposed that Bird derived some advantages frotn the patent granted by queen Elizabeth to Tallis and him, for the sole printing of music and music-paper Dr. Ward speaks of a book which he had seen with the letters T. E. for Thomas East, Est, or Este, who printed music under that patent. Tallis dying in 1585, the patent, by the terms of it, survived to bird, who, no doubt for a valuable consideration, permitted East to exercise the right of printing under the protection of it and he in the titlepage of most of his publications styles himself the “assignee of William Bird.” Bird died in 1623.

Sir John’s newspaper which he wrote at Oxford, was entitled “Mercurius Aulicus, communicating the intelligence and affairs of the court to the rest of the kingdom.” It was printed weekly in one sheet, and sometimes more, in 4to and was chiefly calculated to raise the reputation of the king’s friends and commanders, and ridicule those who sided with the parliament. They came out regularly from the beginning of 1642, to the latter end of 1645, and afterwards, occasionally. When Birkenhead was otherwise engaged, Dr. Peter Heylyn supplied his place, but was not thought so capable of that species of writing, as he did not excel in popular wit, which is necessary to render such kind of pieces acceptable to the public. The parliament thought fit to oppose this court -journal by another on their side of the question, under the title of “Mercurius Britannicus,” written by Marchmont Nedham, to whom the royalists gave the name of “foul-mouthed Nedham” who, finding himself somewhat unequal to the Oxford writer, thought fit to ascribe the “Mercurius Aulicus” to several persons, that his deficiency might do the less prejudice to his party. Jacob blunderingly calls the ^ Mercurius Aulicus,“a poem. Sir John’s other satirical works were 1.” The Assembly-man,“written in 1647, but printed, as Wood tells us, 1662-3. 2.” News from Pembroke and Montgomery or, Oxford Manchestered,“c. 1648. 3.” St. Paul’s church-yard libri theologici, politici, historic!, nundinis Paulinis (una cum templo) prostant venales, &c.“printed in three sheets, 1649, 4to. These sheets were published separately, as if they had been parts of one general catalogue. An account of them is in the Cens. Lit. vol. IV. 4.” The four-legged Quaker, a ballad, to the tune of the dog and elder’s maid,“5.” A new ballad of a famous German prince, without date," &c.

, an English divine, probably the son or grandson of the rev. John Biscoe of New Inn hall, Oxford, a nonconformist, was himself educated at a dissenting academy kept by Dr. Benion at Shrewsbury, and was ordained a dissenting minister, Dec. 19, 1716. In 1726, he conformed and received deacon’s and priest’s orders in the church of England, and in 1727 was presented to the living of St. Martin Outwich, in the city of London, which he retained until his death, July 1748. He held also a prebend of St. Paul’s, and was one of his majesty’s chaplains in ordinary. He is now chiefly known for a learned and elaborate work, entitled “The History of the Acts of the Holy Apostles confirmed from other authors and considered as full evidence of the truth of Christianity, with a prefatory discourse upon the nature of that evidence” being the substance of his sermons preached at Boyle’s lecture, in 1736, 1737, 1738, and published in 2 vols. 1742, 8vo. Dr. Doddridge frequently refers to it, as a work of great utility, and as shewing “in the most convincing manner, how incontestably the Acts of the Apostles demonstrates the truth of Christianity.”

, vicar apostolical in England, and the first popish bishop that was sent thither after the reformation, was born in 1553, at Brayles in Warwickshire. He studied in the university of Oxford; Wood thinks, either in Gloucester-hall (now Worcester college), or in Lincoln college, the heads of both which were secret favourers of popery from Oxford he went to Rheims and Rome, and having been sent back to England, as a missionary, he was arrested at Dover, and confined in prison in London until the end of the year 1584. Being then released, he went to Paris, took his degree of licentiate, and came again to England in 1591. In two years he returned to Paris, completed his degree of doctor, and soon after his arrival in England, a dispute arising among the popish clergy here, he was sent to Rome with another missionary to appeal to the pope. In 1612 we find him again in England, and in confinement, on account of the oath of allegiance, to which, however, he was not so averse as many of his brethren. He had, in fact, written against the bull of pope Pius V. to prove that the catholics were bound to be faithful to their sovereigns, and in 1602 he had signed a declaration of the same principle, without any equivocacation or mental reservation, which gave great offence to the Jesuits. Out of respect, however, to the authority of the pope, who had proscribed that oath, he refused to take it, and was committed to prison. On his release he went to Paris, and wrote some tracts against those eminent protestant divines, Perkins and Abbot. Since the death of Watson, bishop of Lincoln, the last of the popish bishops who outlived the reformation, it had often been intended to re-establish the episcopal government in England; and the marriage of the prince Charles, afterwards Charles I. with the Infanta of Spain, seemed to offer a fair opportunity for carrying this scheme into execution, the hopes of the catholics being considerably raised by that match. Accordingly, Dr. Bishop was consecrated at Paris, in 1623, by the title of bishop of Chalcedon, and being sent to England, began his career by forming a chapter, appointing grand vicars, archdeacons, and rural deans, &c. but did not enjoy his promotion long, as he died April 16, 1624. His party speak liberally of his zeal, virtues, and learning, and he undoubtedly was the more useful to their cause in England, as he contrived to exercise his functions without giving much offence to government. Dodd and Wood have given a list of his controversial writings, which are now in little request, but it must not be forgot that he was the publisher of Pits’ s very useful work, “De illustribus Anglic Scriptoribus,” 1623, to which he wrote a verylearned preface.

, an ingenious physician, was born at Glenalbert, near Dunkeld in Perthshire, Scotland, in 1717. After a course of medical studies at Edinburgh, he was appointed in 1740, second surgeon to the military hospital in Jamaica, and spent several years in the West India islands, and in admiral Yemen’s fleet, where he acquired a knowledge of the diseases of the torrid zone. Having in 1745, contracted a bad state of health at New Greenwich in Jamaica, he was under the necessity of resigning his place of second surgeon to the hospital, and returning to England. In May 1746, he purchased an ensigncy in the forty-second regiment, commanded by lord John Murray; and by this transition, his attention being turned from medical pursuits to military affairs, fortification became his favourite study. After a fruitless descent on the coast of Brittany in France in September 1746, and passing a winter at Limerick in Ireland, they were, in the beginning of the next campaign, brought into action at Sandberg, near Hulst in Dutch Flanders, where one Dutch regiment and two English suffered very much. Here, having drawn a sketch of the enemy’s approaches, with the environs, and some time after, a pretty correct one of Bergen-op-Zoom, with the permanent lines, the environs, and the enemy’s first parallel, which were presented by lord John Murray to his royal highness the late duke of Cumberland, his highness ordered Mr. Bisset to attend the siege of that fortress, and give due attention daily to the progress of the attack, and to the defence, in order to take accurate journals of them. These journals, illustrated with plans, were delivered daily to lord John Murray, who forwarded them to the duke, by whose application to the duke of Montague, then master of the ordnance, Mr. Bisset received a warrant as engineer extraordinary in the brigade of engineers which was established to serve in the Low Countries during the war and he was also promoted to a lieutenancy in the army. The brigade of engineers being re-formed at the end of the war, and he being at the same time put upon the half-pay list as lieutenant, he continued to employ great part of his time in the study of fortification and in 1751, after visiting France, published his work “On the Theory and Construction of Fortifications,” 8vo, and some time after, being unemployed, he resumed the medical profession to which he had been originally destined, and retired to the village of Skelton, in Cleveland, Yorkshire, where, or in the vicinity, he ever after continued,

, a French poet and miscellaneous writer, was born at Konigsberg, Nov. 24, 1732, of a family of French refugees, of the protestant religion. After completing his education, he became a clergyman of that communion, and appears to have formed his taste for oratory and poetry from a frequent perusal of the Bible, the style of the historical part of which he much admired. He was a no less warm admirer of Homer. Although a Prussian by birth, he was a Frenchman at heart, and having accustomed himself to the language of his family, he felt a strong desire to reside in what he considered as properly his native country, conceiving at the same time that the best way to procure his naturalization would be through the medium of literary merit. As early as 1762, he published at Berlin a translation of the Iliad, which he called a free translation, and was in fact an abridgment and this served to introduce him to D'Alembert, who recommended him so strongly to the king, Frederick II. that he was admitted into the Berlin academy, received a pension, and afterwards visited France in order to complete his translation of Homer. A first edition had been printed in 1764, 2 vols. 8vo, but the most complete did not appear until 1780, and was followed by the Odyssey in 1785. Such was the reputation of both among his countrymen, that the academy of inscriptions admitted his name on their list of foreign members. Modern French critics, however, have distinguished more correctly between the beauties and defects of this translation. They allow him to have been more successful in his “Joseph,” a poem published first in 1767, and with additions in 1786, and now become almost a classic in France. It was translated into English in 1783, 2 vols. 12mo, but is certainly not likely to become a classic in this country, or where a taste prevails for simplicity and elegance. His “Joseph” was followed by “Les Bataves,” a poem of which some detached parts had appeared in 1773, under the title of “Guillaume de Nassau,” Amsterdam. This was reprinted in 1775, and again in 1796. During the war in 1793, as he attached himself to the French interest, he was struck off the list of the academy of Berlin, and his pension withdrawn but on the peace of Bale, his honours and his pension were restored. If his sovereign punished him thus for acting the Frenchman, he was not more fortunate with his new friends, who imprisoned him because he was a Prussian. On the establishment of the institute, however, Bitaube was chosen of the class of literature and the fine arts but gave a very bad specimen of his taste in translating the “Herman and Dorothea” of Goethe, and comparing that author with Homer, whose works, from this opinion, we should suppose he had studied to very little purpose. Some time before his death, which happened Nov. 22, 1808, he was admitted a member of the legion of honour. His other works were 1. “Examen de la Confession de Foi du Vicaire Savoyard,” 1763, a very liberal expostulation with Rousseau on account of his scepticism. 2. “De l'influence cles Belles-lettres sur la Philosophic,” Berlin, 1767, 8vo; and 3. “Eloge de Corneille,” 1769, 8vo none of which are in the collection of his works published at Paris in 1804, 9 vols. 8vo. Bitaub cannot be ranked among writers eminent for genius, nor is his taste, even in the opinion of his countrymen, of the purest standard; but his works procured him a considerable name, and many of the papers he wrote in the memoirs of the Paris academy discover extensive reading and critical talents. His private character appears to have been irreproachable, and his amiable manners and temper procured him many friends during the revolutionary successions.

At this time Dr. Cullen was removed to Edinburgh, and there being a vacancy in the chemical chair at Glasgow, it was immediately agreed that it could not be bestowed with greater propriety than upon the author of so important a discovery. Accordingly, Dr. Black was appointed professor of anatomy, and lecturer on chemistry in the university of Glasgow, in 1756, but not conceiving himself so well qualified for filling the anatomical chair, he obtained the concurrence of the university to exchange tasks with the professor of medicine. While in Glasgow, therefore, his chief business was delivering lectures on the institutes of medicine. His reputation as a professor increased every year, and he became a favourite practitioner in that large and active city. Indeed, the sweetness of his temper could not fail to make him a welcome visitor in every family. His countenance was no less engaging than his manner was attractive. The ladies regarded themselves as honoured by his attentions, particularly as they were exclusively bestowed on those who evinced a superiority of mental accomplishments or propriety of demeanour, and of grace and elegance of manner. This situation, and the anxious care which he took of his patients, may in some measure account for the little progress made by Dr. Black in that fine career of experimental investigation which he had so auspiciously opened. Yet his inactivity must be lamented as highly injurious to science it displayed an indolence or carelessness of reputation not altogether to be justified.

2. When a liquid body is raised to the boiling temperature by the continued and copious application of heat, its particles suddenly attract to themselves a great quantity of heat, and by this combination their mutual relation is so changed, that they no longer attract each other, but are converted into an elastic fluid-like air. On the other hand, when these elastic fluids, either by condensation, or by the application of cold bodies, are reconverted into liquids, they give out a vast quantity of heat, the presence of which was not formerly indicated by the thermometer.

Perhaps, also, the delicacy of his constitution precluded him from exertion; the slightest cold, the most trifling approach to repletion, immediately affected his breast, occasioned feverishness, and, if continued for two or three days, brought on a spitting of blood. Nothing restored him but relaxation of thought and gentle exercise. The sedentary life to which study confined him was manifestly hurtful, and he never allowed himself to indulge in any intense thinking without finding these complaints sensibly increased.

The aspect of Dr. Black was comely and interesting. His countenance exhibited that pleasing expression of inward satisfaction, which, by giving ease to the beholder, never fails to please. His manner was unaffected and graceful. He was affable, and readily entered into conversation, whether serious or trivial. He was a stranger to none of the elegant accomplishments of life. He had a fine musical ear, with a voice which would obey it in the most perfect manner; for he sung and performed on the flute with great taste and feeling, and could sing a plain air at sight, which many instrumental performers cannot do. Without having studied drawing, he had acquired a considerable power of expressing with his pencil, and seemed in this respect to have the talents of a history painter. Figure, indeed, of every kind, attracted his attention. Even a retort, or a crucible, was to his eye an example of beauty or deformity. He had the strongest claim to the appellation of a man of propriety and correctness. Every thing was done in its proper season, and he ever seemed to have leisure in store. He loved society, and felt himself beloved in it; never did he lose a single friend, except by the stroke of death. His only apprehension was that of a long continued sick bed -less, perhaps, from any selfish feeling, than from the consideration of the trouble and distress which it would occasion to attending friends: and never was this generous wish more completely gratified. On the 26th Nov. 1799, and in the seventy-first year of his age, he expired without any convulsions, shock, or stupor, to announce or retard the approach of death. Being at table with his usual fare, some bread, a few prunes, and a measured quantity of milk diluted with water, and having the cup in his hand, when the last stroke of the pulse was to be given, he set it down on his knees, which were joined together, and kept it steady with his hand, in the manner of a person perfectly at ease; and in this attitude expired, without spilling a drop, and without a writhe in his countenance, as if an experiment had been required to shew to his friends the facility with which he departed. His servant opened the door to tell him that some one had left his name; but getting no answer, stepped about half-way towards him, and seeing him in that easy posture, supporting his bason of milk with one hand, he thought that he had dropt asleep, which sometimes happened after his meals. He went back and shut the door; but before he went down stairs, some anxiety, which he could not account for, made him return again, and look at his master. Even then he was satisfied after coming pretty near him, and turned to go away but returning again, and coming up close to him, he found him without life.

, an eminent surveyor and architect, was born in the borough of Southwark, on the 20th of December, 1750. His father was a respectable tradesman in St. John’s parish, and his mother was a native of Spain. The whole of his grammatical education was derived from a common seminary in the neighbourhood; and at a proper age he was placed under a surveyor of no eminence, but from whom he derived very few advantages in the knowledge of his profession. However, from the natural bent of an ardent mind, he sought the acquaintance of men of genius, several of whom belonged to the Jioyal Academy. Into that academy he was admitted as a student; and in 1773 he was presented with the medal for the best drawing of the inside of St. Stephen’s church in Walbrook. This prize he bore away from many competitors and, at the delivery of it, received a high compliment to his abilities from the late sir Joshua Reynolds, the president. About the same time he entered into business for himself in Southwark, and carried it on for some years with increasing success among his private connections, when an event occurred which brought him into public notice and reputation. An act of parliament had passed in 1779, declaring, that “if any offenders convicted of crimes for which transportation had been usually inflicted, were ordered to solitary imprisonment, accompanied by well regulated labour and religious instruction, it might be the means, under providence, not only of deterring others from the commission of the like crimes, but also of reforming the individuals, and enuring them to the habits of industry.” By this act his majesty was authorised to appoint three persons to be supervisors of the buildings to be erected; and the supervisors were to fix upon any common, heath, or waste, or any other piece of ground, in Middlesex, Essex, Kent, or Surrey, on which should be erected two plain strong edifices, to be called “Penitentiary Houses” one for the confinement and employment of six hundred males, the other of three hundred females. In the same year in which the act was passed, three supervisors were appointed to carry it into execution. These were John Howard, esq George Whatley, esq. and Dr. John Fothergill. This commission however was dissolved, first by the death of Dr. Fothergill, and soon after that event by the resignation of Mr. Howard, who found it not in his power to coalesce with his remaining colleague. Another set of supervisors was therefore appointed in 1781, being sir Gilbert Elliot, bart. sir Charles Bunbury, bart. and Thomas Bowdler, esq. One of the principal objects with these gentlemen was to provide that they should be constructed in the manner most conducive to the ends of solitary confinement, useful labour, and moral reformation. Accordingly, the supervisors proposed premiums for the best plans that should be produced of the penitentiary houses intended to be erected. The highest premium was a hundred guineas, which xvas unanimously assigned to Mr. Blackburn, in the month of March 1782. This preference, as a pecuniary consideration, was a matter of little consequence. The grand advantage that was to be expected from it, with regard to Mr. Blackburn, was, that he should be employed as the architect and surveyor of the buildings proposed. And in fact he was appointed by the supervisors to that office and the plan of a penitentiary house for male offenders was accordingly arranged by him, and proper draughts were made for the use of the workmen; and a great part of the work was actually contracted for by different persons. Yet the designs of government were not carried into execution the circumstances of the times having diverted the attention of public men from this important object nor has it ever since been resumed. Nevertheless, though Mr. Blackburn might in this respect be disappointed of his just expectations, he did not lose his reward, nor was the nation deprived of the benefit arising from his ingenuity. A spirit of erecting prisons in conformity to his plans was immediately excited and many county gaols, and other structures of the same nature, were built under his inspection. Besides the completion of several prisons, Mr. Blackburn was engaged in other designs of a similar nature, when he was arrested by the hand of death, in the fortieth year of his age. He departed this life on the 28th day of October, 1790, at Preston in Lancashire, being on a journey to Scotland, whither he was going at the instance of his grace the duke of Buccleugh, and the lord provost of Glasgow, with a view to the erection of a new gaol in that city. From Preston his remains were removed to London, and interred in the burying-ground of Bunhill-fields.

Being a dissenter of the presbyterian denomination, he was in the habits of intimacy with the principal persons of that persuasion both in town and country without however confining his regard and affection to any particular sect. But what confers peculiar honour on Mr. Blackburn’s memory is, that he enjoyed the intimate friendship and entire esteem of the excellent Mr. Howard; that he concurred with him in his ideas, and eminently promoted his benevolent designs. Mr. Blackburn frequently corresponded with Mr. Howard, when that gentleman was engaged, either at home or abroad, in his journeys and voyages of humanity. Of Mr. Blackburn Mr. Howard used to say, that he was the only man he ever met with, who was capable of delineating to his mind, upon paper, his ideas of what a prison ought to be.

, the celebrated author of the “Confessional,” was born at Richmond in Yorkshire, June 9, 1705. At the age of seventeen he was admitted pensioner of Catherine-hall, Cambridge, where his peculiar notions on civil and religious liberty rendered him obnoxious to his superiors, and occasioned the loss of a fellowship for which he was a candidate. In 1739, he was ordained by Dr. Gooch, bishop of Norwich, at Ely chapel, Holborn, and in a short time afterwards was inducted into the rectory of Richmond in Yorkshire, where he resided constantly for forty years, during which he composed all the pieces contained in the late edition of his works, besides a multitude of smaller ones. His first appearance as an author was on the following occasion. In 1749, the rev. John Jones, vicar of Alconbury, near Huntingdon, published his “Free and candid disquisitions relating to the Church of England,” containing many observations on the supposed defects and improprieties in the liturgical forms of faith and worship of the established church. As Mr. Blackburne corresponded with this gentleman, who had submitted the work to his perusal in manuscript, and as there were many of his opinions in which Mr. Blackburne coincided, it was not unnatural to suppose that he had a hand in the publication. This, however, Mr. Blackburne solemnly denied, and his biographer has assigned the probable reason. “The truth,” says he, “is, Mr. Blackburne, whatever desire he might have to forward the work of ecclesiastical reformation, could not possibly conform his style to the milky phraseology of the ‘ Disquisitions,’ nor could he be content to have his sentiments mollified by the gentle qualifications of Mr. Jones’s lenient pen. He was rather (perhaps too much) inclined to look upon those who had in their hands the means and the power of reforming the errors, defects, and abuses, in the government, forms of worship, faith and discipline, of the established church, as guilty of a criminal negligence, from which they should have been roused by sharp and spirited expostulations. He thought it became disquisitors, with a cause in hand of such high importance to the influence of vital Christianity, rather to have boldly forced the utmost resentment of the class of men to which they addressed their work, than, by meanly truckling to their arrogance, to derive upon themselves their ridicule and contempt, which all the world saw was the case of these gentle suggesters, and all the return they had for the civility of their application.” Animated by this spirit, which we are far from thinking candid or expedient, Mr. Blackburne published “An Apology,” for the “Free and candid disquisitions,” to which, whatever might be its superior boldness to the “milky phraseology” of Mr. Jones, he yet did not venture to put his name nor, although he was suspected to be the author, did he meet with any of that “arrogance,” which is attributed to those who declined adopting Mr. Jones’s scheme of church-reformation. On the contrary, in July, 1750, he was collated to the archdeaconry of Cleveland, and in August following to the prebend of Bilton, by Dr. Matthew Hutton, archbishop of York, to whom he had been for some years titular chaplain and when his friends intimated their suspicions that he would write no more “Apologies” for such books as “Free and candid Diquisitions,” he answered, “with a cool indifference,” that he had made no bargain with the archbishop for his liberty. His next publication, accordingly, was an attack on Dr. Butler bishop of Durham’s charge to his clergy in 1751, which, in Mr. Blackburne’s opinion, contained some doctrines diametrically opposite to the principles on which the protestant reformation was founded. This appeared in 1752, under the title of “A Serious Enquiry into the use and importance of external religion, &c.” but was not generally known to be his, until Mr. Baron, an enthusiast in controversies, republished it with Mr. Blackburne’s name, in his collection, entitled “The Pillars of Priestcraft and Orthodoxy shaken.”

His next publications were on the subjects of the new style Archdeacon Sharpe’s charges the Jew naturalization-bill a letter to archbishop Herring, on church reformation none of which require much notice. When in 1755, Dr. Law’s notion appeared concerning the soul and the state of death, or what was called “the soul-sleeping system,” Mr. Blackburne adopted, and defended it in a tract entitled “No proof in the Scriptures of an intermediate state of happiness or misery, between death and the resurrection,” and he urged the same opinion in a subsequent tract but as the Confessional is the publication on which his fame principally rests, the history of it is more interesting than any detail of his minor tracts. On Commencement Sunday 1757, Dr. Powell, an eminent tutor of St. John’s college, Cambridge, published a sermon on subscription to the Liturgy and XXXIX articles, in which he maintained that a latitude was allowed to subscribers, even, so far as to admit of the assent and conserit of different persons to different and even opposite opinions, according to their different interpretations of the propositions to be subscribed. Dr. Powell’s casuistry on the subject appeared to Mr. Blackburne so detestable, and so subversive of the principles of good faith among men, that he determined to expose and refute it to the best of his power, and accordingly published “Remarks on the rev. Dr. Powell’s Sermon in defence of Subscriptions, &c.” 1758. His sentiments on the subject of subscriptions are thus explained, in that part of his life which was written by himself. "When he took possession of the living of Richmond, he had been engaged in a way of life that did not give him time or opportunity to reflect upon subjects of that nature with precision; and though, upon taking his first preferment, he determined conscientiously to perform the duties of it, yet he was by no means aware of the difficulties that afterwards embarrassed him in qualifying himself for holding it. He, therefore, then subscribed as directed by law, without scruple, and without apprehending the obligation he laid himself under, according to the form, of giving his assent and consent to the whole system of the church. When the same form was to be subscribed to qualify him. to hold the archdeaconry and prebend, he consulted some of his friends, and particularly Dr. Law (afterwards bishop of Carlisle), who gave him his opinion at large, containing such reasons, as had occurred to himself on the several occasions he had to undergo that discipline. He was likewise referred to Dr. Clarke’s Introduction to his Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity and lastly, to the sixth article of the church of England all which appeared plausible enough to satisfy him, for that time, that with these salvos and modifications, he might safely subscribe to the prescribed forms. Some time afterwards, however, upon a prospect of farther advancement to a considerable preferment, he took occasion to re-consider these arguments, and thought they fell short of giving that satisfaction which an honest man would wish to have, when he pledges his good faith to society in so solemn a form as that prescribed by the 36th canon, enjoining subscription to the articles and liturgical forms of the church of England.

“In this situation of mind, he set himself to examine into the rise and progress of this requisition in protestant churches, and into the arguments brought in defence, or rather in excuse of it the result of which was the compilation since known by the name of the * Confessional, or a full and free enquiry into the right, utility, and success of establishing Confessions of Faith and Doctrine in Protestant churches.' This work lay by him in manuscript for some years. He had communicated his plan to Dr. Edmund Law, who encouraged him greatly in the progress of it, and appears by many letters in the course of their correspondence to have been extremely impatient to have it published. The fair copy, however, was never seen by any of the author’s acquaintance, one confidential friend excepted, who spoke of its existence and contents to the late patriotic Thomas Hollis, esq. to whom the author at this time was not personally known. Mr. Hollis mentioned this manuscript to Mr. Andrew Millar, the bookseller, who in 1763, intending a summer excursion to visit his friends in Scotland, was desired by Mr. Hollis to call upon Mr. Blackburne at Richmond, where, after some conversation, the manuscript was consigned to Mr. Millar’s care for publication, and accordingly came out in the spring of 1766. The only condition made with Mr. Millar was, that the author’s name should be concealed.”

Such is the author’s account of the origin of this celebrated work, which soon gave rise to a controversy of considerable length. We follow him with more reluctance in his account of its reception, in which he states that grievous offence was taken at it by that part of the clergy “who affect to call themselves orthodox” and archbishop Seeker is stated to have thrown off his mask of moderation at once. More calm reasoners, however, at this later period may be of opinion, that many of the opponents of the Confessional stood in no need of affectation to indicate the class to which they belonged and that the archbishop, as well as many of his brethren, might think themselves amply justified in considering the Confessional, as having a tendency to render the principles of the church of England a series of private opinions ending in ho general system, and affording encouragement to perpetual fluctuation and indecision, under pretence of regard for conscience. Nor, as the press was to be the medium of this controversy, can we, upon any principles of candour, conceive, why archbishop Seeker, or any of his brethren, should be censured for encouraging the best writers they could find.

This controversy lasted from 1766, the period of publishing the first edition of the Confessional, to 1779, when it was in part revived, or rather continued (for it had never been entirely dropt), in consequence of an application made to parliament for relief in the matter of subscription. During this time, between seventy and eighty pamphlets were published by the contending parties, of which not above ten or twelve appeared with the authors’ names. Some of these are supposed to have been furnished by Mr. Blackburne. One singular effect followed the first publication of the Confessional. It was supposed that the author of such a work could not possibly remain in the church after having made so many objections to her constitution and accordingly a congregation of dissenters in London sent a deputation to him, to know whether he was inclined to accept the situation of their pastor. But whatever objections the learned archdeacon had to certain points of discipline and doctrine peculiar to the church of England, which he wished to be reformed he never conceived that the best way to bring about such a reformation was to leave her entirely in the hands of those who were adverse to it and therefore, although he abstained from any open opposition to the principles and conduct of Mr. Lindsey and Dr. Disney (both his relations and friends), he does not appear to have approved either. His own words, however, will best illustrate his sentiments on this delicate subject;

“Mr. Blackburne had his objections to the liturgy and articles of the church of England, as well as Mr. Lindsey, and in some instances to the same passages, but differed widely from him on some particular points, which, he thought, as stated by Mr. Lindsey and his friends, could receive no countenance from scripture, unless by a licentiousness of interpretation that could not be justified. But Dr. Priestley and some of his friends having carried the obligation to secede from the church of England farther than Mr. Blackburne thought was either sufficiently candid, charitable, or modest, and had thereby given countenance to the reproach, thrown upon many moderate and worthy men, by hot and violent conformists, for continuing to minister in the church, while they disapproved many things in her doctrine and discipline, he thought it expedient, in justice to himself and others of the same sentiments, to give some check to the crude censures that had been passed upon them. And, accordingly, intending to publish ' Four Discourses’ delivered to the clergy of the archdeaconry of Cleveland, in the years 1767, 1769, 1771, and 1773, he took that opportunity to explain himself on this subject in a preface, as well on behalf of the seceders, as of those whose Christian principles admitted of their remaining in the church without offering violence to their consciences.” Of Dr. Priestley’s conduct he speaks yet more decidedly in a letter dated Jan. 4, 177O, to a dissenting minister, “I cannot think the dissenters will be universally pleased with Dr. Priestley’s account of their principles, not to mention that some degree of mercy seemed to be due to us, who have shown our benevolence to all protestant dissenters, and have occasionally asserted their rights of conscience with the utmost freedom. But no, it seems nothing will do but absolute migration from our present stations, in agreement with our supposed convictions though, perhaps, it might puzzle Dr. Priestley to find us another church, in which all of us would be at our ease, &c.” On the secession of Dr. Disney from the church, a circumstance which appears to have given him great uneasiness, he went so far as to draw up a paper under the title “An Answer to the Question, Why are you not a Socinian r” but this, although now added to his works, was not published in his life-time, from motives of delicacy. He had been suspected, from his relationship and intimacy with Mr. Lindsey and Dr. Disney, of holding the same sentiments with them, and his object in the above paper was to vindicate his character in that respect. Still, as it did not appear in his life-time, it could not answer that purpose, and although we are now told that some time before his death, he explicitly asserted to his relation, the Rev. Mr. Comber, his belief in the divinity of Christ, the suspicions of the public had undoubtedly some foundation in the silence which in all his writings he preserved respecting a point of so much importance. When considerably advanced in years, he formed the design of writing the life of Luther and had made some collections for the purpose, hut was diverted from it by being engaged to draw up a work of far less general interest, the Memoirs of Mr. Thomas Hollis. In 1787, he performed his thirty-eighth visitation in Cleveland, after which he was taken ill at the house of his friend the Rev. William Comber, but reached home a few weeks before his death, which took place Aug. 7, 1787, in his eightythird year. Mr. Blackburne left a widow (who died Aug. 20, 1799), and four children, Jane, married to the Rev. Dr. Disney the Rev. Francis Blackburne, vicar of Brignal, near Greta-bridge, Yorkshire Sarab, married to the Rev. John Hall, vicar of Chew Magna, and rector of Dundry in Somersetshire and William Blackburne, M. D. of Cavendish square, London.

“Without ever taking an active part in the disputes which in his time agitated, and are still agitating, the church of England, on the article of predestination, it is certain that Mr. Blackburne was, in the general sentiments of his creed, what he more than once declared himself to be, a moderate Calvinist; and his writings place it beyond a doubt, that he believed himself so much more a Protestant for being so. His Calvinism, however, was of the largest and most liberal east. This will be easily understood from what he thought of the great work of David Hartley on Man * a book,‘ writes Mr. Blackburne to a friend, in 1750, ’ to which, if I am not exceedingly mistaken, Christianity is, or will be, more beholden than to all the books besides of the two last centuries. But he has joined necessity and religion together. What of that Ask the church of England in her articles.' ”While engaged in the controversial field, and maintaining what he believed to be the cause of truth and liberty, Mr, Blackburne, like his admired Luther, pursued his adversary often with vehemence, and sometimes with asperity of attack and when either rank or eminence in the object of his animadversions was likely to lend a sanction to prejudice and superstition, or to give an imposing air to the encroachments of human authority in matters of religion, no writer ever more intrepidly encountered odium, by exposing error and bigotry if it were even found, where many good and gentle natures will hardly allow it to be looked for, under the lawn and the mitre. Yet, doubtless, in the execution of so critical an office, the most acute and honest judgment might at times fail in discernment, or carry severity too far. To say, therefore, that Mr. Blackburne never passed an unjust censure, or harboured an unworthy dislike, as a polemic, would be to suppose that he was perfect in the most difficult of all tasks the task of inquiring uito the justness of argument, the integrity of motives, and the rectitude of conduct of other men like himself.

"Of all this, in his last years, especially when he had retired from the business of controversy, and looked back on the scene which he had quitted for ever, Mr. Blackburne was duly sensible and one day, a few weeks before his death, conversing with a lady then resident at Richmond, one of the most amiable and excellent of her sex, he acknowledged, with great earnestness, that some things which he had written and published in the course of his life he was afraid might have been too warmly or too hastily advanced. Yet no scholar, perhaps, was ever more industrious and indefatigable in the investigation both of facts and of arguments, or less precipitate in delivering his researches to the public, than archdeacon Blackburne.

“Nor did mere difference of opinion, even on points of the highest political and religious consequence, or on speculative topics, where years of study had endeared conviction to him, operate as a bar to his approbation of the merits of his opponent and he readily acknowledged, and admired, literary talent and scriptural knowledge, or clear and able enforcements of the truths and obligations of religion, as well as personal virtue and eminent piety, in those from whom otherwise he differed widely, and whom, with no little eagerness, he had sometimes opposed. ”Mr. Blackburne’s cordial and eloquent compliment to the memory of Jortin, to whom, besides some specific disagreements, he was nearly as dissimilar in general characters as Luther to Erasmus, has been more than once repeated. His amanuensis testifies the genuine satisfaction which the reading of Dr. Johnson’s Prayers and Meditations appeared to afford his venerable friend and he well remembers with what delight Mr. Blackburne listened to the sermons of bishop Sherlock, which he had doubtless often himself perused before and with what frankness of heart he wished that it had been in his power to be equally useful as a preacher of the doctrines of Christianity.

"Amidst the calls of his public station, and the labours of private study, during the most active stages of his life, Mr. Blackburne had been always constant in the regular performance of family devotion and of solitary prayer. The contemplation too of some passage in the Old or New Testament, with the comments of the best early or later critics, was not forgotten in the habitual arrangement of his forenoon. In his latter days, these exercises and meditations, and a course of reading congenial to them, suited particularly well with the sober and serious cast of a mind like his, and with afflictions fast weaning to a better world. Towards the close of his life, retaining strong faculties of memory and intellect, his powers of cheerful and instructive conversation were little diminished by age or what they had lost, if any thing they had lost, in vigour, was abundantly compensated in that soft mellowness of temper, which, like the mild setting sun of an autumnal evening, gilds the declining day of a wise and virtuous old man.

“Such was Francis Blackburne y a believer of Christianity, from the deepest conviction of its truth a Protestant on the genuine principles of the reformation from popery; a strenuous adversary of superstition and intolerance, and of every corruption of the simplicity or the spirit of the gospel a zealous promoter of civil liberty a close and perspicuous reasoner a keen and energetic writer an attentive, benevolent, and venerable archdeacon an elegant and persuasive preacher; a faithful pastor and exemplary guide; of unblemished purity of life; of simple dignity of manners a sincere and cordial friend an affectionate husband, and an indulgent father in short, a just, humane, pious, temperate, and independent man.”

, esq. of Orford, near Warrington in Lancashire, deserves some notice in a work of this description, as a promoter of science. This gentleman died in 1786, at the advanced age of ninety-six, the reward of a very regular and temperate life, and a mind undisturbed by any violent emotions. His health and tranquillity were also not a little promoted by the turn he took in early life to the cultivation of plants. He was supposed to be the second gentleman in England who cultivated the pine-apple, and his garden always continued one of the chief objects of botanical curiosity for its products both foreign and domestic, in the north of England. Of this a catalogue was printed by his gardener, Mr. Neal, in 1779. He retained his faculties in very considerable perfection till within two or three years before his death. He was exemplary in the discharge of religious duties, and in charity to the poor. His daughter Anna, who died, advanced in years, in 1794, was also attached to scientific pursuits, particularly natural history, of which she formed a very extensive museum at her seat at Fairfield near Warrington. She was equally fond of botany, and was the friend and constant correspondent of Linnæus and many other celebrated botanists on the continent and at home. A plant which she discovered, Linnæus named in honour of her, Blackburniana. She bequeathed her museum to her nephew John Blackburne, esq. M. P. for Lancashire.

, a very extraordinary poet, was born in 1721, at Annan in the county of Dumfries, in Scotland. His parents were natives of Cumberland, of the lower order, but industrious and well-informed. Before he was six months old he lost his sight by the small-pox, and therefore, as to all purposes of memory or imagination, may be said never to have enjoyed that blessing. His father and friends endeavoured to lessen the calamity by reading to him those books which might convey the instruction suitable to infancy, and as he advanced, they proceeded to others which he appeared to relish and remember, particularly the works of Spenser, Milton, Prior, Pope, and Addison. And such was the kindness which his helpless situation and gentle temper excited, that he was seldom without some companion who carried on this singular course of education, until he had even acquired some knowledge of the Latin tongue. It is probable that he remembered much of all that was read to him, but his mind began very early to make a choice. He first discovered a predilection for English poetry, and then, at the age of twelve, endeavoured to imitate it in various attempts, one of which is preserved in his works, but rather with a view to mark the commencement than the perfection of his talent.

Having completed his education at the university, he began a course of study, with a view to give lectures on oratory to young gentlemen intended for the bar or the pulpit, but by Hume’s advice he desisted from a project which the latter thought unlikely to succeed, and determined to study divinity, which promised to gratify and enlarge the pious feelings and sentiments that had grown up with him. Accordingly, after the usual probationary course, he was licensed a preacher of the gospel, agreeably to the rules of the church of Scotland, in 1759. In this character he attained considerable reputation, and was fond of composing sermons, of which he has left some volumes in manuscript, and a treatise of morals, both of which his friends once intended for the press. Two occasional sermons are said to have been published in his lifetime, but probably never reached this country, as no notice of them occurs in our literary journals.

“His manner of life (says that gentleman) was so uniform, that the history of it during one day, or one week, is the history of it during the seven years that our personal intercourse lasted. Reading, music, walking, conversing, and disputing on various topics, in theology, ethics, &c. employed almost every hour of our time. It was pleasant to hear him engaged in a dispute, for no man could keep his temper better than he always did on such occasions. I have known him frequently very warmly engaged for hours together, but never could observe one angry word to fall from him. Whatever his antagonist might say, he always kept his temper. ‘ Semper paratus et refellere sine pertinacia, et refelli sine iracundia.’ He was, however, extremely sensible to what he thought ill usage, and equally so whether it regarded himself or his friends. But his resentment was always confined to a few satirical verses, which were generally burnt soon after.”

"The late Mr. Spence (the editor of the quarto edition of his poems) frequently urged him to write a tragedy and assured him that he had interest enough with Mr. Garrick to get it acted. Various subjects were proposed to him, several of which he approved of, yet he never could be prevailed on to begin any thing of that kind*. It may seem remarkable, but as far as I know, it was invariably the case, that he never could think or write on any subject proposed to him by another.

“I have frequently admired with what readiness and rapidity he could sometimes make verses. I have known him dictate from thirty to forty verses, and by no means bad ones, as fast as I could write them but the moment he was at a loss for a rhyme or a verse to his liking, he stopt altogether, and could very seldom be induced to finish what he had begun with so much ardour.”

To this his elegant biographer adds “All those who ever acted as his amanuenses, agree in this rapidity and ardour of composition which Mr. Jameson ascribes to him in the account I have copied above. He never could dictate till he stood up; and as his blindness made walking about without assistance inconvenient or dangerous to him, he fell insensibly into a vibratory sort of motion of his body, which increased as he warmed with his subject, and was pleased with the conceptions of his mind. This motion at last became habitual to him, and though he could sometimes restrain it when on ceremony, or in any public appearance, such as preaching, he felt a certain uneasiness from the effort, and always returned to it when he could indulge it without impropriety.”

In the same year, he published “Paraclesis or consolations deduced from natural and revealed Religion in two dissertations the first, supposed to have been composed by Cicero now rendered into English the last originally written by Dr. Blacklock.” The plan of the original dissertation is to prove the superiority of the consolations to be derived from the Christian revelation: but it is painful to find by his preface that his motive for writing it, was “to alleviate the pressure of repeated disappointments to sooth his anguish for the loss of departed friends, to elude the rage of implacable and unprovoked enemies; in a word, to support his own mind, which, for a number of years, besides its literary difficulties, and its natural disadvantages, had maintained an incessant conflict with fortune.” Of what nature his disappointments were, or who could be implacable enemies to such a man, we are not told. His biographer, indeed, informs us that he “had from nature a constitution delicate and nervous, and his mind, as is almost always the case, was in a great degree subject to the indisposition of his body. He frequently complained of a lowness and depression of spirits, which neither the attentions of his friends, nor the unceasing care of a most affectionate wife, were able entirely to remove.” Let us hope, therefore, for the honour of mankind, that his complaints were those, not of a man who had enemies, but of one who was sensible that, with strong powers of mind, and well-founded consolations, he was yet excluded from many of the rational delights of which he heard others speak, and of which, if he formed any idea, it was probably disproportionate and distressing.

Such are the few events of Dr. Blacklock’s life. His character, and the character of his writings, are more interesting, and will probably ever continue to be the subject of contemplation with all who study the human mind, or revere the dispensations of Providence. His perseverance in acquiring so extensive a fund of learning, amidst those privations which seem to barr all access to improvement, is an extraordinary feature in his character, and notwithstanding the kind zeal of the friends who endeavoured to make up for his want of sight by reading to him, many of his attainments must ever remain inexplicable.

With respect to his personal character, his biographer, and indeed all who knew him, have expatiated on the gentleness of his manners, the benignity of his disposition, and that warm interest in. the happiness of others which led him so constantly to promote it in the young people who were committed to his charge. In their society he appeared entirely to forget the loss of sight, and the melancholy which, at other times, it might produce. “He entered,” says his biographer, " with the cheerful playfulness of a young man, into all the sprightly narrative, the sportive fancy, the humorous jest that rose around him. It was a sight highly gratifying to philanthropy, to see how much a mind endowed with knowledge, kindled by genius, and above all, lighted up with innocence and piety, like Blacklock’s, could overcome the weight of its own calamity, and enjoy the content, the happiness, and the gaiety of others. Several of those inmates of Dr. Blacklock’s house retained, in future life, all the warmth of that impression which his friendship at this early period had made upon them and in various quarters of the world he had friends and correspondents from whom no length of time or distance of place had ever estranged him.

“Music, which to the feeling and the pensive, in whatever situation, is a source of extreme delight, but which to the blind must be creative, as it were, of idea and of sentiment, he enjoyed highly, and was himself a tolerable performer on several instruments, particularly on the flute. He generally carried in his pocket a small flageolet , on which he played his favourite tunes; and was not displeased when asked in company to play or to sing them; a natural feeling for a blind man, who thus adds a scene to the drama of his society.”

, physician to king William III. and queen Anne, and a very voluminous writer, was son of Mr. Robert Blackmore, an attorney at law. He received the first part of his education at a country school, from whence he was removed to Westminster in the thirteenth year of his age. He was afterwards sent to St. Edmund’shall, in the university of Oxford, where he continued thirteen years. He is said to have been engaged for some time in the profession of a school -master but it is probable he did not long continue in that situation and, says Dr. Johnson, to have been once a schoolmaster, is the only reproach which all the perspicacity of malice, animated by wit, has ever fixed upon his private life. It appears that he travelled afterwards into Italy, and took the degree of doctor in physic, at the university of Padua. He also visited France, Germany, and the Low Countries, and having spent about a year and a half abroad, he returned again to England. On his arrival in London, he engaged in the practice of physic there, and was chosen, fellow of the royal college of physicians. He early discovered his attachment to the principles of the revolution; and this circumstance, together with the eminence which he had attained in his profession, recommended him to the notice and favour of king William. Accordingly, in 1697, he was appointed one of his majesty’s physicians in ordinary he had also a gold medal and chain bestowed on him by that prince, and received from him the honour of knighthood. Upon the king’s death, he was one of the physicians who gave their opinions at the opening of his majesty’s body. When queen Anne ascended the throne, he was appointed one of her physicians, and continued in that station for some time. Sir Richard Blackmore was the author of a variety of pieces both in prose and verse and the generality of his productions had many admirers in his own time for the third edition of his “Prince Arthur, an heroic poem in ten books,” was published in 1696, fol. The following year he also published in folio “King Arthur, an heroic poem, in twelve books.” In 1700 he published in folio, in verse, “A Paraphrase on the book of Job as likewise on the songs of Moses, Deborah, David on four select Psalms some chapters of Isaiah and the third chapter of Habbakuk.” He appears to have been naturally of a very serious turn, and therefore took great offence at the licentious and immoral tendency of many of the productions of his contemporary authors. To pass a censure upon these was the design of his poem, entitled “A Satire upon Wit,” or rather the abuse of it, which was first published in 1700. But this piece was attacked and ridiculed by many different writers, and there seemed to be a kind of confederacy of the wits against him. How much, however, they felt his reproof, appears from the following circumstance. In Tom Brown’s works are upwards of twenty different satirical pieces in verse against Blackmore, said to be written by colonel Codrington, sir Charles Sedley, colonel Blount, sir Samuel Garth, sir Richard Steele, Dr. Smith, Mr. William Burnaby, the earl of Anglesea, the countess of Sandwich, Mr. Manning, Mr. Mildmay, Dr. Drake, colonel Johnson, Mr. Richard Norton, &c. and most of these pieces are particularly levelled at our author’s “Satire upon Wit.” One topic of abuse against Blackmore was, that he lived in Cheapside. He was sometimes called the “Cheapside Knight,” and the “City Bard;” and Garth’s verses, in the collection just cited, are addressed “to the merry Poetaster at Sadlers Hall in Cheapside.” In Gibber’s lives we are also told, that “sir Richard had, by the freedom of his censures on the libertine writers of his age, incurred the heavy displeasure of Dryden, who takes all opportunities to ridicule him, and somewhere says, that he wrote to the rumbling of his chariot-wheels. And as if to be at enmity with Blackmore had been hereditary to our greatest poets, we find Mr. Pope taking up the quarrel where Dryden left it, and persecuting this worthy man with yet a severer degree of satire. Blackmore had been informed by Curl, that Mr. Pope was the author of a Travestie on the first Psalm, which he takes occasion to reprehend in his ‘ Essay on PoJite Learning,’ vol. II. p. 270. He ever considered it as the disgrace of genius, that it should be employed to burlesque any of the sacred compositions, which, as they speak the language of inspiration, tend to awaken the soul to virtue, and inspire it with a sublime devotion.”

On the 16th of November 1713, he began a paper, printed three times a week, called the “Lay Monk.” Only forty numbers of it were published, which, in 1714, were collected into a volume, under the title of the “Lay Monastery.” The Friday’s papers in this collection were written by Hughes, and the rest by sir Richard. In a letter to Mr. Hughes, he declared that he was not determined to the undertaking by a desire of fame or profit, hut from a regard to the public good. In 1716, he published in 2 vols. 8vo, “Essays upon several subjects,” and in 1718, “A collection of poems,” in 1 vol. 8vo. But the work which procured him the greatest reputation, was his “Creation, a philosophical poem, demonstrating the Existence and Providence of a God, in seven books.” This passed through several editions, and was greatly applauded by Mr. Addison. Mr. Locke also formed a very favourable opinion of sir Richard Blackmore; although perhaps he estimated his poetical talents too highly. In 1721, our author published in 12mo, “A new version of the Psalms of David, fitted to the tunes used in churches.” This was recommended by public authority, as proper to be used in the churches and chapels of England, but it does not appear to have been generally adopted. Towards the close of his life, his practice as a physician is said to have declined which might probably arise from the numerous attempts which were made to lessen his reputation. He died on the 8th of October, 1729, in an advanced age; and manifested in his last illness the same fervent piety, which had distinguished him in his life. He was certainly a man of considerable learning and abilities, and a most zealous advocate for the interests of religion and virtue. He wrote, indeed, too much, and was deficient in point of taste nor did he take sufficient time to polish his compositions. But he was far from being destitute of genius; and it is sufficiently manifest, that it was not his dullness, which excited so much animosity against him. Hardly any author has ever been more satirized than sir Richard Blackmore, and yet, so far as we can judge from his writings, there have been few, perhaps none, who have had better intentions. He had very just ideas of the true ends of writing and it would have been happy for the world, if such ideas had been adopted by, and really influenced, authors of more brilliant genius. And though his historical and epic poems exposed him to some degree of ridicule, yet he was far from being a proper object of the extreme contempt with which he was treated. The merit of his poem on Creation, and the excellency of his life, might have procured him better usage. And whatever were the defects of his compositions, he was justly entitled to commendation for the morality of their tendency. He who labours to reform mankind is more deserving of our esteem, than he who would corrupt them, whatever may be the powers of genius possessed by the latter, or whatever reputation his wit may have procured him. The fashion of the times, or the mutual jealousies and animosities of contemporary wits and authors, often occasion great injustice to be done to worthy men and useful writers. But time will, generally, in a great degree, remove such prejudices; and those who form an impartial estimate of the character and various productions of Blackmore, will acknowledge, that as a writer, with all his faults, he had considerable merit; that as a man, he was justly entitled to great applause. For, numerous as his enemies and opponents were, they seem to have been incapable of fixing the least imputation upon his character; and those who personally knew him spoke highly of his virtues. We think it an act of justice to endeavour to remove from a worthy man some part of that load of obloquy with which his memory has been overwhelmed. To this character, from the Biog. Britannica, we may add, that Dr. Johnson has increased the number of those liberal-minded men who have endeavoured to rescue sir Richard Blackmore’s name from the contempt with which it has been treated, and to do justice to his abilities as well as his virtues. To his “Creation” the doctor has given high praise, and has drawn the character of it with singular precision and elegance. From the inaccuracy with which Blackmore in his poems has pronounced the ancient, names of nations or places, Dr. Johnson has inferred, that the thirteen years he spent at the university, seem to have passed with very little attention to the business of the place. A strong testimony, however, to his diligence whilst at Edmund-hall, has lately been produced in the Gentleman’s Magazine, from Turner’s “Book of Providence.” “Dr. Richard Blackmore,” says Turner, “my contemporary and colleague (fellow collegian) at Oxon, now living, and one of the college in London, was, in his first years, one of the most eager and diligent students I ever knew sitting up at his book till twelve, one, two, and sometimes three o'clock in the morning, and then lying down only upon his chairs till prayer-time, till his health broke, and he was constrained by necessity to retire into the country, to repair himself by physic.”

1721, 8vo. 3. “King Alfred, in twelve books,” 1723, 8vo. 4. “History of the Conspiracy against king William the Third,” 1723, 8vo, 5. “A discourse on the Plague, with a preparatory account of malignant fevers, in two parts containing an explication of the nature of those diseases, and the methods of cure,” 1720, 8vo. 6. “A treatise on the Small-pox, in two parts and a dissertation upon the modern practice of Inoculation,” 1722, 8vo. 7. “A treatise on Consumptions and other distempers belonging to the breast and lungs,” 1724, 8vo, 8. “A treatise on the Spleen and Vapours, or hypochonclriacal and hysterical affections; with three discourses on the nature and cure of the Cholic, Melancholy, and Palsy,” 1725, 8vo. 9. “A critical dissertation upon the Spleen,” 1725. 10. “Discourses on the Gout, Rheumatism, and the King’s Evil,” 1726, 8vo. 11. “Dissertations on a Dropsy, a Tympany, the Jaundice, the Stone, and the Diabetes,” 1727, 8vo. 12. “Just prejudices against the Arian hypothesis,” 1725, 8vo. 13. “Modern Arians unmasked,” 1721, 8vo. 14. “Natural Theology, or moral Duties considered apart from positive: with some observations on the desirableness and necessity of a supernatural revelation,” 1728, 8vo. 15. “The accomplished Preacher; or, an essay upon divine eloquence,” 1731, 8vo. This last piece was published after the author’s death, in pursuance of his express order, by the rev. Mr. John White, of Nayland, in Essex who attended sir Richard during his last illness, and bore testimony to the elevated piety with which he prepared for his approaching dissolution.

, knight, and LL. D. an illustrious English lawyer, was born July 10, 1723, in Cheapside, in the parish of St. Michael-le-Querne, at the house of his father, Mr. Charles Blackstone, a silkman, and citizen and bowyer of London, who was the third son of Mr. John Blackstone, an eminent apothecary, in Newgate-street, descended from a family of that name in the west of England, at or near Salisbury. His mother was Mary, eldest daughter of Lovelace Bigg, esq. of Chilton Foliot, in Wiltshire. He was the youngest of four children, of whom, John died an infant, Charles, the eldest, and Henry, the third, were educated at Winchester-school, under the care of their uncle Dr. Bigg, warden of that society, and were afterwards both fellows of New college, Oxford. Charles became a fellow of Winchester, and rector of Wimering, in Hampshire; and Henry, after having practised physic for some years, went into holy orders, and died in 1778, rector of Adderbury, in Oxfordshire, a living in the gift of New-college. Their father died some months before the birth of the subject of this article, and their mother died before he was twelve years old. from his birth, the care both of his education and fortune was kindly undertaken by his maternal uncle, Mr. Thomas Bigg, an eminent surgeon in London, and afterwards, on the death of his eldest brothers, owner of the Chilton estate, which, if we mistake not, is still enjoyed by that family. The affectionate care of this uncle, in giving all his nephews a liberal education, supplied the great loss they had so early sustained, and compensated, in a great degree, for their want of more ample fortunes, and it was always remembered by them with the sincerest gratitude. In 1730, being about seven years of age, he was put to school at the Charter-house, and in 1735 was, by the nomination of sir Robert Walpole, on the recommendation of Charles Wither, of Hall, in Hampshire, esq, his cousin by the mother’s side, admitted upon the foundation.

The first years of a counsel’s attendance on the courts afford little matter proper to be inserted in a narrative of this kind and he, in particular, not being happy in a graceful delivery, or a flow of elocution, (both of which he much wanted), nor having any powerful friends or connexions to recommend him, made his way very slowly, and acquired little notice and little practice yet he then began to lay in that store of knowledge in the law which he has since communicated to the world, and contracted an acquaintance with several of the most eminent men in that profession, who saw through the then intervening cloud, those talents which afterwards were exerted with so much splendour.

The 26th of April, 1750, he commenced doctor of civil law, and thereby became a member of the convocation which enabled him to extend his views beyond the narrow circle of his own society, to the general benefit of the university at large. In this year he published “An essay on Collateral Consanguinity,” relative to the claim made by such as could by a pedigree prove themselves of kin to the founder of All-Souls college, of being elected preferably to all others into that society. Those claims became now so numerous, that the college, with reason, complained of being frequently precluded from making choice of the most ingenious and deserving candidates. In this treatise, which was his first publication, he endeavoured to prove, that as the kindred to the founder, a Popish ecclesiastic, could be only collateral, the length of time elapsed since his death must, according to the rules both of the civil and canon law, have extinguished consanguinity; or that the whole race of mankind were equally founders’ kinsmen. This work, although it did not answer the end proposed, or convince the then visitor, yet did the author great credit; and shewed that he had read much, and well digested what he had read. And most probably, the arguments contained in, it had some weight with his Grace the late archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Cornwallis, when about forty years ago, on application to him, as visitor of the college, he formed a new regulation, which gives general satisfaction, by limiting the number of founder’s kin; by which the inconvenience complained of was in a great measure removed, without annihilating a claim founded on the express words of the college statutes. In forming this new regulation, his Grace made choice of Mr. Blackstone as his common-law assessor, together with 'Dr. Hay the civilian.

Mr. Viner having by his will left not only the copy-right of his abridgement, but other property to a considerable amount, to the university of Oxford, to found a professorship, fellowships, and scholarships of common law, he was on the 20th of October, 1758, unanimously elected Vinerian professor; and on the 25th of the same month read his first introductory lecture; one of the most elegant and admired compositions which any age or country ever produced this he published at the request of the vice-chancellor and heads of houses, and afterwards prefixed to the first volume of his Commentaries. His lectures had now gained such universal applause, that he was requested by a noble personage, who superintended the education of our present sovereign, then prince of Wales, to read them to his royal highness; but as he was at that time engaged to a numerous class of pupils in the university, he thought he could not, consistently with that engagement, comply with this request, and therefore declined it. But he transmitted copies of many of them for the perusal of his royal highness who, far from being offended at an excuse grounded on so honourable a motive, was pleased to order a handsome gratuity to be presented to him.

In November 1759, he published a new edition of the Great Charter, and Charter of the Forest; which added much to his former reputation, not only as 'a great lawyer, but as an accurate antiquary, and an able historian. It must also be added, that the external beauties in the printing, the types, &c. reflected no small honour on him, as the principal reformer of the Clarendon press, from whence no work had ever before issued, equal in those particulars to this. This publication drew him into a short controversy with the late Dr. Lyttelton, then dean of Exeter, and afterwards bishop of Carlisle. The dean, to assist Mr. Blackstone in his publication, had favoured him with the collation of a very curious ancient roll, containing both the Great Charter, and that of the Forest, of the 9th of Henry III. which he and many of his friends judged to be an original. The editor of the Charters, however, thought otherwise, and excused himself (in a note in hjs introduction) for having made no use of its various readings, “as the plan of his edition was confined to charters which had passed the great seal, or else to authentic entries and enrolments of record, under neither of which classes the roll in question could be ranked.” The dean, upon this, concerned for the credit of his roll, presented to the Society of Antiquaries a vindication of its authenticity, dated June the 8th, 1761 and Mr. Blackstone delivered in an answer to the same learned body, dated May the 28th, 1762, alleging, as an excuse for the trouble he gave them, “that he should think himself wanting in that respect which he owed to the society, and Dr. Lyttelton, if he did not either own and correct his mistakes, in the octavo edition then preparing for the press, or subijiit to the society’s judgment the reasons at large upon which his suspicions were founded.” These reasons, we may suppose, were convincing, for here the dispute ended .

Many imperfect and incorrect copies of his lectures having by this time got abroad, and a pirated edition of them being either published, or preparing for publication in Ireland, he found himself under the necessity of printing a correct edition himself; and in November, 1765, published the first volume, under the title of “Commentaries on the Laws of England,” and in the course of the four succeeding years the other three volumes, which completed a work that will transmit his name to posterity among the first class of English authors, and will be universally read and admired, as long as the laws, the constitution, and the language of this country remain. Two circumstances respecting this great work, omitted by his biographer, we are enabled to add from unquestionable authority. So anxious was he that this work should appear with every possible advantage, that he printed three copies of the first volume, which he sent to three learned friends, for their opinion. The other circumstance does honour to his liberality. After reserving the copy-right in his own hands for some years, he disposed of it to Messrs. Strahan and Cadell for a considerable sum, but as, immediately after concluding the bargain, the decision passed the house of lords, which depreciated literary property, he offered Messrs. Strahan and Cadell, to cancel the agreement, and substitute another, by which he thought they would be less injured. These gentlemen, however, met his proposition with a corresponding liberality, and the original bargain stood; and every reader will be glad to hear thatthey were no losers, the work soon becoming, and yet remaining, in every sense, an English classic.

In 1766, he resigned, the Vinerian professorship, and the principality of New-inn hall finding he could not discharge the personal duties of the former, consistently with his professional attendance in London, or the delicacy of his feelings as an honest man. Thus was he detached from Oxford, to the inexpressible loss of that university, and the great regret of all those who wished well to the establishment of the study of the law therein. When he first turned his views towards the Vinerian professorship, he had formed a design of settling in Oxford for life he had flattered himself, that by annexing the office of professor to the principality of one of the halls (and perhaps converting it into a college), and placing Mr. Viner’s fellows and scholars under their professor, a society might be established for students of the common law, -similar to that of Trinity hall in Cambridge for civilians. Mr. Viner’s will very much favoured this plan. He leaves to the university “all his personal estate, books, &c. for the constituting, establishing, and endowing one or more fellowship or fellowships, and scholarship or scholarships, in any college or hall in the said university, as to the convocation shall be thought most proper for students of the common law.” But notwithstanding this plain direction to establish them in some college or hall, the clause from the delegates which ratified this designation, had the fate to be rejected by a negative in convocation.

In the new parliament chosen in 1768 he was returned burgess for Westbury in Wiltshire. In the course of this parliament, the question, “W 7 hether a member expelled was, or was not, eligible in the same parliament,” was frequently agitated in the house with much warmth and what fell from him in a debate being deemed by some persons contradictory to what he had advanced on the same subject in his Commentaries, he was attacked with much asperity, in a pamphlet supposed to be written by a baronet, a member of that house. To this charge he gave an early reply in print. In the same year, Dr. Priestley animadverted on some positions in the same work, relative to offences against the doctrine of the established church, to which he published an answer.

He seemed now arrived at the point he always wished for, and might justly be said to enjoy “otium cum dignitate.” Freed from the attendance at the bar, and what he had still a greater aversion to, in the senate, “where (to use his own expression) amid the rage of contending parties, a man of moderation must expect to meet with no quarter from any side,” although he diligently and conscientiously atcended the duties of the high office he was now placed in, yet the leisure afforded by the legal vacations he dedicated to the private duties of life, which, as the father of a numerous family, he now found himself called upon to exercise, or to literary retirement, and the society of his friends, at his villa, called Priory-place, in Wallingford which he purchased soon after his marriage, though he had for some years before occasionally resided at it. His connection with this town, both from his office of recorder, and his more or less frequent residence there, 'from about 1750, led him to form and promote every plan which could contribute to its benefit or improvement. To his activity it stands indebted for two new turnpike roads through the town; the one opening a communication, by means of a new bridge over the Thames at Shillingford, between Oxford and Reading the other to Wantage through the vale of Berkshire. He was indeed always a great promoter of the improvement of public roads: the new western road over Botley Causeway was projected, and the plan of it entirely conducted by him. He was the more earnest in this design, not merely as a work of general utility and ornament, but as a solid improvement to the estate of a nobleman, in settling whose affairs he had been most laboriously and beneficially employed. To his architectural talents, also, his liberal disposition, his judicious zeal, and his numerous friends, Wallingford owes the rebuilding that handsome fabric, St. Peter’s church. These were his employments in retirement; in London his active mind was never idle, and when not occupied in the duties of his station, he was ever engaged in some scheme of publifc utility. The last of this kind in which, he was concerned, was the act of parliament for providing detached houses of hard labour for convicts, as a substitute for transportation. Of this scheme we have just given some account in the life of Blackburn the architect. It has been put in practice in several counties, but the question as to the beneficial effects of solitary confinement, although frequently agitated, has not been so completely decided as to obviate many objections which have been lately offered.

In this useful and agreeable manner he passed the last ten years of his life; but not without many interruptions Ly illness. His constitution, hurt by the studious midnight labours of his younger days, and an unhappy aversion he always had to exercise, grew daily worse not only the gout, with which he was frequently, though not very severely, visited from 1759, but a nervous disorder also, that frequently brought on a giddiness or vertigo, added to a corpulency of body, rendered him still more unactive than, he used to be, and contributed to the breaking up of his constitution at an early period of life. About Christmas 1779 he was seized with a violent shortness of breath, which the faculty apprehended was occasioned by a dropsical habit, and water on the chest. By the application of proper remedies that effect of his disorder was soon removed, but the cause was not eradicated for on his coming up to town to attend Hilary term, he was seized with afresh attack, chiefly in his head, which brought on a drowsiness and stupor, and baffled all the art of medicine the disorder increasing so rapidly, that he became at last for some days almost totally insensible, and expired on the 14th of Feb. 1780, in the fifty-sixth year of his age.

A few weeks before he died, he was applied to by the trustees for executing the will of the late sir George Downing, bart. who had bequeathed a large estate for the endowing a new college in Cambridge, to give his assistance in forming a proper plan for this society, and framing a body of statutes for its regulation. This was a task to which his abilities were peculiarly adapted and it may be difficult to determine, whether the application reflected more, honour on the trustees, or on him. He had mentioned to some of his most intimate friends, his undertaking this business with great pleasure, and seemed to promise himself much satisfaction in the amusement it would afford him but, alas his disorder was then coming on with such hasty strides, that before any thing could be done in it, death put an end to this and all his labours, and left the university of Cambridge, as well as that of Oxford, to lament the loss of Mr. Justice Blackstone. He was buried, by his own direction, in a vault he had built for his family, inliis parish church of St. Peter’s in Wallingford. His neighbour And friend Dr. Barrington, bishop of Landaff, now of Durham, at his own particular request, performed the funeral service, as a public testimony of his personal regard and highest esteem.

In his public line of life he approved himself an able; upright, impartial judge perfectly acquainted with the laws of the country, and making them the invariable rule of his conduct. As a senator, he was averse to party violence, and moderate in his sentiments. Not only in parliament, but at all times, and on all occasions, he was a firm supporter of the true principles of our happy constitution in church and state on the real merits of which few men were so well qualified to decide. He was ever an active and judicious promoter of whatever he thought useful or advantageous to the public in general, or to any particular society or neighbourhood he was connected with; and having not only a sound judgment, but the clearest ideas, and the most analytical head that any man, perhaps, was ever blessed with; these qualifications, joined to an unremitting perseverance in pursuing whatever he thought right, enabled him to cany many beneficial plans into execution, which probably would have failed, if they had been attempted by other men.

His professional abilities need not be dwelt upon. They will be universally acknowledged and admired, as long as his works shall be read, or, in other words, as long as the municipal laws of this country shall remain an object of study and practice and though his works will only hold forth to future generations his knowledge of the law, and his talents as a writer, there was hardly any branch of literature he was unacquainted with. He ever employed much time in reading, and whatever he had read and once digested, he never forgot. He was an excellent manager of his time and although so much of it was spent in an application to books, and the employment of his pen, yet this was done without the parade or ostentation of being a hard student. It was observed of him, during his residence at college, that his studies never appeared to break in upon the common business of life, or the innocent amusements of society; for the latter of which few men were better calculated, being possessed of the happy faculty of making iis own company agreeable and instructive, whilst he enjoyed, without reserve, the society of others. Melancthon himself could not have been more rigid in observing the hour and minute of an appointment. During the years in which he read his lectures at Oxford, it could not be remembered that he had ever kept his audience waiting for him, even for a few minutes. As he valued his own time, he was extremely careful not to be instrumental in squandering or trifling away that of others, who, he hoped, might have as much regard for theirs, as he had for his. Indeed, punctuality was in his opinion so much a virtue, that he could not bring himself to think favourably of any who were notoriously defective in it.

This ill-fated man, after his failure in physic and in printing, became an unsuccessful candidate for the place of secretary to the society for the encouragement of learning. He was then made saperintendant of the works belonging to the duke of Chandos at Cannons, and experienced those disappointments incident to projectors. He also formed schemes in agriculture, and wrote a treatise on the subject, which, we are told, was the cause of his being engaged in Sweden. In that kingdom he drained marshes, practised physic, and was even employed in that capacity for the king. At length he was involved in some state cabals, or, as some accounts inform us, in a plot with count Tessin, and was put to the torture, which not producing a confession, he was beheaded, Aug. 9, 1747. The British ambassador was recalled from Sweden in the same year, among other reasons, for the imputations thrown on his Britannic majesty in the trial' of Dr. Blackwell. Soon after this event, appeared “A genuine copy of a Letter from a merchant in Stockholm, to his correspondent in London, containing an impartial account of Dr. Alexander Blackwell, his plot, trial, character, and behaviour, both under examination and at the place of execution, together with a copy of a paper delivered to a friend upon the scaffold,” in which he denied the crime imputed to him. When Mrs. Blackwell died does not appear. An improved edition of her Herbal was published by Trew, the text in Latin and German, Nuremberg, 1750 1760, fol. and at Leipsic was published in 1794, 8vo, “Nomenclator Linnaeanus in Blackvellianum Herbarium per C. G. Greening,” a proof of the estimation in which this work is still held on the continent.

, an ingenious and very learned writer of the last century, was born August 4, 1701, in the city of Aberdeen. His father, the rev. Mr. Thomas Blackwell, was minister of Paisley in Renfrewshire, from whence he was removed in 1700 to be one of the ministers of Aberdeen. He was afterwards elected professor of divinity in the Marischal college of that city, and in 1717 was presented by his majesty to be principal of the college, in both which offices he continued until his death in 1728. His mother’s name was Johnston, of a good family near Glasgow, and sister to Dr. Johnston, who was many years professor of medicine in the university of Glasgow. Our author received his grammatical education at the grammarschool of Aberdeen, studied Greek and philosophy in the Marischal college there, and took the degree of master of arts in 1718; which, as he was at that time only seventeen years of age, must be regarded as a considerable testimony of his early proficiency in literature. A farther proof of it was his being presented, on the 28th of November 1723, by his majesty king George the First, to the professorship of Greek, in the college in which he had been educated. He was admitted into this office on the 13th of December in the same year; and after that continued to teach the Greek language with great applause. His knowledge of that language was accurate and extensive, and his manner of communicating it perspicuous and engaging. He had a dignity of address which commanded the attention of the students, a steadiness in exacting the prescribed exercises which enforced application, and an enthusiasm for the beauties of the ancients, and utility of classical learning, which excited an ardour of study, and contributed much to diffuse a spirit for Grecian erudition far superior to what had taken place before he was called to the professorship. Together with his lessons in the Greek tongue, he gave, likewise, lessons on some of the Latin classics, chiefly with a view to infuse a relish for their beauties. To his zeal and diligence in discharging the duties of his station, it is probable that the world was, in part, indebted for such men as Campbell, Gerard, Reid, Beattie, Duncan, and the Fordyces, who have appeared with so much eminence in the republic of letters. When the celebrated Dr. Berkeley was engaged in the scheme of establishing an American university in the Summer Islands, Mr. Blackwell was in treaty with him for going out as one of his young professors; but the negociation did not take effect. In 1735 was published at London, in octavo, without the name of the bookseller, and without his own name, our author’s “Enquiry into the Life and Writings of Homer” a work, the great ingenuity and learning of which will be acknowledged by all who have perused it. It was embellished with plates, designed by Gravelot, and executed by different engravers. This we apprehend to be the most esteemed, and it is, in our opinion, the most valuable, of Mr. Blackwell’s performances. The second edition appeared in 1736; and, not long after, he published “Proofs of the Enquiry into Homer’s Life and Writings, translated into English being a key to the Enquiry with a curious frontispiece.” This was a translation of the numerous Greek, Latin, Spanish, Italian and French notes which had been subjoined to the original work. In 1748, came out, in London, “Letters concerning Mythology,” in a large octavo, but without the bookseller (Andrew Millar’s) name. On the 7th of October, in the same year, our author was appointed by his late majesty, George II. to be principal of the Marischal college in Aberdeen, and was admitted to the office on the 9th of November following. He continued, also, professor of Greek till his death. He is the only layman ever appointed principal of that college, since the patronage came to the crown, by the forfeiture of the Marischal family in 1716 all the other principals having been ministers of the established church of Scotland. When Robert and Andrew Foulis, printers at Glasgow, intended to publish an edition of Plato, Mr. Blackwell proposed to furnish them with several critical notes for it, together with an account of Plato’s Life and Philosophy but the printers not acceding to the terms which he demanded for this assistance, he promised, by a Latin advertisement in 1751, himself to give an edition of Plato. His design, however, was not carried into execution nor did it appear, from any thing found among his papers after his death, that he had made any considerable progress in the undertaking. On the 3d of March, 1752, he took the degree of doctor of Laws. In the following year, appeared the first volume of his “Memoirs of the Court of Augustus,” in 4to. The second volume came out in 1755 and the third, which was posthumous, and left incomplete by the author, was prepared for the press by John Mills, esq. and published in 1764. At the same time, was published the third edition of the two former volumes. This is a proof of the good reception the work met with from the public, though it must be acknowledged that the parade with which it was written, and the peculiarity of the language, exposed it to some severity of censure, particularly to a most acute, and in some respects humourous, criticism by Dr. Johnson, written for the Literary Magazine, and now inserted in Johnson’s works. It cannot be denied that there is a considerable degree of affectation in Dr. Blackwell’s style and manner of composition and, unhappily, this affectation increased in him as he advanced in years. His “Enquiry into the Life of Homer” was not free from it it was still more discernible in his “Letters concerning Mythology” and was most of all apparent in his “Memoirs of the Court of Augustus.” We perceive in his various productions a mixture of pedantry but it is not the sober dull pedantry of the merely recluse scholar. In Dr. Blackwell it assumes a higher form. Together with the display of his erudition, he is ambitious of talking like a man who is not a little acquainted with the world. He is often speaking of life and action, of men and manners; and aims at writing with the freedom and politeness of one who has been much conversant with the public. But; in this he is unsuccessful: for though he was not destitute of genius or fancy, and had a high relish for the beauties of the ancient authors, he never attained that simplicity of taste, which leads to true ease and elegance in composition. It is probable, also, that, like many others at that time, he might be seduced by an injudicious imitation of lord Shaftesbury; a writer, whose faults have been found more easily attainable than his excellences.

Soon after Dr. Blackwell became principal of his college he married Barbara Black, the daughter of a merchant of Aberdeen, by whom he had no children, and who survived him so late as 1793. Several years before his death, his health began to decline so that he was obliged to employ an assistant for teaching his Greek class. His disorder was of the consumptive kind, and it was thought to be increased by the excess of abstemiousness which he imposed on himself and, in which, notwithstanding all the remonstrances of his physicians, he obstinately persisted, from an opinion of his own knowledge of his constitution, and of what he found by experience to suit it best. His disease increasing, he was advised to travel; and accordingly, in February 1757, he set out from Aberdeen, but was able to go no farther than Edinburgh, in which city he died, on the 8th of March following, in the fifty-sixth year of his age. Dr. Blackwell enjoyed an equable flow of temper, in which his intimate friends scarcely ever observed any variation. This he maintained during his whole illness. The day before he set out from Aberdeen, he desired to meet with all the professors of the college, and spent two hours with them with his usual vivacity. In Edinburgh he was visited, at his own desire, by Dr. Wallace, one of the ministers of that city, whose ingenuity and learning are well known. Dr. Blackwell, on the very day in which he died, wrote letters to several of his friends, and took leave of them with the greatest chee. fulness. In the April following our author’s decease, it being Dr. Gerard’s business, as (at that time) professor of moral philosophy and logic in the Marischal college, to preside at conferring the degree of master of arts on those whose standing entitled them to it, the doctor took that occasion to pronounce publicly, on the late principal, such an encomium as his literature deserved. It was a fault in Dr. Blackwell, that he too much assumed the appearance of universal knowledge; the consequence of which was that he sometimes laid himself open, by entering on subjects of philosophy and mathematics, without a sufficient acquaintance with them. With all the ancient, and with most of the modern languages, he was really acquainted and his reading, in the departments of history and the belles lettres, was very extensive. He had a ready and lively manner of introducing his knowledge of this kind, which made his conversation both instructive and entertaining and it was rendered still more so by being accompanied with great good humour, and an entire command of his passions, even when he was provoked. Though he had something of the stiffness of the recluse, he joined with it much of the confidence and good breeding that are found in men who converse much in the world. His life was private and studious: he did not wholly decline mixed companies, though it was but seldom that he came into them and at home he chose only the conversation of the learned, or that of persons of superior rank or fortune. At London he was known to several men of eminence. The late duke of Newcastle, and Mr. Henry Pelham, were his patrons, and procured for him the office of principal of the Marischal college. It is confidently said that they had intended him an establishment at Cambridge, and that the professorship of modern history was fixed upon for him, if he had not died a short time before it became vacant. A man of Dr. Blackwell’s abilities and reputation could not fail of having some valuable literary connexions and correspondents; among whom he had the honour of numbering the late celebrated Dr. Mead, and the no less celebrated Dr. Warburton, bishop of Gloucester. It is said that Mr. Blackwell, soon after the publication of his Enquiry, being at Cambridge, paid a visit to Dr. Bentley, and the discourse turning upon the book, the doctor, being asked his opinion of it, answered, “That when he had gone through half of it, he had forgotten the beginning; and that, when he had finished the reading of it, he had forgotten the whole.” Whatever truth is in this story, it is certain, at least, that a similar objection had been started by others, if not by Dr. Bentley.

He was the author of “A letter to cardinal Cajetane io. commendation of the English Jesuits,” written in 1596. “Answers upon sundry examinations whilst he was a prisoner,” London, 1607, 4to. “Approbation of the Oath of Allegiance letters to the Romish priests touching the lawfulness of taking the Oath of Allegiance,” and another to the same purpose, all of which were printed with the “Answers upon sundry examinations,” &c. “Epistolae ad Anglos Pontificios,” London, 1609, 4to. “Epistolae ad Robertum cardinalem Bellarminum.” See the third volume of the Collections of Melchior Goldast, Francfort, 1613, fol. “Answer to the Censure of Paris in suspending the secular priests obedience to his authority,” dated May the 29th, 1600. This was replied to by John Dorel, or Darrel, dean of Agen the same year. “A treatise against lying and fraudulent dissimulations,” in manuscript, among those given to the Bodleian library by archbishop Laud. At the end of it is the approbation of the book written by Blackwell, and recommended by him as fit for the press; so that no other name being put to it, it has been ascribed to him whereas it is more justly supposed to have been written by Francis Tresham, esq. an English Catholic.

, another brother of the preceding, was born probably about 1526, at Dumfermling in Fifeshire, and educated at St. Andrew’s. He was also sent by his uncle, the bishop of Orkney, to Paris, where in 1551, he taught philosophy. He afterwards applied himself to the study of physic, became a member of the college of physicians, and was finally honoured with the dignity of clean of the faculty, a place of considerable importance in the college of Paris. He was also appointed physician to the duke de Longueville, with a salary of 20O pistoles. During the plague at Paris, he had the resolute humanity to continue in that city, much to his own honour, and the consolation of the people. He is supposed to have died in 16 J 3, or 1614. He wrote several medical and philosophical treatises, of which we only know of two that were printed 1. “Hippocratis quaedam cum Mss. collata,” Paris, 1625, and 2. “Questio Medica, an visceribus nutritiis aestuantibus aquarum metal licarum potus salubris” ibid. 4to. He had a son of both his names, likewise a physician of eminence, of whom Moreri gives a short account.

, an eminent printer, and publisher of geographical maps and charts, was born at Amsterdam in 1571, and died there in 1638. He was the scholar and friend of Tycho-Brahe, and applied himself, besides his particular art, to the study of geography and astronomy. When he had formed the design of his celebrated “Atlas,” he gave liberal prices to the most experienced geographers and draughtsmen for original maps, which he procured to be engraved with great care, and all the elegance which the state of the arts in his time could admit. Eager, however, as he was to render this work perfect, as he was obliged to trust to the incomplete and dubious relations of travellers, the work is now valued chierly as a beautiful specimen of engraving, and bears a considerable price, especially when coloured. It was entitled the “Grand Atlas geographique,” or “Theatrum Mundi” and including the celestial and hydrographical maps, forms 14 vols. fol. 1663 67, very little of it having been published in his life-time, but. the whole completed by his sons. He published also, “Instruction astronomique de l'usage des globes et sphere celestes et terrestres,” Amst. 1642, 4to 1669, 4to. There was a neatness in all his publications of this description, which has been rarely imitated. An accidental fire which destroyed the greater part of the first edition of the atlas and of his other works, rendered them for some time in great demand. His “Theatrum urbium et munimentorum,” was another collection of views and maps in much esteem. These and other designs were pursued and completed by his sons John and Cornelius, and, the latter dying young, chiefly by John, who was also the printer of a great many classics, which yield in beauty only to the Elzevirs. Among the geographical works of John Blaeu, are, 1. “Novum ac magnum theatrum civitatum totius Belgiae,” 1649, 2 vols. fol. 2. “Civitates et admirandae Italiae,” 1663, 2 vols. fol. reprinted with a French text, Amst. 1704, 4 vols. fol. and Hague, 1724. 3. “Theatrum Sabaudise et Pedemontii,” 1682, 2 vols. fol. translated and published under the title “Theatre de Piemont e de la Savoie,” by James Bernard, Hague, 1735, 2 vols. fol. Vossius and Grotius speak in high terms of the talents and industry of John and Cornelius Blaeu. It may be noticed that John Blaeu sometimes concealed himself under a fictitious name. His edition of “Erythraei Pinacotheca,” a work to which we have sometimes referred, was published with Cologne in the title page, instead of Amsterdam, and Jodocus Kalcovius, instead of John Blavius, or Blaeu.

, an eminent mathematician, who flourished in the 16th and 17th centuries, was the son of John Blagrave, of Bulmarsh, esq. and was born at Reading, but in what year is not known. He acquired the rudiments of his education at Reading, whence he removed to St. John’s college, Oxford, but soon quitted the university, and retired to Southcote Lodge at Reading, where he devoted his time to study and contemplation. His genius seemed to be turned most to mathematics; and that he might study this science without interruption, he devoted himself to a retired life. He employed himself chiefly in compiling such works as might render speculative mathematics accurate, and the practical parts easy. He accordingly finished some learned and useful works, in all which he proposed to render those sciences more universally understood. He endeavoured to shew the usefulness of such studies, that they were not mere amusements for scholars and speculative persons, but of general advantage, and absolutely indispensable in many of the necessaries and conveniences of life with this view he published the four following works: 1. “A Mathematical Jewel, shewing the making and most excellent use of an instrument so called: the use of which jewel is so abundant, that it leadeth the direct path-way through the whole art of astronomy, cosmography, geography,” &c. 1582, folio. 2. “Of the making and use of the Familiar Staff, so called for that it may be made useful and familiarly to walk with, as for that it performeth the geometrical mensuration of all altitudes,” 1590, 4to. 3. “Astrolabium uranicum generale a necessary and pleasant solace and recreation for navigators in their long journeying containing the use of an instrument, or astrolabe,” &c. 1596, 4to. 4. “The art of Dialling, in two parts.” 1609, 4to.

, probably a relation of the preceding, was born in the parish of St. Giles, Reading, in 1610, and was a great enthusiast in astrological studies. He published “An introduction to Astrology,” 1682, 8vo, to which is prefixed an engraving of him mentioned by Granger. He was the author of a large supplement to Culpepper’s Herbal; to which is added “An account of all the Drugs that were sold in the druggists and apothecaries shops, with their dangers and connexions.” To this book is subjoined “A new tract of Chirurgery,” 8vo. He was also author of “The Astrological practise of Physick, discovering the true method of curing all kinds of diseases, by such herbs and plants as grow in our nation,” 8vo. In the Biographia Britannica, is an account of a manuscript which had been seen by Dr. Campbell, the author of that article, and had been bought at the sale of the library of an eminent physician near Covent-garden. In the first leaf it was said to be written by Mr. J. Blagrave, and was dedicated to Mr. B. (Backhouse) of Swallowfield. It appeared, from some mention of the royal society, and its members, to have been written in 1669, or 1670. The title was, “A remonstrance in favour of Ancient Learning against the proud pretensions of the moderns, more especially in respect to the doctrine of the Stars.” From the distribution of the several heads, and the extracts from them, it seems to be the work of an ingenious writer; one far superior to Joseph Blagrave in style and composition; and might, possibly, as Mr. Coates conjectures, be an unpublished work of Mr. John Blagrave, the mathematician, by whose will he inherited an estate in Swallowfield, yet we know not how to reconcile this with the dates respecting the royal society, which certainly did not exist in the mathematician’s time. This Joseph Blagrave died in 1679.

, a monk of the order of St. Benedict, was born in the county of Fife, in Scotland, in the reign of king Alexander III. and educated with the celebrated sir William Wallace, at the school of Dundee. He then went over to France, where he studied for some time in the university of Paris, and became a monk of the order of St. Benedict. On his return to Scotland, he found his country in great confusion, owing to the death of Alexander III. without issue, and the contests of various competitors for the throne. At first, therefore, he retired to the house of the Benedictines at Dumfermline but when, sir William Wallace was made governor or viceroy of the kingdom in 1294, Blair became his chaplain, and being by this means an eye-witness of most of his actions, he composed the history of his life in Latin verse. Of this a, fragment only is left, which was copied by sir James BaU four out of the Cottonian library, and published in 1705, by sir Robert Sibbald, the celebrated botanist. It appears to have been written in 1327 and what remains is translated in Hume’s “History of the Douglasses.” Blair, the exact period of whose death is uncertain, is sometimes called John, and sometimes Arnold, which latter name he is said to have adopted when he retired into his monastery, and which is also used by sir Robert Sibbald in his “Relationes quaedam Arnoldi Blair monachi de Dumfermelem et Capellani D. Willelmi Wallas Militis. Cum Comment.” Edinb. 1705, 8vo.

, was educated at Edinburgh, and was, as already noticed, related to Dr. Hugh Blair. He came to London in company with Andrew Henderson, a voluminous writer, who, in his title-pages styled himself A. M. and for some years kept a bookseller’s shop in Westminster-hall. Henderson’s first employment was that of an usher at a school in Hedge-lane, in which he was succeeded by his friend Blair, who, in 1754, obliged' the world with a valuable publication under the title of “The chronology and history of the world, from the creation to the year of Christ 1753. Illustrated in fifty-six tables; of which four are introductory, and contain the centuries prior to the first olympiad; and each of the remaining fifty-two contain in one expanded view fifty years, or half a century. By the rev. John Blair, LL. D.” This volume, which is dedicated to lord chancellor Hardwicke, was published by subscription, on account of the great expence of the plates, for which the author apologized in his preface, where he acknowledged great obligations to the earl of Bath, and announced some chronological dissertations, in which he proposed to illustrate the disputed points, to explain the prevailing systems of chronology, and to establish the authorities upon which some of the particular seras depend. In Dr. Hugh Blair’s life, it has been noticed that this work was partly projected by him. In January 1755, Dr. John Blair was elected F. R. S. and in 1761, F. A. S. In 1756 he published a second edition of his Chronological Tables. In Sept. 1757, he was appointed chaplain to the princess dowager of Wales, and mathematical tutor to the duke of York; and, on Dr. Townshend’s promotion to the deanry of Norwich, the services of Dr. Blair were rewarded, March 10, 1761, with a prebendal stall at Westminster. The vicarage of Hinckley happening to fall vacant six days after, by the death of Dr. Moires, Dr. Blair was presented to it by the dean and chapter of Westminster and in August that year he obtained a dispensation to hold with it the rectory of Burton Goggles, in Lincolnshire. In September 1763, he attended his royal pupil the duke of York in a tour to the continent; had the satisfaction of visiting Lisbon, Gibraltar, Minorca, most of the principal cities in Italy, and several parts of France and returned with the duke in August 1764. In 1768 he published an improved edition of his Chronological Tables, which he dedicated to the princess of Wales, who had expressed her early approbation of the former edition. To the edition were annexed fourteen maps of ancient and modern geography, for illustrating the tables of chronology and history. To which is prefixed a dissertation on the progress of geography. In March 1771 he was presented by the dean and chapter of Westminster to the vicarage of St. Bride’s, in the city of London which made it necessary for him to resign Hinckley, where he had never resided for any length of time. On the death of Mr. Sims, in April 1776, he resigned St. Bride’s, and was presented to the rectorjr of St. John the Evangelist in Westminster and in June that year obtained a dispensation to hold the rectory of St. John with that of Horton, near Colebrooke, Bucks. His brother, captain Blair *, falling gloriously in the service of his country in the memorable sea-fight of April 12, 1782, the shock accelerated the doctor’s death. He had at the same time the influenza in a severe degree, which put a period to his life June 24, 1782. His library was sold by auction December 1113, 1781; and a course of his “Lectures on the canons of the Old Testament,” has since appeared.

Dogger Bank, August 5, 1781, was whom their country, by its rapresentapromoted to the command of the An- tives, voted a monument, on, a new ship of 64 guns. By bravely where he recommended himself to the royal society by some discourses on the sexes of flowers. His stay in London was not long, and after leaving it, he settled at Boston, in Lincolnshire, where Dr. Pulteney conjectures that he practised physic during the remainder of his life. The time of his decease is not known, but it is supposed to have taken place soon after the publication of the seventh Decad of his “Pharmaco-Botanologia,” in 1728. Dr. Blair’s first publication was entitled “Miscellaneous observations in Physic, Anatomy, Surgery, and Botanies,” 1718, 8vo. In the botanical part of this work he insinuates some doubts relating to the method suggested by Petiver, and others, of deducing the qualities of vegetables from the agreement in natural characters, and instances the Cynoglossum, as tending to prove the fallacy of this rule. But the work by which he rendered the greatest service to botany, originated with his “Discourse on the Sexes of Plants,” read before the royal society, and afterwards greatly amplified, and published at the request of several members of that body, under the title of “Botanic Essays,” 1720, 8vo, in which he strengthened the arguments in proof of the sexes of plants, by sound reasoning, and some new experiments. He published also, “Pharmaco-botanologia, or an alphabetical and classical dissertation on all the British indigenous and garden plants of the new dispensatory,” Lond. 1723 28, 4to, but this work extends only to the letter H. Dr. Blair wrote some papers in the Philosophical Transactions, particularly his anatomy and osteology of the elephant, &c.

, a gentleman who was cut off early in life, but whose progress and improvements in natural knowledge were so great, that the editors of the second edition of the Biographia Britannica have thought him entitled to an honourable place in their work, was the son of John Blake, esq. and born in London, Nov. 4, 1745; educated at Westminster school; afterwards instructed in mathematics, chemistry, and drawing: but botany was his favourite object, in which he made a great progress. With these advantages he set out in life, and in 1766 was sent as one of the East India company’s supercargoes at Canton in China where he was no sooner fixed, than he resolved to employ every moment of his time, which could be spared from the duties of his station, to the advancement of natural science for the benefit of his countrymen. His plan was, to procure the seeds of all the vegetables found in China, which are used in medicine, manufactures, and food; and to send into Europe not only such seeds, but the plants by which they were produced, that they might be propagated either in Great Britain and Ireland, or in those colonies of America, the soil and climate of which might suit them best. But it was not to botanic subjects alone, that Mr. Blake’s genius was confined he had begun to collect fossils and ores and he now attended as much to mineralogy, as he had done to botany.

February 12, 1649, he was appointed to command the fleet, in conjunction with col. Deane and col. Popham, and soon after was ordered to sail, with a squadron of men of war, in pursuit of prince Rupert. Blake came before Kinsale in June 1649, where prince Rupert lay in harbour. He kept him in the harbour till the beginning of October; when the prince, despairing of relief by sea, and Cromwell being ready to take the town by land, provisions of all sorts falling short, he resolved to force his way through Blake’s squadron, which he effected with the loss of three of his ships. The prince’s fleet steered their course to Lisbon, where they were protected by the king of Portugal. Blake sent to the king for leave to enter, and coming near with his ships, the castle shot at him; upon which he dropped anchor, and sent a boat to know the reason of this hostility. The captain of the castle answered, he had no orders from the king to let his ships pass: however, the king commanded one of the lords of the court to wait upon Blake, and to desire him not to come in except the weather proved bad, lest some quarrel should happen between him and prince Rupert; the king sent him, at the same time, a large present of fresh provisions. The weather proving bad, Blake sailed up the river into the bay of Wyers, but two miles from the place where prince Rupert’s ships lay; and thence he sent capt. Moulton, to inform the king of the falsities in the prince’s declaration. The king, however, still refusing to allow the admiral to attack prince Rupert, Blake took five of the Brazil fleet richly laden, and at the same time sent notice to him, that unless he ordered the prince’s ships out from his river, he would seize the rest of the Portuguese fleet from America. Sept. 1650 the prince endeavoured to get out of the harbour, but was soon driven in again by Blake, who sent to England nine Portuguese ships bound for Brazil. October following, he and Popham met with a fleet of 23 sail from Brazil for Lisbon, of whom, they sunk the admiral, took the vice-admiral, and 11 other ships, having 10,000 chests of sugar on board. Jn his return home, he met with two ships in search of the prince, whom he followed up the Streights when he took a French man of war, the captain of which had committed hostilities. He sent this prize, reported to be worth a million, into Calais, and followed the prince to the pore of Carthagena, where he lay with the remainder of his fleet. As soon as Blake came to anchor before the fort, he sent a messenger to the Spanish governor, informing him, that an enemy to the state of England was in his port, that the parliament had commanded him to pursue him, and the king of Spain being in amity with the parliament, he desired leave to take all advantages against their enemy. The governor replied, he could not take notice of the difference of any nations or persons amongst themselves, only such as were declared enemies to the king his master; that they came in thither for safety, therefore he could not refuse them protection, and that he would do the like for the admiral. Blake still pressed the governor to permit him to attack the prince, and the Spaniard put him off till he could have orders from Madrid. While the admiral was cruizing in the Mediteranean, prince Rupert got out of Carthagena, and sailed to Malaga. Blake, having notice of his destroying many English ships, followed him and attacking him in the port, burnt and destroyed his whole fleet, two ships only excepted this was in January 1651. In February, Blake took a French man of war of 40 guns, and sent it, with other prizes, to England. Soon after 'he came with his squadron to Plymouth, when he received the thanks of the parliament, and was made warden of the cinque ports. March following, an act passed, whereby colonel Blake, colonel Popham, and colonel Deane, or any two of them, were appointed admirals and generals of the fleet, for the year ensuing. The next service he was put upon, was the reducing the isles of Scilly,- which were held for the king. He sailed in May, with a body of Boo land troops on board. Sir John Grenville, who commanded in those parts for the king, after some small resistance, submitted. He sailed next for Guernsey, which was held for the king, by sir George Carteret. He arrived there in October, and landing what forces he had the very next day, he did every thing in his power in order to make a speedy conquest of the island, which was not completed that year. In the beginning of the next, however, the governor, finding all hopes of relief vain, thought proper to make the best terms he could. For this service Blake had thanks from the parliament, and was elected one of the council of state. March 25, 1652, he was appointed sole admiral for nine months, on the prospect of a Dutch war. The states sent Van Trump with forty-five sail of men of war into the Downs, to insult the English Blake, however, though he had but twentv-three ships, and could expect no succour but from major Bourne, who commanded eight more, yet, being attacked by Van Trump, fought him bravely, and forced him to retreat. This was on the 19th of May, 1652. After this engagement the states seemed inclined to peace but the commonwealth of England demanded such terms as could not be complied with, and therefore both sides prepared to carry on the war with greater vigour. Blake now harassed the enemy by taking their merchant ships, in which he had great success. On the 10th of June, a detachment from his fleet fell upon twenty-six sail of Dutch merchantmen, and took them every one and by the end of June he had sent into port forty prizes. On the 2d of July he sailed, with a strong squadron, northwards. In his course he took a Dutch man of war; and about the latter end of the month, he fell on twelve men of war, convoy to their herring busses, took the whole convoy, 100 of their busses, and dispersed the rest. August 12, he returned into the Downs, with six of the Dutch men of war, and 900 prisoners. Thence he stood over to the coast of Holland, and on Sept. 28th, having discovered the Dutch about noon, though he had only three of his own squadron with him, vice-admiral Penii with his squadron at some distance, and the rest a league or two astern, he bore in among the Dutch fleet, being bravely seconded by Penn and Bourne when three of the enemy’s ships were wholly disabled at the first brunt, and another as she was towing oft* The rear-admiral was taken by captain Mildmay and had not night intervened, it was thought not a single ship of the Dutch fleet would have escaped. On the 29th, about day-break, the English espied the Dutch fleet N.E. two leagues off; the admiral bore up to them, but the enemy having the wind of him, he could not reach them however, he commanded his light frigates to ply as near as they could, and keep firing while the rest bore up after them upon which the Dutch hoisted their sails, and run for it. The English being in want of provisions, returned to the Downs. Blake having been obliged to make large detachments from his fleet Van Trump, who had again the command of the Dutch navy, consisting of eighty men of war, resolved to take this opportunity of attacking him in the Downs, knowing he had not above half his number of ships. He accordingly sailed away to the back of the Goodwin. Blake having intelligence of this, called a council of war, wherein it was resolved to fight, though at so great a disadvantage. The engagement began November 29, about two in the morning, and lasted till near six in the evening. Blake was aboard the Triumph; this ship, the Victory, and the Vanguard, suffered most, having been engaged at one time with twenty of the enemy’s best ships. The admiral finding his ships much disabled, and that the Dutch had the advantage of the wind, drew off his fleet in the night into the Thames, having lost the Garland and Bonaventure, which were taken by the Dutch a small frigate was also burnt, and three sunk and his remaining ships much shattered and disabled Van Trump, however, bought this victory dear, x one of his flag-ships being blown up, all the men drowned, and his own ship and De Kuyter’s both unfit for service till they were repaired. This success invigorated the spirits of the Dutch exceedingly; Van Trump sailed through the channel with a broom at his main-top-mast, to signify that he had swept the seas of English ships. In the mean time, Blake having repaired his fleet, and Monk and Deane being now joined in commission with him, sailed Feb. 8, 1653, from Queensborough, with sixty men of war, which were soon after joined with twenty more from Portsmouth. On the 18th they discovered Van Trump with seventy men of war, and 300 merchant ships under his convoy. Blake, with twelve ships, came up with and engaged the Dutch fleet, and, though grievously wounded in the thigh, continued the fight till night, when the Dutch, who had six men of war sunk and taken, retired. After having put ashore his wounded men at Portsmouth, he followed the enemy, whom he came up with next day, when the fight was renewed, to the loss of the Dutch, who continued retreating towards Boulogne. All the night following Blake continued the pursuit, and, in the morning of the 20th, the two fleets fought again till four in the afternoon, when the wind blowing favourably for the Dutch, they secured themselves on the flats of Dunkirk and Calais. In these three engagements the Dutch lost eleven men of war, thirty merchant ships, and had fifteen hundred men slain. The English lost only one ship, but not fewer men than the enemy. In April Cromwell turned out the parliament, and shortly after assumed the supreme power. The states hoped great advantages from this, but were disappointed Blake said on this occasion to his officers, “It is not for us to mind state affairs, but to keep foreigners from fooling us.” Towards the end of the month Blake and his colleagues, with a fleet of an hundred sail, stood over to the Dutch coast, and forced their fleet to take shelter in the Texel, where, for some time, they were kept by Monk and Deane, while Blake sailed Northward at last Van Trump got out, and drew together a fleet of an hundred and twenty men of war. June 3d, Deane and Monk engaged him off the North Foreland. On the 4th Blake came to their assistance with eighteen fresh ships, by which means a complete victory was gained; and if the Dutch had not again saved themselves on Calais sands, their whole fleet had been sunk or taken. Cromwell having called the parliament, styled the Little Parliament, Blake, Oct. 10, took his seat in the house, where he received their solemn thanks for his many and faithful services. The protector afterwards called a new parliament, consisting of four hundred, 'where Blake sat also, being the representative for his native town of Bridgewater. Dec. 6th he was appointed one of the commissioners of the admiralty. Nov. 1654, Cromwell sent him with a strong fleet into the Mediterranean, with instructions to support the honour of the English flag, and to procure satisfaction for any injuries that might have been done to our merchants. In December Blake came into the road of Cadiz, where he was treated with great respect; a Dutch admiral would not hoist his flag while he was there. The Algerines were so much afraid of him, that they stopped their Sallee rovers, obliged them to deliver up what English prisoners they had on board, and sent them to Blake, in, order to procure his favour. Nevertheless, he came before Algiers on the 10th of March, when he sent an officer on shore to the dey to tell him he had orders to demand satisfaction for the piracies committed on the English, and to insist on the release of all such English captives as were then in the place. To this the dey made answer, that the captures belonging to particular men he could not restore; but, if Mr. Blake pleased, he might redeem what English captives were there at a reasonable price; and, if he thought proper, the Algerines would conclude a peace with him, and for the future offer no acts of hostility to the English. This answer was accompanied with a present of fresh provisions. Blake sailed to Tunis on the same errand. The dey of Tunis sent him a haughty answer. “Here,” said he, “are our castles of Goletta and Porto Ferino, do your worst! do you think we fear your fleet?” On the hearing this, Blake, as his custom was when in a passion, began to curl his whiskers; and, after a short consultation with his officers, bore into the bay of Porto Ferino with his great ships when, coming within musket-shot of the castle, he fired on it so briskly, that in two hours it was rendered defenceless, and the guns on the works along the shore were dismounted, though sixty of them played at a time upon the English. He found nine ships in the road, and ordered every captain, even of his own ship, to man his long boat with choice men, and these to enter the harbour and tire the Tuniseens, while he and his fleet covered them from the castle, by playing continually on it with their cannon. The seamen in their boats boldly assaulted the pirates, and burnt all their ships, with the loss of twenty-five men killed, and forty-eight wounded. This daring action spread the terror of his name throughout Africa and Asia, which had for a long time before been formidable in Europe. He also struck such terror into the piratical state of Tripoly, that he made them glad to strike up a peace with England. These and other exploits raised the glory of the English name so high, that most of the princes and states in Italy thought fit to pay their compliments to the protector, particularly the grand duke of Tuscany, and the republic of Venice, who sent magnificent embassies for that purpose. The war in the mean time was grown pretty hot with Spain and Blake used his utmost efforts to ruin their maritime force in Europe, as Penn had done in the West Indies. But finding himself now in a declining state of health, and fearing the ill consequences which might ensue in case he should die without any colleague to take charge of the fleet, he wrote letters into England, desiring some proper person to be named in commission with him; upon which general Montague sent joint-admiral, with a strong squadron to assist him. Soon after his arrival in the Mediterranean, the two admirals sailed with their whole fleet to block up a Spanish squadron in the bay of Cadiz. At length, in September, being in great want of water, Blake and Montague stood away for the coast of Portugal, leaving captain Stayner with seven ships to look after the enemy. Soon after they were gone, the Spanish plate fleet appeared, but were intercepted by Stayner, who took the vice-admiral and another galleon, which were afterwards burnt by accident, the rear-admiral, with two millions of plate on board, and another ship richly laden. These prizes, together with all the prisoners, were seat into England under general Montague, and Blake alone remained in the Mediterranean till, being informed that another plate fleet had put into Santa Cruz, in the island of Teneriffe, he sailed thither in April 1657, with a fleet of twenty-five men of war. On the 20th he came into the road of Santa Cruz; and though the Spanish governor had timely notice, was a man of courage and conduct, and had disposed all things in the most proper manner, so that he looked upon an attack as what no wise admiral would think practicable yet Blake having summoned him, and received a short answer, was determined to force the place, and to burn the fleet therein; and he performed it in such a manner as appears next to incredible. It is allowed to be one of the most remarkable actions that ever happened at sea. As soon as the news arrived of this extraordinary action, the protector sent to acquaint his second parliament, then sitting, therewith upon which they ordered a public thanksgiving, and directed a diamond ring worth 500l. to be sent to Blake and the thanks of the house was ordered to all the officers and seamen, and to be given them by their admiral. Upon his return to the Mediterranean he cruised some time before Cadiz but finding himself declining fast, resolved to return home. He accordingly sailed for England, but lived not to see again his native land for he died as the fleet was entering Plymouth, the 17th of August 1657, aged 58.His body was conveyed to Westminster abbey, and interred with great pomp in Henry the Seventh’s chapel but removed from thence in 1661, and re-interred in St. Margaret’s church-yard. He was a man of a low stature but of a quick, lively eye, and of a good soldier-like countenance. He was in his person brave beyond example, yet cool in action, and shewed a great deal of military conduct; in the disposition of those desperate attacks which men of a cooler composition have judged rather fortunate thun expedient. He certainly* loved his country with extraordinary ardour, and, as he never meddled with intrigues of state, so whatever government he served, he was solicitous to do his duty. He was upright to a supreme degree, for, notwithstanding the vast sums which passed through his hands, he scarcely left five hundred pounds behind him of his own acquiring. In fine, he was altogether disinterested and unambitious, exposing himseii on all occasions for the benefit of the public and the g-ory of the nation, and not wkh any view to his own private profit or fame. In respect to his personal character, he was pious without affectation, strictly just, and liberal to the utmost extent of his fortune. His officers he treated with the familiarity of friends, and to his sailors he was truly a parent. The state buried him as it was fit: at the public expence a grave was given him, but no tomb; and though he still wants an epitaph, writers of all parties have shewn an eagerness to do his memorv justice. We find it very positively asserted, that captain Benjamin Blake, brother to the general, suffered so many hardships for being a dissenter, in the latter end of the reign of king Charles II. that he found himself under the necessity of selling his patrimony, and transporting himself and his family to Carolina. Another author (though some indeed think it is the same) relates this story of Mr. Humphry Blake, the general’s brother, and tells us, that the family estate was worth tsvo hundred pounds a year, which he was obliged to dispose of, to pay the fines laid upon him for his nonconformity. It is jiowever strange, that every one of the general’s nephevfs an,d nieces, by his sister Susannah, who married a gentleman at Mineheacl, in Somersetshire, should be totally unacquainted with this transaction, and that none of the family should be able to give any account of that matter; and therefore it seems to be justly doubted whether there be any truth in the story, or whether it is only grounded on there being a considerable family of his name settled in that province, one of whom, when it was in private hands, was a lord proprietor.

In the same author there are some remarks concerning Blake’s conduct, in the battle which he fought with the Dutch, on the 29th of November, 1652, that appear worthy of atter.tion. “There are,” says he, “sometimes observations and enquiries, which all historians seem to decline by agreement, of which this action may alford us an example. Nothing appears at the first view more to demand our curiosity, or afford matter for examination, than this wild encounter of twenty-two ships, with a force, according to their accounts who favour the Dutch, three times superior. Nothing can justify a commander in fighting under such disadvantages, but the impossibility of retreating. But what hindered Blake from retiring as well before the fight as after it To say he was ignorant of the strength of the Dutch fleet, is to impute to him a very criminal degree of negligence; and at least it must be confessed, that, from the time he saw them, he could not but know that they were too powerful to be opposed by him, and even then there was time for retreat. To urge the ardour of his sailors, is to divest him of the authority of a commander, and to charge him with the most reproachful weakness that can enter into the character of a general. To mention the impetuosity of his own courage, is to make the blame of his temerity equal to the praise of tils valour; which seems, indeed, to be the most gentle censure that the truth of history will allow. We must then admit, amidst our eulogies and applauses, that the great, the wise, and the valiant Blake, was once betrayed to an inconsiderate and desperate enterprize, by the resistless ardour of his own spirit, and a noble jealousy of ttie honour of his country.” This quotation we reta n for the purpose of ad din", that if the author had lived in the times of a St, Vincent and a Nelson, he would have probably viewed Blake’s temerity in a different light.

Blake’s behaviour to his brother Benjamin has been deservedly celebrated as one of the noblest instances of justice to his country, and, at the same time, of tenderness to a friend and relation, that can be met with in ancient or modern history. When that brother betrayed cowardice in the first trial, he immediately broke and sent him home, as unworthy of the nation’s pay. Yet the want of military virtue did not lessen the ties of fraternal affection, and he left his brother to enjoy that estate which he might be qualified to adorn in private life.

, son to the preceding, was an, eminent physician at Franeker, and one of the most voluminous compilers of his time. He published large works on every branch of medicine and surgery, taken from all preceding and even contemporary authors, without either judgment or honesty; for while he took every thing good and bad which he could find, he in general published all as his own. His “Anatomia practica rationalis,” 1688, would have been a useful work, had it not partaken too much of indiscriminate borrowing but, perhaps, that for which he is best known is his “Lexicon medicum GraecoLatinum,” which has gone through a great many editions, some of which have been improved by more able scholars. The best, we believe, is that printed at Louvain, 1754, 2 vols. 8vo. An English translation, under the title of the “Physical Dictionary,” printed first in 1693, 8vo, was for some time a popular book, until supplanted, if we mistake not, by Quiucey’s. Haller and Man get have given lists of Blancard’s numerous works, but neither gives much of his personal history. There was a collection of what probably were esteemed the best of his pieces, printed at Leyden, 4to, 1701, under the title of " Opera meclica, theoretica, practica et chirurgica.

, a French abbé of considerable talents and amiable character, was born at Angerville, near Chartres, Jan. 26, 1707, of poor parents, who were, however, enabled to give him an education, to complete which he came to Paris. In 1724 he entered among the Jesuits as a noviciate, but did not remain long among them: yet he was highly esteemed by his masters, and preserved the friendship of the eminent Jesuits Brumoy, Bougeant, and Castel. He then employed himself in education, and taught, with much reputation, rhetoric and the classics in two provincial colleges, until the weak state of his health obliged him to restrict his labours to the office of private tutor, an office which he rescued from the contempt into which it had fallen, by taking equal care of the morals and learning of his pupils, all of whom did him, credit in both respects. Being a lover of independence, he resigned his canonry in the cathedral of Boulogne, and when appointed one of the interpreters of the king’s library, the same scruples induced him to decline it, until M.Bignon assured him that the place was given him as the reward of his merit, and required no sacrifices. Soon after he was appointed censor, but upon condition that he should have nothing to censure, and he accordingly accepted the title, but refused the salary and his friends, having thus far overcome his repugnance to offices of this description, procured him the farther appointment of keeper of the books in the king’s cabinet at Versailles. Yet this courtly situation was not at all to his mind, and he resigned in order to go and live in obscurity at St. Germain-en- laye, where he died Jan. 29, 1781, at about eighty. His disposition was amiable in society, where, however, he seldom appeared; but he became gloomy and melancholy in the solitude to which he condemned himself. Premature infirmities had considerably altered his temper. He was oppressed with vapours, from which he suffered alone, and by which he was afraid of making others suffer. It was this that made him seek retirement. “Such as I am,” said he, “I must bear with myself; but are o.hers obliged to bear with me I really think, if I had not the support and consolations of religion, I should lose my senses.” By nature disinterested, he constantly refused favours and benefits, and it was with great difficulty he could be made to accept of any thing. The advancement of his friends, however, was not so indifferent to him as his own; and he was delighted when they were promoted to any lucrative or useful place. Living in this retired manner, he was scarcely known to the public till after his death. Of his writing are the “Varietes morales et amusantes,” 1784, 2 vols. 12mo, and “Apologues et contes orientaux,” 1785, 8vo in both which he shews himself a man of much reading, and who has the talent of writing with sentiment, philosophy, and taste. There are likewise by him several little pieces of poetry, of the light and agreeable kind, of which the greater part were attributed to the best poets of the time, who did not shew any vehement disdain at the imputation which made the abbé Blanchet say, “I am. delighted that the rich adopt my children.” These he would lend to his friends on the most solemn promises to return them without copying, or suffering them to be copied, and would often be extremely anxious if they were not retunted within the time specified, when he immediately consigned them to the flames. One of his poems, however, appears to have escaped this fate, an ode on the existence of God, which was published in 1784, with his “Vues sur Teducation d'un prince,” 12mo. Dusaulx, his relation, wrote an amusing life of the abbé, which is prefixed to the “Apologues.”

Among the curiosities of the Royal Society is preserved of her writing, a phylactery in Hebrew, of which Dr. Grew has given us a description in his “Account of rarities preserved at Gresham college,” London, 1681, folio. It was written by her at the request of Mr. Thoresby, and she it to that repository. By the two pedigrees of the family, printed in Mr. Thoresby’s Ducatus Leodiensis, pages 209 and 587, it seems that she was living in 1712. This is all the account we have been able to procure either of her or her writings, which probably were considerable, as her attainments in this one branch of learning were so uncommon.

, a painter of great abilities, was born at Alkmaar in 1628, and received his earliest instruction from Arent Tierling but afterwards he was successively the disciple of Peter Scheyenburg and Caesar Van Everdingen. When he had spent some years with those masters, he went to Rome, where, during his continuance in that city, he carefully copied the works of the best masters, and was admitted into the society of Flemish painters called Bentvogels, who gave him the name of Jan Maat (which in Dutch signifies mate or companion), and by that name he is most generally known. His subjects were landscapes, with views of rivers or sea-shores, havens or ports, which he executed with a light free pencil; and in the representation of storms and calms (as nature was always his model) he described those subjects with great truth, exactness, and neatness of handling. The pictures of this master which are most commended are the Italian sea-ports, with vessels lying before them. He possessed a lively imagination; nor was his hand less expeditious than his thoughts; and the connoisseurs agreed in opinion, that if he had bestowed more labour on his pictures than he usually did, so as to finish them more highly, he would certainly have destroyed a great deal of their spirit, force, and effect. His most capital performance is a view of the sea-shore, with the waves retiring at ebb tide; which is described by Houbraken as being wonderfully beautiful and natural. He died in 1670.

, a saint and martyr, and according to the Breviary, bishop of Sebasta in Cappadocia, deserves this slight notice, as a person of great note among the vulgar, who in their processions of the wool-trade, always carry an effigies or representation of him, as the inventor or patron of their art of combing it. There was an order of knighthood also instituted in honour of him; and his day, which stands now marked in our Calendar, was Feb. 3. He suffered death in the reign of Dioclesian, about the year 283, according to the Legenda Aurea, but the English version of that book has the year 387, neither of which dates are strictly true, since Dioclesian did not succeed to the empire till the year 2Si, and died before the latter date. Before his death, which was by beheading, he was whipped, and had his flesh tornferreis pectinibiis, with iron combs and this seems to be the only foundation for the respect paid to his memory by wool-combers. Thus far the learned antiquary Dr. Pegge, in a letter on the history of St. Blase but Butler, in his “Lives of the Saints,” fixes his death in the year 316, when he was martyred in the persecution of Licinius, by the command of Agricolaus, governor of Cappadocia and the lesser Armenia.

, a French surgeon, or physician, of the seventeenth century, by uniting the quack and the regular, acquired a considerable degree of reputation, and belongs to a class, we fear, pretty numerous in other countries as well as France. He began his career as a trussmaker, and then placed himself at the head of an academy of his own creation for medical discoveries, the memoirs of which were published monthly, and we presume there must have been some papers of consequence among them, as the celebrated Bonnet translated those of the first three years into Latin, and published them under the title of “Zodiacus Medico-Gallicus,” 1680, 4to. The liberties, however, which Blegny took with the characters of some physicians of reputation occasioned the suppression of these memoirs in 1682, yet he continued to write, and sent his papers to one Ganthier, a physician of Niort, who published them at Amsterdam in 1684, under the title of the “Mercure savant.” In the mean time Blegny endeavoured to make himself famous, and that nothing might be wanting to shew his variety of talents he added to surgery and pharmacy a course of lectures on wig-making. For some time he appears to have imposed on the court itself, as we find that in 1678 he was appointed surgeon in ordinary to the queen; in 1633 surgeon in ordinary to the duke of Orleans; and in 1687, physician in ordinary to the king: but in 1693, his real character becoming more apparent, he was stripped of these honours for having attempted to establish an order of knighthood, and sent to prison at the castle of Angers, where he was confined for eight years. After his release, he retired to Avignon, where he died in 1722, aged about seventy. He published various works, now in little estimation.

, was born at Rennes, Eeb. 25, 1696, and entered early into the congregation of the oratory, where he was a distinguished professor. The order against wigs, which seems to have raised very serious scruples, occasioned his quitting it; but he retained the friendship and esteem of his former brethren. He then went to Paris, where his talents procured him the professorship of eloquence in the collegeroyal, and a place in the academy of belles lettres. He published several works, which have been well received by the public 1. “The Life of the Emperor Julian,” Paris, 1735, 1746, 12mo, a curious performance, well written, and distinguished at once by impartiality, precision, elegance and judgment, and which was translated into English under the inspection of Mr. Bowyer in 1746. 2. “The History of the Emperor Jovian,” with translations of some works of the emperor Julian, Paris, 1748, 2 vols. 12mo, a book no less valuable than the former, by the art with which the author has selected, arranged and established facts, and by the free and varied turns of the translator. This was abridged by Mr. Duncombe in the “Select Works of the Emperor Julian,” 1784, 2 vols. 8vo. The life of Jovian, however, seems much inferior to that of Julian. But the difference may be owing to the character of those two persons, the one being an object of much more interest than the other. 3. A translation of some works of Tacitus, Paris, 1755, 2 vols. 12mo. The manners of the Germans, and the life of Agricola, are the two pieces comprised in this version, which is equally elegant and faithful. Prefixed is a Life of Tacitus, which is also worthy of this writer, and was admired for strength of sentiment and animation of style. For this historian the abbé cle la jSleterie had an uncommon predilection he spoke of him incessantly to his friends. “To Tacitus,” said he, “I am much indebted I ought therefore in justice to dedicate to his glory the remainder of my life.” 4. “Tiberius, or the six first books of the Annals of Tacitus, translated into French,” Paris, 1768, 3 vols. 12mo. This work was not so popular among his countrymen, who blame the affected style, and say they very seldom discover in it the elegant historian of Julian. It occasioned at the time these two lines

, an eminent naturalist, and a Jew hy birth, was born at Anspech, in 1723, of very poor parents. He began to study very late at the age of nineteen, he knew neither German or Latin, and had read only some of the writings of the Rabbis, notwithstanding which, he was employed as a tutor in the family of a Jew surgeon at Hamburgh. There he himself was taught German, and a poor Bohemian Catholic gave him some instructions in Latin; he picked up also some knowledge of anatomy. Afterwards he made rapid progress in regaining lost time, and having removed to live with some relations he had at Berlin, he applied himself with eagerness and success to the study of anatomy and natural history, and received a doctor’s degree at Francfort on the Oder, with which he returned to practise as a physician at Berlin. Here the celebrated naturalist Martini procured him to be elected a member of the society of the “Curious in nature,” and he soon became highly distinguished among the scientific men of his time. He died Aug. 6, 1799, in the seventy-sixth year of his age. His principal work was his “Natural history of Fishes, particularly those of the Prussian states,” four parts, Berlin, 1781 and 1782, large 4to. He wrote afterwards a “Natural history of foreign Fishes,” Berlin, 1784, and “The natural history of German Fishes,” 1782. These different works, of which the descriptions are in German, were afterwards united under the title of “Ichthyology, or the natural history of Fishes,” Berlin, 1785, 12 vols. 4to, published by subscription, in seventy-two parts; the text was translated into French by Laveaux, and was published in 12 vols. fol. and reprinted in 1795. This is unquestionably one of the most splendid books in natural history, but the author, who had begun to have his drawings, engravings, and the colouring executed at his own expence, never could have completed it, had not his countrymen considered it as a national work, and princes, nobles, and amateurs, came forward with the most liberal assistance, and enabled him to finish the last six volumes upon the same scale of elegance as the former. The French edition in 12 vols. 8vo, Berlin, 1796, is greatly inferior to the former. Block wrote also, a “Treatise on the generation of worms in the intestines, and on the method of destroying them,” which gained the prize offered by the royal society of Denmark, and was printed at Berlin, 1782, 4to, and a “Treatise on the waters of Pyrmont,” both in German, Hamburgh, 1774, 8vo.

, bishop of Ripen, in Denmark, who was born in 1717, and died in 1773, cultivated the science of botany, particularly with a view to illustrate those passages of Scripture in which plants, &c. are mentioned. In 1767, he published at Copenhagen “Tentamen Phoenicologices sacra, seu dissertatio emblematico-theologica de Palma,” 8vo, a work containing many curious remarks on the palm or date-tree of Palestine and Idumea, which was called the phosnix by the Greeks and most of the eastern nations. It often occurs in the Bible, and the learned author has collected and explained the several passages. This species of palm is the phoenix dactylifera of modern botanists. A third author of the same name, John Erasmus Block, a Danish gardener, published at Copenhagen a treatise on the art of cultivating gardens, under the title “Horticultura Danica,” 1647, 4to.

, the youngest son of Abraham, was born in 1603, at Utrecht. The first principles of drawing and painting he learned from his father but his natural inclination for the 'art of engraving was so powerful, that he applied himself wholly to the pursuit of it. He first studied under Crispin de Pass, an engraver much more famous for the neatness than the good taste of his works. Not satisfied with what he learned from this artist, he went to Rome, in order to profit by studying the works of the greatest masters and in that city (where the far greater part of his engravings were made) he died in a very advanced age. “The manner of engraving adopted by this excellent artist, appears to me (says Mr. Strutt) to be not only quite original, but the source from which we may trace that style in which the greatest and best French masters excelled; those, I mean, who worked with the graver only. He covered the lights upon his distances, and the other parts of his piates whicn required tinting, with great care. The lights, whether on the distant hills, trees, buildings, or figures, in the engravings prior to his time, had been left quite clear, and by so many white spots scattered in various parts of the same design, the harmony was destroyed, the subject confused, and the principal figures prevented from relieving with any striking effect. By this judicious improvement, Bloemart gave to his prints a more clear and finished appearance than all the laboured neatness even of Jerome Wierix had been able to produce. He drew correctly but from his style of engraving, which was executed entirely with the graver, the extremities of his figures are heavy, and his heads are not always equally beautiful or expressive. With respect to the mechanical part of the work, few indeed have excelled him, either in clearness or freedom of execution. His great fault, however, is want of variety. The naked parts of his figures, the ch-aperies, and the back-ground, are equally neat, and engraved precisely in the same manner. Hence the effect is flat and the flesh, for want of sufficient distinction, appears cold and silvery. His works are justly held in high estimation. They are very numerous, and many of them difficult to be procured.”

, was an artist of whose life we have very few particulars, till he was known at Rome, in the year 1716, being at that time painter to count Martinetz and his reputation, as a good painter of portrait in miniature, was well established in Italy. By the solicitation of Overbeke, he was induced to go to Amsterdam, and in that city was employed to paint small portraits for bracelets, rings, and snuff-boxes and although they were painted in water-colours, yet the colouring was as lively and as natural as if they had been painted in oil. However, as he found his sight much impaired by the minuteness of his work, he discontinued water-colour painting, and attempted the use of oil, with a reasonable degree of success. After he had resided for some years in the Low Countries, he went to England, and set up a new method of printing mezzotinto plates in colours so as to imitate the pictures of which they were copies. In this manner he executed in England several large plates, from pictures of the greatest masters, and disposed of the prints by lottery. But those who obtained the prizes (Mr. Strutt says) appear not to have held them in any very great estimation. “The prints,” he adds, “certainly possess some merit, exclusive of their novelty; but, in general, the colours are flat and dirty the effect is neither striking nor judiciously managed and the drawing is frequently very incorrect, especially in the extremities of his figures.” Mr. Pilkington speaks of them with greater approbation “The artist,” he says, “imitated his models with so much skill, such exact resemblance, such correctness of outline, such similarity of colour and expression, that at first they amazed every beholder who viewed them at a proper distance and many of those prints are still extant, which are much esteemed by persons of good taste.” And Mr. Wai pole observes, that some heads, coloured progressively, according to their several gradations, bear witness to the success and beauty of his invention. He had another merit to the public, with which few inventors begin; for he communicated his secret in a thin quarto, entitled “Coloritto, or the harmony of colouring in painting reduced to mechanical practice, under easy precepts and infallible rules.” His method was performed by several mezzotinto plates for one piece, each expressing different shades and parts of the piece in different colours. He was not, however, it is said, the original inventor of that manner of managing colours, but took it from Lastman and others, who, with, much greater regularity of morals, equal capacities, and more discreet conduct, had before undertaken it without success. Le Blond, whose head was continually full of schemes, next set on foot a project for copying the cartoons of Raphael in tapestry, and made drawings from the pictures for that purpose. Houses were built and looms erected at the Mulberry Ground at Chelsea but the expences being too great, or the contributions not equal to the first expectations, the scheme was suddenly defeated, and Le Blond disappeared, to the no small dissatisfaction of those who were engaged with him. From hence he went to Paris, where, Basan informs us, he was in the year 1737; and in that city he died, 1740, in an hospital. Le Blond was also author of a treatise, in French, on ideal beauty. It was published in 1732, and has since been translated into English.

, generally known by the appellation of colonel Blood, was a disbanded officer of Oliver Cromwell’s army, famous for his daring crimes and his good fortune. He was first distinguished by engaging in a conspiracy to surprise the castle of Dublin, which was defeated by the vigilance of the duke of Ormond; and some of his accomplices were executed. Escaping to England, he meditated revenge against Ormond and actually seized him one night in his coach in St. James’s-street, where he might have finished his purpose if he had not studied refinements in his vengeance. He bound him on horseback behind one of his associates, resolving to- hang him at Tyburn, with a paper pinned to his breast but when they got into the fields, the duke, in his efforts for liberty, threw himself and the assassin, to whom he was fastened, to the ground and while they were struggling in the mire, he was rescued by his servants; but the authors of this attempt were not then discovered. A little after, in 1671, Blood formed a design of carrying off the crown and regalia from the tower; a design, to which he was prompted, as well by the surprising boldness of the enterprize, as by the views of profit. He was very near succeeding. He had bound and wounded Edwards, the keeper of the jewel-office, and had got out of the tower with his prey but was overtaken and seized, with some of his associates. One of them was known to have been concerned in the attempt upon Ormond and Blood was immediately concluded to be the ringleader. When questioned, he frankly avowed the enterprize but refused to discover his accomplices. “The fear of death (he said) should never induce him either to deny a guilt or betray a friend.” All these extraordinary circumstances made him the general subject of conversation and the king was moved with an idle curiosity to see and speak with a person so noted for his courage and his crimes. Blood might now esteem himself secure of pardon and he wanted not address to improve the opportunity. He told Charles, that he had been engaged with others, in a design to kill him with a carabine above Battersea, where his majesty often went to bathe that the cause of this resolution was the severity exercised over the consciences of the godly, in restraining the liberty of their religious assemblies: that when he had taken his stand among the reeds, full of these bloody resolutions, he found his heart checked with an awe of majesty; and he not only relented himself, but diverted his associates from their purpose: that he had long ago brought himself to an entire indifference about life, which he now gave for lost; yet he could not forbear warning the king of the danger which might attend his execution; that his associates had bound themselves, by the strictest oaths, to revenge the death of any of their confederacy; and that no precaution nor power could secure any one from the effects of their desperate resolutions. Whether these considerations excited fear or admiration in the king, they confirmed his resolution of granting a pardon to Blood and what is yet more extraordinary? Charles carried his kindness so far as to grant him an estate of 500l. a-year. He also showed him great countenance and while old Edwards, who had been wounded, in defending the crown and regalia, was neglected, this man, who deserved only to be stared at and detested as a monster, became a kind of favourite. Blood enjoyed his pension about ten years, till, being charged with fixing an imputation of a scandalous nature on the duke of Buckingham, he was thrown into prison, where he died August 24, 1680.

, was a Flemish painter, whose works are not frequently seen in these kingdoms nor are they easily purchased in Holland, being carefully preserved in private collections, and very highly esteemed. The subjects he chose to paint were always taken from the lowest life such as boors drinking, feasting, dancing, or quarrelling shepherds piping, and sometimes the marriages of villagers. He was a faithful and indeed too servile an imitator of nature never departing from the actions, attitudes, or draperies of his models. He showed a good knowledge of the chiaro-scuro, and perspective he had a delicate manner of pencilling, and his colouring was mellow but he had no idea of elegance yet his pictures had in many respects great merit, and his defects seem rather imputable to the taste of his country than to his own genius some of his works being, for the lightness of the touch, the neatness of handling, and transparence of colour, equal to the best of his time. He died in 1667.

, younger son of sir Henry Blount, and brother to sir Thomas Pope Blount hereafter mentioned, an eminent writer in the last century, was born at his grandfather’s seat at Upper Holloway, in the county of Middlesex, April 27, 1654. He was endowed by nature with a great capacity, and with a strong propensity to learning; which excellent qualities were properly cultivated by the assiduous care of his father, and under so able an instructor, he quickly acquired an extraordinary skill in the arts and sciences, without any thing of that pedantry, which is too frequently the consequence of young men’s application to study in the common course. His pregnant parts and polite behaviour brought him early into the world, so that his father, who was a true judge of men, thought fit, when he was about eighteen, to marry him to Eleanora, daughter of sir Timothy Tyrrel, of Shotover in the county of Oxford, and gave him a very handsome estate, having always respected him as a friend, as well as loved him with the affection of a father. The year after his marriage, he wrote a little treatise, which he published without his name, in defence of Dryden, whose “Conquest of Granada” was attacked by Richard Leigh, a player. In 1678, or perhaps in 1679, he published his “Anima Mnndi,” in which it is said, and with great probability, that he had the assistance of his father. It had been long before handed about in manuscript among the acquaintance of its author, with several passages in it much stronger than in that which was transmitted to the press, and licensed by sir Roger L'Estrange. This, however, did not hinder its giving great offence, insomuch that complaint was made to Dr. Compton, then Lord Bishop of London, who, upon perusal, signified that he expected it should be suppressed, and intimating, that he would thereupon rest satisfied. But afterwards, when the Bishop was out of town, an opportunity was taken by some zealous person to burn the book, which however has been reprinted since. The same year he published a broad sheet under the title of “Mr. Hobbes’s last Words and dying Legacy.” It was extracted from the “Leviathan,” and was intended to weaken and expose his doctrine yet he could be no very warm antagonist, since there is still extant a letter of his to Mr. Hobbes, wherein he professes himself a great admirer of his parts, and one who would readily receive his instructions. He afterwards gave a strong testimony in favour of liberty, in a pamphlet on the Popish Plot, and the fearof a Popish successor, entitled, “An Appeal from the country to the city for the preservation of his majesty’s person, liberty, property, and the Protestant religion.” This treatise is subscribed Junius Brutus, and is the strongest invective against Popery and Papists that was published even in that age, when almost all the wit of the nation was pointed that way. There are in it likewise such express recommendations of the Duke of Monmouth, as might well hinder the author from owning it, and give it, in the eyes of the lawyers of those times, an air of sedition at least, if not of treason. In 1680, he printed that work which made him most known to the world, “The Life of Apollonius Tyaneus,” which was soon after suppressed, and only a few copies sent abroad. It was held to be the most dangerous attempt, that had been ever made against revealed religion in this country, and was justly thought so, as bringing to the eye of every English reader a multitude of facts and reasonings, plausible in themselves, and of the fallacy of which, none but men of parts and learning can be proper judges. For this reason it is still much in esteem with the Deists, and the few copies that came abroad contributed to raise its reputation, by placing it in the lists of those that are extremely rare. In the same year he published his “Diana of the Ephesians,” which, as the author foresaw, raised a new clamour, many suggesting that, under colour of exposing superstition, he struck at all Revelation, and while he avowed only a contempt of the Heathen, seemed to intimate no great affection for the Christian priesthood. The wit, learning, and zeal of our author, had, by this time, raised him to be the chief of his sect; and he took a great deal of pains to propagate and defend his opinions in his discourses and familiar letters, as well as by his books, but he had the usual inconsistency of the infidel, and we find him owning, in a letter to Dr. Sydenham, that in point of practice, Deism was less satisfactory than the Christian scheme. The noise his former pieces had made, induced him to conceal, industriously, his being the author of a book, entitled, “Religio Laici,” published in 1683, but which is little more than a translation of Lord Herbert’s treatise under the same title and one may reasonably suppose, that the same motives prevailed on him to drop a design, in which it appears he was once engaged, of writing the Life of Mahomet, the Turkish prophet, which however has been since executed, in his manner, by a French author, Boulanvilliers. That the world might perceive Mr. Blount was capable of turning his thoughts to subjects very different from those he had hitherto handled, he, in 16S4, published a kind of introduction to polite literature, which shewed the extent of his knowledge, and the acquaintance he had in the several branches of philosophy and science. This was entitled “Janus Scientiarum or an Introduction to Geography, Chronology, Government, History, philosophy, and all genteel sorts of Learning,” London, 8vo. He concurred heartily in the Revolution, and seems to have had very honest intentions of punishing those who were king James’s evil counsellors, after the government was re-settled, by declaring the prince and princess of Orange king and queen. He gave another strong testimony of his sincere attachment to his principles, and inviolable love to freedom, by a nervous defence of the liberty of the press wherein he shews that all restraints on it can have no other tendency than to establish superstition and tyranny, by abasing the spirits of mankind, and injuring the human understanding. This little piece, therefore, has been always esteemed one of the best he ever wrote; and has furnished their strongest arguments to many succeeding writers. The warmth of Mr. Blount’s temper, his great affection for king William, and his earnest desire to see certain favourite projects brought about, led him to write a pamphlet, in which, he asserted king William and queen Mary to be conquerors, which was not well relished by the house of commons. The title of this very singular and remarkable piece at large, runs thus: “King William and queen Mary conquerors; or, a discourse endeavouring to prove that their majesties have on their side, against the late king, the principal reasons that make conquest a good title; shewing also how this is consistent with that declaration of parliament, king James abdicated the government, &c. Written with an especial regard to such as have hitherto refused the oath, and yet allow of the title of conquest, when consequent to a just war,” 1693, 4to.

, father to the preceding, and a considerable writer in the last century, was descended from a very ancient and honourable family, and born December 15, 1602, at his father, sir Thomas Pope Blount’s, seat at Tittenhanger, in Hertfordshire. He received the first tincture of letters in the free-school of St. Alban’s, where he manifested an unusual quickness of parts, and having qualified himself for the university, was removed to Trinity-college, in Oxford, and entered a gentleman commoner there in 1616, before he was full fourteen years of age. Some years he spent in that learned society, with great reputation and universal respect, not so much on account of his family, by which he was nearly related to the founder, sir Thomas Pope, as from his personal merit. For in his youth he was of a cheerful disposition, a sprightly wit, an easy address, and frank and entertaining in conversation, charmed all who were of his acquaintance, and was justly esteemed as promising a genius as any in the university. In the year 1618 he took the degree of B.A. and soon after left Oxford for Gray’s-inn, where for some time he applied himself to the study of the law, and set out on his travels in the spring of the year 1634, being then lately become of age. He made first the tour of France, part of Spain and Italy, and then passing to Venice, he there contracted an acquaintance with a Janizary, with whom he resolved to pass into the Turkish dominions. With this view he embarked on the 7th of May, 1634, on board a Venetian galley, in which he sailed to Spalatro, and thence continued his journey by land to Constantinople. There he was very kindly received by sir Peter Wich, then our ambassador at the Port. His stay at Constantinople was short, because, having an earnest desire to see Grand Cairo, and meeting with a sudden opportunity, he readily embraced it, and after a peregrination of near two years, returned safely into England, where, in 1636, he printed an account of his travels, London, 1636, 4to, which soon after came to a second edition, and in 1638 to a third, in the same size. It was then printed in 12mo, and reached many editions the title of the eighth runs thus “A Voyage into the Levant, being a brief relation of a Journey lately performed from England by the way of Venice, into Dalmatia, Sclavonia, Bosnia, Hungary, Macedonia, Thessaly, Thrace, Rhodes, and Egypt, unto Grand Cairo; with particular observations concerning the modern condition of the Turks, and other people under that empire. By sir Henry Blount, knight.” This book made him known to the world, and so much noticed, that shortly after, king Charles I. who desired to fill his court with men of parts, appointed him one of the band of pensioners, then composed of gentlemen of the first families in the kingdom. In 1638, his father, sir Thomas Pope Blount, died, and left him the ancient seat of Blount’s hall, in Staffordshire, and a very considerable fortune. On the 21st of March in the succeeding year, the king conferred on him the honour of knighthood. At the first breaking out of the civil war, he, following the example of the elder branches of his illustrious family, who were eminently loyal, attended the king at York, at Oxford, and other places, was present at the battle of Edgehill, and had there (according to a tradition in the family) the honour of taking care of the young princes. Afterwards he quitted his majesty’s service, and returned to London, where he was questioned for his adhering to the king but he being now grown a very wary and dexterous speaker, so well excused himself, by alleging his duty on account of his post, that he escaped all censure, and was thenceforward well received. It appears, however, that he had not the courage to be faithful, or that Ije had seriously repented his loyalty to the king, for he complied with the usurping government so implicitly, that in 1651 he was named on a committee of twenty persons, for inspecting the practice of the law, and remedying its abuses. He declared himself very warmly against tithes, and would willingly have reduced the income of parish ministers to one hundred pounds a year. A man of this opinion must have been very acceptable at that time. His next appearance, however, was more to his credit. He sat with Dr. Hichard Zouch, Dr. William Clarke, Dr. William Turner, civilians, and with several other eminent persons in the court of king’s (then called the upper) bench, in Westminster hall, on the 5th of July, 1654, by virtue of a commission from Oliver Cromwell, for trying Don Pantalion Saa, brother to the Portuguese ambassador, for murder, of which, being found guilty, he was, much to the honour of the justice of this nation, by sentence of that court, adjudged to suffer death, and was executed accordingly, Jn, the same year, by the death of his elder brother Thomas Pope Blount, esq. the estate of Tittenhanger descended to him. His great reputation for general knowledge and uncommon sagacity was the reason that his name was inserted in the list of twenty-one commissioners appointed, November 1, 1655, to consider of the trade and navigation of the commonwealth, and how it might be best encouraged and promoted, in which station he did his country eminent service. But whatever his compliances with the forms of government set up between 1650 and 1660, he was received into favour and confidence on the ling’s restoration, and appointed high sheriff of the county of Hertford, in 1661. He lived after that as an English gentleman, satisfied with the honours he had acquired, and the large estate he possessed, and having passed upwards uf twenty years in this independent state, be died on the 9th of October, 1682, when he wanted but four months of four-score, and was two days afterwards interred in the vault of his family, at Ridge in Hertfordshire. As to what appears from his writings, he seems to have had strong parts, a lively imagination, and, in consequence of these, some very singular opinions. His style was manly, flowing, and less affected than could be expected, considering the times in, and the subjects on, which he wrote. A Latin fragment, published by his son, in his “Oracles of Reason,” better explains his sentiments than all the rest of his works, and demonstrates that he was a man of an irregular way of thinking.

, called in Latin Blondus, or Blundus, a very eminent divine in the thirteenth century, was educated in the university of Oxford, and went afterwards for his improvement to Paris, where he quickly distinguished himself, among many of his learned contemporaries, by the vivacity of his wit. On his return into England, he again settled himself at Oxford, and read divinity lectures there with universal applause. Wood says he was the first that lectured on Aristotle both in Paris and Oxford. The reputation of his learning obtained him also several other preferments, particularly those of prebendary andhancellor in the church of York. In 1232, the archiepiscopal see of Canterbuiy being vacant by the death of Richard Wethershed, and the rejection of two of his successors, Ralph Nevil, bishop of Chichester and chancellor of England, and John, sub-prior of Canterbury, by the pope, Dr. Blount was, by the chapter of Canterbury, elected archbishop. He did not, however, enjoy that dignity; for the pope immediately objected to him, and after a summary inquiry into the validity of his election, declared it void, for several reasons, of which our historians take notice, though very probably Bale has hit upon the true, although not the ostensible cause, namely, that his abilities rendered him obnoxious to the court of Rome, or, as Bale expresses it, that he was more learned than that court wished an archbishop to be.

Leland, in his life of this learned person, owns ingenuously, that he was so unlucky as never to have met with any of those writings which rendered our author’s memory famous, adding a doubt whether any of them were extant. Bale, in the first edition of his work, omitted this life; and when he added it afterwards, he only copied Leland, adding that Blount had written “Summarium Sacrae Facultatis,” lib. 1. “Disceptationes aliquot,”' lib. 1. and several Commentaries on the Scriptures. Pits transcribes Bale, adding the censure mentioned above yet takes no notice of any other works than those which Bale had before noted, and, which is very remarkable, does not give us the beginning of any of them, as his custom always is, wherever he had seen such books, or could meet with any accounts from other people who had seen them. It is therefore more than probable, that he spoke slightingly of his talents, in order to support the credit of the see of Rome, by lessening the reputation of a person whom it had so vehemently persecuted.

, a miscellaneous writer of the seventeenth century, was born 1618, at Bardsley in Worcestershire, the son of Myles Blount, of Orleton in Herefordshire, who was the fifth son of Roger Blount of Monkland in the same county. He appears to have supplied the want of an university education by diligent application, and after studying the classics, entered himself of the Inner Temple, and was in due course admitted to the bar. Being, however, a Roman catholic, he never pleaded, but after some time resided mostly at Orleton. A sedentary life having much impaired his health, and the popish plot breaking out in 1678, he was so hurried from place to place, that the fatigue brought on a palsy, of which he died at Orleton, Dec. 26, 1679. Whether by this mention of the popish plot, his biographer means that he was concerned in it, does not appear. Wood seems to insinuate that he was only alarmed, as he was known to be a zealous Roman catholic. He was, however, a man of general knowledge, and an industrious and useful writer. His works are, 1. “The Academy of Eloquence, or complete English rhetoric,” 1654, 12mo, often reprinted. 2. “Glossographia, or a Dictionary of hard words,” Lond. 1656, 8vo. Of this there have been at least five editions. 3. “The Lamps of the Law, and the Lights of the Gospel,” ibid. 1658, 8vo. 4. “Boscobel; or the history of his majesty’s escape after the battle of Worcester,” ibid. 1660. 5. Boscobel, the second part, with the addition of the “Claustrum regale reseratum,” or the king’s concealment at Trent in Somersetshire, published by Mrs. Anne Windham of Trent,” ibid. 1681. Both these now are among the scarce and high-priced curiosities of the seventeenth century. Extracts are given from them in the Addenda to lord Clarendon’s History. 6. “The Catholic Almanac for 1661-2-3, &c.” 7. “Booker rebuked; or animadversions on Booker’s Almanac.” 8. “A Law Dictionary,” ibid. 1671, fol. reprinted with additions. 9. “Animadversions on sir Richard Baker’s Chronicle,” Oxf. 1672, 8vo. 10. “A World of Errors, discovered in Mr. Edmund Philips’s World of Words,” London, 1673, fol. 11. “Fragmenta Antiquitatis. Ancient tenures of land, and jocular customs of some manors,” ibid. 1679, 8vo of which Josiah Beckwith of York published a new edition in 1784. 12. “Animadversions on Blome’s Britannia,” not published. 13. “The art of making Devises, treating of Hieroglyphics, Symbols, &c.” a translation from the French, 1646, 4to. 14. “A catalogue of the Catholics, who lost their lives in the king’s cause, during the civil war,” printed at the end of lord Castlemain’s “Catholic Apology.” 15. “A Chronicle of England,” left imperfect, and a history of Herefordshire, a ms. left with his heirs, but which was probably lost, or has escaped the researches of Mr. Gough. 16. “A pedigree of the Blounts,” printed in Peacham’s “Complete Gentleman,” edit. 1661.

Though Dr. Blow’s church music was never collected in, a body, yet besides the three services and ten full and verse anthems printed by Boyce, nineteen of his choral productions have been preserved in Dr. Tudway’s ms collection and in Dr. Aldrich’s collection in Christ church, there are five more. He appears to have been a composer of anthems, even while a singing-boy in the chapel royal. His secular compositions were published in a folio volume in 1700, under the title of “Amphion Anglicus,” in imitation of Purcell’s collection, the “Orpheus Britannicus,” but are deemed considerably inferior. Some of his choral productions are in a very bold and grand style, yet he is unequal and frequently unhappy in his attempts at new harmony and composition. Dr. Burney has given a very elaborate criticism on all his works, accompanied by specimens on plates, by which it appears that he was either defective in some of the qualifications of a great composer, or careless and inaccurate.

, a German poet, was born at Rathenau, in the March of Brandenburgh, Nov. 17, 1739. He studied at Brandenburgh, Berlin, and Francfort on the Oder, and appears to have been intended either for the church or the bar, but preferred philosophy and polite literature, which he cultivated with success, under Ramler and Alexander Baumgarten, and afterwards devoted himself to a retired life in his own country. His first publication, “Lyric Poems,” published at Berlin in 1765, procured him very high reputation and was followed, in 1776, by another volume of Idylls and miscellaneous pieces, in a style of poetry, simple, pure, original, and elegant. In 1785 appeared an additional volume, which contributed to support the character he had acquired. In prose he published what were called “Walks,” moral and critical, and a “Dictionary of German proverbs,” Leipsic, 1782, with their explanations and origin. He died at Rathenau, Aug. 28, 1790, leaving the character of an amiable and virtuous man, beloved by all who knew him, and esteemed by his countrymen as one of the best of their modern poets, although perhaps not belonging to the first class.

, a Theatine, was born at London of French parents, Dec. 4, 1638, and became celebrated for his acquirements both in sacred and profane learning. Having gone to Portugal, he learned the language of that country in six months, and preached several times before the king and queen. He was also admitted into the academy, and appointed to an office in the inquisition. His biographers tell us that when in England he had been chaplain or preacher to Henrietta Maria queen to Charles I. forgetting that he could not be ten years old when that unhappy princess was expatriated. He died at Lisbon, Feb. 13, 1734, in the ninety-fifth year of his age. On the 28th of the same month his eloge was pronounced in the academy, and two learned doctors gravely discussed the question, “whether England was most honoured in. his birth, or Portugal in his death r” On the same occasion various pieces both in Latin and Portuguese were recited to his memory. His works, which must justify this high panegyric, are, 1. “A Vocabulary or Dictionary, Portuguese and Latin,” Coimbra, 1712 1728, 10 vols. folio, including a supplement in 2 vols. Moraes de Silva compiled from this voluminous work a good Portuguese Dictionary, printed at Lisbon, 1789, 2 vols. 4to. 2. “Oraculum utriusque Testament!, musseum Bluteavianum.” 3. “A List of all Dictionaries, Portuguese, Castilian, Italian, French, and Latin,” with the dates, &c. Lisbon, 1728, and printed in the supplement to his Dictionary. 4. Sermons and panegyrics, under the title “Primicias Evangelicas,” 1685, 4to.

, Boudicea, or Bonduca, a renowned British queen of the first century, was the wife of Prasatagus, king of the Iceni (the inhabitants of Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge, and Huntingdonshires), who in order to secure the friendship and protection of Nero to his wife and family, left the emperor and his daughters co-heirs. But as soon as he was dead, the emperor’s officers seized upon his effects in their master’s name. Boadicea, widow of the deceased king, strongly remonstrated against these unjust proceedings but her complaints only exposed her to farther wrongs and injuries, which she resented in such terms, as provoked the officers to treat her in the most barbarous manner; they caused her to be publicly scourged, and her daughters to be ravished.

This story soon spread through the island, and the public indignation was so generally raised, that all, excepting London, agreed to revolt. The Roman historians themselves acknowledge, that the violence and injustice of the emperor’s officers gave the Britons sufficient reason to lay aside their private animosities, and while they aided the queen to revenge her wrongs, to recover their own liberty. Accordingly she put herself at their head, and earnestly exhorted them to take advantage of the absence of the Roman general, then in the isle of Man, by putting these foreign oppressors all to the sword. They readily embraced the proposal and attacking the Romans wherever they found them, massacred all without distinction of age or sex and it is said that seventy thousand perished on this occasion. In the mean time, Suetonius Paulinus, the Roman general, suddenly returning, marched against the revolted Britons, who had an army of 100,000, or, according to Dio CassiuS, 230,000 men, under the conduct of Boadicea. The tine person of Boadicea, fair and dignified, and her undaunted courage, inspired the most ardent hopes. Paulinus, likewise, was in great perplexity the ninth legion had been defeated by the enemy, and Poenius Posthumus, at the head of a large detachment of the second, refused to join him; so that he had the choice but of two expedients, either to march with his army, not exceeding 10,000, into the open field against his numerous enemies, or shut himself up in some town and wait for them. At first he chose the latter, and remained in London, but soon altered his resolution and instead of retiring from the Br.tons, who were now on the march towards him, he resolved to meet them. The field of battle he pitched upon was a narrow tract of ground, facing a large plain, where they encamped, and his rear was secured by a forest. The Britons traversed the plain in large bodies, exulting in their numbers; and, secure of victory, had brought their wives and children in waggons to be spectators of their actions in the battle, placing them round their entrenchments.

Boadicea, in the mean time, was not idle, but mounting her chariot, with her two daughters, rode up and down, through the several squadrons of her army, whom she addressed to the following effect “That it was not the first time the Britons had been victorious, under the conduct of their queen. That, for her part, she came not there as one descended of royal blood, to fight for empire or riches, but as one of the common people, to avenge the loss of their liberty, and the wrongs of herself and children. That the wickedness of the Romans was come to its height and that the gods had already begun to punish them so that, instead of being able to withstand the attack of a victorious army, the very shouts of so many thousands would put them to flight. That if the Britons would but consider the number of their forces, or the motives of the war, they would resolve to vanquish or die. That it was much better to fall honourably in defence of liberty, than. be again exposed to the outrages of the Romans. Such at least was her resolution as for the men, they might, if they pleased, live and be slaves.” At the end of her speech she is said to have let loose a hare, which she had concealed, as an omen of victory.

While Boadicea thus laboured to animate her Britons to behave with their wonted bravery, Paulinus was no less assiduous in preparing his troops for the encounter. The Britons expected his soldiers to be daunted at their number, but when they saw them advance with short steps, sword in hand, without discovering any fear, their hearts began to fail them, and they fell into disorder, which continually increased, it not being in the power of their commanders to lead them back to the charge. The Romans observing their consternation, pushed the advantage with great fury, and threw their army into a confusion past the possibility of recovery. They gave no quarter, and 80,000 of the Britons perished. Boadicea herself escaped falling into the hands of the conquerors but, unable to survive the remembrance of this terrible defeat, either fell a victim to despair or poison. This battle was fought in the year 61.

, a Dutchman, and physician to the state in Ireland, in 1649, desesves some notice here, as being the first inquirer into the natural history of Ireland, of which he published an account. He lived to hold his post of physician to the state only eight months, dying either in 1649 or 1650, but compiled part of it some years before he went over, from materials furnished by sir William and sir Richard Parsons, and his own brother, Dr. Arnold Boate, who practised physic eight years at Dublin, and spent some months with him at London, in his way to Paris, in 1644, instructing him how to improve certain forfeited lands he had purchased in Leinster and Ulster. The title of his book is “Ireland’s Natural History, &c.” published by Samuel Hartlib, esq. “for the common good of Ireland, and more especially for the benefit of the adventurers and planters therein,” Lond. 1652, 12mo. Although some of his accounts are imperfect, and his topographical errors numerous, it is wonderful that a stranger should have accomplished so much, and at least run away with the honour of laying the foundation of the natural history of Ireland. He intended a second and a third book of the vegetables and animals, and a fourth of the natives, their old fashions, laws, and customs, and the attempts of their English conquerors to civilize and improve both them and their country, which his brother, in his letter to Hartlib, promised to publish. What he published was afterwards incorporated into a Natural History of Ireland, by several hands, 1736, reprinted 1755, with a new preface and index of chapters, 4to. Boate’s book was translated into French by Briot, and published at Paris 1666, 12mo. We have no farther account of his history; but Weston, in his catalogue of English writers on husbandry, says that his true name was Beats.

, one of the most eminent Italian poets and scholars, and one of the revivers of literature in Europe, was born in 1313. His father was a merchant of Florence, when to be a merchant was the first of situations, and his family was originally of Certaldo, a village about twenty miles from Florence, which accounts for Boccaccio always adding to his name the words “da Certaldo.” He was not, therefore, the son of a peasant, as reported by some biographers, but it cannot be denied that he was the fruit of an illicit connection which his father formed at Paris, where he happened to be on commercial 'business, and where this son was born, and it appears, likewise, that his father was not very rich. Being, however, brought early to Florence, his education commenced there, and he is said to hav e evinced a decided attachment to poetry before he was ten years old, about which time his father placed him in a merchant’s counting-house, to learn- arithmetic and book-keeping, that he might be the sooner enabled to provide for him among his connections. Some years after, this merchant took him to Paris, where he went to set up in business, and for six years, during which Boccaccio resided in his house, endeavoured to reconcile him to trade; but finding after every experiment, either by persuasion or constraint, that this was impossible, he at length sent him home to his father.

At Florence, as at Paris, Boccaccio’s time was divided between mercantile employment, to which he had a fixed dislike, and his taste for literature, which he contrived to indulge whenever possible. This became more easy at Naples, where his father had sent him in 1333, that he might be detached entirely from his studies, and acquire a zest for commercial pursuits; but here, during a residence of eight years, instead of giving his company only to merchants, he formed an acquaintance with the most eminent men of letters, both Neapolitans and Florentines, who lived there under the liberal patronage of king Robert. There is no reason, however, to suppose that Boccaccio profited by this monarch’s bounty, but he appears to have acquired the good graces of one of the king’s natural daughters, a married lady, for whom he composed several pieces both in prose and verse, and whom, he often mentions un ier the name of Fiammetta. Generally admired for his personal accomplishments, wit, and. spirit, and happy in his attachment to a king’s daughter, it is not very surprising that the fulfilment of his father’s wishes as to trade should become more and more difficult. The taste which his mistress had for poetry, his acquaintance with men of letters, the deep impression made on his mind by an accidental view of Virgil’s tomb, the presence of the celebrated Petrarch, who was received with the highest distinction at the court of Naples, in 1341, and who was about to receive the same honours at Rome, and the acquaintance Boccaccio had formed with him, all contributed, with his natural bent, to decide irrevocably that he should be a scholar and a poet. On his return to Naples, after a residence of two years with his father at Florence, he was favourably received by the queen, who now reigned in the room of her deceased husband, and it is said that it was to please her, as well as his beloved Fiammetta, that he began to write the “Decameron,” which unquestionably places him. in the first rank of Italian prose writers. In the mean time, his father finding it impossible to resist his inclination for literature, ceased to urge him more on the subject of trade, and only conditioned with him that he should study the canon law. Boccaccio endeavoured to please him, but found the Decretals worse than the ledger and the day-book, and returned with fresh ardour to the muses and the classics, studying to acquire a purer Latin style than hitherto, and to add t& his treasures a knowledge of the Greek. This he learned partly in Calabria, where he frequently went, or in Naples, where he had formed an intimacy with Paul of Perugia, an able Greek grammarian, and librarian to king Robert. He studied also mathematics, astronomy, or rather astrology, under a celebrated Genoese, Andelone del Nero, and even paid some attention to the outlines of theology, but it does not appear that he went much farther.

A short time before his death he made his will, bequeathing what property he had to his two nephews, the sons of James, his elder brother. The most valuable legacy, however, was that of his books, which were almost all copies by his own hand, or collected at great expence. These he left to one father Martin, an Augustine, who was his executor, and in this perhaps his adviser, with a view that they might become the property of his convent., They were, however, lost to the world. A celebrated scholar, Niccolo Niccoli, in the succeeding century, built in that convent a library for the express purpose of preserving Boccaccio’s books, but time destroyed them and it. It has been remarked as somewhat singular, that in this will, Boccaccio makes no mention of a natural son he had in his youth, and who was settled at Florence, yet this young man superintended his funeral, and caused the above inscription to be engraven on his tomb. He was universally regretted at Florence, where, in his poverty, he had not met with very liberal attentions. Verses, however, are more easily bestowed than money, and the poets of the time, particularly Sachetti, hastened with their contributions to his memory. Two medals also were struck, and twenty years afterwards, the republic wishing to pay higher honour to him as well as to Dante and Petrarch, deliberated on a magnificent monument to be erected to the three great ornaments of their country in the church of St. Maria del Fiore, but this was never carried into execution.

The predominant passion of Boccaccio, in youth, was the love of pleasure tempered by that of study; as he advanced in age, study became his sole delight. He had no ambition either for rank or fortune. The public employments confided to him came unasked, and when he could lay them down, he did so. He was equally averse to any domestic employments which were likely to take up much of his time, and would accept of no private tutorships, which so often eventually promote a man’s interest. His character was frank and open, but not without a degree of pride, which, however, particularly when he was in low circumstances, kept him from mean compliances. With respect to his talents, it is eviuent that he had always made a false estimate of them he had the fullest confidence in his poetical powers, yet nothing he wrote in verse rises above mediocrity, and many of his prose Italian writings desefve no higher praise. He is superior and inimitable only in his tales, on which he did not pride himself, nor indeed set any value. He fell into the same error with his master Petrarch in supposing that his serious Latin works would be the source of his fame, which he owes entirely to his Tales, as Petrarch owes his to his love-verses. All his Latin writings are crude and hasty. * In them, says Paul Cortesius, “he labours with thought, and struggles to give it utterance but his sentiments find no adequate vehicle, and the lustre of his native talents is obscured by the depraved taste of the times.” In his youth, he was flattered as having obtained the second place in poetry, his admiration for Dante not permitting him to aspire to the first, and the sonnets of Petrarch were not yet known. It is to his honour, however, that as soon us he saw the latter, he threw into the fire the greater part of his lyric compositions, sonnets, canzoni, &e. and seems to have determined to apply himself entirely to the perfection of Italian prose, in which it must be confessed he has succeeded admirably. As a recent event has rendered some of Boccaccio’s writings an object, of research among collectors, we shall enter somewhat more fully than is usual into a detail of their editions. Among his Latin works, we have, 1. “De genealogia Deorum lib. XV. De montium, sylvarum, lucuum, fluviorum, stagnorum, et marium nominibus, liber.” These two were first printed together in folio without date, but supposed to be at Venice, and. anterior to 1472, in which year appeared the second edition, at Venice, with that date. The third was published at the same place in 1473, and followed by others at Reggio, Vincenza, Venice, Paris, and Basle, which last, in 1532, is accompanied with notes and supplements. This account of the genealogy of the Gods, or the heathen mythology, must have been the fruit of immense reading, and as no information on the subject existed then, a high value was placed on it, although it has been since superseded by more recent and accurate works. He has been very unjustly accused of quoting authors no where else to be found, as if he had invented their names, but it is surely more reasonable to think they might be known in his days, although their memory has since perished, or that he might have been himself deceived. This same work, translated into Italian by Joseph Betussi, has gone through twelve or thirteen edi-. tions, the first, of Venice, 1547, 4to. There are -also two French translations, the first anonymous, Paris, 1498, fol. and 1531, also in fol. the second by Claude Wittard, Paris, 1578, 8vo. The lesser book, or Dictionary of the names of mountains, forests, &c. was also translated into Italian by Niccolo Liburnio, and printed in 4to. without date or place, but there is a second edition at Florence, 1598, 8vo. 2. “De casibus Virorum et Foeminarum illustrium libri IX.” Paris, 1535, 1544, fol. and at Vincenza the same year translated into Italian by Betussi, Venice, 1545, 8vo, and often reprinted. But there must have been an edition long previous to the oldest of these, as we find it translated into English in 1494, by John Lydgate, monk of Edmundsbury, at the commandment of Humphrey duke of Gloucester, under the title of “John Boccace of the Fall of Princes and Princesses .” It has likewise been translated and often reprinted in French, Spanish, and German. The first of the Spanish translations is dated Seville, 1495, and the first of the French was printed at Bruges in 1476, folio, then at Paris, 1483, at Lyons the same year, and again at Paris in 1494, 1515, folio, and 1578, 8vo. 3. “De claris Mulieribus.” The first edition of this is without place or date, in the black letter the second is that of Ulm, 1473, fol. followed by those of Louvain and Berne from 1484 to 1539. Of this work the Italians have two translations, one by Vincent Bagli, a Florentine, Venice, 1506, 4to; the other by Betussi, who prefixed a life of Boccaccio, Venice, 1545, and 1547, 8vo. The first edition of the Spanish translation is dated Seville, 1528, fol. That of the German translation is dated Augsburgh, 1471, and was followed by one at Ulm, 1473, 4to. The French have two translations, the oldest 1493, fol. 4. “Eclogae,” sixteen in number, and printed with those of Virgil, Calphurnius, &c. Florence, 1504, 8vo. They are also inserted in the “Bucolicorum auctorcs,” Basil, 1546, 8vo. Like Petrarch, he introduces the events of his time in these eclogues, with the principal personages under fictitious names, but he has furnished us with a key to these in a letter to P. Martin de Signa, his confessor, of which Manni has givdn an extract in his history of the Decameron. His Italian works in verse are, 5. “La Teseide,” the first attempt at an epic in Italian, and written in the ottava rima, or heroic verse, of which Boccaccio is considered as the inventor; printed at Ferrara, 1475, fol. Venice, 1528, 4to, and translated into French, 1597, 12mo. 6. “Amorosa visione,” Milan, 1520 and 1521, 4to, and with grammatical observations and an apology for Boccaccio by Claricio d'Lmola, Venice, 1531, 8vo. This singular poem is divided into fifty cantos or chapters, which contain five triumphs, namely those of wisdom, glory, riches, love, and fortune, written in the terza rima, with a curious contrivance, gratifying to the bad taste of the times, by which the initial letters of each stanza are made to compose an acrostic in praise of the princess Mary, whom elsewhere he celebrates under the name of Fiammetta. 7. “II Filastrato,” a poetical romance in heroic verse, the hero of which is young Troilus, the son of Priam, and the subject, his amours with Chryseis, whom the poet does not make the daughter of Chryses, but of Calchas. Of this there are four editions Bologna, 1498, 4to, Milan, 1499, 4to, Venice 1501 and 1528, 4to. 8. “Nimfale Fiesolano.” It is thought that in this poem Boccaccio has concealed, under the disguise of a pastoral fiction, an amorous adventure which happened in his time in the environs of Florence. The first edition is in 4to. without place or date; the second is of Venice 1477, and was followed by many others at Venice and Florence, and one recently of Paris, 1778, 12mo. It was translated into French by Anthony Guercin du Crest, and printed at Lyons, 1556, 16mo. 9. “Rime,” or miscellaneous poems. We have noticed that he burned the greater part of his minor poems, but those which were dispersed in manuscript in various hands, have been often collected, and the publication of them announced. M. Baldelli, who has since, in 1806, published a good life of Boccaccio, collected all of these poems he could find, and printed them at Leghorn, 1802, 8vo.

Of his Italian works in prose, we may notice, 10. “Il Filocopo, owero amorosa fatica, &c.” a romance written by our author when very young, defective in interest, and altogether so in style, when compared with what he wrote afterwards. The first edition of this romance is without place or date the others, which are all rare, are those of Venice, 1472, Florence, 1472, Milan 1476 and 1478, all in fol. Venice, 1514, 4to, and often reprinted during the same century, and twice translated into French, Paris, 1542, fol. &c. 11. “L'Ammorosa Fiammetta,” another romance not much more valuable than the preceding. Fiammetta, as we have already noticed, is the princess Mary of whom he was enamoured, and Pamphile, whose absence she is made deeply to regret, was himself. Whether this was a real or a poetical amour is not very clear. The romance was first published without date or place, in 4to, but is supposed to have appeared at Padua, with a Latin title, and, at the end of the volume, the date of 1472; the second, which has not the place, is dated 1480, 4to, and was followed by others in the sixteenth century at Florence, Venice, &c. and a French and Spanish translation, often reprinted. 12. “L'Urbano,” Florence, 1598, 8vo, translated into French under the title “Urbain le Mescogneu,” Lyons, without date, 4to, black letter, was a piece which Boccaccio is said to have written to divert his melancholy for the death of his friend Petrarch, but Mazzuchelli and other critics consider it as spurious. 13. “Ameto, or Nimfale d'Ameto,” written with a mixture of prose and verse, is supposed to relate to a real adventure concealed under a poetical allegory. It has gone through a great number of editions, Rome and Venice, 1478, 4to; Trevisa, 1479, 4to Venice, 1503, fol. Rome, 1520, 4to; Florence, 1521, 8vo. 14. “II Corbaccio, o sia Laberinto d'Amore,” a very bitter and indecent satire on a female who had given him some offence after his return to Florence. In spite of the licentiousness of this work, the style has recommended it to the curious, but we doubt whether this was the cause of its passing through so many editions: Florence, 1487, 4to, Venice, 1516, 24mo, &c. &c. and a valuable edition, Paris, 1569, 8vo, by Corbinelli, with a preface and notes. Belleforest translated it into French, Paris, 1571, 1573, and there was a second translation or imitation, by Premont, entitled “Songe de Boccace, ou de Labyrinthe d' Amour,” Paris, 1699, &c. in which the editor has abridged so much, and added so much, that it can scarcely be called Boccaccio’s work. 15. “Origine Vitaet costumi di Dante Alighieri,” Rome, 1544, 8vo, Florence, 1576, 8vo. lit this life of Dante we have many anecdotes not elsewhere to be found, but the author upon, the whole inclines too much to the romantic to attend sufficiently to the strict veracity of the biographer yet the purity of the style recommends it, and the affection and sincerity with which he praises Dante, form, perhaps, a curiosity, from one who had the ambition to be placed so near him. This is naturally connected with 16. “Commento sopra la Commedia di Dante Alighieri,” a valuable work, not only for style, but for the many difficult passages of Dante which are admirably illustrated, although it must be confessed they are at the same time intermixed with much matter that has very little connection with the text. It was an abridgement of the lectures which he gave at Florence, when attacked with the disorder which shortened his days, and was not printed until th;e last century. It extends only to the 17th chapter of the Inferno, and forms the two last volumes of the edition of Boccaccio’s prose works (with the exception of the Decameron) published at Naples (with the false title of Florence), in 1724, 5 vols. 8vo. Lastly, we come to his 17. “II Decamerone,” the work on which his fame is permanently established, and which, of all works, it is difficult to characterize in few words. The assertion, that the greater part of the hundred novels which it contains are taken from the ancient French writers of tales, only shows that those who maintain this opinion are not acquainted either with these writers, or with the Decamerone, of which, at most, ten of the stories only are imitated from the French Fabliaux, or taken from the same remote sources, and it is equally unjust to consider them merely as a collection of amorous and licentious stories. The greater part of the poets, indeed, who have stolen from him have stolen only what is of this obnoxious description, and therefore easily brought a reproach on the whole. Boccaccio, in this work, depicts, as on a vast canvass, men of all conditions, all characters and all ages and events of every kind, comic and serious. He exhibits models of every species of eloquence, and carries the purity and elegance of the Italian language to a degree of perfection unknown before his time. Perhaps few works of the kind have ever been so popular. For more than three centuries it has gone through repeated editions, of which an hundred at least may be mentioned, and his biographer very properly asks, what criticism can stand against this fact

In order to appreciate these editions, it is necessary to advert to the fate of this extraordinary work in the press. For about a century, it was circulated in manuscript, and liberties of every kind were taken at every transcription. At length it was printed for the first time, as has been supposed, in 1470, and run through various editions to the end of the fifteenth, and for more than sixty years of the sixteenth century. During this period it was prohibited by the popqs Paul IV. and Pius IV. who were in this respect more scrupulous than their twenty-five or twenty-six predecessors in the papal chair. Two grand dukes of Tuscany, Cosmo I. and Francis I. applied one after the other to two other popes, Pius V. and Gregory XIII. in consequence of which the academicians were employed to reform the Decameron important corrections were made, and many passages suppressed, and in this state various editions were permitted to be printed. But with respect to the ancient editions, it is now necessary to observe that there are two opinions, which we shall state, without attempting to reconcile. We have already noticed that the first edition has been supposed to have been printed in 1470, without a date but on the other hand, it is contended that the edition of 1471, by Valdarfer, is not only the first with a date (which those who maintain the existence of the edition of 1470 are disposed to allow), but that in fact there was no previous edition. Those who are of this latter opinion very naturally ask their antagonists to produce the edition of 1470, or an edition without date that can be supposed of that period. In England it is certain that no such edition is known but the French bibliographers seem to be of a different opinion. Ginguene 1 to whom we are indebted for the greater part of this life of Boccaccio, who has written the literary history of Italy, and is considered in France, we apprehend justly, as their first critic and bibliographer in Italian literature this writer speaks of the first edition without a date in the following terms “Elle est sans date et sans nom de lieu ni d'imprimeur, in-fol. en caracteres inegaux et mal formes.” (Hist. Litt. d'ltalie, vol. III. p. 129). It remains, therefore, for the reader to determine whether this is the language of a man who has seen the book, and describes what he has seen; and if this be decided in the affirmative, the existence of the edition is proved, as far as his authority goes. But it must be confessed Ginguene goes no fa ther. He says nothing of any library which possesses this treasure, nor of its supposed value but when he comes to speak of Valdarfer’s edition of 1471, he informs us that it- has been valued by bibliomaniacs (bibliomanes) at 3000 francs, or 125l. And this brings us to notice the copy of this edition recently sold from the duke of Roxburgh’s library, to the marquis of Blandford, for the immense (and with respect to the value of books, the unprecedented) sum of Two Thousand Two Hundred And Sixty Pounds. In the catalogue of this library, it is stated that “no other perfect copy is yet known to exist, after all the fruitless researches of more than three hundred years;” but, notwithstanding this, we find that the French bibliographers set a value on the edition, as if copies, however rare, were still occasionally to be found. We cannot suppose that the French booksellers or collectors would fix a price-current on an article which had not been seen, for three hundred years, still less that our authority is speaking of imperfect copies, the value of which can only be estimated by the quantum of imperfection. It remains also to be noticed that the French bibliographers speak precisely with the same familiarity of the Junti edition of Florence, 1527, 4to, which they value at 600 francs, or 25l. and which sold at the Roxburgh sale for 29 1. no great advance upon the French price. They certainly speak both of this edition, and of the 1471, as of rare occurrence, but by no means hint that the latter is of that extreme rarity imputed to it in this country .

, an artist who flourished about 1496-, is among the Cremonese, what Griilandajo, Mantegna, Vannucci, Francia, arc in their respective schools the best modern among the ancients, and the best ancient among the moderns. He was the master of Garofalo before his journey to Rome in 1500. The birth of the Madonna with other histories of her life, and that of the Saviour in the frieze of the Dnotno at Cremona, are works of Boccaccino. The style is partly original, partly approaches that of Pietro Perugino less co-ordinate in composition, less agreeable in the airs of the heads, weaker in chiaroscuro hut richer in drapery, more varied in colour, more spirited in attitudes, and perhaps not less harmonious or pleasing in landscape and architecture. His great defect is the short and stumpy appearance which an immoderate load of drapery often gives to his figures. It is probable that he was at Rome, as Vasari pretends that he there reviled the works of Michael Angelo and what followed, as related by the same historian, admits of too much doubt to deserve attention. He died, according to Vasari, in 1518, aged fifty-eight. His son, Ca.Millo Boccaccino, was born at Cremona, in 1511, where he received the first instructions in the art of painting from his father and for some time he was obliged to conform himself to the -style and manner of his instructor. But he determined to quit that hard dry manner of colouring, to which he had been accustomed, and by degrees assumed a style of colour equally remarkable for its suavity and strength. The best remaining specimens of his art are in the church of St. Sigismondo, at Cremona; where, among the Four Evangelists, the figure of St. John, bent upwards in contrast with the arched vault, in boldness of foreshortening and truth of perspective, emulates the style of Correggio. He died very young, at a time when there was a great expectation of his arriving at very high perfection, in 1546.

, an eminent literary lady of France, and a member of the academies of Rome, Bologna, Padua, Lyons, and Rouen, was born at Rouen, Oct. 22, 1710. She was educated at Paris in the convent of the Assumption, where she made a very rapid progress in every branch of education. At a very early age, she studied the English language, that she might be enabled to transfuse the beauties of Pope’s Temple of Fame into French but she concealed her performance for many years, nor did it appear till 1764, in the collection of her works. She had, however, given an ample proof of her poetical talents in 1746, by gaining the first prize givea by the academy of Rouen, which was founded the year preceding by the duke of Luxembourg. This procured her the homage and the society of the most eminent nits and scholars of the day. From this time she published nothing without her name. Having acquired an uncommon relish for the “Paradise Lost” of Milton, she endeavoured to translate a part of it into French, and was highly complimented by Voltaire on her success. She imitated also, but with much more success and more ease, Gesner’s “Death of Abel.” In 1749, her tragedy of “The Amazons” was represented on one of the Paris stages with considerable applause: but her fame rests principally on an epic poem, entitled “The Columbiad, or Discovery of America,” in ten cantos, which procured her the highest reputation at that time from the critics of her own country, although the execution is very far from corresponding with the magnitude of the undertaking.

, a satirical wit, was born at Loretto in 1556, the son of an architect of a Roman family, about the beginning of the seventeenth century. The method he took to indulge his turn for satire, or rather plot of his publications, was the idea that Apollo, holding his courts Oh Parnassus, heard the complaints of the wholeworld, and gave judgment as the case required. He was received into the academies of Italy, where he gained great applause by his political discourses, and his elegant criticisms. The cardinals Borghese and Cajetan having declared themselves his patrons, he published his “News from Parnassus/' and” Apollo’s Secretary,“a continuation which being well received, he proceeded further, and printed his” Pietra di Paragone“wherein he attacks the court of Spain, setting forth their designs against the liberty of Italy, and inveighing particularly against themfor the tyranny they exercised in the kingdom of Naples. The Spaniards complained of him in form, and were determined at any rate to be revenged. Boccalini was frightened, and retired to Venice. Some time after he was murdered in a surprising manner. He lodged with one of his friends, who having got up early one morning, left Boccalini in bed; when a minute after four armed men entered his chamber, and gave him so many blows with bags full of sand that they left him for dead so that his friend, upon his return, found him unable to utter one word. Great search was made at Venice for the authors of this murder and though they were never discovered, yet it was universally believed that they were set to work. by the court of Spain. This story, however, has been called in question by Mazzuchelli, and seems indeed highly improbable at least it can by no means stand upon its present foundation. His attacking the court of Spain in his” Pietra di Paragone,“is said to have been the cause of his murder but another cause, if he really was murdered, must be sought, for he died, by whatever means, Nov. 10, 1613, and the” Pietra“was not published until two years after that event. It appears likewise from one of his letters, that he had kept the manuscript a profound secret, communicating it only to one confidential frienc!, to whom the above letter was written. Besides, the register of the parish in which he died, mentions that on Nov. 10, 1613, the signor Trajan Boccalini died at the age of fiftyseven, of a cholic accompanied with a fever. Apostolo Zeno, vrho mentions this circumstance in his notes on Fontanini’s” Italian Library,“adds, that in a speech publicly delivered at Venice in 1<320, in defence of Trissino, whom. Boccalini had attacked, ample mention rs made of him, who had then been dead seven years, and in terms of severe censure; but not a word was said of his assassination, which could not have then been a secret, nor could there be any reason for concealing it. If indeed he suffered in the manner reported, it formed an exact counterpart of what he records to have happened to Euclid the mathematician. Euclid had demonstrated, as a mathematical problem, that all the lines both of princes’” and private men’s thoughts meet in one centre namely, to pick money out of other men’s pockets and put it into their own and for this he was attacked by some of his hearers who beat him with sand-bags and perhaps, as a foundation for the story, some of Boccalini’s readers may have said that he ought to have been punished in the same manner. Boccal'mi’s works are: 1. “Itagguagli di Parnaso, centuria prima,” Venice, 1612, 4to. “Centuria secxinda,” ibid. 1613, 4to, neither published long enough before his death to have excited much general odium. These two parts were afterwards frequently reprinted in one volume. There is unquestionably in this work, much to make it popular, and mnch to excite hostility. His notions on government, liberty, &c. were too free for his age and country and his treatment of literary characters is frequently captious and unjust, yet the work upon the whole is amusing, and original in its plan. A third part was published by Jerome Briani, of Modena, at Venice, 165O, 8vo, and die whole was translated and published in English, tinder the inspection of Hughes the poet, 1705, lol. 2. “Pietra del Paragone politico,” Cosmopoli (Amsterdam), 1615, 4to, and often, reprinted in various sizes; that of Amsterdam, 1653, 24mo, is reckoned the best. It has been translated into Latin, French, and English, first in 1626, 4to, and afterwards in Hughes’s edition and into German. This “political touchstone” bears hard on the Spanish monarchy, and may be considered as a supplement to his “News from Parnassus.” 3. “Commentari sopra Cornelio Tacito,” Geneva, 1669, 4to, Cosmopoli (Amsterdam), 1677, 4to, and afterwards in a collection published under the title “La Bilancia politica di tutte le opere di Trajano Boccalini,” &c. with notes and observations by the chevalier Louis du May, at Castellana, 167S, 3 vols. 4to. The first two volumes of this scarce work contain the Tacitus, on which the annotator, not content with being very free in his religious opinions, takes some extraordinary liberties with the text, and therefore they were soon inserted in the Index Expurgatorius. They contain, however, many curious facts which tend to illustrate the political affairs of the time. The third volume is filled with political and historical letters, collected hy Gregorio Leti but although these are signed with Boccalini’s name, they are supposed to have been written by his son, and by the editor Leti, a man not very scrupulous in impositions of this kind. 6. “La Segretaria d'Apollo,” Amst. 1653, 24mo, a sort of continuation of the “Ragguagli,” very much in Boccalini’s manner, but most probably we owe it to the success of his acknowledged works.

, an eminent musical composer, was born at Lucca, Jan. 14, 1740, where he resided till 1768, when he went to Paris, and where he continued till 1780. He then removed to Madrid, where he died in 1806. His instrument was the violoncello, and he has perhaps supplied the performers on bowed-instruments and lovers of music with more excellent compositions than any master of the present age, except Haydn. His style is at once bold, masterly, and elegant. There are movements in his works, of every style, and in the true genius of the instruments for which he writes, that place him high in rank among the greatest masters who have ever written for the violin or violoncello. There i$ perhaps no instrumental music more ingenious, elegant, and pleasing, than his quintets; in which invention, grace, modulation, and good taste, conspire to render them, when well executed, a treat for the most refined hearers and critical judges of musical composition. The works of this excellent composer would be of use to judicious collectors, as his genius, taste, and judgment were too fertile and refined, to suffer him to commit to paper frivolous or indigested thoughts. His productions of forty years ago have lost nothing of their worth, nor will forty years more wholly deprive them of their bloom. They consist of fifty-eight collections of symphonies, quintets, &c. In the religious cast he has only one piece, a “Stabat mater.”

, an eminent Italian scholar, was born at Bologna in 1488, of a noble family. In his studies he made uncommon proficiency, and had distinguished himself at the early age of twenty by his very learned work on Plautus. According to the custom of the age, he attached himself to various princes, but at first to the celebrated Albert Pio, count of Carpi. Having become imperial orator at the court of Rome, he obtained by his talents and knowledge of business, the titles of chevalier and count Palatine, and was intrusted with some important functions, such as that of bestowing the degree of doctor, of creating notaries, and even legitimizing natural children. At Bologna he was professor of Greek and Latin, rhetoric and poetry, and was chosen one of the Auziani in 1522. Having acquired a handsome fortune, he built a palace, and in 1546 founded an academy in it, named from himself Academia Bocchiana, or Bocchiale. It was also called Ermatena, agreeable to its device, on which was engraven the two figures of Mercury and Minerva. He also established a printing-office in his house, and he and his academicians employed themselves in correcting the many beautiful editions which they printed. Bocchi was a good Hebrew scholar, and well versed in antiquities and history, particularly that of his own country. The senate of Bologna employed him on writing the history of that city, and bestowed on him the title of Historiographer. Cardinal Sadolet, the two Flaminio’s, John Phil. Achillini, and Lcl. Greg. Giraldi, were among his particular friends, who have all spoken very favourably of him in their works. This last was much attached to him, and it is supposed that he meant to express this attachment by giving him the name of Phileros (loving friend), or Philerote, which is on the title of some of his works. Bocchi died at Bologna, Nov. 6, 1562. He wrote, 1. “Apologia in Plautum, cui accedit vita Ciceronis authore Plutarcho,” Bologn.

, an ingenious naturalist, was born at Palermo, in Sicily, April 24th 1633, of a wealthy and respectable family, originally from Savona in Genoa. To improve himself in natural history, particularly in botany, to which he was early attached, he travelled over Sicily, Corsica, Malta, many parts of Germany, Holland, and England, conversing with the most eminent literary characters in the places he visited, with whom he afterwards kept up a correspondence. At Paris he became acquainted with the abbé Bourdalot, to whom he communicated various observations he had made, which, were published at Amsterdam in 1674 under the title “Recherches et observations d'Histoire Naturelle.” In the course of his travels, he was admitted doctor in medicine at Padua, was elected member of the Academ. Naturae Curios, and made botanist to the grand duke of Tuscany. In 1682, he entered among the Cistertian monks at Florence, and with the habit of the order took the name of Sylvio, which he affixed to his latter works, but he was still permitted to continue his researches in natural history. Returning at length to Sicily, he retired to one of the houses of the Cistertians near Palermo, where he died, Dec. 22, 1704. As he had been indefatigable in his researches, his colleciion of plants and other natural productions was very considerable. Sherrard, who saw his hortus siccus, or specimens of dried plants, in 1697, was so struck with their number and beauty, that he engaged him to give a catalogue of them to the public, which he did in his “Musrco plante rare,” published at Venice in 4to, the same year. The catalogue was also published by itself. Several of his works appear to have been printed while he was on his travels; the first of them, “De abrotano mare monitum,” in 1668 and in the same year, “Manifesturn botanicum, de plantis Siculis,” Catatue, 4to. By an advertisement at the beginning of the work he offers to botanists the seeds of many of the curious and rare plants he had collected, at moderate prices. Morison published an edition of this work at Oxford in 1674, 4to, under the title of “Icones et descriptiones rariarum plantarum Sicilian, Melitae, Galliae, et Italioe.” Many of the plants, Haller says, were new. The figures are small, and in general not well delineated or engraved. His next production was “Recherches et observations naturelles,” published at Paris in 1671, 12mo, again at Amsterdam in 1674, and again in 1744, in 8vo. It consists of letters to his correspondents in France, Italy, England, &c. In 1684, in 16mo, “Opcrvazioni natural) ove si contengono materie medico fisiche e di botanica,” Bologna. The observations are twenty in number, and dedicated, or addressed to so many of the author’s friends and patrons, among whom are many perons of high rank. He is very profuse in his elogia on the medical virtue of many of the plants, which he praises far beyond their real value. “Tenere oportet,” Haller says, “creduium esse virum et in viribus medicis plantarum liberalem.” “Musæo di fisica e cli esperienze decorate di opervazioni naturali,” Venet. 1697, 4to. The author here assumes the name of Sylvlo. The observations are, as in the former work, dedicated to his noble patrons, and contain ample accounts of the medical virtues of various plants, much beyond what, from experience, they have been found to possess. Some smaller dissertations were printed in Miscel. Naturae Curias, and in the Journal des Savans. On the whole, Boccone appears to have been an industrious and intelligent writer, possessing considerable originality, and deserves to be classed among botanists of the third rate.

, or Bochius, a Latin poet, was born at Brussels July 27, 1555, and became so eminent for his poetry, as to be called the Belgic Virgil. Having attached himself to cardinal Radzevil, he studied theology for some time, under the tuition of Bellarmin, afterwards the celebrated cardinal. He then travelled in Italy, Poland, Livonia, Russia, and other countries. The only memorable event that his biographers have recorded of these travels, is, that in his way to Moscow his feet were frozen, and he was thinking of submitting to amputation, when the place where he stopped happening to be surprized by the enemy, he recovered his feet in a most surprising manner, and escaped the danger of losing either them or his liberty. On his return home, he devoted his time to his literary pursuits, especially poetry, and died Jan. 13, 1609. He has left the following pieces 1. “De Belgii principatu.” 2. “Parodia heroica Psahnorum Davidicorum.” 3. “Observationes physicae, ethicae, politics, et historical, in Psalmos.” 4. “Vita Davidis.” 5. “Orationes.” 6. “Poe'mata, &.C.” these poetical pieces, consisting of epigrams, elegies, &c. were collected and printed at Cologne, in 1615, with the addition of some poems by his son, a promising youth, who died in Calabria. It must not be omitted that Booh wrote the verses under the cuts of Verstegan’s absurd book against queen Elizabeth, entitled “Theatrum crudelitatum Hereticorum nostri temporis,” a sort of popish martyrology.

, a learned professor of the university of Helmstadt, was born in 1722, at Wernigerode. After having been educated at home, with great care, by his father, who was judge of that city, and counsellor to the count Stolberg of Wernigerode, he went in 1739 to the school of Closter-Bergen, near Magdeburgh, then superintended by Steinmez, and in 1741, took his leave of this school, in a Latin oration, “De societatibus hujus sevi notabilioribus.” He then went to Halle, and having early imbibed a taste for oriental languages and sacred philology, he attached himself particularly to the two Michaelis’s, father and son, who were then professors in that university. From Halle, he went to Leipsic, where he studied Arabic, Syriac, Chaldaic, Samaritan, Ethiopian, and rabbinical Hebrew. On his return to Halle in 1747, he maintained a thesis for his doctor’s degree, under the presidency of Michaelis the father, “On the antiquity of the Hebrew language” and then opened a course of lectures which were much admired. Notwithstanding this success, however, he left Halle, after a residence of two years, and settled at Helmstadt. Here he became a most popular teacher, his lectures being attended by an unusual number of students; and in 1754, the uniYersity secured his services by appointing him professor extraordinary of oriental languages. About this time, happening to meet with some works in which the study of the Armenian, Coptic, and Turkish languages was recommended, he had a great desire to add these to his stock, and not having been able to obtain the assistance of Jablonski for the Coptic, he determined to learn the others without a master. Having begun this task at his lisure hours, in 1756, he made such rapid progress as to be able to publish, before the conclusion of the year, the first two chapters of St. Matthew translated from the Turkish into Latin, with a critical preface on the history and utility of the Turkish language and the first four chapters of the same evangelist translated from the Armenian into Latin, with some considerations on the Armenian language. These two little works, which were published, the first at Bremen, and the other at Halle, were criticised with some severity, perhaps not unjust; but the zeal and industry of the author, although not altogether successful in these attempts, were still the subject of admiration, and were not unrewarded. In 1760 he obtained a pension and in 1763, lest he should accept of the offer of a professorship made to him by the university of Giessen, that of Helmstadt conferred on him the title of professor in ordinary of philosophy, with an augmentation of salary. His various works in the mean time amply confirmed their choice, and extended his reputation throughout Europe. Of his private life we have no further account, although it was prolonged for many years after this period, as he died of an apoplexy, March 7, 1796. His principal works are, 1. “Evangelium secundum Matthaeum ex versione Æthiopici interpretis in Bibliis polyglottis Anglicanis editum cum Graeco, c.” Halle, 1748, 4to, with a preface by Michaelis on the Ethiopian translation of the New Testament. 2. “Evangelium secundum Matthaeum ex versione Persica, &c.” Helmstadt, 17.50, 4to. 3. Persian translations of Mark, Luke, and John, 1751, 4to. published separately. 4. “Evangelium secundum Marcum ex versione Arabica, &c.” Lerngow, 1752, 4to. 5. “Novum Testamentum ex versione jEthiopica, &c. in Latinum,” Brunswick, 1753 55, 2 vols. 4to. 6. “Fragmenta Veteris Test, ex versione Æthiopici interpretis, et alia quaedam opuscula Æthiopica,” Wolfenb. 1755, 4to. 7. “Pseudo-critica Millio-Bengeliana,” Halle, 1767, 8vo, pointing out some inaccuracies in the variorum editions of the New Testament by these eminent critics. Bode is considered by his countrymen as a man of most extensive learning, but as destitute of elegance as a writer, either in Latin or German, and as unacquainted with the art of enlivening his subject.

, a French lawyer, and political writer, was born at Angers about 1530. In his youth he was supposed, but not upon good foundation, to have been a monk. He studied first at Toulouse, and after taking his degrees, read lectures there with much applause, having a design to settle there as law- pro lessor, and with that view he pronounced an oration on public instruction in the schools but finding Toulouse not a sufficiently ample stage for his ambition, he removed to Pans, and began to practise at the bar, where his expectations being likewise disappointed, he determined to apply himself to literary occupations, and in this he had very considerable success. Henry III. who liked to have men of letters about him, admitted him into familiar conversation, and had such an opinion of him, that he sent to prison one John, or Michael de la Serre, who had written against Bodin, and forbid him under pain of death to publish his work but this courtly favour did not last. Thuanus ascribes the king’s withdrawing his countenance to the envy of the courtiers but others think it was occasioned by Bodin' s taking a political part in opposition to the king. He found an asylum, however, with the duke of Alene,on, who made him secretary of his commands, one of the masters of the requests of his palace, and grand master of his waters and forests. The insurgents in the Netherlands at this time intended to declare the duke their sovereign, and were said to be prompted to this by queen Elizabeth of England. Bodin, however, accompanied him into England and Flanders, but he had the misfortune to lose this patron in 1584.