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

, or rather Paget (Eusebius), a Puritan divine, was born at Cranford in Northamptonshire, about 1542, and at the age of twelve years came to Oxford, where he was first choirister, and afterwards student of Christ Church. He made, according to Wood, a considerable progress in logic and philosophy, but, although a noted sophister, left the university without taking a degree. As Wood passes immediately to his being presented to the rectory of St. Anne’s, Aldersgate-street, that biographer seems to have known nothing of the intermediate events. On his leaving Oxford, he became vicar of Oundle, and rector of 'Langton in his native county, where, in 1573, he was first prosecuted for nonconformity. He was afterwards preferred to the rectory of Kilkhampton in Cornwall, and although he had acquainted both his patron and ordinary that there were some things in the book of Common Prayer with which he could not comply, and they had promised, that if he would accept the cure, he should not be molested on that account, yet a prosecution was commenced against him, which ended in his losing all his preferments, and even a school which he attempted to establish for his maintenance. This appeared particularly hard in his case, as, according to every authority, he was “a learned, peaceable, and good divine, who had formerly complied with the customs and devotions of the church, and had been indefatigable in the ministry.” He appears to haye remained some years under ecclesiastical censure; but at last, in September 1604, was promoted to the rectory of St. Anne and St. Agnes, Aldersgate-street, which he held till his death in May 1617, in the seventy- fifth year of his age. His remains were interred in this church. An account of his prosecution may be seen in the Harleian Mss. 813, fol. 14, b. and an abridgment of it in Neal’s “History of the Puritans.” He was the author of a sermon “on Tithes” another “of Election” a Latin “Catechism,” Lond. 1591, 8vo a translation of Calvin’s “Harmony of the Gospels,” ibid. 1584, 4to; and “The History of the Bible, briefly collected, by way of question and answer.” It does not appear when this first appeared, but it was afterwards printed at the end of several of the old editions of the Bible.

He had a son Ephraim, who was born in 1575, and educated also at Christ Church, where he became so uncommon a proficient in languages, that at the age of twenty-six, he is said to have understood and written fifteen or sixteen, ancient and modern. His only preferment was to the church of St. Edmund the King, Lombard-street, London, from which he uas driven by the usurping party, for his loyalty. In religious sentiments he does not appear to have differed from his father; but he adhered to the king and constitution, which was then an unpardonable crime. He retired to Deptford in Kent, where he died in April 1647, aged seventy-two. In addition to the other causes of his sufferings, he wrote much against the Independents, baptists, and other sectaries, as appears by his “Iferesiography” yet, in 1645, two years before his death, he united with his brethren in London, in petitioning parliament for the establishment of the Presbyterian discipline, which he thought better than none. He wrote some books that are still valued as curiosities, particularly his “Christianographia, or a description of the multitudes and sundry sorts of Christians in theworld, not subject to the pope,” &c. Lond. 1635, 4to, often reprinted, with (in some of the editions) a “Treatise of the religion of the ancient Christians in Britany;” and his " Hasresiographia, or a description of the Heresies of later times,' 7 ibid. 1645, &c. 4to. Of this there have been at least four editions,

, an Italian of great skill in Oriental languages and biblical learning, was born at Lucca in 1466, and afterwards became an ecclesiastic of the order of St. Dominic, and resided for the greater part of his life at Lyons. He was deeply and accurately skilled in the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, and Arabic tongues, but especially in the Hebrew. In the course of his studies he was led to conceive that the Vulgate translation of the Scriptures was either not by Jerome, or greatly corrupted; and he therefore undertook to make a new one, following Jerom only where he conceived that his version corresponded with the original. This design, so very soon after the restoration of letters, is calculated to give us a very high opinion of Pagninus’s courage and learning, and appeared in so favourable a light to pope Leo X. that he promised to furnish him with all necessary expences for completing the work; and he was likewise encouraged in his labours by the succeeding popes, Hadrian VI. and Clement VII. who licensed the printing of it. It appears, by a letter of Picus Mirandula to Pagninus, that he had spent twenty-five years upon this translation. It is the first modern translation of the Bible from the Hebrew text; and the Jews who read it affirmed, that it agreed entirely with the Hebrew, and was as faithful, and more exact than the ancient translations. The great fault of Pagninus was, that he adhered too closely and servilely to the original text; and this scrupulous attachment made his translation, says father Simon, “obscure, barbarous, and full of solecisms. He imagined, that, to make a faithful translation of the Scriptures, it was necessary to follow exactly the letter, according to the strictness of grammar. This, however, is quite contrary to his pretended exactness, because two languages seldom agree in their ways of speaking; and therefore, instead of expressing the original in its proper purity, he defaces and robs it of its ornaments.” Father Simon, nevertheless, allows the great abilities and learning of Pagninus; and all the later commentators and translators of the Scriptures have agreed in giving him his just commendation. Huetius, though he seems to think father Simon’s criticism of him well grounded, yet makes no scruple to propose his manner as a model for all translators of the sacred books: “Scripture interpretandae rationibus utile nobis exemplar proposuit Sancius Pagninus.”

He afterwards translated the “New Testament” from the Greek, and dedicated it to pope Clement VII. It was printed with the former at Lyons in 1528. He was also the author of an “Hebrew Lexicon and an Hebrew Grammar; which Buxtorf, who calls him” Vir linguarum Orientalium peritissimus," made great use of in compiling his. He died in 1536, aged seventy. Saxius places his birth in 1471, and his death in 1541. Though he appears. to have lived and died a bigoted Catholic, Luther spoke of him, and his translations, in terms of the highest applause.

, a French Protestant divine, was born in 1626, and studied, with great success and approbation, at Saumur; after which he became minister of a place called Marchenoir in the province of Dunois. He was an able advocate against the popish party, as appears by his best work, against father Nicole, entitled “Examen du Livre qui porte pour titre, Prejugez legitimes centre les Calvinistes,” 2 vols. 1673, 12mo. Mosheim therefore very improperly places him in the class of those who explained the doctrines of Christianity in such a manner as to diminish the difference between the doctrines of the reformed and papal churches; since this work shews that few men. wrote at that time with more learning, zeal, and judgment against popery. Pajon, however, created some disturbance in the church, and became very unpopular, by explaining certain doctrines, concerning the influence of the Holy Spirit, in the Arminian way, and had a controversy with Jurieu on this subject. The consequence was, that Pajon, who had been elected professor of divinity at Saumur, found it necessary to resign that office after which he resided at Orleans, as pastor, and died there Sept. 27, 1685, in the sixtieth year of his age. He left a great many works in manuscript; none of which have been printed, owing partly to his unpopularity, but, perhaps, principally to his two sons becoming Roman Catholics. A full account of his opinions may be seen in Mosheim, or in the first of our authorities.

, Count d'Ansembray, a French nobleman, was born at Paris in 1678. During his education he discovered an inclination for mathematical pursuits, and was instructed in the philosophy of Des Cartes. After this he increased his knowledge by an acquaintance with Huygens, Ruysh, Boerhaave, and other eminent men of the time. On his return from his travels he was appointed director-general of the posts in France; but, coming into possession of a country-seat at Bercy, by the death of his father, he collected a museum there furnished with philosophical and mechanical instruments, and machines of every description, which attracted the attention of the learned, and was visited by Peter the Great, the emperor of Germany, and other princes. In the Transactions of the Academy of Sciences, of which he was a member, there are several of his papers; among which is a description of an “Instrument for the Measurement of Liquids” of“An Areometer, or Wind Gage” and of a “Machine for beating regular Time in Music.” He died in 1753, bequeathing his valuable museum to the academy.

, a political and infidel writer of great notoriety, was born in 1737, at Thetford, in Norfolk. His father was a staymaker, a business which he himself carried on during his early years at London, Dover, and Sandwich. He afterwards became an exciseman and grocer, at Lewes in Sussex; and, upon the occasion of an election at Shoreham, in 1771, is said to have written an election song. In the following year he wrote a pamphlet, recommending an application to parliament for the“increase of the salaries of excisemen; but, for some misdemeanours, was himself dismissed from his office in 1774. In the mean time, the ability displayed in his pamphlet attracted the notice of one of the commissioners of excise, who sent him to America, with a strong recommendation to Dr. Franklin, as a person who could be serviceable at that time in America. What services were expected from him, we know not, but he arrived at a time when the Americans were prepared for the revolution which followed, and which he is supposed to have promoted, by scattering among the discontented his memorable pamphlet, entitled” Common Sense."

His first engagement in Philadelphia was with a bookseller, who employed him as editor of the Philadelphia Magazine, for which he had an annual salary of fifty pounds currency. When Dr. Rush of that city suggested to Paine the propriety of preparing the Americans lor a separation from Great Britain, he seized with avidity the idea, and immediately beg^n the above mentioned pamphlet, which, when finished, was shewn in manuscript to Dr. Franklin and Mr. Samuel Adams, and entitled, after some discussion, “Common Sense,” at the suggestion of Dr. Rush. For this he received from the legislature of Pennsylvania, the sum of 500l.; and soon after this, although devoid of every thing that could be called literature, he was honoured with a degree of M. A. from the university of Pennsylvania, and vvas chosen a member of the American Philosophical Society. In the title-page of his “Rights of Man,” he styled himself “Secretary for foreign affairs to the Congress of the United States, in the late war.” To this title*, however, he had no pretensions, and so thorough a republican ought at least to have avoided assuming what he condemned so vehemently in others. He was merely a clerk, at a very low salary, to a committee of the congress; and his business was to copy papers, and number and file them. From this office, however, insignificant as it was, he was dismissed for a scandalous breach of trust, and then hired himself as a clerk to Mr. Owen Biddle of Philadelphia; and early in \1&0, the assembly of Pennsylvania chose hiii) as cierk. fn 1782 he printed at Philadelphia, a letter to the abbé Raynal on the affairs of North Amer ca, in which he undertook to clear up the mistakes in Raynal’s account of the revolution; and in the same yer he also printed a letter to the earl of Shelburne, on his speech in parliament, July 10, 1782, in which that nobleman had prophesied that, “When Great Britain shall acknowledge American independence, the sun of Britain’s glory is set for ever.” It could not be difficult to answer such a prediction as this, which affords indeed a humiliating instance of want of political foresight. Great Britain did acknowledge American independence, and what is Great Britain now? In 1785, as a compensation for his revolutionary writings, congress granted him three thousand dollars, after having rejected with great indignation a motion for appointing him historiographer to the United States, with a salary. Two only of the states noticed by gratuities his revolutionary writings. Pennsylvania gave him, as we have mentioned, 500l. currency; and NewYork gave him an estate of more than three hundred acres, in high cultivation, which was perhaps the more agreeable to him, as it was the confiscated property of a royalist. lu 1787 he came to London, and before the end of that year published a pamphlet on the recent transactions’ between Great Britain and Holland, entitled “Prospects on the Rubicon.” In this, as may be expected, he censured the Cneasures of the English administration.

He had long cherished in his mind a most cordial hatred against his native country, and was now prepared in some measure for that systematic attack on her happiness which he carried on, at intervals, during the remainder of his life. Being released, in November 1789, from a sponging-house where he was confined for debt, he beheld with delight the proceedings of the French, and hastened to that country, but made no long stay at this time; and finding, on his return to London in 1790, Mr. Burke’s celebrated work on the French revolution, he produced, within a tew months, the first part of his “Rights of Man,” and in 17.')2, the second part. Had these been left to the natural demand of the public, it is probable they might have passed unnoticed by government, but the industry with which they were circulated by the democratic societies of that period, among the lower classes of society, betrayed intentions which it would have been criminal to overlook; and prosecutions were accordingly instituted against the author and publishers. The author made his escape to France, and never returned to this country more. His inveteracy against her establishments, however, continued unabated, and perhaps was aggravated by the verdict which expelled him from the only nation where he wished to propagate his disorganizing doctrines, and where he had at that time many abettors. When the proceedings of the latter had roused the loyal part of the nation to address the throne in behalf of our constitution, Paine published “A Letter to the Addressers,” the object of which was to procure a national convention in contempt of the parliament. This likewise was circulated by his partizans with no small industry. In the mean time, although ignorant of the French language, he was chosen a member of the French convention, and in consistency with his avowed malignity, gave his vote for a declaration of war against Great Britain. His adopted country, however, was not very grateful for his services, for when Robespierre gained the ascendancy, he sent Paine, with that mad enthusiast Anacharsis Cloots, to prison at the Luxemburgb, and Paine narrowly escaped being guillotined, amidst the hundreds who then underwent that fate, or were murdered in other ways.

During his confinement, which lasted eleven months, he certainly merited the praise of his friends, for his calm unconcern, and his philosophy; and they no doubt would rejoice to hear that he passed those hours of danger in. “defying the armies of the living God,” by his blasphemous composition called “The Age of Reason,” the first part of which was published at London in 1794, and the second the yenr following. If any thing can exceed the mischievous intention of this attack on revealed religion, and which certainly produced very alarming effects on the minds of many of the lower classes, among whom it was liberally circulated, it was the ignorance of which his answerers have convicted him in every species of knowledge necessary for a discussion of the kind .

His subsequent publications were “The Decline and Fall of the English system of Finance;” a most impudent letter to general Washington, whom he had the ingratitude to revile as an apostate and impostor. *' Agrarian Justice opposed to Agrarian law, and to Agrarian Monopoly;“f( Letter to Mr. Erskine on the prosecution pf T. Williams, for publishing the Age of Reason.” He continued in France till 1802, “drunk,” as his biographer informs us, “every day, mixing with the lowest company, and so filthy in his person, as to be avoided by all men of decency. His habitual drunkenness seems to have commenced with the delirium of the French revolution, and the practice gained upon him while in London.” Tired at length with France, which now had nothing of a republic left, he wished to return to America, but knew not well what to do with himself. He could not return to England, where he had been outlawed, and he was aware that he was odious in the United States, where Washington had justly considered him as an anarchist in government, and an infidel in religion, He had no country in the world, and it may be truly said he had not a friend. He was obliged, however, to return to the United States, where his farm, now greatly increased in value, would supply all his wants.

In Oct. 1802, accordingly, he arrived at Baltimore, under the protection of the president Jefferson, but was no longer an object of curiosity, unless among the lower classes of emigrants from England, Scotland, or Ireland. With them, it appears, “he drank grog in the tap-room, morning, noon, and night, admired and praised, strutting and staggering about, showing himself to all, and shaking hands with all; but the leaders of the party to which he had attached himself paid him no attention.” He had brought with him to America a woman, named madame Bonneviile, whom he had seduced from her husband, with her two sons; and whom he seems to have treated with the utmost meanness and tyranny. By what charms he had seduced this lady, we are not told. He was now sixty-five years old, diseased in body from habitual drunkenness, and gross in manners. It would be too disgusting to follow, his biographer in his description of the personal vices of this man. It may suffice that he appeared for many months before his death to be sunk to the lowest state of brutality.

The closing scene of his life, as related by his medical attendant, Dr. Manley, is too instryctive and admonitory to be omitted. “During the latter part of his life,” says this physician, “though his conversation was equivocal, his conduct was singular. He would not be left alone night or day. He not only required to have some person with him, but he must see that he or she was there, and would not allow his curtain to be closed at any time; and if, as it would sometimes unavoidably happen, he was left alone, he would scream and holla, until some person came to him. When relief from pain would admit, he seemed thoughtful and contemplative, his eyes being generally closed, and his hands folded upon his breast, although he never slept without the assistance of an anodyne. There was something remarkable in his conduct about this period (which comprises about two weeks immediately preceding his death), particularly when we reflect, that Thomas Paine was author of the” Age of Reason." He would call out during his paroxysms of distress, without intermission, ‘ O Lord help -me, God help me, Jesus Christ help me, O Lord help me,’ &c. repeating the same expression without any the least var ation, in a tone of voice that would alarm the house. It was this conduct which induced me to think that he had abandoned his former opinions; and I was more inclined to that belief, when I understood from his nurse (who is a very serious, and, I believe, pious woman,) that he would occasionally inquire, when he saw her engaged with a book, what she was reading, and being answered, and at the same time asked whether she should read aloud, he assented, and would appear to give particular attention. The book she usually read was * Hobart’s Companion for the Altar/

"I took occasion, during the night of the 5th and 6th of June, to test the strength of his opinions respecting revelation. I purposely made him a very late visit; it was a time which seemed to sort exactly with my errand; it was midnight; he was in great distress, constantly exclaiming in the words above mentioned; when, after a considerable preface, I addressed him in the following manner, the nurse being present:

On the 8th of June, 1809, about nine in the morning, died this memorable man, aged seventy-two years and five months; who at the close of the eighteenth century had well nigh persuaded the common people of England to think> that all was wrong in that government and that religion which their forefathers had transmitted to them, and under which they had enjoyed so many blessings. He had the merit of discovering, that the best way of diffusing discontent and revolutionary fanaticism was by a broad display, in their naked and barbarous forms, of those infidel and anarchical elements, which sophistry had, till his time, refined above the perceptions of the vulgar. By stripping the mischief of the dress, though still covering it with the name and boast of philosophy, he rendered it as familiar to the capacity as it was flattering to the passions of the mob; and easy to be understood in proportion to the ascendancy of the baser qualities of the mind.

To this merit, and in a literary point of view, it is a merit, he seems justly entitled. He was familiar with those artifices of writing which very much promoted his objects. Things that are great are easily travestied. It is only to express them in a vulgar idiom, and incorporate them witfa low ideas. This is always very gratifying to the mean, the little, and the envious; and perhaps this was one of his most successful tricks upon the multitude. He had, besides, a sort of plebeian simplicity of style, almost bordering upon naivete", which clothed his imposture with the semblance of honesty; while the arrogance with which he treated great names was, with the base and contumelious, an argument, of his conscious pride and independence of thinking.

, a celebrated grammarian at Rome, in the reign of Tiberius, was born of a slave at Vicenza. It is said he was first brought up in a mechanical business, but while attending his master’s son to school, he discovered so much taste for learning, and made so much progress in it, that he was thought worthy of his freedom, and became a teacher or preceptor at Rome. With his learning he joined an excellent memory, and a ready elocution; and made extempore verses, then a very popular qualification. With all this merit, his manners were very dissolute, and he was so arrogant as to assert, that learning was born when he was born, and would die when he died; and that Virgil had inserted his name in his “Eclogues” by a certain prophetic spirit; for that he, Palaemon, would infallibly become one day sole judge and arbiter of all poetry. He was excessively prodigal and lavish, and continually poor, notwithstanding the great sums he gained by teaching, and the profit he made, both by cultivating his lands, and in, the way of traffic. There is an “Ars Grammatica” ascribed to him in the edition of the “Grammatici Antiqui,” and separately printed; and a work “De Ponderibus et Mensuris,” which is more doubtful.

was a Greek philosopher, of whom a treatise in explication of ancient fables has been several times reprinted in Greek and Latin; the best edition is that of Fischer, Lips. 1761. But little is known of him, and there are several ancient writers of this name; one an Athenian, placed by the poets before the time of Homer; one a native of Puros, who lived under Artaxerxes Mnemon; and one, a grammarian and philosopher, born at Athens or in Egypt, posterior to Aristotle. Which of these is author of the work already noticed, is not at all certain.

, natural son of James de Palafox, marquis de Hariza, in the kingdom of Arragon, was born in 1600. His mother, it is said, attempted to drown him at his birth, but one of his father’s vassals drew him out of the water, and took care of him till the age at which he was acknowledged by his parents. Philip IV. appointed Palafox member of the council of war; then that of the Indies. Having afterwards chosen the ecclesiastical profession, he was made bishop of Los Angelos, “Angelopolis,” in New Spain, in 1639, with the title of visitor of the courts of chancery and courts of audience, and judge of the administration of the three viceroys of the Indies. Palafox employed his authority in softening the servitude of the Indians, checking robbery in the higher ranks, and vice in the lower. He had also great contentions with the Jesuits concerning episcopal rights. He was made bishop of Osina or Osma, in Old Castille, in 1653, which diocese he governed with much prudence and regularity, and died, in great reputation for sanctity, September 30, 1659, aged 59. This prelate left some religious books, of which the principal are, “Homilies on the Passion of Christ,” translated into French by Amelot de la Houssaye, 16to; several tracts on the “Spiritual Life,” translated by the abbé le Roi; “The Shepherd of Christmas-night,” &c. but he is best known by his “History of the Siege of Fontarabia;” and “History of the Conquest of China by the Tartars,” 8vo. There is a collection of his works printed at Madrid in 13 vols. fol. 1762, and a life by Dinouart in French, 1767, 8vo.

, seigneur de Bigot, a French poet, was born in May 1650, at Toulouse, of a noble family. He was a member of the academy of the Jeux Floraux, became chief magistrate of Toulouse in 1675, when scarcely twenty-five years of age and was made head of the consistory 1684, in which othce he acquitted himself with great integrity. He went to Rome two years after, and at length to Paris, in which city he chiefly resided from that time, and where M. de Vendome fixed him in his service in 1691, as one of his secretaries. He died October 23, 1721, at Paris, aged 71, leaving some “Comedies,” and a small collection of miscellaneous “Poems,” most of them addressed to M. de Vendome. M. Palaprat wrote for the stage with his friend Brueis, and their works have been collected in five small volumes 12mo, of which his is the least part. His style is gay and lively, but he discovers little genius or fancy, and he seems to have been indebted for his literary reputation to his private character, which was that of a man of great candour and simplicity.

, an excellent writer in the sixteenth century, was born at Veroli, in the Campagna di Roma, and descended of noble and ancient families by both his parents. He was baptised by the name of Anthony, which according to the custom of the times, he altered to the classical form of Aonius. He applied himself early to the Greek and Latin languages, in which he made great progress, and then proceeded to philosophy and divinity. The desire he had of knowledge, prompted him to travel through the greatest part of Italy; and to listen to the instructions of the most famous professors in every place he visited. His longest residence was at Rome, where he continued for six years, till that city was taken by Charles V. when the disorders committed by the troops of that prince leaving no hopes of enjoying tranquillity, he resolved to depart, and retire to Tuscany. He had at this time a great inclination to travel into France, Germany, and even as far as Greece; but the narrowness of his fortune would not admit of this. On his arrival in Tuscany, he chose Sienna for his abode, to which he was induced by the pleasantness of the situation, and the sprightliness and sagacity of the inhabitants: and accordingly he sold his estate at Veroli, with the determination never to see a place any more, where, though he was born, yet he was not beloved. He purchased a country-house in the neighbourhood of Sienna, called Ceciniano, and pleased himself with the fancy of its having formerly belonged to Cecina, one of Cicero’s clients. Here he proposed to retire on his leisure- days, and accordingly embellished it as much as. possible. At Sienna he married ajoung woman, of whom he was passionately fond, and who brought him four children, two boys and two girls. He was also professor of polite letters, and had a great number of pupils.

But his career was disturbed by a quarrel he had with one of his colleagues, who was enraged to see his own reputation eclipsed by the superior lustre of Palearius. We are not told the particular point upon which the contest commenced; but it is certain that our professor was defended by Peter Aretin, who, perhaps more to revenge his own cause, or gratify a detracting humour, than from any respect for Palearius, composed, against his envious rival, an Italian comedy or farce, which was acted upon the stage at Venice; and so poignant was the ridicule, that the subject of it thought proper to quit Sienna, and retire to Lucca. Hither he was followed some time after, though with much reluctance, by Palearius, concerning which we have the following account: Anthony Bellantes, a nobleman of Sienna, being impeached of several misdemeanors, employed Palearius to plead his cause, who made so excellent a speech before the senate of that city in his defence, that he was acquitted and dismissed; but, the same nobleman having some time after accused certain monks of robbing his grandmother, employed his advocate again to support the charge. The monks accused, making oath of their innocence, were cleared by the court, but were incensed at the prosecution, and aspersed Palearius both in their sermons, and on all other occasions, as an impious wretch, unfit to be harboured in a Christian country. They also declared him a heretic, because he disapproved several superstitious practices; neither did they approve of the book he had written on the “Death of Christ.” Palearius, however, defended himself with so much strength of reason and eloquence, that the accusations were dropped. Yet finding himself still exposed to vexatious persecutions, he thought proper to accept of an invitation to teach polite literature at Lucca.

Although he had here a handsome gratuity, and was only to attend his scholars one hour in the twenty-four, yet it was entirely owing to the expences of his family that he engaged in this employment, which was otherwise irksome to him. He passed, however, some years at Lucca, before he obtained the offer of several immunities, and a handsome stipend from the magistrates of Milan, where he hoped that he was now settled in peace for life, but the event proved otherwise. Paul V. who had been a Dominican monk, coming to the pontificate in 1566, determined to show his bigotry against every thing that had the appearance of heresy, and therefore ordered the cause of Palearius to be re-heard. On which Palearius was suddenly arrested at Milan, and carried to Rome, where they found it not difficult to convict him of having said “That the German doctors who followed Luther were to be commended in respect to some points; and that the court of the inquisition was erected for the destruction of men of learning.” He was then condemned to be burnt, which sentence was executed the same year, 1566. He was greatly respected by the most eminent scholars of his time, such as Bembusj Sadoletus, Sfondratus, Philonardus, cardinals; Benedictus Lampridius, Anthony Flaminius, and Andreas Alciatus; besides others, whose names may be seen in the catalogue to the last edition of his “Letters,” containing the names of his literary correspondents.

He was the author of several works. In the piece on the immortality of the soul, 1. “De immortalitate animae, Jibri tres,” which is reckoned his master-piece, he establishes the doctrine of the soul’s immortality, against Lucretius; for which reason Daniel Pareus annexed it to his edition of that poet at Francfort, 1631, 8vo. Sadolet bestows high encomiums upon this poem^ in a letter to Palearius. It was printed by Gryphius in 1536, in 16mo; and is inserted in our author’s works. 2. “Epistolarum, libri 4,” “Orationum, lib, 3,” 1552. 3. “Actio in pontifices Romanes et eorum asseclas, ad imperatorem Rom. reges et principes Christianse reipublicae summos Oecumenici concilii praesides conscripta cum de consilio Tridentino habendo deliberaretur.” He drew up this piece with a design to get it presented by the emperor’s ambassadors to the council of Trent. It is a regular plan in defence of the protestants, and was published at Leipsic in 1606. 4. “Poemata;” these are some poems printed at Paris in 1576. His works came out under this title, “Aonii Palearii opera,” Amst. 1696, 8vo. In the preface is given, a circumstantial account of the author’s life. They were reprinted, Jenae, 1728, 8vo. There is also a piece extant, with the following title: “Dialogo intitulato il grammatico overo deile false Esercitationi, delle scuele (da Aonio Paleario),” Perugia, 1717. He also wrote a “Discourse upon the Passion of Christ,” in Italian, which is lost but the plan of it is in his “Orations,” p. 90, 91. In Schelhorn’s “Amcenitates,” Leipsic, 1737, is “Aonii Palearii ad Lutherum, Calvinum, aliosque de concilio Tridentino epistola;” a letter, in which he advises the Lutherans and Calvinists to unite, as the hest means of resisting the attack made by the council of Trent on both.

, a learned Italian cardinal, descended from an illustrious family, was born at Bologna, Oct. 4, 1524. He was intended for the profession of the civil and canon law, in which some of his family had acquired fame, and he made great progress in that and other studies. His talents very early procured him a canonry of Bologna; after which he was appointed professor of civil law, and obtained the title of the new Alciatus from his emulating the judgment and taste of that learned writer. Some business requiring his presence at Rome, he was appointed by ca'rdinal Alexander Farnese, who had been his fellow-student at Bologna, and who was then perpetual legate of Avignon, governor of Vaisson, in the county of Venaissin, but hearing of the death of his mother, he made that a pretence for declining the office, and therefore returned to his professorship at Bologna. The Farnese family were, however, determined to serve him in spite of his modesty, and in 1557 obtained for him the post of auditor of the rota. When Pope Pius IV. opened the council of Trent, Paleotti was made proctor and counsellor to his legates, who, in truth, did nothing of importance without his advice. Of this council Paleotti wrote a history, which still remains in ms. and of which Pallavicini is said to have availed himself in his history. After this council broke up he resumed his functions at Rome, where in 1565 he was raised to the dignity of the purple by Pius IV. and by Pius V. he was created bishop of Bologna, but the see upon this occasion was erected into an archbishopric to do honour both to Paleotti and his native country. Being a conscientious man, he was always so assiduous in the duties of his diocese, that it was with the greatest reluctance the popes summoned him to attend the consistories and other business at Rome. He died at Rome, July 23, 1597, aged seventy-three. He was author of several works of considerable merit, on subjects in antiquities, jurisprudence, and morals. Of these the most considerable are the following: “Archiepiscopale Bonnoniense” “De imagiriibus Sacris, et Profanis,” 1582, 4to, in Italian; and in Latin, 1594; “De Sacri Consistorii Consultationibus” “De Nothis, Spuriisque Filiis,” Francfort, 1573, 8vo; “De Bono Senectutis” Pastoral Letters, &c.

, called by Dr. Burney the Homer of the most ancient music that has been preserved, was, as his name imports, a native of the ancient Proeneste, now corruptly called Palestrina, and is supposed to have been born some time in 1529. All the Italian writers who have mentioned him, say he was the scholar of Gaudio Mell. Fiamingo, by which name they have been, generally understood to mean Claude Goudimel, of whom we have given some account in vol. XVI.; but this seems doubtful, nor is there any account of his life on which reliance can be placed. All that we know with certainty is, that about 1555, when he had distinguished himself as a composer, he was admitted into the Pope’s chapel, at Rome; in 1562, at the age of thirty three, he was elected maestro di capella of Santa Maria Maggiore, in the same city; in 1571 was honoured with a similar appointment at St. Peter’s; and lastly, having brought choral harmony to a degree of perfection that has never since been exceeded, he died in 1594, at the age of sixty-five. Upon his coffin was this inscription, “Johannes Petrus Aloysius Praenestinus Musicae Princeps.”

By the assistance of signor Santarelli, Dr. Burney procured at Rome a complete catalogue of all the genuine productions of Palestrina, which may be classed in the following manner: masses in four, five, and six parts, twelve books; of which lib i. appeared at Rome in folio, 1554, when the author was in the twenty-fifth year of his age; and in that city only went through three several editions during his life. Lib. ii. of his masses, which includes the celebrated composition entitled “Missa Papse Marcelli,” was published likewise at Rome, in 1567. -Of this production it has been related by Antimo Liberati, and after him by Adami, Berardi, and other musical writers, that the pope and conclave having been offended and scandalized at the light and injudicious manner in which the mass had been long set and performed, ^determined to banish music in parts entirely from the church; but that Palestrina, at the age of twenty-six, during the short pontificate of Marcellus Cervinus, intreated his holiness to suspend the execution of his design till he had heard a mass composed in what, according to his ideas, was the true ecclesiastical style. His request being granted, the composition, in six parts, was performed at Easter 1555, before the pope and college of cardinals, who found it so grave, noble, elegant, learned, and pleasing, that music was restored to favour, and again established in the celebration of sacred rites. This mass was afterwards printed, and dedicated to the successor of Marcellus, pope Paul IV. by whom Palestrina was appointed chapel-master.

, a very celebrated English divine, and one of the most successful writers of his time, was born at Peterborough in July 1743, and was educated by his father, who was the head master of Giggleswick school, in Yorkshire, vicar of Helpstone in Northamptonshire, and a minor canon of Peterborough. In his earliest days he manifested a taste for solid knowledge, and a peculiar activity of mind. In Nov. 1758 he was admitted a sizar of Christ’s college, Cambridge, and before he went to reside there was taught the mathematics by Mr. William Howarth, a master of some eminence at Dishworth, near Rippon. In December 1759, soon after he took up his residence in the university, he obtained a scholarship, and applied to his studies with such diligence as to make a distinguished figure in the public schools, particularly when he took his bachelor’s degree in 1763. He was afterwards employed for about three years as assistant at an academy at Greenwich; in 1765 he obtained the first prize for a prose Latin dissertation; the subject proposed was “A comparison between the Stoic and Epicurean philosophy, with respect to the influence of each on the morals of a people,” in which he took the Epicurean side.

Having received deacon’s orders, he became curate to Dr. Hinchliffe, then vicar of Greenwich, and afterwards bishop of Peterborough; and when he left the academy above-mentioned, continued to officiate in the church. In June 1766 he was elected a fellow on the foundation of Christ’s college, and at the ensuing commencement took his degree of M. A. He did not, however, return to his residence in college until Oct. 1767, when he engaged in the business of private tuition, which was soon followed by his appointment to the office of one of the college tutors. On the 21st of December 1767, he was ordained a priest by bishop Terrick.

The duties of college tutor Mr. Paley discharged with uncommon assiduity and zeal; and the whole of his system of tuition, as given by his biographer, appears to have been eminently calculated to render instruction easy, pleasant, and of permanent effect. It is somewhat remarkable, that while thus employed in improving others, he was laying the foundation of his future fame; for his lectures on moral philosophy, and on the Greek Testament, contained the outlines of the very popular works which he afterwards published. He maintained an intimate acquaintance with almost every person of celebrity in the university; but his particular friends were Dr. Waring, and Dr. John Jebb, well known for his zeal in religious and political controversy, and with whom, in some points, Mr. Paley was thought to have coincided more closely than afterwards appeared to be the case. Even now they could not persuade him to sign the petition for relief in the matter of subscription to the thirty-nine articles, although he was prevailed on to contribute to the cause, by an anonymous pamphlet, entitled “A Defence of the Considerations on the propriety of requiring a subscription to Articles of Faith,” in answer to Dr. Randolph’s masterly pamphlet against the “Considerations.” After he had spent about ten years as college-tutor, he quitted the university in 1776, and married. His first benefice in the church was the rectory of Musgrove, in Westmoreland, worth only about eighty pounds a-year, which he obtained in the month of May 1775, and in December 1776 he was inducted into the vicarage of Dalston, in Cumberland; and not long after to the living of Appleby, in Westmoreland, worth about 300l. per annum.

In 1776, a new edition of bishop Law’s “Reflections on the Life and Character of Christ,” originally published in the “Consideration on the Theory of Religion,” was given in a separate form at Cambridge, for the use of the students. To this treatise some brief “Observations on the character and example of Christ” were added, with an “Appendix on the Morality of the Gospel” both from Mr. Paley’s pen. From a passage in this little essay it appears, that his theory of morals was not then altogether firmly fixed on the basis which supports it now.

While at Appleby, he published a small volume selected from the Book of Common Prayer, and the writings of some eminent divines, entitled “The Clergyman’s Comr panion in visiting the Sick.” This useful work at first appeared without his name, but it has passed through nine editions, and is now printed among his works. In June 1780, he was collated to the fourth prebendal stall in the cathedral church of Carlisle, and thus became coadjutor in the chapter to his friend Mr. Law, who was now archdeacon; but in 1782, upon Dr. Law’s being created an Irish bishop, Mr. Paley was made archdeacon of the diocese, and in 1785, he succeeded Dr. Burn, author of “The Justice of Peace,” in the chancellorship. For these different preferments he was indebted either to the venerable bishop of Carlisle, Dr. Law, or to the dean and chapter of the cathedral church. While his residence was divided between Carlisle and Dalston, Mr. Paley engaged in the composition of his celebrated work, “The Elements of Moral and Political Philosophy;” but hesitated long as to the publication, imagining there would be but fewreaders for such a work; and he was the more determined on this point after he had entered on the married state, thinking it a duty that he owed his family to avoid risking any extraordinary expense. To remove this last objection, Dr. John Law presented a living then in his gift to Mr. Paley, on the promise that he would consider it as a compensation for the hazard of printing, and he immediately set about preparing his work for the press, which appeared in 1785, in quarto. Of a work * so generally known and admired, and so extensively circulated, it would be unnecessary to say much. Although the many editions which came rapidly from the press stamped no ordinary merit on it, yet some of his friends appear to have not been completely gratified. They expected, that from his intimacy with Jebb, and the latitudinarian party at Cambridge, he would have brought forward those sentiments which Jebb in vain endeavoured to disseminate while at the university; and they were surprized to find that his reasoning on subscription to articles of religion, and on the British constitution, in which he not only disputes the expediency of reform in the House of Commons, but vindicates the influence of the crown in that branch of parliament, was diametrically opposite to their opinions and wishes.

* In this work there are some opi- system was also attacked by Mr. Pearnions equivocally expressed, without son, tutor of Sidney college, Camthe characteristic decision which be- bridge, in " Remarks on the Theory

On the death of the venerable bishop of Carlisle in 1787, Mr. Paley drew up a short memoir of him. (See Law, Edmund). His next work places him in a high rank among the advocates for the truth and authenticity of the Christian Scriptures. It is entitled “Horae Paulina; or, the Truth of the Scripture History of St. Paul evinced, by a comparison of the Epistles which bear his name with the Acts of the Apostles, and with one another,” which he dedicated to his friend Dr. John Law, at that time bishop of Killala. The principal object of this work is to shew, that by a comparison of several indirect allusions and references in the Acts and Epistles, independently of all collateral testimony, their undesigned coincidence affords the strongest proof of their genuineness, and of the reality of the transactions to which they relate. Instead of requiring the truth of any part of the apostolic history to be taken for granted, he leaves the reader at liberty to suppose the writings to have been lately discovered, and to have come to our hands destitute of any extrinsic or collateral evidence whatever. The design was original, and the execution admirable. Soon after he compiled a small work, entitled “The Young Christian instructed in Reading, and the Principles of Religion.” This having brought upon him a charge of plagiarism, he defended himself in a good-humoured letter in the Gentleman’s Magazine. Previously to the appearance of these works he was offered by Dr. Yorke, bishop of Ely, the mastership of Jesus college, Cambridge, which, after due deliberation, he declined. In May 1792, he was instituted to the vicarage of Addingham, near Great SaJ-j kcld, on the presentation of the dean and chapter of Carlisle. During the political ferment excited by the French, revolution, he published “Reasons for Contentment, addressed to the labouring classes,” and the chapter in his “Moral Philosophy,” on the British Constitution. In 1793, he vacated Dalston, on being collated by the bishop of Carlisle (Dr. Vernon) to the vicarage of Stanwix. His biographer informs us that, " beiug afterwards asked, by a clerical friend, why he quitted Dalston, he answered with a frankness peculiar to him, for he knew no deceit, 'Why, Sir, I had two or three reasons for taking Stanwix in exchange: first, it saved me double house-keeping, as Stanwix was within a twenty minutes walk of my house in Carlisle: secondly, it was fifty pounds a -year more in value: and, thirdly, I began to find my stock of sermons coming over again too fastV

In 1794, he published “A View of the Evidences of Christianity, in three parts: I. Of the direct historical Evidence of Christianity, and wherein it is distinguished from the Evidence alleged for other Miracles. II. Of the Auxiliary Evidences of Christianity; and, III. A brief Consideration of some popular Objections.” This work was first published in three volumes, 12mo, but in a few months it was republished in two volumes, 8vo, and has been continued in this form through many successive editions. It is perhaps the most complete summary of the evidences of our holy religion that has ever appeared. In August of the same year the bishop of London, Dr. Porteus, instituted him to the prebend of St. Pancras, in the cathedral of St. Paul’s, and in a very short time he was promoted to the subdeanery of Lincoln, a preferment of 700l. per annum, by Dr. Pretyman, bishop of that diocese. In January 1795, he proceeded to Cambridge to take his degree of D. D.; and before he left that place, he was surprized by a letter from the bishop of Durham, Dr. Barrington, with whom he had not the smallest acquaintance, offering him the valuable rectory of Bishop-Wear-*­mouth, estimated at twelve hundred pounds a-year. When he waited on his new patron to express his gratitude, his lordship instantly interrupted his acknowledgments: “Not a word,” said he, “you cannot have greater pleasure in, accepting the living of Bishop-Wearmouth, than I have in offering it to you.” After reading himself in, as a prebendary, at St. Paul’s cathedral, March 8th, Dr. Paley, for he now assumed that title, immediately proceeded to BishopWearmouth, took possession of his valuable cure, and then returned to Cambridge against the commencement, to complete the Doctor’s degree, and on Sunday July 5th, preached before the university his sermon “On the dangers incidental to the Clerical character.” He now resigned the prebend of Carlisle, and the living of Stanwix, and divided his residence principally between Lincoln and Bisbop-Wearmoutb, spending his summers at the latter, and his winters at the former of those places. He next undertook the composition of his last work,entitled “Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, collected from the appearances of Nature.” In this he proceeded very slowly, and was much interrupted by ill-health; but the work was published in the summer of 1802. It was dedicated to the bishop of Durham, for the purpose of making the most acceptable return he was able for a great and important benefit conferred upon him. In this work he has traced the marks of wisdom and design in various parts of the creation; but has dwelt principally on those which may be discovered in the constitution of the human body. It is replete with instruction, and from its style and manner peculiarly calculated to fix the reader’s attention.

In 1804, Dr. Paley’s health was much upon the decline, and having experienced a severe attack in May 1805, it was evident that the powers of nature were exhausted, and medicine of no avail. He died on the 25th, under the accumulated influence of debility and disease, and was interred in the cathedral of Carlisle by the side of his first wife, by whom he had eight children, viz. four sons and four daughters. His second wife survived him. Since his death a volume of his “Sermons” has been published, and received by the public with nearly the same avidity as his other works.

In private life, Dr. Paley is said to have had nothing of the philosopher. He entered into little amusements with a degree of ardour which formed a singular contrast with the superiority of his mind. He was fond of company, which he had extraordinary powers of entertaining; nor was he at any time more happy, than when communicating the pleasure he could give by exerting his talents of wit and humour. No man was ever more beloved by his particular friends, or returned their affection with greater sincerity and ardour. That such a man, and such a writer, should not have been promoted to the bench of bishops, has been considered as not very creditable to the times in which we live. It is generally understood that Mr. Pitt recommended him to his majesty some years ago for a vacant bishopric, and that an opposition was made from a very high quarter of the church, which rendered the recommendation ineffectual. If this be true, it is a striking proof of Mr. Pitt’s liberality; for, according to his biographer, Dr. Paley frequently indulged in sarcastic and disrespectful notice of that celebrated statesman. What truth may be in this, or what justice in the complaints of his friends, we shall not inquire. Judging from his writings, we should be inclined to regret, with them, that he had not higher preferment; but, contemplating his character, as given in the “Memoirs of William Paley, D. D. by George Wilson Meadley,” we must rather wonder that he had so much. It will, however, be universally acknowledged, that no author ever wrote more pleasingly on the subjects he has treated than Dr. Paley. The force and terseness of his expressions are not less admirable than the strength of his conceptions; and there is both in his language and his notions a peculiarity of manner, stamped by the vigour of his mind, which will perpetuate the reputation of his works.

, a surgeon of eminence, was born at Ghent in Flanders in 1649; and, being made anatomist and reader in surgery in that city, was much distinguished by his lectures as well as practice, and wrote upon several subjects with learning and judgment. He died at Ghent, about eighty years old, in 1730. He paid various visits to London, Paris, and Leyden, where he formed an acquaintance with the most eminent surgeons of his time, profited by their discoveries, and was himself the inventor of some instruments. His first publication was a “System of Osteology,” in Flemish, which he afterwards translated into French, and which was often reprinted. In 1708, he published his “Description Anatomique des Parties de la Femme qui servent a la Generation,” together with Licetus’ treatise on monsters, and a description of one born at Ghent in 1703. In 1710, he printed his “Anatomic Chirurgicale, ou description exacte des Parties du Corps humain, avec des remarques miles aux Chirurgiens dans la pratique de leur art,” in French; and in 1718, reprinted it in Flemish. It was regarded as a valuable work, and was republished after his death, in France, Italy, and Germany. Palfin also translated the treatise of Anthony Petit on “Diseases of the Eyes,” into Flemish, adding several other tracts on the same subject.

, an Italian poet, who flourished in the sixteenth century, was born at Stellada, in Ferrara, upon the bank of the Po. We are told by some, that his true name was Pietro Angelo Manzolli, of which “Marcello Palingenio” is the anaigram . He is chiefly known by his “Zodiacus Vitae,” a poem in twelve books, dedicated to Hercules II. of Este, duke of Ferrara. Some say he was physician to that prince, but this will admit of a doubt; at least it is certain he was not so when he wrote the dedication to his “Zodiac.” This poem, on which he had employed several years, brought him into trouble, as it contained many sarcastic attacks on monks and church-abuses and his name therefore appears in the “Index librorum prohibitorum,” as a Lutheran heretic of the Brst class, and as an impious author. It is thought, he carries too far the objections of libertines and scoffers at religion; otherwise his work is interspersed with judicious maxims, and some have considered it as a truly philosophical satire against immorality and prejudice. In the close of the dedication, he declares himself a good catholic, so far as to submit all his opinions to the censure of the church; and this declaration might perhaps have secured him against the inquisition, had the affair related only to some particular tenet; but it could not acquit him of that impiety, which Palingenius was, not without reason, suspected to teach. In his third book, for instance, he inculcates the doctrine of Epicurus without the least reserve. He published this book in 1536, and again at Basil, in1537 ; and seems not to have lived long after that date. Gyraldus, who wrote about 1543, relates, that, after his burial, his body was ordered to be dug up, in order to be burnt; which execution was prevented by the duchess of Ferrara, who, it is thought, had received him at her court among the Lutherans.

, an ingenious artist, was born at Agen in France, about 1524. He was brought up as a common labourer, and was also employed in surveying. Though destitute of education, he was a very accurate observer of nature; and in the course of his surveys, he conceived the notion that France had been formerly covered by the sea, and propagated his opinion at Paris, against a host of opponents, with the greatest boldness. It was considered as a species of heresy. For several years after, he employed himself in trying different experiments, in order to discover the method of painting in enamel. But some person presenting him with a beautiful cup of that kind of stone-ware called by the French faience, because it was first manufactured in a city of Italy called Faenza, the sight of this cup inflamed him with an insurmountable desire to discover the method of applying enamel to stoneware. At this time he was ignorant of even the first rudiments of the art of pottery, nor was there any person within, his reach from whom he could procure information. His experiments were, therefore, unsuccessful, and he wasted his whole fortune, and even injured his health, without gaining his object. Still he gave it up only for a time, and when a few years of industry and frugality had put it in his power, he returned to his project with more ardour than ever. The same fatigues, the same sacrifices, the same expences Were incurred a second time, but the result was different. He discovered, one after another, the whole series of operations, and ascertained the method of applying enamel to stone-ware, and of making earthenware superior to the best of the Italian manufacture. He was now treated with respect, and considered as a man of genius. The court of France took him under its protection, and enabled him to establish a manufactory, where the manufacture of the species of stone-ware which he had invented was brought to a state of perfection. The only improvement which was made upon it afterwards in France, was the application of different colours upon the enamel, and imitating the paintings which had been executed long before on porcelain vessels. This improvement scarcely dates farther back than thirty or forty years. It was first put in practice by Joseph Hanon, a native of Strasbourg, and was suggested by a German, who sold to Hanon the method of composing the colours applied upon the porcelain of Saxony. These vessels were soon after superseded by the Queen’s ware of the celebrated Wedgewood, which both in cheapness, beauty, and elegance of form, far surpassed any thing of the kind that had appeared in Europe.

After Palissy had thus succeeded in his favourite object, he pursued the science of chemistry, and applied his knowledge to the improvement of agriculture. He was the first person who formed a collection of natural history at Paris, upon which he gave lectures at the rate of half a crown each person, a large sum for that period, but he entered into an obligation to return the money fourfold, provided it were found that he taught any thing that proved false. In 1563 he printed at Rochelle “Recepte veritable par laquelle tous les hommes de la France pourront apprendre a augmenter leur tresors,” &c. which, after his death, was reprinted under the title of “Moyen de devenir riche,” in 2 vols. 8vo. In 1580 he published “Discours admirable de la Nature des Eaux, et Fontaines, de Metaux, des Sols, des Saline, des Pierres, des Terres,” &c. This work was exceedingly valuable in the then existing state of knowledge, and in it he first taught the true theory of springs, and asserted that fossil-shells were real sea- shells deposited by the waters of the ocean. He also pointed out the use of marie and of lime in agriculture.

Palissy is supposed to have died about 1590: he was of the protestant religion, and was sometimes threatened on that account. His reply to Henry the Hid. deserves to be commemorated. “If,” says the king, “you do not change your religion, I shall be compelled to give you up to the power of your enemies.” “Sire,” said Palissy, “you have often said that you pitied me, but I must now pity you, for your expression of ‘I shall be compelled;’ give me leave to tell your majesty, that it is not in your power to compel a potter to bend his knee before the images which he fabricates.” His memory is still respected in France, and a complete edition of his works, with a life, was published at Paris in 1777, by Faujas de St. Fond, 4to.

, known also by the name of James de Teramo, from the city where he was born in 1349, chose the ecclesiastical profession, was successively archbishop of Tarento, Florence, and Spoletto, had the administration of the duchy for pope Alexander V. and John XXIII. and was sent as legate into Poland in 1417, where he died the same year. He wrote some forgotten works enumerated by Marchand, but is most known by his religious romance, entitled “J. de Teramo compendium perbreve, consolatio Peccatorum nuncupatum, et apud nonnullos Belial vocitatum; id est, Processus Luciferi contra Jesum,” Ausb. 1472, fol. but it seems doubtful whether the first edition is not in German, and published without a date. Mr. Dibdin has amply described both in the “Bibliotheca Spenceriana,” and Marchand has discussed the history of the work at great length. It was reprinted several times since in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and in a collection entitled “Processus juris joco-serii,” Hanovise, 1611, 8vo, which contains likewise “the Process of Sataii against the Virgin,” by Barthole, and “Les Arrets d'Amour.” Peter Farget, an Augustine, has translated “Belial’s trial” into French, Lyons, 1485, 4to, printed often since, in the same form. It has also been published under the name of James d'Ancharano; and has in one form or other been translated into most of the European languages.

, a celebrated Italian architect, was born in 1518 at Vicenza in Lombardy. As soon as he had learned the principles of art from Trissino, the celebrated poet, who was his townsman, he went to Rome, and applying himself with great diligence to study the ancient monuments, he entered into the spirit of their architects, and formed his taste upon them. On his return he was employed to construct various edifices, and obtained great reputation throughout Italy, which abounds in monuments of his skill, particularly the palace Foscari, at Venice, and the Olympic theatre at Vicenza, where he died in 1580. He excelled likewise in the theory of his art, as appears by his publications, which are still in the highest reputation. His first was his treatise on architecture, “I quattro libri dell' Architettura,” Venice, 1570. This has been often reprinted, and our country has the merit of a very splendid edition, published at London in 1715, in English, Italian, and French, 2 or 3 vols. fol. This edition, published by Leoni, is enriched with the most valuable of the notes which Inigo Jones wrote on his copy of the original, now in the library of Worcester college, Oxford. A French edition of the London one was published by Nic. du Bois, at the Hague in 1726, 2 vols. fol.; and in 1740, one much enlarged in Italian and French, at Venice, 5 vols. fol. This has been more recently followed by Scamozzi’s fine edition in Italian and French, printed at Vicenza, 1776—83, 4 vols. fol. In 1730, our countryman, lord Burlington, printed an elegant work, entitled “Fabriche antiche designate da Andrea Palladio, e date in luce da Riccardo Conte de Burlington,” fol. This collection of Palladio' s designs is very scarce, as the noble editor printed only a limited number of copies for his friends. Palladio also composed a small work, entitled “Le Antichita di Roma,” not printed till after his death. He illustrated Caesar’s “Commentaries,” by annexing to Badelli’s translation of that work, a preface on the military system of the Romans, with copper-plates, designed, for the most part, by his two sons, Leonida and Orazio, who both died soon after. Palladio was modest in regard to his own merit, but he was the friend to all men of talents; his memory is highly honoured by the votaries of the fine arts; and the simplicity and purity of his taste have given, him the appellation of the Raphael of architects.

, bishop of Helenopolis in Bithynia, and afterwards of Aspona, was by nation a Galatian, and born about the year 368 at Cappadocia. He became an anchoret in the mountain of Nebria in the year 388, and was made a bishop in the year 401. This prelate was a steady friend to St. John Chrysostom, whom he never forsook during the time of his persecution, nor even in his exile. He went to Rome, some time after the death of that saint; and at the request of Lausus, governor of Cappadocia, composed the history of the Anchorets, or Hermits, and entitled it “Lausiaca,” after the name of that lord, to whom he dedicated it in the year 420, when it was written; being then in the 20th year of his episcopacy, and 53d of his age. Palladius was accused of being an Origenist, because he does not speak very favourably of St. Jerome, and was intimately connected with Ruffinus; but perhaps no good proof can be drawn thence of his Origenism. He had been the disciple of Evagrias of Pontus, and was even suspected to adhere to the sentiments of Pelagius. He died in the fifth century, but what year is not known. His “History” was published in Greek by Meursius, at Amsterdam, in 1619, and in Latin in the “Bibliotheca Patrum” but he seems not to have been the writer of the “Life of St. John Chrysostom, in Greek and Latin, by M. Bigot,” printed in 1680.

, a celebrated naturalist, the son of Simon Pallas, professor of surgery at Berlin, was born in that city, Sept. 22, 1741, and educated at first under private tutors, who spoke with astonishment of the progress he made. So early as the fifteenth year of his age, he entered upon a course of lectures on medicine and the branches connected with it; and two years afterwards was enabled to read a course of public lectures on anatomy. Yet while thus occupied in his professional labours, he found leisure to prosecute the study of insects, and other classes of zoology, for which he seems to have very early conceived a predilection, and in which he particularly excelled. In the autumn of 1758 he went to the university of Halle, and in 1759 to Gottingen; and during his residence at the latter, among other ingenious researches, his attention was drawn to the worms which breed in the intestines. This produced a treatise entitled “De infestis viventibus intra viventia,” in which he has with singular accuracy described those worms which are found in the human body.

In July 1760 he went to Leyden, and studied under Albinus, Gaubius, and Muschenbroeck; and in December touk his doctor’s degree, on which occasion his inaugural dissertation had for its subject his dissertation on worms, with new experiments. During his stay at Leyden, natural history became his predominant passion. He employed all the time he could steal from his professional studies in visiting the public and private cabinets of natural history, with which Leyden abounded, and was particularly charmed with the collection of Gronovius, which he repeatedly examined. Having visited the principal cities of Holland, her arrived at London, in July 1761. The principal intention of his journey to England was to improve his knowledge in medicine and surgery, and to inspect the hospitals. He was now, however, so much absorbed in his passion for natural history, that he neglected every other pursuit, and gave himself totally up to this favourite branch of science. At this juncture, his zeal was so ardent, that after having passed the day in curiously examining the various collections in natural history, and perusing the principal books he could procure on that subject, he would frequently employ the greater part of the night, and occasionally even whole nights together, whenever he met with new publications that either awakened his curiosity or interested his researches. With a view of extending his information in this department, he took several journeys to the sea-coasts, and particularly in Sussex.

Previously to his commencing practice, his father sent him to Hanover for the purpose of procuring the post of surgeon in the allied army; but as, upon his arrival in that city, in the month of July, peace was on the point of being concluded, he returned to Berlin, where he passed a year, chiefly in preparing materials for a “Fauna Insectorum Marchica,” or a description of the insects in the march of Brandenburg. Having at length prevailed upon his father to let him settle in Holland, he took up his residence at the Hague, and his reputation as a man of science was, by this time, so well established, that he was, the same year, elected fellow of the Royal Society of London; and in the following year member of the Academic des Curieux de la Nature; to both of which societies he had previously sent very interesting and ingenious papers.

The intimacy he now contracted with the most celebrated naturalists in Holland, and particularly with those of the Hague, who had just begun to form a literary society the free access which he had to the museum of the prince of Orange, and other curious cabinets; the systematic catalogues of those collections that he drew up, and several of which he gave to the public; contributed to advance his knowledge of the productions of nature in the various parts of the globe, and enabled him to collect such materials as gave birth to those accurate compositions on zoology, which have deservedly distinguished him as the first zoologist of Europe. One of his earliest works in this branch of science, which rendered him eminently conspicuous, was his “Elenchus- Zoophytorum.” In a dedication prefixed to his “Miscellanea Zoologica,” published in the same year, the author lays before the prince of Orange a plan for a voyage to the Cape of Good Hope, and to the other Dutch settlements in the East Indies, and which, impelled by his wonted ardour for scientific knowledge, he offered to undertake and superintend. This project was strongly recommended by Gaubius, and approved by the prince; but was prevented from being carried into execution by the author’s father; who not only refused his consent to his taking such a distant expedition, but even recalled him to Berlin: in obedience to his father’s wishes, but with great reluctance, he quitted Holland in November 1766.

On his return to Berlin (continues Mr. Coxe, from whose ingenious travels these particulars are extracted), his only consolation in being separated from his friends in Holland, and in having lost so many opportunities of improving himself in natural history, consisted in putting into order the numerous materials he had collected, and the observations he was incessantly making, and in giving them to the public. He had, however, scarcely begun to publish his­“Spicilegia Zoologica,” before he was invited by the empress Catharine II. to accept of the professorship of natural history in the Imperial Academy of Sciences at St. Petersburgh. Although in this instance his father and relations again refused their assent; yet the author’s ardent zeal for his favourite science, joined to an irresistible desire to visit regions so little explored, induced him, without a moment’s hesitation, to accede to the invitation, and to hasten his departure for a country where his curiosity was so likely to be amply gratified. He accordingly quitted Berlin in June 1767, and arrived at Petersburg on the 10th of August.

He made his appearance among the Russians at a critical period. The empress had already ordered the Academy of Sciences to send astronomers into various parts of the Russian empire, to observe the transit of Venus over the sun’s disk in 1769. Being just returned from a voyage down the Volga, and from visiting the interior provinces of European Russia, she had perceived the deficiencies of the topographical and geographical accounts, and anticipated the advantage of deputing learned and skilful men to visit the distant provinces of her extensive dominions. For this purpose Catharine had directed the academy to send, in company with the astronomers, the most able naturalists and philosophers. Pallas instantly offered to accompany this expedition; and was as eagerly accepted. He was immediately charged with drawing out general instructions for the naturalists, and was gratified with the choice of his associates. To him was submitted, at his own request, the conduct of the expedition to the east of the Volga, and towards the extreme parts of Siberia; and he was the most calculated for that expedition, as the elder Gmelin, who had been his precursor in those regions, had almost entirely neglected the zoology of those remote districts. Pallas employed the winter previous to his departure in forming a systematic catalogue of the animals in the cabinet of the Academy of Sciences; in putting into order the celebrated collection of professor Breyn of Dantzic, lately purchased by prince Orlof; in preparing for the press six numbers of his “Spicilegia Zoologica,” which were printed during his absence, under the direction of Dr. Martin; and in forming the necessary arrangements and notices for his intended expedition.

At length, in June 1768, he quitted Petersburg, in company with Messrs. Falk, Lepekin, and Guldenstadt, as his associates; passed through Moscow, Vlodimir, Kasimof, Murom, Arsamas, to Casan; and having examined great part of that province, wintered at Simbirsk. From thence he departed, in March of the following year; and penetrated through Samara and Orenburg, as far as Gurief, a small Russian fortress, situated at the mouth of the river Yaik or Ural. There he examined the confines of Kalmuc Tartary, and the neighbouring shores of the Caspian, and returning through the province of Orenburg, passed the second winter at Ufa. After several expeditions in the adjacent parts of that province, he left Ufa on the I 6th of May 1770; prosecuted his route through the Uralian mountains to Catharinenburgh; visited the mines of that district; proceeded to Tcheliabinsk, a small fortress in the government of Orenburg; and in December made an excursion as far as Tobolsk. The next year he was employed in traversing the Altai mountains, and in tracing the course of the Irtish up to Omsk and Koly van; where having inspected the celebrated silver mines, he made for Tomsk, and finished that year’s expedition at Krasnoyarsk, a town upon the Yenisei. In that place, situated only in 56 north latitude, the cold was so intense, that the learned professor was witness to the natural freezing of quicksilver; which curious phenomenon he has minutely described. From Krasnoyarsk he issued on the 7th of March, 177-2; and proceeded by Irkutsk, and across the lake Baikal, to Udinsk, Selenginsk, and Kiakta, where the trade between Russia and China is principally carried on. Having penetrated into that part of Dauria which is situated in the south-easternmost part of Siberia, he journeyed between the rivers Ingoda and Argoon, at no great distance from the Amoor; thence tracing the lines which separate the Kussian empire from the Mongui hordes dependent upon China, he returned to Selenginsk, and again wintered at Krasnoyarsk. In the summer of 1773 he visited Tara, Y r aitsk, and Astracan, and concluded his route for that year at Tzaritzin, a town upon the Volga; from whence he continued his journey in the ensuing spring; and arrived at Petersburg on the 30th of July, 1774, after an absence of six years.

The account of this extensive and interesting tour was published by Dr. Pallas in five volumes, 4to, which greatly extended his fame, and established his character. The author, in this valuable work, has entered into a geographical and topographical description of the provinces, towns, and villages, which he visited in his tour, accompanied with an accurate detail of their antiquities, history, productions, and commerce. He has discriminated many of the tribes who wander over the various districts, and near the confines of Siberia; and specified with peculiar precision their customs, manners, and languages; he has also rendered his travels invaluable to the naturalist, by the many important discoveries in the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms, with which he has enriched the science of natural history.

Two years afterwards, in 1776, the professor published his collections relative to the political, physical, and civil history of the Mongul tribes; in which he throws new light on the annals of a people, whose ancestors conquered Russia, China, Persia, and Hindoostan, and, at more than one period, established perhaps a larger empire than ever was possessed by any single nation. Mr. Pallas here proves unquestionably that the Mongul tribes are a distinct race from the Tartars; that they differ from them in their features, language, and government; and resemble them in nothing except in a similar propensity to a roving life. He intended a second volume, describing their religious establishment, consisting in the worship of the Dalai Lama. It is the religion of Thibet and of the Mandshur sovereigns who now sit upon the throne of China. “A work,” as Mr. Tooke, in his Russia Illustrata, Introd. p. cxi. justly observes, " that will enrich the stock of human knowledge with discoveries, the greatest part entirely new, and which no person but Mr. Pallas is able to communicate. 1 * Whether, however, this second volume ever made its appearance, we have our doubts.

In the same year in which Dr. Pallas printed his “Elenchus Zoophytorum,” he also published a treatise under the title of “Miscellanea Zoologica quibus novae imprimis atque obscurae animalium species describuntur, et observationibus iconibusque illustrantur.” This work is in a great measure incorporated into a subsequent publication made the next year on his return to Berlin, entitled “Spicilegia Zoologica,” and was continued in numbers, or fasciculi, till 1780. The works of count Buffon, the illustrious French zoologist, amply attest the labours of Pallas; and our countryman Mr. Pennant makes frequent acknowledgments of his obligations to the same source, particularly for his history of quadrupeds and arctic zoology. In June 1777, the learned professor read before the academy of Petersburgh, in a meeting at which the king of Sweden was present, a dissertation on the formation of mountains, and the changes which this globe has undergone, more particularly as it appears in the Russian empire. This treatise appeared so curious to Mr. Tooke, who was also, as a member of the academy, present at that sitting, that he has given 3 translation of it in his “Russia Illustrata.” In 1778 the doctor published “Novae species quadrupedum e Gliriumordine,” describing numbers of the rat genus and their anatomy. In 1781 he brought out “Enumeratio plantarum quae in horto Procopii & Demidof Moscua vigent,” or catalogue of the plants in M Demidofs gardens at Moscow. His newnorthern collections on various subjects in geography, natural history, and agriculture, came forth the same year; to which were afterwards added two more volumes. In 1782 he put forth two fasciculi or numbers of “Icones insectarum prsesertim Russiae Siberieeque peculiarium.” In 1784 he published the first number of his “Flora Russica;” a splendid work, executed at the empress Catharine’s expence. About this period her majesty conceived the idea of collecting from all quarters of the globe a universal vocabulary, the superintendance whereof she committed to our author, which necessarily for a time retarded his zoological researches. Exclusive of these separate publications, he printed in the acts of the imperial academy of sciences, various zoological and botanical dissertations.

Not long after this he was distinguished by a peculiar mark of imperial favour, in being appointed member of the board of mines, with an additional salary of 200l. per annum, and honoured with the order of St. Vlodimir. The empress also purchased his ample collection of natural history, in a manner highly flattering to the author, and honourable to herself. She riot only gave hi.n five thousand rubles more than he had valued it at, but informed him that it should remain in his possession during his life. In 1784 the care of putting in order and publishing the papers of Gmelin and proft ssor Gultenstaedt, was consigned to Dr. Pallas, which he executed with great diligence and accuracy; but, for some reason, the first volume only of Gultenstaedt’s remains has appeared. In 1794, Dr. Palias travelled to the Crimea, and on his return published his “Physical and Topographical picture of Tauri;!a.” On his’ return, finding his health, by long and incessant labours, upon the decline, so as to render it necessary for him to remove to a warm climate, he pitched upon Taurida, and his munificent patroness, the empress, granted him an estate in that province, and gave him a present of 10,000 rubles towards his establishment. Here in 1800 he was visited by Dr. Clarke, who in his late travels, has given some interesting particulars of his interviews with him. It does not appear that Dr. Pallas was judicious in selecting this place as one in which health could be promoted, nor was he in other respects without disappointments which embittered his declining days. He survived Dr. Clarke’s departure, however, upwards of ten years, when determining once more to see his brother and his native city, he took a journey to Berlin, where he died Sept. 8, 1811, in the 71st year of his age. The collection of dried plants, made by Pallas for his own use, was purchased of him by Mr. Cripps, the companion of Dr. Clarke, and now forms a part of the valuable museum of A. B. Lambert, esq.

, one of the wits of Italy, the son of Jerome Pallavicino, was born at Placentia about 1615, or from that to 1620. Less from inclination, than from some family reasons, he entered the congregation of the regular canons of Latran, and took the habit, with the name of Mark Anthony, in their house at Milan. After commencing his studies here with much success, he went to Padua for further proficiency. He then settled at Venice, where he was chosen a member of the academy of the Incogniti. Here he became captivated by a courtezan, whoso charms proved irresistible; and, in order to have the lull enjoyment of them without restraint, he obtained leave from his general to make the tour of France, but in fact continued privately at Venice, while he had the art to impose upon his friends, by sending them frequently, in letters, feigned accounts of his travels through France. He afterwards went to Germany, about 1639, with duke Amalfi in the character of his chaplain. During this residence in Germany, which lasted about sixteen months, he addicted himself to every species of debauchery; and having a turn for satire, employed his pen in repeated attacks on the court of Rome in general, and on the Barbarini family in particular. The chief vehicle of his satire was a publication called “The Courier robbed of his mail,” and this as well as his other works contained so many just censures of the abuses of the court of Rome, that he might have been ranked among those honourable men who had contributed to enlighten his countrymen, had he not been as remarkable for his indecencies, which were so gross that many of his works were obliged to be published under concealed names. His personal attacks on the pope, and the Barbarini family, naturally roused their indignation; and after much search for him, one Charles Morfu, a Frenchman of a vile character, engaged to ensnare him, and having insinuated himself into his friendship, at length exhorted him to go with him to France. He flattered him with the extraordinary encouragement which was given to men of letters by cardinal Richelieu; and, to deceive him the more, even produced feigned letters from the cardinal, inviting our author to France, and expressing a desire he had to establish in Paris an academy for the Italian tongue, under the direction of Pallavicino. Pallavicino, young, thoughtless, and desperate, and now fascinated by the prospect of gain, left Venice much against the advice of his friends, and went first to Bergamo, where he spent a few days with some of his relations, who entertained his betrayer. They then set out for Geneva, to the great satisfaction of our author, who proposed to get some of his works printed there, which he had not been able to do in Italy. But Morfu, instead of conducting him to Paris, took the road to Avignon; where, crossing the bridge of Soraces, in the county of Venaissin (in the pope’s territories), they were seized by officers on pretence of carrying contraband goods, and confined. Morfu was soon discharged, and liberally rewarded; but Pallavicini, being carried to Avignon, was thrown into prison; and, after being kept there for some months, was brought to trial, and was beheaded in 1643 or 1644. Those who are desirous of farther information respecting this young man’s unfortunate history, may be amply gratified in the prolix: articles drawn up by Bayle, and particularly Marclmnd. His works were first published collectively at Venice, in 1655, 4 vols. 12mo. This edition, according to Marchand, contains only such of his works as had been permitted to beprinted in his life-time. Those which had been prohibited were afterwards printed in 2 vols. 12 mo, at Villafranca, a fictitious name for Geneva, 1660. Among these is a piece called “II divortio Celeste,” which some deny to be his. It is a very coarse satire on the abuses of the Romish church, and was translated and published in English in 1679, under the title of “Ciirist divorced from the church of Rome because of their lewdness,” Lond. 8vo.

, an eminent cardinal, was the son of the marquis Alexander Pallavicini and Frances Sforza, and born at Rome in 1607. Although the eldest son of his family, yet he chose the ecclesiastical life, and was very early made a bishop by pope Urban VIII. to whom his conduct was so acceptable, that he was appointed one of those prelates who assist in the assemblies called congregations at Rome. He was also received into the famous academy of the Humoristi, among whom he often sat in quality of president. He was likewise governor of Jesi, and afterwards of Orvietto and Camerino, under the above pontiff. But all these honours and preferments were insufficient to divert him from a design he had for some time formed of renouncing the world, and entering into the society of the Jesuits, where he was admitted in 1638. As soon as he had completed his noviciate he taught philosophy, and then theology. At length Innocent X. nominated him to examine into divers matters relating to the pontificate; and Alexander VII. created him a cardinal in 1657. This pope was an old friend of Pallavicino, who had been serviceable to him when he came to Rome with the name of Fabio Chigi. Pallavicino had even contributed to advance his temporal fortune, and had received him into the academy of the Humoristi; in gratitude for which, Chigi addressed to him some verses, printed in his book entitled “Philomathi Museb juveniles.” When Pallavicino obtained a place in the sacred college, he was also appointed at the same time examiner of the bishops; and he was afterwards a member of the congregation of the holy office, i. e. the inquisition, and of that of the council, &c. His promotion to the cardinalate wrought no change in his manner of life, which was devoted to study or to the duties of his office. He died in 1667, in his sixtieth year.

He composed a “History of the Council of Trent,” in opposition to that by father Paul. The history is well written, and contains many facts given with impartiality, but the general design is a laboured defence of the proceedings of that council. It was originally published in Italian, 1656, 2 vols. fol.; but the Latin edition by Giattino, in 3 vols. 4to, is preferred. He was the author of various other works that are now in little estimation, except perhaps his “Letters,” which contain some particulars of literary history and criticism, and some critical treatises.

, was of the same family with the preceding cardinal, and merits a brief notice here, as being in some degree connected with our history, although the figure he makes in it has not been thought the most reputable. The family of Pallavicino, or, as sometimes spelt, Palavicini, is one of the most noble and ancient in Italy, and its branches have extended to Rome, Genoa, and Lombardy. Many of them appear to have attained the highest ranks in church, state, and commerce. Sir Horatio, the subject of this article, belonged to the Genoese branch, and was born in that city, but leaving Italy, went to reside in the Low Countries, whence, after marrying two wives, one a person of low birth, whom he did not acknowledge, and the other a lady of distinction, he came over to England, with a recommendation to queen Mary, probably from a relation, one Rango Pallavicino, who belonged to Edward Vlth’s household. Mary, who had then restored the Roman catholic religion, appointed Horatio collector of the papal taxes to be gathered in this kingdom; but at her death, having a large sum of money in his hands, he abjured the religion of Rome, and thought it no harm to keep the money. This transaction, however, does not appear to have much injured his character, or perhaps time had effaced the remembrance of it, for in 1586 queen Elizabeth gave him a. patent of denization, and in the following year honoured him with knighthood. He appears to have been a man of courage, and warmly espoused the interests of the nation at a most critical period. In 1588 he fitted out and commanded a ship against the Spanish armada, and must have rendered himself conspicuous on that occasion, as his portrait is given in the tapestry in the House of Lords, among the patriots and skilful commanders who assisted in defeating that memorable attack on the liberty of England. The queen also employed him in negociations with the German princes, and in raising loans, by which he very opportunely assisted her, and improved his own fortune. He died immensely rich, July 6, 1600, and was buried in the church of Baberham, in Cambridgeshire, near which, at Little Shelford, he had built a seat, in the Italian style, with piazzas. He had likewise two considerable manors in Essex, and provbably. landed property in other counties. His widow, about a year after his death, married sir Oliver Cromwell, K. B. and his only daughter, Baptina, was married to Henry Cromwell, esq. son to this sir Oliver, who was uncle to the usurper. He left three sons, but the family is now unknown in England.

, historiographer, printer, and bookseller to the king, and genealogist of the duchy of Burgundy, was born at Paris, March 19, 1608. In his youth he showed a taste for genealogy, and heraldic studies, in which he appears to have been instructed and encouraged by his relation, Louvain Gelliot, who published a work on armorial bearings. In his twenty -fifth year he settled at Dijon, where he married Vivanda Spirinx, the daughter of a printer and bookseller, with whom he entered into business. At his leisure hours, however, he still continued his heraldic researches, and laboured with so much perseverance in this study as to produce the following works: 1. “Le parlement de Bourgogne, avec les armoiries,” &c. 1660, fol. 2. “Genealogie des comtes d'Amanze,” fol. 3. “La vraie et parfaite science des Armoiries de Gelliot, avec de plus de 6000 ecussons,” 1660, fol. 4. “Histoire genealogique de comtes de Chamilli.” 5. " Extraits de la hambre des comptes de Bourgogne, fol. He left also thirteen volumes of ms collections respecting the families of Burgundy. It is an additional and remarkable proof of his industry and ingenuity, that he engraved the whole of the plates in these volumes with his own hand. His history of the parliament of Burgundy was continued by Petitot, and published in 1733. Palliot died at Dijon in 1698, at the age of eighty-nine.

, an eminent artist, born at Serinalto, in the territory of Bergamo, about the middle of the sixteenth century, was a disciple of Titian. He emulated his master’s manner, but, according to Fuseli, was more anxious to attain the colour and breadth of Giorgioni. This appears chiefly in his “St. Barbara.” His colouring had extraordinary strength and brightness, and his pictures are wrought to great perfection, yet with freedom, and without the appearance of labour. Vasari describes, with great fervour, a composition of the elder Palma, at Venice, representing the ship in whicii the body of St. Mark was brought from Alexandria to Venice. “In that grand design,” he says, “the vessel was struggling against the fury or an impetuous tempest, and is expressed with the utmost judgment; the distress of the mariners, the violent bursting of the waves against the sides of the ship, the horrid gloom, only enlivened with flashes of lightning, and every part of the scene filled with images of terror, are so strong, so lively, and naturally represented, that it seems impossible for the power of colour or pencil to rise to a higher pitch of truth and perfection; and that performance very deservedly gained him the highest applause.” Notwithstanding this deserved praise, his pictures in general are not correct in design, and his latter works did not maintain his early reputation. He died, according to Vasari, at the age of forty-eight, but in what year is not absolutely known, although some fix it in 1588.

, the Young, so called in contradistinction of the preceding Jacob, his great-uncle,^ may be considered as the last master of the good, and the first of the bad period of art at Venice. Born in 1544, he left the scanty rudiments of his father Antonio, a weak painter, to study the works of Titian, and particularly those of Tintoretto, whose spirit and slender disengaged forms were congenial to his own taste. At the age of fifteen he was taken under the protection of the duke of Urbino, carried to that capital, and for eight years maintained at Rome, where, by copying the antique, Michael Angelo, Raphael, and more than all, Polidoro, he acquired ideas of correctness, style, and effect: these he endeavoured to embody in the first works which he produced after his return to Venice, and there are who have discovered in them an union of the best maxims of the Roman and Venetian schools: they are all executed with a certain facility which is the great talent of this master, but a talent as dangerous in painting as in poetry. He was not, however, successful in his endeavours to procure adequate employment: the posts of honour and emolument were occupied by Tintoretto and Paul Veronese, and he owed his consideration as the third in rank to the patronage of Vittoria, a fashionable architect, sculptor, and at that time supreme umpire of commissions: he, piqued at the slights of Paul and Robusti, took it into his head to favour Palma, to assist him with his advice, and to establish his name. Bernini is said to have done the same at Rome, in favour of Pietro da Cortona and others, against Sacchi, to the destruction of the art; and, adds Mr. Fuseli, as men and passions resemble each other in all ages, the same will probably be related of some fashionable architect of our times. Palma, overwhelmed by commissions, soon relaxed frdnl his womed diligence; and his carelessness increased when, at the death of his former competitors, and of Leonardo Corona, his new rival, he found himself alone and in possession of the field. His pictures, as Cesare d'Arpino told him, were seldom more than sketches; sometimes, indeed, when time and price were left to his own discretion, in which he did not abound, he produced some work worthy of his former fame; such as the altar-piece at S. Cosmo and Datniano; the celebrated Naval Battle of Francesco Bembo in the public palace; the S. Apolloniaat Cremona; St. Ubaldo and the Nunziata at Pesaro; the Finding of the Cross at Urbino: works partly unknown to Ridolfi, but of rich composition, full of beauties, variety, and expression. His tints fresh, sweet, and transparent, less gay than those of Paul, but livelier than those of Tintoretto, though slightly laid on, still preserve their bloom. In vivacity of expression he is not much inferior to either of those masters; and his Plague of the Serpents at St. Bartolomeo may vie for features, gestures, and hues of horror, with the same subject by Tintoretto in the school of St. Rocco: but none of his pictures are without some commendable part; and it surprises that a man, from whom the depravation of style may be dated in Venice, as from Vasari at Florence, and Zuccari at Rome, should still preserve so many charms of nature and art to attract the eye and interest the heart. He died in 1628, in the eighty-fourth year of his age.

, a learned and pious divine, was the second son of sir Thomas Palmer, knt. of Wingham, in Kent, where he was born in 1601. He was educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge, but was afterwards chosen fellow of Queen’s. In 1626 archbishop Abbot licensed him to preach a lecture at St. Alphage’s church in Canterbury, every Sunday afternoon; but three years after, he was silenced, on a charge of nonconformity, for a time, but was again restored, the accusation being found trifling. Although a puritan, his character appeared so amiable that bishop Laud presented him in 1632 with the vicarage of Ashwell, in Hertfordshire, and when the unfortunate prelate was brought to his tri,.l, he cited this as an instance of his impartiality. At Ashwell Mr. Palmer became no less popular than he had been at Canterbury. In the same year he was chosen one of the preachers to the university of Cambridge, and afterwards one of the clerks in convocation. In 1643, when the depression of the hierarchy had made great progress, he was chosen one of the assembly of divines, in which he was distinguished for his moderation, and his aversion to the civil war. He preached also at various places in London until the following year, when the earl of Manchester appointed him master of Queen’s college, Cambridge. He preached several times before the parliament, and appears to have entered into their views in most respects, although his sermons were generally of the practical kind. He did not live, however, to see the issue of their proceedings, as he died in 1647, aged fortysix. Granger gives him the character of a man of uncommon learning, generosity, and politeness, and adds, that he spoke the French language with as much facility as his own. Clark enters more fully into his character as a divine. His works are not numerous. Some of his parliamentary sermons are in print, and he had a considerable share in the “Sabbatum Redivivum,” with Cawdry; but his principal work, entitled “Memorials of Godliness,” acquired great popularity. The thirteenth edition was printed in 1708, 12mo.

, a dissenting writer of the last century, was born in Southwark, where his father was an undertaker, and of the Calvinistic persuasion. Under whom he received his classical education is not known. In 1746 he began to attend lectures, for academical learning, under the rev. Dr. David Jennings, in Wellclose square, London. Soon after, leaving the academy, about 1752, he was, on the rev. James Read’s being incapacitated by growing disorders, chosen as assistant to officiate at the dissenting meeting in New Broad-street, in conjunction with Dr. Allen; and on the removal of the latter to Worcester, Mr. Palmer was ordained sole pastor of this congregation in 1759. He continued in this connection till 1780, when the society, greatly reduced in its numbers, was dissolved. For a great part of this time he filled the post of librarian, at Dr. Williams’s library, in Red- Cross-street. After the dissolution of his congregation he wholly left off preaching, and retired to Islington, where he lived privately till his death, on June 26, 1790, in the sixty-first year of his age. He married a lady of considerable property, and during the latter years of his life kept up but little connection with the dissenters. He was a man of considerable talents, and accounted a very sensible and rational preacher. His pulpit compositions were drawn up with much perspicuity, and delivered with propriety. He allowed himself great latitude in his religious sentiments, and was a determined enemy to any religious test whatever. Tests, indeed, must have been obnoxious to one who passed through all the accustomed deviations from Calvinism, in which he had been educated, to Socinianism.

, an Italian chronicler, was born in 1405, at Florence; and after being educated under the best masters, arrived at high political rank in the republic, was frequently employed on embassies, and was promoted to the great dignity of gonfalonier. He died in 1475. He compiled a general “Chronicle” from the creation to his own time; of which a part only has been published, including the events from the year 447 to 1449. The first edition was published, at the end of Eusebius’ Chronicle, without date or place, but, as supposed, at Milan iti 1475, 4to. It was reprinted at Venice in 1483, 4to. It was continued to the year 1482, by Matthias Palmieri, who, although almost of the same names, was neither his relation nor countryman. This Matthias was a native of Pisa, was apostolical secretary, and accounted a very able Greek and Latin scholar. He died in his sixtieth year, in 1483.

Besides his “Chronicle,” Matthew, or Matteo, Palmieri wrote in Latin the life of Nicolas Acciajuoli, grandseneschal of the kingdom of Naples, which is printed in the thirteenth volume of Muratori’s “Script. Rer. Ital.;” a work on the taking of Pisa by the Florentines, “De captivitate Pisarum,” printed in Muratori’s nineteenth volume, and, in Italian, “Libro della vita civile,” written in the form of dialogues, and printed at Florence in 1529, 8vo. It was translated into French by Claude des Hosiers, Paris, 1557, 5vo. Palmieri was also a poet. He composed in the terza rima, in imitation of Dante, a philosophical, or rather a theological, poem, which had great celebrity in his day: its title was “Citta di Vita,” and was divided into three books, and an hundred chapters. But having advanced, among other singular opinions, that human souls were formerly those angels who remained neuter during the rebellion in heaven against their Creator, and were sent to the world below as a punishment, the Inquisition, after his death, ordered his poem to be burnt, although it had never been published, but read in manuscript. Some assert, that he was burnt along with his poem but Apostolo Zeno has proved that he died peaceably in 1475, and was honoured with a public funeral, by order of the state of Florence, that Rinuccini pronounced his funeral oration, and that, during the ceremony, his poem was laid on his breast, as his highest honour.

, a Spanish painter and writer on the art, was born at Bujalance, and studied at Cordova in grammar, philosophy, theology, and jurisprudence. The elements of art he acquired of Don Juan de Valdes Leal; and to acquaint himself with tht? style of different schools, went, in company of Don Juan de Alfaro, in 1678, to Madrid. Here the friendship of Carrenno procuring him the commission of painting the gallery del Cierzo, he pleased the king and the minister, and in 1688 he was made painter to the king. He was now overwhelmed with commissions, for many of which, notwithstanding the most surprising activity, he could furnish only the designs; their ultimate finish was left to the hand of his pupil Dionysius Vidal hut whatever was designed and terminated by himself, in fresco or in oil, possesses invention, design, and colour, in the essential; and what taste and science could add, in the ornamental parts. His style was certainly more adapted to the demands of the epoch in which he lived, than to those of the preceding one, and probably would not have obtained from Murillo the praises lavished on it by Luca Giordano; but of the machinists, who surrounded him, he was, perhaps, the least debauched by manner.

, a polite scholar, who flourished in the reigns of Henry VII. and VIII. was a native of London, and educated there in grammar. He afterwards studied logic and philosophy at Cambridge, at which university he resided till he had attained the degree of bachelor of arts; after which he went to Paris, where he spent several years in the study of philosophical and other learning, took the degree of master of arts, and acquired such excellence in the French tongue, that, in 1514, when a treaty of marriage was negotiated between Louis XII. kinpr of France, and the princess Mary, sister of king Henry VIII. of England, Mr. Palsgrave was chosen to be her tutor in that language. But Louis XII. dying almost immediately after his marriage, Palsgrave attended his fair pupil back to England, where he taught the French language to many of the young nobility, and was appointed by the king one of his chaplains in ordinary. He is said also to have obtained some church preferments, but we know only of the prebend of Portpoole, in the church of St. Paul’s, which was bestowed upon him in April 1514, and the living of St. Dunstan’s in the East, given to him by archbishop Cranmer in 1553. In 1531, he settled at Oxford for some time, and the next year was incorporated master of arts in that university, as he had before been in that of Paris; and a few days after was admitted to the degree of bachelor of divinity. At this time he was highly esteemed for his learning; and was the first author who reduced the French tongue under grammatical rules, or that had attempted to fix it to any kind of standard. This he executed with great ingenuity and success, in a large work which he published in that language at London, entitled “L'Eclaircissement de la Language Fran9ois,” containing three books, in a thick folio, 1530, to which he has prefixed a large introduction in English. This work is now extremely scarce. In the dedication he says that he had written two books on the subject before; one dedicated to his pupil Mary, the other to Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk. He made a literal translation into English of a Latin comedy called “Acolastus,” written by Fullonius, and published it in 1540. He is said also to have written some “Epistles.”

When Mr. Palsgrave was born, or to what age he lived, are particulars which we have not been able to trace; yet his death probably happened before September 1554, as in that month Edmond Brygotte, S. T. P. was collated to the prebend of Portpoole “per mortem Joh. Pallgrave.”

, a learned Fleming, was the son of Adolphus, counsellor of state to the emperor Charles V. and born at Bruges in 1536. He was educated at Louvain and Paris, and became afterwards a learned divine and critic. Obtaining a canonry in the church of Bruges, he collected a library, and formed a design of giving good editions of the fathers; but the civil wars obliged him to retire to St. Omer’s, of which place the bishop made him archdeacon. Some time after, Philip II. king of Spain named him to the provostship of St. Saviour at Utrecht, and after that to the bishopric of St. Omer’s: but, as he went to Brussels to take possession of it, he died at Mons in Huinault, in 1587. He is chiefly known for his critical labours upon “Tertullian and Cyprian;” of both which writers he published editions, and prefixed lives. “The commentaries of this author upon Tertullian,” says Dupin, “are both learned and useful but he digresses too much from his subject, and brings in things of no use to the understanding of his author:” and he passes much the same judgment of his labours upon Cyprian. All the later editors, however, of these two fathers have spoken well of Pamelius, and have transcribed his best notes into their editions.

A new edition of Rabanus, which he was preparing at the time of his decease, has been since published at Cologn, and includes Commentaries by Pamelius on Judith, and St. Paul’s “Epistle to the Hebrews.” His other works are, “Catalogus Commentar. veterum selectorum in universa Biblia,” Antwerp, 1566, 8vo; “Conciliorum Paralipomena,” a discourse in Latin, addressed to the Flemish States; “De non admittendis una in Republica diversorum Religionum exercitiis,” 1589, 8vo; “Micrologus de Ecclesiasticis observationibus;” an edition of Cassiodorus “De Divinis nominibus” and two books of the “Liturgies of the Latins,” 1571, 2 vols. 4to.

, a French poet, was born at Couville near Chartres in 1691, where he remained a Jong time in obscurity, upon some small employment. At length, the comedian Le Grand, having seen some of his pieces, went to find him out, and encouraged him; and Marmontel called him the Fontaine of the place. Panard had many qualities of Fontaine; the same disinterestedness, probity, sweetness, and simplicity of manners. He knew, as well as any man, how to sharpen the point of an epigram; yet always levelled it at the vice, not the person. He had a philosophic temper, and lived contented with a little. He died at Paris June 13, 1764. His works, under the title of “Theatre & Oeuvres diverse*,” have been printed, 1763, in 4 vols. 12mo. They consist of comedies, comic operas, songs, and all the various kinds of smaller poetry.

, the son of Albert Pancirolus, a famous lawyer in his time, and descended from an illustrious family at Reggio, was born there April 17, 1523. He learned Latin and Greek under Sebastian Corrado and Bassiano Lando, and made so speedy a proficiency in them, that his father, thinking him fit for the study of the law at fourteen, taught him the first elements of that faculty himself; and Guy studied them incessantly under his father for three years, but without neglecting the belles lettres. He was afterwards sent into Italy, in order to complete his law-studies under the professors of that country. He went first to Ferrara; and, having there heard the lectures of Pasceto and Hyppolitus Riminaldi, passed thence to Pavia, where he had for his master the famous Alciat, and to Bologna and Padua, where he completed a course of seven years study, during which he had distinguished himself in public disputations on several occasions: and the fame of his abilities having drawn the attention of the republic of Venice, he was nominated by them in 1547, while only a student, second professor of the Institutes in the university of Padua. This nomination obliged him to take a doctor’s degree, which he received from the hands of Marcus Mantua. After he had filled this chair for seven years, he was advanced to the first of the Institutes in 1554; and two years after, on the retirement of Matthew Gribaldi, who was second professor of the Roman law, Pancirolus succeeded him, and held this post for fifteen years. At length, having some reason to be dissatisfied with his situation, he resigned it in 1571, when Emanuel Philibert duke of Savoy offered him the professorship of civil law, with a salary of a thousand pieces of gold. Here his patron the prince shewed him all imaginable respect, as did also his son Charles Emanuel, who augmented his appointments with a hundred pieces. The republic of Venice soon became sensible of the loss sustained by his departure, and were desirous of recalling him to a vacant professorship in 1580. This Pancirolus at first refused, and would indeed have been content to remain at Turin, but the air of the place proved so noxious to him, that he lost one eye almost entirely, and was in danger of losing the other; the dread of which induced him to hearken to proposals that were made afresh to him in 1582; and having a salary of a thousand ducats offered to him, with the chair he had so much wished for, he returned to Padua. The city of Turin, willing to give him some marks of their esteem, at his departure, presented him with his freedom, accompanied with some pieces of silver plate. He then remained at Padua, where his stipend was raised to the sum of twelve hundred ducats. Here he died in June 1599, and was interred in the church of St. Justin, after funeral service had been performed for him in the church of St. Anthony; where Francis Vidua of that university pronounced his funeral oration. He was author of a number of learned works, of which the principal are: 1. “Commentarii in Notitiam utriusque Imperii et de Magistratibus,” Venice, 1593, fol. often reprinted, and inserted in the Roman Antiquities of Gracvius; 2. “De Numismatibus antiquis;” 3. “De quatuordecim Regionibus Urbis Romae,” printed in the Leyden edition of the Notitia, 1608; 4. “Rerum Memorabiliuui jam olim deperditarum, et contra recens atque ingeniose inventarum,” 1599, 2 vols. 8vo, often reprinted and translated. He wrote also a valuable treatise, which was not published till 1637, entitled “De Claris Legum Interpretibus.”!

, a Christian philosopher, of the Stoic sect, flourished in the second century. Some say he was born in Sicily, others at Alexandria, of Sicilian parents. He is said to have taught the Stoic philosophy in the reign of Commodus, from A. D. 180, in the school of Alexandria; where from the time of St. Mark, founder of that church, there had always been some divine who explained the Holy Scriptures. The Ethiopians having requested Demetrius, bishop of Alexandria, to send a proper person to instruct them in the Christian religion, he sent Pantænus who gladly undertook the mission, and acquitted himself very worthily in it. It is said, that he found the Ethiopians already tinctured with the truth of Christian faith, which had been declared to them by St. Bartholomew; and that he saw the gospel of St. Matthew in Hebrew, which had been left there by that apostle. St. Jerome says, that Pantænus brought it away with him, and that it was still to be seen in his time in the Alexandrian library; but this story is not generally credited, since no good reason can be given, why St. Bartholomew should leave a Hebrew book with the Ethiopians. Pantænus, upon his return to Alexandria, continued to explain the sacred books under the reign of Severus and Antoninus Caracalla, and did great service to the church by his discourses. He composed some “Commentaries” upon the Bible, which are lost. Theodoret informs us that Pantænus first started the remark, which has been followed by many interpreters of the prophecies since, “That they are often expressed in indefinite terms, and that the present tense is frequently used both for the preterite and future tenses.” We may form a judgment of the manner in, which Pantænus explained the Scriptures, by that which Clemens Alexandria as, Origen, and all those have observed, who were trained up in the school of Alexandria. Their commentaries abound with allegories; they frequently leave the literal sense, and find almost every where some mystery or other; in the explaining of which, they usually shew more erudition than judgment. Mil ner observes, that the combination of Stoicism with Christianity must have very much debased the sacred truths; and we may be assured that those who were disposed to follow implicitly the dictates of such an instructor as Pantænus, must have been furnished by him with a clouded light of the gospel. Cave is of opinion that Pantænus’s death occurred in the year 213.

, a learned physician and historian, was born at Basil June 13, 1522. In his early education he made very considerable proficiency, but it ap pears that his friends differed in their opinions as to his profession, some intending him for a learned profession, and some for a printer, which they conceived to be connected with it. At length after a due course of the languages and polite literature, he studied divinity according to the principles of the reformed religion, but changing that design, he taught dialectics and natural philosophy at Basil for about forty years. He then, at an advanced age, studied medicine, took the degree of doctor in that faculty, and practised with much reputation until his death, March 3, 1595, in the seventy-third year of his age. He composed various works both in medicine and history, some in Latin and some in German, and translated certain authors into the latter language. His most useful work, nowscarce, was an account of the eminent men of Germany, published at Basil in 1565, fol. under the title of “Posographia heroum et illustrium virorum Germanise,” dedicated to the emperor Maximilian II. who honoured him with the title of Count Palatin. He published also a Latin history of the order of St. John of Jerusalem, 1581, folio. ' Historia Militaris ordinis Johannitarum, Rhodiorum aut Melitensium Equitum;“” Chronographia Ecclesiae Christi,“ibid, 1568;” Diarium Historicum,“1572; and, in his youth,” Comoedia de Zaccheo publicanorum principe," 1546, 8vo.

, a learned scholar of the sixteenth century, was born at Verona in 1529. He discovered an attachment to history and antiquities in his earliest years, and entered into the order of the Augustins. As soon as he had made profession, the general of his order sent him to Rome to complete his studies, and in 1553 he was appointed to instruct the novices. He then taught scholastic theology at Florence for some time, but his chief residence was at Rome, where he was patronized by cardinal Marcello Cervini, afterwards pope Marcel 1 us II. From thence he passed into the court of cardinal Alexander Farnese, with whom he travelled into Sicily in 1568, where he died in his thirty-ninth year. One of his first labours was an edition of the “Fasti Consulares,” first brought to light by Sigonius, which he published, illustrated with notes, at Venice in 1557. He published treatises also, “De Antiquis Romanorum Nominibus;” “De Principibus Romanis;” “De Republica;” “De Triumphis et Ludis Circensibus;” and “Topographia Romae.” These valuable works are founded in a great measure upon ancient inscriptions, of which he had collected and copied nearly three thousand. Some time after, this collection, which had come into the hands of cardinal Savelli, disappeared, and Maffei is of opinion that the collection published at Antwerp by Martin Sanctius, in 1588, and which served as a foundation for Gruterus’s great work, was in reality that of Panvinius. Panvinius was also a profound investigator of sacred or Christian antiquities, as appears by his works, “. De Ritu sepeliendi mortuos apud veteres Christianos” “De antiquo Ritu baptizandi Catechumenos;” “DePrimatu Pein;” “Chronicon Ecclesiasticum;” “De Episcopatibus Titulis, et Diaconis Cardinalium” “Annotationes et Supplementa ad Platinam de Vitis Pontificnm;” “De Septem pnrcipuis Urbis Romse Basilicis;” “De Bibliotheca Vaticana.” He had undertaken a general ecclesiastical history, for which he collected matter sufficient to fill six large -manuscript volumes, which are preserved in the Vatican. He wrote a chronicle of his own order, and a history of his native city, Verona, including an account of its antiquities, printed many years after his death.

, an eminent bibliographer, was born at Sulzbach in the Upper Palatinate, March 16, 1729, and having been educated for the church, took his doctor’s degree in divinity and philosophy, and became pastor of the cathedral church of St. Sebaldus at Nuremberg, where he died in 1805. No farther particulars have yet reached us of this learned and laborious writer, who has long been known here by his “Annales Typographiei, ab artis inventæ origine ad annum M. D. post Maittairii, Denisii, aliorumque doctissimorum virorum curas in ordinem redacti, emendati et aucti,” Nuremberg, 1793—1803, 11 vols. 4to. This is unquestionably a work of the very first importance to bibliographers, and is thought to exceed Maittaire’s in clearness of arrangement and accuracy. It comes down, beyond his original intention, to 1536; but is not quite complete without another work of his printed in German, “Annals of ancient German Literature, or an account of books printed in Germany frpm the invention of the art to 1520,” Nuremberg, 1788, 4to. His other works, also unfortunately in German, are an “Account of the most ancient German Bibles, printed in the fifteenth century, which are in the library at Nuremberg,” 1777, 4to; “History of Bibles printed at Nuremberg, from the invention of the Art,” Nuremberg, 1778, 4to. And a “History of early Printing at Nuremberg to the year 1500,” ibid. 1789, 4to.

, a very distinguished character in modern times, born at Rostino, in the island of Corsica, in 1726, was the son of Hiacente Paoli, a Corsican patriot, who, despairing of the freedom of his country, had retired with his family to Naples. Pascal was educated among the Jesuits, and at their college he made a rapid progress in his studies, and displayed an understanding equally solid and capacious. He appeared in so favourable a light to his countrymen, that he was unanimously chosen generalissimo, in a full assembly of the people, when he had attained but to the 29th year of his age. He began with new-modelling the laws of Corsica, and established the appearance, if not the reality, of subordination: he also instituted schools, and laid the foundation of a maritime power. In 1761 the government of Genoa, perceiving the change lately effected among the natives, sent a deputation to a general council, convoked at Vescovato, for the express purpose of proposing terms of accommodation; but it was unanimously resolved never to make peace with them, unless upon the express condition of Corsica being guaranteed in the full enjoyment of its independence. A memorial to the same effect was also addressed, at tfie same time, to all the sovereigns of Europe. But nothing was gained by this step; and in 1768, the Genoese, despairing of rendering the Corsicans subservient to their will, transferred the sovereignty of their island to France, on condition of receiving in lieu of it 40,000,000 of livres. Notwithstanding this, Paoli remained firm to his cause: and a vigorous war commenced, in which, for some time, the French were beaten, and in one instance their general was obliged to capitulate, with all his infantry, artillery, and ammunition; but an immense force bing now sent from France, overwhelmed the Corsican patriots; they were defeated with great slaughter, and Paoli, left with only about 500 men, was surrounded by the French, who were anxious to get possession of his 'person: he, however, cut his way through the enemy, and escaped to England with his friends, where they were received with every degree of sympathy and respect. Paoli was introduced at court, and the duke of Grafton, then prime minister, obtained for him a pension of 1200l. a-year, which he liberally shared with his companions in exile. From this time he lived a retired life, devoting himself chiefly to the cultivation of literature. During his retirement, which lasted more than twenty years, he was introduced to Dr. Johnson by Mr. Boswell, and lived in habits of intimacy with that eminent scholar. Much of their conversation is recorded by Mr. Boswell.

When the French revolution took place, the national convention passed a decree by which Corsica was numbered among the departments of France, and entitled to all the privileges of the new constitution, and Paoli was induced, by the promising appearance of affairs, and the solicitations of the French assembly, to return to the island. Accordingly he resigned his pension from the English court, took a grateful leave of the country in which he had been so hospitably entertained, and in the month of April 1790, presented himself at the bar of the national assembly at Paris, together with the Corsican deputies. Soon after this he embarked for Corsica, where he was received with an extraordinary degree of attachment and respect. He was elected mayor of Bastia, commander-in-chief of the national guard, and president of the department; and, in short, he at once acquired more authority in the island, than before its subjugation by the French. He was, however, not quite contented; he was ambitious of seeing Corsica wholly independent, which, upon the execution of Louis XVI. was the prevailing wish of the Corsicans. The French convention, however, meant nothing less, and at length declared Paoli a traitor. On this he resolved upon an expedient which, though it was a renunciation of independence, promised to secure all the advantages of real liberty. This was an union of Corsica with the crown of Great Britain; after effecting which, he returned to England, having unfortunately lost all his property, by the failure of a mercantile house at Leghorn, and passed the remainder of his life in great privacy. He died in London, February. 5, 1807, in the eighty-first year of his age. Few foreigners, however distinguished, have been so much caressed in England as general Paoli. By living in habits of familiarity with men of letters, his name and exploits acquired high celebrity: and Goldsmith, Johnson, and many others, equally eminent in the literary world, although differing in almost every thing else, cordially united in his praise. On the continent his reputation was greatly respected: it was usual to compare Paoli to Timoleon and Epaminondas. He was unquestionably a great man; but it is the opinion of those who have enjoyed the opportunity of studying his character, that he was a politician rather than a soldier: that he shone more in council than inarms; and that the leading feature of his public conduct was a certain degree of Italian policy, which taught him to refine and speculate on every event.

, a native of Antwerp, was born in 1628, and was educated as a Jesuit. He has already been mentioned in our account of Holland us, as the coadjutor of that writer in the compilation of the “Acta Sanctorum.” He died in 1714, in the seventy-eighth year of his age. He was, according to Dupin, less credulous than Bollandus, and became involved in a controversy with the Carmelites respecting the origin of their order. There is little else interesting in his history; but in addition to the account given in our article Bollandus, of the “Acta Sanctorum,” we may now mention that the work has been continued to the fifty-third volume, folio, which appeared in 1794, but is yet imperfect, as it comes only to October 14th. Brunet informs us that there are very few perfect copies to be found in France, some of the latter volumes being destroyed during the revolutionary period. The reprint at Venice, 1734, 42 vols. is of less estimation.

, bishop of Hierapolis, a city of Phrygia in Asia Minor, near to Laodicea, was the disciple of St. John the Evangelist, or of another of that name; but Irenaeus says positively, that he was the disciple of St. John the Evangelist; for Polycarp was his disciple, and he says, Papias was Polycarp’s companion. Papias wrote five books, entitled “The Expositions of the Discourses of the Lord;” of which there are only some fragments left in the writings of Irenaeus and Eusebius. He made way for the opinion several of the ancients held touching the temporal reign of Christ, who they supposed would come upon earth a thousand years before the day of judgment, to gather together the elect, after the resurrection, into the city of Jerusalem, and let them there enjoy all felicity during that period. Irenaeus, who was of the same judgment, relates a fragment he took out of Papias’s fourth book, where he endeavours to prove that opinion from a passage in Isaiah; and Eusebius, after having quoted a passage taken out of Papias’s Preface, adds, “That that author relates divers things which he pretended he had by unwritten tradition; such as were the last instructions of our Lord Christ, which are not set down by the Evangelists, and some other fabulous histories, amongst which number his opinion ought to be placed touching the personal return of Christ upon earth after the resurrection.” The occasion of his falling into that error,“says Eusebius again,” was his misunderstanding of the discourses and instructions of the Apostles, as not thinking that those expressions ought to bear a mystical sense; and that the Apostles used them only for illustration, for he was a man of a mean genius, as his books manifest, and yet several of the ancients, and, among the rest, Irenaeus, maintained their opinions on the authority ofPapias."

, a learned canon of la Chapelle-au Riche, at Dijon, in which city he was born, May 1, 1666, was the son of Philip Papillon, advocate to the parliament. He was a man of literature, and an able critic, and furnished Le Long of the Oratory, Desmolets, Niceron, and several others among the learned, with a number of important memoirs and anecdotes. He died February 23, 1738, at Dijon, aged seventy-two. His principal work is, “La Bibliotheqtie des Auteurs de Bourgogne,” Dijon, 1742, 2 vols. folio, printed under the inspection of his friend M. Joly, canon of la Chapelle-auRiche.

, was one of a family of engravers on wood, who obtained considerable reputation in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. He flourished about 1670, but attained less fame than his son John, who was born at St. Quentin in 1661. The grandson John Baptist Michel was the most successful in his art, especially in those engravings which represent foliage and flowers, many beautiful specimens of which are inserted in his publication on the art of engraving in wood; and the whole prove that he was a very skilful master in every branch of the art he professed. The human figure he seems to have been the least acquainted with, and has consequently failed most in those prints into which it is introduced. He died in 1776; about ten years before which event he published in 2 vols. 8vo, his “Traite historique et pratique de la gravure en bois,” a work of great merit as to the theory of an art, which, it is almost needless to add, has of late years been brought to the highest perfection by some ingenious men of our own country, led first to this pursuit by the excellent example and success of the Messrs. Bewickes.

, an ingenious physician, the son of Nicholas Papin, also a physician, was born at Blois. He took the degree of doctor, and travelled to England, where he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, in December 1680. He passed the following year in London, and published in English an account of a machine which he had invented, and which still bears his name: this was “The New Digester, or Engine for the softening of Bones,” 1681, 4to. It soon appeared in French, with the title of “La Maniere d'amollir les Os, et de faire cuire toutes sortes des Viandes en peu de terns et a peu de fraix,” Paris, 1682. The machine consists of a very strong metal boiler, with an air-tight cover screwed down with great force; hence the contained matter, being incapable of escaping either by evaporation or by bursting the machine, may be heated to a degree far beyond that of boiling water, so as to dissolve the gluten of bones and cartilages. He afterwards improved this digester, and it has since been much employed in chemical and philosophical experiments. He assisted Boyle in various experiments, of which an account is given in the history of the Royal Society. Papin was a protestant, and being therefore prevented from returning home by the revocation of the edict of Nantes, he took up his residence at Marpurg, where he taught the mathematics, and published a “Fasciculus Dissertationum dequibusdam Machinis Physicis,” 1696, 12mo; and in 1707 he published at Francfort an account of a machine which he had invented for raising water by the action of fire, entitled “Ars nova ad aquam ignis adminiculo efficacissime elevandam.”

His father, Nicholas Papin, was author of several works, which, however, are nearly forgotten. Two of them related to the powder of Sympathy, which he defended; and one to the discovery of Harvey, which he opposed.

, some time a minister of the church of England, and afterwards reconciled to that of Rome, was the author of some pieces which made a great noise in the seventeenth century. From an account of his life, published by himself, it appears that he was born at Blois in 1657, and descended from a family of the reformed religion. He passed through his studies in divinity at Geneva. That university was then divided into two parties upon the subject of grace, called “particularists” and “universalists,” of which the former were the most numerous and the most powerful. The universalists desired nothing more than a toleration; an J M. Claude wrote a letter to M. Turretin, the chief of the predominant party, exhorting him earnestly to grant that favour. But Turretin gave little heed to it; and M. de Maratiz, professor at Groningen, who had disputed the point warmly against Mr. Daille, opposed it zealously; and supported his opinion by the authority of those synods who had determined against such toleration. There happened also another dispute upon the same subject, which occasioned Papin to make several reflections. M. Pajon, who was his uncle, admitted the doctrine of efficacious grace, but explained it in a different manner from the reformed in general, and Juneu in particular; and though the synod of Anjou in 1667, after many long debates upon the matter, dismissed Pajon, with leave to continue his lectures at Saumur, yet as his inU rest there was not great, his nephew, who was a student in that university in 1633, was pressed to con iemn the doctrine, which was branded with the appellation of Pajonism. Papin declared, that his conscience would not allow him to subscribe to the condemnation of either party; on which the university refused to give him a testimonial in the usual form. All these disagreeable incidents put him out of humour with the authors of them, and brought him to view the Roman catholic religion w;th less dislike than before. In this disposition he wrote a treatise, entitled “The Faith reduced to its just hounds;” in which he maintained, that, as the papists professed that they embraced the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures, they ought to be tolerate' I by the most zealous protestants. He also wrote several letters to the reformed of Bourdeaux, to persuade them that they might be saved in the Romish church, if they would be reconciled to it,

This work, as might be expected, exasperated the protestants against him; and to avoid their resentment, he crossed the water to England, in 1686, where James II. was endeavouring to re- establish popery. There he receive 1 deacon’s and priest’s orders, irom the hands of Turner, bishop of Ely; and, in 16S7, published a book against Jurieu, entitled “Theological Essays concerning Providence and Grace, &c.” This exasperated that minister so much, that when he knew Papin was attempting to obtain some employ as a professor in Germany, he dispersed letters every where in order to defeat his applications; and, though he procured a preacher’s place at Hamburgh, Jurieu found means to get him dismissed in a few months. About this time his “Faith reduced to just bounds” coming into the hands of Bayle, that writer added some pages to it, and printed it. These additions were ascribed by Jurieu to our author, who did not disavow the principal maxims laid down, which were condemned in the synod of Bois-le-duc in 1687. In the mean time, an offer being made him of a professor’s chair in the church of the French refugees at Dantzic, he accepted it: but it being afterwards proposed to him to conform to the synodical decrees of the Walloon churches in the United Provinces, and to subscribe them, he refused to comply; because there were some opinions asserted in those decrees which he could not assent to, particularly that doctrine which maintained that Christ died only for the elect. Those who had invited him to Dantzic, were highly offended at his refusal; and he was ordered to depart, as soon as he had completed the half year of his preaching, which had been contracted for. He was dismissed in 168^, and not long after embraced the Roman catholic religion; delivering his abjuration into the hands of Bossuet, bishop of Meaux, Nov. 15, 1690.

Upon this change, Jurieu wrote a pastoral letter to those of the reformed religion at Paris, Orleans, and Blois; in which he pretended that Papin had always looked upon all religions as indifferent, and in that spirit had returned to the Roman church. In answer to this letter, Papin drew up a treatise, “Of the Toleration of the Protestants, and of the Authority of the Church.” The piece, being approved by the bishop of Meaux, was printed in 1692: the author afterwards changed its title, which was a little equivocal, and made some additions to it; but, while he was employed in making collections to complete it farther, and finish other books upon the same subject, he died at Paris the 19th of June, 1709. His widow, who also embraced the Roman catholic religion, communicated these papers, which were made use of in a new edition printed at large in 1719, 12mo. M. Pajon of the Oratory, his relation, published all his “Theological Works,” 1723, 3 vols. 12mo they are all in French, and written with shrewdness and ability.

, a celebrated Roman lawyer, born in the year 175, was advocate of the treasury or exchequer, and afterwards pretorian prefect under the emperor Severus, about the year 194. This emperor had so high an opinion of his worth, that at his death he recommended his sons Caracalla and Geta to his care: but the first, having murdered his brother, enjoined Papinian to compose a discourse, to excuse that barbarity to the senate and people. Papinian could not be prevailed on to comply with this: but on the contrary answered boldly, that it was easier to commit a parricide than to excuse it; and to accuse an innocent person, after taking away his life, was a second parricide. Caracalla was so much enraged at this answer, that he ordered Papinian to be beheaded, which sentence was executed in the year 212, when he was in his thirtyseventh year, and his body was dragged through the streets of Rome. He had a great number of disciples, and composed several works among those, twenty-seven books of “Questions in the Law” nineteen books of “Responses or Opinions” two of “Definitions” two others upon “Adultery” and a single book upon the “Laws of Ediles.” His reputation was so great, that he is called “the honour of jurisprudence, and the treasure of the laws.”

, an Italian comic writer, born at Placentia, in the beginning of the sixteenth century, was an author of some eminence in his time. His comedies have a certain character of originality, which still, in some degree, supports their credit. They are six in number, five in prose, and one in verse. The best edition is that printed at Venice, in 1560, in two small volumes, duodecimo. There is a volume of letters by him, entitled “Lettere Amorose di M. Girolamo Parabosco,” printed also at Venice in 154-5. These were republished in 1548, “con alcune Novelle e Rime” and there is a volume of “Rime” alone, printed by Giolito at Venice, in 1547, 8vo. He composed also, novels in the style of Boccacio and Bandelli, which were published at Venice in 1552, under the title of “I Diporti di M. Girolamo Parabosco,” and reprinted in 1558, 1564, 1586, and 1598, and lately inserted in the collection entitled “Novelliero Italiano,” 1791, 26 vols. 8vo, with the imprint of Londra for Livorno. The work consists of three days, or “Giornate;” the first and second of which comprise sixteen tales, and four curious questions. The third contains several “Motti,” or bon-mots, with a few madrigals, and other short poems. There is also a volume by him entitled “Oracolo,” the oracle, published at Venice, in 1551, in 4to. In this the author gives answers to twelve questions proposed in the beginning of the book; which answers are given and varied according to some rules laid down in the preface. It appears that Parabosco lived chiefly, if not entirely, at Venice, as all his books were published there. His “Diporti,” or Sports, open with a panegyric upon that city.

, a man of a strange and paradoxical genius, and classed by Brucker among the Theosophists, was born, as is generally supposed (for his birth-place is a disputed matter), at Einfidlen near Zurick, in 1493. His family name, which was Bombastus, he afterwards changed, according to the custom of the age, into Paracelsus. His father, who was a physician, instructed him in that science, but, as it would appear, in nothing else, for he was almost totally ignorant of the learned languages. So earnest was he, however, to penetrate into the mysteries of nature, that, neglecting books, he undertook long and hazardous journeys through Germany, Italy, Spain, Denmark, Hungary, Moscovy, and probably several parts of Asia and Africa. He not only visited literary and learned men, but frequented the workshops of mechanics, descended into mines, and thought no place mean or hazardous, if it afforded him an opportunity of increasing his knowledge of nature. He also consulted barber-surgeons, monks, conjurors, old women, quacks of every description, and every person who pretended to be possessed of any secret art, particularly such as were skilled in metallurgy. Being in this manner a self-taught philosopher and physician, he despised the medical writings of the ancients, and boasted that the whole contents of his library would not amount to six folios. He appears indeed to have written more than he ever read. His quackery consisted in certain new and secret medicines procured from metallic substances by the chemical art, which he administered with such wonderful success, that he rose to the summit of popular fame, and even obtained the professorship of medicine at Bail. One of his nostrums he called Azoth, which he said was the philosopher’s stone, the medical panacea, and his disciples extolled it as the tincture of life, given through the divine favour to man in these last days. But while his irregular practice, and arrogant invectives against other physicians, created him many enemies, his rewards were by no means adequate to his vanity and ambition; and he met frequently with mortifications, one of which determined him to leave Basil. A wealthy canon who happened to fall sick at that place, offered him a hundred florins to cure his disease, which Paracelsus easily effected with three pills of opium, one of his most powerful medicines. The canon, restored to health so soon, and apparently by such slight means, refused to stand to his engagement. Paracelsus brought the matter before the magistrate, who decreed him only the usual fee. Inflamed with violent indignation at the contempt which was thus thrown upon his art, he railed at the canon, the magistrate, and the whole city, and leaving Basil, withdrew into Alsace, whither his medical fame and success followed him. After two years, during which time he practised medicine in the principal families of the country, about the year 1530 he removed into Switzerland, where he conversed with Bullinger and other divines. From this time, he seems for many years to have roved through various parts of Germany and Bohemia. At last, in the year 1541, he died in the hospital of St. Sebastian, in Saltsburg.

Different and even contradictory judgments have been formed by the learned concerning Paracelsus. His admirers and followers have celebrated him as a perfect master of all philosophical and medical mysteries, have called him the medical Luther, and have even been weak enough to believe that he was possessed of the grand secret of converting inferior metals into gold. But others, and particularly some of his contemporaries, have charged his whole medical practice with ignorance, imposture, and impudence. J. Crato, in an epistle to Zwinger, attests, that in Bohemia his medicines, even when they performed an apparent cure, left his patients in such a state, that they soon after died of palsies or epilepsies. Erastus, who was for two years one of his pupils, wrote an entire book to detect his impostures. We have mentioned his want of education, and it is even asserted, that he was so imperfect a master of his vernacular tongue, that he was obliged to have his German writings corrected by another hand. His adversaries also charge him with the most contemptible arrogance, the most vulgar scurrility, the grossest intemperance, and the most detestable impiety. Still it appears, that with all these defects, by the mere help of physical knowledge and the chemical arts, he obtained an uncommon share of medical fame; while to support his credit with the ignorant, he pretended to an intercourse with invisible spirits, and to divine illuminations.

With regard to his system of chemistry, in which his real merit lies, the fundamental doctrines of it resolved every thing into three elements, salt, sulphur, and mercury, and were for a long time received, although in fact they were borrowed from his predecessor, Basil Valentine. His medical skill consisted principally in the bold administration of some powerful remedies, which had been heretofore thought too dangerous to be used, particularly opium, a drug with which, it is obvious, he would be able in many instances to afford great and speedy relief; but with which also few permanent cures could be effected, and much mischief would necessarily be produced, when it was misapplied. Antimony and mercury were also medicines which he liberally prescribed, and he used various preparations of them of the most active kind. He deserves the praise, however, of having been one of the first to employ mercury for the cure of the venereal disease, and of course he must have been successful in a degree, to which none of his contemporaries, who did not resort to that remedy, could attain. From his total ignorance of anatomy and rational physiology, his inability from want of literature to investigate the doctrines of the ancients, which he nevertheless boldly impugned, and his employment of a barbarous jargon, as well as his infatuated notions of magic, astrology, geomancy, and all the other branches of mystical imposture, he is, as a theorist, beneath contempt. We shall not pretend, therefore, to enter into any detail of the unintelligible jargon and absurd hypotheses which he employed, or to enumerate the immense farrago of treatises, which made their appearance under his name after his death, the notices of which occupy above nine quarto pages in the Bibliotheca of Haller: for the first we are unable to comprehend, and the latter would be a waste of time. The most complete edition is that of Geneva, 1658, 3 vols. folio.

, a French historian, and laborious writer of the sixteenth century, was still living in 1581, and was then turned fourscore. He was the author of many works, among which the following are remarkable: 1. “The History of Aristseus, respecting the version of the Pentateuch,” 4 to. 2. “Historia sui temporis,” written in Latin, but best known by a French version which was published in 1558. 3. “Annales de Bourgogne,” 1566, folio. This history, by no means well digested, begins at the year 378, and ends in 1482. 4. “De moribus Gallic, Historia,” 4to. 5. “Memoires de l'Histoire de Lyon,” 1625, folio. 6. “De rehus in Beigio, anno 1543 gestis,”l:>4:i, 8vo. 7. “LaChroniquede Savoie,” 1602, fol. 8. “Histuna Galliae, a Fraiu isci I. coronatione ad annum 1550.” 9. “Historia Ecclesiae Gallicanae.” 10. “Memoralia insignium Francis Famiiiarum.” He was an ecclesias.ic, and became dean of Beaujeu.

, or rather Deparcieux (Anthony), an able mathematician, was born in 1703, at a hamlet near Nismes, of industrious but poor parents, who were unable to give him education; he soon, however, found a patron, who placed him in the college at Lyons, where he made astonishing progress in mathematics. On his arrival at Paris, he was obliged to accept of humble employment from the mathematical instrument makers, until his works brought him into notice. These were, 1. “Table astronomiques,” 1740, 4to. 2. “Traite” de trigonometric rectiligne et spherique, avec un trait6 de gnomonique et des tables de logarithmes,“1741, 4to. 3.” Essai sur les probabilites de la dnre de la vie humame,“1746, 4to. 4.” Reponse aux objections contrtr ce livre,“1746, 4to. 5.” Additions a I'essai, c.“1760, 4to. 6.” Memoires sur la possibility et la facilit^ d‘amener aiipres de PEstrapade, a Paris, les eaux de la riviere d’Yvette,“1763, 4to, reprinted, with additions, in 1777. It was always Deparcieux’s object to turn his knowledge of mathematics to practical purposes, and in the memoirs of the academy of sciences are many excellent papers which he contributed with this view. He also introduced some ingenious improvements in machinery. He was censor- royal and member of the academy of sciences at Paris, and of those of Berlin, Stockholm, Metz, Lyons, and Montpelher. He died at Paris Sept. 2, 1768, aged sixty-five. He had a nephew of the same name, born in 1753, who was educated at the college of Navarre at Paris, where he studied mathematics and philosophy, and at the age of twentyfour gave public lectures. In 177y he began a course of experimental philosophy, in the military school of Brienne; after which, he occupied the philosophical professorship at the Lyceum in Paris, where he died June 23, 1799, in a state bordering on indigence. He wrote a” Traité elementaire de Mathematiques,“for the use of students; ”Traite* des annuites, ou des rentes a terme,“1781, 4to” Dissertation snr le moyen d‘elever l’eau par la rotation d'une curde verticale sans fin,“Amst. 1782, 8vo” Dissertation sur ies globes areostatiques,“Paris, 1783, 8vo. He left also some unfinished works; and a” Cours complet de physique et de chimie," was in the press when he died.

, an ingenious French mathematician and philosopher, was born at Pau, in the province of Gascony, in 1636; his faiher being a counsellor of the parliament of that city. At the age of sixteen he entered into the order of Jesuits, and made so great proficiency in his studies, that he taught polite literature, and composed many pieces in prose and v< rse with considerable delicacy of thought and style before he was well arrived at the age of manhood. Propriety and elegance of language appear to have been his first pursuits, lor which purpose he studied the belles lettres; but afterwards he devoted himself to mathematical and philosophical studies, and read, with due attention, the most valuable authors, ancient and modern, in those sciences. By such assiduity in a short time he made himself master of the Peripatetic and Cartesian philosophy, and taught them both with great reputation. Notwithstanding he embraced Cartesianism, yet he affected to be rather an inventor in philosophy himself. In this spirit he sometimes advanced very bold opinions in natural philosophy, which met with opposers, who charged him with starting absurdities: but he was ingenious enough to give his notions a plausible turn, so as to clear them seemingly from contradictions. His reputation procured him a call to Paris, as professor of rhetoric in the college of Louis the Great. He also taught the mathematics in that city, as he had before done in other places; but the high expectations which his writings very reasonably created, were all disappointed by his early death, in 1673, at thirty-seven years of age. He fell a victim to his zeal, having caught a contagious disorder by preaching to the prisoners in the Bicetre.

, a French surgeon of eminence, was born at Laval, in the district of the Maine, in 1509. He commenced the study of his profession early in life, and practised it with great zeal both in hospitals and in the army; and when his reputation was at its height, he was appointed surgeon in ordinary to king Henry II. in 1552; and he held the same office under the succeeding kings, Francis II. Charles IX. and Henry III. To Charles IX. especially he is said to have on one occasion conferred great professional benefits, when some formidable symptoms had been produced by the accidental wound of a tendon in venesection, which he speedily removed. His services appear to have been amply acknowledged by the king; who spared him in the horrible massacre of St. Bartholomew’s, although a protestant. “Of all those,”' says the duke of Sully, <c who were about the person of this prince (Charles IX.) none possessed so great a share of his confidence as Ambrose Pare“, his surgeon. This man, though a Huguenot, lived with him in so great a degree of familiarity, that, on the day of the massacre, Charles telling him, the time was now come when the whole kingdom would be catholics; he replied, without being alarmed, * By the light of God, sire, I cannot believe that you have forgot your promise never to command me to do four things namely, to enter into my mother’s womb, to be present in the day of battie, to quit your service, or to go to mass.‘ The king soon after took him aside, and disclosed to him freely the trouble of his soul: * Ambrose,’ said he, * I know not what has happened to me these two or three days past, but I feel my mind and body as much at enmity with each other, as if I was seized with a fever; sleeping or waking, the murdered Huguenots seem ever present to my eyes, with ghastly faces, and weltering in blood. I wish the innocent and helpless had been spared!' The order which was published the following day, forbidding the continuance of the massacre, was in consequence of this conversation.” Pare", after having been long esteemed as the first surgeon of his time, and beloved for his private virtues, died Dec. 20, 1590, at the age of eighty-one; and as he was buried in the church of St. Andrew, Eloy would from that circumstance infer that he died a Roman catholic, of which we have no proof.

Pare was not a man of learning, although we meet with learned references and numerous quotations from the ancients, in his writings; but he must be considered as a bold and successful operator, and a real improver of his art; particularly in the practice of tying divided arteries, which he effected by drawing them out naked, and passing a ligature over them; and in the treatment of gun-shot wounds. Even in anatomy, in which he did not excel, he was, by frequent dissections, enabled to add some observations of his own to what he had borrowed from Vesalius. As an author he had high fame, and his works were universally read and translated into most of the languages of Europe. His first treatise, “Maniere de trailer les playes faites par harquebuses, fleches, &c.” was published at Paris in 1545, and again in 1552 and 1564. He afterwards laboured strenuously to put his brethren in possession of a body of surgical science in their native tongue; and in 1561 published the first edition of his works, in folio. This was translated by Thomas Johnson, Lond. 1634, and reprinted with additions in 1649. His treatise on gun-shot wounds was published by Walter Hammond in 1617, and that on the plague in 1630. Numerous editions of his whole works were afterwards printed io German, Dutch, and French; and his pupil, Guillemeau, who was also surgeon to Charles IX. and Henry IV. translated them into Latin. This translation has been frequently reprinted at variousplaces, with the title of “Ambrosii Paraei, Opera, novis iconibus elegantissimis illustrata, et Latinitate donata.” This volume contains twenty -six treatises, and there is no branch of surgery which is not touched upon in the collection.

, a French mathematician, was born at Paris in 1666. He shewed early a propensity to mathematics, eagerly perusing such books as fell in his way. His custom was to write remarks upon the margins of the books which he read; and he had filled some of these with a kind of commentary at the age of thirteen. At fourteen he was put under a master who taught rhetoric at Chartres. Here he happened to see a Dodecaedron, upon every face of which was delineated a sun-dial, except the lowest, on which it stood. Struck immediately with the curiosity of these dials, he set about drawing one himself; but, having a book which only shewed the practical part without the theory, it was not till some time after, when his rhetoric-master came to explain the doctrine of the sphere to him, that he began to understand how the projection of the circles of the sphere formed sundials. He then undertook to write a “Treatise upon Gnomonics,” anr the piece was rude and unpolished enough; but it was entirely his own. About the same time he wrote also a book of “Geometry,” at Beauvais.

At length his friends sent for him to Paris, to study the law; and, in obedience to them he went through a course in that faculty, but this was no sooner finished, than, his passion for mathematics returning, he shut himself up in the college of Dormans, and, with an allowance of less than 200 livres a year, he lived content in this retreat, which he never left but to go to the royal college, in order to hear the lectures of M. de la Hire, or M. de Sauveur. As soon as he found himself able enough to teach others, he took pupils; and, fortification being a part of mathematics which the war had rendered very necessary, he turned his attention to that branch; but after some time began to entertain scruples about teaching what he knew only in books, having never examined a fortification elsewhere, and communicating these scruples to M. Sauveur, that friend recommended him to the marquis d'Aligre, who happened at that time to want a mathematician in his suite. Parent accordingly made two campaigns with the marquis, and instructed himself thoroughly by viewing fortified places, of which he drew a number of plans, though hq had never received any instruction in that branch. From this time he assiduously cultivated natural philosophy, and the mathematics in all its branches, both speculative and practical; to which he joined anatomy, botany, and chemistry, and never appears to have been satisfied while there was any thing to learn. M. de Billettes being admitted into the academy of sciences at Paris in 1699, with the title of their mechanician, nominated for his eleve or disciple, Parent, who excelled chiefly in that branch. It was soon found in this society, that he engaged in all the various subjects which were brought before them, but often with an eagerness and impetuosity, and an impatience of contradiction, which involved him in unpleasant disputes with the members, who, on their parts, exerted a pettish fastidiousness in examining his papers. He was in particular charged with obscurity in his productions; and indeed the fault was so notorious, that he perceived it himself, and could not avoid correcting it.

The king having, by a regulation in 1716, suppressed the class of eleves of the academy, which seemed to put too great an inequality betwixt the members, Parent was made a joint or assistant member for geometry \ but he enjoyed this promotion only a short time, being taken off by the small-pox the same year, aged fifty. He was author of a work entitled “Elements of Mechanics and Natural Philosophy;” “Mathematical and Physical Researches,” a sort of journal, which first appeared in 1705, and which in 1712 was greatly enlarged, and published in three vols. 4to; and “A treatise on Arithmetic.” Besides these, he was the author of a great number of papers in the different French “Journals,” and in the volumes of the “Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences,” from 1700 to 1714, and he left behind him in manuscript many works of considerable research: among these were some complete treatises on divers branches of mathematics, and a work containing proofs of the divinity of Jesus Christ, in four parts.

, a celebrated divine of the reformed religion, was born Dec. 30, 1548, at Frankenstein in Silesia, and put to the grammar-school there, apparently with a design to breed him to learning; but his father marrying a second time, a capricious and narrow-minded woman, she prevailed with him to place his son apprentice to an apothecary at Breslau; and afterwards changing her mind, the boy was, at her instigation, bound to a shoemaker. Some time after, however, his father resumed his first design, and his son, about the age of sixteen, was sent to the college-school of Hirchberg, in the neighbourhood of Frankenstein, to prosecute his studies under Christopher Schilling, a man of considerable learning, who was rector of the college. It was customary in those times for young students who devoted themselves to literature, to assume a classical name, instead of that of their family. Schilling was a great admirer of this custom, and easily persuaded his scholar to change his German name of Wangler for the Greek one of Pareus, from wa^ice, a cheek, which Wangler also means in German. Pareus had not lived above three months at his father’s expence, when he was enabled to provide for his own support, partly by means of a tutorship in the family, and partly by the bounty of Albertus Kindler, one of the principal men of the place. He lodged in this gentleman’s house, and wrote a poem upon the death of his eldest son, which so highly pleased the father, that he not only gave him a gratuity for it, but encouraged him to cultivate his poetical talents, prescribing him proper subjects, and rewarding him handsomely for every poem which he presented to him.

In the mean time, his master Schilling, not content with making him change his surname, made him also change his religious creed, that of the Lutheran church, with regard to the doctrine of the real presence, and effected the same change of sentiment throughout his school; but this was not at first attended with the happiest effects, as Schilling was expelled from the college, and Pareus’s father threatened to disinherit him; and it was not without the greatest difficulty, that he obtained his consent to go into the Palatinaie, notwithstanding he conciliated his father’s parsimony by assuring him that he would continue his studies there without any expence to his family. Having thus succeeded in his request, he followed his master Schilling, who had been invited by the elector Frederic III. to be principal of his new college at Amberg, and arrived there in 1566. Soon after he was sent, with ten of his school-fellows, to Heidelberg, where Zachary Ursinus was professor of divinity, and rector of the college of Wisdom. The university was at that time in a most flourishing condition, with regard to every one of the faculties; and Pareus had consequently every advantage that could be desired, and made very great proficiency, both in the learned languages and in philosophy and divinity. He was admitted into the ministry in 1571, and in May that year sent to exercise his function in a village called Schlettenbach, where very violent contests subsisted between the Protestants and Papists. The elector palatine, his patron, had asserted his claim by main force against the bishop of Spire, who maintained, that the right of nomination to the livings in the corporation of Alfestad was vested in his chapter. The elector allowed it, but with this reserve, that since he had the right of patronage, the nominators were obliged, by the peace of Passaw, to present pastors to him whose religion he approved. By virtue of this right, he established the reformed religion in that corporation, and sent Pareus to propagate it in the province of Schlettenbach, where, however, he met with many difficulties before he could exercise his ministry in peace. Before the end of the year he was called back to teach the third class at Heidelberg, and acquitted himself so well, that in two years’ time he was promoted to the second class; but he did not hold this above six months, being made principal pastor of Hemsbach, in the diocese of Worms. Here he met with a people more ready to receive the doctrines of the Reformation than those of Schlettenbach, and who cheerfully consented to destroy the images in the church, and other remains of former superstition. A few months after his arrival he married the sister of John Stibelius, minister of Hippenheim; and the nuptials being solemnized Jan. the 5th, 1574, publicly in the church of Hemsbach, excited no little curiosity and surprize among the people, to whom the marriage of a clergyman was a new thing. They were, however, easily reconciled to the practice, when they came to know what St. Paul teaches concerning the marriage of a bishop in his epistles to Timothy and Titus. Yet such was the unhappy state of this country, rent by continual contests about religion, that no sooner was Popery, the common enemy, rooted out, than new disturbances arose, between the Lutherans and Calvinists. After the death of the elector Frederic III. in 1577, his son Louis, a very zealous Lutheran, established every where in his dominions ministers of that persuas.nn, to the exclusion of the Sarramentariane, or Calvinists, by which measure Pareus lost his living at Hemsbach, and retired into the territories of prince John of Casimir, the elector’s brother. He was now chosen minister at Ogersheim, near Frankenthal, where he continued three years, and then removed to Winzingen, near Neustadt, at which last place prince Casimir, in 1578, had founded a school, and settled there all the professors that had been driven from Heidelberg. This rendered Winzingen much more agreeable, as well as advantageous; and, upon the death of the elector Louis, in 1583, the guardianship of his son, together with the administration of the palatinate, devolved upon prince Casimir, who restored the Calvinist ministers, and Pareus obtained the second chair in the college of Wisdom at Heideiberg, in Sept. 1584. He commenced author two years afterwards, by printing his “Method of the Ubiijuitarian controversy;” “Methodus Ubiquitariae coniroversise.” He also printed an edition of the “German Bible,” with notes, at Neustadt, in 1589, which occasioned a warm controversy between him and James Andreas, an eminent Lutheran divine of Tubingen.

In 1591, he was made first professor in his college; in 1592, counsellor to the ecclesiastical senate; and in 1593, was admitted doctor of divinity in the most solemn manner. He had already held several disputes against the writers of the Augsburg Confession, but that of 1596 was the most considerable, in which he had to defend Caivin against the imputation of favouring Judaism, in his Commentaries upon several parts of Scripture. In 1595, he was promoted to the chair of divinity professor lor the Old Testament in his university; by which he was eased of the great fatigue he had undergone for fourteen years, in governing the youth who were educated at the college of Wisdom. Tossanus, professor of divinity for the New Testament, dying in 1602, Pareus succeeded to that chair, and a few years after he bought a house in the suburbs of Hei(lelburg, and built in the garden an apartment for his library, which he called his “Pareanum.” In this ru- took great delight, and the whole house went uitfrw;irds by that name, the elector having, out of respect to him, honouivd it with several privileges and immunities. At the same time, his reputation spreading itself every where, brought young students to him from the remotest parts of Hungary and Poland. In 1617 an evangelical jubilee was instituted in memory of the church’s deliverance from popery an hundred years before, when Luther began to preach. The solemnity lasted three days, during which orations, disputations, poems, and sermons, were delivered on the occasion. Pareus also published some pieces on the subject, which drew upon him the resentment of the Jesuits of Mentz; and a controversy took place between them. The following year, 1618, at the instance of the States General, he was pressed to go to the synod of Dort, but excused himself on account of age and infirmities. After this time he enjoyed but little tranquillity. The apprehensions he had of the ruin which his patron the elector Palatine would bring upon himself by accepting the crown of Bohemia, obliged him to change his habitation. He appears to have terrified himself with a thousand petty alarms, real or imaginary, and therefore his friends, in order to relieve him from this timidity of disposition, advised him to take refuge in the town of Anweil, in the dutchy of DeuxPonts, near Landau, at which he arrived in Oct. 1621. He left that place, however, some months after, and went to Neustadt, where his courage reviving, he determined to return to Heidelberg, wishing to pass his last moments at his beloved Pareanum, and be buried near the professors of the university. His wish was accordingly fulfilled; for he died at Pareanum June 15, 1622, and was interred with all the funeral honours which the universities in Germany usually bestow on their members.

He left a son named Philip, who wrote the life of his father. Although Pareus was a great enemy to innovations, yet his “Irenicum” proves that he was a friend to conciliation, and his services in promoting the reformed religion were very extensive. His exegeticai works were published by his son at Francfort in 1647, in 3 vols. folio. Among these are his “Commentary upon St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,” in 1617, which gave such offence to James I. of England, as containing some anti-monarchical principles, that he caused it to be burnt by the common hangman; and the university of Oxford also condemned it. It was refuted by David Owen, who was D. D. and chaplain to John Ramsay, viscount Haddington and earl of Holderness, in a piece entitled “Anti-Paraeus, sive determinatio de jure regio habita Cantabrigiae in scholis theologicis, 19 April, 1619, contra Davidem Paroeum, caeterosque reformats religionis antimonarchos,” Cantab. 1632, 8vo. He had before published “The Concord of a Papist and Puritan, for the coercion, deposition, and killing of kings,” Camb. 161O, 4to.

, son of the preceding, one of the most laborious grammarians that Germany ever produced, was born at Hembach, May 24, 1576. He began his studies at Neustadt, continued them at Heidelberg, and afterwards visited some of the foreign universities, at the expence of the elector Palatine, where he was always courteously received, not only on account of his own merit, but his father’s high reputation. Among others, he received great civilities from Isaac Casaubon at Paris. In 1612, he was made rector of the college of Neustadt, which post he held till the place was taken by the Spaniards in 1622, when he was ordered by those new masters to leave the country immediately, at which time his library was also plundered by the soldiers. He published several books on- grammatical subjects, and was remarkably fond of Plautus. This drew him into a dispute with John Gruter, professor at Heidelberg, in 1620, which was carried to such a height, that neither the desolation which ruined both their universities and their libraries, and reduced their persons to the greatest extremities, nor even their banishment, proved sufficient to restrain their animosity, or incline them to the forbearance of mutual sufferers. Philip also undertook the cause of his late father against Owen, mentioned in the last article, whom he answered in a piece entitled “Anti-Owenus,” &c. He was principal of several colleges, as he was of that at Hanau in 1645. The dedication of his father’s exegetical works shews him to be living in 1647, and Saxius conjectures that he died the following year. The same writer informs us that his first publication was “Castigationes in brevem et maledicam admonitionem Joannis Magiri Jesuitae predicantis apud Nemetes Spirantes,” Heidelberg, 1608, 8vo. This refers to a controversy which his father had with Magirus, the Jesuit. He wrote also some commentaries upon the “Holy Scriptures,” and other theological works. He published “Plautus,” in 1609, with notes; also a “Lexicon Plautinum,” in 1614; st Analecta Plautina,“in 1617; a treatise” De imitatione Tereiuiana, ubi Plautum imitatus est,“1617; a second edition of” Plautus,“in 1619, and of the” Analecta Plautina,“in 1620, and again in 1623. H also published a third edition of his” Plautus“in 1641. The” Prolegomena“which it contains of that poet’s life, the character of his versification, and the nature of his comedy, have been prefixed entire to the Delphin edition. He published his answer to Gruter in 1620, with this title,” Provocatio ad senatum criticum pro Plauto et electis Plautinis“and more of this angry controversy may be seen in the long preface prefixed to his” Analecta Plautina.“He also published” Calligraphia Romana, sive Thesaurus phrasium linguae Latinos,“in 1620; and” Electa Symmachiana, Lexicon Symmachianum, Calligraphia Synimachiana,“in 1617, 8vo: to which we may add his father’s life,” Narratio de curriculo vitce et obitu D. Parei," 1633, 8vo.

, son of the preceding, trod in the steps of his father, applied himself vigorously to the study of the classics, and published several laborious pieces; for which he was obliged to Vossius, who had a great respect for him, and made it his business to procure booksellers who would print his works. He was unfortunately killed, in 1635, by a gang of highwaymen, or, as others say, by some soldiers at the siege of Keiserslauteren. He was a considerable master of Greek. His publications are, 1. “The Poem of Musseus upon the Loves of Hero and Leander, with notes,” 1627. 2. “Mellificium Atticum,” a thick 4to, being a collection of sentences extracted from Greek authors, which he dedicated to the university of Oxford. 3. MeduHa Historise Ecclesiastics,“in 1631; to which he added” Notes.“4. An edition of Lucretius, Francfort, 1631, 8vo. 5.” Historia Bavarico-Palatina,“1633. 6.” Spicilegium subsecivum," or notes upon Quintilian, published in an edition of that author at London, in 1641, 8vo.

, usually called the Abbe Paris, would not have deserved notice here unless for certain impostures connected with his name, in which, however, he had no hand. He was born at Paris, and was the eldest son of a counsellor to the parliament, whom he was to have succeeded in that office; but he preferred the ecclesiastical profession; and, when his parents were dead, resigned the whole inheritance to his brother, only reserving to himself the right of applying for necessaries. He was a man, says the abb UAvocat, of the most devout temper, and who to great candour of mind joined great gentleness of manners. He catechized, during some time, in the parish of St. Come; undertook the direction of the clergy, and held conferences with them. Cardinal de Noailles, to whose cause he was attached, wanted to make him curate of that parish, but found many obstacles to his plan; and M. Paris, after different asylums, where he had lived extremely retired, confined himself in a house in the fauxbourg St. Marcoul, where, sequestered from the world, he devoted himself wholly to prayer, to the practice of the most rigorous penitence, and to labouring with his hands, having for that purpose learnt to weave stockings. He was one of those who opposed the bull Unigenitus, and was desirous also to be an author, and wrote “Explications of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,” to the “Galatians,” and “An Analysis of the Epistle to the Hebrews;” but acquired no reputation by these. He died May I, 1727, at Paris, aged thirty-seven, and was interred in the little church-yard belonging to St. Medard’s parish. Though M. Paris had been useless to the Jansenists while alive, they thought proper to employ him in working miracles after his death; and stories were invented of miraculous cures performed at his tomb, which induced thousands to flock thither, where they practised grimaces and convulsions in so ridiculous and disorderly a manner, that the court was at last forced to put a stop to this delusion, by ordering the church-yard to be walled up, January 27, 1732. Some time before, several curates solicited M. de Vintimille, archbishop of Paris, by two requests, to make judicial inquiry into the principal miracles attributed to M. Paris; and that prelate appointed commissioners who easily detected the impostnre, which would not deserve a place here had it not served Hume and some other deists with an argument against the real miracles of the gospel, the fallacy of which argument has been demonstrated with great acuteness by the late bishop Douglas, in his “Criterion.”

, an English historian, was a Benedictine monk of the congregation of Clugny, in the monastery of St. Alban’s, the habit of which order he took in 1217. He was an universal scholar; understood, and had a good taste both in painting and architecture. He was also a mathematician, a poet, an orator, a divine, an historian, and a man of distinguished probity. Such rare accomplishments and qualities as these, did not fail to place him very high in the esteem of his contemporaries; and he was frequently employed in reforming some monasteries, visiting others, and establishing the monastic discipline in all. He reproved vice without distinction of persons, and did not even spare the English court itself; at the same time he shewed a hearty affection for his country in maintaining its privileges against the encroachments of the pope. Of this we have a clear, though unwilling, evidence in Baronius, who observes, that this author remonstrated with too sharp and bitter a spirit against the court of Rome; and that, except in this particular only, his history was an incomparable work. He died at St. Alban’s in 1259. His principal work, entitled “Historia Major,” consists of two parts: The first, from the creation of the world to William the Conqueror; the second, from that king’s reign to 1250. He carried on this history afterwards to the year of his death in 1259. Rishanger, a monk of the monastery of St. Alban’s, continued it to 1272 or 1273, the year of the death of Henry III. It was first printed at London in 1571, and reprinted 1640, 1684, fol. besides several foreign editions. There are various ms copies in our public libraries, particularly one which he presented to Henry III. and which is now in the British Museum. From Jiis Mss. have also been published “Vitas duorum Offarum, Merciae regum, S, Albani fundatorum” <c Gesta viginti duo abbatum S. Albani“”Additamenta chronicorum ad historian) majorern,“all which accompany the editions of his” Historia Major“printed in 1640 -and 1684. Among his unpublished Mss. are an epitome of his” Historia Major," and a history from Adam to the conquest, principally from Matthew of Westminster. This is in the library of Bene't college, Cambridge. The titles of some other works, but of doubtful authority, may be seen in Bale and Pits.

, famous for his adventures, and his hostility to the Jesuits, was the son of a weaver at Bar-le-duc, of the name of Parisot, where he was born March 8, 1697. He embraced the monastic life in 1716, and the provincial of his order going to Rome, to attend the election of a general in 1734, took Parisot with him as his secretary. In 1736 he went to Pondicherry, and was made a parish-priest of that city by M. Dupleix, the governor but the Jesuits, with whom he quarrelled, found means to remove him from the East Indies to America, whence he returned to Rome in 1744. He was now employed in drawing up an account of the religious rites of the Malabar Christians but, dreading the intrigues of the Jesuits, withdrew to Lucca, where he completed his work, under the title of “Historical Memoirs relative to the Missions into the Indies,” in 2 vols. 4to. As this work contained some curious discoveries of the means made use of by the Jesuit missionaries to increase their number of converts, he greatly offended both his own order and them, and was obliged to quit his country: he went first to Venice, then to Holland, and afterwards to England, where he established in the neighbourhood of London two manufactories of tapestry. From London he removed to Prussia, and from thence into the duchy of Brunswick. Here he was allowed by the pope to assume the habit of a secular priest. He now assumed the name of the abbé Plate!, went to France, and from thence to Portugal, where, on account of the persecutions which he endured, he obtained a pension. Having completed his great work against the Jesuits, he revisited France, and committed it to the press, in 6 vols. 4to. Afterwards he re-entered the order of the capuchins at Commercy, but, being of a restless disposition, he soon quitted their community, and took up his abode at a village in Lorrain, where he died in 1770, at the age of seventy -three.

Parker (Henry) Lord Morley, a nobleman of literary taste in the reign of Henry VIII. was the son and heir of sir William Parker, knight, by Alice, sister and heir of Henry Lovel, and daughter of William Lovel, a younger son of William lord Lovel of Tichmersh, by Alianore, daughter and heir of Robert Morley, lord Morley, who died 21 Henry Vlth. He was educated at Oxford, but at what college, or at what time, does not appear. After leaving the university, he retired to his estate in Northamptonshire, and in the 21st year of the reign of Henry VIII. was summoned to parliament by the title of lord Morley. He was one of the barons, who, in the year following, signed the memorable declaration to pope Clement Vji. threatening him with the loss of his supremacy in England, unless he consented to the king’s divorce, but he still remained a bigoted adherent to the popish religion. In the 25th of the same reign, having a dispute for precedence with lord Dacre of Gillesland, his pretensions were confirmed by parliament. Anthony Wood says, that “his younger years were adorned with all kind of superficial learning, especially with dramatic poetry, and his elder with that which was divine.” Wood adds, that he was living, “an ancient man, and in esteem among the nobility, in the latter end of Henry VIII.” But from his epitaph, which is inserted in Collins’s Peerage, it appears that he died in Nov. 1556, aged eighty. His great grandson, Edward lord Morley, who married Elizabeth, sole daughter and heir of William Stanley, lord Montegle, had issue Mary, who by her husband Thomas Habington, of Henlip in Worcestershire, was mother of William Habington the poet, and was supposed to have been the person who wrote to her brother William, lord Morley and Montegle, the famous letter of warning respecting the gun-powder plot.

Phillips says that our lord Morley was sent by Henry VIII. with the garter to the archduke of Austria. Of his works, nothing has been published but “A Declaration of the 94th Psalm,” printed by T* Berthelet in 1539. The rest, which remain in ms. in the king’s library, and whose titles are given in Casley’s catalogue, are translations from catholic writers, three or four lives from Plutarch, and Tully’s Dream of Scipio. Waldron, in his “Literary Museum,” has given a specimen of one of lord Morley’s translations from Boccaccio. Lord Morley is also said to have written several tragedies and comedies, whose very titles are lost, and which, as Mr. Warton thinks, were nothing more than grave mysteries and moralities, which probably would not have been lost had they deserved to live. “Certain Rhimes,” and the “Lives of Sectaries,” are mentioned as his, but of them nothing is now known, ex cept some lines which may be seen in our authorities.

, the second protestant archbishop of Canterbury, a very learned prelate, and a great benefactor to the literature of his country, was born in the parish of St. Saviour’s, Norwich, Aug. 6, 1504. He was of ancient and reputable families both by the father’s and mother’s side. His father dying when he was only twelve years of age, the care of his education devolved on his mother, who appears to have spared no pains in procuring him the best tutors in such learning as might qualify him for the university, to which he was removed in September 1521. He was entered of Corpus Christi or Bene't college, Cambridge, and was at first maintained at his mother’s expense, but in six months after admittance that expense was in some measure relieved, by his being chosen, a scholar of the house, called a bible clerk. In 1524 he took his degree of bachelor of arts, and in 1526 was made subdeacon, under the titles of Barnwell, and the chapel in Norwich fields. While at college, he had for his contemporaries Bacon and Cecil, Bradford and Ridley, afterwards men of great eminence in state and church, and the two latter distinguished sufferers for the sake of religion.

In April 1527 he was ordained deacon, in June priest, and in September created master of arts, and chosen fellow of the college, having approved himself to the society by his regular and studious behaviour. He now studied the Scriptures, fathers, and ecclesiastical writers, with such diligence and attention, that in a few years he made great progress in every branch of knowledge necessary for a divine; and began to be so much noticed on that account, that when cardinal Wolsey was looking out for men of the greatest learning and character, to fill his new college at Oxford, Mr. Parker was one of those whom he selected for this mark of distinction; but, through the persuasion of his friends, he declined the cardinal’s offer, as did, at the same time, his celebrated predecessor Cranmer, then on the eve of being made archbishop of Canterbury.

In 1533, when Mr. Parker had reached his twenty-ninth year, Cranmer, who was now promoted to the archbishopric, granted him a licence to preach through his province, as the king did a patent for the same throughout the kingdom, good and solid preachers being at that time very rare, The university, likewise, as he was much afflicted with a head-ache, readily passed a grace that he might preach covered, and showed him other marks of their regard. We have already noticed some of his celebrated contemporaries, and it may now be added, that he lived in great intimacy and friendship with Bilney, Stafford, Arthur, friar Barnes, Sowode, master of the college, Fowke, and many others, by whose means religion and learning were beginning to revive at Cambridge. For Bilney he had so great a veneration, that he went down to Norwich to attend his martyrdom, and afterwards defended him against the misrepresentations of sir Thomas More, who had asserted that he recanted at the stake. In the abovementioned year (1533) he was sent for to court, and made chaplain to queen Anne Boleyn, with whom he soon became a great favourite, she admiring his piety, learning, and prudence. A short time before her death, she gave him a particular charge to take care of her daughter Elizabeth, that she might not want his pious and wise counsel; and at the same time laid a strict charge upon the young princess, to make him a grateful return, if it should ever be in her power.

In July 1535 he proceeded B. D. and in the same year was preferred by the queen to the deanry of the college of Stoke-Clare in Suffolk, which was the more acceptable, as affording him an agreeable retirement for the pursuit of his studies. His friend Dr. Walter Haddon used to call it Parker’s Tusculanum. Meeting here with many superstitious practices and abuses that stood in need of correction, he immediately composed a new body of statutes, and erected a school for the instruction of youth in grammar and the study of humanity, which by his prudent care and management soon produced the happiest effects. These regulations were so generally approved, that when the duke of Norfolk was about to convert the monastery at Thetford, of his own foundation, into a college of secular priests, he requested a sight of them for his direction. Mr. Parker now continued to be an assiduous preacher, often preaching at Stoke, and at Cambridge, and places adjacent, and sometimes at London, at St. Paul’s-cross. At what time he imbibed the principles of the reformers we are not told, but it appears that in these sermons he attacked certain Romish superstitions with such boldness, that articles were exhibited against him by some zealous papists, against whom he vindicated himself with great ability before the lord Chancellor Audley, who encouraged him to go on without fear. On the death of queen Anne in 1537, the king took him under his more immediate protection, appointed him one of his chaplains, and, upon new-modelling the church of Ely, nominated him to one of the prebends in the charter of erection.

In 1538 he made a visit to the university, where, after having performed his exercises with general applause, he commenced D. D. In 1542 he was presented by the chapter of Stoke to the rectory of Ashen in Essex, which he resigned in 1544, and was presented to the rectory of Birmingham All Saints, in the county of Norfolk; but his most important promotion that year, was to the mastership of Bene't college, Cambridge, where he had been educated. On this occasion he was recommended to the society by the king, as the fittest person in every respect; and they knowing his character, did not hesitate to elect him, and he was admitted accordingly Dec. 4, 1544. He began his government of the college with making some useful orders concerning certain benefactions and foundations belonging to the college; and, to prevent the college goods from being embezzled, he caused exact inventories of them to be made, and deposited in the common chest, ordering at the same time that they should be triennially inspected and renewed by the master and fellows. Finding likewise their accounts in great confusion, occasioned principally by the neglect of registering them in books belonging to the society, he put them into such a method, that by comparing the rentals, receipts, expenses, &c. together, they might at any time appear as clear as possible, and these he caused to be annually engrossed on parchment for their better preservation. He also undertook the revisal of the statutes, and reduced them to nearly their present form, being assisted in this by his friend Dr. Mey, the civilian, and one of the visitors who confirmed them in the second year of Edward VI. All these regulations and transactions, with some other matters relating both to the college and university, he caused to be registered in a book, called the Black Book, which has ever since been in the custody of the master. The old statutes were indeed once more introduced in the time of queen Mary, but continued no longer in force than to the first year of Elizabeth’s reign, when the former were again revived, and in 1568 finally reviewed, corrected, and approved by her visitors. In 1545 he was elected vice-chancellor, in which office he had an opportunity of exerting himself still farther for the welfare of his college and the university at large; and he gave such satisfaction, that within the space of three years he was elected to the same office. On his election, Dr. Haddon, the public orator, gave him this character to his friend Cheke, “cujus tu gravitatem, consilium, literas, nosti, nos experimur;” adding, “Catonem aut Quintum Fabium renatum putes.”

In the same year, 1545, the society presented him to the rectory of Land-Beach; but to his great mortification, he was obliged to resign his beloved college of Stoke in 1547, although he laboured as much as possible to prevent its dissolution. To preserve, however, as far as he could, the memory of its founder Edmund Mortimer, earl of March, he brought away with him his arms painted on glass, and placed them in a window of the master’s lodge; and secured the books of history and antiquities, which made part of that invaluable collection with which he afterwards enriched his college. The same year, and in the forty-third of his age, he married Margaret the daughter of Robert Harlstone, gent. of Mattishall in Norfolk, and sister of Simon Harlstone, who had lived some time at Mendlesham in Suffolk, where he was distinguished for his piety and sufferings in the reign of queen Mary. Dr. Parker had been attached to this lady for about seven years, but they were prevented from marrying by the statute of Henry VIII. which made the marriage of the clergy felony. Mr. Masters conjectures that it was about this time he drew up, in his defence, a short treatise still preserved in the college library “De conjugio Sacerdotum,” and another against alienation of the revenues of the church, which Strype has printed in his Appendix, No. VII. It is also probable that, on the increase of his family, he added the long gallery to the master’s lodge. The lady he married proved a most affectionate wife, and had so much sweetness of temper and amiable disposition, that bishop Ridley is said to have asked, “If Mrs. Parker had a sister?” intimating that he would have been glad to have married one who came near her in excellence of character.

In 1549, when Kett’s rebellion broke out, Dr. Parker happened to be on a visit to his friends at Norwich, where he did great service by his exhortations and sermons; and even ventured into the camp of the rebels, and, without regarding the imminent danger to which this exposed him, boldly inveighed against their rebellion and cruelty, exhorted them to temperance, sobriety, and submission, and placed in the strongest light every argument and warning that was likely to prevail. To give a faithful account of this affair, he afterwards employed Mr. Nevile (see Nevile, Alexander), who wrote it in elegant Latin, and received for his reward an hundred pounds. In 1550 he lost his most intimate friend Dr. Martin Bucer, who left him one of his executors; and to testify his great regard for that eminent reformer, he preached his funeral sermon. In this, with great modesty and diffidence, he has drawn a most excellent character of him, and indeed the whole is written in a style so plain and uniform, as to be much superior to the common rate of sermons in those days. It was printed by Jugge, under the title, “Howe we ought to take the death of the godly, a sermon made in Cambridge at the burial of the noble clerck, D. M. Bucer. By Matthew Parker, D. of Divinitie.”

In 1552 the king presented him to the canonry and prebend of Covingham, in the church of Lincoln, where he was soon after elected dean, upon Dr. Taylor’s promotion to that see. He had before been nominated to the mastership of Trinity-college, probably on the death of Dr. Redman in 1551, but this did not take effect. It is also said that he declined a bishopric in this reign. On the accession of queen Mary, however, the scene was changed, and he, with all the married clergy who would not part with their wives, and conform to those superstitious rites and ceremonies they had so lately rejected, were stript of their preferments. He bore this reverse of fortune with pious resignation. “After my deprivation” (he says, in his private journal) “I lived so joyful before God in my conscience, and so neither ashamed nor dejected, that the most sweet leisure for study, to which the good providence of God has now recalled me, gave me much greater and more solid pleasures, than that former busy and dangerous kind of life ever afforded me. What will hereafter befall me, I know not; but to God, who takes care of all, and who will one day reveal the hidden things of men’s hearts, I commend myself wholly, and my pious and most chaste wife, with my two most dear little sons.” It appears also by a ms. in the college, quoted by Strype, that Dr. Parker “lurked secretly in those years (the reign of queen Mary) within the house of one of his friends, leading a poor life, without any men’s aid or succour; and yet so well contented with his lot, that in that pleasant rest, and leisure for his studies, he would never, in respect of himself, have desired any other kind of life, the extreme fear of danger only excepted. And therein he lived as all other good men then did. His wife he would not be divorced from, or put her away all this evil time (as he might, if he would, in those days, which so rigorously required it), being a woman very chaste, and of a very virtuous behaviour, and behaving herself with all due reverence toward her husband.”

It may seem extraordinary that one who had so early imbibed the sentiments of the reformers, and had adhered to them so constantly, should have escaped the vigilance of the persecutors; and it is certain that strict search was sometimes made for him, and that on one occasion, when obliged to make his escape on a sudden, he got a fall from his horse, by which he was so much hurt, that he never recovered it. Yet either from the remissness of his enemies, or the kindness of his friends, he was enabled to secrete himself, and notwithstanding the danger he was in, he employed his time in study. Among other things, it was during this alarming interval, that he wrote or rather enlarged a treatise, supposed to be drawn up by bishop Ponet, in defence of priests’ marriages, against a book of Dr. Martin’s, which he caused to be printed, but without his name, in 1562. The title was “A Defence of Priests’ Marriages, established by the Imperial laws of the realm of England; against a civilian, naming himself Thomas Martin, doctor of the civil laws,” &c. This work is noticed in our account of Dr. Martin, and a full account of it is given by Strype, p. 504. Dr. Parker also employed some part of his time in translating the book of Psalms into various and elegant English metre, which was likewise afterwards printed, but in what year is uncertain, unless in 1567, as minuted with a pen in the copy which is in the college library. This book, which Strype says he never could get a sight of, is divided into three quinquagenes with the argument of each psalm in metre placed before it, and a suitable collect full of devotion and piety at the end. Some copies of verses, and transcripts from the fathers and others on the use of the psalms are prefixed to it, with a table dividing them into Prophetici, Eruditorii, Consolatorii, &c. and at the end are added the eight several tunes, with alphabetical tables to the whole.

On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he left his retreat in Norfolk, and being on a visit to his friends at Cambridge, was sent for up to town by his old acquaintance and contemporaries at the university, sir Nicholas Bacon, now lord-keeper of the great seal, and sir William Cecil, secretary of state, who well knew his worth. But he was now become enamoured of retirement, and suspecting they designed him for some high dignity in the church, of which however no intimation had yet been given, he wrote them many letters, setting forth his own inabilities and infirmities, and telling the lord-keeper in confidence, “he would much rather end his days upon some such small preferment as the mastership of his college, a living of twenty nobles per ann. at most, than to dwell in the deanry of Lincoln, which is 200 at the least.” These statesmen, however, still considered him as in every respect the best fitted for the archbishopric of Canterbury; and the reluctance he showed to accept it, and the letters he wrote both to them and the queen, only served to convince all parties that they had made a proper choice. He was accordingly consecrated on Dec. 17, 1559, in Lambeth chapel, by William Barlow, late bishop of Bath and Wells, and then elect of Chichester; John Story, late bishop of Chichester, and then elect of Hereford; Miles Coverdale, bishop of Exeter, and John Hodgkin, suffragan bishop of Bedford. An original instrument of the rites and ceremonies used on this occcasion, corresponding exactly with the archbishop’s register, is still carefully preserved in Bene't college library, and proved of great service, when the papists, some years after, invented a story that Parker was consecrated at the Nag’s head inn, or tavern, in Cheapside. That this was a mere fable has been sufficiently shown by many authors, and is acknowledged even by catholic writers. Being thus constituted primate and metropolitan, Dr. Parker endeavoured to fill the vacant sees with men of learning and piety, who were well affected to the reformation; and soon after his own consecration, he consecrated in his chapel at Lambeth, Grindal, bishop of London; Cox, bishop of Ely; Sandys, bishop of Worcester; Jewell, bishop of Salisbury; and several others. The subsequent history of archbishop Parker is that of the church of England. He had assisted at her foundation, and for the remainder of his life had a principal hand in the superstructure. Referring, however, to ecclesiastic history, and particularly to Strype’s invaluable volume, for the full details of the archbishop’s conduct, we shall confine ourselves to a few of the most prominent of those measures in which he was personally concerned. Soon after his consecration he received a letter from the celebrated Calvin, in which that reformer said that “he rejoiced in the happiness of England, and that God had raised up so gracious a queen, to be instrumental in propagating the true faith of Jesus Christ, by restoring the gospel, and expelling idolatry, together with the bishop of Rome’s usurped power.” And then in order to unite protestants together, as he had attempted before in king Edward’s reign, he intreated the archbishop to prevail with her majesty, to summon a general assembly of all the protestant clergy, wheresoever dispersed; and that a set form and method (namely of public service, and government of the church) might be established , not only within her dominions, but also among all the reformed and evangelical churches abroad. Parker communicated this letter to the queen’s council, and they took it into consideration, and desired the archbishop to return thanks to Calvin; and to signify that they thought his proposals very fair and desireable, but as to church-government, to inform him, that the church of England would adhere to the episcopal form. The death of Calvin prevented any farther intercourse on this subject, but Strype has brought sufficient evidence that Calvin was not absolutely averse to episcopacy, and that he was as zealous for uniformity as our archbishop, who has been so much reproached for his endeavours to promote it.

In 1560, Parker wrote a letter to the queen, with the concurrence of the bishops of London and Ely, exhorting her majesty to marry, which it is well known she declined. He also visited several dioceses, in some of which he found the churches miserably supplied with preachers. The bishop of Ely certified, that of 152 livings in his diocese, fifty-two only were duly served; and that there were thirty-four benefices vacant, thirteen that had neither rectors nor vicars, and fifty-seven that were enjoyed by non-­residents. This was not owing to the popish clergy being deprived of their benefices, for the number so deprived did not exceed two hundred in the whole kingdom; but the truth was, that at the conclusion of Mary’s reign the great bulk of the clergy were grossly ignorant, and it was long before the universities were encouraged to furnish a series of learned divines.

In 1561, archbishop Parker and some of the other prelates made an application to the queen against the use of images, to which her majesty still discovered a very great inclination, and it may be inferred that they induced her to change her opinion on this matter, from the anecdote given in our account of dean Nowell, who incurred her displeasure by only presenting her with a prayer-book, illustrated with engravings. In other respects she adhered to many of her father’s notions, and when about this time she took a journey into Essex and Suffolk, she expressed great displeasure at finding so many of the clergy married, and at observing so many women and children in cathedrals and colleges. She had, indeed, so strong an aversion to matrimony in the clergy, that it was owing to Cecil’s courage and dexterity, as appears by a letter of his to Parker, that she did not absolutely prohibit the marriage of all ecclesiastics. He was, however, obliged to consent to an injunction, “that no head or member of any college or cathedral, should bring a wife, or any other woman, into the precincts of it, to abide in the same, on pain of forfeiture of all ecclesiastical promotions.” Archbishop Parker took the liberty to remonstrate with the queen against this order, and on this interview she treated the institution of matrimony with contempt, declared to him that she repented her making any of them bishops, and wished it had been otherwise; nay, threatened him with injunctions of another nature, which his grace understood to be in favour of the old religion. In his letter to Cecil on this occasion, he assures him that the bishops have all of them great reason to be dissatisfied with the queen; that he repents his having engaged in the station in which he was; and that the reception which he had from her majesty the day before, had quite indisposed him for all other business, and he could only mourn to God in the bitterness of his soul; but if she went on to force the clergy to any compliance, they must obey God rather than men, and that many of them had conscience and courage enough to sacrifice their lives in defence of their religion.

But, whatever our archbishop might suffer from the despotic caprices of the queen, he had yet more trouble with the dissentions which appeared in the church itself, and never ceased to prevail, in a greater or less degree, until the whole fabric was overturned in the reign of Charles I. These first appeared in the opposition given to the ecclesiastic habits by a considerable number of divines, and those men of worth and piety, who seemed to be of opinion that popery might consist in dress as well as doctrine. By virtue of the clause in the act of uniformity, which gave the queen a power of adding any other rites and ceremonies she pleased, she set forth injunctions ordering that the clergy should wear seemly garments, square caps, and copes, which had been laid aside in the reign of king Edward. Many conformed to these in every circumstance, but others refused the cap and surplice, considering them as relics of popery, and therefore both superstitious and sinful. The queen, enraged at this opposition, which was favoured even by some of her courtiers, wrote a letter to the two archbishops, reflecting with some acrimony on it, as the effect of remissness in the bishops; and requiring them to confer with her ecclesiastical commissioners, that an exact order and uniformity might be maintained in all external rites and ceremonies; and that none hereafter should be admitted to any ecclesiastical preferment, but those who were disposed to obedience in this respect. Archbishop Parker, accordingly, with the assistance of several of his brethren, drew up ordinances for the due order in preaching and administering the sacraments, and for the apparel of persons ecclesiastical. According to these, the preachers were directed to study edification, and to manage controversy with sobriety; exhorting the people to frequent the communion, and to obey the laws, and the queen’s injunctions. All the licences for preaching were declared void and of no effect, but were to be renewed to such as their bishops thought worthy of the office; and such as preached unsound doctrine were to be denounced to the bishop, and not contradicted in the church. These who had licences were to preach once in three months; and those who were unlicensed, were to read homilies. In administering the sacrament, the principal minister was to wear a cope, but at all other prayers only the surplice; in cathedrals they were to wear hoods, and preach in them; the sacrament was to be received by every body kneeling; every minister saying the public prayers, or administering the sacraments, was to wear a surplice with sleeves; and every parish was to provide a communion-table, and to have the ten commandments set on the east wall above it. The bishops were to give notice when any persons were to be ordained, and none were to be ordained without degrees. Then followed some rules about wearing apparel, caps, and gowns; to all which was added, a form of subscription to be required of all who were admitted to any office in the church; that they would not preach without licence, that they would read the Scriptures intelligibly, that they would keep a register-book, that they would use such apparel in service-time especially as was appointed, that they would keep peace and quiet in their parishes, that they would read some of the Bible daily, and in conclusion, that they would observe uniformity, and conform to all the laws and orders already established for that purpose; and to use no sort of trade, if their living amounted to twenty nobles.

It might have been expected that these ordinances would have pleased the queen, as being in conformity with her wishes, and, in fact, in answer to her orders; but the opponents of the habits, who began to be called Puritans, applied to their friends at court, and especially to her great favourite Robert Dudley, earl of Leicester, who prevailed so far with her majesty, that all her former resolution disappeared, and she refused to sanction the ordinances with her authority, telling the archbishop, that the oath of canonical obedience was sufficient to bind the inferior clergy to their duty, without the interposition of the crown. The archbishop, hurt at such capricious conduct, and at being placed in such a situation between the court and the church, told Cecil, that if the ministry persisted in their indifference, he would “no more strive against the stream, fume or chide who would;” and it is most probable his remonstrances prevailed, for the above ordinances were a few days after published, under the name of Advertisements; and he then proceeded upon them with that zeal which procured him from one party the reproach of being a persecutor, and from the other the honour of being a firm friend and supporter of the church-establishment. The particular steps he took, the trials he instituted, and the punishments he inflicted, are detailed at length by Strype and other church-historians; but on the merit of his conduct there is great diversity of opinion. It has been said, both in excuse and in reproach of his measures, that he was too subservient to the queen. To us it appears, that he took as much liberty in advising the queen, and in contending with her humours, as any prelate or statesman of her reign, and that what he did to promote uniformity in the church arose from a sincere, however mistaken opinion, that uniformity was necessary to the advancement of the reformation, and in itself practicable. All that is wrong in this opinion must be referred to the times in which he lived, when no man conceived that an established church could flourish if surrounded by sectaries, and when toleration was not at all understood in its present sense.

He continued to struggle with the difficulties attending his office and measures, until his seventy-first year, when, finding himself in a declining condition, he signed his will April 5, 1575, and died on May 17 following. He was buried in his own chapel at Lamleth, with a Latin inscription by his friend Dr. Walter Haddon: but this was demolished, and his bones taken up and scattered, during the usurpation; nor was it known what became of them till they were discovered by Dugdale, in archbishop Sancroft’s time, who again replaced them in the midst of the area of the chapel, as a small marble stone facing the altar, with this inscription upon it, now denotes, "Corpus Matthæi archiepiscopi tandem hie quiescit:" the monument itself, with an epitaph upon it of his own drawing up, being since removed into the anti-chapel.

Concerning his learning and zeal for the promotion of learning, there is no difference of opinion. His skill in ancient liturgies was such, that he was one of the first selected to draw up the Book of Common Prayer; and when he came to be placed at the head of the church, he laboured much to engage the bishops, and other learned men, in the revisal and correction of the former translations of the Bible. This was at length undertaken and carried on under his direction and inspection, who assigned particular portions to each of his assistants, which he afterwards perused and corrected, and spared no pains in getting it completed. It was first published in 1568, and has usually been called the “Bishop’s Bible,” and ran its course with the Geneva translation, until the present version was executed, in the reign of king James. He also published a "Saxon homily on the Sacrament,“translated out of Latin into that language, by Ælfric a learned abbot of St. Alban’s, about 900 years before; with two epistles of the same, in which is not the least mention of the doctrine of transubstantiation. He was the editor also of editions of the histories of Matthew of Westminster and Matthew of Paris, and of various other works, enumerated by Tanner; some of which were either composed by him, or printed at his expence. The work on which he is thought to have spent most time was that” De Antiquitate Britanniæ Ecclesiæ;“but his share in this is a disputed point among antiquaries. In his letter to the lord treasurer, to whom he presented a copy, he speaks of it as his own collection, which had been the employment of his leisure hours. Dr. Drake likewise, in the preface to his edition of it, quotes a letter of the archbishop’s in the college-library, in which he expressly styles it,” My book of Canterbury Predecessors;“and archbishop Bramhall was of opinion, that the conclusion of the preface proved Parker himself to have been the author. But notwithstanding these testimonies, the matter is doubtful. Selden was the first who called it in question, although without giving his reasons; and sir Henry Spelman considered Dr. Ackworth to have been either the author or collector of the work. Archbishop Usher thinks that Ackworth wrote only the first part, concerning the British antiquities; and he, Selden, and Wharton, ascribe the lives of the archbishops to Josselyn, and make Parker little more than the director or encourager of the whole. And this certainly seems to be confirmed by the copy now in the Lambethlibrary. This copy, which originally belonged to that library, but was missing from the year 1720, was replaced in 1757 by Dr. Trevor, bishop of Durham, who found it in the Sunderland-library. This, which Dr. Ducarel thought the only perfect one existing, contains many manuscript papers, letters, and notes, respecting archbishop Parker and the see of Canterbury; and, among these, some proofs that Ackworth and Josselyn had a considerable share in the composition of the work. At the beginning of St. Augustine’s life we find this note:” These 24 pages of St. Augustine’s life were thus begun by George Acworth Dr. of laws, at the appointment of Matthew Parker Abp.of Cant, and the lives of all the archbishops should have in this course been perfected—(some words not intelligible)—but deth prevented it.“This Dr. Ackworth, as we have mentioned in our account of him (vol. I.) was alive in 1576, but how long after is not known, but as this is a year after our prelate’s death, there seems some difficulty in understanding the latter part of this note, without adopting archbishop Usher’s opinion above mentioned. We also find in the Lambeth copy, on the title-page of the history, the following note:” This Historie was collected and penned by John Josselyn, one of the sons of sir Thomas Josselyn, knight, by the appointment and oversight of Matthew Parker archbishop of Cant. the said John being entertained in the said archb. house, as one of his antiquaries, to whom, besides the allowance afforded to him in his howse, he gave to hym the parsonage of Hollinborn in Kent," &c.

It seems probable therefore that Parker planned this work, and supplied his assistants with materials from his own collections respecting ecclesiastical antiquities. It was printed probably at Lambeth, where the archbishop had an establishment of printers, engravers, and illuminators, in a folio volume, in 1572. The number of copies printed appears to have been very small, some think not more than four or five, for private distribution; but this must be a mistake; for Dr. Drake mentions his having consulted twenty-one copies, most of which, he adds, were imperfect. The copies extant, however, in a perfect state, are very few: Strype mentions only five, and one of these, which he calls the choicest of all, belonged to archbishop Sancroft, came afterwards into the hands of Mr. Wharton, and appears to be the one now at Lambeth. There is a very fine copy in the British Museum, bound in green velvet embroidered, which appears to have been the presentation-copy to queen Elizabeth. A bad edition of the work was published at Hanover in 1605; and a very elegant one by Dr. Drake in 1729, folio. In 1574, a short life of archbishop Parker was published abroad, most probably by one of his enemies among the puritans, under the title “The Life of the 70 Archbishopp of Canterbury, presently settinge. Englished, and to be added to the 69 lately sett forth in Latin. This number of seventy is so complete a number as it is great pitie ther should be one more: but that as Augustin was the first, so Matthew might be the last.” Of this scurrilous publication an account may be seen in the “Restituta,” vol. I.

To the university of Cambridge, and particularly to his own college, he was a most munificent benefactor, founding, at his own expence, many fellowships and scholarships. He was also the founder of the first Society of Antiquaries, over which he presided during his life, and in this office was succeeded by archbishop Whitgift. He had the taste and spirit of an antiquary from his earliest years, and employed his interest, when he rose in the world, as well as his fortune, in accumulating collections, or transcripts of manuscripts, from the dissolved monasteries. In his library is a letter from the privy-council, dated July 1568, signifying the queen’s pleasure, that the archbishop, or his deputies, should be permitted to peruse all the records of the suppressed houses. The greatest favour, therefore, which he conferred on literature, was the invaluable collection of Mss. and printed books which he gave to his college, and which is there still preserved. Fuller styled this collection “the Sun of English Antiquity, before it was eclipsed by that of sir Robert Cotton,” and justly, as it contained more materials, relating to the civil and ecclesiastical history of this kingdom, than had ever been collected. The manuscripts are of the eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries. Some are as old as the tenth, ninth, and eighth. They relate to the writings of the fathers and school-divinity, to civil and ecclesiastical matters, to the concerns of various religious houses, of the university, &c. Many of them are in the old Saxon character, and they are all well described in Nasmith’s Catalogue. A copy of his will is preserved in the College-library, as are two pictures of him in oil, with a beautiful one in water-colours, taken in the seventieth year of his age, at the end of the college-statutes. His only surviving son, John, was knighted in 1603, and died in 1618, but there is nothing remarkable in his history; and the family is now thought to be extinct.

, was a puritan divine of considerable learning and reading, but his early history is very variously represented. Mr. Brook, in his late “Lives of the Puritans,” places him as rector of North- Benflete, in Essex, in 1571, on the authority of Newcourt, but Newcourt is evidently speaking of a Robert Parker, who held Bardfield-parva in 1559, and must have been a different person. On the other hand, Mr. Masters, in his History of C. C. C. C informs us that he was in 1581 a pensioner of Bene't college, Cambridge, and was made scholar of the house in 1583, at which time he published a copy of Latin verses on the death of sir William Buttes, and succeeded to a fellowship in the latter end of the year following. He was then A. B. but commenced A. M. in 1585, and left the university in 1589. Both his biographers agree that the person they speak of was beneficed afterwards at Wilton, in Wiltshire, and the author of “A scholastical Discourse against symbolizing with Anti-christ in ceremonies, especially in the sign of the Cross,” printed in 1607, without a printer’s name, consisting of near 400 pages closely printed in folio. In this he appears to have employed very extensive reading to very little purpose, according to Dr. Grey; and even Mr. Pierce, in his “Vindication of the Dissenters,” owns that “his fancy was somewhat odd as to his manner of handling his argument.” It contained at the same time matter so very offensive, that a proclamation was issued for apprehending the author, who, after many narrow escapes, was enabled to take refuge in Holland. Here some of his biographers inform us that he was chosen minister of the English church at Amsterdam; but the magistrates of the city, being unwilling to disoblige the king of England by continuing him their pastor, he removed to Doesburgh, where he became chaplain to the garrison. Others tell us that he would have been chosen pastor to the English church at Amsterdam, had not the magistrates been afraid of disobliging king James. According to Mr. Brook, it would appear that he had published his work “De Descensu” before he left England, but we can more safely rely on Mr. Masters, who had seen the book, and who informs us that it was while he was at Amsterdam that he published a treatise, “De Descensu domini nostri Jesu Christi ad Inferos,” 4to, which had been begun by his learned friend Hugh Sandforcl, who finding death approaching, committed the perfecting of it to him. This he was about to do when compelled to leave England. His preface is dated Amsterdam, Dec. 30, 1611. He was also the author of a treatise “De Politia Ecclesiastica Christi et Hierarchicaopposita,” published in 1616, at which time he had been dead two years. He is indeed here represented “as an Eminent servant of Christ, called home to rest from his labours in the midst of his course.” The Bodleian catalogue assigns to him two other posthumous works, “A Discourse concerning Puritans,” 1641, 4to, and “The Mystery of the Vials opened in the 16th chapter of the Revelations.” He left a son, Thomas, author of a work called “Methodus gratioe divinse in traductione hominis peccatoris ad vitam,” Lond. 1657, 8vo, which the editor considered as a work of importance by the care he took to collate four ms copies. Brook says he wrote also “Meditations on the Prophecy of Daniel,” and died in 1677, in New England, to which he went in 1634, to avoid the consequences of nonconformity at home.

, a man of some learning, and no contemptible writer, but of despicable character, was born in Sept. 1640, at Northampton, where his father, John Parker, then practised the law. John had been bred to that profession in one of the Temples at London, and inclining to the parliament against the king, was preferred to be a member of the high court of justice in 1649, in which office he gave sentence against the three lords, Capel, Holland, and Hamilton, who were beheaded. During Oliver’s usurpation he was made an assistant committeeman for his county. In 1650, be published a book in defence of the new government, as a commonwealth, without a king or house of lords, entitled “The Government of the People of England, precedent and present,” with an emblematical engraved title-page. In June 1655, when Cromwell was declared protector, he was appointed one of the commissioners for removing obstructions at Worcesterhouse, in the Strand, near London, and was sworn serjeant at law next day. In Jan. 1659, he was appointed by the rump-parliament one of the barons of the exchequer; but, upon a complaint against him, was soon after displaced. His character, however, appears to have been such, that he was again made regularly serjeant at law, by the recommendation of chancellor Hyde, at the first call after the return of Charles II.

His son, Samuel, the subject of the present article, was educated among the Puritans at Northampton; whence, when prepared for the university, he was sent to Wadhamcollege in Oxford, and admitted, in 1659, under a presbyterian tutor. While here he affected to lead a strict and religious life, entered into a weekly society, then called the gruellers, because their chief diet was water-gruel; and it was observed “that he put more graves into his porridge than all the rest.” This society met at a house in Holywell, where he was so zealous and constant an attendant upon prayers, sermons, and sacraments, that he was esteemed one of the most valuable young men in the university. He took the degree B. A. Feb. 28, 1660. At the time of the restoration he was a violent independent, and as for some time he continued to rail against episcopacy, he was much discountenanced by the new warden, Dr. Blandford. Upon this he removed to Trinity college, where, by the advice of Dr. Ralph Bathurst, then a senior fellow of that society, he was induced to change his opinions, and became as violent against the nonconformists as he had ever been for them. He afterwards thanked Dr. Bathurst for having restored him “from the chains and fetters of an unhappy education.” He now proceeded M. A. in 1663, and having taken orders, resorted frequently to London, and became chaplain to a nobleman, whom he amused by his humourous sallies at the expence of his old friends the presbyterians, independents, &c. Mason was never more mistaken than when in his “Ode to Independence” he mentions him by the epithet “mitred dullness.” Parker was undoubtedly a man of wit, and although Marvell was his match, yet the success of the latter was not a little owing to his having the best cause.

In 1665 he was elected a fellow of the royal society, and published about the same time some physico-theological essays, in Latin, with the title “Tentamina Physico-Theologica de Deo; sive Theologia Scholastica, ad normarn novae et reformats philosophise concinnata,” Lond. 1665, 4to. This he dedicated to archbishop Sheldon. The work was attacked by N. Fairfax, M. D. in a treatise with the whimsical title of “The Bulk and Selvedge of the World.” In 1666 he published “A free and impartial Censure of the Platonic Philosophy;” and shortly after “An account of the nature and extent of the Divine Dominion and Goodness, especially as they refer to the Origenian hypothesis concerning the pre-existence of souls, together with a special account of the vanity and groundlessness of the hypothesis itself,” Oxon. 166o, 4to. About Michaelmas, 1667, archbishop Sheldon appointed him one of his chaplains, a proof that at this time he was in estimation; and this seems to have led the way to higher preferment. He now left Oxford, and resided at Lambeth, under the eye of his patron; who, in June 1670, collated him to the archdeaconry of Canterbury, in the room of Dr. Sancroft, afterwards archbishop. On Nov. 26, the same year, having accompanied William prince of Orange on his visit to Cambridge, he bad the degree of D. D. conferred upon him. On Nov. 18, 1672, he was installed prebendary of Canterbury and had the rectories of Ickham and Chartham, in Kent, conferred upon him by the archbishop about the same time. About this time he published some of those writings against the presbyterians which involved him in a controversy. The first of these was his “Discourse of Ecclesiastical Polity, wherein the authority of the civil magistrate over the consciences of subjects in matters of external religion is asserted.” This was first answered by the anonymous author of “Insolence and Impudence triumphant,” &c. 1669; and by Dr. John Owen, in “Truth and Innocence vindicated.” He then published “A Defence and Continuation of Ecclesiastical Polity (against Dr. Owen),” Lond. 1671, 8vo “Toleration discussed,” &c. 1670, 4to “A Discourse in Vindication of bishop Bramhall and the Church of England, from the fanatic charge of Popery,” &c. This was prefixed to a “Treatise” of the said bishop, written in his own defence, 1672, 8vo. A humourous censure of this piece being published by Andrew Marvell, entitled '< The Rehearsal Transprosed,“&c. our author, in the same humourous taste, wrote” A Reproof to the Rehearsal Transprosed,“1673, 8vo. Wood, however, observes, that,” finding himself beaten in this cudgelling way, his high spirit was abated for ever after, and though Marvell replied to his ‘ Reproof,’ yet he judged it more prudent to lay down the cudgels. It put him upon a more sober, serious, and moderate way of writing.“(See Marvell.) Parker’s last publication in this controversy was” A free and impartial Inquiry into the causes of that very great esteem and honour the Nonconformist Ministers are in with their followers,“1673, 8vo. In 1678 he published his” Disputationes de Deo et providentia divina,“&c. 4to, which is highly commended by Dr. Henry More in the general preface to his works. This was followed by other works, entitled” Demonstration of the divine authority of the Law of Nature, and of the Christian Religion,“1681, 4to” The Case of the Church of England briefly stated in the three first and fundamental principles of a Christian Church. I. The Obligation of Christianity by Divine Right. II. The Jurisdiction of the Church by Divine Right. III. The institution of Episcopal Superiority by Divine Right,“London, 8vo;” An account of the Government of the Christian Church, in the first six hundred years; particularly shewing, I. The Apostolical practice of Diocesan and Metropolitical Episcopacy. II. The usurpation of patriarchal and papal authority. III. The war of two hundred years between the bishops of Rome and Constantinople, of universal supremacy,“London, 1683, 8vo;” Religion and Loyalty, or, a demonstration of the power of the Christian Church within itself, supremacy of sovereign powers over it, and duty of passive obedience and nonresistance to all their commands, exemplified out of records,“&c. 8vo and the year following, the second part of the same work, containing” the history of the concurrence of the imperial and ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the Government of the Church, from the beginning of the reign of Jovian to the end of Justinian," 1685, 8vo.

As he thus by his writings, as well as personal conduct, maintained an unreserved obsequiousness to the court, during the reign of Charles II. so upon the accession of his brother to the throne, he continued in the same servile complaisance; and it was not long before he reaped the fruits of it in the bishopric of Oxford, to which he was nominated by James II. on the death of Dr. Fell in 1686, being allowed to hold the archdeaconry of Canterbury in commendam. He was also made a privy counsellor, and constituted, by a royal mandamus, president of Magdalencollege in Oxford, a situation which amounted to a disgrace, as it was in violation of the statutes, and in resistance to the lawful election of Dr. Hough. (See Hough )

Having now openly rejected the church of England, which he had sacrificed to his ambition, he became one of the Romish mercenaries, prostituting his pen in defence of transubstantiation, and the worship of saints and images. The papists, it is certain, made sure of him as a proselyte; one of whom, in a letter from Liege, informs his correspondent that he even proposed in council, whether it was not expedient that at least one college in Oxford should be allowed to be catholics, that they might not be forced to be at such charges by going beyond the seas to study. In the same spirit, having invited two popish noblemen, with a third of the church of England, to an entertainment, he drank the king’s health, wishing a happy success to all his affairs; adding, that the religion of the protestants in England seemed to him to be in no better a condition than Buda was before it was taken, and that they were next to Atheists who defended that faith. So very notorious was his conduct, that the more prudent and artful of the popish party condemned it. Father Peter, a Jesuit, and privy-counsellor to king James, in a letter to father la Chaise, confessor to Louis XIV. uses these expressions: “The bishop of Oxford has not yet declared himself openly; the great obstacle is his wife, whom he cannot rid himself of; his design being to continue a bishop, and only change communion, as it is not doubted but the king will permit, and our holy father confirm; though I don't see how he can be farther useful to us in the religion he is in, because he is suspected, and of no esteem among the heretics of the English church; nor do I see that the example of his conversion is like to draw many others after him, because he declared himself so suddenly. If he had believed my counsel, which was to temporize for some longer time, he would have done better; but it is his temper, or rather zeal, that hurried him on to it.” These two letters were first printed in a “Third Collection of Papers relating to the present juncture of affairs in England,” &c. \6S9 9 4to, and have been since inserted in Echard’s and Rapin’s histories.

His character was now become contemptible, and his authority in his diocese so very insignificant, that when he assembled his clergy and desired them to subscribe an “Address of Thanks to the king for his declaration of Liberty of Conscience,” they rejected it with such unanimity, that he got but one clergyman to concur with him in it. The last effort he made to serve the court was his publishing “Reasons for abrogating the Test” and this produced a controversy, in which he was completely foiled, his character despised, and his spirit broken. He died unlamented at Magdalen college, May 20, 1687, and was buried in the outer chapel. He was a man of learning, and in some instances an acute writer. Of that character MarvelPs wit cannot deprive him. But it may be allowed, with Burnet, that he was a man of no judgment, and of as little virtue; and as to religion, rather impious; that he was covetous and ambitious, and seemed to have no other sense ofreligion but as a political interest, and a subject of party and faction. He seldom came to prayers, or to any exercises of devotion; and was so lifted up with pride that he grew insufferable to all that came near him.

It must have been as the last effort of a desperate cause when he sent a “Discourse” to James, persuading him to embrace the protestant religion, with a “Letter” to the same purpose, which was printed at London in 1690, 4to. His works have but few readers at this day; and Swift observes, that “MarvelPs remarks on Parker continued to be read when the book which occasioned them was long ago sunk.” He left a son of his own name, who was an excellent scholar, and a man of singular modesty. He never took the oaths after the revolution. He married a bookseller’s daughter at Oxford, where he resided with a numerous family of children to support which he published some books, particularly, 1 “An English Translation of Tully de finibus, 1702,” 8vo, in the preface to which he has some animadversions upon Locke’s Essay concerning Human Understanding. 2. “An abridgment of the Ecclesiastic Histories of Eusebius, Socrates, Sozornen, and Theotloret,” 1729. He also published a Latin manuscript of his father, containing the history of his own time, under this title, “Reverendi admodum in Christo patris Samuelis Parkeri episcopi de rebus sui temporis commentariorum libri quatuor,” 1726, 8vo, of which,' two English translations were afterwards published, one by the rev. Thomas Newlin, fellow of Magdalen college. But Mr. Parker’s last and greatest work was entitled “Bibliotheca Biblica,” printed at Oxford in 5 vols. 4to, the first of which appeared in two parts in 1720, and the fifth in 1735, with an account of the other writings of the author, and some particulars of his life, drawn up by Dr. Thomas Haywood, of St. John’s college, to whom were attributed most of the dissertations in the work. He describes it as “being a new Comment upon the five Books of Moses, extracted from the ancient fathers, and the most famous critics both ancient and modern, with occasional annotations or dissertations upon particular difficulties, as they were often called for.” Mr. Parker died July 14, 1730, in his fiftieth year, leaving a widow and children. The metrical paraphrase of Leviticus xi. 13, &c. in vol. Hi. was written by Mr. Warton, of Magdalen college, father to the late learned brothers, Joseph and Thomas Warton; and the “Fragment of Hyppolitus, taken out of two Arabic Mss. in the Bodleian,” in the fourth vol. was translated by the late Dr. Hunt. Mr. Parker never was in orders, as he could not reconcile his mind to the new government; but he associated much and was highly respected by many divines, particularly nonjurors, as Dr. Hickes, Mr. Collier, Mr. Dodwell, Mr. Leslie, Mr. Nelson, and Dr. Grabe, whose liberality lessened the difficulties which a very large family occasioned. He appears to have had a place in the Bodleian library, as Mr. Wheatly, in a letter to Dr. Rawlinson, dated Dec. 1739, says, “Sam. Parker’s son I had heard before was apprenticed to Mr. Clements: but the account you give me of his extraordinary proficiency is new. If it be true also, I hope some generous patron of learning will recall him from the bookseller’s shop, and place him in his father’s seat, the Bodleian library.” This son, Sackville Parker, was afterwards for many years an eminent bookseller at Oxford, and one of the four Octogenarian booksellers, who died in 1795 and 1796, namely, James Fletcher, at eighty-six; Sackville Parker, at eightynine; Stephen Fletcher, at eighty -two, and Daniel Prince, at eighty-five. They were all born at Oxford, except James Fletcher. The present worthy bookseller, Mr. Joseph Parker, is nephew and successor to Mr. Sackville Parker.

, an eminent prelate of the sixteenth century, was born at Guild ford, in Surrey, in 1511, and was the son of Mr. George Parkhurst of that place. He was educated there in the grammar school adjoining to Magdalen college gate, under Thomas Robertson, a very famous teacher. He was elected fellow of Merton college in 1529, and three years after, proceeding in arts, entered into holy orders. Anthony Wood says that he was at this time better esteemed for poetry and oratory than divinity. Yet we find him recorded in the life of Jewell, as the tutor of that excellent prelate, who entered of Merton college in 1535, and as “prudently instilling, together with his other learning, those excellent principles into this young gentleman, which afterwards made him the darling and wonder of his age.” Among other useful employments, we find him collating Coverdale and Tindal’s translations of the Bible along with his pupil, of whom he conceived a very high opinion, and on one occasion exclaimed “Surely Paul’s Cross will one day ring of this boy,” a prophecy which was remarkably fulfilled in Jewell’s celebrated sermon there in 1560. Parkhurst, it is true, was a poet and an orator, but he had very early examined the controversy that was about to end in the reformation, and imbibed the spirit of the latter. In 1548, according to a ms note of Baker, he was presented by Thomas lord Seymour to the rich benefice of Bishop’s Cleve in Gloucestershire, which he held three years in commendam, and where he did much good by his hospitality and charity; but the author of Jewell’s life says that he held this living in 1544, and when in that year Jewell commenced master of arts, he bore the charges of it. Nor, says Jewell’s biographer, “was this the only instance wherein he (Jewell) did partake of this good man’s bounty, for he was wont twice or thrice in a year to invite him to his house, and not dismiss him without presents, money, and other things that were necessary for the carrying on his studies. And one time above the rest, coming into his chamber in the morning, when he was to go back to the university, he seized upon his and his companions purses, saying, What mo'ney, I wonder, have these miserable, and beggardly Oxfordians? And finding them pityfully lean and empty, stuffed them with money, till they became both fat and weighty.”

After the death of Edward VI. he joined the exiles abroad, and took up his residence at Zurich, where he remained till the death of queen Mary. Here he met with his pupil Jewell, and on the change of affairs in England they intended to have returned together, but Parkhurst, thinking that Jewell had not chosen the safest route for his travels, left him and went by himself, the consequence of which was that Parkhurst was robbed of all he had on the road, and Jewell arrived safe in England, and had the satisfaction of relieving the wants of his former benefactor. Soon after Parkhurst arrived, he was elected to the see of Norwich April 13, 1560, and consecrated by archbishop Parker, &c. on Sept. 1. He held the living of Cleve for some time after this along with his bishopric. He now married Margaret, daughter of Thomas Garnish, of Kenton in Suffolk, esq. by Margaret his wife, daughter of sir Hugh Francis, of Giffard’s Hall in Suffolk, knight. In 1566, by virtue of a commission from the principal ministers of the university of Oxford, directed to Laurence Humphrey, the queen’s divinity professor, he and four other bishops were created doctors of divinity, Oct. 30, in the house of one Stephen Medcalf in London, in the presence of William Standish, public notary and registrar of the university, and others.

In the conduct of his diocese, it appears that he differed in many respects from his metropolitan archbishop Parker, and exerted his authority towards the puritans with such moderation, as was accounted “great remissness.” This produced frequent remonstrances on the part of the archbishop. To one of the last of these recorded by Strype, our prelate returned for answer, “What I am and what my doings are, cannot be hidden. And therefore do refer myself to the reports not of any one, but of all severally. This I find by good proof, that the rough and austere manner of ruling doth the least good. And on the other part, the contrary hath and doth daily reclaim and win divers. And therefore do I chuse rather to continue my accustomed and natural form and manner, which I know, how it hath and doth work, than with others by rigour and extremity to over-rule,” &c.

Strype, on the authority of his contemporary Becan, who knew him well, gives him this character: “He was naturally somewhat hasty; but soon appeased again. He would speak his mind freely, and fear none in a good cause. A true friend, and easily reconciled to any against whom he had taken a displeasure. He appointed in his diocese (that was large) for the better oversight thereof, ten commissaries, to whom he, as occasion served, sent instructions for the regulation and order of his see. He could have been willing to allow a liberty of officiating in the church, to such as could not conform to some of the ceremonies of it, looking upon them as indifferent matters; but upon command from above, he readily obeyed his prince’s and metropolitan’s authority. He was a friend to prophesies; that is, to the meetings of the ministers in several appointed parish churches in his diocese, as in St. Edmund’s Bury, &c. to confer together about the interpretation and sense of the scriptures. But the queen forbidding it, upon some abuses thereof, the archbishop signified to him her will, and he in obedience sent to his archdeacons and commissaries, to have them forborn for the future.” “As for his life and conversation, it was such as might be counted a mirror of virtue; wherein appeared nothing but what was good and godly; an example to the flock in righteousness, in faith, in love, in peace, in word, in purity. He preached diligently, and exhorted the people that came to him. He was a learned man, as well in respect of human learning, as divine, well seen iti the sacred Scriptures; an earnest protestant, and lover of sincere religion; an excellent bishop, a faithful pastor, and a worthy example to -all spiritual ministers in his diocese, both for doctrine, life, and hospitality.” This character is confirmed by Bale, in the dedication to Parkhurst, of his “Reliques of Rome,” printed in 1563.

Dr. Parkhurst died Feb. 2, 1574, and was buried in the nave of the cathedral of Norwich, on the south side between the eighth and ninth pillars. Against the west part of the latter was a monument, now much mutilated; his figure in a gown and square cap, and the inscription, being taken away during the rebellion, with the epitaph, which is still on record in Blomefield’s History of Norwich.

His works have not much connexion with his profession, all, except his letters, being Latin poetry on sundry occasions. He was indeed one of the translators of the Bishops’ Bible, of which his share was the Apocrypha from the book of Wisdom to the end; but he is best known to the curious by his “Ludicra, sive Epigrammata juvenilia.” In T572 he sent a copy of these to his old and dear friend Dr. Wilson, master of St. Catherine’s, as a new-year’s gift, and styled them his “good, godly, and pleasant epigrams;” and they were in the following year printed by Day, in a small 4to volume. Why Anthony Wood should give the report that these epigrams were as indecent as Martial’s, when he adds at the same time that “he cannot perceive it,” seems unaccountable; but even Blomefield has adopted this false accusation. Many of them appear to have been first printed at Zurich in 1558, where they were written, and republished now. Among the commendatory verses is a copy by dean Nowell, to whom two of the epigrams are addressed, and who was not likely to have commended indecencies, if we could suppose our pious prelate capable of publishing such. “His epigrams,” says archdeacon Churton, “affording notices of persons and things not elsewhere easily found, are on the Grecian rather than the Roman model, not sparkling with wit, but grave and didactic.” The other works attributed to bishop Parkhurst are, 1. “Epigrammata in mortem duorum fratrum Suffolciensium, Caroli et Henrici Brandon,” Lond. 1552, 4to. These were the sons of Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, and died of the sweating-sickness. 2. “Epigrammata seria,” ibid. 1560, which seem to be a part of his larger collection; and some of them had been long before published at Strasburgh, along with Shepreve’s “Summa et synopsis Nov. Test, distichis ducentis sexaginta comprehensa.” 3. “Vita Christi, carm. Lat. in lib. precum privat.” ibid. 1578. He also addressed Henry VIII. and queen Catherine in some complimentary verses, when they were about to visit Oxford in 1543; and there is an epitaph of his on queen Catherine in the chapel of Sudley-castle. Several of his letters have been published by Strype, and more in ms. are in the British Museum.

, a late learned divine and lexicographer, was the second son of John Parkhurst, esq. of Catesby, in Northamptonshire, by Ricarda Dormer, daughter of judge Dormer. He was born in June 1728, was educated at Rugby school in Warwickshire, and was afterwards of Clare-hall, Cambridge, where he took his degree of B. A. in 1748, that of M. A. in 1752, and was many years fellow of his college. Being a younger brother, he was intended for the church, and entered into orders, but becoming heir to a very considerable estate, he was relieved from the usual anxieties respecting preferment, and was now a patron himself. Still he continued to cultivate the studies becoming a clergyman and in the capacity of a curate, but without any salary, he long did the duty, with exemplary diligence and zeal, in his own chapel at Catesby, which, after the demolition of the church of the nunnery there, served as a parish-church, of which also he was the patron. When several years after, in 178 4, it fell to his lot to exercise the right of presentation, he presented to the vicarage of Epsom in Surrey, the late rev. Jonathan Boucher (see Boucher), as one who in his opinion had given the best proofs of his having a due sense of the duties of his office. It was by marriage he had become patron of this living, having in 1754 married Susanna Myster, daughter, and, we believe, heiress of John Myster, esq. of Epsom.

In 1753 he began his career of authorship, by publishing in 8vo, “A serious and friendly Address to the rev. John Wesley, in relation to a principal doctrine advanced and maintained by him and his assistants.” This doctrine is what is called the faith of assurance, which Mr. Parkhurst objects to, in the manner stated by Wesley, as leading to presumption and an uncharitable spirit. Mr. Parkhurst’s next publication was of more importance, “An Hebrew and English Lexicon, without points; to which is added, a methodical Hebrew grammar, without points, adapted to the use of learners,” 1762, 4to. To attempt a vindication of all the etymological and philosophical disquisitions scattered through this dictionary, would be very fruitless; but it is not perhaps too much to say, that we have nothing of the kind equal to it in the English language. The author continued to correct and improve it, through various editions, the last of wjiich was published in 1813. But his philological studies were not confined to the Hebrew language; for he published a “Greek and English Lexicon,” with a grammar, 1769, 4to, which has likewise gone through many editions, the first of which, in octavo, the form in which they are now printed, "was superintended by his. learned daughter, the wife of the rev. Joseph Thomas. The continued demand for both these lexicons seems to be a sufficient proof of their merit; and their usefulness to biblical students has indeed been generally acknowledged.

Mr. Parkhurst’s only remaining publication was entitled, “The Divinity and Pre-existence of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, demonstrated from Scripture in answer to the first section of Dr. Priestley’s Introduction to the history of curly opinions concerning Jesus Christ; together with strictures on some other parts of the work, and a postscript relating to a late publication of Mr. Gilbert Wakefield,” 1787, 8vo. This work was very generally regarded as completely performing all that its title-page promised; and accordingly the whole edition was soon sold off. A very unsatisfactory answer was, however, attempted by Dr. Priestley, in “A Letter to Dr. Home,” c.

Mr. Parkhurst died at Epsom in Surrey, March 21, 1797. He was a man of very extraordinary independency of mind and firmness of principle. In early life, along with many other men of distinguished learning, it was objected to him that he was a Hutchinsonian; and this has been given as a reason for his want of preferment. A better reason, however, may be found in the circumstances of his acquisition of property, which rendered him independent, and his love of retirement, which was uniform. He always gave less of his time to the ordinary interruptions of life than is common. In an hospitable, friendly, and pleasant neighbourhood, he visited little, alleging that such a course of life neither suited his temper, his health, or his studies. Such a man was not likely to crowd the levee of a patron. Yet he was of sociable manners; and his conversation always instructive, often delightful; for his stores of knowledge were so large, that he has often been called a walking library. Like many other men of infirm and sickly frames, he was occasionally irritable and quick, warm and earnest in his resentments, though never unforgiving. Few men, upon the whole, have passed through a long life more at peace with their neighbours, more respected by men of learning, more beloved by their friends, or more honoured by their family.

Of his strict sense of justice, the following has been related as a very striking instance. One of his tenants falling behind-hand in the payment of his rent, which was 500l. per annum, it was represented to his landlord that it was owing to his being over-rented. This being believed to be the case, a new valuation was made; and it was then agreed, that, for the future, the rent should not be more than 450l. Many in his situation would have stopped here, and considered the sacrifice as sufficient. Mr. Parkhurst, however, justly inferring that if the farm was then too dear, it must necessarily have been always too dear, unasked, and of his own accord, immediately struck off 50l. from the commencement of the lease, and instantly refunded all that he had received more than 450l.

Mr. Parkhurst was in his person rather below the middle size, but remarkably upright, and firm in his gait. He was throughout life of a siqkly habit; and his leading a life so remarkably studious and sedentary (it having, for many years, been his constant practice to rise at five, and, in winter to light his own fire), to the very verge of David’s limits of the life of man, is a consolatory proof to men of similar habits, how much, under many disadvantages, may still be effected by strict temperance and a careful regimen.

, one of our early law-writers, was born of a genteel family, and educated at Oxford, but left it without a degree, and became a student of the Inner Temple, where, Wood says, he made wonderful proficiency in the common law. After being called to the bar, he became eminent in his profession, and had great practice as a chamber-counsel. Whether he was ever a reader of his inn, or a bencher, seems doubtful, tie died, according to Pits, in 1544, but according to Bale, in 1545, and is supposed to have been buried in the Temple church. He wrote, in Norman French (but Wood gives the title in Latin), “Perutilis Tractatus; sive explanatio quorundam capitulorum valde necessaria,” Lond. 1530, a work which must have answered its character of " valde necessaria,' 7 as it was reprinted in 1532, 1541, 1545, 1567, 1597, 1601, and 1639. There were also two English translations, of 1642 and 1657, all in 8vo.

, a celebrated old herbalist, was born in 1567, and bred up as a London apothecary, in which profession he became eminent, and was at length appointed apothecary to king James I. King Charles I. afterwards conferred upon him the title of Botanicus Regius Primarius. A great share of his attention, during a long life, was devoted to the study of plants. He had a garden well stored with rarities, and he bestowed equal notice upon the curiosities of the flower-garden, and on the native productions of his own and other countries, embracing their literary history, as well as their practical investigation.

His first publication was his “Paradisi in Sole Paradisus terrestris, or a choice Garden of all sorts of Rarest Flowers, &c.; to which is annexed a Kitchen Garden,” &c. This was printed at London, anno 1629, in a folio of 612 pages. A second edition, “much corrected and enlarged,” appeared in 1656, after the decease of the author. Both editions are dedicated “to the Queen’s most excellent Majesty,” which could hardly have been, as Dr. Pulteney supposed, queen Elizabeth; but rather the queen of Charles I.; and it is to the honour of those who edited the new impression, in 1656, that this dedication was not then suppressed. About a thousand plants, either species or varieties, are described in this book, of which 780 are figured, in wood cuts, partly copied from Clusius and Lobel, partly original, but all of them coarse and stiff, though sometimes expressive. Numerous remarks are interspersed, respecting the botanical history or medical virtues of the plants, as well as their culture; but the latter subject is, for the most part, given in the introductory chapters, which display no small degree of intelligence and experience. This book affords a very correct and pleasing idea of the gardens of our ancestors, at the time it was written -, and has been considered, by the learned authors of the Hortus Kewensis," unequivocal authority as to the time when any particular species was introduced or cultivated among us. Though our kitchen-gardens had not arrived at such perfection as they attained in king William’s days, and have since preserved, there is reason to think the science of horticulture declined considerably after the time of Parkinson, previous to its restoration at the end of the seventeenth century. It is no small praise to Parkinson’s work, that the late Mr. Curtis held it in particular estimation, always citing it in his Magazine with peculiar pleasure and respect.

In 1640 our author published his principal work, the “Theatrum Botanicum, or Theatre of Plants, or an Herbal of large extent;” &c. a ponderous folio of 1746 pages, with innumerable wooden cuts. This work and the Herbal of Gerarde were the two main pillars of botany in England till the time of Ray; one or other, or both, being the inexhaustible resource of all who had any love for plants, or any interest in inquiring into their qualities. Of these two writers it is justly observed that Parkinson was by far the most original and the most copious, but his cuts being of vastly inferior merit to those admirable ones prepared for Conrad Gesner, with which Gerarde had the means of adorning his publication, the latter has greatly prevailed in popularity, as a book of reference. It is indeed chiefly for the figures that we now cite these works. Nice distinctions of species, or any discrimination between species and varieties, are not to be expected; still less, any ideas of classification or scientific arrangement, worthy a moment’s consideration or comparison. It is not to be wondered at if these great works contain some hundreds of repetitions, when we consider how obscurely many plants had been described, or even figured, by previous authors; insomuch that it was in many cases next to impossible to discover whether a given plant had been described before. Parkinson, however, is entitled to superior praise on this head, having taken all possible pains to avoid such mistakes, by his deep study of synonyms. Some papers of Lobel are said to have fallen into the hands of Parkinson, after the death of the former, which proved of use to his undertaking; but it does not appear that he implicitly confided in such, any more than in previously printed authorities, without a due investigation, and therefore they became in some measure his own.

The time of Parkinson’s decease is not known, but he appears to have been living when his Herbal was published, in 1640, at which period he was, if Dr. Pulteney’s date of his birth be correct, seventy-three years old. Nothing is recorded of his family. Some copies of his “Paradisus” have an engraved portrait of the author, done in his sixtysecond year and there is a small oval one in the title-page of his “Herbal, or Theatrum Botanicum.”

, a philosopher of the Eleatic sect, flourished about the sixty-ninth olympiad, or 504 B. C. Some have supposed he was a pupil of Anaximander. He was, however, at first a man of property and consequence in civil life, until Diochetas, a Pythagorean, introduced him into the recesses of philosophy. Cebes, in his allegorical table, speaks of Parmenides as an eminent pattern of virtue. He wrote the doctrines of his school in verses, of which a few fragments still remain in the collection “Poesis Philosophica,” by Henry Stephens, Paris, 1573, but insufficient to explain his system of philosophy. Plato, in the dialogue which bears the name of Parmenides, professes to represent his tenets, but confounds them with his own. From the scattered reports of the ancients, Brucker has compiled the following Abstract of the philosophy of Parmenides.

, a French author and poet, whose works are now scarce, as well as obsolete, was originally a merchant at Dieppe, where he was born in 1494, and became famous by means of his voyages, and his taste for the sciences. He died in the island of Sumatra, A. D. 1530, being then only thirty-six. The collection of his verses in 4to, printed in 1536, is entitled “Description nouvelle des Dignites de ce Monde, et de la Dignite de l'homme,” composee en rithme Franchise et en maniere d‘exhortation, par Jean Parmentier: avec plusieur chants Royaulx, et une Moralite a l’Honneur de la Vierge, mise par personaiges; plus la deploration sur la mort dudit Parmentier et son frere, composee par Pierre Crignon.“This book is very rare. Crignon, who published it, was Parmentier' s particular friend, and thus speaks of him” From the year 1522, he had applied to the practice of cosmography, on the great fluctuations of the sea he became very profound in astrology he composed several maps, spherical and plain, which have been used with success in navigation. He was a man worthy to be known by all the learned; and capable, if he had lived, of doing honour to his country by great enterprises. He was the first pilot who conducted vessels to the Brasils, and the first Frenchman who discovered the Indies, as far as the island Samothra or Sumatra, named Taprobane by the ancients. He reckoned also upon going to the Moluccas; and he has told me several times, that when he should return to France, his intention was to seek a passage to the North, and to make discoveries from thence to the South.“Another work by him is entitled” Moralites tres-excellens en Thonneur de la benoiste Vierge Marie; mise en rime Franchise et en personnaiges, par Jehan Parmentier,“Paris, 1531,4to, black letter. This also is extremely scarce, but is reprinted in the” Description nouvelle," &C.

, whose family name was Francis Mazzuoli, is more generally called Parmigiano, from Parma, where he was born in 1503. He studied under two uncles, Michele and Philip, but the chief modelof his imitation was Correggio, from whose works, compared with those of Michael Angelo, Raphael, and Julio, he formed that peculiar style for which he is celebrated. He displayed his natural genius for painting so very early, that at sixteen he is said to have produced designs which would have done honour to an experienced painter. His first public work, the St. Eustachius, in the church of St. Petronius, in Bologna, was done when he was a boy. In 1527, when Rome was sacked by the emperor Charles V. Parmigiano was found, like Protogenes at Rhodes, so intent upon his work as not to notice the confusion of the day. The event is variously related; some say that he escaped, like the ancient artist, from all violence, by the admiration of the soldiers; others, that he was plundered by them of his pictures, though his person was safe the first party who came taking only a few, while those who followed swept away the rest. His turn for music, and particularly his talent for playing on the lute, in some degree seduced him from his principal pursuit; and Vasari says he was much diverted from his art by the quackery of the alchymists; but this fact has by some writers been questioned. He died of a violent fever, in 1540, at the early age of 36.

The ruling features, says Mr. Fuseli, of Parmigiano’s style, are elegance of form, grace of countenance, contrast in attitude, enchanting chiaro-scuro, and blandishments of colour. When these are pure, he is inimitable; but his elegance is often stretched to excessive slenderness, his grace deformed by affectation, contrast driven to extravagance, and from the attempt to anticipate the beauties which time alone can give, his shade presents often nothing but a pitchy mass, and his lights a faded bloom. The taste of Parmigiano was exquisite, but it led him more to imitate the effects than the principles of his masters; with less comprehension than ardour, he adopted the grace of Raphael, the contrasts of Michael Angelo, the harmony of Correggio, without adverting that they were founded on propriety, energy, and grandeur of conception, and the permanent principles of chiaro-scuro; hence the cautious precept of Agostino Caracci, which confines his pupil to a little of Parmigiano’s grace.

Parmigiano was a learned designer; to his depth in design we must ascribe that freedom of execution, those decided strokes of his pencil, which Albano calls divine, and which add grace to the finish of his pictures; they have not, indeed, all equal “impasto” of colour, nor equal effect, though some, for the amore with which they are conducted, have been ascribed to Correggio such is the Cupid scooping his bow, with the two infants at his feet, one laughing, the other crying, of which there are several repetitions. We see indeed, some of the pictures of Parmigiano so often repeated, that though we may grant them the respect due to age, we can scarcely allow them all the praise of originality. Such is, among his lesser works, the picture of the Madonna with the Infant, St. John and St. Catherine, and the head of St. Zaccharia, or some other sainted elder, in the fore-ground; its duplicates are nearly spread over every gallery of Italy. His altar-pieces are not numerous, and the most valued of them is perhaps that of St. Marguerita, in Bologna, a composition rich in figures, contemplated with admiration, and studied by the Caracci; Guido even preferred it to the St. Cecilia of Raphael. The last of his works is the “Moses breaking the Tables,” at Parma, in which, says sir Joshua Reynolds, we are at a loss which to admire most, the correctness of drawing, or the grandeur of the conception. The etchings of Parmigiano, models of freedom, taste, and delicacy, are universally known.

Parmigiano had a cousin and pupil, G. Mazzuoli, who is little known beyond Parma and its districts, though for “impasto,” and the whole mystery of colour, he has few equals. There is reason to believe that several pictures ascribed to Francis, especially those of a stronger and gayer tone, have been painted by this artist. He was more attached to the style of Correggio than Francis, and seized its character with great felicity in the Nuptials of St. Catherine, in the church del Carmine. He excelled in perspective, and in the Last Supper, in the refectory of S. Giovanni, placed and painted a colonnade with all the illusion of Pozzo. To the most harmonious chiaro-scuro, he added grandeur, variety, vivacity, in fresco. None of his fellow artists equalled him in copiousness, fertility, and execution; and to these perhaps we may ascribe the inequality perceptible in his works. He flourished about 1580, and had a son Alexander, who painted in the dome of Parma, in 1571. He was a feeble imitator of the family style.

, a very pleasing English poet, was descended from an ancient family, settled for some centuries at Congleton, in Cheshire. His father, of the same name, wns attached to the republican party in the reign of Charles I.; and on the restoration found it convenient to go over to Ireland, carrying with him a large personal fortune, with which he purchased estates in that kingdom. These, with the lands he had in Cheshire, descended to the poet, who was horn in 1679, in Dublin. In this city he was educated, and entered of Trinity-college, Dublin, at the age of thirteen. He became M. A. in 1700, and in the same year was ordained deacon, although under the canonical age, by a dispensation from the primate. Three years after he was admitted into priest’s orders, and in 1705, Dr. Ashe, bishop of Clogher, conferred upon him the archdeaconry of Clogher. About the same time, he married miss Anne Minchin, an amiable lady, by whom he had two sons, who died young, and a daughter who long survived him.

He had by this time given some occasional specimens of his poetical talent, but his ruling passion led him to the enjoyments of social life, and the company of men of wit a id learning; and as this was a taste he could gratify at home but in a very small degree, he contrived many excursions to London, where he became a favourite. From some letters published by his biographer, Dr. Goldsmith, we learn that he was admired for his talents as a companion, and his good nature as a man; but with all this, it is acknowledged, that his temper was unequal, and that he was always too much elevated, or too much depressed. It is added, indeed, that he was sensible of this; but his attempts to remove his spleen were rather singular. Goldsmith tells us, that, when under its influence, he would fly with all expedition to the remote parts of Ireland, and there make out a gloomy kind of satisfaction in giving hideous descriptions of the solitude to which he retired. Having tried this imaginary remedy for some time, he used to collect his revenues, and set out again for England to enjoy the conversation of his friends, lord Oxford, Swift, Pope, Arbuthnot, and Gay. With Pope he had a more than usual share of intimacy. Pope highly respected him, and they exchanged opinions on each other’s productions with freedom and candour. He afforded Pope some assistance in his translation of Homer, and wrote the life prefixed to it; but Parnell was a very bad prose-writer, and Pope had more trouble in correcting this life than it would have cost, him to 'write it. Being intimate with all the Scriblerustribe, he contributed the “Origin of the Sciences:” and also wrote the “Life of Zoilus,” as a satire on Dennis and Theobald, with whom the club had long been at variance. To the Spectator and Guardian he contributed a few papers of very considerable merit, in the form of “Visions.”

It seems probable that he had an ambition to rise by political interest. When the Whigs were ejected, in the end of queen Anne’s reign, he was persuaded to change his party, not without much censure from those whom he forsook, and was received by the earl of Oxford and the new ministry as a valuable reinforcement. When Oxford was told that Dr. Parnell waited among the crowd in the outer room, he went, by the persuasion of Swift, with his treasurer’s staff in his hand, to inquire for him, and to bid him welcome; and, as may be interred from Pope’s dedication, admitted him as a favourite companion to his convivial hours; but it does not appear that all this was followed by preferment. Parnell also, conceiving himself qualified to become a popular preacher, displayed his elocution with great success in the pulpits of London; but the queen’s death putting an end. to his expectations, abated his diligence, and from that time he fell into a habit of intemperance, which greatly injured his health. The death of his wife is said to have first driven him to this miserable resource.

Having been warmly recommended by Swift to archbishop King, this prelate gave him a prebend in 1713, and in May 1716, presented him to the vicarage of Finglass, in the diocese of Dublin, worth 400l. a-year. “Such notice,” says Dr. Johnson, “from such a man, inclines me to believe, that the vice of which he has been accused was not gross, or not notorious.” But he enjoyed these preferments little more than a year, for in July 1717 he died at Chester, on his way to Ireland, in his thirty-eighth year. Dying without male issue, his estate, but considerably embarrassed by his imprudence, devolved to his nephew, sir John Parnell, bart. one of the justices of the King’s-bt-nch in Ireland, and father to the Irish chancellor of the Exchequer, sir John Parnell, who died in 1801. justly founded, are, his “Rise of Woman;” the “Fairy Tale;” the “Hymn to Contentment;” “Health;” the “Vigil of Venus” the “Night-piece on Death” the <c Allegory on Man,“and” The Hermit.“These have been respectively criticised by his biographers Goldsmith and Johnson, and have stood the test of nearly a century.” His praise,“says Dr. Johnson,” must be derived from the easy sweetness of his diction,; in his verses there is more happiness than pains: he is sprightly without effort, and always delights, though he never ravishes: every thing is proper, yet every thing seems casual."

In 1758, a volume was published, it is not known by whom, entitled “The Posthumous Works of Dr. Thomas Parnell.” This, although it exceeded the volume published by Pope in bulk, appeared so far inferior in merit, that the admirers of Parnell questioned the authenticity of most of the pieces; and there are but a few of them indeed which can be ascribed to him without some injury to his character. Goldsmith refused to incorporate them with the collection he published in 1770; but they were afterwards added to the edition in Johnson’s Poets, and apparently without his consent. He says of them: “I know not whence they came, nor have ever inquired whither they are going.”

, an English divine, was the son of Richard Parr, likewise a divine, and was born at Fermoy, in the county of Cork, where, we presume, his father was beneficed, in 1617; and this singularity is recorded of his birth, that his mother was then fifty-five years of age. He was educated in grammar at a country school, under the care of some popish priests, who were at that time the only schoolmasters for the Latin-tongue. In 1635, he was sent to England, and entered as a servitor of Exeter college, Oxford, where his merit procured him the patronage of Dr. Piideaux, the rector, by whose interest, as soon as he had taken his bachelor’s degree in arts, in 1641, he was chosen chaplain-fellow of the college. He found here another liberal patron and instructor in the celebrated archbishop Usher, who, in 1643, retired to this college from the tumult then prevailing through the nation and observing the talents of Mr. Parr as a preacher, made him his chaplain; and, about the end of that year, took him with him to Glamorganshire. On his return with this prelate, he obtained the vicarage of Ryegate in Surrey, on the presentation of Mr. Roger James, gent, son of sir Roger James, knight, whose sister he married, a widow lady of considerable property. In doctrinal points he appears to have concurred with the assembly of divines, who were mostly Calvinists; but it seems doubtful whether he ever took the Covenant. In 1649, he resigned his fellowship of Exeter college, and continued chaplain to archbishop Usher, while that prelate lived. In 1653, he was instituted to the living of Camberweli in Surrey, and appears to have been some time rector of Bermondsey, where his signature occurs in the register of 1676, and he is thought to have resigned it in 1682. At the Restoration he was created D. D. and had the deanery of Armagh, and an Irish bishopric, offered to him, both which he refused; but accepted a canonry of Armagh. He remained vicar of Camberweli almost thirty-eight years, and was greatly beloved and followed. Wood, in his quaint way says, “He was so constant and ready a preacher at Camberweli, that his preaching being generally approved, he broke two conventicles thereby in his neighbourhood that is to say, that by his out- vying the Presbyterians and Independents in his extemporarian preaching, their auditors would leave them, and flock to Mr. Parr.” All who speak of him indeed concur in what is inscribed on his monument, that <c he was in preaching, constant in life, exemplary in piety and charity, most eminent a lover of peace and hospitality and, in fine, a true disciple of Jesus Christ.“He died at Camberweli Novembers, 1691, and was buried in the church-yard, where the above monument was erected to his memory. His wife died before him. Dr. Parr wrote” Christian Reformation: being an earnest persuasion to the speedy practice of it: proposed to all, but especially designed for the serious consideration of his dear kindred and countrymen of the county of Cork in Ireland, and the people of Ryegate and Camberweli in Surrey,“Lond. 1660, 8vo. He published also three occasional sermons; but the most valuable present he made to the publick was his” Life of Archbishop Usher," prefixed to that prelate’s Letters, printed in folio, 1686. It is the most ample account we have of Usher; and few men could have enjoyed better opportunities of knowing his real character. Wood mentions Dr. Thomas Marshall’s intention of enlarging this, as noticed in oiir account or' him.

, a celebrated painter of Ephesus, or, according to others, of Athens, flourished in the time of Socrates, as we learn from Xenophon, who has introduced him in a dialogue, discoursing with that philosopher. He was one of the most excellent painters of his time. Pliny tells us, that it was he who first gave symmetry and just proportions in the art; that he also was the first who knew how to express the truth of character, and the different airs of the face; that he found out a beautiful disposition of the hair, and heightened the grace of the visage. It was allowed even by the masters in the art, that he bore away from all others the glory of succeeding in the outline, in which consists the grand secret of painting. But the same author observes, that Parrhasius became insupportable by his pride; and affected to wear a crown of gold upon his head, and to carry in his hand a baton, studded with nails of the same metal. It is said that, though Parrhasius was excelled by Timanthes, yet he excelled Zeuxis. Among his pictures was a celebrated one of Theseus; and another representing Meleager, Hercules, and Perseus, in a groupe together; as also Æneas, with Castor and Pollux in a third. But of him, or his pictures, the accounts handed down to us are extremely imperfect, and little to be relied on in forming a just estimate of his merit.

, an eminent grammarian in Italy, was born at Cosenza in the kingdom of Naples, in 1470. He was designed for the law, the profession of his ancestors but his inclination was to study classical literature. His family name was Giovanni Paulo Parisio; yet, according to the humour of the grammarians of that age, he adopted that under which we have classed him. He taught at Milan with great reputation, being particularly admired for a graceful delivery, which attracted many auditors to his lectures. He went to Rome during the pontificate of Alexander VI. and was like to have been involved in the misfortunes of the cardinals Bernardini Cajetan, and Silius Savello, whose estates were confiscateed, and themselves banished for conspiring to depose the pope. As it was well known that he had corresponded with these men, he took the advice of a friend, in retiring from Rome. Not long after, he was appointed public professor of rhetoric at Milan, where his superior merit drew upon him the envy of his contemporary teachers, who, by false accusations, rendered his situation so uneasy, that he was obliged to leave Milan, and retire to Vicenza, where he obtained the professorship of eloquence, with a larger salary; and he held this professorship, till the states of the Venetians were laid waste by the troops of the league of Cambray. He now withdrew to his native country, having made his escape through the army of the enemies. He was afterwards sent for by Leo X. who was before favourably inclined to him; and on his arrival at Rome, appointed him professor of polite literature. He had been now some time married to a daughter of Denietrius Chalcondylas; and he took with him to Rome Basil Chalcondylas, his wife’s brother, and brother of Demetrius Chalcondylas, professor of Greek at Milan. He did not long enjoy this employment conferred upon him by the pope: for; being worn out by his studies and labours, he became so cruelly afflicted with the gout, as to lose the use of his limbs. Poverty was added to his other sufferings; and in this unhappy state he left Rome, and returned into Calabria, his native country, where he died of a fever in 1533.

His works were published, collectively, by Henry Stephens, in 1567, of which the principal is entitled “Liber de rebus per Epistolam Qusesitis.” This consists of a number of letters written to different learned men, containing explanations of passages in the ancient writers, and elucidations of points of antiquity, which display much erudition. There are also illustrations of Ovid’s Heroical Epistles; of Horace’s Art of Poetry; of Cicero’s Oration for Milo, and various other tracts on classical subjects. The whole collection was reprinted in the first volume of Gruter’s “Thesaurus Criticus.” A new edition of the book “De Quæsitis,” with additions from the author’s manuscript, was given at Naples in 1771.

, D. D. rector of Wichampton in Dorsetshire, and preacher at Market-Harborough in Leicestershire, for which latter county he was in the commission of the peace, was born in Bury-street, St. James’s, in 1722. He was admitted a scholar of Westminster in 1736, whence, in 1740, he was elected a student of Christchurch, Oxford, and took the degree of M. A. March 31, 1747 B. D. May 25, 1754; and D. D. July 8, 1757. He was a very learned divine; and an able, active, magistrate. He was appointed chaplain in 1750; preacher at Market-Harborough in Leicestershire in 1754; and in 1756 was presented by Richard Fleming, esq. to the rectory of Wichampton. He died at Market-Harborough, April 9, 1780. His publications were, 1. “The Christian Sabbath as old as the Creation,” 1753, 4to. 2. “The Scripture Account of the Lord’s Supper. The Substance of Three Sermons preached at Market-Harborough, in 1755, 1756,” 8vo. 3. “The Fig-tree dried up; or the Story of that remarkable Transaction as it is related by St. Mark considered in a new light explained and vindicated in a Letter to . . . . . . . . . esq.” 1758, 4to. 4. “A Defence of the Lord Bishop of London’s [Sherlock] Interpretation of the famous text in the book of Job, ‘ I know that my Redeemer liveth,’ against the Exceptions of the Bishop of Gloucester [Warburton], the Examiner of the Bishop of London’s Principles; with occasional Remarks on the argument of the Divine Legation, so far as this point is concerned with it,” 1760, 8vo. 5. “Dissertation on Daniel’s Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks,” 1762, 8vo. 6. “Remarks on Dr. Kennicott’s Letter,” &c. 1763, 8vo. 7. “The Case between Gerizirn and Ebal,” &c. 1764, 8vo. 8. “An Harmony of the Four Gospels, so far as relates to the History of our Saviour’s Resurrection, with a Commentary and Notes,” 1765, 4to. 9. “The Genealogy of Jesus Christ, in Matthew and Luke, explained; and ttie Jewish Objections removed,” 1771, 8vo. 10. Dr. Parry wrote one of the answers to Dr. Heathcote’s pamphlet 011 the Leicestershire election in 1775.

, an excellent physician and polite scholar, was born at Barnstaple, in Devonshire, in March 1705. His father, who was the youngest of nine sons of colonel Parsons, and nearly related to the baronet of that name, being appointed barrack-master at Bolton, in IreJand, removed with his family into that kingdom soon after the birth of his then only son, James, who received at Dublin the early part of his education, and, by the assistance of proper masters, laid a considerable foundation of classical and other useful learning, which enabled him to become tutor to lord Kingston. Turning his attention to the study of medicine, he went afterwards to Paris, where (to use his own words) " he followed the most eminent professors in the several schools, as Astruc, Dubois, Lemery, and others; attended the anatomical lectures of the most famous (Hunaud and Le Caf); and chemicals at the king’s garden at St. Come* He followed the physicians in both hospitals of the Hotel Dieu and La Charite, and the chemical lectures and demonstrations of Lemery and Bonlduc; and in botany, Jussieu. Having finished these studies, his professors gave him honourable attestations of his having followed them with diligence and industry, which entitled him to take the degrees of doctor and professor of the art of medicine, in any university in the dominions of France. Intending to return to England, he judged it unnecessary to take degrees in Paris, unless he had resolved to reside there; and as it was more expensive, he therefore went to the university of Rheims, in Champaign, where, by virtue of his attestations, he was immediately admitted to three examinations, as if he had finished his studies in that academy; and there was honoured with his degrees June 11, 1736. In the July following he came to London, and was first employed by Dr. James Douglas to assist him in his anatomical works, but after some time began to practise. He was elected a member of the royal society in 1740; and, after due examination, was admitted a licentiate of the college of physicians, April 1, 1751.

On his arrival in London, by the recommendation of his Paris friends, he was introduced to the acquaintance of Dr. Mead, sir Hans Sloane, and Dr. James Douglas. This great anatomist made use of his assistance, not only in his anatomical preparations, but also in his representations of morbid and other appearances, a list of several of which was in the hands of his friend Dr. Maty; who had prepared an eloge on Dr. Parsons, which was never used, but which, by the favour of Mrs. Parsons, Mr. Nichols has preserved at large. Though Dr. Parsons cultivated the several branches of the profession of physic, he was principally employed in midwifery. In 1738, by the interest of his friend Dr. Douglas, he was appointed physician to the public infirmary in St. Giles’s. In 1739 he married miss Elizabeth Reynolds, by whom he had two sons and a daughter, who all died young. Dr. Parsons resided for many years in Red Lion-square, where he frequently enjoyed the company and conversation of Dr. Stukeley, bishop Lyttleton, Mr. Henry Baker, Dr. Knight, and many other of the most distinguished members of the royal and antiquarian societies, and that of arts, manufactures, and commerce; giving weekly an elegant dinner to a large but select party. He enjoyed also the literary correspondence of D'Argenville, Button, Le Cat, Beccaria, Amb. Bertrand, Valltravers, Ascanius, Turberville Needham, Dr. Garden, and others of the most distinguished rank in science. As a practitioner he was judicious, careful, honest, and remarkably humane to the poor; as a friend, obliging and communicative; cheerful and decent in conversation; severe and strict in his morals, and attentive to fill with propriety all the various duties of life. In 1769, finding his health impaired, he proposed to retire from business and from London, and with that view disposed of a considerable number of his books and fossils, and went to Bristol. But he returned soon after to his old house, and died in it after a week’s illness, on the 4th of April, 1770, much lamented by his family and friends. By his last will, dated in October 1766, he gave his whole property to Mrs. Parsons; and, in case of her death before him, to miss Mary Reynolds, her only sister, “in recompence for her affectionate attention to him and to his wife, for a long course of years, in sickness and in health.” It was his particular request that he should not be buried till some change should appear in his corpse; a request which occasioned him to be kept unburied 17 days, and even then scarce the slightest alterution was perceivable. He was buried at Hen don, in a vault which he had caused to be built on the ground purchased on the death of his son James, where his tomb had a very commendatory inscription. A portrait of Dr. Parsons, by Mr. Wilson, is now in the British Museum; another, by Wells, left in the hands of his widow, who died in 1786; with a third unfinished; and one of his son James; also a family piece, in which the same son is introduced, with the doctor and his lady, accompanied by her sister. Among many other portraits, Mrs. Parsons had some that were very fine of the illustrious Harvey, of bishop Burnet, and of Dr. John Freind; a beautiful miniature of Dr. Stukeley; some good paintings, by her husband’s own hand, particularly the rhinoceros which he described in the “Philosophical Transactions.” She possessed also his Mss. and some capital printed books; a large folio volume entitled “Figure quaedam Miscellaneae qu0e ad rem Anatomicam Historiamque Naturalem spectant quas propria adumbravit manu Jacobus Parsons, M. D. S S. R. Ant.” &c. another, called “Drawings of curious Fossils, Shells,” &c. in Dr. Parsons’s Collection, drawn by himself;" &c. &c. Mrs. Parsons professed herself ready to give, on proper application, either to the royal or antiquarian society, a portrait of her husband, and a sum of money to found a lecture to perpetuate his memory, similar to that established by his friend Mr. Henry Baker.

Dr. Parsons left the following works 1. “A mechanical and critical Enquiry into the nature of Hermaphrodites,” 1741, 8vo, which was principally a compilation. 2. “A description of the Urinary Human Bladder, and the parts belonging to it, with figures,” 1742, which was intended to disprove the reported utility of Mrs. Stephens’ s medicines for the stone. 3. “Philosophical Observations on the analogy between the Propagation of Animals and that of Vegetables,” 1752, 8vo. As an antiquary, Dr. Parsons distinguished himself by an elaborate publication, eotitled “Remains of Japhet being historical inquiries into the affinity and origin of the European languages,” 1767, 4to. This is a performance of great erudition and research. Besides these separate publications, Dr. Parsons was the author of several papers, printed in the Philosophical Transactions; viz. “Croonian Lectures on Muscular Motion,” 1745, in which he considers the muscular fibres as tubes; “Huomu Physiognomy explained,” in the Appendix to the Philos. Trans, for 1746; and several other papers on anatomical and physiological subjects, especially an account of the dissection of a rhinoceros, which is valuable, and illustrated by good figures.

We shall close this article with an extract from Dr. Maty’s eulogium: “The surprising variety of branches which Dr. Parsons embraced, and the several living as well as dead languages he had a knowledge of, qualified him abundantly for the place of assistant secretary for foreign correspondences, which the council of the royal society bestowed upon him about 1750. He acquitted himself to the utmost of his power of the functions of this place, till a few years before his death, when he resigned in favour of his friend, who now gratefully pays this last tribute to his memory. Dr. Parsons joined to his academical honours those which the royal college of physicians of London bestowed upon him, by admitting him, after due examination, licentiate, on the first day of April, 1751. The diffusive spirit of our friend was only equalled by his desire of information. To both these principles he owed the intimacies which he formed with some of the greatest men of his time. The names of Folkes, Hales, Mead, Stukeley, Needham, Baker, Collinson, and Garden, may be mentioned on this occasion; and many more might be added. Weekly meetings were formed, where the earliest intelligence was received and communicated of any discovery both here and abroad; and new trials were made, to bring to the test of experience the reality or usefulness of these discoveries. Here it was that the microscopical animals found in several infusions were first produced; the propagation of several insects by section ascertained; the constancy of nature amidst these wonderful changes established. His ‘ Remains of Japhet, being historical inquiries into the affinity and origin of the European Languages,’ is a most laborious performance, tending to prove the antiquity of the first inhabitants of these islands, as being originally descended from Gomer and Magog, above 1000 years before Christ, their primitive and still subsisting language, and its affinity with some others. It cannot be denied that there is much ingenuity as well true learning in this work, which helps conviction, and often supplies the want of it. But we cannot help thinking that our friend’s warm feelings now and then mislead his judgment, and that some at least of his conjectures, rest' ing upon partial traditions, and poetical scraps of Irish filids and Welsh bards, are less satisfactory than his tables of affinity between the several northern languages, as deduced from one common stock. Literature, however, is much obliged to him for having in this, as well as in many of his other works, opened a new field of observations and discoveries. In enumerating our learned friend’s dissertations, we find ourselves at a loss whether we should follow the order of subjects, or of time; neither is it easy to account for their surprising variety and quick succession. The truth is, that his eagerness after knowledge was such, as to embrace almost with equal facility all its branches, and with equal zeal to ascertain the merit of inventions, and ascribe to their respective, and sometimes unknown, authors, the glory of the discovery. Many operations which the ancients have transmitted to us, havebeen thought fabulous, merely from our ignorance of the art by which they were performed. Thus the burning of the ships of the Romans at a considerable distance, during the siege of Syracuse, by Archimedes, would, perhaps, still continue to be exploded, had not the celebrated M. Buffon in France shewn the possibility of it, by presenting and describing a model of a speculum, or rather assemblage of mirrors, by which he could set fire at the distance of several hundred feet. Inthe contriving, indeed, though not in the executing of such an apparatus, he had in some measure been forestalled by a writer now very little known or read. This Dr. Parsons proved in a- very satisfactory manner; and he had the pleasure to find the French philosopher did not refuse to the Jesuit his share in the invention, and was not at all offended by the liberty he had taken. Another French discovery, I mean a new kind of painting fathered upon the ancients, was reduced to its real value, in a paper which shewed ouv author was possessed of a good taste for the fine arts: and I am informed that his skill in music was by no means inferior, and that his favourite amusement was the flute. Richly, it appears from these performances, did our author merit the honour of being a member of the antiquarian society, which long ago had associated him to its labours. To another society, founded upon the great principles of humanity, patriotism, and natural emulation, he undoubtedly was greatly useful. He assisted at most of their general meetings and committees and was for many years chairman to that of agriculture always equally ready to point out and to promote useful improvements, and to oppose the interested views of fraud and ignorance, so inseparable from very extensive associations. No sooner was this society formed, than Dr. Parsons became a member of it. Intimately convinced of the nobleness of its views, though from his station in life little concerned in its success, he grudged neither attendance nor expence. Neither ambitious of taking the lead, nor fond of opposition, he joined in any measure he thought right; and submitted cheerfully to the sentiments of the majority, though against his own private opinion. The just ideas he had of the dignity of our profession, as well as of the common links which ought to unite all its members, notwithstanding the differences of country, religion, or places of education, made him bear impatiently the shackles laid upon a great number of respectable practitioners; he wished, fondly wished, to see these broken; not with a view of empty honour and dangerous power, but as the only means observing mankind more effectually, checking the progress of designing men and illiterate practitioners, and diffusing through the whole body a spirit of emulation. Though by frequent disappointments he foresaw, as well as we, the little chance of a speedy redress, he nobly persisted in the attempt; and, had he lived to the final event, would undoubtedly, like Cato, still have preferred the conquered cause to that supported by the gods. Afier having tried to retire from business and from London, for the sake of his health, and having disposed of most of his books with that view, he found it inconsistent with his happiness to forsake all the advantages which a long residence in the capital, and the many connexions he had formed, had rendered habitual to him. He therefore returned to his old house, and died in it, after a short illness, April 4, 1770. The style of our friend’s compositions was sufficiently clear in description, though in argument not so close as could have been wished. Full of Lis ideas, he did not always so dispose and connect them together as to produce in the minds of his readers that conviction which was in his own. He too much despised those additional graces which command attention when joined to learning, observation, and sound reasoning. Let us hope that his example and spirit will animate all his colleagues; and that those practitioners who are in the same circumstances will be induced to join their brethren, sure to find amongst them those great blessings of life, freedom, equality, information, and friendship. As long as these great principles shall subsist in this society, and I tVust they will outlast the longest liver, there is no doubt but the members will meet with the reward honest men are ambitious of, the approbation of their conscience, the esteem of the virtuous, the remembrance of posterity.”

, another learned and amiable physician, though less known as an author, the son of major Parsons, of the dragoons, was horn in Yorkshire, in 1742. He was educated at Westminster school, whence in 17:. 9 he was elected to a studentship in Christ Church, Oxford. Having made choice of medicine as a profession, he prosecuted the study of it with uncommon assiduity, not only at Oxford, but also at London and Edinburgh. But while he bestowed much attention on every branch of medical knowledge, he at first showed a particular predilection for natural history and botany, and in the latter branch made a very distinguished figure during his stay at Edinburgh. In 1766 he had the honour of obtaining the prize medal given by Dr. Hope for the most extensive and elegant hortus siccus, and the same year took his degree of M. A. This, however, was only a prelude to more distinguished honours. In 1769, when he took his degree of M. B. he was appointed to the anatomy lecture at Oxford, and was also the first reader in anatomy at Christ Church, on the institution of John Freind and Matthew Lee, M. D. and students of that house. In consequence of this appointment, his attention, it may naturally be supposed, was more particularly directed to anatomy, and under his direction a very commodious anatomical theatre was built; and for the instruction of his pupils he provided a set of anatomical preparations, which for neatness and elegance have seldom been surpassed. From the time of his appointment he read two courses of anatomical lectures every year; and although they were calculated rather for the general philosopher than the medical practitioner, yet they were not only highly instructive to all his audience, but afforded incontestable evidence of his genius and abilities. He was soon after elected one of the physicians to the Radcliffe infirmary, and in June 1772 proceeded M. D. He had a considerable share also of private practice, and from his attention and success his reputation with the public kept pace with the esteem in which he was held by the university. In 1780 he was elected the first clinical professor on the foundation instituted in 1772 by George Henry, earl of Lichfield, late chancellor of the university. In this department also he read lectures during the winter months with much credit to himself. But it is not improbable that the various active employments in which he was engaged, and which necessarily exposed him to fatigue and danger, had some share in overthrowing a constitution naturally strong. He was not, however, cut off by any tedious or painful ailment, but died of a fever April 3, 1785, in the forty-fourth year of his age, and was buried in the north transept of the cathedral, where four of his children were buried before him.

, an English divine, and miscellaneous writer, was born at Dedham, in Essex, in 1729. His family was ancient, and settled at Hadleigh, in Suffolk, as early as the reign of HenryV1I. where some of their descendants still reside. He lost his father when veryyoung, and owed the care of his education to his maternal uncle, the rev. Thomas Smythies, master of the grammar school at Lavenham, in Suffolk, with whom he continued till he went to Cambridge, where he was entered of Sidney Sussex college, and took his degrees there of B. A. in 1752, and M. A. in 1776. After he had taken orders he was appointed to the free school of Oakham in Rutlandshire, and remained there till 1761, when he was presented to the school and curacy of Wye by Daniel earl of Winchelsea and Nottingham. In the sedulous discharge of the twofold duties of this preferment he was engaged upwards of half a century, and was distinguished by his urbanity, diligence, and classical talents, nor was he less esteemed in his clerical character. He was also presented to the rectory of Eastwell, in 1767, by the same patron, and to the small rectory of Snave in 1776, by archbishop Cornwallis, who enhanced the value of this preferment by a very kind letter, in which his grace testified his high respect for the character and talents of the new incumbent. Mr. Parsons was the author of several publications, among which were, The nine first papers in the second volume of the “Student,” published in 1750; “On advertising for Curates;” a paper in The World; “The inefficacy of Satire, a poem,” 176G, 4to; “Newmarket, or an Essay on the Turf,” 1774, 2 vols.; “Astronomic Doubts, a pamphlet,” 1774; “A volume of Essays,” 1775; “Dialogues of the Dead with the Living,” 1782; “Simplicity,” a poem, 1784; and “Monuments and Painted Glass in upwards of 100 churches, chiefly in the eastern part of Kent,” 1794, 4to. This work, which is interspersed with judicious remarks and interesting anecdotes by the compiler, is become scarce, owing to the fire in Mr. Nichols’s premises, but is highly valuable to the antiquary and lover of such researches. Mr. Parsons also established a Sunday school at Wye; and recommended and contributed much to their establishment in the county of Kent by a sermon and some letters which he published on this occasion. The last years of his life were passed in great retirement; alternately engaged in the discharge of his ministerial functions, and in literary pursuits and correspondence, which, however, were interrupted by the loss of his sight about a year before his death, and at the same time by a very painful disorder. He bore these trials with exemplary patience and resignation. It was his frequent practice, when on his bed, and free from the more excruciating pains of his disorder, to compose moral, lively, and religious pieces, which he afterwards dictated to a faithful amanuensis, who wrote them down. He died at Wye, June 12, 1812, in the eighty-third year of his age.

, in both which ways he wrote his name, a celebrated English Jesuit, was the son of a blacksmith, at Nether Stowey, near Bridgewater in Somersetshire, where he was born in 1546; and, appearing to be a boy of extraordinary parts, was taught Latin by the vicar of the parish, who conceived a. great affection for him t, and contributed to his support at Oxford, where he was admitted of Baliol college in 1563. In the university he became so remarkable, as an acute disputant in scholastic exercises, then much in vogue, that, having taken his first degree in arts in 1568, he was the same year made probationer fellow of his college. He soon after became the most famous tutor in the society, and when he entered into orders, was made socius sacerdos, or chaplain fellow. In 1572 he proceeded M. A. was bursar that year, and the next dean of the college; but it is said that being charged by the society with incontinency, and embezzling the college-money, to avoid the shame of a formal expulsion, he was permitted, out of respect to his learning, to resign, which he did in Feb. 1574, obtaining leave to keep his chamber and pupils as long as he pleased, and to have his commons also till the ensuing Easter. These last circumstances have induced some writers to think that it was merely a change of religious principles which occasioned his resignation.

He had till this time openly professed himself a protestant, and was very zealous in introducing books of that religion into the college library: but soon after his resignation, he quitted Oxford for London, and went thence, June 1574, to Louvain: where, meeting with father William Good, his countryman, a Jesuit, he spent a week in the spiritual exercises at the college of that order, and began to entertain an affection for it. He proceeded, however, to Padua, in consequence of a determination he had formed before he left England, which was to study physic as a profession; but he had not been long at Padua, before the unsettled state of his mind and fortune excited in him a curiosity to visit Ilome, where meeting with some English Jesuits, he gave up all thoughts of the medical profession for that of the church. He now went back to Padua, settled his affairs there, and at Rome in May 1575, was chosen a member of the society of Jesus, and admitted into the English college.

He was indeed in all respects qualified to make a figure in this society, being, according to Camden, fierce, turbulent, and bold; and he soon answered every expectation his new friends could entertain. Having completed the course of his studies, he became one of the principal penitentiaries; and was in such credit with the pope in 157D, that he obtained a grant from his holiness to change an hospital at Rome, founded in queen Mary’s time, into a college or seminary for the English, by the name of “ Collegium de urbe,” dedicated to the Holy Trinity and St. Thomas (a Becket), where the students were obliged to take the following oath: “I. N. N. considering with howgreat benefits God hath blessed me, &c. do promise, by God’s assistance, to enter into holy orders as soon as I shall be fit, and to return to England to convert my countrymen there, whenever it shall please the superior of this house to command me.” He had no sooner seen this college established, and his friend father Allen chosen, by his recommendation, rector of it, than he was appointed to go as superior missionary to England, in order to promote the Romish religion in that kingdom, being the first ever appointed on such a business. Edmund Campian was joined with him, and other assistants, in this arduous province; and they managed matters so artfully, that, notwithstanding the time of their departure from Rome, and the whole route of their journey, and even their portraits had been sent to England before them, yet they found means by disguise to escape the strictest search that was made, and arrived safe in London.

Here they hired a large house, in the name of lord Paget; and, meeting the heads of their party, communicated to them a faculty they brought from the pope, Gregory XIII. dispensing with the Romanists for obeying queen Elizabeth; notwithstanding the bull which had been published by his predecessor Pius V. absolving the queen’s subjects from their oath of allegiance, and pronouncing an anathema against all that should obey her. They then dispersed themselves into different parts of the kingdom; the mid-land counties being chosen by Parsons, that he might be near enough to London, to be ready upon all emergencies. Carnpian went into the North, where they had the least success. The harvest was greatest in Wales. Parsons travelled about the country to gentlemen’s houses, disguised either in the habit of a soldier, a gentleman, a minister, or an apparitor; and applied himself to the work with so much diligence, that, by the help of his associates, he entirely put an end to the custom, that had till then prevailed among the papists, of frequenting the protestant churches, and joining in the service. And notwithstanding the opposition made by a more moderate class of papists, who denied the pope’s deposing power, and some of whom even took the oath of allegiance, yet, if we may believe himself, he had paved the way for a general insurrection before Christmas. But all his desperate designs were defeated by the vigilance of lord Burleigh; and Campian being discovered, imprisoned, and afterwards executed, Parsons, who was then in Kent, found it necessary to revisit the continent, and went to Rouen in Normandy. He had contrived privately to print several books for the promotion of his cuuse, while he was in England: and now being more at ease, he composed others, which he likewise procured to be dispersed very liberally. In 1583, he returned to Rome, being succeeded in his office of superior to the English mission by a person named Heyward. The management of that mission, however, was left to him by Aquaviva, the general of the order; and he was appointed prefect of it in 1592. In the interim, having procured for the English seminary before mentioned, at Rome, a power of choosing an English rector in 1586, he was himself elected into that office the following year.

When Spain had prepared her “invincible armada” to invade England, Parsons was dispatched thither, to avail himself of the present temper of the Spanish monarch, and reconcile him a little to the order of the Jesuits, whose enormities had nearly brought them under the censure of the inquisition. Parsons found means not only to elude the severity of that tribunal, but obtained of the king, that his majesty should appoint one of the judges, and himself another, for this inquisition; and then undertook the principal business of the voyage. While he was in England, he had laboured to promote the popish recusancy, and to bring the English papists under the government of the Jesuits. In the same spirit, after he was obliged to quit this country, he employed all his arts and interest for the erection of seminaries to supply England from time to time with priests to keep up that recusancy, and to prepare the papists there to join with any invasion which those abroad should procure.

After the defeat of the armada in 1588, he used every means in his power to persuade the Spanish monarch to a second invasion; and when he failed in this, he endeavoured to raise a rebellion in England, urging the earl of Derby to appear at the head of it, who is said to have been poisoned, at his instigation, for refusing to acquiesce. Nor did he stop here. We find sir Ralph Winwood informing secretary Cecil from Paris, in 1602, of an attempt to assassinate the queen that year by another English Jesuit, at the instigation of father Parsons; and when all these plans proved abortive, he endeavoured to prevent the succession of king James by several means; one of which was, exciting the people to set up a democratic form of government, for which he had furnished them with principles in several of his books. Another was, to persuade the pope to make his kinsman the duke of Parma king of England, by joining with the lady Arabella, and marrying her to the duke’s brother, cardinal Farnese. Cardinal d'Ossat gives the king of France a large account of both these projects in one of his letters; and in another mentions a third contrivance which Parsons had communicated to him, and whose object was, that the pope, the king of France, and the king of Spain, should first appoint by common consent a successor for England, who should be a catholic; and then should form an armed confederacy to establish him on the throne.

The death of his friend cardinal Allen, however, in 1594, diverted his attention for a while from these weighty public affairs, to the objects of his private ambition. As it was chiefly by his interest, that the cardinal had obtained the purple (see Alan or Allen, William), he conceived great hopes of succeeding him in it. The dignity was worth his utmost endeavours, and he spared no pains to compass it. Among other efforts he employed some Jesuits to obtain in Flanders a petition to the king of Spain, in his favour, subscribed by great numbers of the lowest of the people, as well as those of superior rank. He applied also to that monarch by John Piragues, one of his prime confidents, but received no answer; and then went himself to Rome in 1596, under pretence of settling some disputes, that had arisen in the English college there during his absence. He had the year before been complimented, in a letter from some of the principal persons of his order there, on the assured prospect of success; and upon his arrival was visited, among others of the highest rank, by cardinal Bellarmin, who encouraged him to wait upon the pope. At this interview he entertained the pontiff with an artful account of the reports that were spread all over Flanders, and even at Rome, of his holiness’ s design to confer the purple upon him, and that the king of Spain had written to his holiness upon the occasion. Father More, who furnishes these particulars, tells us further, that Parsons made a modest speech, as usual on such occasions, intimating that he feared he was unworthy of so high an honour: but he was much mortified when the pope, Clement VIII. who was more in the secret than he supposed, assured him, that he had heard nothing from the Spaniards upon any such subject; that idle reports were not to be minded; that he was very well satisfied with his services, and exhorted him to continue in the same course. The truth appeared to be, that the pope having received many complaints of him from the secular clergy, instead of bringing him into the sacred college, had some thoughts of stripping him of the posts he already possessed. Disappointed in this attempt, and threatened with such disgrace, Parsons withdrew on pretence of health to Naples, and did not return to Rome till after the death of Clement in 1606.

But this check did not hinder him from exercising his jurisdiction over the Romanists in England, as prefect of the English mission and, after his return to Rome, we find him removing the arch- presbyter of England, Blakwell, for taking the oath of supremacy to James I. He likewise obtained a brief from Paul V. to deprive all such priests as should take that oath; and thus continued zealous an the discharge of this office to the last. Father More lias given copies of three letters, one to the mission in England, another to the rector of St. Omer’s, and the third to the arch-presbyter Berkit, successor to Blakwell; all dictated by him, while he lay past recovery in the opinion of his physicians. The last was finished the 13th of April; and the fever, which had seized him on the I Oth, put a period to his life on the 18th, 1610. Pope Paul, as soon as he heard of his illness, indulged him in all the ceremonies usually granted to cardinals at the point of death. His body was afterwards embalmed and interred, pursuant to his own request, in the chapel of his college at Rome, close to that of cardinal Allen. A monument was soon after erected to his memory, with an inscription; a copy of which may be seen in Ribadineira’s Bibl. Soc. Jes. under the letter P.

The character of father Parsons was variously represented by protestants and catholics, but even the latter are not agreed. More recent writers seem little disposed to elevate it, although belonging to the same communion. Berrington, who has drawn a very impartial character, begins with asserting that “intrigue, device, stratagem, and all the crooked policy of the Machiavelian school,” are associated with the sound of his name. Dodd, the general biographer of the popish writers, is not without a considerable degree of impartiality in characterizing Parsons, but yet appears more zealous to defend him than strict impartiality admits. Parsons, however, was certainly a man of talents, and beyond comparison the best writer of his party.

His works are, 1. “A brief Discourse, containing the Reasons why Catholics refuse to go to Church,” with a Dedication to Queen Elizabeth, under the fictitious name of John Howlet, dated Dec. 15, 1530. 2. “Reasons for his coming into the Mission of England, &c.” by some ascribed to Campian. 3. “A brief Censure upon two Books, written against the Reasons and Proofs.” 4.“A Discovery of John Nichols, misreported a Jesuit” all written and printed while the author was in England. 5. “A Defence of the Censure given upon his two Books, &c.” 1583. 6. “De persecutione Anglicana epistola,” Rome and Ingolstadt, 1582. 7. “A Christian Directory,” 1583. 8. “A Second Part of a Christian Directory, &c.” 1591. These two parts being printed erroneously at London, Parsons published an edition of them under this title: “A Christian Directory, guiding men to their Salvation, &c. with m.my corrections and additions by the Author himself.” This book is really an excellent one, and was afterwards put into modern English by Dr. Stanhope, dean of Canterbury; in which form it has gone through eight or ten editions. 9. “Responsio ad Eliz. Reginse edictum contra Catholicos,” Romae, 1593, under the name of And. Philopater. 10. “A Conference about the next Succession to the Crown of England, &c.” 1594, under the feigned name of Doleman. This piece was the production of cardinal Allen, Inglefield, and others, who furnished the materials, which Parsons, who had a happy talent this way, put into a proper method. Parsons’s style is among the best of the Elizabethan period. 11. “A temperate Wardword to the turbulent and seditious Watchword of sir Fr. Hastings, knight, 7 ' &c. 1599, under the same name. 12.” A Copy of a Letter written by a Master of Arts at Cambridge, &c.“published in 1583. This piece was commonly called” Father Parsons’s Green Coat,“being sent from abroad with the binding and leaves in that livery, but there seems reason to doubt whether this was his (see Ath. Ox. vol. II. new edit, note, p. 74). 13.” Apologetical Epistle to the Lords of her Majesty’s Privy Council, &c.“1601. 14.” Brief Apology, or Defence of the Catholic Ecclesiastical Hierarchy erected by pope Clement VIII. &c.“St. Omers, 1601. 15.” A Manifestation of the Folly and bad Spirit of secular Priests,“1602. 16.” A Decachordon often Quodlibetical Questions/' 1602. 17. “De Peregrinatione.” 18. “An Answer to O. E. whether Papists or Protestants be true Catholics,” 1603. 19. “A Treatise of the three Conversions of Paganism to the Christian Religion,” published (as are also the two following) under the name of N. D. (Nicholas Doleman), in 3 *6ls. 12mo, 1603, 1604. 20. “A Relation of a Trial made before the king of France in 1600, between the bishop of Evreux and the lord Plessis Mornay/' 1604. 21.” A Defence of the precedent Relation, &c.“22.” A Review of ten public Disputations^ &c. concerning the Sacrifices and Sacrament of the Altar,“1604. 23.” The Forerunner of Bell’s Downfall of Popery,“1605. 24.” An Answer to the fifth Part of the Reports of Sir Edward Coke, &c.“1606, 4to, published under the name of a Catholic Divine. 25.” De sacris alienis non adeundis, questiones duae,“1607. 26.” A Treatise tending to Mitigation towards Catholic subjects in England, against Thomas Morton (afterwards bishop of Durham),“1607. 27.” The Judgment of a Catholic Gentleman concerning king James’s Apology, &c.“1608. 28.” Sober Reckoning with Thomas Morton,“1609. 29.” A Discussion of Mr. Barlow’s Answer to the Judgment of a Catholic Englishman concerning the Oath of Allegiance,“1612. This book being left not quite finished at the author’s death, was afterwards completed and published by Thomas Fitzherbert. The following are also posthumous pieces: 30.” The Liturgy of the Sacrament of the Mass,“1620. 31.” A Memorial for Reformation, &c.“thought to be the same with” The High Court and Council of the Reformation,“finished after twenty years’ labour in 1596, but not published till after Parsons’s death; and republished from a copy presented to James II. with an introduction and some animadversions by Edward Gee, under the title of,” The Jesuits Memorial for the intended Reformation of the Church of England under their first Popish Prince,“1690, 8vo. 32. There is also ascribed to him,” A Declaration of the true Causes of the great Troubles pre-supposed to be intended against the Realm of England, &c. Seen and allowed, anno 1581.“33. Parsons also translated from the English into Spanish,” A Relation of certain Martyrs in England,“printed at Madrid 1590, 8vo.Several of his Mss. are preserved in Baliol college library, particularly a curious one entitled” Epitome controversiarum, hujus temporis."

, a noble Venetian, born in 1540, was made historiographer of the republic in 1579, and afterwards was employed in several embassies, was made governor of Brescia, and finally elected a procurator of St. Mark. Such was his character for wisdom, integrity, and zeal for the public welfare, that he was called the Cato of Venice. He died in 1598, at the age of 58. He cultivated the sciences and general literature, and was the author of several works of merit. Among these are: “Delia Perfezione della vita Politica;” “Discorsi Politici,” published by his sons in 1599 “A History of Venice, from 1513 to 1551, with the Addition of an Account of the War of Cyprus:” written also in Italian, but he had begun to write it in Latin, in imitation of the style of Sallust, and had finished four books in that language. A new edition of this history was given by Apostolo Zeno in 1703.

, a learned antiquary, was a noble of Palermo, and secretary to the senate of that city, where he died in 1629. He was author of several works, but is principally known by his “Sicilia descrittacon Medaglie,” Palermo, 1612, fol. This work was afterwards enlarged by Leonardo Agostini, and printed at Rome in 1649, and at Lyons in 1697. Havercamp published a Latin edition of it in three volumes folio, 1723, which makes part of the Italian Antiquities of Grsevius and Burman.

, a French mathematician and philosopher, and one of the greatest geniuses and best writers that country has produced, was born at Clermont in Auvergne, June 19, 1623. His father, Stephen Pascal, was president of the Court of Aids in his province, and was also a very learned man, an able mathematician, and a friend of Des Cartes. Having an extraordinary tenderness for this child, his only son, he quitted his office and settled at Paris in 1631, that he might be quite at leisure to attend to his son’s education, of which he was the sole superintendant, young Pascal never having had any other roaster. From his infancy Blaise gave proofs of a very extraordinary capacity. He was extremely inquisitive; desiring to know the reason of every thing; and when, good reasons were not given him, he would seek for better; nor would he ever yield his assent but upon such as appeared to him well grounded. What is told of his manner of learning the mathematics, as well as the progress he quickly made in that science, seems almost miraculous, liis father, perceiving in him an extraordinary inclination to reasoning, was afraid lest the knowledge of the mathematics might hinder his learning the languages, so necessary as a foundation to all sound learning. He therefore kept him as much as he could from all notions of geometry, locked up all his books of that kind, and refrained even from speaking of it in his presence. He could not however prevent his son from musing on that science; and one day in particular he surprised him at work with charcoal upon his chamber floor, and in the midst of figures. The father asked him what he was doing: “I am searching,” says Pascal, “for such a thing;” which was just the same as the 32d proposition of the 1st book of Euclid. He asked him then how he came to think of this: “It was,” says Blaise, “because I found out such another thing;” and so, going backward, and using the names of bar and round, he came at length to the definitions and axioms he had formed to himself. Of this singular progress we are assured by his sister, madame Perier, and several other persons, the credit of whose testimony cannot reasonably be questioned.

From this time he had full liberty to indulge his genius in mathematical pursuits. He understood Euclid’s Elements as soon as he cast his eyes upon them. At sixteen years of age he wrote a treatise on Conic Sections, which was accounted a great effort of genius; so much so, that Des Cartes, who had been in Holland a long time, upon, reading it, fancied that M. Pascal the father was the real author of it. At nineteen he contrived an admirable arithmetical machine, which would have done credit as an invention to any man versed in science, and, much more to such a youth.

About this time his health became so impaired, that he was obliged to suspend his labours for the space of four years. After this, having seen Torricelli’s experiment respecting a vacuum and the weight of the air, he turned his thoughts towards these objects, and undertook several new experiments, one of which was as follows: havingprovided a glass tube, 46 feet in length, open at one end, and hermetically sealed at the other, he filled it with red wine, that he might distinguish the liquor from the tube, and stopped up the orifice; then having inverted it, and placed it in a vertical position, with the lower end immersed into a vessel of water one foot deep, he opened the lower end, and the wine descended to the distance of about 32 feet from the surface of the vessel, leaving a considerable vacuum at the upper part of the tube. He next inclined the tube gradually, till the upper end became only of 32 feet perpendicular height above the bottom, and he observed the liquor proportionally ascend up to the top of the tube. He made also a great many experiments with siphons, syringes, bellows, and all kinds of tubes, making use of different liquors, such as quicksilver, water, wine, oil, &c.; and having published them in 1647, he dispersed his work through all countries.

All these experiments, however, only ascertained effects, without demonstrating the causes. Pascal knew that Torricelli conjectured that those phenomena- which he had observed were occasioned by the weight of the air, though they had formerly been attributed to Nature’s abhorrence of a vacuum: but if Torricelli’s theory were true, he reasoned that the liquor in the barometer tube ought to stand higher at the bottom of a hill, than at the top of it. In order therefore to discover the truth of this theory, he made an experiment at the top and bottom of a mountain in Auvergne, called le Puy de Dome, the result of which gave him reason to conclude that the air was indeed heavy. Of this experiment he published an account, and sent copies of it to most of the learned men in Europe. He also renewed it at the top and bottom of several high towers, as those of Notre Dame at Paris, St. Jaques de la Boucherie, &c. and always remarked the same difference in the weight of the air, at different elevations. This fully convinced him of the general pressure of the atmosphere; and from this discovery he drew many useful and important inferences. He composed also a large treatise, in which he fully explained this subject, and replied to all the objections that had been started against it. As he afterwards thought this work rather too prolix, and being fond of brevity and precision, he divided it into two small treatises, one of which he entitled “A Dissertation on the Equilibrium of Fluids;” and the other, “An Essay on the Weight of the Atmosphere.” These labours procured Pascal so much reputation, that the greatest mathematicians and philosophers of the age proposed various questions to him, and consulted him respecting such difficulties as they could not resolve. Upon one of these occasions he discovered the solution of a problem proposed by Mersenne, which had baffled the penetration of all that had attempted it. This problem was to determine the curve described in the air by the nail of a coach-wheel, while the machine is in motion; which curve was thence called a roullette, but now commonly known by the name of cycloid. Pascal offered a reward of 40 pistoles to any one who should give a satisfactory answer to it. No person having succeeded, he published his own at Paris; but, as ie began now to be disgusted with the sciences, he would not set his real name to it, but sent it abroad under that of A. d'Ettonville. This was the la’st work which he published in the mathematics; his infirmities, from a delicate constitution, though still young, now increasing so much, that he was under the necessity of renouncing severe study, and of living so recluse, that he scarcely admitted any person to see him. Another subject on which Pascal wrote very ingeniously, and in which he has been spoken of as an inventor, was what has been called his Arithmetical Triangle, being a set of figurate numbers disposed in that form. But such a table of numbers, and many properties of them, had been treated of more than a century before, by Cardan, Stifelius, and other arithmetical writers.

After having thus laboured abundantly in mathematical and philosophical disquisitions, he forsook those studies and all human learning at once, to devote himself to acts of devotion and penance. He was not twenty-four years of age, when the reading some pious books had put him upon taking this resolution; and he became as great a devotee as any age has produced. He now gave himself up entirely to a state of prayer and mortification; and he had always in his thoughts these great maxims of renouncing all pleasure and all superfluity; and this he practised with, rigour even in his illnesses, to which he was frequently subject, being of a very invalid habit of body.

Though Pascal had thus abstracted himself from the world, yet he could not forbear paying some attention to what was doing in it; and he even interested himself in the contest between the Jesuits and the Jansenists. Taking the side of the latter, he wrote his celebrated “Lettres Provinciates,” published in 1656, under the name of Louis de Montalte, making the former the subject of ridicule, *< These letters,“sVys Voltaire,” may be considered as a model of eloquence and humour. The best comedies of Moliere have not more wit than the fmt part of these letters; and the sublimity of the latter part of them is equal to any thing in Bossuet. It is true indeed that the Whole book was built upon a false foundation; for the extravagant notions of a few Spanish i.nd Henmh Jesuits were artfully ascribed to the whole society. Many absurdities might likewise have been discovered among the Dominican and Franciscan casuists; but this would not have answered the purpose; for the whole raillery was to be levelled only at the Jesuits. These letters were intended to prove, that the Jesuits had formed a design to corrupt mankind; a design which no sect or society ever had, or can have.“Here, however, Voltaire is not altogether correct; for the Jesuits cited by Pascal, were considered as oracles by their order; and the whole society always acted so systematically as a body, that the doctrines of one may be imputed to the rest, more fairly than in any other class of men. Voltaire calls Pascal the first of their satirists; for Despre*aux, says he, must be considered as only the second. In another place, speaking of this work of Pascal, he says, that” examples of all the various species of eloquence are to be found in it. Though it has now been written almost 100 years, yet not a single word occurs in it, savouring of that vicissitude to which living languages are so subject. Here then we are to fix the epoch when our language may be said to have assumed a settled form. The bishop of Lucon, son of the celebrated Bussy, told me, that asking one day the bishop of Meaux what work he would covet most to be the author of, supposing his own performances set aside, Bossu replied, ' The Provincial Letters’.“These letters were first published in 1607, 12 mo, an edition highly valued, and were afterwards translated into all languages, and printed over and over again. Some have said that there were decrees of formal condemnation against them; and also that Pascal himself, in his last illness, detested them, and repented of having been a Jansenist: but both these particulars are without foundation. It was supposed that father Daniel was the anonymous author of a piece against them, entitled” The Dialogues of Oleander and Eudoxus."

Pascal was but about thirty years of age when these letters were published; yet he was extremely infirm, and his disorders increasing soon after so much, that he conceived liis end fast approaching, he gave up all farther thoughts of literary composition. He resolved to spend the remainder of his days in retirement and pious meditation; and with this view he broke off all his former connections, changed his habitation, and spoke to no one, not even to his own servants, and hardly ever even admitted them into his room. He made his own bed, brought his dinner from the kitchen, and carried back the plates and dishes in the evening; so thrt he employed his servants only to cook for him, to go to town, and to do such other things as he could not absolutely do himself. In his chamber nothing was to be seen but two or three chairs, a table, a bed, and a few books. It had no kind of ornament whatever; he had neither a carpet on the floor, nor curtains to his bed. But this did not prevent him from sometimes receiving visits; and when his friends appeared surprised to see him thus without furniture, he replied, that he had what was necessary, and that any thing else would be a superfluity, unworthy of a wise man. He employed his time in prayer, and in reading the Scriptures; writing down such thoughts as this exercise inspired. Though his continual infirmities obliged him to use very delicate food, and though his servants employed the utmost care to provide only what was excellent, he never relished what he ate, and seemed quite indifferent whether they brought him good or bad. His indifference in this respect was so great, that though his taste was not vitiated, he forbad any sauce or ragout to be made for him which might excite his appetite.

Though Pascal had now given up intense, study, and though he lived in the most temperate manner, his health continued to decline rapidly; and his disorders had so enfeebled his organs, that his reason became in some measure affected. He always imagined that he saw a deep abyss on one side of him, and he never would sit down till a chair was placed there, to secure him from the danger which he apprehended. At another time he pretended that he had a kind of vision or ecstasy; a memorandum of which he preserved during the remainder of his life in a bit of paper, put between the cloth and the lining of his coat, and which he always carried about him. Some of the Jesuits reproached him with insanity; but his disorder had nothing more in it than a fever, or a vertigo. During the last years of his life, indeed, he became very superstitious, and exhibited a melancholy example of human infirmity in that respect. In company Pascal was distinguished by his amiable behaviour, by his easy, agreeable, and instructive conversation, and by great modesty. He possessed a natural kind of eloquence, which was in a manner irresistible. The arguments he employed, for the most part produced the effect which he proposed; and though his abilities entitled him to assume an air of superiority, he never displayed that haughty and imperious tone, which may often be observed in men of shining talents. Toward the close of hii life, he employed himself wholly in pious and moral reflections, writing down those which he judged worthy of being preserved. The first piece of paper he could find was employed for this purpo.se; and he commonly put down only a few words of each sentence, as he wrote them merely for his own use. The bits of paper upon which he had written these thoughts, were found, after his death, filed upon different pieces of string, without any order or connection; and being copied exactly as they were written, they were afterwards arranged and published.

Pascal died at Paris, August 19, 1662, aged thirty-nine. He had been some time about a work against atheists and infidels; but he did not live long enough to digest the materials he had collected. What was found among his papers was published under the title “Pense*es,” or Thoughts upon Religion, and other subjects; and has been much admired. After his death appeared also two other little tracts; one of which is entitled “The Equilibrium of Fluids;” and the other “The Weight of the mass of Air.”

The works of Pascal were collected in five volumes octavo, and published at Paris in 1779. This edition of Pascal’s works may be considered as the first published; at least the greater part of thern were not before collected into one body; and some of them had remained only in manuscript. For this collection the public were indebted to the abbot Bossut, and Pascal deserved to have such an editor. “This extraordinary man,” says he, “inherited from nature all the powers of genius. He was a geometrician of the first rank, a profound reasoner, and a sublime and elegant writer. If we reflect, that in a very short life, oppressed by continual infirmities, he invented a curious arithmetical machine, the elements of the calculation of cnances, and a method of resolving various problems respecting the cycloid; that he fixed in an irrevocable manner the wavering opinions of the learned respecting the weight of the air; that he wrote one of the completest works which exist in the French language; and that in his thoughts there are passages, the depth and beauty of which are incomparablewe shall be induced to believe, that a greater genius never existed in any age or nation. All those who had occasion to frequent his company in the ordinary commerce of the world, acknowledged his superiority; but it excited no envy against him, as he was never fqnd of shewing it. His conversation instructed, without making those who heard him sensible of their own inferiority; and he was remarkably indulgent towards the faults of others. It may be easily seen by his Provincial Letters, and by some of his other works, that he was born with a great fund of humour, which his infirmities could never entirely destroy. In company, he readily indulged in that harmless and delicate raillery which never gives offence, and which greaily tends to enliven conversation; but its principal object generally was of a moral nature. For example, ridiculing those authors who say,” my book, my commentary, my history; they would do better,“added he,” to say our book, our commentary, our history; since there are in them much more of other people’s than their own."