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

, a celebrated Benedictine of the ninth century, was born at Soissons, and carefully educated by the monks of Notre Dame in his native city, in the exterior part of their abbey. He afterwards took the religious habit under St. Adelard in the abbey of Corbey, and daring the exile of his abbot Wala, who succeeded Adelard, wrote, about the year 831, a treatise “On the Body and Blood of Christ” for the instruction of the young monks at New Corbey in Saxony, where he teaches, that the same body of Christ which was born of the Virgin, which was crucified, rose again, and ascended into heaven, is really present in the Eucharist. This treatise made a great noise in the reign of Charles the Bald. Bertram (otherwise Ratram), John Scotus Erigena, and some others, wrote against Paschasius, who was then abbot of Corbey; and Frudegard, abbot of New Corbey, wrote to him on the subject about the year 864, informing him that many persons understood in a figurative sense the words “this is my Body; this is my Blood,” in the institution of the Eucharist, and supported themselves on the authority of St. Augustine. Paschasius on the other side maintained that he taught nothing in his treatise different from the faith of the church, nor from what had been universally believed from the time of the apostles; but these disputes, together with some disturbances raised against him, induced him to resign his abbey, and he died soon after, April 26, in the year 865. He was only a deacon, having declined taking priest’s orders from a principle of humility. Claude, and several other protestant writers, have asserted that Paschasius was the first who taught the doctrine of the real presence; but the popish writers maintain that this doctrine has been always believed and taught in the Romish church. His remaining works are, “Commentaries” on St. Matthew, on Psalm xliv. and on the Lamentations of Jeremiah; “The Life of St. Adelard,” and other works in the Library of the Fathers, which Father Sirmond printed separately at Paris, 1618, folio. Father d'Acheri, in torn. XII. of his “Spicilegium, has published Paschasius Ratbert’s treatise” De Partu Virginis;“another question much agitated in the ninth century. His treatise” De Corpora Christ!" has been inserted by Martenne in his collection, where it is more accurate than in P. Sirmond’s edition.

, the son of George Pasor, a learned professor of divinity and Hebrew in the academy of Herborne, by Apollonia his wife, daughter of Peter Hendschius, senator of that place, was born there April 12, 1599. Discovering a very docile disposition, he was carefully educated in the elements of Greek and Latin in his native place, until the appearance of the plague obliged him to be removed to Marpurg in 1614; but the following year he returned to Herborne, and again applied himself closely to his studies. In 1616, he was sent to Heidelberg; and, meeting there with skilful professors, he made such improvement, that he was employed as a tutor, and taught in private both mathematics and Hebrew. He was honoured also with the degree of M. A. by the university in Feb. 1617, and then studied divinity under David Pareus, Abraham Scultetus, and Henry Alting. In April 1620, he was appointed mathematical professor; which office he retained until Heidelberg was invested by the duke of Bavaria’s troops, in September 1622, when he lost his books and Mss. and narrowly escaped with his life to Herborne, where he found a comfortable employment in the academy till 1623. Proceeding thence to Ley den, he constantly attended the lectures of the most eminent Dutch divines, particularly those of Erpenius upon the Arabic tongue, and of Snellius upon divinity.

After a few weeks stay at this university, he arrived in England; and, bringing proper testimonials with him to Oxford, was incorporated M. A. there, in June 1624. Here he began to teach Hebrew and the mathematics privately, but at the end of the year took a tour into France with some gentlemen of Germany; and spending the winter at Paris, attended the lectures of Gabriel Sionita, regius professor of Syriac and Arabic: who, having left off reading in public some years for want of auditors, was prevailed upon by Pasor to resume those exercises in his own house. Having much improved himself under this excellent master, he returned to Oxford in 1625, and had chambers in Exeter college, in which he preferred residing, notwithstanding the plague had dispersed the students, rather than go to Ireland with archbishop Usher, who offered him his table and a handsome pension. As soon as the infection ceased, he had some pupils, either in divinity or the oriental tongues; and in the latter he was tutor to the celebrated Pococke. Afterwards, upon his petition, he was appointed to read public lectures in Arabic, Chaldee, and Syriac, twice a week in term time, in the divinity-school; for which he was handsomely rewarded. He held this temporary professorship for about three years from Oct. 1626, during which time he also delivered a Hebrew lecture in Now college. In 1629 he accepted an invitation to be professor of moral philosophy at Groningen; and, upon the death of Muller, the mathematical professor, six years after, Pasor succeeded to that chair; but when, in 1645, he was raised to that of divinity, of which faculty he was then created doctor, he resigned his mathematical professorship, retaining that of moral philosophy. All these favours induced him to remain at Groningen, where he died Jan. 28, 1658.

He published few books, for wbich he is said to have given two reasons: first, “Because he was not willing that youth should be diverted from reading the good books already published;” and secondly, “Because he did not care that the booksellers should risk their money.” He published, however, while at Oxford, an “Oratio pro linguæ Arabicæ professione, publice ad academicos habita in Schola Theologica universitatis Oxon. 25 Oct. 1626,” Oxon. 1627, 4to. He was also editor of those useful works which his father (who died in 1637) compiled for the use of Greek scholars, and which were at one time very popular; viz. his “Manuale GrsEcorum vocum Novi Testamenti, deque Graecis N. Testament!, accentibus.” Leyden, 1634, 12mo, often reprinted at Herborn, Amsterdam, and other places “Syllabus sive idea omnium Novi Test, dictionum, seu dialectorum,” 12mo, Amsterdam, Franeker, Francfort, &c &c. “Lexicon Graeco- Latin urn in N. Testamentum,” 8vo. There are editions of this printed at London, Amsterdam, Geneva, c. and two at least with Leusden’s improvements, Amsterdam, 1675, and Leipsic, 1695. George Pasor was nineteen years professor at Herborn, and eleven years at Franeker, where he was buried with a monumental inscription. It remains to be mentioned, that a Latin life of Mattdew Pasor was published, containing his journal, many trifling particulars in which, Bayle says, ought to have been left out. But what would have become of Bayle’s own works, particularly his Dictionary, had his editors left out what was trifling, obscene, and impious

, a learned Frenchman, was born in 1528 at Paris; of which city he was an advocate in parliament, afterwards a counsellor, and at last advocate-general in the chamber of accounts. He pleaded many years with very great success before the parliament, where he was almost constantly retained in the most difficult causes, and every day consulted as an oracle. He did not, however, confine his studies to the law; but was esteemed a general scholar. Henry III. gave him the, post of advocate of the chamber of accounts, which he filled with his usual reputation, and resigned it some time after to Theodore Paquier, his eldest son. He was naturally beneficent and generous; agreeable and easy in conversation his manner sweet, and his temper pleasant. He died at Paris, at the advanced age of eighty -seven, Aug. 31, 1615, and was interred in the church of St, Severin.

His works show considerable knowledge of ancient history, especially that of France; and he raised no little reputation by his attacks on the Jesuits in his “Les Recherches,” which was answered by father Garasse. His animosity to that order laid him in some measure open to this antagonist, for he very readily adopted any story, ever so improbable, which he heard of them from their bitterest enemies. All his works, however, are written with elegance and humour, and he appears to have been formed by nature equally for a poet and a lawyer. His works were first printed together at Trevoux, and passed through many editions, the last in 1665. They were afterwards printed along with those of his son Nicholas, at Amsterdam, in 1723, 2 vols. fol. Of his “Letters,” the best edition is that at Paris, in 1619, in 5 vols. 8vo. His “Poe.ns” consist of one book “Of Portraits;” six books of “Epigrams;” and a book of “Epitaphs.” But in this collection is wanting his “Catechism of the Jesuits” instead of which are inserted the letters of his son Nicolas. Among his pieces in verse, “La Pure” had at one time a fashidnable reputation. It is entitled “La, Puce des grands touii de and contains several poems upon a flea which Paquier spied on the breast of the learned Catharine de Roches, in a visit to her on the extraordinary sessions at Poitiers in 1569. Such are the trifles by which a. nation is sometimes amused. He left three sons, of whom the eldest, Theodore, was advocate-general in the chamber of accounts; Nicolas, master of requests, whose” Letters" were printed in 1623, at Paris, containing several discourses upon the occurrences in France in the time of Henry IV. and Louis XIII. and Guy, who was auditor of the accounts.

, the chief of a family of engravers, and likewise a man of letters, was a native of Utrecht, but we have no account of his education, or dates either of birth or death. It appears that he applied himself very early in life to the study of the arts, and particularly delighted in drawing and designing from the works of the most eminent artists his contemporaries. He was sent by prince Maurice to teach drawing in an academy at Paris. At what time he came to England is not very clear none of his works done here are dated, says Vertue, later than 1635. From the paucity of English heads engraved by Crispin, and other circumstances, lord Orford seems inclined to doubt whether he ever was in England, and thinks it not improbable that drawings were sent to him from this country, as we know was the case afterwards with Houbraken, when he was employed on the “Illustrious Heads.”

How long he lived is not known. His fame was at itj highest from 1610 or sooner to 1643. In this last year, when probably very old, he published at Amsterdam his famous drawing book in Italian, French, High and Lovr Dutch, a folio, with forty-eight plates. His next work, according to lord Orford, was entitled “Instruction du roy en Texercise de monter a cheval, par Messire Antoine de PJuvinel,” a work in dialogues, French and Dutch, foolish enough in itself, but adorned with many cuts admirably designed and engraved, and with many portraits. Holland’s “HerooJogia” was executed at his expence, for which he employed the best Flemish engravers, but does not mention any share he had himself in that collection of portraits. Crispin Passe’s works are so numerous that it would be difficult to obtain a complete catalogue. Lord Orford and Mr. Strutt have mentioned the principal, as connected with the English series; but they have omitted his Virgil, Homer, and Ovid, and his “Hortus Floridus,” the latter a folio, and the other in 4to, which are much valued abroad, but very scarce. There is, or was, a complete collection of his illustrated books, and single plates, in the royal library at Paris, and many of them are in every English collector’s portfolio or library.

Passe worked entirely with the graver, in a neat, clear style, which has much originality in it; and, excepting some little stiffness which frequently appears, and the want of harmony, with respect to the distribution of the light and shadow, a fault which prevailed at the time in which he lived, his best works possess a very considerable share of merit, especially his portraits, many of which he drew from the life; and the far greater part of his historical and emblematical subjects are engraved from his own compositions. He drew the human figure very correctly, and marked the extremities with a degree of exactness, not usually found in the works of those masters who employed themselves upon small subjects; when he attempted large ones he was not equally successful.

, an able French optician, was born in 1702, and at first brought up to trade, which he partly relinquished for the study of natural philosophy and astronomy, and being already known to his advantage by several members of the academy of sciences, he published a volume in 1738, 12mo, on the construction of a reflecting telescope from sixteen inches to six feet and a half, the latter producing the effect of a telescope 150 feet long; and some time after, he wrote “The Description and use of Telescopes, Microscopes,” &c. of his own invention. He also constructed an astronomical pendulum, crowned with a moving sphere, which was made to represent the revolutions of the planets, in a manner that exactly Corresponded with the astronomical tables. He presented this machine to Lewis. XV. and it was formerly to be seen in the royal apartments at Versailles. He made a similar instrument for the Turkish emperor, which shewed the rising and setting of the sun and moon. He furnished the king and other great men in France with sets of instruments for making experiments in optics, and other branches of science. In 1765 he gave some plans for making canals, by means of which ships might come up to Paris; and his proposal is inserted in M. de la Lande’s work on ie Navigable Canals," published 1778; but he had not the satisfaction of seeing it accomplished, being carried off in twenty-four hours, by a lethargy, November 6, 1769.

, a celebrated professor of eloquence in the royal college at Paris, and one of the politest writers of his time, was born Oct. 18, 1534, atTroyes in Champagne. His uncle, who undertook to educate him, placed him at the college of his native city, where some harsh conduct of his master induced him to run away. Arriving at Bourges, he entered first into the service of a farrier, and afterwards waited upon a monk; but, growing in time sagacious enough to see his folly, he returned to his uncle, who pardoned him, and maintained him for three years at college, where he proceeded in his studies with so much diligence, that he became in a short time able to teach irv public. In that capacity his first post was master of the second class in the college of Du Plessis, from which he removed to that of cardinal Le Moine but being obliged to retire for some time from Paris on account of the plague, on his return he engaged in the business of teaching Latin. At length he took up a resolution to study the law; for which purpose he went to Bourges, and spent three years under Cujacius; but at last became professor of eloquence, having obtained that chair in 1572, on the vacancy which happened by the assassination of Ramus. In the discharge of this post he grew so eminent, that the most learned men of the time, and the counsellors of the supreme courts at Paris, went to hear his lectures. He was an indefatigable student, passing frequently whole days without taking any food; yet to an extraordinary erudition he joined an uncommon politeness of manners, having nothing of the mere scholar, except the gown and hood. These accomplishments brought him acquainted with all the people of quality but he contracted an intimacy only with M. de Mesmes, in whose house he lived for thirty years, till his death, which was occasioned by a palsy, Sept. 14, 1602.

He was highly esteemed by Ronsard, Belleau, and Baif; and was much admired as a Latin poet; he was indeed chiefly partial to the Latin authors, and formed a dictionary of that language, which some say was incorporated in an improved edition of Calepin. His chief works are, 1. “Chant d'allegresse pour Pentree de Charles IX. en sa ville de Troyes,” Troyes, 1564, 8vo. 2. “Complaintesur la mort d'Adrien Turnebe,” Paris, 1565, 8vo. 3, “Sonnets sur le tombeau du Seigneur de la Chatre, 1569, 8vo. 4.” Hymne de la paix, Paris, 1563, 8vo. 5. “Recueil des poesies, Francoises et Latines,” Paris, 1606, 8vo. 6. “c Orationes et proefationes.” 7. “Conjecturarum liber.” 8. “De literarum inter se cognatione et permutatione.” 9. “Commentarii in Catullum, Tibullum, et Propertium.” 10. “Kalenclae Januariae.” 11.“Oratio de Csecitate.” 12. “Notae in Petronii Arbitri satyricon.” 13. “Encomium Asini.” Besides which, Groevius tells us that he had met with academical questions by Passerat in manuscript upon some of Cicero’s orations, out of which he took what was for his purpose in illustrating that author; and Pithou said that Passerat knew nothing else but Cicero.

, a painter and a poet, of no great merit in either line, died at Rome in 1679, at the age of about seventy. The work which is most likely to preserve his name is his “Lives of the Painters, Sculptors, and Architects, who nourished at Rome in his own time.” This book is full of curious and interesting anecdotes, and was published in Italian at Rome in 1772. Fuseli speaks of him as celebrated for his impartiality and acumen in this work. Though no great painter, he was a disciple of the famous Dominichino; and though his sonnets were bad, one of them is said very materially to have promoted his fortune.

, nephew of the former, was born at Rome in 1654, and was at first a pupil of his uncle, but, soon discovering the inability of that teacher, became the disciple of Carlo Maratti. Under such a master he made great progress, and became famous. His style of historical composition was grand, his colouring like that of his master Maratti, his invention fruitful, and his expression natural and agreeable. One of his best works is his “St. Jerome meditating on the last Judgment,” at Pesaro. He died in 1714.

, a learned Italian antiquary and philologer, was born at Gubio in the duchy of Urbino, in Nov. 1694. His father, who was a physician at Todi, designed him for the study of the law, which accordingly he followed, but pursued with it that of antiquities, for which he had a strong genius. After residing four years at Rome he returned to Todi, and began to collect the antiquities of that city and its environs. In 1726 he turned his attention chiefly to the Etruscan antiquities, and collected a vast number of lamps, which he arranged in classes. Having lost his wife in 1738, after twelve years of happy union, he became an ecclesiastic, and was apostolic prothonotary, and vicar-general of Pesaro. In February 1780, he was overturned in his carriage, and died in consequence of the fall. His works are, 1. “Lucernae fictiles Musei Passerii,” a splendid 4>ook in 3 vols. folio, He had drawn up a fourth, on the lamps of the Christians, but this has not been published. These came out in 1739, 1743, and 1751. 2. “Lettere Roncagliesi;” Letters from his villa at Roncaglia, on Etruscan antiquities, 1739. There were seventeen letters, and a continuation was afterwards published. 3. “In Thorns? Dempsteri Libros de Etruria regali Paralipomena, quibus tabula? eidem operi additsG illustrantur. Accedunt dissertatio de re numaria Etruscorum; de nominibus Etruscorum; et notoe in tabulas Eugabinas, auctore I. Baptista Passerio,” Lucafc, 1767, folio. 4. 4< Picturae Etruscorum in vasculis, nunc primum in unum collectae, explicationibus et dissertationibus illustrate," Romae, 1767, 3 vols. folio. 5. Many learned dissertations published in several collections; as, for example, five in the third volume of Gori’s Museum Etruscum; De Genip domestico, de Ara sepulchrali, de funeribus Etruscorum, de Velciorum familia, de Architectura Etrusca. These are all full of the most recondite learning.

, an artist of Bologna, was one of the pupils and assistants of Zuccari, and the first of Bolognese painters who introduced naked torsoes in sacred subjects. The most eminent of his altar-pieces are the Decollation of St. Paul alle Tre Fontane, at Rome, and at S. Giacomo, of Bologna, our Lady with various Saints, painted in competition with the Caracci, and honoured by their praise. His Tityus, when exhibited to the public at Bologna, was by the Dilettanti mistaken for a work of Michael Angelo. But he did not always husband his powers with equal diligence and refinement, hurried away by that frankness and facility of execution which debauched Cesari, whom he however excelled in correctness of design. In portrait, for character, dignity, and propriety of composition, he approached Titian himself, in the opinion of Guido. His power of drawing with the pen attracted Agostino Caracci to his school, who made it the guide of his line in engraving. He composed a book on symmetry and anatomy, which may be considered as a commentary on his works. He had three sons of considerable merit as artists. A sparrow, often introduced in the works of Bartholomew, is an allusion to his name. He died in 1595.

, an Italian cardinal, famous rather as a patron of letters, than as a writer, and employed by the see of Rome in many important negociations, was born at Fossombrone in the dutchy of Urbino, in 1682. He studied in the Clementine college at Rome, where he afterwards formed that vast library and curious collection of manuscripts, from which the learned world has derived so much advantage. In 1706 he attended the nuncio Gualterio, his relation, to Paris, where he formed an intimacy with the most learned men of the time, and examined every thing that deserved attention. He was particularly intimate with Mabillon, and Montfaucon. In 1708 ha went into Holland, at first for the sake of literary inquiries, but afterwards as a kind of secret agent for the pope at the Hague, where he resided four years, and attended the congress at Utrecht in 1712. On his return to Rome., he passed through Paris, where he was most graciously and honourably received by Louis XIV. who gave him his portrait set with diamonds. He then proceeded to Turin to accommodate some differences between the pope and the duke of Savoy; and upon his return to Rome was declared president of the apostolic chamber. In the two congresses at Bale in 1714, and at Soleure in 1715, he was again employed, and strongly evinced his zeal, talents, activity, prudence, and other qualities of a great negotiator. His account of this embassy was published in 1738, in folio, under the title of “Acta Legationis Helvetica,” which may be considered as a model of conduct for persons employed in such services. Upon the accession of Clement XII. he was sent as nuncio to the court of Vienna, where he pronounced the funeral oration of prince Eugene. In the pontificate of Innocent XIII. which lasted from 1721 to 1724, Passionei had been made archbishop of Ephesus; ie continued in favour with the successors of that pope, Benedict XIII. and Clement XII. the latter of whom, in 1738, raised him to the dignity of cardinal, having at the same time made him secretary of the briefs. Benedict XIV. in 1755 made him librarian of the Vatican, which he enriched by many important accessions; and in the same year he was admitted into the French academy, under the peculiar title of associ6 etranger. He died on the 15th of July, 1761, at the age of seventy-nine.

Cardinal Passionei did not write much besides the articles that have been already mentioned. He worked, indeed, with Fontanini, in revising the “Liber diurnus Romanorum Pontificum,” and produced a paraphrase on the nineteenth psalm, with a few more small pieces: but he was most illustrious for his enlightened knowledge of letters, and his judicious and liberal patronage of learned men and useful works; an example but too little followed in the present age. He had one of the most valuable libraries in Rome, composed of the best, the scarcest, and most remarkable books in all sciences, and in all languages, ancient and modern. He himself was the librarian, and did the honours of it in a manner the more satisfactory to the learned, as no one was more able to second and extend their views on the subjects of their researches. “In this,” says a Swedish traveller, “he was very different from the cardinals Davia, Gualterio, and Imperiali, all three also very rich in books. The first was always reading, and never wrote; the second was always writing, and never read; and the third neither read nor wrote.” Cardinal Passionei’s temper, however, was not equable, and Benedict XIV. delighted to put him in a rage, sometimes by taking away one of his books, and making him think it was lost, but more frequently, which was the greatest provocation our cardinal could receive, by introducing a work written by a Jesuit. On one occasion when the pope did this, the cardinal opened the window, and threw the book with all his force into the square of Monte Cavallo. At this instant the pope appeared, and vouchsafed him his grand benediction. It is said, that by way of answer to this benediction, a certain gesture of the cardinal’s put a stop to the pleasantry that the pope had promised himself from this scene. He most cordially hated the Jesuits; and had it depended on him, their society would have been soon dissolved. On this subject and every other on which he entered with the pope Benedict, he spoke with the firmest independence, and the pope generally found it necessary in all disputes to yield to him. Let us not forget, however, that it was this cardinal who opened the treasures of the Vatican to Dr. Kennicott, in a very handsome order signed by his name. This was at the time justly said to be an honour which no work relating to the Bible could boast of since the reformation.

His nephew, Benedict Passionei, rendered an important service to the learned world by publishing at Lucca, in 1763, “Inscrizioni antiche, con annotaz.” a folio volume, containing all the Greek and Latin inscriptions collected by the cardinal. His valuable collection of antique urns, bas-reliefs, and other works of art, was dispersed after his death.

, a celebrated painter, was a native of France; but neither his Christian name, his age, nor the master under whom he studied, are known to the writers on these subjects. He has sometimes been called the French Claude, from his successful imitation of that master. In his figures he is clearly superior to him. The forms of his trees are elegant and free, his scenery rich, and his buildings and other objects designed in a very pleasing manner. His touch is light, yet firm; his colouring generally clear and natural. Two of his works have been engraved by Strange, and all of them prove that he studied nature with nice observation, and his choice from her productions was always agreeable. In France he is sometimes called, Paid le tue, or le bon Patd; and there was also a Patet le Jeune, of whom still less is known.

, an ancient Roman historian, who flourished in the reign of Tiberius Caesar, was born in the year of Rome 735. His ancestors were illustrious for their merit and their offices. His grandfather espoused the party of Tiberius Nero, the emperor’s father; but being old and infirm, and not able to accompany Nero when he retired from Naples, he ran himself through with his sword. His father was a soldier of rank, and Paterculus was a military tribune, when Caius Caesar, a grandson of Augustus, had an interview with the king of the Parthians, in an island of the river Euphrates, in the year 753. He commanded the cavalry in Germany under Tiberius, and accompanied that prince for nine years successively in all his expeditions. He received honourable rewards from him but we do not find that he was preferred to any higher dignity than the proctorship. The praises he bestows upon Sejanus give some probability to the conjecture, that he was looked upon as a friend of this favourite; and, consequently, that he was involved in his ruin. His death is placed by Dodwell in the year 784, when he was in his fiftieth year.

He wrote “An Abridgment of the Roman History, in two Books,” in which although his purpose was, to begin from the foundation of Rome to the time wherein he lived, we find in what remains of the beginning of his first book, some account of many cities more ancient than Rome. He promised a larger history, of which this is only an outline, and had opportunities to have acquired valuable materials, during his military expeditions and travels. Even in the present work we have many particulars related, that are 09 where else to be found. The style of Paterculus, although injured by the carelessness of transcribers, and impossible to be restored to purity for want of manuscripts, is yet manifestly worthy of an age, whicli produced his celebrated contemporaries Virgil, Sallust, Livy, &c. His manner of drawing characters is one of his chief merits; yet he is condemned, and indeed with the greatest reason, for his partiality to the house of Augustus, and for his extravagant praise, not only of Tiberius, but even of his favourite Sejanus.

Of Velleius Paterculus, as of Hesychius among the Greeks, one ms. only was discovered, called the codex Murbacensis, and even that is now lost. In it, says Bentley, “the faults of the scribes are found so numerous, and the defects so beyond all redress, that, notwithstanding the pains of the learnedest and acutest critics for two whole centuries, these books still are, and are like to continue, a mere heap of errors.” No ancient author but Prisciaa makes mention of Paterculus: the moderns have done him infinitely more justice, and have illustrated him with notes and commentaries. He was first published, from the manuscript of Morba^ by Rhenanus, at Basil, in 1520, but under such circumstances, that this edition was considered as a spurious work. It was reprinted by Paul Manutius at Venice in 1571 afterwards by Lipsius, at Leyden, in 1581 then by Gerard Vossius, in 1639: next by Boeclerus, at Strasburg, in 1642: by Peter Burman, at Leyden, in 1719, in 8vo by Ruhnkenius, at Leyden, 1779, 2 vols. 8vo and lastly, by Krausius, at Leipsic, 1800, 8vo. To the Oxford edition, in 1693, 8vo, were prefixed the “Annales Velleiani” of Dodwell, which shew deep learning, and a great knowledge of antiquity.

, a gentleman who deserves honourable notice in the literary history of his country, was the son of a woollen-draper in the parish of St. Paul, Covent-garden, and born March 17, 1728. He lost his father when about the age of twelve years; and his guardian not only neglected him, but involved his property in his own bankruptcy, and sent him to France. Having there acquired a knowledge of foreign literature and publications beyond any persons of his age, he resolved to engage in the importation of foreign books; and, when little more than twenty years old, opened a shop in the Strand: the only person who then carried on such a trade being Paul Vaillant. Though, by the mis-conduct of some who were charged with his commissions in several parts of the continent, it proved unsuccessful to the new adventurer, he continued in business till 1753, when he published Dr. Pettingal’s “Dissertation on the original of the Equestrian Figure of the George and of the Garter.” At the same early period in which he engaged in business he hacl married Miss Hamilton, a lady of the most respectable connexions in North Britain, still younger than himself, both their ages together not making 38 years. He next commenced auctioneer in Essex-house. This period of his life tended to develope completely those extraordinary talents in bibliography (a science hitherto so little attended to) which soon brought him into the notice of the literary world. The valuable collection of Mss. belonging to the right hon. sir Julius Caesar, knt. judge of the Admiralty in the reign of queen Elizabeth, and, in the reigns of James I. and Charles I. chancellor and under-treasurer of the Exchequer, had fallen into the hands of some uninformed persons, and were on the point of being sold by weight to a cheesemonger, as waste paper, for the sum of ten pounds; some of them happened to be shewn to Mr. Paterson, who examined them, and instantly discovered their value. He then digested a masterly catalogue of the whole collection, and, distributing it in several thousands of the most singular and interesting heads, caused them to be sold by auction, which produced 356l.; and had among the purchasers the late lord Orford, and other persons of rank. These occurrences took place in 1757.

The first person who attempted to give a sketch of universal bibliography and literary history was the learned and laborious Christopher-Augustus Hermann, professor in the university of Gottingen, in the year 1718, when, ie published his well known work, ‘ Conspectus Reipublicae Literarioe, sive Via ad Historian! Literariam*’ which gradually went through seven editions, the last of which was published at Hanover, 1763. Numberless other works, analogous to this, were published in the same interval, in Germany. About the period alluded to, many detailed, descriptive, and rational catalogues of books appeared in the several countries of Europe; the art and the taste of constructing libraries became more general than in any preceding age; and the only thing which appears worthy of remark, and rather unaccountable, is that, even after the progress of philosophy or bibliography, the Germans, in this department, have excelled every other people in Europe. It is universally acknowledged, that the best work of the kind that ever appeared, about that time, was the catalogue of the celebrated library of the count of Bunau, better known under the name of “Bibliotheca Bunaviana,” so remarkable, indeed, for number, selection, order, connexion, references, and universal interest. The only historical system of national literature exhibited in Europe was that of the Italian, by Tiraboschi. IVlr. Paterson supplied some important materials towards one among ourselves, in his “Bibliotheca Anglica Curiosa, 1771.” He was an enemy to those systems of bibliography which are now generally practised on the continent; and he set no importance even on the newly-established classification of the “Universal Repertory of Literature,” published at Jena. We hope, indeed, that those among the readers themselves, who have happened to look at the above-mentioned catalogue, will not only coincide with our bibliographer’s opinion, but will perhaps smile at seeing all the branches of human knowledge confined in sixteen classes, and the last of them entitled “Miscellaneous Works;” the proper meaning of which words has a tendency to destroy the whole classification! Mr. Paterson acted consistently with these ideas in all his bibliographical performances; and it is owing to the merit of an appropriate, circumstantial, and judicious classification, that his catalogues are unrivaled, and some of them are justly regarded as models. We refer the readers to the catalogues themselves, and especially to the Bibliotheca Fleetwoodiana, Beauclerktana, Croftsiana, Pinelliana, published from time to time, as well as to those of the Strange, Fagel, and Tyssen libraries, which he performed within the last two years of his life; and they will perceive in each of them an admirable spirit of order, exhibited in different ways, and suggested by those superior abilities which alone can discover and appreciate these variable combinations of the several circumstances.

A man so thoroughly conversant in the history of literature could not fail to perceive that a vast number of books were held as valuable and scarce in England, which were rather common in other countries. He thought he could do his native country an essential service, and procure emolument for himself, if he should undertake a journey through some parts of the continent, and succeed in purchasing some articles of this description. With this view he set out for the continent in the year 1776, and actually bought a capital collection of books, which, on his return to England, he digested in the catalogue (the best, perhaps, of his performances) that bears the title of “Bibliotheca Universalis Selecta.” One of the most respectable booksellers of London had been his fellow-traveller in that journey; and, being informed of his design, and relying on his good sense and excellent intention, offered him his friendly assistance. He lent him a thousand pounds, to be employed in an additional purchase of books, in hopes that he might have the money returned to him when the speculation was carried into execution. Mr. Paterson, as usual, proved unsuccessful; and the generous friend, sympathising in his misfortunes, never claimed the return of his loan! Mr. Paterson’s fame had come to the ears of the late marquis of Lansdown, who requested the learned bibliographer to arrange his elegant and valuable library, to compile a detailed catalogue of his books and manuscripts, and to accept, for the purpose, the place of his librarian, with a liberal salary. Mr. Paterson accordingly entered into the office of librarian, remained in it for some years, and perhaps expected to close his life in the same station when, unfortunately, a misunderstanding took place between the noble lord and him, by which he was obliged to withdraw.

Mr. Paterson was a writer of some consideration, and from time to time indulged in several publications, to none of which he ever put his name. The first, in order of time, is, to our knowledge, “Another Traveller; or, Cursory Remarks made upon a Journey through Part of the Netherlands, by Coriat, jun. in 1766,” in three volumes 12mo; the second is “The Joineriana or, The Book of Scraps,” in two volumes 8vo, 1772, consisting of philosophical and literary aphorisms; the third is “The Templar,” a periodical paper, of which only fourteen numbers appear to have been published, and the last of them in December 1773, intended as an attack on the newspapers for advertising ecclesiastical offices, and places of trust under government; and the last is “Speculations on Law and Lawyers,” 1778, tending to evince the danger and impropriety of personal arrests for debt previous to any verification, At the pressing solicitations of his friends, he consented, as soon as the Fagel catalogue was completed, to undertake some “Memoirs of the Vicissitudes of Literature in England during the latter Half of the Eighteenth Century;” of which it is not improbable some materials may be found among his papers.

Mr. Paterson died in his house in Norton-street, Fitzroysquare, on the 29th of October, 1802, in the 77th year of his age; and on the 4th of the subsequent November, he was buried in the parish-church of his birth, in Coventgarden. He was rather below the middle size, and thin, but well proportioned, of philanthropic looks, sonorous voice, and unassuming and polite manners. His moral character was eminent, and unexceptionable, in every sense of the word.

, a French physician, wit, and free-thinker, was born Aug. 31, 1601, at Hodenc en Bray, a village jiear Beauvais. He appears to have been at first a corrector of the press at Paris, and in that capacity was noticed by the celebrated Riolan, who became his friend and adviser; and Patin having applied to the study of medicine, acquitted himself so ably in all his academic trials, that he received the degree of doctor in the Paris school of medicine in 1627. in this city he began practice, but became more noted for his wit and humour, both of the most sarcastic kind, while he laid himself open to the wit of others by the peculiarity of his opinions, by his censure of every thing modern, and his utter aversion to all improvement in medicine. Notwithstanding these singularities, his entertaining conversation procured him access to many families of distinction; and the president Lamoignon often diverted the cares of his professional life by the sallies and bon-mots of Patin.' Patin was an excellent Latin scholar, and expressed himself with such elegance in that language, that all Paris flocked to his theses as to a comedy. Some fancied he had the air and countenance of Cicero, but he won more upon them by having the disposition of Rabelais.

In 1650 he was chosen dean of the faculty of medicine, and afterwards succeeded Riolan, the younger, in the professorship of medicine in the Royal-college, where he taught with great reputation. The disputes which took place in his time respecting the use of antimony roused all his spleen, as he regarded this medicine as a poison, and had even made out a list of patients, which he called the martyrology of antimony. Great, however, was his mortification when, in 1666, a majority of the faculty decided to admit emetic wine into the list of prescriptions. He was quite inconsolable.

Patin died in 1672, with the character of a man df learning. He had a good library, and knew books well, but his judgment was not equal to his erudition; he projected some works in his profession, particularly a history of celebrated physicians, but executed little, except a life of Simon Pietre, which appears not to have been printed. His memory is preserved by his “Letters,” published irt six vols. 12mo, a miscellany of literary history, criticism, and satire, mixed with many of those loose opinions which have made some rank him among the philosophers of France. His great consolation on his death-bed was that he should meet in the other world with Aristotle, Plato, Virgil, Galen, and Cicero. His “Letters” were long read with avidity, but are not to be relied on in point of fact. Every thing of that kind is disfigured by prejudice. There is a collection of his sayings among the “Ana.”

, son of the preceding, and an able physician and antiquary, was born at Paris, Feb. 2.i, 1633. He was educated with great care by his father, and made such surprizing progress in his studies, that at the age of fourteen he defended Greek and Latin theses in philosophy, with the greatest applause in an assembly composed of thirty-four prelates, the pope’s nuncio, and many other persons of distinction. Being intended for the bar, he completed his law studies, and became an advocate in the parliament of Paris, but he soon relinquished this career for the study of medicine, which in his opinion promised greater advantages. He became afterwards a considerable practitioner, and a teacher of reputation in the medical school of Paris, where he took his doctor’s degree in 1656; but was about this time obliged to leave France for fear of imprisonment. The cause of this is variously related, but the most probable account is, that he had been in some way accessary to the circulation of certain libels which drew upon him the resentment of the court.

He then visited Germany, Holland, England, Swisserland, and Italy, and finally settled at Padua, where he was, in Sept. 1676, appointed professor extraordinary, in 1681 first professor of chemistry, and in 1683, professor of the practice of physic. In all these appointments he acquitted himself with such credit and ability, that the Venetian state honoured him with knighthood of the order of St. Mark; the academy “naturae curiosorum” also admitted him a member, under the title of Galen L, and he was a long time chief director of the academy of the Ricovratu He died at Padua Oct. 2, 1693. He was a man of extensive learning, and a voluminous writer both in Latin, French, and Italian. Such of his works as relate to medicine are only inaugural orations; but those by which he is best known, relate to the medallic science, in which he was a great proficient. These are, 1. “Familiae Romans ex antiquis numismatibus ah urbe condita ad tempera D. Augusti,” 1663, folio. This is chiefly founded on the work of Fulvius Ursinus. 2. “Introduction a l'Histoire par la Connoissance des Medailles,” 1665, 12mo. 3. “Imperatorum Romanorum Numismata,” 1671, folio. 4. “Thesaurus Numismatum,” 1672, 4to. 5. “Practica delle Medaglie,” 1673, 12mo. 6. “Suetonius ex Numismatibus illustratus,” 1675, 4to,“and some other pieces. He published also the lives of the professors of Padua, with the title of” Lycseum Patavinum, sive Icones et Vitae Professorum Patavi, anno 1682, docentium,“Pat. 1682, 4to. His wife and two daughters were learned women, and members of the Academy of Ricovrati at Padua, in which they distinguished themselves. Charlotte-Catherine, the eldest daughter, pronounced a Latin oration on the raising of the siege of Vienna, and published” Tabellse Selectae," which contained an explanation of forty-one engravings from the most celebrated painters. Gabrielle-Charlotte, the youngest daughter, published a panegyrical oration on Louis XIV., and a Latin dissertation on the phoenix on a medal of Caracalla, Venice, 1683. His wife was author of a collection of moral and Christian reflections.

, a learned English prelate, successively bishop of Chichester and Ely, was born at Gainsborough in Lincolnshire, Sept. 8, 1626. His father was a mercer of good credit in that place, and sent him to a school, with a view to a learned education, which was kept by one Merry weather, a good Latin scholar, and the translator of sir Thomas Browne’s “Religio Medici.” In 1644, June 25, he was admitted as a sizar of Queen’s college, Cambridge, and was elected fellow March 1, 1648. He took the degree of B. A. in 1647; that of M. A. in 1651; and that of B. D. in 1658. Previous to this period he received holy orders from the celebrated Dr. Hall, bishop of Norwich, then ejected from his bishopric by the usurping powers, and living at Higham. This was probably about 1651, as in 1652 Mr. Patrick preached a sermon at the funeral of Mr. John Smith, of Queen’s college, who died Aug. 7, 1652, and was buried in the chapel of that college. He was soon after taken as chaplain into the family of sir Walter St. John of Battersea, who gave him that living in 1658. This vacated his fellowship, and the same year he took his degree of bachelor of divinity, and published his first work (if we except the funeral-sermon above mentioned), entitled “Mensa Mystica: or a Discourse concerning the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper; to which is added, a Discourse concerning Baptism,” Lond. 8vo. In the following year he published “The Heart’s Ease, or a remedy against all troubles; with a consolatory discourse, particularly directed to those who have lost their friends and dear relations,” ibid. 1659, 12mo; this went through many editions. In 1660 appeared “Jewish hypocrisy; a caveat to the present generation,” &c.

In 1661, he was elected, by a majority of the fellows, master of Queen’s college, in opposition to a royal mandamus, appointing Mr. Anthony Sparrow for that place; but the affair being brought before the king and council, was soon decided in favour of Mr. Sparrow; and some of the fellows, if not all, who had sided with Patrick, were ejected. His next preferment was the rectory of St. Paul’s, Covent- Garden, London, *in room of the celebrated nonconformist, Dr. Manton. This was given him by William earl of Bedford, in 1662. He endeared himself much to the parishioners by instruction and example, and particularly by continuing all the while among them during the plague in 1665. It is said further, that, out of a special regard to them, he refused the archdeaconry of Huntingdon. His remaining in London, however, during the plague was an instance of pious heroism which ought not to be slightly passed over. He was not indeed the only clergyman who remained at his post on this occasion; but their number was not great. We shall now present our readers with a few extracts from some letters which he wrote to his friends who importuned him to leave London, as they give a more faithful and pleasing picture of his real character than is elsewhere to be found.

In another letter, dated Sept. 21, he resumes the subject of the former, “My deare friend, I must tell you, for you will heare it from other hands, that the plague is again increased, as I suspected it would, according as you would understand by my last. Our only comfort is, that we are in the hands of God, and not in the hands of men; for his mercies are very great. I am very joyfull to heare at last, that you bend your thoughts to resign me up to God. I hope it will make your life more happy, whether I die or live. You do not trouble me by your instances to leave this place, because I think most of your love, which is conspicuous therein: and I should have reflected as much without these intreaties of yours, upon the desirableness of seeing my friends once more, who, I think, I may truly say, have faster hold of me than any thing in this world. But if God will pull me from them, his will be done! I ought to esteem him my best friend, who doth not envy to me any other, and will spare my life, unless it be better for me to die. To him I still referre myself, which I call trusting in God, (as you would hate scene, if it had been fit, before this time: but I doubt you will be afraid to receive papers printed in London): but it is not to accomplish a martyrdome, as you call it (that 's too high a name), but to do a little service to my neighbors, who I think would not be so well if I was not here.”

One more extract will not be thought uninteresting: “There are people who rely upon pitiful things as certain tokens of its (the plague’s) going away shortly. I have been told, more than once, of the falling out of the clapper of the great bell at Westminster, which, they say, it did before the great plague ended; and this they take for a very comfortable sign. Others speak of the dawes more frequenting the pallace and abbey, which, if true, is a better sign, supposing the aire to have been infected. For the bookes I read tell mee, that the goeinge away of birds is the forerunner of the plague, and that one shall see few in a plague -year. The death of birds in houses where they are caged, ordinarily preceeds the death of the inhabitants; for these aiery creatures feel the alteration in that element sooner than wee. Thus you see how desirous all are for some token for good, and how they catch at the smallest shadows for it. But the best sign of all, I doubt, is much wanting and that is, the reformation of men’s manners of which I heare little, unless that those come to church who did not before. I think often of a saying in the second book of Esdras, which describes the temper of the world exactly, chap. xvi. 19, 20. A sad thing that the event of these judgments proves no better; but so it commonly falls out, and men soon forget both their smart, and also the good resolutions which it formed. I hope, my friend, the hand of God will not be without its instruction to us, and that we shall be careful, if he let us live, to improve it as we ought. I cannot but acknowledge a great wisdom, as well as justice, in this restraint which I now suffer; and therefore I thankfully accept it, and intreat you to assist me with your prayers, that I may both understand the meaning of it, and likewise make the right use which God intends. I must ever also acknowledge a wonderful kindnesse of God to me, mixed with this for I am well and chearful to my admiration and astonishment, when I seriously think of it.” Two of the papers mentioned in the above letters, which he circulated during the plague, were printed in the latter editions of his “Heart’s Ease.” Having some reason to be offended with the treatment he met with at Cambridge, he went to Oxford for his degrees in divinity; and entering himself of Christ-church, was incorporated B. D. and completed his doctor’s degree in 1666, about which time he was made chaplain in ordinary to the king. In 1668 he published his “Parable of the Pilgrim,” 4to, which some have thought the precursor of Bunyan’s more popular work; but the difference is too strikingly marked in the reception these two “Pilgrims” have met with to admit of any comparison, or detract from the genius that predominates in the humble tinker’s performance. This was followed by Dr. Patrick’s “Exposition of the Ten Commandments,” 1668, 8vo, and by a controversial work of some importance, printed the following year, with the title “A friendly debate betwixt two neighbours, the one a conformist, the other a non-conformist, about several weighty matters. Published for the benefit of this city. By a lover of it, and of pure religion.” This consisted of two parts, to which a third was added in 1670, and was answered by some of the non-conformist writers, who were much exasperated at it . Dr. Patrick’s next publication, of the more practical kind, was his “Christian Sacrifice; a treatise showing the necessity, end, and manner of receiving the Holy Communion, &c.” 1671, 8vo. This was followed by his “Devout Christian,” a book of forms of prayer, 1672; “Advice to a Friend,” 1677, 12mo; “Jesus and the Resurrection justified by witnesses in Heaven and Earth,” 1677, 8vo; “The Glorious Epiphany,” 1678, 8vo; a translation of Grotius, “De Veritate,” 1680, 8vo; and various pious tracts of the popular kind, published from this date to 1703, and a considerable number of occasional sermons.

In the interim, in July 1672 he was made prebendary of Westminster, and dean of Peterborough in Aug. 1679. Here he completed the “History of the Church of Peterborough,” which had been compiled by Simon Gunton, who was a native and prebendary of Peterborough. Gunton died irr 1676; and Patrick published, in 1686, his manuscript in folio, with a large “Supplement,” from page 225 to 332, containing a fuller account of the abbots and bishops of Peterborough, than had been given by Gunton. In 1680, the lord-chancellor Finch offered him the living of St. Martin’s in the Fields; but he refused it, and recommended Dr. Thomas Tenison. In 1682, Dr. Lewis de Moulin, who had been history-prqfessor at Oxford, and had written much against the church of England, sent for Patrick upon his death-bed, and solemnly declared, before Dr. Burnet also, his regret upon that account; which declaration being signed, was published after his death.

During the reign of James II. Dr. Patrick wag one of those able champions, who defended the protestant religion against the designs of the court, and published some pieces, which were afterwards reprinted in the collection- of “Controversial Tracts,” 3 vols. fol. But his most remarkable service in this way was his conference with two Romish priests, of which we have the following account “Great endeavours were used to bring Laurence Hyde, earl of Rochester, lord high treasurer in king James’i reign, to embrace popery; but in vain. At length his lordship being pressed and fatigued by the king’s intreaties, told his majesty, that to let him see it was not through any prejudice of education, or obstinacy, that he persevered ia liis religion, he would freely consent to hear some protestant divides dispute with some popish priests, and promised to side with the conquerors. On this the king appointed a conference to be held at Whitehall, at which his majesty and several persons of rank were present. The protestant champions were Dr. Patrick and Dr. William Jane, the two chaplains then in waiting. Those on the popish side were Gifford, a doctor of the Sorbonne, probably the same whom king James wished to obtrude upon Magdalen-college, and a Mr. Tilden, who, having turned papist at Lisbon, went by the name of Dr. Godden. The subject of their dispute was the ‘ rule of faith,’ and ‘ the proper judge in controversies.’ The conference was very long; and at last the Romish doctors were pressed with so much strength of reason and authority against them, that they were really put to silence. On this the earl of Rochester declared ‘ that the victory the protestant divines had gained made no alteration in his mind, being beforehand convinced of the truth of his religion, and firmly resolved never to forsake it.’ The king, going off abruptly, was heard to say, he never saw a bad cause so well, nor a good one so ill maintained.”

Such is the account given of this debate by Kennet in his “Complete History of England:” bishop Burnet’s account is somewhat different. He says, “That the king desired of the earl, he would suffer himself to be instructed in religion. He answered, he was fully satisfied about his religion; but, upon the king’s pressing it that he would hear his priests, he said he desired then to have some of the English clergy present, to which the king consented; only he excepted to Tillotson and Stillingfleet. Lord Rochester said he would take those who should happen to be in waiting; for the forms of the chapel were still kept up. And Drs. Patrick and Jane were the men.” “Patrick,” adds Burnet, “told me, that at the conference there was no occasion for them to say much. The priests began the attack. And when they had done, the earl said, if they had nothing stronger to urge, he would not trouble those learned gentlemen to say any thing; for he was sure he could answer all that he had heard. And so answered all with much heat and spirit, not without some scorn, saying, Were these grounds to persuade men to change their religion? This he urged over and over again with great vehemence. The king, seeing in what temper he was, broke off the conference, charging all that were present to say nothing of it.” The king had often taken pains to gain over Patrick, sent for him, treated him kindly, desired him to abate his zeal against his church, and quietly enjoy his own religion: but the dean replied, with proper courage, “That he could not give up a religion so well proved as that of the Protestants.” Conformably to this principle, he opposed the reading of his majesty’s declaration for liberty of conscience; and assisted Dr. Tenison in setting up a school at St. Martin’s, in opposition to the popish one, opened at the Savoy, in order to seduce the youth of the town into popery; and this was the origin of the ward and parish schools of London. He had also a great share in the comprehension projected by archbishop SanCroft, in order to bring over the dissenters, which, it is well known, was unsuccessful.

At the Revolution in 1688, great use was made of the dean, who was very active in settling the affairs of the church: he was called upon to preach before the prince and princess of Orange; and was soon after appointed one of the commissioners for the review of the liturgy. He was thought to have excellent talents for devotional composition, and his part now was to revise the collects of the whole year, in which he introduced some amendments and improvements of style. In October 1689, he was made bishop of Chichester; and employed, with others of the new bishops, to compose the disorders of the church of Ireland. In July 1691, he was translated to the see of Ely, in the room of Turner, who was deprived for refusing the oaths to government. Here he continued to perform all the offices of a good bishop, as well as a good man, which he had ever proved himself on all occasions. He died at Ely, May 31, 1707, aged eighty; and was interred in the cathedral, where a monument is erected to his memory, with an inscription said to have been written by Dr. Leng, afterwards bishop of Norwich.

This prelate was one of the most learned men as well as best writers of his time. We have noticed his principal writings, but have still to add his “Paraphrases” and Commentaries upon the Old Testament, as far as the prophets, which are the result of extensive reading, and perhaps the most useful of any ever written in the English language. They were published at various times, but reprinted in 2 vols. folio; and, with Lowth on the Prophets, Arnald on the Apocrypha, and Whitby on the New Testament, have been published, in folio, and very recently in 4to, as a regular commentary upon all the sacred books. The style of this prelate is even and easy, his compositions rational, and full of good and sound sense. Burnet ranks him among those many worthy and eminent clergymen in this nation, who deserved a high character; and were indeed au honour to the church, and to the age in which they lived.

Our prelate had a brother John Patrick, preacher at the Charter-house, according to Wharton, and one of the translators of Plutarch. Dr. Samuel Patrick, the editor of an edition of Ainsworth’s Dictionary was also at the Charterhouse, but whether a relation does not appear. Wharton also says he had a son, who wasted an estate left him by his father, and it was sold, after his death, “for debts and portions.” Mrs. Catherine Patrick, a maiden lady of eightytwo years old, said to be our prelate’s grand-daughter, died at Bury in 1792. Whiston speaks of a life of bishop Patrick, written by himself, which he had read, and which was in Dr. Knight’s hands, but where now, is not known.

, a French minor poet, was born at Caen in 1585, and being the son of a lawyer, was designed by his father for the same profession. This destination, which seldom suits a poetical imagination, was accordingly rejected by Patrix, who addicted himself entirely to poetry. About the age of forty, he attached himself to the court of Gaston, duke of Orleans, 'to whom, and to his widow, Margaret ofLorraine, he faithfully devoted his services. A Norman accent, and a certain affectation of rustic simplicity, did not prevent him from being in high favour at that little court: his wit, liveliness, and social talent, making amends for such imperfections. Towards the latter end of life, he became strongly touched with sentiments of religion, and suppressed, as far as he could, the licentious poems which he had written in his youth. He lived to the great age of eighty-eight, and died at Paris in 1672. At eighty, he had a violent illness, and when he recovered from it, his friends advised him to leave his bed; “Alas!” said he, “at my time of life, it is hardly worth while to take the trouble of dressing myself again.” He proved however mistaken, as to the shortness of his subsequent life. Of his works there are extant, 1. A collection of verses entitled “La miv-ricorde de Dieu sur un pecheur pénitent,” Blois, 1660, 4to. These were written in his age, yet possess some fire. 2. “Plaints des Consonnes qui n‘ont pas Thonneur d’entrer dans le noiu de Neufgermain,” preserved in the works of Voiture 3. Miscellaneous poems, in the collection of Barbin. The greater part of them are feeble, with the exception of a few original passages. The poem most known was made a few days before his death. It is called the Dream; and, though it is of a serious cast, a translation of it, oddly enough, possesses a place in all our English jest bokks, beginning, “I dreamt that buried in my fellow-clay,” &c. It asserts a moral and religious axiom, which is undeniable, that death levels all conditions. The original is little known; it is this:

, a platonic philosopher and man of letters, was born, in 1529, at Clissa in Illyricum, and was educated at Padua. In 1553 he began to appear as an author by some miscellaneous Italian tracts. In 1557, with the view of obtaining the patronage of the duke of Ferrara, he published a panegyrical poem on the house of Este, entitled “L'Eridano,” in a novel kind of heroic verse of thirteen syllables. After this, for several years, he passed an unsettled kind of life, in which he twice visited the isle of Cyprus, where he took up his abode for seven years, and which he finally quitted on its reduction by the Turks in 1571. He also travelled into France and Spain, and spent three years in the latter country, collecting a treasure of ancient Greek Mss. which he lost on his return to Italy. In 1578 he was invited to Ferrara by duke Alphonso II. to teach philosophy in the university of that city. Afterwards, upon the accession of Clement VIII. to the popedom, he was appointed public professor of the Platonic philosophy at Rome, an office which he held with high reputation till his death, hi 1597. He professed to unite the doctrines of Aristotle and Plato, but in reality undermined the authority of the former. He wholly deserted the obscurity of the Jewish Cabbala, and in teaching philosophy closely followed the ancient Greek writers. During his lecturing at Rome, he more openly discovered his aversion to the Aristotelian philosophy, and advised the pope to prohibit the teaching pf it in the schools, and to introduce the doctrine of Plato, as more consonant to the Christian faith. His “Discussiones Peripatetics,” a learned, perspicuous, and elegant work, fully explains the reason on which his disapprobation of the Peripatetic philosophy was founded. He was one of the first of the moderns who attentively observed the phenomena of nature, and he made use of every opportunity, that his travels afforded him, for collecting remarks concerning various points of astronomy, meteorology, and natural history. In one of his “Dialogues on Rhetoric,” he advanced, under the fiction of an Ethiopic tradition, a theory of the earth which some have thought similar to that afterwards proposed by Dr. Thomas Burnet. His other principal works were, “Nova Geometria,” 1587; “Parallels Militari,” 1594, both of which are full of whimsical theories and an elaborate edition of “Oracula Zoroastris, Hermetis Trismegisti, et aliorum ex scriptis Platonicorum collecta, Graece et Latine, prefixa Dissertation^ Historica,” 1591.

, a polite scholar, and memorable for being one of the first polishers and refiners of the French language, was born in 1604 at Paris, where his father was procurator to the parliament. After studying the law, and being received an advocate, he went into Italy; and, on his return to Paris, frequented the bar. “He was the first,” says Voltaire, “who introduced correctness and purity of language in pleadings.” He obtained the reputation of a most exact speaker and excellent writer, and was esteemed so perfectly knowing in grammar and in his own language, that all his decisions were submitted to as oracles. Vaugelas, the famous grammarian, to whom the French language was greatly indebted, for much of its perfection, confesses that he learned much from Patru and Boileau applied to him to review his works, and used to protit by his opinion. Patru was an extremely rigid censor, though just; and when Racine made some observations upon the works of Boileau a little too subtle and refined, Boileau, instead of the Latin proverb, “Ne sis mihi patruus,” “Do not treat me with the severity of an uncle,” replied, “Ne sis mihi Patru,” “Do not treat me with the severity of Patru.”

Patru was in his personal character honest, generous, sincere; and preserved a gaiety of temper which no adversity could affect: for this famous advocate, in spite of all his talents, lived almost in a state of indigence. The love of the belles lettres made him neglect the law; and the barren glory of being an oracle to the best French writers had more charms for him, than all the profits of the bar. Hence he became so poor, as to be reduced to the necessity of selling his books, which seemed dearer to him than his life; and would actually have sold them for an underprice, if Bqileau had not generously advanced him a larger sum, with this further privilege, that he should have the use of them as long as he lived. His death was preceded by a tedious illness, during which he received a present of five hundred crowns from the statesman Colbert, as a mark of the esteem which the king had for him. He died Jan. 16, 1681. He had been elected a member of the French academy in 1640, by the interest of cardinal Richelieu, and made a speech of thanks on his reception, with which the academicians were so much pleased, as to order that every new member should in future make one of a similar kind on being admitted; and this rule has been observed ever since. When M. Conrart, a member of the French academy died, one of the first noblemen at court, but whose mind was very moderately cultivated, having offered for the vacant place, Patru opened the meeting with the following apologue: “Gentlemen, a.:mcien Grecian had an admirable Lyre; a string broke, but instead of replacing it with one of catgut, he would have a silver one, and the Lyre with its silver string was no longer harmonious.” The fastidious care with which he retouched and finished every thing he wrote, did not permit him to publish much. His miscellaneous works were printed at Paris in 1670, 4to; the third edition of which, in 1714, was augmented with several pieces. They consist of <f Pleadings,“” Orations,“” Letters,“” Lives of some of his Friends,“” Remarks upon the French Language,“&c. A very ingenious tract by him was published at Paris in 1651, 4to, with this title,” Reponse du Cure a la Lettre du Mar^uillier sur la conduite de M. le Coadjuteur."

, an unfortunate poet, was born at Peasmarsh, in the county of Sussex, in 1706, and was the son of a farmer at that place, who rented a considerable estate of the earl of Thanet. He discovered excellent parts, with a strong propensity to learning and his father, not being in circumstances to give him a proper education, applied to his noble landlord, who took him under his protection, and placed him at Appleby school in Westmoreland. Here he became acquainted with Mr. Noble, a clergyman of great learning and fine taste, who promoted his studies and directed his taste. Upon his leaving Appleby, he went to Sidney college in Cambridge, where he pursued the plan Mr. Noble had given him, and went through the classics, as well as all our English poets, with great advantage. Of these last, Spenser’s “Fairy Queen” and Brown’s “( Britannia’s Pastorals” are said to have given him the greatest delight. He had, however, unfortunately contracted a habit of desultory reading, and had no relish for academical studies. His temper could not brook restraint; and his tutor, he thought, treated him with great rigour. A quarrel ensued; and, to avoid the scandal of expulsion, with which he was threatened, he took his name out of the college book, and went to London. Even now his friends would have forgiven him, and procured his readmission; but the pleasures of the town, the desire of being known, and his romantic expectations of meeting with 0u,e generous patron to reward his merit, rendered him deaf to all advice. He led a pleasurable life, frequented Button’s, and became acquainted with some of the most eminent wits of the time. As he had no fortune, nor any means of subsistence, but what arose from the subscriptions for the poems he proposed to publish; and, as he wanted even common prudence to manage this precarious income, he was soon involved in the deepest distress and most deplorable wretchedness. In a poem, entitled “Effigies Authons,” addressed to lord Burlington, he describes himself as destitute of friends, of money; a prey to hunger; and passing his nights on a bench in St. James’s park. In a private letter to a gentleman, he thus expressed himself: “Spare my blushes; I have not enjoyed the common necessaries of life these two days, and can hardly hold to subscribe myself,” &c. Curll, the bookseller, finding some of his compositions well received, And going through several impression>, took him into his house; and, as Pope affirms in one of his letters, starved him to death. But this does not appear to be strictly true; and his death is more justly attributed to the small-pox, which carried him off in 1727, in his 21st year. His biographer says, that he had a surprising genius, and had raised hopes in all that knew him, that he would become one of the most eminent poets of the age; but surh of his poems as we find in the collection published in 2 vols. 8vo, in 1728, would not in our days be thought calculated to Support such high expectations.

, a learned Jew, born in that city, in 1353, embraced Christianity, and entered the ecclesiastical profession after his wife’s decease. He was appointed preceptor to John II. king of Castille; afterwards archdeacon of Trevigno, bishop of Carthagena, bishop of Burgos, and is said to have died patriarch of Aquileia, August 29, 1435, aged 82. He has left additions to Nicholas de Lyra’s “Postills;” a treatise, entitled “Scrutinium Scripturarum,” Mant. 1474, fol. reprinted several times; and other learned works, abounding, according to Dupin, in useful biblical criticism. His three sons were baptized with him, and recommended themselves by their merit. Alphonso was bishop of Burgos, and wrote an abridgment of the Spanish History, which is in the “Hi>pama illustrata,” 4 vols. fol. Gonsalvo, the second son, was bishop of Placentia; and Alvarez, the third, published a History of John II. king of Castille.

, the Deacon, or Paulus Diaconus, so called because he had been a deacon of the church of Friuli, though some call him by his father’s name Warmafridcs, and others, from the profession he took up in his latter years Paulus Monachus, was originally a Lombard, born in the city of Friuli, in the eighth century, and educated in the court of the Lombard kings at Pavia. After Desiderius, the last king of the Lombards, was taken prisoner by Charlemagne, and carried to France, tired of the tumult of the public world, he retired from the busy scenes he had been engaged in, and became a monk in the famous monastery of Monte Casino, where he wrote his history of the Lombards, in six books, from their first origin down to the reign of Luitprandus, who was their eighteenth king that reigned in Italy, and died in the year 743. He was an eye-witness of many of the transactions he relates; and as he was a Lombard, we may suppose him well informed of the affairs of his own nation, and had read the history of the Lombards, written in the same century in which they began to reign in Italy, by Secundus Tridentinus, originally a Lombard, but a native of the city of Trent, who flourished, according to Baronius, in the year 615; but his history is now lost. He often quotes his authority, and though he sometimes falls into trivial mistakes, about foreign affairs, and such as happened long before his time, as Grotius learnedly evinces, yet, in the transactions of his own nation, he is, generally speaking, very exact. He died in the year 799.His history was printed at Hamburgh in 1611, and is besides to be found in the eighteenth volume of Muratori’s Rerum Italic. Scriptores.

, so named from the place of his birth, flourished in the third century, and was among the first who entertained the opinions since known by the name of Socinian, or Unitarian. In the year 260 he was chosen bishop of Antioch, and having begun to preach against the divinity of Jesus Christ, he was admonished, in a council assembled at Antioch, in the year 264: but, in another, held in phe year 269 or 270, sentence of deposition was passed. To this he refused to submit, and was supported in his disobedience by Zenobia the consort of Odenatus, At length, when this queen was driven from Antioch, the emperor Aurelian expelled Paul in the year 272 or 273. Jt is not known what became of him afterwards; nor are any of his writings extant. His morals appear to have been as obnoxious as his doctrines. Dr. Lardner has en4eavoured to defend both, yet it appears evident that he hail the whole Christian world against him, and queen Zenobia only for him. His wealth, says Gibbon, was a sufficient evidence of his guilt, since it was neither derived from the inheritance of his fathers, nor acquired by the arts of honest industry. His followers were for a considerable time called Paulianists, but have since been known by many other names, according to the shades of difference in their opinions.

, a worthy ecclesiastic of the Romish church, was born April 24, 1576, and studied at Toulouse, where he was ordained a priest in 1600. On his return to Narbonne from Marseilles, his ship was taken by the Turks, and he remained for a considerable time in slavery, under three masters, the last of whom he converted. Returning at length to France, Louis XIII. made him abbot of St. Leonard de Chaulme, and he had afterwards the care of the parish church of Clichy, which he completely repaired and furnished at his own expence. Towards the end of 1609, he went to reside in the house of Emmanuel de Goudy, as tutor to his children, but does not appear to have remained here long. He then obtained the curacy of Chatillon-les-Dombes, which he kept only five months. Compelled by the solicitations of numberless persons of the highest distinction, to return, to the Goudy family, he resigned himself wholly to his natural desire of relieving the poor and afflicted. Louis XIII. being made acquainted with his zeal, appointed him almonergeneral of the gall ies, 1619; and the following year, St. Francis de Sales, because, as he says, he “knew not a worthier priest in the church,”made him superintendant of the nuns of the visitation. On niadame de Goudy’s decease, M. Vincent retired to the college des Bon Knfans, cf which he, wasprincipal, and which he never quitted, but to perform the oftie of a missionary. Some years after, he accepted the house de St. Lazare, though with great reluctance. His life was a continued series of good works, and it is scarcely to be conceived how one man could plan so many, still less, how he could execute them. Among these were missions in all parts of France, as well as in Italy, Scotland, Barbary, Madagascar, &c. ecclesiastical conferences, at which the most eminent bishops of the kingdom were present spiritual retirements, as they were called, which were also gratuitous; an Hospital for Foundlings, for which his humane applications procured an income of 40,000 livres; the foundation of the Charitable Virgins, for the relief of sick poor; to which we may add, the hospitals de Bicetre, de la Salpetriere, de la Piti; those of Marseilles for galley-slaves; of St. Reine for pilgrims, and of le Saint Nom de Jesus, for old men, which are principally indebted to him for their establishment. In times of the greatest distress, he sent above two millions of livres into Lorraine in money and effects; nor did Picardy and Champagne experience much less of his bounty, when the scourges of heaven had reduced those provinces to the most deplorable indigence. During ten years that M. Vincent presided in the council of conscience, under Anne of Austria, he suffered none but the most worthy to be presented to benefices. Being a zealous patron of nunneries, he supported the establishment of the nuns de la Providence, de Sainte Genevieve, and de la Croix. He laboured with success for the reform of Grammorit, Premontre, and the abbey of St. Genevieve, as welt as for the establishment of the great Seminaries. Even those, who have doubted whether his talents were very extensive, have openly acknowledged that he was one of the most pious priests in the kingdom, and more useful to the poor and to the church, than most of those who are considered as great geniuses. This excellent man died loaded with years, labour, and mortifications, Sept.27,1660, aged near 85. He was canonized by Clement XII. on July 16, 1737. Those who wish to know more of St. Vincent de Paul, may consult his Life by M. Collet, 2 vols. 4to, and “PAvocat.du Diable,” 3 vols. 12mo.

, an ecclesiastical writer of the fifth century, was descended from an illustrious family of Roman senators, and born at Bourdeaux about the year 253. He was directed in his studies by the famous Ausonius; and applied himself so earnestly to the best Latin authors, that he acquired a style not unlike theirs. He was advanced afterwards to the most considerable offices of the empire. Ausonius says, that Paulinus was consul with him; but his name not being found in the Fasti Consulares, it is probable he obtained that dignity only in the room of some other person, who died in the office, and perhaps in the year 378, after the death of Valens. He married Therasia, an opulent Spar nish lady, who proved instrumental in converting him to Christianity; and he was baptized in the year 389. He dwelt four years in Spain, where he embraced voluntary poverty; selling his goods by degrees, and giving them to the poor. The inhabitants of Barcelona, where he resided, conceived such an esteem for him, that they would have him ordained a priest to which, after a long resistance, he consented, upon condition that he should not be obliged to remain in Barcelona, because his design was to withdraw to Nola. This ordination was performed in the year 393, and the next year he left Spain to go into Italy. In his way he saw St. Ambrose at Florence, who shewed him marks of respect; and was kindly received at Rome both by the quality and the people: but the clergy there growing jealous of him, he left that city quickly, and went to Nola, where he dwelt in a country-house about half a league from the town. He lived there sixteen years with his wife Therasia, in the study and exercises of a monastic life; and then, in the year 409, was chosen and ordained bishop of Nola. The beginning of his episcopate was disturbed by the incursions of the Goths, who took that city; but the assault being over, he enjoyed it peaceably to his death, which happened in the year 431.

His works consist of “Poems,” and “Letters,” and are written with much art and elegance; his manner of expression being close and clear, his words pure and well chosen, and his sentences strong and lively. All his writings are short, but pretty numerous, and composed with great care. Ausonius highly commends his poems; jet they cannot pass for perfect, especially those which he made after his conversion. He uas esteemed, beloved, and caressed by all the great men of that age, of w'hat party soever they were; and corresponded with them all, without falling out with any. He was, in truth, like Titus, the delight of his times. Milner says that he appears, through the mist of superstition, which clouds his narrative, to have been one of the best Christians of the age. He was a mirror of piety, liberality, and humility, worthy of a more intelligent age, and of more intelligent writers, than of those who have recorded his life. The first edition of his works was at Paris, in 1516, by Badius; the second at Cologne, by Grsevius: Rosweditis caused them to be printed at Antwerp, in 1622; and the last edition of them was at Paris, in 2 vols. quarto, the former of which contains his genuine works. Du Pin wishes, that “the booksellers had taken as much care to have it upon good paper, and in a fair character, as the editor did to make it correct and useful.”

, patriarch of Aquileia in the eighth century, and one of the best bishops of his time, owes his fame in a great measure to his zeal in behalf of the doctrine of the Trinity. He was born near Friuli, in the year 726, and became greatly distinguished by his laborious application, and zeal for the advancement of learning and science. The emperor Charlemagne bestowed on him various substantial marks of his favour, and, towards the close of the year 776, promoted him to the patriarchate of Aquileia, where he died in the year 804. A complete edition of all his works, with learned notes and commentaries, was published at Venice, in 1713—7, by John Francis Madrisi, a priest of the congregation of the Oratory.

, a Danish professor and physician, was born at Rostock, in the circle of Lower Saxony, April 6, 1603, and died at Copenhagen, April 25, 1680. He published some medical treatises, and in 1639 a Latin quarto, on medicinal plants, entitled Quadripartitum Botanicum; and in 1648 a thicker volume, in Danish, with wooden cuts, called “Flora Danica,” which, however, embraces the garden plants as well as the native ones, known in Denmark at the time of its publication. He wrote also against tobacco and tea, and his work was translated into English by the late Dr. James, in 1746. The most remarkable circumstance attending it is his contending, with the positiveness, usual to those who are in the wrong, that the Chinese Tea is no other than our European Myrica gale; an error which Bartholin very cautiously and repectfully corrects, in his Acta Medica, v. 4. 1, where the true tea is, not very accurately, figured. The Paullinia, in botany, is so named in honour of him, by Linnæus.

, more commonly known to the learned by his Latinized name Palmerius, was born in the territory of Auge, in 1587, th son of Julien ie Paulmier, who was a physician of eminence. He was bred a protestant, embraced a military life, and served with credit in Holland and in France. After a time, he retired to Caen, where he gave himself up entirely to the study of letters and antiquity; and was the first promoter of an academy in that city, which has since been considered as a valuable institution. He died at Caen, Oct. 1, 1670, being then eighty-three. His works are, 1. “Observationes in optimos auctores Graccos,” Lugd. Bat. 1668, 4to. 2. “Graeciaj antiquae Descriptio,” Lugd. Bat. 1678, 4to. This work contains a very learned and useful digest of what the ancients have written concerning Greece. Prefixed to jt is a life of the author, written at some length, but in a very affected style, by the editor Stephen Morinus. 3. Some poems in the Greek, Latin, French, Italian, and Spanish languages. These, however, are the worst part of his works. He versified in too many languages to be very excellent in any.

, a celebrated traveller, was the son of Nicholas Paulo, a Venetian, who went with his brother Matthew, about 1225, to Constantinople, in the reign of Baudoin. While they were on this expedition Marco was born. On their return through the deserts they arrived at the city where Kublai, grand khan of the Tartars, resided. This prince was highly entertained with the account which they gave him of the European manners and customs, and appointed them his ambassadors to the pope, in order to demand of his holiness a hundred missionaries. They accordingly came to Italy, obtained from the Roman pontiff two Dominicans, the one an Italian, and the other an Asiatic, and carried with them young Marco, for whom the Tartar prince expressed a singular affection. This youth was at an early period taught the different dialects of Tartary, and was afterwards employed in embassies which gave him the opportunity of traversing Tartary, China, and other eastern countries. After a residence of seventeen years at the court of the great khan, the three Venetians came back to their own country in 1295, with immense wealth. A short time after his return, Marco served his country at sea against the Genoese, his galley in a naval engagement was sunk, and himself taken prisoner and carried to Genoa. He remained there many years in confinement; and, as well to amuse his melancholy, as to gratify those who desired it of him, sent for his notes from Venice, and composed the history of his own and his father’s voyages in Italian, under this title, “Delle maraviglie del mondo da lui vidute,” &c. of which the first edition appeared at Venice in 1496, 8vo. This work has been translated into several foreign languages, and has been inserted in various collections. The best editions are one in Latin, published by Andrew Miiller at Cologne in 1671, and one in French, to be found in the collection of voyages published by Bergeron, at the Hague in 1735, in two vols. In the narrative there are many things not easily believed, but the greater part of his accounts has been verified by succeeding travellers. He not only gave better accounts of China than had been before received; but likewise furnished a description of Japan, of several islands of the East Indies, of Madagascar, and the coasts of Africa, so that from his work it might be easily collected that a direct passage by sea to the East Indies was not only possible, but practicable.

, a native of the island Ægina, now Engia, whence he has his name, flourished, according to Le Clerc, in the fourth century; but with more truth he is placed by Abulfaragius, who is allowed to give the best account of those times, in the seventh. It is said that he travelled over Greece and other countries to gain information respecting the medical art; and that he studied at Alexandria before it was taken and plundered by Amrour, and there copied a part of the works of Alexander Trallian, who was his favourite author. On his return from his travels he made an abridgment of the works of Galen, and wrote several treatises, which are deservedly famous. It appears that his knowledge in surgery was very great; for Fabricius ab Aquapendente, one of the best chirurgical writers, has thought fit to transcribe him in a great number of places.

, an ancient Greek writer, who has left us a curious description of Greece, lived in the second century, but very few particulars of his life are known. Suidas mentions two of this name: one of Laconia, who wrote concerning the Hellespont, Laconia, the Amphyclions, &c. another, who was a sophist or rhetorician of Cicsarea in Cappadocia, lived at the same time with Aristides, and is mentioned by Philostratus, in his Lives of the Orators. This last is supposed to be our Pausanias. He was, according to the same Philostratus, “a disciple of the famous sophist Herodes Atticus, whom he imitated in many respects, but especially in composing without premeditation. His pronunciation was according to the manner of the Cappadocians, who had a way of lengthening short syllables, and shortening long ones. The character of his composition was negligent, yet not without force. He declaimed a long time at Rome, where he died very old, though he continued all the while a member of the college at Athens.” His work is properly an account of a journey through Greece, in which the author noted every thing that was remarkable. All public monuments, as temples, theatres, tombs, statues, paintings, &c. came within his design: he took the dimensions of cities, which had formerly been great and famous, but were then in ruins; nor did he hastily pass over places that were memorable for illustrious transactions of old. By these observations he throws much light upon the history and antiquities of Greece; and clears up many passages in ancient authors, which would otherwise have remained very perplexed and obscure. His work has been recommended to modern travellers, and it is well known that Spon and VVheler made great use of it. Pausanias was first published at Venice in 1516, fol. by Aldus, who was assisted by Marcus Musurus: Muslims wrote a preface in Greek, which is prefixed to this edition, and addressed to John Lascaris, a learned Greek of the same age. Afterwards, in 1547, Romulus Amaseus published a Latin version of this work at Rome; and, three years after, an edition was printed at Basil, with a new Latin version by Abr. Loescherus. A better edition than had yet appeared, with the Greek text of Aldus corrected by Xylander, and the Latin version of Amaseus by Sylburgius, came out ut Francfort, 1583, in folio; from which that of Hanover, 1613, in folio, was printed word for word. But the best of all is that of Leipsic, 1696, in folio, with the notes of Kuhnius. This learned man had already given proof, by his critical labours upon JElian, D. Laertius, and Pollux, that he was very well qualified for a work of this nature and his notes, though short, are very good. When he undertook this edition of Pausanias he proposed great advantages from four manuscripts in the king of France’s library; but, upon consulting them on several corrupt and obscure passages, he found that they did not vary from Aldus’s copy. The main succours he derived were from some manuscript notes of Isaac Casaubon, upon the margin of Aldus’s edition; and, by the help of these, and his own critical skill, he was enabled to correct and amend an infinite number of places. A new edition, in 4 vols. 8vo, was published at Leipsic, in 1794 1797, by Jo. Frid. Facius, which by the few who have had an opportunity of examining it, is thought excellent. It has very correct indexes, and some aid from a Vienna and a Moscow manuscript. An English translation was published in 1794 by Mr. Thomas Taylor.

, a Parisian architect of the seventeenth century, and one of a family of artists, excelled in the ornaments and decorations of buildings, and wa& architect to Louis XIV. and monsieur his only brother. He planned the cascades, which are so justly admired, at the castle of St. Cloud, and built the church of the nuns of Port-royal, at Paris, in 1625. Le Pautre was received into the royal academy of sculpture, December 1, 1671, and died some years after. His “CEuvres d' Architecture” are engraved in one vol. folio, sometimes bound up in five. John le Pautre, his relation, born in 1617, at Paris, was placed with a joiner, who taught him the first rudiments of drawing; but he soon surpassed his master, and became an excellent designer, and skilful engraver. He perfectly understood all the ornamental parts of architecture, and the embellishments of country houses, such as fountains, grottos, jets-d‘eau, and every other decoration of the garden. John le Pautre was admitted a member of the royal aca<iemy of painting and sculpture April 11, 1677, and died February 2, 1682, aged sixty-five. His *’ GEuvres d' Architecture," Paris, 1751, 3 vols. fol. contains above 782 plates, which were much valued by the chevalier Bernin. Peter le Pautre, related to the two preceding, was born at Pans, March 4, 1659, and excelled so much in statuary as to be appointed sculptor to his majesty. He executed at Rome, in 1691, the beautiful gronp of <flneas and Anchises, which is in the grand walk at theThuilleries; and completed, in 1716, that of Arria and Paetus (or rather of Lucretia stabbing herself in presence of Collatinus) which Theodon had begun at Rome. Several of his other works embellish Marly. This ingenious artist was professor and perpetual director of St. Luke’s academy, and died at Paris, January 22, 1744, aged eighty-four.

, a native of Amsterdam, who distinguished himself by his philosophical writings, was born there in 1739; no particulars of his early life are given in our authority, but it appears that he was educated for the church, and held a canonry in some part of Germany. He died July 7, 1799, at Xantem, near Aix-laChapelle. He was uncle to the famous, or rather infamous, Anacharsis Cloots, who was the idol of the lowest of the mob of Paris about the time of the revolution, and his opinions were in some respects as singular; but he had far more learning, and more skill in disguising them. He is principally known for his “Recherches philosophiques, 1. surlesGrecs; 2. sur les Arnericains, les Egyptiens, et les Chinois,” Paris, 1795, 7 vols. 8vo. In this his countrymen seem willing to allow that he asserts more than be proves; that his object is to contradict all preceding historians, and to lessen the character of the nations he describes. His style is agreeable, but he is full of paradoxes, and of those bold opinions which were once in vogue in France, and reconamended him much to Frederick the Great of Prussia, while they rendered him obnoxious to the ministers of religion.

, sieur of Villeneuve, a French poet, born at Nantes in 1636, was for a considerable time comptroller-general of the imposts in Dauphine* and Provence; yet he mingled the flowers of poetry with the thorns of that occupation, and became celebrated at court by a miscellaneous publication of prose and verse, entitled “Amities, Amours, et Amourettes,” published in 1685. This publication gained him particularly the favour of the ladies; and the duke of Savoy honoured him with the title of chevalier of St. Maurice, and he was made a member of the academy of Aries. The latter part of his life was embittered by a law-suit, which obliged him to pay for the dishonesty of one of his associates in office. He died April 30, 1690, at the age of fifty-four. His remaining works are, 1. “Zelotide,” a novel of gallantry, which was admired in the country, but despised at Paris. 2. A collection of poetry, containing eclogues, sonnets, stanzas, &c. published at Paris in 1672, in 2 vols. 12mo, under the title of “Nouvelles Oeuvres.” These contain rather the fancies of a minor wit, than the efforts of real genius.

, a writer of considerable note inhis day, appears to have been the son of Mr. Henry Peacham of Leverton, in Holland, in the county of Lincoln, and was born in the latter part of the seventeenth century, unless he was the Henry Peacham who published “The Garden of Eloquence,” a treatise on rhetoric, in 1577, 4to, and then he must be referred to the early part of the reign of queen Elizabeth. But we are more inclined to think, with Mr. Malone, that the “Garden of Eloquence” was a production of his father’s. Very little i& known with certainty of his history, and that little has been gleaned from his works, in which he frequently introduces himself. In his “Compleat Gentleman,” he says he was born at North Mims, near St. Alban’s, where he received his education under an ignorant schoolmaster. He was afterwards of Trinity college, Cambridge, and in the title to his “Minerva,” styles himself master of arts. He speaks of his being well skilled in music, and it appears that he resided a considerable time in Italy, where he learnt music of Orazio Vecchi. He was also intimate with all the great masters of the time at home, and has characterized their several styles, as well as those of many on the continent. His opinions, says Dr. Burney, concerning their works are very accurate, and manifest great knowledge of all that was understood at the time respecting practical music.

He informs us also of his skill in painting; that he could take likenesses, and on one occasion took his majesty’s (James I.) as he sat at dinner. He also made, perhaps engraved, a map of Cambridge. Lord Orford mentions his engraving of a good print, after Holbein, of sir Thomas Cromwell, knight, afterwards earl of Essex. From his “Gentleman’s Exercise” we learn that he either kept school, or had private pupils. Lord Orford says that he was tutor to the children of the earl of Arunde), whom he accompanied to the Low Countries. In the same work, Peacham says he translated king James’s “Basilicon Doron” into Latin verse, and presented it to prince Henry, to whom he also dedicated his “Minerva Britannica” in 1612. He also published in 1615, “Prince Henry revived; or a poem upon the birth of prince H. Frederick, heir apparent to Frederick Count Palatine of the Rhine.” The only other particulars we derive from his own hints are, that he lived for some time in St. Martin’s in the Fields, and was addicted to melancholy. It is said that he was reduced to poverty in his old age, and wrote penny pamphlets for bread. This last is asserted in a ms note by John Gibbon, Bluemantle, on a copy of one of Peacham’s tracts sold at Mr. West’s sale. It is entitled ' A Dialogue between the cross in Cheap and Charing crosse. Comforting each other, as fearing their fall, in these uncertain times. By Ryhen Pameach" (Henry Peacham). The chief merit of this, Mr. Gough says, is that its wooden frontispiece exhibits the ruined shaft of Charing Cross, and the entire cross of Cheap. It has no date. Cheapside cross, we know, was taken down in 1640.

His other works are, 1. “Minerva Britannica, or a garden of Heroical Devises,” &c. 1612, 4to. This is a collection of emblems in verse, with a plate to each. Mr. Ellis has selected several specimens from this curious volume. 2. “The period of Mourning, in memory of the late prince. Together with Nuptial Hymnes in honour of this happy marriage betweene Frederick count Palatine and Elizabeth daughter of our Sovereigne,” 1613, 4to. 3. “A most true relation of the affairs of Cleve and Gulick,” &c. 1614, 4to, in prose. 4. “Thalia’s Banquet,” a volume of epigrams,“1620, 12mo. 5.” The Valley of Varietie,“1633, 12mo. 6.” The Duty of all true subjects to their king; as also to their native country in time of extremity and danger,“in two books, 1639, 4to. 7.” The worth of a penny, or a caution to keep money; with the causes of the scarcity and misery of the want thereof, in these hard and merciless times; as also how to save it, in our diet, apparel, recreations, &c.“4to. This piece of humour, which appeared first in 1647, was reprinted in 1667, 1677, and 1695, and perhaps oftener. 8.” The Gentleman’s Exercise; or an Exquisite Practise as well for drawing all manner of beasts in their true portraiture, as also the making of colours for limning, painting, tricking, and blazoning of coats of arms, &c.“1630, and 1634, 4to. All these are works of considerable merit, Peacham being a man of general knowledge, good taste, and acute observation, and were very popular during the seventeenth century. His” Complete Gentleman “particularly was in high estimation with the gentry of that age. Sir Charles Sedley, who had been guilty of an offence against good manners, and was indicted for it, was asked on his trial by the chief justice, sir Robert Hyde, whether he had ever read the” Complete Gentleman" P

, bishop of St. Asaph, and Chichester, in the reign of Henry Vj. is supposed to have been born in Wales about 1390. He was educated in Oriel college, Oxford, of which he was chosen fellow in October 1417, in the room of Richard Garsdale, S. T. P. who was then elected provost of the college. Having studied with a view to the church, he was ordained deacon and priest in 1420 by Fleming, bishop of Lincoln. In 1425 he took his degree of bachelor of divinity, and about this time is supposed to have left the university. Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, was now protector of the kingdom, and being a great patron of learned men, invited Mr. Peacock to court, where he was enabled to make a very considerable figure by his talents. In 1431, he was elected master of the college of St. Spirit and St. Mary, founded by sir Richard Whittington; and with it was appointed to the rectory of St. Michael in Riola, now St. Michael Royal, situated in the street called Tower Royal in Viutry ward. This situation he resigned in 1444, on being promoted to the bishopric of St. Asaph. To whom he owed this preferment seems uncertain, as his patron the duke of Gloucester was now declining in court interest, but perhaps the estimation he was held in at court may account for it. He now was honoured with the degree of D. D. at Oxford, in his absence, and without performing any exercises, an omission for which he was reproached afterwards by his enemies, although it was not then uncommon. In 1447 he preached a sermon at Paul’s cross, in which he maintained that bishops were not under obligation to preach or to take the cure of souls, and that their duties consist entirely in the various acts of church government. This doctrine was not very palatable even then, and he was under the necessity of explaining himself to the archbishop of Canterbury; but it showed, what appeared more clearly afterwards, that he was accustomed to think for himself, and to pay little deference to authority or custom.

In 1449, he was translated to the see of Chichester, and now began to give opinions which were ill suited to the times in which he lived. Although he had taken great pains both in his preaching and writings to defend the established church against the disciples of Wickliffe, now called Lollards, he gave it as his opinion, that the most probable means of reclaiming them was by allowing them the use of their reason, and not insisting on the infallibility of the church. The clergy, we may suppose, were not satisfied with such doctrine; and many of the learned men of the universities were so highly offended with it, and with his writing in the English language on subjects which ought to be concealed from the laity, that they at last prevailed with the archbishop of Canterbury to cite him. The archbishop accordingly issued his mandate, in Oct. 1457, ordering all persons to appear who had any thing to allege against the bishop of Chichester; and his books being found to contain various heretical opinions, he read a recantation, first in the archbishop’s court at Lambeth, and afterwards at St. Paul’s cross, where his books were burnt, as they also were at Oxford. He was likewise deprived of his bishopric, and confined in Thorney abbey, in Cambridgeshire, where it is supposed he died about 1460. His biographer has given an ample account of his writings, all of which remain in ms. except his “Treatise of Faith,” published by Wharton in 1688, 4to. He appears to have been a man of learning, and an acute reasoner. The opinions for which he suffered were not perhaps so decided as to procure him admittance to the list of reformers; but it is evident that he was one of the first who contended against the infallibility of the Romish church, and in favour of the holy scriptures being the principal guide. In 1744 the rev. John Lewis, of Margate, published “The Li/e” of this prelate, which, as he justly styles it, forms a “sequel to the Life” of Wickliff, and is an useful introduction to the history of the English reformation.

, a learned English prelate, was born at London, Sept. 8, 1690. He was the son of Thomas Pearce, a distiller, in High Holborn, who having acquired a competent fortune by his business, purchased an estate at Little Ealing, in Middlesex, to which he retired at the age of forty, and where he died in 1752, aged eighty-eight. His son, after some preparatory education at a school at Ealing, was removed in 1704 to Westminster school, where he was soon distinguished for his merit, and in 1707 was elected one of the king’s scholars. He remained at this school till the year 1710, when he was twenty years old. This long continuance of his studies has been attributed to the high opinion Dr. Busby entertained of him, who was accustomed to detain those boys longer under his discipline, of whose future eminence he had most expectation. That Dr. Busby had such a custom is certain, and that it was continued by his successor is probable, but Mr. Pearce could not have been under the tuition of Busby, who died in 1695. To this delay, however, without doubt, Mr. Pearce was greatly indebted for the philological reputation by which he was very early distinguished.

He was elected to Trinity college, Cambridge, in 1710, and during his first year’s residence, amused himself occasionally with the lighter species of composition. Among these were a letter in the Guardian, No. 121, signed Aw Mum; and two Spectators, No. 572, and 633; specimens of that easy humour which characterizes these periodical works. In 1716 the first fruits of his philological studies appeared at the university press, in an excellent edition of Cicero “De Oratore,” with very judicious notes and emendations. This volume, at the desire of a friend, he dedicated to lord chief justice Parker, afterwards earl of Macclesfield, to whom he was then a stranger, but who became his patron. The first favour he bestowed on Mr. Pearce, was to apply to Dr. Bentley for his interest in the election of a fellowship, for which he was a candidate, and which he accordingly obtained. Soon after this he paid a visit to the chief justice, who received him in the kindest manner, invited him to dinner at Kensington, and gave him a purse of fifty guineas. From that time an intimacy commenced, which was dissolved only by his lordship'i death.

In 1717 Mr. Pearce was ordained a deacon by Dr. Fleetwood, bishop of Ely, and in the following year, priest, by the same prelate. It had always been his intention to devote himself to the church but, as he himself informs us, “he delayed to take orders till he was twenty-seven years of age; and, as he thought, had taken time to prepare himself, and to attain so much knowledge of that sacred office, as should be sufficient to answer all the good purposes for which it is designed.” In 1718 he went to reside as domestic chaplain with lord Parker, then lord Chancellor, who in 1719 gave him the rectory of Stapleford Abbots, in Essex, and in the following year that more valuable one of St. Bartholomew Exchange. When he attempted to return his thanks to the chancellor for this last preferment, his lordship said, “You are not to thank me so much as Dr. Bentley, for this benefice.” “How is that, my lord?” “Why,” added his lordship, “when I asked Dr. Bentley to make you a fellow of Trinity college, he consented so to do but on this condition, that I would promise to unmake you again as soon as it lay in my power; and now he, by having performed his promise, has bound me to give you this living.”

Not long after this, Mr. Pearce was appointed chaplain to his majesty; and in 1723 was presented by the chancellor to the vicarage of St. Martin’s in the Fields, on which he resigned St. Bartholomew’s. The parish, of which he was now vicar, being large, and honoured with the residence of the royal family in it, the chancellor represented to Mr. Pearce the propriety of taking the degree of doctor in divinity and as he was not of sufficient standing in the university, that honour was obtained for him by application to the archbishop of Canterbury. In 1724 he increased his reputation, as a critic, both at home and abroad, by his edition of Longinus “De Sublimitate,” with a new Latin version and learned notes. This appeared first in an elegant 4to, but has since been reprinted in 8vo, and remained the best edition, until the publication of that of Toup.

In 1739, in consequence of the late queen Caroline’s having recommended him to sir Robert Walpole, Dr. Pearce was appointed dean of Winchester. He informs us in his memoirs of what led to this promotion. When vicar of St. Martin’s, lord Sundon was one of his parishioners, and one of the members of parliament for Westminster. These two circumstances brought them acquainted together, and Dr. Pearce was sometimes invited to dinner, where he became acquainted with lady Sundon, queen Caroline’s farourite, and by her means was introduced to her majesty, who frequently honoured him with her conversation at the drawing-room, The subjects which her majesty started were not what are often introduced in that circle. One day she asked him if he had read the pamphlets published by Dr. Stebbing, and Mr. Foster, upon the sort of heretics meant by St. Paul, whom in Titus iii. 10, 11, he represents as self-condemned. “Yes, madam,” replied the doctor, “I have read all the pamphlets written by them on both sides of the question.” “Well,” said the queen, “which of the two do you think to be in the right” The doctor answered, “I cannot say, madam, which of the two is in the right, but I think that both of them are in the wrong.” She smiled, and said, “Then what is your opinion of the text?” “Madam,” said the doctor, “it would take up more time than your majesty can spare at this drawing-room, for me to give my opinion and the reasons of it; but if your majesty should be pleased to lay your commands upon me, you shall know my sentiments of the matter in the next sermon which I shall have the honour to preach before his majesty.” “Pray do then,” said the queen, and he accordingly prepared a sermon on that text, but the queen died a month before his term of preaching came about, and before he was promoted to the deanry of Winchester. In 1744 the dean was elected prolocutor of the lower house of convocation for the province of Canterbury, the archbishop having signified to some of the members, that the choice of him would be agreeable to his grace.

In 1748 dean Pearce was promoted to the see of Bangor, but the history of this and of his subsequent translation to Rochester, will be best related in his own words: “In the year 1746,” says he, " archbishop Potter being alone with dean Pearce one day at Lambeth, said to him, ‘ Why do you not try to engage your friend lord Bath * to get you made a bishop?’ * My lord,‘ said the dean, ’ I am extremely obliged to your grace for your good opinion of me, and for your kind intentions in my favour; but I have never spoken to him on that subject, nor ever thought of doing so, though I believe he would do what lies in his power; but I will tell your grace very frankly, that I have no thoughts of any bishopric. All that I have in view in this: I am now dean of Winchester; and that deanry is worth upwards of 600l. a year; my vicarage of S,t. Martin’s is about 500l. a year, and this last I should be glad of an opportunity of resigning, on account of the great trouble and little leisure which so large a parish gives me; but if I should out-live my father, who is upwards of eighty years

"In 1748 the bishopric of Bangor became vacant. The dean was then at Winchester, and received there a letter from Mr. Clark (afterwards sir Thomas, and master of the rolls) informing him, that lord chancellor Hardwicke wished to see dean Pearce thought of on that occasion, and that he hoped the dean would answer Mr. Clarke’s letter in such a way, as when seen, might be approved of by the ministry. Dean Pearce answered the letter with acknowledgment of the favour thought of for him; but assuring Mr. Clark, who, as he perceived, was to communicate the answer to lord Hardwicke, that he had long had no thoughts of desiring a bishopric, and that he was fully satisfied with his situation in the church and that as to the ministry, he was always used to think as favourably of them as they could wish him to do, having never opposed any of the public measures, nor designing so to do. In truth, the dean had then fixed upon a resolution to act no otherwise than as he had told the archbishop he should do, upon his father’s death. The dean received no answer to this letter written to Mr. Clark, and he thought that there was an end of that matter.

"About a fortnight after this, the dean went up to his parish in Westminster; but in his way thither, lay one night at his father’s house, in Little Ealing, near Brentford; where, the next morning early, a letter was brought to him from the duke of Newcastle by one of his grace’s servants, signifying that his grace had his majesty’s order to make the dean of Winchester an offer of the bishopric of Bangor, and desiring to see him at the cockpit the next day at 12 o'clock. Accordingly he waited upon him, when, with many kind expressions to the dean, the duke signified the gracious offer of his majesty, which he had the order to make him. The dean asked his grace, whether he might be permitted to hold his deanry of Winchester in commendam with Bangor, to which the answer was, No; but that he might hold the vicarage of St. Martin’s with it. The dean said, that he was desirous to quit the living, which was troublesome to him, and would be more so as he was growing in years; but if that could not be indulged him, he rather chose to continue in his present situation. The duke used some arguments to persuade the dean to accept of the offer with a commendam to hold the living. He could not, however, prevail with the dean any farther, than that he would take three days’ time to consider of it. During that time, the dean had brought his father and lord Bath to consent, that he might decline to accept of that bishopric without their displeasure; but before the dean saw the duke a second time, lord Hardwicke, then chancellor, sent for him, and desired him to be, without fail, at his house, that evening. He went, and lord Hardwicke told him. that he found, by the duke of Newcastle, that he made difficulties about accepting the bishopric which was so graciously offered him. The dean gave his lordship an account of all that had passed between the duke and him; upon which his lordship used many arguments with the dean to induce him to accept the ofter, as intended. Among other things, he said, * If clergymen of learning and merit will not accept of the bishoprics, how can the ministers of state be blamed, if they are forced to fill them with others less deserving?‘ The dean was struck with that question, and had nothing ready in his thoughts to reply to it. He therefore promised lord Hardwicke to consent, the next day, when he was to see the duke of Newcastle. ’ Well then,‘ said lord Hardwicke, * when you consent, do it with a good grace.’ The dean promised to do that too; and accordingly he declared to the duke, the next day, his ready acceptance of his majesty’s offer, with such acknowledgments of the royal goodness as are proper on the occasion; and on Feb. 21, 1748, he was consecrated bishop of Bangor.

"In the year 1755, the bishop of Bangor being with archbishop Herring at Croydon, and walking with him in his garden, he said, ‘ My Lord, you know that the bishop of Rochester, Dr. Wilcocks, is very ill, and probably will not live long; will you accept of his bishopric and the deanry of Westminster, in exchange for yours of Bangor?’ The bishop excused himself, and told him plainly, that his father being dead, and his estate come to him, he had now nothing in view, but to beg his majesty’s leave to resign the see of Bangor, and to retire to a private life in the year 1757; that so long, he was contented to continue in the possession of the bishopric of Bangor; but that then he designed to try if he could obtain leave to resign, and live upon his private fortune. The archbishop replied, ‘ I doubt whether the king will grant it, or that it can be done.’ A second time, at another visit there, he mentioned the same thing, and a second time the bishop gave him the same answer. But in a short time after, upon another visit, when the archbishop mentioned it a third time, he added, ‘ My lord, if you will give me leave to try what I can do to procure you this exchange, I promise you not to take it amiss of you, if you refuse it, though I should obtain the offer for you.’ c This is very generous in your grace,‘ said the bishop, c and 1 cannot refuse to consent to what you propose to do.’

“Sometime after, in the same year (the bishop of Rochester declining very fast), the duke of Newcastle sent to the bishop of Bangor, and desired to see him the n x ext day. He went to him, and the duke informed him, that he was told, -that the chancellorship of Bangor was then vacant, and he pressed the bishop so much to bestow it upon one! whom he had to recommend, that the bishop consented to comply with his request. ‘ Well, my lord,’ said the duke, * now I have another favour to ask of you.‘ * Pray, my lord duke,’ said the bishop, e what is that?‘ c Why,’ said the duke, ‘ it is, that you will accept of the bishopric of Rochester, and deanry of Westminster, in exchange for Bangor, in case the present bishop of Rochester should die.’ * My lord,‘ said the bishop, ’ if I had thoughts of exchanging my bishopric, I should prefer what you mention before any other dignities.‘ ’ That is not,‘ said the duke, * an answer to my question: will you accept them in exchange, if they are offered to you?’ ‘ Your grace offers them to me,’ said the bishop, ‘ in so generous and friendly a manner, that 1 promise you to accept them.’ Here the Conversation ended; and Dr. Wilcocks dying in the beginning of the year 1756, the bishop of Bangor was promoted to the bishopric of Rochester and deanry of Westminster.” On the death of Dr. Sherlock, bishop of London, lord Bath spoke to the bishop of Rochester, and offered to use his endeavours with his majesty for appointing him to succeed that eminent prelate; but Dr. Fearce told him, that from the earliest time that he could remember himself to have considered about bishoprics, he had determined nevefc to accept the bishopric of London, or the archbishopric of Canterbury, and he begged his lordship not to make any application in his behalf for the vacant see of London. Lord Bath repeated his offer on the death of Dr. Osbaldiston in 1763, but Dr. Pearce again declined the proposal, and was indeed so far from desiring a higher bishopric, that he now meditated the resignation of what he possessed. This is one of the most remarkable circumstances in the Jife of Dr. Pearce. Being now (1763) seventy-three years old, and finding himself less fit for the duties of bishop and dean, he informed his friend lord Bath of his intention to resign both, and to live in a retired manner upon his own private fortune; and after much discourse upon, the subject at different times, he prevailed upon his lordship at last to acquaint his majesty with his intention, and to desire, in the bishop’s name, the honour of a private audience from his majesty for that purpose. This being granted, Dr. Pearce stated his motives as he had done to lord Bath, adding that he was desirous to retire for the opportunity of spending more time in his devotions and studies; and that he was of the same way of thinking with a general officer of the emperor Charles V. who, when he desired a dismission from that monarch’s service, told him, ‘.’ Sir, every wise man would, at the latter end of life, wish to have an interval between the fatigues of business and eternity.“The bishop then shewed the king, in a written paper, instances of its having been done several times, and concluded with telling his majesty, that he did not expect or desire an immediate answer to his request, but rather that his majesty would first consult some pf his ministers as to the propriety and legality of it. This the king consented to do; and about two months after, he sent for the bishop and told him, that he had consulted with two of his lawyers, lord Mansfield and lord Northington, who saw no objection to the proposed resignation, and in consequence of their opinion, his majesty signified his own consent. The interference, however, of lord Bath, in requesting that his majesty would give the bishopric and deanry to Dr. Newton, then bishop of Bristol, alarmed the ministry, who thought that no dignities in the church should be obtained from the crown, but through their hands. Lord Northington suggested to his majesty some doubts on the subject, and represented that the bishops in general disliked the design; and at length Dr. Pearce was told by his majesty, that he must think 110 more about resigning Vtae bishopric but” that he would have all the merit of having done it." In 1768, however, he was permitted to resign his deanry, which was nearly double in. point of income to the bishopric which he was obliged to retain.

With respect to Dr. Pearce’s earnest desire of resigning his preferments, his biographer observes, that it gave occasion to much disquisition and conjecture. “As it could not be founded in avarice, it was sought in vanity; and Dr. Pearce was suspected as aspiring to the antiquated praise of contempt of wealth, and desire of retirement.” But his biographer, who had the best opportunities of judging, is of opinion, that his motives were what he publicly alleged, a desire of dismission from public cares, and of opportunity for more continued study. To a private friend the bishop declared that “as he never made a sinecure of his preferments, he was now tired of business, and being in his 74th year, he wished to resign while his faculties were entire, lest he might chance to outlive them, and the church suffer by his infirmities.”

In 1773, by too much diligence in his office, bishop Pearce had exhausted his strength beyond recovery. Having confirmed at Greenwich, seven hundred persons, he found himself, the next day, unable to speak, and never regained his former readiness of utterance. This happened on the first of October, and from that time, he remained in a languishing state; his paralytic complaint increased, and at length his power of swallowing was almost lost. Being asked by one of his family, who constantly attended him, how he could live with so little nutriment, “I live,” said he, “upon the recollection of an innocent and well-spent life, which is my only sustenance.” After some months of lingering decay, he died at Little Ealing, June 29, 1774, aged eighty-four, and was buried by his wife in the church of Bromley in Kent, where a monument is erected to his memory with an epitaph written by himself, merely rehearsing the dates of his birth and death, and of his various preferments. A cenotaph was afterwards erected in Westminster-abbey, with a Latin inscription.

The diligence of bishop Pearce’s early studies, says his biographer, appeared by its effects; he was first known to the public by philological learning, which he continued to cultivate in his advanced age. Cicero “De Oratore” was published by him, when he was bachelor of arts, and Cicero “De Omciis, when he was dean of Wiucheste in 1745. The edition of Cicero undertaken by Olivet, produced a correspondence between him and Dr. Pearce, in which Olivet expresses, in terms of great respect, his esteem, of his learning, and his confidence in his criticism. But Dr. Pearce did not confine his attention to the learned languages: he was particularly studious of Milton’s poetry, and when Dr. Bentley published his imaginary emendations of the” Paradise Lost,“wrote in opposition to them a full vindication of the established text. This was published in 1733, 8vo, under the title of Review of the Text of Paradise Lost,” and is now become very scarce; but many, both of the conjectures and refutations, are preserved in bishop Newton’s edition.

In his domestic life he was quiet and placid, not difficult to be pleased, nor inclined to harass his attendants or inferiors, by peevishness or caprice. This calmness of mind appeared in his whole manner and deportment. His stature was tall, his appearance venerable, and his countenance expressive of benevolence.

In his parochial cure he was punctually diligent, and very seldom omitted to preach; but his sermons had not all the effect which he desired, for his voice was low and feeble, and could not reach the whole of a numerous congregation. Those whom it did reach were both pleased and edified with, the good sense and sound doctrine which he never failed to deliver. When advanced to the honours of episcopacy, he did not consider himself as placed in a state that allowed him any remission from the labours of his ministry. He was not hindered by the distance of Bangor from annually resorting to that diocese (one year only excepted), and discharging his episcopal duties there, tp 1753; after which, having suffered greatly from the fatigue of his last journey, he was advised by his physician and friend, Dr. Heberden, and prevailed upon, not to attempt another. When he accepted the bishopric of Bangor, he established in himself a resolution of conferring Welsh preferments or benefices only on Welshmen; and to this resolution he adhered, in defiance of influence or importunity. He twice gave away the deanry, and bestowed many benefices, but always chose for his patronage the natives of the country, whatever might be the murmurs of his relations, or the disappointment of his chaplains. The diocese of Rochester conjoined, as had been for some time usual, with tjie deanry of Westminster, afforded him a course of duty more commodious. He divided his timd between his public offices, and his solitary studies. He preached at Bromley or Ealing, and by many years labour in the explication of the New Testament, produced the “Commentary,” &c. which was offered to the public after his decease. It was bequeathed to the care of the rev. John Derby, his lordship’s chaplain, who published it in 1777, in 2 vols. 4to, underthe title of “A Commentary, with notes, on the Four Evangelists and the Acts of the Apostles, together with a new translation of St. Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians, with a paraphrase and notes. To which are added other Theological pieces.” Prefixed is an elegant dedication to the king, in the name of the editor, but from the pen of Dr. Johnson; and a life written by the bishop himself, and connected in a regular narrative by paragraphs, evidently by Dr. Johnson’s pen. This life is highly interesting, and contains many curious particulars which we have been obliged to omit.

, a pious dissenting divine, was born at Kidderminster in Warwickshire, Aug. 29, 1698, and received his education at a dissenting academy at Tt wkesbury, in Gloucestershire, under Mr. Jones, who was likewise the master of this school when Messrs. Butler and Seeker, afterwards the well-known prelates, were educated at it. Mr. Pearsall having been admitted into the ministry among the dissenters, was settled for ten years at Bromyard, in Herefordshire, and afterwards for sixteen years at Warminster, in Wiltshire. His last charge, for about fifteen years, was at Taunton, in Somersetshire, where he died Nov. 10, 1762. He is known in the religious world by two works of considerable reputation, his “Contemplations on the Ocean,” &c. in 2 vols. 12mo, which are mentioned with respect by Hervey in the third volume of his “Theron and Aspasio;” and his “Reliquiæ Sacræ,” which were published by Dr. Gibbons, 1765, 2 vols. 12mo. They consist of meditations on select passages of scripture, and sacred dialogues between a father and his children. He is much an imitator of Hervey, particularly in his “Contemplations,” but has less imagination, although enough to catch the attention of young readers.

, a very learned English bishop, was born Feb. 12, 1612, at Snoring in Norfolk; of which place his father was rector. In 1623 he was sent to Eton school; whence he was elected to King’s college, Cambridge, in 1632. He took the degree of B. A. in 1635, and that of master in 1639; in which year he resigned his fellowship of the college, and lived afterwards a fellow-commoner in it. The same year he entered into orders, and was collated to a prebend in the church of Sarum. In 1640 he was appointed chaplain to Finch, lord-keeper of the great seal; by whom in that year he was presented to the living of Torrington, in Suffolk. Upon the breaking out of the civil war he became chaplain to the lord Goring, whom he attended in the army, and afterwards to sir Robert Cook in London. In 1650 he was made minister of St. Clement’s, Eastcheap, in London. In 1657 he and Gunning, afterwards bishop of Ely, had a dispute with two Roman catholics upon the subject of schism. This conference was managed iivwriting, and by mutual agreement nothing was to be made public without the consent of both parties; yet a partial account of it was published in 1658, by one of the Romish disputants, cum privilegw, at Paris, with this title, “Schism unmasked a late conference,” &c. In 1659 he published “An Exposition of the Creed,” at London, in 4to; dedicated to his parishioners of St. Clement’s, Eastcheap, to whom the substance of that excellent work had betn preached several years before, and by whom he had been desired to nnake it public. This “Exposition,” which has gone through twelve or thirteen editions, is accounted one of the most finished pieces of theology in our language. It is itself a body of divinity, the style of which is just; the periods, for the most part, well turned the method very exact; and it is, upon the whole, free from those errors which are too often found in theological systems. There is a translation of it into Latin by a foreign divine, who styles himself “Simon Joannes Arnoldus, Ecclesiarum ballivise, sive praefecturae Sonnenburgensis Inspector;” and a very valuable and judicious abridgment was in 1810 published by the rev. Charles Burney, LL. D. F. R. S. In the same year (1659) bishop Pearson published “The Golden Remains of the ever-memorable Mr. John Hales, of Eton;” to which he wrote a preface, containing the character of that great man, with whom he had been acquainted for many years, drawn with great elegance and force. Soon after the restoration he was presented by Juxon, then bishop of London, to the rectory of St. Christopher’s, iri that city; created D. D. at Cambridge, in pursuance of the king’s letters mandatory; installed prebendary of Ely, archdeacon of Surrey, and made master of Jesus college, Cambridge; all before the end of 1660. March 25, 1661, he succeeded Dr. Lore in the Margaret professorship of that university; and, the first day of the ensuing year, was nominated one of the commissioners for the review of the liturgy in the conference at the Savoy, where the nonconformists allow he was the first of their opponents for candour and ability. In April 1662, he was admitted master of Trinity college, Cambridge; and, in August resigned his rectory of St. Christopher’s, and prebend of Sarum. In 1667 he was admitted a fellow of the royal society. Jn 1672 he published, at Cambridge, in 4to, “Vindiciae F.pistolarum S. Ignatii,” in answer to mons. Dailie; to which is subjoined, “Isaaci Vossii epistolas duæ adversus Davidem Blondellum.” Upon the death of Wilkins, bishop of Chester, Pearson was promoted to that see, to which he was consecrated Feb. 9, 1673. In 1684- his “Annales Cynrianici, sive tredecim annorum, quibus S. Cyprian, inter Christianos versatus est, historia chronologica,” was published at Oxford, with Fell’s edition. of that father’s works. Dr. Pearson was disabled from all public service by ill health, having entirely lost his memory, a considerable time before his death, which happened at Chester, July 16, 1686. Two years after, his posthumous works were published by Dodweli at London, “Cl. Jaannis Pearsoni Cestriensis nuper Episcopi opera posthuma, &c. &c.” There are extant two sermons published by him, 1. “No Necessity for a Reformation,' 7 1661, 4to. 2.” A Sermon preached before the King, on Eccles. vii. 14, published by his majesty’s special command," 1671, 4to. An anonymous writer in the Gentleman’s Magazine (1789 p. 493) speaks of some unpublished Mss. by bishop Pearson in his possession. His ms notes on Suidas are in. the library of Trinity college, Cambridge, and were used by Kuster in his edition.

Our prelate was reckoned an excellent preacher, very judicious and learned, particularly accurate and exact in chronology, and well versed in the fathers and the ecclesiastical historians. Dr. Bentley used to say that bishop Pearson’s “very dross was gold.” In bishop Burnet’s opinion he “was in all respects the greatest divine of his age.” Bishop Huet also, to whom he communicated various readings on some parts of Origen’s works, gives him a high character. But, as Burnet reminds us, he was an affecting instance “of what a great man can fall to; for his memory went from him so entirely, that he became a child some years before he died.” He had a younger brother Richard, professor of civil law in Gresham college, and under-keeper of the royal library at St. James’s, of whom Ward gives some account, but there is nothing very interesting in his history.

, a French wit, the son of a surgeon of Toulouse, where he was born in 1638, wrote several Latin poems, which were reckoned good, but applied himself chiefly to the poetry of his native country. Having been three times honoured with the laurel at the academy of the Floral games, he wrote a tragedy called Gela, which was acted, in 1687, with applause, in consequence of which he published it, with a dedication to the first prince of the blood. He wrote also “Le sacrifice d' Abraham;” and ^ Joseph vendu par ses Freres,“two singular subjects for tragedies; but received with favour. He produced besides a tragedy called” La Mort de Neron,“concerning which an anecdote is related, which nearly coincides with one which is current here, as having happened to our dramatic poet Fletcher. He wrote usually at public-houses, and one day left behind him a paper, containing his plan for that tragedy; in which, after various marks and abbreviations, he had written at large,” Ici le roi sera tu6“Here the king is to be killed. The tavern-keeper, conceiving that he had found the seeds of a plot, gave information to the magistrate. The poet was accordingly taken up; but on seeing his paper, which he had missed, in the hands of the person who had seized him, exclaimed eagerly,” Ah! there it is; the very scene which I had planned for the death of Nero." With this clue, his innocence was easily made out, and he was discharged. Pechantre died at Paris in 1709, being then seventy-one; he had exercised the profession of physic for some time, till he quitted it for the more arduous task of cultivating the drama.

, a man of letters in France, who was for some time professor of eloquence in the royal college of la Fleche, was born in 1741, at Villa Franca in Rouergue. He was a disinterested scholar, a plain, modest, and vjrtuous man. His eulogium on the great Colbert received the public approbation of the French academy in 1773. His principal fame has arisen from a poem (as he calls it) in prose, named “Telephus,” in twelve books. It was published in octavo in 1784, and is said to have been translated into English. The piece is well written, and contains, among other things, a beautiful picture of true friendship, of which he himself afforded a noble example. Pechmeja, and M. du Breuil, an eminent physician of the time, were the Pylades and Orestes of their age. The former had a severe illness in 1776, when his friend flew to his assistance, and from that time they were inseparable, and had every thing in common. A person once inquired of Pechmeja what income he possessed, “I have,” said he, “200 livres a-year.” Some wonder being expressed how he could subsist on so little, “Oh,” said he, “the doctor has plenty more.” The doctor died first of a contagious disorder, through which his friend attended him, and died only twenty days after, a victim to the strength of his friendship. He died about the end of April 1785, at the age of only forty-four.

, a learned antiquary, the younger son of Robert and Elizabeth Peck, was born in the parish of St. John the Baptist, at Stamford, in Lincolnshire, May 4, and baptized May 12, 1692. His mother’s maiden name was Jephson. It does not appear at what seminary he received the early part of his education; but it was probably at the grammar-school of his native town. He completed his studies at Trinity-college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. 1715; and of M. A. 1727.

The first work discovered of his writing is “Το ὕϕος ἄγιον; or an Exercise on the Creation, and an Hymn to the Creator of the World; written in the express words of the Sacred Text; as an attempt to shew the Beauty and Sublimity of Holy Scripture,” 1716, 8vo. This was followed by a poem, entitled “Sighs on the Death of Queen Anne,” published in 1719; subjoined to which are three poems, viz, 1. “Paraphrase on part of the cxxxixth Psalm.” 2. “The Choice.” 3. “Verses to Lady Elizabeth Cecil, on her Birth-day, Nov. 23, 1717.” At the end of this work he mentions, as preparing for the press, “The History of the two last Months of King Charles I.” and solicits assistance; but this never was published. He also mentions a poem on Saul and Jonathan, not then published. During his residence at the university, and perhaps in the early part of it, he wrote a comedy called the “Humours of the University; or the Merry Wives of Cambridge.” The ms. of this comedy is now in the possession of Octavius Gilchrist, esq. of Stamford, who has obliged the editor with a transcript of the preface . In August 1719, he occurs curate of King’s Cliff, in Northamptonshire, and in 1721 he offered to the world proposals for printing the history and antiquities of his native town. In 1723, he obtained the rectory of Godeby Maureward, by purchase, from Samuel Lowe, esq. who at that time was lord of the manor, and patron of the advowson. In 1727, he drew up a poetical description of Belvoir and its neighbourhood, which is printed in Mr. Nichols’s History of Leicestershire; and in that year his first considerable work appeared, under the title of “Academia Tertia Anglicana; or, The Antiquarian Annals of Stanford, in Lincoln, Rutland, and Northampton Shires; containing the History of the University, Monasteries, Gilds, Churches, Chapels, Hospitals, and Schools there,” &c. ornamented with XLI plates; and inscribed to John duke of Rutland, in an elaborate dedication, which contains a tolerably complete history of the principal events of that illustrious family, from the founder of it at the Conquest. This publication was evidently hastened by “An Essay on the ancient and present State of Stamford, 1726,” 4to, by Francis Hargrave, who, in the preface to his pamphlet, mentions a difference which had arisen between him and Mr. Peck, because his publication forestalled that intended by the latter. Mr. Peck is also rather roughly treated, on account of a small work he had formerly printed, entitled “The History of the Stamford Bull-running.” In 1729, Jie printed a single sheet, containing, “Queries concerning the Natural History and Antiquities of Leicestershire and Rutland,” which were afterwards reprinted in 174O. He was elected a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, March 9, 1732, and in that year he published the first volume of “Desiderata Curiosa; or, A Collection of divers scarce and curious Pieces, relating chiefly to matters of English History 5 consisting of choice Tracts, Memoirs, Letters, Wills, Epitaphs, &c. Transcribed, many of them, from the originals themselves, and the rest from divers ancient ms Copies, or the ms Collations of sundry famous Antiquaries, and other eminent Persons, both of the last and present age: the whole, as nearly as possible, digested into order of time, and illustrated with ample Notes, Contents, additional Discourses, and a complete Index.” This volume was dedicated to lord William Manners; and was followed, in 1735, by a second volume, dedicated to Dr. Reynolds, bishop of Lincoln. There being only 250 copies of these volumes printed, they soon became scarce and high-priced, and were reprinted in one volume, 4to, by subscription, by the late Mr. Thomas Evans, in 1779, without, however, any improvements, or any attempt, which might perhaps have been dangerous by an unskilful hand, at a better arrangement. In 1735, Mr. Peck printed, in a quarto pamphlet, “A complete Catalogue of all the Discourses written both for and against Popery, in the time of King James the Second; containing in the whole an account of four hundred and fifty-seven Books and Pamphlets, a great number of them not mentioned in the three former Catalogues; with references after each title, for the more speedy finding a further Account of the said Discourses and their Authors in sundry Writers, and an Alphabetical List of the Writers on each side.” In 1736, he obtained, by the favour of bishop Reynolds, the prebendal stall of Marston St. Lawrence, in the cathedral church of Lincoln. In 1739, he was the editor of “Nineteen Letters of the truly reverend and learned Henry Hammond, D. D. (author of the Annotations on the New Testament, &c.) written to Mi*. Peter Stainnough and Dr. Nathaniel Angelo, many of them on curious subjects,” &c. These were printed from the originals, communicated by Mr. Robert Marsden, archdeacon of Nottingham, and Mr. John Worthington. The next year, 1740, produced two volumes in quarto; one of them entitled “Memoirs of the life and actions of Oliver Cromwell, as delivered in three Panegyrics of him written in Latin; the first, as said, by Don Juan Roderiguez de Saa Meneses, Conde de Penguiao, the Portugal Ambassador; the second, as affirmed by a certain Jesuit, the lord ambassador’s Chaplain; yet both, it is thought, composed by Mr. John Milton (Latin Secretary to Oliver Cromwell), as was the third with an English version of each. The whole illustrated with a large Historical Preface many similar passages from the Paradise Lost, and other works of Mr. John Milton, and Notes from the best historians. To all which is added, a Collection of divers curious Historical Pieces relating to Cromwell, and a great number of other remarkable persons (after the manner of Desiderata Curiosa, vol. I. and II.)” The other, “New Memoirs of the Life and Poetical Works of Mr. John Milton; with, first, an Examination of Milton’s Style; and, secondly, Explanatory and Critical Notes on divers passages in Milton and Shakspeare, by the Editor. Thirdly, Baptistes; a sacred Dramatic Poem in Defence of Liberty, as written in Latin by Mr. George Buchanan, translated into English by Mr. John Milton, and first published in 1641, by order of the House of Commons. Fourthly, The Parallel) or archbishop Laud and cardinal Wolsey compared, a vision, by Milton. Fifthly, The Legend of sir Nicholas Throckmorton, knt. Chief Butler of England, who died of poison, anno 1570, an Historical Poem, by his nephew sir Thomas Throckmorton, knt. Sixth, Herod the Great, by the Editor. Seventh, The Resurrection, a Poem, in imitation of Milton, by a Friend. And eighth, a Discourse on the Harmony of the Spheres, by Milton; with Prefaces and Notes.” Of these his “Explanatory and Critical Notes on divers passages of Shakspeare” seem to prove that the mode of illustrating Shakspeare by extracts from contemporary writers, was not entirely reserved for the modern commentators on our illustrious bard, but had occurred to Mr. Peck. The worst circumstance respecting this volume is the portrait of Milton, engraved from a painting which Peck got from sir John Meres of KirkbyBeler in Leicestershire. He was not a little proud to possess this painting, which is certainly not genuine and what is worse, he appears to have known that it was not genuine. Having asked Vertue whether he thought it a picture of Milton, and Vertue peremptorily answering in the negative, Peck replied, “I'll have a scraping from it, however: and let posterity settle the difference.”

In 1742, Mr. Peck published his last work: “Four Discourses, viz. 1. Of Grace, and how to excite it. 2. Jesus Christ the true Messiah, proved from a consideration of his miracles in general. 3. The same proved from a consideration of his resurrection in particular. 4. The necessity and advantage of good laws and good magistrates: as delivered in two visitation and two assize-sermons.” At this time he had in contemplation no less than nine different works but whether he h&d not met with encouragement for those which he had already produced, or whether he was rendered incapable of executing them by reason of his declining health, is uncertain; none of them, however, ever were made public. He concluded a laborious, and it may be affirmed, an useful life, wholly devoted to antiquarian pursuits, Aug. 13, 1743, at the age of sixty-one years. He was buried in the church of Godeby, with a Latin inscription. There are two portraits of him; one in his “Memoirs of Milton; the other prefixed to the second edition of his” Desiderata Curiosa,“inscribed,” Francis Peck, A. M. natus Stanfordias, 4 Maii, MDCXCII." By his wife, the daughter of Mr. Curtis of Stamford, he had two sons, Francis, a clergyman, who died in 1749, rector of Gunby in Lincolnshire; and Thomas, who died young; and a daughter, Anne, widow (in 1794) of Mr. John Smalley, farmer at Stroxton in Lincolnshire.

The greater part of Mr. Peck’s Mss. became the property of sir Thomas Cave, bart. Among others, he purchased 5 vols. in 4to, fairly transcribed for the press, in. Mr. Peck’s own neat hand, under the title of “Monasticon Anglicanum.” These volumes were, on the 14th of May, 1779, presented to the British Museum, by the last sir Thomas Cave, after the death of his father, who twenty years before had it in contemplation to bestow them on that excellent repository. They are a most valuable and almost inestimable collection, and we hope will not be neglected by the editors of the new edition of Dugdale. Mr. Peck’s other literary projects announced in the preface to his “Desiderata,” and at the end his “Memoirs of Cromwell,” are, 1. “Desiderata Curiosa,” vol. III. Of this Mr. Nichols has a few scattered fragments. 2. “The Annals of Stanford continued.” 3. “The History and Antiquities of the Town and Soke of Grantham, in Lincolnshire.” 4. “The Natural History and Antiquities of Rutland.” 5. “The Natural History and Antiquities of Leicestershire.” The whole of Mr. Peck’s Mss. relative to this work, were purchased by sir Thomas Cave, in 1754, whose grandson, with equal liberality and propriety, presented them to Mr. Nichols for the use of his elaborate history of that county. It appears from one of Mr. Peck’s Mss. on Leicestershire, that he meditated a chapter on apparitions, in which he cordially believed. 6. “r rhe Life of Mr. Nicholas Ferrar, of Little Gidding, in the county of Huntingdon, gent, commonly called the Protestant St. Nicholas, and the pious Mr. George Herbert’s Spiritual Brother, done from original Mss.” This ms. of Ferrar is now in the possession of Mr. Gilchrist of Stamford, before mentioned, who informs us that there is nothing in it beyond what may be found in Peckard’s Life of Ferrar. 7. “The Lives of William Burton, esq. author of the Antiquities of Leicestershire, and his brother Robert Burton, B. D. student of Christ-church, and rector of Seagrave, in Leicestershire, better known by the name of Democritus jun.” Mr. Nichols had also the whole of this ms. or plan, which was merely an outline. 8. “New Memoirs of the Restoration of King Charles the Second (which may be considered also as an Appendix to secretary Thurloe’s Papers), containing the copies of Two Hundred and Forty-six Original Letters and Papers, all written annis 1658, 1659, and 1660 (none of them ever yet printed). The whole communicated by William Cowper, esq, Clerk of the Parliament.” In 1731, Mr. Peck drew up a curious “Account of the Asshebys and De la Launds, owners of Bloxham, in the county of Lincoin,” a ms. in the British Museum. Mr. Gilchrist has a copy of Langbaine’s Lives, carefully interlined by him, whence it should seem that he meditated an enlargement of that very useful volume. Mr. Peck also left a great many ms sermons, some of which are in the possession of the same gentleman, who has obligingly favoured us with some particulars of the Stamford antiquary.

, archbishop of Canterbury in the reign of Edward 1. was born in the county of Sussex, about 1240, and educated in the monastery at Lewes, whence he was sent to Oxford, and became a minorite friar. Hid name occurs in the registers of Merlon-college, which was founded in his time, but not with sufficient precision to enable us to say that he was educated there. He was, however, created D. D. at this university, and read public lectures. Pits says he was professor of divinity, and afterwards provincial of his order in England. He appears to have been twice at Paris, where he also read lectures with great applause. He went from Paris, after his second visit, to Lyons, where he obtained a canonry in the cathedral, which Godwin and Cave inform us was held with the archbishopric of Canterbury for two centuries after. Fuller says it was a convenient half-way house between Canterbury and Rome. He then went to Rome, where the pope appointed him auditor or chief judge of his palace, but Leland calls the office which the pope bestowed upon him that of Palatine lecturer or reader, “lector, ut vocant, Palatinus.” In 1278, this pope consecrated him archbishop of Canterbury, on Peckham’s agreeing to pay his holiness the sum of 4000 marks, which there is some reason to think he did not pay; at least it is certain he was so slow in remitting it, that the pope threatened to excommunicate him.

On his arrival in England, he summoned a convocation at Lambeth, reformed various abuses in the church, and punished several of the clergy for holding pluralities, or for being non-residents; nor did he spare the laity, of whatever rank, if found guilty of incontinence. In 1282 he went in person to the prince of Wales, then at Snowdon, in order to bring about a reconciliation between him and the king (Edward I.) but was unsuccessful, and therefore, when on his return he passed through Oxford, he excommunicated the prince and his followers. He died at Mortlake, in 1292, and was buried in Canterbury cathedral, near the remains of St. Thomas a Becket. Godwin represents him as a man of great state and outward pomp, but easily accessible and liberal, except to the Jews, whom he persecuted severely. He founded a college at Wingham, in Kent, which at the dissolution had an annual revenue of 84l. Wood, in his “Annals,” makes frequent mention of Peckham’s attention to the interests of the university of Oxford; and in some of his regulations he showed his taste and learning in censuring certain logical and grammatical absurdities which prevailed in the schools, and appears to have always promoted discipline and good morals. Tanner enumerates a great number of his works on divinity, which show him accomplished in all the learning of his age. These remain, however, in manuscript, in our different libraries, except some of his letters published by Wharton, and his statutes, institutions, &c. in the “Concil. Mag. Brit, et Hib. vol. II.” Two only of his works were published separately, and often reprinted; viz. his “Collectanea Bibiiorum libri quinque,” Colon. 1513, 1591; Paris, 1514 and his “Perspectiva Communis,” Venice, 1504 Colon. 1592, Norimb. 1542, and Paris, 1556, 4to.

, a learned anatomist, and a native of Dieppe, a considerable author of the seventeenth century, has rendered his name famous by his discovery of the thoracic duct, and the receptacle of the chyle; with which, however, some alledge that Bartholomeus Eustachius was acquainted before him. But the world is obliged to Pecquet for shewing, beyond all contradiction, that the lacteal vessels convey the chyle to this receptacle; and for proving that it is thence carried, by particular vessels, through the thorax, almost as high as the left shoulder, and there thrown into the left subclavian vein, and so directly carried to the heart. He died at Paris, in February 1674. The work in which he published the discovery was entitled “Experimenta nova Anatomica, quibus incognitnm hactenus Chyli Receptaculum, et ab eo per Thoracem in Kamos usque subclavios Vasa lactea deleguntur;” to which was subjoined a dissertation, “De Circulatione Sanguinis et Chyli Motu,” 1651. It was reprinted in 1654, together with an essay “De Thoracis lacteis,” in answer to Kiolan and many subsequent editions have appeared.

, a learned antiquary, was born of a noble family at Mantua, in 1646. He entered himself among the Jesuits, and became distinguished for his deep knowledge of history and antiquities. His private character too was such as made him beloved by every person who knew him. He was chosen by Hannuncio, duke of Parma, to arrange his rich and curious cabinet of medals, of which, in 1694, he began to publish an account under the title of “I Cassari in oro raccolti nel Farnese Musaeo o publicati colle loro congrue interpretazioni;” and be continued his labours till his death, Jan. 20, 1721. This work, in its complete form, consists of ten vols. folio, and bears the title of “Museo Farnese” but is not held in so much estimation on the continent as to bear a high price.

, an English poet, who flourished in the reign of queen Elizabeth, was a native of Devonshire. was first educated at Broadgate’s Hall, but was some. time afterwards made a student of Christ Church college, Oxford, about 1573, where, after going through all the several forms of logic and philosophy, and taking all the necessary steps, he was admitted to his master of arts degree in 1579. After this it appears that he removed to London, became the city poet, and had the ordering of the pageants. He lived on the Bank-side, over against Black-friars, and maintained the estimation in his poetical capacity which he had acquired at the university, which seems to have been of no inconsiderable rank. He was a good pastoral poet; and Wood informs us that his plays were not only often acted with great applause in his life-time, but did also endure reading, with due commendation, many years after his death. He speaks of him, however, as a more voluminous writer in that way than he appears to have been, mentioning his dramatic pieces by the distinction of tragedies and comedies, and has given us a list of those which he says he had seen; but in this he must have made some mistake, as he has divided the several incidents in one of them, namely, his “Edward I.” in such manner as to make the “Life of Llewellin,” and the “Sinking of Queen Eleanor,” two detached and separate pieces of themselves; theerror of which will be seen in the perusal of the whole title of this play. He moreover tells us, that the lastmentioned piece, together with a ballad on the same subject, was, in his time, usually sold by the common balladmongers. The real titles of the plays written by this author, of which five only are known, are, 1. “The Arraignment of Paris,” 1584, 4to. 2, “Edward the First, 1593,” 4to. 3. “King David and Fair Bethsabe,” 1599, 4to. 4. “The Turkish Mahomet and Hyren the Fair Greek.” 5. “The Old Wives Tale,” a comedy, 1595, 4to.,

Wood and Winstanley, misguided by former catalogues, have also attributed to him another tragedy, called “Alphonsus, emperor of Germany.” But this, Langbaine assures us, was written by Chapman, he himself having the play in his possession, with that author’s name to it. About 1593 Peele seems to have been taken into the patronage of the earl of Northumberland, to whom he dedicated in that year, “The Honour of the Garter, a poem gratulatorie, the Firstling, consecrated to his noble name.” He was almost as famous for his tricks and merry pranks as Scoggan, Skelton, or Dick Tarleton; and as there are books of theirs in print, so there is one of his called “Merrie conceited Jests of George Peele, gent, sometime student in Oxford; wherein is shewed the course of his life, how he lived,” &c. 1627, 4to. These jests, as they are called, might with more propriety he termed the tricks pf a sharper. Peele died before 1598, of the consequences of his debaucheries. Oldys says he left behind him a wife and a daughter. He seems to have been a person of a very irregular life; and Mr. Steevens, with great probability, supposes, that the character of George Pieboard, in “The Puritan,” was designed as a representative of George Peele. See a note on that comedy, as published by Mr. Malone.

, an eminent and laborious antiquary, descended from an ancient family in Derbyshire, was the $on of Christopher Pegge, a woollen-draper, and was born at Chesterfield, Nov. 5, 1704. He was admitted a pensioner of St. John’s college, Cambridge, May 20, 1722, and in November was elected a scholar upon Lupton’s foundation. In Jan. 1725 he took his degree of B. A. and in March 1726 was elected to a fellowship, which he did not hold long, owing to a singular circumstance. His fellow competitor was Mr. Michael Burton, who had the superior right as being a-kin to the founder of the fellowship, but this claim was set aside, owing to his being deficient in literature. He now artfully applied to the college for a testimonial, that he might receive orders, and undertake some cure in the vicinity of Cambridge; and this being unadvisedly granted, he immediately appealed to the visitor (Dr. Thomas Greene, bishop of Ely), representing that, as the college had, by the testimonial, thought him qualified for ordination, it could not, injustice, deem him unworthy of becoming a fellow of the society. The consequence was, that the visitor found himself reluctantly obliged to eject Mr. Pegge, and Burton took possession of the fellowship. The visitor, however, recommended Mr. Pegge in such a manner to the master and seniors of the college, that he was from that time considered as an honorary member of the body of fellows (tanquam socins), and kept his seat at their table and in the chapel, being placed in the situation of a fellow-commoner. Feeling yet more the indignity of the trick played upon them by Burton, they chose Mr. Pegge to a Platt-fellowship in 1729.

Classical criticism being one of his earliest studies, it is thought that he had before this time meditated an edition of Xenophon’s “Cyropaedia” and “Anabasis,” from a collation of them with the Duport ms. in the library of Eton, to convince the world that he had not been unjustly preferred to Burton; but this undertaking was probably prevented by the appearance of Hutchinson’s edition. Having taken the degree of M. A. in July 1729, he was ordained deacon in December, and priest in February following, on both occasions by Dr. Baker, bishop of Norwich. His first clerical employment was as curate to the Rev. Dr. John Lynch, at Sandwich, in Kent. This he held from Lady Day 1730, to Midsummer 1731, when he removed to Bishopsbourne, another living belonging to Dr. Lynch, who at the end of the same year procured for him the living of Godmersham.

Being now possessed of a living, and of some independent personal property inherited from his mother, he married, in April 1732, miss Anne Clarke, the only daughter of Benjamin Clarke, esq. of Stanley, near Wakefield, in Yorkshire. While he resided in Kent, which was for the space of twenty years, he made himself universally acceptable by his general knowledge, his agreeable conversation, and his vivacity. Having an early propensity to the study of antiquities as well as of the classics, he here laid the foundation of what in time became a considerable collection of books, and his cabinet of coins grew in proportion; by which two assemblages, so scarce among country gentlemen in general, he was qualified to pursue those collateral studies, without neglecting his parochial duties, to which he was always assiduously attentive. Here, however, the placid course of his life was interrupted by the death of Mrs. Pegge, whom he lamented with unfeigned sorrow; and now meditated on some mode of removing himself, without disadvantage, to his native country, either by obtaining a preferment tenable with his present vicarage, or by exchanging this for an equivalent. Having been induced to reside for some time at Surrenden, to superintend the education of Sir Edward Dering’s son, that baronef obtained for him the perpetual curacy of Brampton, near Chesterfield, in the gift of the dean of Lincoln; but the parishioners insisting that they had a right to the presentation, law proceedings took place, before the termination of which in favour of the dean of Lincoln, Mr. Pegge was presented by the new dean of Lincoln, Dr. George, to the rectory of Whittington, near Chesterfield. He was accordingly inducted Nov. 11, 1751, and resided here upwards of forty-four years without interruption. About a fortnight after, by the interest of his friend sir Edward Dering with the duke of Devonshire, he was inducted into the rectory of Brinhill, or Brindle, in Lancashire, on which he resigned Godmersham. Sir Edward also obtained for him in the same year a scarf from the marquis of Hartington (afterwards the fourth duke of Devonshire) who was then called up to the house of peers by the title of baron Cavendish of Hard wick. In 1758 Mr. Pegge was enabled, by the acquiescence of the duke of Devonshire, to exchange Brinhill for Heath, alias Lown, which lies within seven miles of Whittington; a very commodious measure, as it brought his parochial preferments within a smaller distance of each other. The vicarage of Heath he held till his death. His other preferments were, in 1765, the perpetual curacy ofWingerworth; the prebend of Bobenhull, in the church of Lichfield, in 1757; the living of Whittington in Staffordshire, in 1763; and the prebend of Louth, in Lincoln church, in 1772. Towards the close of his life he declined accepting a residentiaryship in the church of Lichfield, being too old to endure, with tolerable convenience, a removal from time to time. His chief patron was archbishop Cornwallis, but he had an admirer, if not a patron, in every dignitary of the church who knew him; and his protracted life, and his frequent and almost uninterrupted literary labours, made him very generally known. In 1791, when on a visit to his grandson, sir Christopher Pegge, of Oxford, he was created LL. D. by that university. He died, after a fortnight’s illness, Feb. 14, 1796, in the ninety-second year of his age, and was buried, according to his own desire, in the chancel of the church of Whittington, near Chesterfield, where his son placed a mural tablet of black marble, over the east window, with a short inscription.

Dr. Pegge’s manners were those of a gentleman of liberal education, who had seen much of the world, and had formed them upon the best models within his observation. Having in his early years lived in free intercourse with many of the principal and best-bred gentry in various parts of Kent, he ever after preserved the same attention, by associating with superior company, and forming honourable Attachments. In his avocations from reading and retirement, few men could relax with more ease and cheerfulness,or better understood the desipere in loco: and as he did not mix in business of a public nature, he appeared to most advantage in private circles; for he possessed an equanimity which obtained the esteem of his friends, and an affability which procured the respect of his dependents. His habits of life were such as became his profession and station. In his clerical functions he was exemplariiy correct, performing all his parochial duties himseif, until the failure of his eye-sight rendered an assistant necessary; but that did not happen till within a fevv years before his death. As a preacher, his discourses from the pulpit were of the didactic and exhortatory kind, appealing to the understandings rather than to the passions of his auditory, by expounding the Holy Scriptures in a plain, intelligible, and unaffected manner. Though he had an early propensity to the study of antiquities, he never indulged himself much in it, as long as more essential and professional occupations had a claim upon him; for he had a due sense of the nature and importance of his clerical functions, and had studied divinity in all its branches with much attention.

As an antiquary, by which character chiefly he will hereafter be known, he was one of ttie most laborious of his time. He was elected a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries in 1751, the year in which the charter of incorporation was granted; and when their “Archaiologia” began to be published, he contributed upwards of fifty memoirs, many of which are of considerable length, being by much the greatest number hitherto contributed by any individual member of that learned body. He also wrote seven curious memoirs for the “Bibliotheca Topographica Brit.” and many hundred articles in the Gentleman’s Magazine from the year 1746 to 1795. His principal signatures were Paid Gemsege, (Samuel Pegge), and T. Row, (the rector of Whittington), and sometimes L. E. the final letters of his name. Numerous as these articles are, there is scarcely one of them which does not convey some curious information, or illustrate some doubtful point in history, classical criticism, or antiquities; and if collected together, with some kind of arrangement, might form a very interesting and amusing volume, or volumes.

His independent publications on numismatical, antiquarian, and biographical subjects were also very numerous: 1. “A Series of Dissertations on some elegant and very raluable Anglo-Saxon Remains,” 1756, 4to. 2. “Memoirs of Roger de Weseham, dean of Lincoln, afterwards bishop of Lichfield, and the principal favourite of Robert Grossetete, bishop of Lincoln,” 1761, 4to. 3. “An Essay on the Coins of Cunobelin in an epistle to the right rev. bishop of Carlisle (Dr. Lyttelton), president of the society of antiquaries,” 1766, 4to. 4. “An assemblage of coins fabricated by authority of the archbishops of Canterbury. To which are subjoined two Dissertations,” 1772, 4to. 5. “Fitz-Stephen’s Description of the city of London,” &c. 1772, 4to. 6. “The Forme of Cury. A roll of ancient English cookery, compiled about the year 1390, temp. Rich. II. with a copious index and glossary, 7 ' 1780, 8vo. The original of this curious roll was the property of the late Gustavus Brander, esq. who presented it afterwards to the British Museum. Prefixed to this publication is his portrait, engraved at the expence of Mr. Brander. 7.” Annales Eliae de Trickenham, monachi ordinis Benedictini. Ex Bibliotheca Lamethana.“To which is added,” Compendium compertorum; ex bibliotheca ducis Devoniae,“1789, in 4to. Both parts of this publication contain copious annotations by the editor. The former was communicated by Mr. Nichols, to whom it is inscribed,” ad Johannem Nicolsium, celeberrimum typographum;“and the latter was published by permission of the duke of Devonshire, to whom it is dedicated. 8.” The Life of Robert Grossetete, the celebrated bishop of Lincoln,“1793, 4to. This has very justly been considered as the chef-d'oeuvre- of the author. Seldom has research into an obscure period been more successful. It is a valuable addition to our literary history. 9.” An historical account of Beauchief Abbey, in the county of Derby, from its first foundation to its final dissolution,“1801, 4to. 10.” Anonymiana; or Ten centuries of observations on various authors and subjects," 1809, 8vo, a very entertaining assemblage of judicious remarks and anecdotes. It is needless to add that these two last publications were posthumous.

, son of the preceding, was born in 1731. He studied law, and became a barrister of the MiddleTemple; one of the grooms of his majesty’s privy-chamber, and one of the esquires of the king’s household. He was, like his father, a frequent contributor to the Gentleman’s Magazine. He was also author of “Curialia; or an historical account of some branches of the Royal Household,” part I, 1782; part II, 1784, and part III, 1791. He had been several years engaged in preparing the remaining numbers of the “Curialia” for the press; the materials for which, and also his very amusing “Anecdotes of the English Language,” he bequeathed to Mr. Nichols, who published the “Anecdotes” in 1803, 8vo, a second edition in 1814; and the fourth and fifth numbers of the “Curialia” in 1806. He also assisted Mr. Nichols in publishing his father’s ' “History of Beauchief Abbey,” and wrote his father’s life, to which we have referred in the preceding article. He died May 22, 1800, aged sixtyseven, and was buried on the west side of Kensington church-yard. By his first wife, he had one son, Christopher Pegge, M. D. F. R. S. knighted in 1199, and now regins professor of physic at Oxford.

, an eminent dissenting minister, distinguished for his zealous defence of the principles of nonConformity, and a no less zealous latitudinarian in opinion, was born in 1673, at Wapping in London, of reputable parents. By hrs mother, who died last, when he was about seven years old, he, with a brother and sister, both older than himself, was committed to Mr. Matthew Mead, the famous dissenting minister at Stepney, as his guardian, at whose house he lived for some time after his mother’s death, and was taught by the same tutors Mr. Mead kept for his own sons. He was afterwards, by Mr. Mead’s direction, put to other grammar-schools, and at last sent to Utrecht in Holland, where he had his academical institution, and studied under Witsius, Leydecker, Graevius, Leusden, De Vries, and Luyts, and was well known to the celebrated Mr. Hadrian Reland, who was then his fellow student, and afterwards when he was professor corresponded with Mr. Peirce. The latter part of his time abroad Mr. Peirce spent at Leyden, where he attended Perizonius and Noodt especially, hearing Gronovius, Mark and Spanheim, occasionally; and with some of these professors in both universities he afterwards held a correspondence. After he had spent above five years in these two places, he lived privately in England, for some time at London, among his relations, and for some time at Oxford, where he lodged in a private house, and frequented the Bodleian library. After this, at the desire of his friends, he preached an evening lecture on Sundays at the meeting-house in Miles-lane, London, and occasionally in other places, until he settled at Cambridge, where he was treated with great respect and civility by many gentlemen of the university. In 1713 he was removed to a congregation at Exeter, where he continued till 1718, when a controversy arising among the dissenters about the doctrine of the Trinity, from which some of them were at this time departing, three articles were proposed to him, and Mr. Joseph HalJet, senior, another dissenting minister in Exeter, in order to he subscribed; which both of them refused, and were ejected from their congregation. After this a new meeting was opened March 15, 1618-9, in that city, of which Mr. Peirce continued minister till his death, which happened March 30, 1726, in the 53d year of his age. His funeral sermon was preached April the 3d following by Mr. Joseph Hallet, jun. and printed at London, 1726, in 8vo; in which he was restrained by Mr. Peirce himself from bestowing any encomiums on him; but Mr. Hallet observes in a letter, that “he was a man of the strictest virtue, exemplary piety, and great learning; and was exceedingly communicative of his knowledge. He would condescend to converse on subjects of learning with young men, in whom he found any thirst after useful knowledge; and in his discoursing with them would be extremely free, and treat them as if they had been his equals in learning and years.” His works have been divided into four classes. Under the philosophical class, we find only his “Exercitatio Philosophica de Homoeomeria Anaxagorea,” Utrecht, 1692. But he was more voluminous in the controversy between the church of England and the dissenters. Of the latter he has been esteemed a great champion. In their defence he published, 1. “Eight Letters to Dr. Wells,” London, 1706 and 1707. 2. “Consideration on the sixth Chapter of the Abridgment of the London Cases, relating to Baptism and the sign of the Cross,” London, 1708. 3. “Vindiciae Fratrum Dissentientium in Anglia,” London, 1710, 8vo. 4. “An Enquiry into the present duty of a Low Churchman,” London, 1711, 8vo. 5. “Vindication of the Dissenters,” London, 1717, 8vo. 6. “A Letter to Dr. Bennet, occasioned by his late treatise concerning the Nonjurors’ Separation,” &c. London, 1717, 8vo. 7. “Preface to the Presbyterians not chargeable with King Charles’s death,” Exeter, 1717, in 8vo. 8. “Defence of the' Dissenting Ministry and Ordination,” in two parts, London, 1718, 8vo. 9. “The Dissenters’ Reasons for not writing in behalf of Persecution. Designed for the satisfaction of Dr. Snape, in a letter to him,” London, 1718, 8vo. 10. “Interest of the Whigs with relation to the Test- Act,” London, 1718, 8vo. 11. “Reflections on Dean Sherlock’s Vindication of the Corporation and Test Acts,” London, 1718, 8vo. 12. “Charge of misrepresentations maintained against Dean Sherlock,” London, 1719, 8vo. 13. “Loyalty, integrity, and ingenuity of High Church and the Dissenters compared,” London, 1719, 8vo. Relative to his controversy at Exeter, which produced his ejectment, were published by him, 1. “The Case of the Ministers ejected at Exon,” London, 1719, 8vo. 2. “Defence of the Case,” London, 1719, 8vo. 3. “Animadversions on the true Account of the Proceedings at Salter’s Hall: with a Letter to Mr. Eveleigh,” London, 1719, 8vo. 4. “A Second Letter to Mr. Eveleigh, in answer to his Sober Reply,” Exeter, 1719, 8vo. 5. “A Letter to a subscribing Minister in Defence of the Animadversions,” &c. London, 1719, 8vo. 6. “Remarks upon the Account of what was transacted in the assembly at Exon,” London,

1719, 8vo. 7. “An Answer to Mr. Enty’s Defence of the Assembly,” London, 1719, 8vo. 8. “The Western Inquisition,” London, 1720, 8vo. 9. “The Security of Truth, in answer to Mr. Enty,” London, 1721, 8vo. 10. “Inquisition-honesty displayed,” London, 1722, 8vo. On the doctrine of the Trinity he published, 1. “A Letter to a Dissenter in Exeter,” London, 1719, 8vo. 2. “Plain Christianity defended,” in four parts, London, 1719, 1720, 8vo. 3. “Thirteen Queries propounded to the Rev. Mr. Walrond, in an appendix to the Innocent vindicated,” London, 1719, 8vo. There was an Answer to these queries printed in 1721, under the title of “An Answer to some Queries printed at Exon, relating to the Arian Controversy,” and ascribed to Dr. Daniel Waterland. Mr. Peirce had some thoughts of writing a reply, but changing his purpose, Mr. Joseph Hallet, jun. wrote a defence of then), printed at London in 1736, 8vo, with this title: “The Truth and Importance of the Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation demonstrated: in a defence of the late learned Mr. Peirce’s thirteen Queries, and a Reply to Dr. W 's, and a gentleman’s Answer to them,” &c. 4. “Propositions relating to the Controversy concerning the Trinity, in a Letter to the Rev. Mr. Enty,” London, 1720, 8vo. 5. “An Answer to a pamphlet, entitled Textf of Holy Scripture compared, &c.” London, 1721, 8vo. 6. “A Reply to Mr. Enty’s late piece, entitled Truth and Liberty consistent,” &c. London, 1721, 8vo. His most valuable works, however, are his commentaries on the Scripture: 1. “A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Colossians. With an Appendix upon Ephes. iv. 8.” London, 1725, 4to. 2. “A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Philippians,” Loud. 1725, 4to. 3. “A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistle to the, Hebrews,” 1727, 4to. Theological: 1. “An essay in favour of giving the Eucharist to Children,” 1728, 8vo. 2. “Fifteen Sermons, and a Scripture Catechism,” 1728, 8vo.

, a very learned Frenchman, was descended from an ancient and noble family, seated originally at Pisa in Italy, and born in 1580. His father, lienaud Fabri, lord of Beaugensier, sent him at ten years of age to Avignon, where he spent five years on his classical studies in the Jesuits’ college, and was removed to Aix in 1595, for the study of philosophy. In the mean time, he attended the proper masters for dancing, riding, and handling arms,all which he learned to perform with expertness, but rather as a task, than a pleasure, for even at that early period, he esteemed all time lost, that was not employed on literature. It was during this period, that his father being presented with a medal of the emperor Arcadius, which was found at Beaugensier, Peiresc begged to have it: and, charmed with deciphering the characters in the exergue, and reading the emperor’s name, in that transport of joy he carried the medal to his uncle; who for his encouragement gave him two more, together with some books upon that subject. This incident seems to have led him first to the study of antiquities, for which he became afterwards so famous. In 1596, he was sent to finish his course of philosophy under the Jesuits at Tournon, where he also studied mathematics and cosmography, as being necessary in the study of history, yet all this without relaxing from his application to antiquity, in which he was much assisted by one of the professors, a skilful medallist; nor from the study of belles lettres in general. So much labour and attention, often protracted till midnight, considerably impaired his constitution, which was not originally very strong. In 1597, his uncle, from whom he had great expectations, sent him to Aix, where he entered upon the law; and the following year he pursued the same study at Avignon, under a private master, whose name was Peter David who, being well skilled likewise in antiquities, was not sorry to find his pupil of the same taste, and encouraged him in this study as well as that of the law. Ghibertus of Naples, also, who was auditor to cardinal Aquaviva, much gratified his favourite propensity, by a display of various rarities, and by lending him Goltzius’s “Treatise upon Coins.” He also recommended a visit to Home, as affording more complete gratification to an antiquary than auy part of Europe. Accordingly, his uncle having procured a proper governor, he and a younger brother set out upon that tour, in Sept. 1599; and passing through Florence, Bologna, Ferrara, and Venice, he fixed his residence at Padua, in order to complete his course of law. He could not, however, resist the temptation of going frequently to Venice, where he formed an acquaintance with the most distinguished literati there, as Sarpi, Molinus, &c. in order to obtain a sight of every thing curious in that famous city. Among others, he was particularly caressed by F. Contarini, procurator of St. Mark, who possessed a curious cabinet of medals*, and other antiquities, and found Peiresc extremely useful and expert in explaining the Greek inscriptions. After a year’s stay at Padua, he set out for Rome, and arriving there in Oct. 1600, passed six months in viewing whatever was remarkable. After Easter he gratified the same curiosity at Naples, and then returned to Padua about June. He novr resumed his study of the law; and at the same time acquired such a knowledge of Hebrew, Samaritan, Syriac, and Arabic, as might enable him to interpret the inscriptions on the Jewish coins, &c. In these languages he availed himself of the assistance of the rabbi Solomon, who was then at Padua. His taste for the mathematics was also revived in consequence of his acquaintance with Galileo, whom he first saw at the house of Pinelli at Rome; and he began to add to his other acquisitions a knowledge of astronomy and natural philosophy. From this time it was said that “he had taken the helm of learning into his hand, and begun to guide the commonwealth of letters.”

In 1605, he accompanied Du Vair, first president of the senate at Aix, who was very fond of him, to Paris; whence, having visited every thing curious, he crossed the water, in company with the French king’s ambassador, in 1606, to England. Here he was very graciously received by king James; and having seen Oxford, and visited Camden, sir Robert Cotton, sir Henry Saville, and other learned men, he passed over to Holland; and after visiting the several towns and universities, with the literati in each, he went through Antwerp to Brussels, and thence back to Paris, returning home in Sept. 1606, on account of some family affairs.

Soon after this, he made a purchase of the barony of Rians, which he completed in 1607; and in the same year, at the solicitation of his uncle, having approved himself before that assembly, he was received a senator on the 1st' of July. In the following year his uncle died. In 1616, he attended Du Vair to Paris; where, in 1618, he procured a faithful copy, and published a second edition of “The -Acts of the Monastery of Maren in Switzerland.” This was in defence of the royal line of France against the title of the Austrian family to the French crown by right of succession; and, upon this, he was nominated the same year, by Louis XIII. abbot of Guistres in Guienne. He remained in France till 1623, when, upon a message from his father, now grown old and sickly, he left Paris, and arrived at Aix in October. Not long after he presented to the court a patent from the king, permitting him to continue in the function of his ancient dignity, and to exercise the office of a secular or lay person, notwithstanding that, being an abbot, he had assumed the person of a churchman. The court of parliament, not assenting to this, decreed unanimously, that, being already admitted into the first rank, he should abide perpetually in it; not returning, as the custom of the court was, to the inferior auditory, in which trials are usually had of criminal cases. He obtained also, a rescript from the pope, to license him to be present at the judgment of capital causes, as even in the higher auditory some select cases of that nature wers customarily heard: but he never made use of this licence, always departing when they came to vote, without voting himself. In 1627, he prevailed with the archbishop of Aix, to establish a post thence to Lyons, and so to Paris and all Europe; by which the correspondence that ho constantly held with the literati every where, was much facilitated. Jn 1629, he began to be much tormented with complaints incident to a sedentary life; and, in 1631, having completed the marriage of his nephew Claude with Margaret D'Alries, a noble lady of the county of Avignon, he bestowed upon him the barony of Rians, together with a grant of his senatorial dignity, only reserving the function to himself for three years. The parliament not agreeing to this, he procured, in 1635, letters-patent from the king, to be restored, and to exercise the office for five years longer, which he did not outlive, for, being seized June 1637, with a fever, he died, on the 24th of that month, in his fifty-seventh year.

A very honourable funeral was provided for him by his nephew Claude, in the absence of his brother, who was then at Paris; but who, returning shortly to Provence, hastened to perform the funeral rites, and to be present at the obsequies. He also procured a block of marble from Genoa, from which a monument was made and erected to his memory, with an epitaph by Rigault. As he had been chosen in his life-time a member of the academy of the Humoristi at Rome, his eulogium was pronounced by John James Bouchier, of that learned society, in the presence of cardinal Barberini, his brother Antonio, cardinal Bentivoglio. and several other cardinals, and such a multitude of celebrated and learned men, that the hall was scarce able to contain them. Many copies of verses, in Italian, Latin, and Greek, were recited; which were afterwards printed together, with a collection of funeral elegies in forty languages, under the title of “Panglossia.” Peiresc was, in his person, of a middle size, and of a thin habit; his forehead large, and his eyes grey; a little hawk-nosed, his cheeks tempered with red the hair of his head yellow, as also his beard, which he used to wear long; his whole countenance bearing the marks of uncommon courtesy and affability. In his diet he affected cleanliness, and in all things about him; but nothing superfluous or costly. His clothes were suitable to his dignity; yet he never wore silk. In like manner, the rest of his house was adorned according to his condition, and very well furnished; but he neglected his own chamber. Instead of tapestry, there hung the pictures of his chief friends and of famous men, besides innumerable bundles of commentaries, transcripts, notes, collections from books, epistles, and such like papers. His bed was exceeding plain, and his table continually loaded and covered with papers, books, letters, and other things; as also all the seats round about, and the greatest part of the floor. These were so many evidences of the turn of his mind, which made the writer of his eulogium compare him to the Roman Atticus; and Bayle, considering his universal correspondence and general assistance to all the literati in Europe, called him “the attorney-general of the literary republic.” The multiplicity of his engagements prevented him from finishing any considerable work; but he left behind him a great number of Mss. on local history and antiquities, mathematics and astronomy, the medallic science, languages, &c. Of the writings of this scholar there have been published 48 Italian letters, addressed to Paul and John Baptist Gualdo, in the “Lettere d'uomini illustri;” a considerable number of letters among those of Camden, and a long and learned dissertation on an ancient tripod found at Frejus, in the “Mem. de Literature et de l'Histoire,” by Desmalets, in 1731. It is remarkable, that though Peiresc bought more books than any man of his time, yet the collection which he left was not large. The reason was, that as fast as he purchased, he kept continually making presents of them to learned men to whom he knew they would be useful. But the destruction of a multitude of his papers after his death, by some of his near relations, is mentioned by the learned with indignation and regret; they were applied to the vile uses of heating the oven and boiling the pot. Gassendi, another ornament of France, has given us his life iii detail, in elegant Latin, one of those delightful works, which exhibit a striking likeness of a great and good man at full length, and shew every feature and fold of the drapery in the strongest and clearest light.

, was born in Great Britain in the fourth century, and is said to have been abbot of the monastery uf Banger. His real name is said to be Morgan, which signifying in the Celtic languages sea born, from A/or, sea, and gan born, was translated into risXayw;, in Latin I'elagius. For the greater part of his life, he Whs distinguished among his brethren both for piety and learning, but towards the close of his life, he went to Rome, and began to teach certain doctrines in that city about the year 400, which occasioned no small disturbance in the church He absolutely denied all original sin, which he held to be the mere invention of St. Augustine and taught that men are entire masters of their actions, and perfectly free creatures; in opposition to all predestination, reprobation, election, &c. He owned, indeed, that the natural power of man needed to be assisted by the grace of God, to enable him to work out his own salvation; but, by this grace, he only meant outward assistance, viz. the doctrines of the law, and of the gospel. Though, when pressed by those words of St. Paul, “Deus est enim, qui operatur in nobis,” &c. he owned that it is God, in effect, that makes us will what is good, when he warns and excites us by the greatness of the glory we are to obtain, and by the promises of rewards; when he makes us love him by revealing his wisdom, &c. These are Pelagius’ s own words, as cited by St. Augustine; who confutes him, and shews, that, besides these exterior graces, there are required other real and interior ones. He owned, that the will of man is indeed aided by a real grace; but he added, that this grace is not absolutely necessary in order to live well; but that it only helps us to do well with the more ease. Julian, one of his adherents, went farther yet; and owned that the assistance of grace was absolutely necessary to enable us to do perfect works. In effect, the grand doctrine of the Pelagians was, that a man might accomplish all the commands of God by the mere power of nature; and that the gifts of grace were only necessary to enable him to act well more easily, and more perfectly.

As the morals of Pelagius had long been irreproachable, he found it easy to gain a crowd of followers; and the heresy spread so much, that it became necessary for him to quit Rome, in the year 409, going to Sicily, and accompanied by Crlestius, his chief disciple and fellow-labourer, and, as is said, his countryman. They continued in Sicily, till the re-port of a conference, held at Carthage between the orthodox and the donatists, induced them to go to Africa: but Pelagius did not stay long there; and, after fris departure, Celestius being accused of denying orio-inal sin by Paulinus, was condemned by a council held at Carthage in the year 412, under Aurelius, primate of Africa. Upon this, he repaired to his friend Pelagius, who had retired to Palestine.

Here they were well received by John bishop of Jerusalem, the enemy of St. Jerom, and well looked on by the better sort of people. Count Marcellinus, being desirous to know in what their doctrine, which was much talked of, consisted, applied to St. Augustin, bishop of Hippo, for information; and Pelagius, fearing to engage with so formidable an antagonist, wrote the bishop a letter full of protestations of the purity of his faith, and St. Augustin seems always unwilling to believe that Pelagius had fallen into error until the year 414, when Pelagius resolved to undertake his treatise of the natural strength of man, in. support of his doctrine of free-will; which, however, he still expressed in ambiguous terms, but not so as to deceive either Augustine or Jerome, who wrote against him. In Palestine, his doctrine was approved in a council held at Diospolis in the year 415, consisting of fourteen bishops. Theodore of Mopsuestia was one of Pelagius’ s most powerful friends in the east, a man of profound erudition and great reputation; who, though he wrote zealously against all heresies, fell into that of Pelagius, as also of Nestorius. On the other hand, the African bishops held a council, according to custom, in the year 416, at Carthage, and decided that Pelagius and Celestius ought to be anathematized, and communicated their judgment to the pope Innocent I. in order to join the authority of the see of Rome to their own, and, prompted by St. Augustine, refute in a summary way the chief errors imputed to Pelagius, and conclude thus: “Though Pelagius and Celestius disown this doctrine, and the writings produced against them, without its being possible to convict them of falsehood; nevertheless, we must anathematize in general whoever teacheth that human nature is capable of avoiding sin, and of fulfilling the commands of God; as he shews himself an enemy to his grace.” About the same time a council was held at Milevtim, composed of sixtyone bishops; who, after the example of that of Carthage, wrote to pope Innocent, desiring him to condemn this heresy, which took away the benefit of prayer from adults, and baptism from infants. Besides these two synodicai letters, another was written by St. Augustin, ju the name of himself and four more bishops; in which he explained the whole matter more at large, and desired the pope to order Pelagius to Rome, to examine him more minutely, and know what kind of grace it was that he acknowledged; or else to treat with him on that subject by letters, to the end that, if he acknowledged the grace which the church teachetb, he might be absolved without difficulty.

Celestius, upon his condemnation at Cartilage in the year 412, had indeed appealed to this pope but, instead of pursuing his appeal, he retired into Palestine. Pek gius, however, who had more art, did not despair of bringing Rome over to his interest, by flattering the bishop of that city, and accordingly drew up a confession of faith, and sent it to pope Innocent with a letter, which is now lost. Innocent was dead; and Zosimus had succeeded him, when this apology of Pelagius was brought to Rome. On the first notice of ttiis change, Celestius, who had been driven from Constantinople, hastened to the west, in hopes of securing the new pope’s favour, by making him his judge, and Zosimus, pleased to be appealed to in a cause that had been adjudged elsewhere, readily admitted Celestius to justify himself at Rome. He assembled his clergy in St. Clement’s church, where Celestius presented him a confession of faith; in which, having gone through all the articles of the Creed, from the Trinity to the resurfection of the dead, he said, “If any dispute has arisen on questions that do not concern the faith, I have not pretended to decide them, as the author of a new doctrine; but I offer to your examination, what I have from the source of the prophets and apostles; to the end that, if I have mistaken through ignorance, your judgment may correct and set me right.” On the subject of original sin, he continued, “We acknowledge that children ougtr to be baptized for the remission of sins, agreeably to the rule of the universal church, and the authority of the gospel; because the Lord hath declared, that the kingdom of heaven can be given to those only who have been baptized. But we do not pretend thence to establish the transmission of sin from parents to their children: that opinion is widely different from the catholic doctrines. For sin is not born with man; it is man who commits it after he is born: it does not proceed from nature, but from will. We therefore acknowledge the first, in order not to admit of several baptisms; and take this precaution, that we may not derogate from the Creator.” Celestius having confirmed by word of mouth, and several repeated declarations, what was contained in this writing, the pope asked him, whether he condemned all the errors that had been published under his name? Celestius answered, that he did condemn them in conformity with the sentence of pope Innocent, and promised to condemn whatever should be condemned by the holy see. On this Zosimus did not hesitate to condemn Heros and Lazarus, who had taken upon them, to be the chief prosecutors of the Pelagian doctrine. He deposed them from the episcopal office, and excommunicated them; after which he wrote to Aurelius, and the other bishops of Africa, acquainting them with what he had done, and at the same time sending them the acts of his synod.

Soon after this, Zosimus received a letter from Praylus, bishop of Jerusalem, successor to John, recommending to him Pelagius’s affair in affectionate terms. This letter was accompanied by another from Pelagius himself, together with the confession of faith before mentioned. In this letter Pelagius said, that his enemies wanted to asperse his character in two points: first, that he refused to baptize infants, and promised them the kingdom of heaven, without the redemption of Jesus Christ; secondly, that he reposed so much confidence in free-will, as to refuse the assistance of grace. He rejected the first of these errors, as manifestly contrary to the gospel; and upon the article of grace he said, “We have our free-will either to sin or not to sin, and in all good works it is ever aided by the divine assistance. We say, that all men have free-will, as well Christians as Jews and Gentiles: all of them have it by nature, but it is assisted by grace in none but Christians. In others this blessing of the creation is naked and unassisted. They shall be judged and condemned; because having free-will, by which they might arrive at faith, and merit the grace of God, they make an ill use of this liberty. The Christians will be rewarded; because they, by making a good use of their free-will, merit the grace of the Lord, and observe his commandments.” His confession of faith was like that of Celestius, On baptism he said, “We hold one single baptism, and we assert that it ought to be administered to children in the same form of words as to adults,” Touching grace he said, “We confess a freewill: at the same time holding, that we stand continually in need of God’s assistance; and that those are as well mistaken, who say with the Manichees, that man cannot avoid sinning, as those who say with Jovinian, that man cannot sin.” He concluded with these words: “Such, blessed pope, is the faith which we have learned in the catholic church, the faith which we have always held, and still continue in. If any thing contained therein shall not Jiave been explained clearly enough, or not with sufficient caution, we desire that you would correct it; you who )iold the faith, and the see of Peter. If you approve of my confession of faith, whoever pretends to attack it, will shew either his ignorance or his malice, or that he is not orthodox; but he will not prove me an heretic.”

For some time this defence answered its purpose, and Zosimus wrote a second letter to Aurelius, and to all the bishops of Africa, informing them that he was now satisfied with Pelagius and Celestius’ s confession of faith, and persuaded of their sincerity. Aurelius, however, and his brethren, were more surprised than daunted at this letter, and firmly maintained the judgment they had given, and which had been confirmed by Innocent I. At the head of their decrees they addressed a second letter to pope Zosimus, in these terms: “We have ordained, that the sentence given by the venerable bishop Innocent shall subsist, until they shall confess without equivocation, that the grace of Jesus Christ does assist us, not only to know, but also to do justice in every action; insomuch, that without it we can neither think, say, or do any thing whatever, that belongs to true piety.” They added, “That Celestius’ s having said in general terms, that he agreed with Innocent’s letters, was not satisfactory in regard to persons of inferior understandings; but that he ought to anathematize in clear terms all that was bad in his writings, lest many should believe that the apostolical see had approved his errors, rather than be persuaded that he had reformed them.” The bishop of Africa likewise reminded pope Zosimus oi his predecessor’s decision, relating to the council of Diospolis; shewed him the artifice made use of in the confession of faith which Pelagius had sent to Rome; and refuted after their manner the cavils of the heretics: and, as Zosimus had reprimanded them for having too easily given credit to the accusers of Celestius, they justified themselves at his expenee; by shewing, that he himself had been too precipitate io this affair. They also declared plainly, that this cause arising in Africa, and having been judged there, Celestius could have no right to appeal from thence, nor the pope to take cognizance of it: to which they added a protest, to prevent Zosimus from attempting to pronounce any sentence by default, in favour of Celestius and Pelagius.

Zosimus, either through a persuasion that these heretics had dealt insincerely with him, or finding it prudent to yield to the necessity of the occasion, upon the receipt of this letter, issued out a formal condemnation of the Pelagians, and applied also to Honorius, requesting him to cause all heretics to be driven out of Rome; in compliance with which, the emperor gave a rescript at Ravenna, April 418, directd to the pretorian prefect of Italy, who, in consequence, issued his ordinance jointly with the pretorian prefect of the east, and the prefect of Gaul, purporting, that all such as should be convicted of this error should suffer perpetual banishment, and that all their possessions should be confiscated. The pope also vigorously prosecuting hs design to extirpate the friends 01 Pelagius, caused all the bishops to be deposed who would not subscribe the condemnation of the new heresy, and drove them out of Italy by virtue of the laws of the empire. Atticus, bishop of Constantinople, likewise rejected their deputies. They were driven from Ephesus and Theodotus bishop of Antioch condemned them, and drove Pelagius thence, who was lately returned from Palestine, where he had taken refuge from the emperor’s rescript. We have no certain account of him after this; but there is reason to believe, that he returned to England, and spread his doctrine there; which induced the bishop of Gaul to send thither St. Germain of Auxerre, in order to refute it. However that be, it is certain that Pelagian heresy, as it is called, spread itself both in the east and west, and took so deep root, that it subsists to this day in different sects, who all go by the general name of Pelagians, except a more moderate part who are called Semi-Pelagians.

This Heresiareh wrote several things, among which are, <e A Treatise upon the Trinity;“” A Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles,“which oddly enough has been annexed to those of St. Jerom, and was long thought to be written by him, although a decided Anti-Pelagian;” A Book of Eclogues, or Spiritual Maxims;“several letters, among which is one addressed to a virgin, named Demetrias, which is printed in the works of St. Jerom; several pieces in his own defence and a treatise on free-will. The History of Pelagianism by Jansenius, in his treatise called <fc Augustine,” is thought the best.

, an eminent English mathematician, descended from an ancient family in Lincolnshire, was bora at Southwyke in Sussex, March t, 1610; and educated in grammar-learning at the free-school, then newly founded, at Steyning in that county. At thirteen, he was sent to Trinity college in Cambridge, where he pursued his studies with unusual diligence, but although capable of undergoing any trials, and one of the best classical scholars of his age, he never offered himself a candidate at the election of scholars or fellows of this college. After taking the degree of B. A. in 1628, he drew up the “Description and Use of the Quadrant, written for the use of a friend, in two books;” the original ms. of which is still extant among his papers in the Royal Society; and the same year he held a correspondence with Mr. Henry Briggs on logarithms. In 1630 he wrote “Modus supputatidi Ephemerides Astronomicas (quantum ad motum solis attinet) paradigmate ad an. 1630 accommodate;” and “A Key to unlock the Meaning of Johannes Trithemius, in his Discourse of Ste^anography;” which key Pell the same year imparted to Mr. Samuel Hartlib and Mr. Jacob Homedae. The same year, he took the degree of master of arts at Cambridge, and the year following was incorporated in the university of Oxford. In June he wrote “A Letter to Mr. Edward Win gate on Logarithms;” and, Oct. 5, 1631, “Commentationes in Cosmographiam Alstedii.” July 3, 1632', he married Ithamaria, second daughter of IVtr. Henry Reginolles of London, by whom he had four sons and four daughters. In 1633 he finished his “Astronomical History of Observations of heavenly Motions and Appearances;” and his “Eclipticus Prognostica or Foreknower of the Eclipses; teaching how, by calculation, to foreknow and foretell all sorts of Eclipses of the heavenly lights.” In 1634, he translated “The everlasting Tables of Heavenly Motions, grounded upon the observations of all times, and agreeing with them all, by Philip Lansberg, of Ghent in Flanders” and the same year he committed to writing, “The Manner of deducing his Astronomical Tables out of the Tables and axioms of Philip Lansberg.” In March 1635, he wrote “A Letter of Remarks on Gellibrand’s Mathematical Discourse on the Variation of the Magnetic Needle; and, June following, another on the same subject. Such were the employments of the first six years of Mr. Pell’s public life, during which mathematics entirely engrossed his attention. Conceiving this science of the utmost importance, he drew up a scheme for a mathematical school on an extensive scale of utility and emulation*, Which was much approved by Des Cartes^ but so censured by Mersenne in France, that our author was obliged to write in its defence. The controversy may be seen in Hooke’s Philosophical Collections, and with Pell’s” Idea of the Mathematics."

Mr. Pell’s eminence, however, in mathematical knowledge, was now so great, that he was thought worthy of a professor’s chair in that science; and, i.pon the vacancy of one at Amsterdam in 1639, sir William Bos -ell, the English resident with the States-general, used his interest, that he might succeed in that professorship; which was not filled up till above four years after, 1643, when Pell was chosen to it. The year following he published, in two pages 4to, “A Refutation of Longomontamis’s Discourse, De vera circuli mensura,” printed at Amsterdam in 1644. In June 1646, he was invited by the prince of Orange to be professor of philosophy and mathematics at Breda, in the college newly founded there by his highness, with the offer of a salary of 1000 guilders a year. This he accepted, but upon his removal to Breda, he found that he was rt quired to teach mathematics only. His “Idea Matheseos,” which he had addressed to Mr. Hartlib, who in 1639 had sent it to Des Cartes and Mersenne, was printed 1650 at London, 12mo, in English, with the title of “An Idea of Mathematics,” at the end of Mr. John Dury’s “Reformed Library-keeper.” On the death of the prince of Orange, in 1650, and the subsequent war between the English and Dutch, he left Breda, and returned to Eng land, in 1652; and, in 1654, was sent by Cromwell as his agent to the protestant cantons in Switzerland, his instructions being dated March 30th of that year. His first speech in Latin to the deputies of Zurich was on the 13th of June; and he continued in that city during most of his employment in Switzerland, in which he had afterwards the title of resident. Being recalled by Cromwell, he took his leave of the cantons in a Latin speech at Zuricu, the 23d of June, 1658; but returned to England so short a time before the usurper’s death, that he had no opportunity of an audience from him. Why Cromwell employed him does not appear, but it is thought that during his residence abroad, he contributed to the interests of Charles Ji. and the church of England; and it is certain that, after the restoration, he entered into holy orders, although at an unusually advanced period of life. He was ordained deacon March 31, 1661, and priest in June following, by Sanderson, bishop of Lincoln; and, on the 16th of that month, instituted to the rectory of Fobbing in Essex, given him by the king. On Dec. the 5th following, he brought into the upper house of convocation the calendar reformed by him, assisted by Sancroft, afterwards abp. of Canterbury. In 1663, he was presented by Sheldon, bishop of London, to the rectory of Laingdon in Essex; and, upon the promotion of that bishop to the see of Canterbury in the next month, became one of his grace’s domestic chaplains. He was then doctor of divinity, and expected, as Wood tells us, “to be made a dean; but being not a person of activity, as others who mind not learning are, could never rise higher than a rector.” The truth is, adds Wood, “he was a helpless man as to worldly affairs; and his tenants and relations dealt so unkindly by him, that they defrauded him of the profits of his rectory, and kept him so indigent, that he was in want of necessaries, even ink and paper, to his dying day.” He was for some time confined to the King’s-bench prison for debt; but, in March 1682, was invited by Dr. Whistler to live in the college of physicians. Here he continued till June following, when he was obliged, by his ill state of health, to remove to the house of a grandchild of his in St. Margaret’s church-yard, Westminster. From this too he was again removed, for we find that he died at the house (in Dyot street) of Mr. Cothorne, reader of the church of St. Giles’s in the Fields, Dec. the 12th, 1685, and was intecred by the charity of Busby, master of Westminster school, and Sharp, rector of, St. Giles’s, in the rector’s vault under that church. Besides what have been mentioned, Dr. Pell was the author of, 1. “An Exercitation concerning Easter,” 1644, in 4to. 2. “A Table of 10,000 square numbers,” &c. 1672, folio. 3. An Inaugural Oration at his entering upon the Professorship at Breda. 4. He made great alterations and additions to “Rhonius’s Algebra,” printed at London 1668, 4to, under the title of “An Introduction to Algebra; translated out of the High Dutch into English by Thomas Branker, much altered and augmented by D. P. (Dr. Pell).” Also a Table of odd numbers, less than 100,000, shewing those that are incomposite, &c. supputated by the same Thomas Branker. 5. His Controversy with Longomontanus concerning the Quadrature of the Circle, Amsterdam, 1646, 4to. He likewise wrote a Demonstration of the 2d and 10th books of Euclid; which piece was in ms. in the library of lord Brereton in Cheshire: as also'Arrhimedes’s Arenarins, and the greatest part of Diophantus’s six books of Arithmetic; of which author he was preparing, Aug. 1644, a new edition, with 2 corrected translation, and new illustrations. He designed likewise to publish an edition of Apollonius, but laid it aside, in May, 1645, at the desire of Golius, who was engaged in an edition of that author from an Arabic manuscript given him at Aleppo 18 years before. This appears from the letters of Dr. Pell to sir Charles Cavendish, in the Royal Society.

Some of his manuscripts he left at Brereton in Cheshire", where he resided some years, being the seat of William lord Brereton, who had been his pupil at Breda. A great many others came into the hands of Dr. Busby; which Mr. Hook was desired to use his endeavours to obtain for the society. But they continued buried under dust, and mixed with the papers and pamphlets of Dr. Busby, in four large boxes, till 1755; when Dr. Birch, secretary to the Royal Society, procured them for that body, from the trustees of Dfr. Busby. The collection contains not only Pell’s mathematical papers, letters to him, and copies of those from him, &c. but also several manuscripts of Walter Warner, the mathematician and philosopher, who lived in the reignS of James the First and Charles the First.

, an abbe, and an author by profession, of some celebrity at Paris, was born at Marseilles in 1663, and became a religious of the order of Servites. Being tired of this mode of life, he took some voyages as chaplain to a vessel. On his return, he wrote a poem called “An Epistle to the King on the glorious Success of his Arms,” which gained the prize irt th french academy in 1704. With this Epistle Pellegrin had sent an Ode on the same subject, which proved the only formidable rival to his Epistle, and for some time divided the opinions of the academy. This singular success made him known at court. Madame Maintenoti took notice of him, and gained him a brevet to be translated into the order pf Cluni. Pellegrin subsisted solely by the prizes he gained in several literary academies, and his other literary labours. He even kept a kind of shop, where those who wanted occasional verses, as epigrams, sonnets, madrigals, &c. were supplied at certain prices, according to the number and goodness of the lines. This trade growing slack, he began to write for the theatres, but here a new obstacle arose. The cardinal de Noailles insisted that he should either cease to write for the stage, or to officiate at the mass. He would fain have had a dispensation on this $ubject, but, the cardinal being inexorable, he gave up the mass, as least profitable. He would, however, have felt the loss of the latter, had not his friends procured him a salary for writing the account of the theatrical entertainments in the Mercure. Pellegrin deserved to be in better circumstances, for a great part of what he earned so laboriously was distributed among his relations: and his disposition was singularly candid and modest. He was, at the same time, negligent of his appearance, and had an impediment in his speech; circumstances which conspired to plunge him in that neglect he so severely experienced. He lived, however, to the age of 82; and closed this long life on the 5th of September, 1745. His works are very various; poems of all kinds, sacred and profane; versions of the Psalms and other parts of Scripture; comedies, operas, &c. the general character of all which is, that they are seldom excellent in their plans, and that the veriification is almost invariably flat and tedious.

, an Italian historian and antiquary, was born in 1598, at Capua, and educated at the Jesuits’ school at Naples. He entered into the clerical order, but appears to have passed his whole time in the researches of an historian and antiquary, which, produced, I. “L'Apparato alle Antichita di Capua,” printed in 1651, in which he minutely describes all the parts of Campagna Felice, and relates its history and revolutions. 2. “Historia Principurn Longobardorum,” containing several historical pieces not yet published, illustrated with learned annotations and dissertations. This was republished in the collections of Burmann and Muratori, and with various additions, at Naples, 1749, by Sig. Fr. Moria Pratilli. PeU legrini died at Naples in 1660, at the age of sixty-five.

, famous for his collection of medals, and his publications respecting them, was for a long time commissary-general, and chief-clerk of the French marine. He united the knowledge of a man of letters with all the activity of a man of business; but having, after forty years of service, obtained leave to retire, he thenceforth gave himself up entirely to the study of antiquities, and wrote upon the subject after he was blind with age, by means of an invention described in the last volume of his works. His cabinet of medals, which was purchased by the king in 1776, was the richest ever formed by a private individual; and learned men of all countries highly respected the collector of so valuable a treasure. He died in August 1782, at the surprising age of ninety -nine. He enriched the science of medals by a valuable set of works on that subject, forming altogether, with the supplements, ten volumes in quarto, with many plates; these were published at different times from 1762 to 1773, and contain judicious and learned explanations of the plates, which are executed with great exactness and beauty. It is to Pellerin that we are indebted for the first plates of medals perfectly representing the originals in every flaw and irregularity of edge and impression, which is a most capital improvement, and makes the view of such plates almost equal to the coins themselves.

, a chemist of considerable eminence, was born at Bayonne in 1761. He acquired the rudiments of pharmacy in his father’s house, and afterwards studied the subject at Paris with such constant application, that at a very early age he was familiarly acquainted with chemical processes, and even with the exact state of the science. At the age of twenty-one he published a set of experiments on the arsenic acid, in which he explained the properties of Macquer’s neutral arsenical salt, and demonstrated the real nature of Macquer’s process. In these observations he had been anticipated by Scheele, by Bergman, by the Dijon academicians, and by Berthollet; but it was no inconsiderable merit in so young a man to have advanced as far in the subject as these masters of the science. Soon after, he published several observations on the crystallization of sulphur and cinnabar, on the distillation of phosphorus from bones, on deliquescent salts, on oxymuriatic acid, on the formation of ethers, and particularly on muriatic and acetic ethers. His success in these encouraged him to attempt the analysis of the zeolite, at that time a much more difficult task than at present, when the mode of analyzing minerals has been reduced to a regular system. In 1785 he undertook the analysis of plumbago, a labour in which he had been anticipated by Scheele, and which was completed the year following, in the course of the celebrated experiments made upon iron and its combinations, by Berthollet, Monge, and Vandertnonde. His next object was the combination of phosphorus with the metals; the existence of which had been merely pointed out by Margraff. To Pelletier we owe almost all the knowledge concerning the metallic phosphurets which we at present possess. The next object of his researches was aurum Musivum, a brownish yellow scaly powder sometimes used in painting. He demonstrated it to be a compound of sulphur and the oxide of tin, and pointed out several improvements in the method of preparing it.

In 1790, when the churches of France were stript of their bells, and it was proposed to extract the copper from them, Mr. Pelletier pointed out a method of scorifying the tin, which constitutes the other ingredient, by means of the black oxide of manganese. His first essays were made in Paris, but he demonstrated in the foundery of Romilly that his process succeeded also in the large way. Soon after he analyzed the blue pigment manufactured in England, and known in France by the name of cendres bleues d‘Angleterre, and gave a process for preparing it. Nothing more was necessary than to precipitate copper from nitrous acid by means of a sufficient quantity of lime. His next set of experiments consisted in an examination of strontian, and in a comparison of it with barytes. They confirmed the previous experiments of Dr. Hope and’ Mr. Klaproth. He had formerly examined a small specimen of. carbonat of strontian without finding in it any thing peculiar.

In 1791, on the death of Tillet, he was admitted a member of the academy of sciences, and on the abolition of the academy, he was chosen one of the original members of the national institute which was substituted in its place. In 1792 he went to La Fere to assist at the trials of a new kind of gunpowder. Being obliged to spend the greatest part of the day in the open air, in a cold raw day, his health, naturally delicate, was considerably impaired. But he had gradually recovered almost completely, when he fell a sacrifice to the science to which he had devoted the whole of his attention. He breathed at different times, and during long periods, oxyiruriatic acid gas. The consequence was a consumption, which wasted him rapidly, and at last carried him off on the 21st July 17.V7, in the thirty-sixth year of his age.

Short as the period of his life was, the services which he rendered to chemistry were by no means inconsiderable. His analyses are always precise, and his dissertations written with that perspicuity which marks the clear thinker, and the master of his subject. His fondness for the science was extreme; he continued his labours to the very last, and even on his death-bed spoke of them with satisfaction. His constitution was always weak, and his character marked with timidity; but his mind was remarkably active, and his conduct irreproachable.

, one of the few who have been able to unite attention to business, with the love and cultivation of letters, was born at Paris in 1630, and bred to the law, but always in strict intimacy with Boileau, Bignon, Lamoignon, and the other great men of his time. He was first counsellor of the Châtelet, then in the parliament, afterwards president of the fourth chamber of requests, and next Prévôt des Marchands. To this place he was nominated in 1668, and signalized his situation there by building a quay at Paris, which still retains his name. Being much approved in this office, be was appointed in 1683 to succeed the famous Colbert in that of controllergeneral of the finances. He held this place only six years, after which he resigned it, and in 1697 retired from court entirely, to lead a life of meditation and devotion. He died in August 1711, at the age of eighty-one. Though the life of Pelletier was so much occupied by business, he either produced or was concerned in several publications. 1. Extracts and Collections from the fathers, the ecclesiastical writers, and from scripture, made with great judgment, in several volumes, 12mo. 2. Editions of the “Comes Theologus,” and “Comes Juridicus,” of Peter Pithou, who was his maternal great grandfather. 3. “Comes Senectutis,” and 4. “Comes Rusticus,” both in 12mo, and written in imitation of the former works of Pithou, consist chiefly of the thoughts of various authors. 5. The best edition of the Body of Canon Law, in Latin, with the notes of Peter and Francis Pithou, in 2 vols, fol. 6. An edition of the Observations of Peter Pithou on the Code and on the Novellae.

, a celebrated French physician, born at Mans in 1517, was eminent also as a scholar, and became principal of the colleges of Bayeux and Mans at Paris, where he died in 1582. His writings have not retained all the estimation which they possessed in his time; but they are numerous. 1. Commentaries on Euclid, written in Latin, 8vo. 2. “De dimensione circuli,” Basil. 1563, fol. 3. “Disquisitiones Geometricae,” Lugd. 1567, 8vo, with some other works of this kind. 4. “Dialogue de POrtografe e prononciacion Frangoase,” Lyon, 1555, 8vo, in which, as may be seen by the title, he proposes to write words as they are pronounced; a theoretical improvement, but attended with too many difficulties in practice to b& adopted in any country. Mr. "James Elphinston made similar attempts, with similar success, in England. 5. Two or three collections of very bad poetry. 6. A description of Savoy. 7. A translation of Horace’s Art of Poetry. 8. A French Art of Poetry written in prose. He published also on his own profession, 9. A small treatise in Latin, on the Plague. And 10. A Concordance of several passages in Galen, with some detached treatises, 1559, one vol. 4to.

, a learned German divine and reformer, was born Jan. 8, 1478, at Ruffach, in Alsatia. His family name was Kursiner, or Kirsner, but the name Pellican, which means the same thing in Latin as Kirsner in German, and is in neither very significant, was given him by his maternal uncle. Pellican began his studies at Ruffach in his sixth year, and under an excellent master, who inspired him with a love for literature; yet his difficulties were many, as, among other hindrances, he was obliged to write down every thing taught him, printing being then in its infancy, and no elementary treatise had issued from the press. His maternal uncle already mentioned, who lived at Heidelberg, and had often been rector of the university, hearing of the progress his nephew made in his studies, sent for him to that seminary, where he applied to the belles lettres and logic for about sixteen months, which was probably as long as his uncle could afford to maintain him. He returned therefore in Sept. 1492 to his parents, who were poor, and could give him little support, but got some employment as assistant to a schoolmaster, and had, what was then of great importance to him, the power of borrowing books from the convent of the Cordeliers. His frequent visits for this purpose brought on an acquaintance with those holy fathers, who conceived a very high opinion of Pellican, now in his sixteenth year, and appear to have found little difficulty in persuading him to enter their order, which accordingly he did in January 1493, but against the consent of his relations. He then commenced his theological studies, and in the following year was admitted to the order of subdeacon. In 1496, at the request of his uncle, he was sent to Tubingen, and recommended to Paul Scriptor, a very learned professor of philosophy and mathematics, under whom he profited much, and who conceived a great affection for his pupil. In 1499, meeting with a converted Jew, who was now one of his own order, Pellican expressed his wish to learn Hebrew, and with the assistance of this Jew accomplished the elementary part, although not without great difficulty. Melchior Adam mentions his enthusiastic joy on receiving the loan of a part of the Bible in Hebrew. Reuchlin, who came to Tubingen in 1500, gave Pellican some assistance in this language; and with this, and other helps, certainly very difficult to be procured at that time, and by indefatigable industry, he at length acquired such knowledge of it, as to be accounted, after Reuchlin, the first Hebrew scholar in Germany.

In 1501, in his twenty-third year, he was ordained priest, and the following year he was appointed to teach theology in the convent of his order at Basil, and he likewise 'gave lectures on philosophy and astronomy. After remaining here for six years, he was in 1503 sent to Ruffach to. teach the same branches, and had Sebastian Munster for one- of his pupils in Hebrew and astronomy. In 1511 he was chosen guardian of the convent of Pfortzheim, where he taught theology until 1514, when Caspar Sazger, provincial of his order, engaged him as his secretary; and as this office required his attendance on the provincial in all his journeys, Pellican had many opportunities of becoming acquainted with the learned of his time, and particularly of transcribing from the libraries whatever might add to his stock of oriental and biblical literature, which appears now to have been the fixed object of his studies. On his return from Rouen, where he had been to assist at a chapter, he stopped three months at Basil, with leave of the provincial, to superintend an edition of the Psalter in four languages, which Froben had then at press.

Melchior Adam is rather prolix in his account of Pellican’s journeys with the provincial, little of which is interesting. It appears to have been in 1519 that he was appointed guardian at Basil, and where he met with the writings of the illustrious Luther, which, some say, converted him to the protestant faith; but it would be more correct to say that they served to confirm him in certain sentiments which he had for some time entertained, and was now so little afraid of avowing, that in 1522 he was accused of Lutheranism in a chapter of his order. By what means he defended himself we are not told, but it was with such success, that he obtained permission for some of the ablest of the students and preachers to read the works of Luther. The following year the provincial Sazger paying a visit at Basil, the professors of the university and some of the canons tendered complaints against Pellican and others, as being Lutherans, and contributing to the circulation of Luther’s works. Sazger was for deposing them, but the senate would not admit of it, and said that, if he obliged Pellican and his friends to leave the city for this cause, they, the senate, would take care to send every one of the order after them. Sazger took the hint, and left Basil, where Oecolampadius and Pellican being put into the situation of those professors who had been their accusers, Pellican entered on a course of lectures on the Bible, which formed the foundation of the commentaries he afterwards published in several volumes folio, from 1533 to 1537.

Pellican continued professor at Basil until 1526, when Zuinglius invited him to Zurich in the name of the senate of that city, to teach Hebrew. Although he had been for three years explaining the Hebrew Bible, yet he was modest enough to doubt his abilities for this office, and would have declined it had not his friends represented to him how much more effectually he might promote the reformation at Zurich than at Basil, where he was already in some danger from the enemies of the new principles. Accordingly he consented, and at Zurich thivw off the clerical dress he had usually worn for thirty-three years; and, as was generally done by the reformers, entered into the married state with a lady, who died ten years after (in 1536, when he married a second time). He continued to execute the office of professor of Hebrew at Zurich until his death, April 1, 1556, in the seventy-eighth year of his age.

Pellican was a man of extensive learning, and particularly an able biblical critic. His skill in the languages, and his critical talents, made his services of great importance in the publication of various works. Amerbach, the printer, employed him on the works of St. Augustine published in 1506, in 9 vols. folio; and he executed many translations, particularly of the Bible, or parts of it, the Chaldee paraphrases, &c. His works are said to have been published together in 7 volumes, folio; but, although they may amount, including his commentaries, to that number, there is no such collective edition.

, a French academician, and a man of genius, was descended from an ancient and distinguished family, and born at Beziers in 1624. His mother, who was left a widow very young, brought him up in the protestant religion, and sent him to Castres to learn the belles lettres of Morns, or More, a learned Scotsman, who was principal of a college of the protestants at that place, and father of the famous Alexander More. At twelve years of age he was removed to Montaubon to study philosophy; and thence to Toulouse, where he applied himself to the law. He acquired a good knowledge of the Latin, Greek, Spanish, and Italian languages; but his love for the belles lettres did not make him neglect the law, which he studied so diligently as to publish, when he was not quite one-and-tweiuy, “A Commentary upon the Institutes of Justinian,” Paris, 1645, 12mo. Some little time after he went to Paris, where the celebrated Conrart, to whom he had been recommended by the protestants of Castres, introduced him to the gentlemen of the academy who assembled at his house; but Pellisson soon returned to Castres, the residence of his family, and applied himself to the business of the bar. He had excited the admiration of all about him, and was going on in a most flourishing way, when the small-pox seized him, and disfigured his countenance so much that his friend mademoiselle de Scudery told him he had abused the common liberty of men to be ugly. Having come to Paris a second time, he had contracted a friendship for this ladv, and for many years, it is said, they did not fail either to see or write to each other every day. In 1652 he became secretary to the king; and the same year read his “History of the French Academy, from its establishment in 1635 to 1652,” to that society, who were so well pleased with it that they decreed him the first vacant place in the academy, and that, in the mean time, he should be empowered to come to all their meetings, and give his vote as an academician; with a proviso, however, that the like favour could not hereafter be granted to any person, upon any consideration whatever. This work of PtJlisson, which has always been reckoned a master-piece, was printed at Paris, 1653, in 8vo.

Fouquet, the celebrated superintendant of the finances, who well knew his merit and talents, made him his first clerk and confidant in 1657; and Pellisson, though much to his injury, always preserved the sincerest attachment to him. Two years after, he was made master of the accounts at Montpelier, and had scarcely returned from that place to Paris, when the disgrace of his patron Fouqnet involved him in much trouble, and in 1661 he was sent to the Bastile, and confined there above four years. Though a very strict watch was set over him, he found means to correspond with his friends, and even with Fouquet himself, from whom he also received letters. He used his utmost endeavours, and employed a thousand arts to serve this linister; and he composed in his behalf three famous pleadings, which, Voltaire says, “resemble those of the Roman orator the most of any thing in the French language. They are like many of Cicero’s orations a mixture of judicial and state affairs, treated with an art void of ostentation, and with all the ornaments of an affecting eloquence.” In the mean time, the public was so convinced of his innocence, and he was so esteemed in the midst of his misfortunes, that Tanaquil Faber dedicated his edition of Lucretius to him; and the very day that leave was given to see him, the duke de Montausier, and other persons of the first distinction, went to visit him in the Bastile. He was set at liberty in 1666; and, two years after, had the honour to attend Louis XIV. in his first expedition against the United Provinces, of which he wrote a history. In 1670 he abjured the protestant religion, for which, it is said, he was prepared, during his imprisonment, by reading books of controversy. Voltaire says, “he had the good fortune to be convinced of his errors, and to change his religion at a time when that change opened his way to fortune and preferment.” He took the ecclesiastical habit, obtained several benefices, and the place of master of the requests. The king settled on him a pension of 6000 livres; and, towards 1677, entrusted him with the revenues of some abbeys, to be employed in converting the protestants. He shewed great zeal in this work; but was averse to harsh measures. He published “Reflexions surles differens de la Religion” a new edition of which came out in 1687, augmented with an “Answer to the objections from England and Holland,' 7 in the same language. He employed also his intervals of leisure, for many years, in writing a large controversial volume upon the sacrament; but did not live to finish it, and the world has probably lost little by it. What he wrote on religious subjects does little credit to his pen. Even when he died, which was on Feb. 7, 1693, his religion was a matter of dispute; both papists and protestants claiming him for their own, while a third party thought he had no other religion than what he found necessary at court. He wrote some other works than those mentioned, both in prose and verse, but they have not been in request for many years. A selection, indeed, was published lately (in 1805), at Paris, somewhat in the manner of the compilations which appeared in this country about thirty years ago, under the name of” Beauties."

, an historical writer, was born Oct. 17, 1694, at Leipsic, but his family were originally of Lyons. Being appointed preceptor to the prince de Montbelliard’s son, with whom ho spent the years 1712 and 1713, at Geneva, he had an opportunity of attending Messrs. Turretin and Pictet’s theological lectures; and M. Lenfant, whose pupil he also was, consecrated him to the service of the altar. He became pastor of the French church at Berlin, counsellor to the Upper Consistory, member and librarian of the academy, and died 1757, aged sixty-three. His “Histoire des Celtes,” printed in Holland, 1740, and 1750, in 2 vols. 12mo, was reprinted at Paris, 1770, 3 vols. 12mo, or 2 vols. 4to, and is esteemed a work of accuracy and merit.

, a learned physician, mathematician, and mechanist, was born at London, in 1694. After studying grammar at a school, and the higher classics under Mr. John Ward, afterwards professor of rhetoric at Gresham college, he went to Leyden, and attended the lectures of the celebrated Boerhaave, to qualify himself for the profession of medicine. Here also, as well as in England, he constantly mixed with his professional studies those of the best mathematical authors, whom he contemplated with great effect. From hence he went to Paris, to perfect himself in the practice of anatomy, to which he readily attained, being naturally dexterous in all manual operations. Having obtained his main object, he returned to London, enriched also with other branches of scientific knowledge, and a choice collection of mathematical books, both ancient and modern, from the sale of the valuable library of the abbe Gallois, which took place during his stay in Paris. After his return he assiduously attended St. Thomas’s hospital, to acquire the London practice of physic, though he seldom afterwards practised, owing to his delicate state of health. In 1719 he returned to Leyden, to take his degree of M. D where he was kindly entertained by his friend Dr. Boerhaave. After his return to London, he became more intimately acquainted with Dr. Mead, sir I. Newton, and other eminent men, with whom he afterwards cultivated the most friendly connexions. Hence he was useful in assisting sir I. Newton in preparing a new edition of his “Principia,” in writing an account of his philosophical discoveries, in bringing forward Mr. Robins, and writing some pieces printed in the 2d volume of that gentleman’s collection of tracts, in Dr. Mead’s * Treatise on the Plague," and in his edition of Cowper on the Muscles, &c. Being chosen professor of physic in Gresham-college, he undertook to give a course of lectures on chemistry, which was improved every time he exhibited it, and was publisned in 1771, by his friend Dr. James Wilson. In this situation too, at the request of the college of physicians, he revised and reformed their pharmacopoeia, in a new and much improved edition. After a long and laborious life, spent in improving science, and assisting its cultivators, Dr. Pemberton died in 1771, at seventy-seven years of age.

, a learned divine, was born, according to Fuller, in Sussex, but more probably at Egerton, in Kent, in 1591, and was educated at Magdalen college, Oxford, on one of the exhibitions of John Baker, of Mayfield, in Sussex, esq. Wood informs us that having completed his degree of bachelor by determination, in 1613, he removed to Magdalen-hall, where he became a noted reader and tutor, took the degree of M. A. entered into orders, was made divinity reader of that house, became a famous preacher, a well-studied artist, a skilful linguist, a good orator, an expert mathematician, and an ornament to the society. “All which accomplishments,” he adds, “were knit together in a body of about thirtytwo years of age, which had it lived to the age of man, might have proved a prodigy of learning.” As he was a zealous Calvinist, he may be ranked among the puritans, but he was not a nonconformist. He died while on a visit to his tutor, Richard Capel, who was at this time minister of Eastington, in Gloucestershire, in the thirty-second year of his age, April 14, 1623. His works, all of which were separately printed after his death, were collected in 1 vol. fol. in 1635, and reprinted four or five times; but this volume does not include his Latin works, “De formarum origine;” “De Sensibus internis,” and “Enchiridion Oratorium,” Bishop Wilkins includes Pemble’s Sermons in the list of the best of his age.

, a celebrated mathematician, who descended from an illustrious family of Aix, was born at Moustiers, in the diocese of Riez, in Provence, in 1530. He studied the belles lettres under Ramus, but is said to have afterwards instructed his master in mathematics, which science he taught with great credit in the royal college at Paris. He died Aug. 23, 1560, aged thirty. M. Pena left a Latin translation of Euclid’s “Catoptrica,” with a curious preface, and also employed his pen upon that geometrician’s other works, and upon an edition of the “Spherica” of Theodosius, Greek and Latin, Paris, 1558, 4to, c.

, a learned judge, was born in Moorfields, May 16, 1675, and, as the anonymous author of his life says, was baptised by the name of Thomas son of Thomas Pengelly; but others have supposed that he was a natural son of Richard Cromwell the protector, For this supposition we find no other foundation than that Cromwell, who lived very privately in the neighbourhood, had known Mr. Pengelly from his youth, afterwards kept up a friendship with him, and died at his seat at Cheshunt, in August 1712. Mr. Pengelly was brought up to the bar, and becoming eminent in his profession, was made a serjeant May 6, 1710; knighted May 1, 1719, and in June following appointed his majesty’s prime Serjeant at law, on the decease of sir Thomas Powis. He sat as member for Cockermouth, in Cumberland, in the parliaments called in 1714 and 1722. He was made chief baron of the exchequer Oct. 16, 1726, on the death of sir Jeffery Gilbert; and his conduct on the bench corresponded with the high reputation he had acquired at the bar. He died of an infectious fever, caught at Taunton assizes, April 14, 1730. He excelled in profound learning, spirit, justice, and generosity, and dared to offend the most powerful, if he thought their conduct reprehensible. He was a florid, yet convincing orator, an excellent judge, a pious Christian, and an accomplished, sprightly companion. By a humane codicil in his will, dated in 1729, he left a considerable part of his fortune to procure the discharge of persons confined for debt, which was accordingly done by his executor Mr. Webb. There is a copy of this will published in his life, but the name of his residuary legatee is for some reason omitted. The anonymous history of Oliver Cromwell, first printed in 1724, has been supposed to have been written by him, but this is doubtful. It has been also attributed to Dr. Gibson, bishop of London.

, a writer of considerable estimation among the people called Quakers, was the son of an alderman of London during Cromwell’s time, who was lord mayor in 1642, and appointed one of the judges on the trial of the king. For this he was at the restoration prosecuted, and died in the Tower. Isaac the son, was born about 1617, and in his education is said to have had the advantages which the schools and universities of his country could give; but what school or university had the honour of his education, is not mentioned. From his father’s station, we are told, he had a reasonable prospect of rising in the world, but chose a life devoted to religion and retirement; and, as he has himself said, received impressions of piety from his childhood. He is represented by himself and his sect, as one who passed much of the early part of his life in a state of spiritual affliction, perceiving in himself, and in the world at large, a want of that vital religion and communion with the divine nature, which he believed the holy men of ancient time to have possessed. Whatever he read in the Scripture, as opened to his understanding, he determined fully to practise, and was contented to bear the reproach, opposition, and suffering which it occasioned. It appears also, that he met with opposition from his relations, and, among the rest, from his father; but he declares that his heart was preserved in love to them amidst all he suffered from them. On his first hearing of the Quakers, he thought them a poor, weak, and contemptible people, although, while his judgment seemed to reject them, the conferences which he occasionally had with them, seemed to increase his secret attachment. At length, in 1658, he became fully satisfied respecting them, partly through the preaching of George Fox; and became himself an unshaken and constant asserter of their peculiar tenets, as a minister and author.

He married about 1648 Mary Springett, a widow, whose daughter, by her former husband, became the wife of William Penn. He resided on his own estate, called the Grange, at Chalfont, in Buckinghamshire. It does not appear that he travelled much as a minister; for of six imprisonments which he suffered, during the reign of Charles II. five were in his own county. The first was in 1661, when the nation was alarmed on account of the fifth monarchy men, which occasioned much disturbance to the meetings of Dissenters. He was taken from a meeting in his own family, and committed to Aylesbury gaol, where, although a weakly man, he was kept for seventeen weeks (great part of which was in winter) in a cold room without a fire-place, by which means he became unable to turn himself in bed. In 1664, he was again taken out of a meeting, and remained a second time prisoner in the same gaol for nearly the same time. In 1665, he was taken up at Amersham as he was attending the corpse of a friend to the burial-ground of the Quakers. The concourse of that people who walked after it in the street, seems to have been construed into a conventicle, for he was committed to Aylesbury gaol for one month only, on the Conventicle Act, in order to banishment. It is remarkable that the justice, because it was not then convenient to end him from Amersham to Aylesbury, dismissed him on his word to come iigain the next day but one, when he accordingly casne, and was committed: as did on the samft occasion several other Quakers. The same year he was arrested in his house by a soldier without a warrant, and carried before a deputy-lieutenant, by whom he was again sent to his old quarters at Aylesbury; and, though the pestilence was suspected to be in the gaol, and no crime was laid to his charge, he was kept there till a person died of it. After about nine months’ confinement he was discharged; but when he had been at home about three weeks, a party of soldiers came and seized him in bed, carrying him again to prison at Aylesbury. The cold, damp, and unhealthiness of the room, again gave him a fit of illness, which lasted some months. At length he was brought by Habeas Corpus to the bar of the King’s-bench, and (with the wonder of the court that a man should be so long imprisoned for nothing) he was discharged in 1668. During one of these imprisonments his estate was seized, and his wife and family turned out of his house.

In 1670, he was imprisoned a sixth time. He was visiting some of Ins friends, confined at that time in Readinggaol; on which he was taken before a justice and confined there himself. Kllwood relates, that during this confinement, which lasted a year and nine months, he incurred a premunire, as did many of the Quakers. For being from time to time examined at the assizes, it was common to tender them the o;tli of allegiance, which they refusing, from their scruple to swear at all, they became criminals in the view of \[\e law when they went out of court, however innocent they might have been on their coming in. It seems probable, that the political principles of the father had some share in occasioning the sufferings of the son; v\ho, from his writings, appears to have been of a meek and quiet spirit. He died at Goodnestone-courr, Sussex, in 1679, being about sixty-three years of age. Ell wood says, that his disposition was courteous and affable his ordinary discourse cheerful and pleasant, neither morose nor light, but innocently sweet, and tempered wuh such a serious gravity, as rendered his conversation both delightful and profitable. His numerous writings were collected into one volume folio, and published 1681; afterwards reprinted in two volumes 4to, and next in 4 vols. 8vo. Some select pieces have also been reprinted, and lately, some of his letters, 1796, in octavo; many of them, are dated from Aylesbury. They breathe a spirit of genuine philanthropy, but, being deeply tinctured with mysticism, have been more sought for by such as are fond of that species of writing, than by other readers.

, afterwards sir William Penn, knt. admiral of England, and one of the commanders at the taking of Jamaica, was born at Bristol in 1621, of an ancient family. He was addicted from his youth to maritime affairs; and before he had reached his thirty-second year, went through the various promotions of captain; rear-admiral of Ireland; vice-admiral of Ireland; admiral to the Straits; vice-admiral of England; and general in the first Dutch war, and commander in chief under the duke of York, in the signal victory over the Dutch in 1665, on which occasion he was knighted. On his return he was elected into parliament for the town of Weymouth; in 1660, commissioner of the admiralty and navy, governor of the fort and town of Kinsale, vice-admiral of Murtster, and a member of that provincial council. He then took leave of the sea, but still continued his other employments till 1669; when, through bodily infirmities, he withdrew to Wanstead in Essex, and there died in 1670. Though he was thus engaged, both under the parliament and king, he took no part in the civil war, but adhered to the duifes of his profession. Besides the reputation of a great and patriot officer, he acquired credit for having improved the naval service in several important departments. He was the author of several little tracts on this subject, some of which are preserved in the British Museum. The monument erected to his memory by his wife in RadclifFe church, Bristol, contains a short account of his life and promotions. But in Thurloe’s State Papers there are minutes of his proceedings in America, not mentioned on his monument, which he delivered to Oliver Cromwell’s council in Sept. 1655. He arrived at Portsmouth in August, and thence wrote to Cromwell, who returned him no answer: and, upon his first appearing before the council, he was committed to the Tower, for leaving his command without leave, to the hazard of the army; but soon after discharged.

, the son of the preceding, was born in the parish of St. Catherine, near the Tower of London, Oct. 14, 1644. He was sent to school at Chigwell in Essex, which was near his father’s residence at Wanstead; and afterwards, in his twelfth year, to a private school on Tower-hill; and he had also the advantage of a domestic tutor. Penn relates, in a conference he had with some religious persons on the continent, that “the Lord,” as he expresses it, “first appeared to him about the twelfth year of his age; and that, between that and the fifteenth, the Lord visited him, and gave him divine impressions of himself.” Wood informs us, that during the time of Penn’s residence at this school at Chigwell, “being retired in a chamber alone, he was so suddenly surprized with an inward comfort, and (as he thought) an external glory in the room, that he has many times said how from that time he had the seal of divinity and immortality; that there was a God, and that the soul of man was capable of enjoying his divine communications.” It appears, that before this time, he had been impressed by the preaching of one Thomas Loe, a quaker, but no particulars of the circumstance are known; it is however incidentally mentioned, that it was by the same person that he was afterwards confirmed in his design of uniting himself with that sect.

In 1660, he was entered a gentleman-commoner at Christchurch, Oxford where, although he is said to have taken great delight, at the times of recreation, in manly sports, he, with some other students, withdrew from the national forms of worship, and held private meetings, where they both preached and prayed among themselves. This gave great offence to the heads of the college, and Penn, at the age of sixteen, was fined for nonconformity; but, having then a degree of that inflexibility, where he thought himself right, which he shewed on subsequent occasions, he not only persisted in his religious exercises, but in his zeal joined a party who tore in pieces the surplices of every student whom they met with one on: an outrage so flagrant, that he was expelled from the college.

On his return home his lot was not more easy. His father, observing his delight to be in the company of sober and religious people, such as in the gay and licentious reign of Charles II. was more likely to prevent, than to promote, his rising in the world, endeavoured by severity to divert him from his purpose. Penn, as he relates himself, was whipped, beaten, and finally turned out of doors, in 1662. The father, however, either relenting, or hoping to gain his point by other means, sent his son to Paris, in company with some persons of quality who were travelling that way. In France he continued some time, and returned so well skilled in the language, and in the embellishments of a polite behaviour, that he was joyfully received by his father. During his residence in Paris he was assaulted in the street one evening by a person with a drawn sword, on account of a supposed affront; but, among other accomplishments of a gay man, he had become so good a swordsman as to disarm his antagonist. In one of his writings he very rationally condemns this barbarous practice, reflecting how small a proportion the omission of a piece of respect bears to the loss of life; which in this case might have been consequent upon the rencounter.

After his return from France, he was admitted of Lincoln’s Inn, with the view of studying the law, and continued there till the memorable year 1665, when the plague raged in London. In 1666, his father committed to him the care of a considerable estate in Ireland, which occasioned him, for a time, to reside in that kingdom. At Cork he was informed, by one of the people called Quakers, that Thomas Loe, whose preaching had affected him so early in life, was shortly to be at a meeting in that city. To this meeting he went. It is said that Loe, who preached in the meeting, began his declaration with these words: “There is a faith that overcomes the world, and there is a faith that is overcome by the world.” The manner in which Loe enlarged upon this exordium is not known; but the effect was the conviction of young Penn, who afterwards constantly attended the meetings of the Quakers, notwithstanding all obstacles. The year after his arrival in Ireland he was, with many others, taken from a meeting at Cork, and carried before the mayor, by whom he was committed to prison; but was soon released, on application to the earl of Orrery. This was his first imprisonment, at which time he was about twenty-three years of age; and it tended to strengthen the ties of his union with a people whom he believed to suffer innocently. His father, understanding his attachment to the Quakers, remanded him home; and though there was yet no great alteration in his dress, yet his serious deportment evincing the religious state of his mind, confirmed the fears of his father, and gave occasion to a species of conflict between them not easily described. The father felt great affection for an accomplished and dutiful son, and ardently desired the promotion of his temporal interests, which he feared would be obstructed by the way of life he had embraced. The son was sensible of the duty he owed to his parent, and afflicted in believing that he could not obey him but at the risk of his eternal welfare. At length the father would have compounded with the son, and suffered him to retain the simplicity of his manners to all others, if he would consent to be uncovered before the king, the duke (afterwards James II.), and himself. Penn desired time to consider of this requisition; and having employed it in fasting and supplication, in order, as he conceived, to know the divine will, he humbly signified to his father that he could not comply with it. After this, the father being utterly disappointed in his expectations, could no longer endure the sight of his son, and a second time drove him from his family. In this seclusion he comforted himself with the promise of Christ, to those who leave house or parents for his sake. His support, outwardly, was the charity of his friends, and some supplies privately sent him by his mother; but, by degrees, his father, becoming convinced of his integrity by his perseverance, permitted him to return to the family; and, though he did not give him open countenance, he privately used his interest to get him released, when imprisoned for his attendance at the Quakers’ meetings.

In 1668, he first appeared both as a minister and an author among the Quakers. We shall not pretend to give the titles of all his numerous tracts. His first piece has this title, which is very characteristic of the man “Truth exalted, in a short but sure testimony against all those religions, faiths, and worships, that have been formed and followed in the darkness of apostacy; and for that glorious light which is now risen and shines forth in the life and doctrine of the despised Quakers, as the alone good old way of life and salvation; presented to princes, priests, and people, that they may repent, believe, and obey. By William Penn whom Divine love constrains, in an holy contempt, to trample on Egypt’s glory, not fearing the king’s wrath, having beheld the majesty of him who is invisible.” The same year, on occasion of a dispute with Thomas Vincent, a Presbyterian, Penn wrote his “Sandy foundation shaken which occasioned him to be imprisoned a second time in the Tower of London, where he remained about seven months; and from which he obtained his release also, by another book entitled” Innocency with her open face,“in which he vindicated himself from the charges which had been cast on him for the former treatise. In the Tower also he wrote his famous” No Cross no Crown,“or rather, probably, the first edition of it, of which the title was different. It may be esteemed his master-piece, and contains a strong picture of Christian morality. The complete title is,” No Cross, no Crown; a Discourse, shewing the nature and discipline of the holy Cross of Christ; and that the denying of Self, and daily bearing of Christ’s Cross, is the alone way to the Rest and Kingdom of God. To which are added, the living and dying testimonies of many persons of fame and learning, both of ancient and modern times, in favour of this treatise.“It has gone through several editions, and has been lately translated into French. After his release, he again visited Ireland, where his time was employed, not only in his father’s business, but in his own function as a minister among the Quakers, and in applications to the government for their relief from suffering; in which application he succeeded so well, as to obtain, in 1670, an order of council for their general release from prison. The same year he returned to London, and experienced that suffering from which his influence had rescued his friends in Ireland. The Conventicle-act came out this year, by which the meetings of Dissenters were forbidden under severe penalties. The Quakers, however, believing it their religious duty, continued to meet as usual; and when sometimes forcibly kept out of their meeting-houses, they assembled as near to them as they could in the street. At one of these open and public meetings in Gracechurchstreet, Penn preached, for which he was committed to Newgate, his third imprisonment; and at the next session at the Old Bailey, together with William Mead, was indicted for- 4 * being present at, and preaching to an unlawful, sed-tious, and riotous assembly.” He pleaded his own cause, made a long and vigorous defence, though menaced and ill treated by the recorder, and was finally acquitted by the jury, who first brought in a verdict of “Guilty of speaking in Gracechurch-street;” and when that was not admitted, a verdict of “Not guilty.” He was, nevertheless, detained in Newgate, and the jury fined. The trial was soon after published, under the title of “The People’s ancient and just liberties asserted, in the Trial of William Penn and William Mead, at the Sessions held at the Old Bailey in London, the st, 3d, 4th, and 5th of September, 1670, against the most arbitrary procedure of that Court/' This trial is inserted in his works, and at once affords a proof of his legal knowledge and firmness, and of the oppression of the times. The pretence for the detention of Penn in Newgate was for his fines, which were imposed on him for what was called contempt of court: but he was liberated by his father’s privately paying these fines. His paternal kindness now seems to have returned, and flowed abundantly; for he died this year, fully reconciled to his son, and left him in possession of a plentiful estate: it is said, about 1,500l. per annum. Penn, in his” No Cross, no Crown,“p. 473, edit. xiii. 1789), has collected some of his father’s dying expressions; among which we find this remarkable one, in the mouth of a man who had so much opposed the religious conduct of his son” Son William 1 let nothing in this world tempt you to wrong your conscience: 1 charge you, do nothing against your conscience. So will you keep peace at home, which will be a feast to you in a day of trouble."

Near this time he held a public dispute at Wycombe, in Buckinghamshire, with a Baptist teacher, concerning the universality of the divine light. He also wrote a letter to the vice-chancellor of Oxford, on account of the abuse which his friends suffered there from the junior scholars. And during his residence this winter at Penn, in Buckinghamshire, he published his “Seasonable Caveat against Popery,” though it was the religion of the queen and of the heir-apparent. This has been brought to prove the unreasonableness of the clamour that was afterwards raised against him, that he favoured Popery: an aspersion to which Burnet gave some ear, but which Tillotson retracted. Near the close of the year, he was led to his fourth imprisonment. A serjeant and soldiers waited at a meeting until he stood up and preached; then the serjeant arrested him, and he was led before the lieutenant of the Tower, by whom, on the act for restraining nonconformists from inhabiting in corporations, he was again committed, for six months, to Newgate. During his confinement, he wrote several treatises; and also addressed the parliament, which was then about to take measures for enforcing the Conventicle Act with greater severity. Shortly after the release of Penn from this imprisonment, he travelled, in the exercise of his ministry, in Holland and Germany. Few particulars of this journey are preserved; but it is alluded to in the account of a subsequent one which he published.

In 1672, he married Guliehna Maria Springett, whose father having been killed at the siege of Bamber, in the civil wars, and her mother having married Isaac Penington of Chaifont, Bucks, in his family (which was a place of general resort for Quakers in that county) Gulielma had her education, and probably became acquainted with Penn. After his marriage he resided at Rickmansworth, in Hertfordshire. The same year he wrote several controversial pieces; and, among the rest, one against Muggleton. In this employment, about this time, he seems to have spent much of his leisure. In 1674, he ventured to write to the king, complaining of the severity of some justices, and others, to the Quakers; and some time after he presented to the king, and to both houses of parliament, a book entitled “The continued Gry of the oppressed for Justice; giving an account of the cruel and unjust proceedings against the persons and estates of many of the people called Quakers.” In 1675 he held a public dispute near Rickmansworth, with the famous Richard Baxter.

It may not be amiss to mention, that the manner in which the ministers of the people called Quakers travel in the business of their ministry is simply this: Having a view of the country in which they believe themselves divinely required to minister, they proceed from place to place, according as their minds feel disposed, by the touches of the same influence which they conceived to have drawn them from their habitations. Their employment is visiting the meetings, and often the families of their friends and sometimes appointing move public meetings for the information of persons of other societies, whom also they visit, at their duty or inclination leads them. This seems to have been the case with Pcnn and his companions, whose principal business at HerwerJen was in visiting the princess and her family. She received them with great readiness, and they remained four days at her town, in which time they had many religious opportunities, both for worship and conference, with her and in her house, one of which was open to the inhabitants of the town. On leaving Herwerden, he took a circuit in Germany, by Cassel, Francfort, Chrisheim, Manheim, Mentz, Cologne (called by himself Cullen), Mulheim, Wesel, Cleve, and Nimeguen; and returned to Amsterdam in less than a month after he had loft it. After staying about three days, he again left it, and went by Horn, Worcum, Harlingen, Leenwarden, Lippenhus, Groningen, Embden, and Bremen, to his hospitable friend the princess Elizabeth at Herwerden; whence, after another stay of about four days, a second circuit brought him to Amsterdam; and from Holland he returned home, by Harwich and London, to his wife and family at Werminghurst, in Sussex. He concludes the narrative of his journey in thvse words: “I had that evening (viz. of his return) a sweet meeting among them, in which God’s blessed power made us truly glad together: and I can say, truly blessed are they who can cheerfully give up to serve the Lord. Great shall be the increase and growth of their treasure, which shall never end. To Him thai was, and is, and is to come; the eternal, holy, blessed, righteous, powerful, and faithful One; be glory, honour, and praise, dominion, and a kingdom, for ever and ever, Amen.” Marty remarkable circumstances occur in his account of the journey, particularly the religious sensibility and contrition of mind evinced by the princess, and by her friend and companion, Anna Maria, countess of Homes. But we must refer to Penn’s own account, which is in his works, and also separately extant. At the time of his return, and before his entering on this journey, his residence was at Werminghurst, in Sussex, an estate, probably, of his wife’s.

About the time of his return from the continent, his friends the Quakers, among other methods used at that time to harass them, were vexed by laws which had been made against Papists, and penalties of twenty pounds a month, or two-thirds of their estates (Stat. 23 and 29 Eliz.) Mr. Penn, on this occasion, presented (as it is said) a petition of the Quakers to each House of Parliament, and was twice allowed to speak on their behalf, in a committee, probably of the Commons, for a bill for the relief of the Quakers soon after passed that house; but, before it had passed the other house, it was set aside by a prorogation of parliament.

In 1681, king Charles, in consideration of the services of his father, the admiral, and of a debt due to him from the crown at his death, which that extravagant monarch had no other means of paying, granted to Penn a province in North America, lying on the West side of the Delaware, called the New Netherlands; but, on this occasion, denominated by the king, in respect to the grantee, Pennsylvania. Penn soon after published an account of the province, with the king’s patent, describing the country and its produce, and proposing easy terms of settlement to such as might be inclined to go thither. He also sent a letter to the native Indians, informing them of his desire to hold his possession, not only by the king’s grant, but with their consent and love, acknowledging the injustice which had been done them by Europeans, and assuring them of his peaceable intentions. He then drew up, in twenty-four articles, “The Fundamental Constitution of Pennsylvania;” and the following year he published the “Frame of Government of Pennsylvania.” This having all the attractions of a popular form, and promising unlimited freedom to all religious sects, and, what was most of all agreeable to them, an emancipation from the expences of an established religion, many single persons, and some families, went to the new province. They soon began to clear and improve their lands, and to build a city, which Penn, keeping in view the principle of brotherly love, which is the strength of civil society, named Philadelphia. Commissioners were also appointed to treat with the Indians; and, in: 1682, he visited his newly-acquired territory. At this time he passed about two years in the province, adjusting its interior concerns, and establishing a friendly correspondence with his neighbours; but found it, at the same time, necessary to vindicate himself, in a spirited letter, from the accusation of ambition and the desire of wealth. The following year, 1683, he gave a more full description of Pennsylvania, in “A Letter addressed to the Committee of the Free Society of Traders to that province, residing in London.” He mentions, that two general assemblies had been held, and with such concord and dispatch, that they sat but three weeks, and at least seventy laws were passed, without one dissent in any material point. He also informs the traders, that the assembly had presented him with an impost on certain goods imported and exported; which impost, after his acknowledgments of their affection, he had freely remitted. He also says, after mentioning the establishment of courts of justice, that to prevent law-suits, three peace-makers had been chosen by every county-court, in the nature of common arbitrators. Before he left the province, he addressed an epistle of caution to his friends of the same religious persuasion settled in it; reminding them of the conspicuous station in which they were then placed; being transplanted from oppression, not only to liberty, but to power; and beseeching them to improve the opportunity which God had now put into their hands. Having thus settled his infant colony, he returned to his wife and family in England in 1684. Not many months after the return of Penn from his colony, Charles II. died, and the respect which James II. bore to the late admiral, who had recommended his son to his care, together with that monarch’s personal acquaintance with Penn himself, procured for him a free access at court. He therefore made use of the opportunity, thus afforded him, of soliciting relief for his persecuted friends, the Quakers, fifteen hundred of whom remained prisoners at the decease of Charles II. All this was meritorious; but the rest of Penn’s conduct seems not quite consistent. The nation, at this time, was justly alarmed, as well knowing the king’s inclination to popery; but Penn’s biographers tell us, that he had no such fears. He had long been intimate with the king, and had given credit to the protestations which James had repeatedly made, of his intention to establish liberty of conscience. On his accession, therefore, Penn took lodgings at Kensington; and his ready and frequent reception at court, drew on him the suspicion of being himself a Papist. Burnet, as was hinted before, so far leaned to this opinion, as to mention it in his history, and to declare that Penn was intimate with Petre the Jesuit, and employed by James II. in Holland, in 1686. Burnet also adds the following description of Penn’s character: “He was a talking vain man, who had long been in the king’s favour. He had such an opinion of his own faculty of persuading, that he thought none could stand before it, though he was singular in that opinion; for he had a tedious luscious way, that was not apt to overcome a man’s reason, though it might tire his patience.” Burnet, therefore, was evidently no friend to Penn. But much of this tediousness and egotism may be proved from Penn’s works. Tiilotson had the same suspicions as Burnet; and having mentioned them publicly, Penn, by letter, inquired of him, if he had really spread the report of his being a Papist? In this letter Penn has these words, among others: “I abhor two principles in religion, and pity them that own them: obedience upon authority, without conviction; and, destroying them that differ from me for God’s sake.” Tiilotson, in reply, mentions the ground of his suspicion; namely, that he had heard of Penn’s corresponding with some persons at Rome, and particularly with Jesuits; but professes his particular esteem of Penn’s parts and temper, and says not a word of his intimacy with Petre, who was in England which, had it subsisted, as both were public men at court, Tiilotson must have known In reply, Penn. declared that he held no correspondence with any Jesuit, priest, or regular, in the world, of the Romish communion, and even that he knew not one any where; declaring himself to be a Christian whose creed was the Scripture. In conclusion, Tiilotson declared himself fully satisfied, and, as in that case he had promised, he heartily begs pardon of Penn. The correspondence may be seen at length in Penn’s Works*. In this year, 1686, he published “A Persuasive to Moderation to Dissenting Christians, &c. humbly submitted to the king and his great council;” soon

ency in other matters. That Penn was artifice, there cannot be found an innot a papist is admitted; but he re- stance more striking than Penn’s injoiced in that toleration of king James terview with the president and fellows

II. the object of which was the exten- of Magdalen college, as related in

been that he was the dupe, either of the been the boast of him and his secy king, or of his own vanity and interest. after which came out the king’s proclamation for a general pardon; which was followed, the next year, by his suspension of the penal laws. Penn presented an address of the Quakers on this occasion. He also wrote a book ort occasion of the objections raised against the repeal of penal laws and test; and, the clamour against him continuing, he was urged to vindicate himself from it, by one of his friends, Mr. Popple, secretary to the Plantation -office, which he did in a long reply, dated 1688. But he had now to cope with more powerful opponents than rumour. The revolution took place, and an intimate of James was of course a suspected person. As he was walking in Whitehail, he was summoned before the council then sitting; and, though nothing was proved against him, he was bound to appear the first day of the following term; but, being continued to the next on the same bail, he was then discharged in open court: nothing being laid to his charge. In the beginning of 1690, he was again brought before the council, and accused of corresponding with James. They required bail of him as before; but he appealed to the king himself, who, after a long conference, inclined to acquit him; nevertheless, at the instance of some of the council, he was a second time held a while to bail, but at length discharged. Soon after this, in the same year, he was charged with adhering to the enemies of the kingdom, but proof failing, he was again cleared by the court of King’s-bench. Being now, as he thought, at liberty, he prepared to go again to Pennsylvania, and published proposals for another settlement there; but his voyage was prevented by another accusation, supported by the oath of one William Fuller (a man whom the parliament afterwards declared to be a cheat and impostor); upon which a warrant was granted, for arresting him, and he narrowly escaped it, at his return from the burial of George Fox. Hitherto he had successfully defended himself; but now, not choosing to expose his character to the oaths of a profligate man, he withdrew from public notice, till the latter part of 1693; when, through the mediation of his friends at court, he was once more admitted to plead his own cause before the king and council; and he so evinced his innocence, that he uas a fourth time acquitted. He employed himself in his retirements in writing. The most generally known production of his seclusion, bears the title of '“Fruits of Solitude, in Reflections and Maxims relating to the conduct of human life;” and another not less valued by his sect is his “Key, &c. to discern the difference between the religion professed by the people called Quakers, and the perversions, &c. of their adversaries, c.” which has gone through twelve editions at least. Not long after his restoration to society, he lost his wife, which affected him so much, that he said all his other troubles were nothing in comparison of this; and he published a short account of her character, dyr?g expressions, and pious end. The following year, he appeared as the eulogist of Geor.ge Fox, in a long preface to Fox’s Journal, then published. The preface, giving a summary account of the people whom Fox had been so much the means of uniting, has been several times printed separately, under the title of “A brief Account of the rise and progress of the people called Quakers.” It has passed through many editions in English, two in French, and has been translated into German by A. F. Wenderborn. The same year he travelled as a minister in some of the western counties; and in the next, we find him the public advocate of the Quakers to parliament, before whom a bill was then depending /for their ease in the case of oaths. In the early part of 1696, he married a second Wife, and soon after lost his eldest son, Springett Penn, who appears, from the character given to him by his father, to have been a hopeful and pious young man, just coming of age. The same year he added one more to his short tracts descriptive of Quakerism, under the title of “Primitive Christianity revived,” &c. and now began his paper cpntroversy with the noted George Keith, who from a champion of Quakerism, and the intimate of Barclay, had become one of its violent opponents. Keith’s severest tract accuses Penn and his brethren of deism. In 1697, a bill depending in parliament against blasphemy, he presented to the House of Peers, “A Caution requisite in the consideration of that Bill” wherein he advised that the term might be so defined, as to prevent malicious prosecutions under that pretence. But the bill was dropped. In 1698, he travelled as a preacher in Ireland, and the following winter resided at Bristol. In 1699, he again sailed for his province, with his wife and family, intending to make it his future residence; but, during his absence, an attempt was made to undermine proprietary governments, under colour of advancing the king’s prerogative. A bill for the purpose was brought into parliament, but the measure was postponed until his return, at the intercession of* his frienrls; who also gave him early information of the hostile preparations, and he arrived in England the latter part of 1701. After his arrival, the measure was laid aside, and Penn once more became welcome at court, by the death of king William, and the consequent acce>sion of queen Anne. On this occasion, he resided once more at Kensington, and afterwards at Knightsbridge, till, in 1706, he removed to a convenient house about a mile from Brentford. Next year he was involved in a law-suit with the executors of a person who had been his steward; and, though many thought him aggrieved, his cause was attended with such circumstances, as prevented his obtaining relief, and he was driven to change his abode to the rules of the Fleet, until the business was accommodated; which did not happen until the ensuing year. It was probably at this time, that he raised 6,600l. by the mortgage of his province.

After a lite of almost constant activity and employment, he found, at the age of sixty -five, that the infirmities of age began to visit him, and to lessen his abilities for travelling with his wonted alacrity; yet, in the year 1709, he visited the west of England, and some counties nearer his residence in the metropolis. But at length, in 17 1O, finding the air near the city not to agree with his declining constitution, he took a handsome seat at Rushcomb, near Twyford, in Berkshire, at which he continued to reside to the time of his decease. In 1712, he had, at distant times, three fits, thought to be of the apoplectic kind. The last of these impaired his understanding and memory, so much as to render him unfit for public action afterwards. His friend, Thomas Story, an eminent Quaker, who had been the first recorder of the corporation of Philadelphia, made him annual visits after this time, to his death. In 1713 and 1714, he found him cheerful, and able to relate past transactions, but deficient in utterance, and recollection of the names of absent persons. In 1715, his memory seemed further decayed; but both in this, and the former year, Story relates, that he continued to utter in the Quakers’ meeting at Heading, short, but sound and sensible expressions. This year he also tried, but without benefit, the effect of the waters at Bath. In 1716, he seemed glad to see his friend, and at parting with him and another, he said, “My love is with you. The Lord preserve you, and remember me in the everlasting covenant.” In 1717, he scarce knew his old acquaintance, or coud wajk without leading. His decease was on the 30th of July, 1718, and his interment the 5th of the next moch, at Jordan, near Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire. Without attempting to draw up a regular character of William Pdin, it must be evident from his works, that he was a man of abilities; and, from his conduct through life, that hewas a man of the purest conscience. This, without acceling to his opinions in religion, we are perfectly willing to How and to declare.

, an eminent traveller, naturalist, and antiquary, was born June 14, 1726, at Downing, in Flintshire, the seat of his family for several generations. He was the son of David Pennant, and his mother was the daughter of Richard Mytton of Halston. He was educated first at Wrexham, then at Mr. Croft’s school at Fulham, and last at Queen’s and Oriel colleges, Oxford, where, however, he took no degree, but was complimented with that of LL.D. in the year 1771, long after he had left the university.

A present of the ornithology of Francis Willoughby, made to him at the age of twelve, gave him a taste for that study, and a love for natural history in general, which he afterwards pursued with constitutional ardour, and great reputation; to such small matters do men of talents sometimes owe their prevailing bias. In 1746-7, he made a tour into Cornwall, where he contracted a strong passion for minerals and fossils. The first production of his which appeared in print, though unknown to himself, was an abstract of a letter which he wrote to his uncle, John Myuon, esq. on an earthquake which was felt at Downing, Apr 2, 1750. This appeared in the Philosophical Transacons. In 1754, he was elected a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, an honour which he resigned in 1760. Acordng to his own account, his foresight at this time was small. “I had,” says he, “married a most amiable woman my cicumstances were very narrow, my worthy father being alve, and I vainly thought my happiness would have beeo pemanent, and that I never should have been called again froi my retirement to amuse myself in town, or to be of useto the society.”

Previous to this resignation, however, in 1754, he visited Irelnd but such was the conviviality of the country, that his purnal proved as meagre as his entertainment was plemtul, “so it never was a dish fit to be offered to the publtk.” In 1756, he published in the “Philosophical Transations,” a paper on several coralloid bodies he had colleced at Coal brook- dale, in Shropshire. In 1757, at the insance of the celebrated Linnæus, he was elected of the Real Society at Upsal, which he calls the first and greatest of his literary honours. He kept up a correspondence with Linna3us, till age and infirmities obliged the!atte to desist.

In 1761, he began his “British Zoology,” which, when corroletec, consisted of 132 plates on imperial paper, all engraved by Mazel. Edwards, the celebrated ornithologit, conceived at first a little jealousy on this attempt, but t very soon subsided, and they contracted a great intimcy, which ended only with the death of -Mr. Edwards. He Jevoted the profits of the “British Zoology” to the Welsh charity school, in Gray’s inn-lane, London, and suported the far greater part of the expence; but he lost coniderably by it, and the school did not gain so much as it right if the work had been printed in a quarto, instead of darge folio size. But he confesses he was at that time inexperienced in these affairs.

In 1765, he made a short tour to the continent, where he enjoyed the company of the celebrated Buffon, who pubicly acknowledged his favourable sentiments of Mr. Tenant’s studies in the fifteenth volume of his “Natural Hislry.” They had afterwards a dispute on branches of thei respective studies, but, adds our author, “our blows werdight, and I hope that neither of us felt any material inju” At Ferney he visited Voltaire, who happened to be in good humour, and was very entertaining; but in his attempt to speak English, satisfied the visitors that he was master of the oaths and curses which disgrace that language. During this tour, Mr. Pennant visited also baron Haller, the two Gesners, the poets, and Dr. Trew, a venerable patron of natural history, who resided at Nuremberg. At the Hague, he met with Dr. Pallas, and this meeting gave rise to his “Synopsis of Quadrupeds,” and the second edition, under the name of the “History of Quadrupeds,” a, work received by the naturalists of different parts of Europe in a manner uncommonly favourable. Mr. Pennant had proposed this plan to Pallas, but owing to the latter being promoted at the court of Petersburgh, it ultimately devolved on himself. In 1767, after his return, he was elected fellow of the Royal Society. In 1768, his British Zoology was published in two volumes, 8vo, and the bookseller gave Mr. Pennant lOOl. for permission to do so, which he immediately vested in the Welsh charity-school.

In 1769, he added a third volume, in octavo, on the reptiles and fishes of Great Britain. In the fifty-eighth volume of the Philosophical Transactions, was published his account of a new species of Pinguin, brought by captain Macbride, from the Falklantl islands. In the same year, in conjunction with sir Joseph Banks, and Mr. Loten, who had been a governor in one of the Dutch islands in the Indian ocean, he published twelve plates of Indian Zoology, but that work was afterwards discontinued. In the spring of this year, he acquired one whom he calls a treasure, Moses Griffith, to whom the public are indebted for numberless scenes and antiquities, and who accompanied Mr. Pennant in all his journeys except that of the present year, which was his first tour into Scotland. “I had,” says he, “the hardiness to venture on a journey to the remotest part of North Britain, a country almost as little known to its southern brethren as Kamtschatka. I brought home a favourable account of the land. Whether it will thank me or no I cannot say, but from the report I have made, and shewing that it might be visited with safety, it has ever since been inondZe with southern visitants.” This year, also, he was elected fellow of the Royal Academy at Drontheim.

lu 1770, he published 103 additional plates to the British Zoology, with descriptive additions; and in 1771, he printed, at Chester, his “Synopsis of Quadrupeds,” in one vbiu n'e, 8vo. In May of the same year, he was honoi.-ed by the university of Oxford, with the degree of doctor of laws, conferred in full convocation. About the close of the year, he gave to the puhlic his “Tour in Scotland,” in one 8vo volume, ornamented, as all his works are, with plates. A candid account of that country was such a novelty, that the impression was instantly bought up, and in the next yoar another was printed, and as soon sold. In this tour, as in all the succeeding, he laboured earnestly to conciliate the affections of the two nations, so wickedly and studiously set at variance by evil-designing people; and he received several very flattering letters on the occasion. In the Philosophical Transactions of this year, he has an Account of two new species of tortoises.

On May 18, 1772, he began the longest of his journeys in our island. This was his “Second Tour in Scotland, and Voyage to the Hebrides.” “My success,” he observes on this occasion, “was equal to my hopes: I pointed out every thing I thought would be of service to the country: it was roused to look into its advantages; societies have been formed for the improvements of the fisheries, and for founding of towns in proper places: to all which, I sincerely wish the most happy event; vast sums will be flung away; but incidentally numbers will be benefited, and the passions of patriots tickled, I confess that my own vanity was greatly gratified by the compliments paid to me in every corporaced town. Edinburgh itself presented me with its freedom, and I returned rich in civil honours.”

In 1773, he published the 8vo edition of “Genera of Birds,” and performed a tour through the north of England, where his companion Mr. Griffith made a great many drawings of antiquities, &c. several of which were afterwards used by Mr. Grose, in his “Antiquities of England.” In this tour he contracted an acquaintance with Mr. Hutchinson, the historian of Durham, in a singular manner, which we shall give in his own words: “I was mounted on the famous stones in the ciiurch-yard of Penrith, to take a nearer view of them, and see whether the drawing I had procured, done by the rev. Dr. Tod, had the least foundation in truth.” Thus engaged, a person of good appearance, looking up at me, observed “what fine work Mr. Pennant had made with those stones.” I saw he had got into a horrible scrape; so, unwilling to make bad worse, I descended, laid hold of his button, and told him, “I am the man” After his confusion was over, I made a short defence, shook him by the hand, and we became from that moment fast friends." An account of part of this journey, Mr. Pennant left in manuscript, illustrated with drawings by Mr. Griffith. Mr. Pennant performed all his journeys on horseback, and to that he attributed his healthy old age. He considered the absolute resignation of one’s person to the luxury of a carriage, to forebode a very short interval between that, and the vehicle which is to convey us to our last stage.

In this year, 1781, he was elected an honorary member of the society of Antiquaries at Edinburgh. In the Philosophical Transactions of the same year, was published his history of the Turkey, which he made appear was a bird peculiar to America, and unknown before the discovery of that continent: also a paper on earthquakes felt in Flintshire. In 1782, he published his “Journey from Chester to London.” In 1783, he was elected a member of the Societas Physiographica, at Lund, in Sweden. In 1784, appeared his “Letter from a Welch Freeholder to his Representative.” The same year he published his “Arctic Zoology,” two volumes, quarto, containing the classes of quadrupeds and birds. This work gave occasion to his being honoured, in the year 1791, by being elected member of the American Philosophical Society at Philadelphia. In May 1784, he was elected member of the ftoyal Academy of Sciences at Stockholm; and in January 1785, an honorary member of the Edinburgh Society for promoting of natural knowledge; of the Society of Antiquaries at Perth; and the Agricultural Society at Qdiam, in Hampshire. In 1787, he published a Supplement to the Arctic Zoology. As in 1777, he had again married, he discontinued his tours until the spring 1787, when he visited the dockyards, and travelled by land from Dartford, following the coast to the Land’s-end.

Besides these greater works of our author, he at several times gave the public some trifles, which he collected some years ago, and printed for the amusement of his friends, thirty copies at a private press. The principal was his “History of the Patagonians” which, with some others, he gave to the public, along with his “Literary Life.”

His useful life at last terminated, Dec. 16, 1798, when he left a private character in all respects irreproachable, as a son, husband, and father. He had great public spirit, and rendered himself eminently useful in his county. In his political principles he was a whig of the old school. His fortune, as well as time, was liberally devoted to learned pursuits. He married first, in 1759, the sister of the late Thomas Falconer, esq, of Chester, and of Dr. Falconer of Bath, by whom he had a son, David, and a daughter; and secondly, in 1777, to miss Mostyn, sister to the late sic Roger Mostyn, who survives him.

Few men have so unceasingly devoted themselves to the promotion of useful knowledge, or published so many volumes, especially on subjects of natural history. His works have been so generally read, and are in such high esteem with the public, that it would be unnecessary in this place to enter into their respective merits. It 'is seldom that works so expensive run through so many editions; but Mr. Pennant had the happy art of relieving the dullest subjects by enlivening and amusing digressions: and his tours and his account of London are distinguished by a fund of anecdote, an easy familiarity of style, and that pleasant turn for research which engages the reader’s attention because it agreeably refreshes his memory, and supplies him with information at a small expence of trouble. Dr. Johnson said of him, when some objections were made to his tours, that “he had greater variety of inquiry than almost any man; and has told us more than perhaps one in ten thousand could have done, in the time that he took.” In 1800, his Son published the third and fourth volumes of “The Outlines of the Globe,” the title which Mr. Pennant gave to his imaginary tours, and which were the continuation of his “View of Hindostan.” This work was accompanied by an elegant tribute to his memory by his affectionate Son, who also published, in the following year, Mr. Pennant’s last work, left by him nearly finished for the press, entitled “A Journey from London to the Isle of Wight,” 4to.

, a native of Florence, where he was born in 1488, was called II Fattore, or the Steward, from having been intrusted with the domestic concerns of Raphael, and soon became one of his principal assistants. He more than any other helped him. in the execution of the cartoons of the Arazzi; and in the Loggie of the Vatican painted the histories of Abraham and Isaac. After the death of his master he executed the fresco of the coronation in the stanza of Constantine. The upper part of the Assumption of the Virgin, a work of Raffaellesque grace, at Monte Lupi, in Perugia, is ascribed to him, though Vasari gives it to Perino del Vaga: the under part with the Apostles is painted by Julio. Of the works which he performed alone, no frescoes, and so few oil-pictures remain, that they may be considered as the principal rarities of galleries. Facility of conception, grace of execution, and a singular felicity in landscape, are mentioned as his characteristics. Penni wished much to unite himself with his coheir Julio, but being coldly received by him at Mantua, went to Naples, where his works and principles might have contributed much toward the melioration of style, had he not been intercepted by death in 1528, in his fortieth year. He left at Naples, with his copy of the Transfiguration, a scholar of considerable merit, Lionarde Afalatesta, or Grazia, of Pistoja. Uc had a brother Lucas, who having a close connection with Perino del Vul;;I, who had married his sister, worked with that master (see Perino) for some years at Genoa, Lucca, and other cities of Italy, with great credit. Afterwards he went to England, and was employed by king Henry VIII. for whom he painted several designs; and was also engaged by some of the merchants of London; but at last he almost entirely quitted the pencil, devoting all his time and application to engraving, as some say, but Mr. Fuseli maintains that he only furnished designs for engravers.

, an English poet, was the son of the rev. Mr. Pen rose, rector of Newbury in Berkshire, a man of high character and abilities, descended from an ancient Cornish family, who died in 1769. He was born in 1743, and being intended for the church, pursued his studies at Christ-church, Oxford, until the summer of 1762, when his eager turn for the naval and military profession overpowering his attachment to his real interest, he left his college, and embarked in the unfortunate expedition against Nova Colonia, in South America, under the command of captain Macnainara. The issue was fatal; the Clive, the largest vessel, was burnt, and although the Ambuscade escaped (on board of which Mr. Penrose, acting as lieutenant of marines, was wounded), yet the hardships which he afterwards sustained in a prize sloop, in which he was stationed, utterly ruined his constitution.

Returning to England, with ample testimonials of his gallantry and good behaviour, he finished at Hertford-college, Oxford, his course of studies; and having taken orders, accepted the curacy of Newbury, the income of which, by the voluntary subscriptions of the inhabitants, was considerable augmented. After he had continued in that station about nine years, it seemed as if the clouds of disappointment, which had hitherto overshadowed his prospects, and tinctured his poetical essays with gloom, were clearing away; for he was then presented by a friend, who knew his worth, and honoured his abilities, to the rectory of Beckington and Standerwick, in Somersetshire, worth near 5001. per annum. This came, however, too late; for the state of Mr. Penrose’s healtfi was now such as left little hope, except in the assistance of the waters of Bristol. Thither he went, and there he died in 1779, aged thirtysix. In 1768 he married miss Mary Slocock of Newbury, by whom he had one child, Thomas, who inherits his father’s genius, taste, and personal worth. He was educated at Winchester and New-college, Oxford, of which he is now B. C. Jl. Mr. Penrose was respected for his extensive erudition, admired for his eloquence, and equally beloved and esteemed for his social qualities. By the poor, towards whom he was liberal to his utmost ability, he was venerated in the highest degree. In oratory and composition his talents were great. His pencil was as ready as his pen, and on subjects of humour had uncommon merit. In 1781 a collection of his “Poems” was published by his friend and relation James Peter Andrews, esq. who prefixed the above account of Mr. Penrose. They are distinguished by 'exquisite feeling and taste. His thoughts are pathetic and natural, and he seems possessed of a great portion of the fire and feeling of Collins. Such poems as “The Carousal of Odin,” “Madness,” and “The Field of Battle,” are among the rare productions of modern genius. That these poems are so little known is unaccountable. Mr. Penrose published two occasional sermons of considerable merit.

, or Ap Henry, commonly known by his assumed name of Martin Mar-prelate, or Alar-priest, was born in 1559 in Wales, and studied first at Peterhouse, Cambridge, of which he was A. B. in 1584, and afterwards at Oxford, in which latter university he took the degree of master of arts, and was ordained a priest. Afterwards, meeting with some dissatisfaction, as it is said, and being very warm in his temper, he changed his religion, and became an Anabaptist, or rather a Brownist. He was henceforward a virulent enemy to the church of England, and the hierarchy of that communion, as appears sufficiently by his coarse libels, in which he has shewn his spleen to a great degree. At length, after he had concealed himself for some years, he was apprehended at Stepney, and tried at the King’s-Bench, before sir John Pophain, chief-justice, and the rest of the judges, where he was indicted and condemned for felony, for papers found in his pocket, purporting to be a petition to the queen; and was executed, according to Fuller, at St. Thomas Waterings, in 1593. It appears, that some violence was put upon the laws, even as they then stood, to form a capital accusation against him. For his libels be could not be accused, the legal time for such an accusation having elapsed before he was taken: the papers upon which he was convicted, contained only an implied denial of the queen’s absolute authority to make, enact, decree, and ordain laws; and implied, merely by avoiding to use those terms, according to the very words of the lordkeeper Puckering. His execution was therefore in a high degree unjust. His chief publications are, 1. “Martin Mar-prelate,” the tract that gave so much offence. 12. “Theses Martinianae,” 8vo. 3. “A view of publicke Wants and Disorders in the service of God, in a Petition to the high court of Parliament,” 1588, 8vo. 4. “An Exhortation to the Governors and People of Wales, to labour earnestly to have the preaching of the Gospel planted among them,” 1588, 8vo. 5. “Reformation no Enemy to her Majesty and the State,” 1590, 4to. 6. “Sir Simon Synod’s Hue and Cry for the Apprehension of young Martin Mar-priest, with Martin’s Echo,” 4to. Most of these, and some others, were full of low scurrility and petulant satire. Several tracts, equally scurrilous, were published against him; as, “Pappe with a Hatchet, or a Country Cuffe for the Idiot Martin to hold his Peace;” “X A Whip for an Ape, or Martin displaied;” and others of the same kind. In the composition of these pamphlets, he is said to have had the assistance of John Udall, John Field, and Job Throckmorton, who published their joint effusions at a private printing press. Penry was a man of some learning and zeal for religion, but in his notions of government, both of church and state, appears to have adopted more wild theories than ever his successors, when in power, attempted to carry into practice. His sentence, however, was unjust, and the enemies of the hierarchy have therefore found it no difficult matter to place John Penry at the head of their list of martyrs.

, one of the greatest theoretic musicians of modern times, was born at Berlin about 1667, and became so early a proficient on the harpsichord, that at the age of fourteen he was sent for to court, and appointed to teach the prince, father of the great Frederic king of Prussia, About 1700, he came over to England, and was retained as a performer at Drurylane, and it is supposed that he assisted in composing the operas which were performed there. In 1707 he had acquired English sufficient to adapt ]\iouea,ux’s translation of the Italian opera of “Thomyris” to airs of Scarlatti and Boiioncini, and to new-set the recitatives. In 1709 and 1710, several of his works were advertised in the first edition of the Tatlers, particularly a set of sonatas for a flute and bass, and his first book of cantatas. In 1713 he obtained, at the same time as Crofts, the degree of doctor of music at the university of Oxford. And soon after this, upon, the establishment of a choral chapel at Cannons, he was employed by the duke of Chandos as maestro di capella; in which capacity he composed anthems and morning and evening services, which are still preserved in the Academy of ancient music. In 1715 he composed the masque of “Venus and Adonis,” written by Cibber; and in 1716 “The Death of Dido,” by Booth, both for Drury-lane. These pieces, though not very successful, were more frequently performed that any of his original dramatic compositions. In 1723 he published an ode for St. Cecilia’s day, which he had set for the concert in York-buildings. In 1724 he accepted an offer from Dr. Berkeley to accompany him to the Bermudas, and to settle as professor of music in his intended college there; but, the ship in which they sailed being wrecked, he returned to London, and married Francesca Margarita de l'Epine. This person was a native of Tuscany, and a celebrated singer, who performed in some of the first of the Italian operas that were represented in England. She came hither with one reber, a German, and from this connection became distinguished by the invidious appellation of Greber’s Peg. She continued to sing on the stage till about 1718; when having, at a modest computation, acquired above ten thousand guineas, she retired from the theatre, and afterwards married Dr. Pepusch. She was remarkably tall, and remarkably swarthy; and, in general, so destitute of personal charms, that Pepusch seldom called her by any other name than Hecate, to which she is said to have answered very readily.

The change in Pepusch’s circumstances by Margarita’s fortune was no interruption to his studies: he loved music, and he pursued the knowledge of it with ardour. At the instance of Gay and Kich, he undertook to compose, or rather to correct, the music for “The Beggar’s Opera.” His reputation was now at a great height; and in 1737 he was chosen organist of the Charter-house, and retired, with his wife, to that venerable mansion. The wife died in 1740, before which he lost a son, his only child; so that he had no source of delight left, but the prosecution of his studies, and the teaching of a few favourite pupils, v\ho attended him at his apartments. Here he drew up that account of the ancient genera, which was read before the Royal Society, and is published in the “Philosophical Transactions” for Oct. Nov. and. Dec. 174&; and, soon after the publication of that account, he was chosen a fellow of the Royal Society.

He died the 20th of July, 1752, aged eighty-five; and was buried in the chapel of the Charter-house, where a tablet with an inscription is placed over him. ­As a practical musician, though so excellent a harmonist, he was possessed of so little invention, that few of his coinpositions were ever in general use and favour, except one of his twelve cantatas, “Alexis,” and his airs for two flutes or violins, consisting of simple easy themes or grounds with variations, each part echoing the other in common divisions for the improvement of the hand. Indeed, though only one cantata of the two books he published was ever much noticed, there is considerable harmonica! merit in them all; the recitatives are in general good, and the counterpoint perfectly correct and masterly. Among all the publications of Pepusch, the most useful to musical students was, perhaps, his correct edition of Corelli’s sonatas and concertos in score, published in 1732. He treated all other music in which there was fancy or invention with sovereign contempt. Nor is it true, as has been asserted, that “he readily acquiesced in Handel’s superior merit.” Handel despised the pedantry of Pepusch, and Pepusch, in return, constantly refused to join in the general chorus of Handel’s praise.

The sole ambition bf Pepus’ch, during the last years of his life, seems to have been the obtaining the reputation of a profound theorist, perfectly skilled in the music of the ancients; and attaching himself to the mathematician De Moivre and Geo. Lewis Scot, who helped him to calculate ratios, and to construe the Greek writers on music, he bewildered himself and some of his scholars with the Greek genera, scales, diagrams, geometrical, arithmetical, and harmonical proportions, surd quantities, apotomes, lemmas, and every thing concerning ancient harmonics, that was dark, unintelligible, and foreign to common and useful practice. But with all his pedantry and ideal admiration of the music of the ancients, he certainly had read more books on the theory of modern music, and examined more curious compositions, than any of the musicians of his time; and though totally devoid of fancy and invention, he was able to correct the productions of his contemporaries, and to assign reasons for whatever had been done by the greatest masters who preceded him. But when he is called the most learned musician of his time, it should be said, in the music of the sixteenth century. Indeed, he had at last such a partiality for musical mysteries, and a spirit so truly antiquarian, that he allowed no composition to be music but what was old and obscure. Yet, though he fettered the genius of his scholars by antiquated rules, he knew the mechanical laws of harmony so well, that in glancing his eye over a score, he could by a stroke of his pen smooth the wildest and most incoherent notes into melody, and make them submissive to harmony; instantly seeing the superfluous or deficient notes, and suggesting a bass from which there was no appeal. His “Treatise on Harmony” has lately been praised, as it deserves, in Mr. Shield’s valuable “Introduction to Harmony.”

His admirable library, the most curious and complete in scarce musical authors, theoretical and practical, was dispersed after his death. He bequeathed a considerable part of his best books and manuscripts to Kelner, an old German friend, who played the double-bass in the theatres and concerts of the time; some to Travers, and these and the rest were at last sold, dispersed, and embezzled, in a manner difficult to describe or understand.

, secretary to the admiralty in the reigns of Charles II. and James II. and an eminent benefactor to the literature of his country, was a descendant of the ancient family -of the Pepys’s of Cottenham in Cambridgeshire, and probably the son of liichard Pepys, who was lord chief justice in Ireland in 1654. He was born, according to Collier, in London; but Knight, in this particular a better authority, says he was born at Brampton in Huntingdonshire, and educated at St. Paul’s school. Thence he was removed to Magdalen-college, Cambridge. How long he remained here, we are not told, but it appears by the college-books, that on June 26, 1660, he was created M. A. by proxy, he being then on board of ship as secretary to the navy. He appears to have been related to general Montague, afterwards earl of Sandwich, who first introduced him into public business, and employed him first in various secret services for Charles II. and then as secretary in the expedition for bringing his majesty from Holland. His majesty being thus restored, Mr. Pepys was immediately appointed one of the principal officers of the navy, by the title of clerk of the acts. In this employment he continued until 1673; and during those great events, the plague, the fire of London, and the Dutch war, the care of the navy in a great measure rested on him alone.

In this last-mentioned year, when the king thought proper to take the direction of the admiralty into his own hands, he appointed Mr. Pepys secretary to that office, who introduced an order and method that has, it is said, formed a model to his successors. Important, however, as his services were, they could not screen him from the malevolence of party-spirit; and happening, in 16S4-, to be concerned in a contested election, this opportunity was taken by his opponent to accuse him of being a Papist, which the house of commons inquired into, but without finding any proof. This we learn from the journals of the house. But Collier informs us that he was confined in the Tower for some time, and then discharged, no accuser appearing against him. After his release, the king made an alteration in the affairs of the admiralty, by putting the whole power and execution of that office into commission; and the public was thus, for some years, deprived of Mr. Pepys’s services as secretary. He was not, however, unemployed for he was commanded by his majesty to ac<­company lord Dartmouth in his expedition against Tangier: and at the same time he had an opportunity of making excursions into Spain, as, at other times, he had already done into France, Flanders, Holland, Sweden, and Denmark. He also sailed frequently with the duke of York into Scotland, and along the coast of England.

In April 1684, on his return from Tangier, and on the re-assumption of the office of lord-high-admiral of England by Charles II. Mr. Pepys was again appointed secretary, and held that office during the whole of Charles’s and James’s reigns. During the last critical period, he restricted himself to the duties of his office, and never asked or accepted any grant of honour or profit, nor meddled with any aflair that was not within his province as secretary of the admiralty. In Charles’s time he procured that useful benefaction from his majesty, for placing ten of the mathematical scholars of Christ’s hospital, as apprentices to masters of ships.

On the accession of William and Mary, he resigned his office; and, in 1690, published his “Memoirs” relating to the state of the royal navy of England for the ten years preceding the revolution; a well-written and valuable work. He appears to have led a retired life after this, suffering very much from a constitution impaired by the stone, for which he had been cut in his twenty-eighth year. About two years before his death he went to the seat of an old naval friend, William Hewer, esq. at Clapham, in Surrey, where he died May 26, 1703, and was interred in the same vault with his lady, who died in 1669, in the church of St. Olave, Hart-street, this being the parish in which he lived during the whole of his employment in the Admiralty.

He appears to have had an extensive knowledge of naval affairs, and to have always conducted them with the greatest skill and success. Even after his retirement he was consulted as an oracle in all matters respecting this grand deience of the nation; and, while in office, was the patron and friend of every man of merit in the service. But he was far from being a mere man of business: his conversation and address had been greatly improved by travel, and he was qualified to shine in the literary as well as the political circles. He thoroughly understood and practised music was a judge of painting, sculpture, and architecture; and had more than a superficial knowledge in history and philosophy. His fame, indeed, was such, that in 1684 he was elected president of the Royal Society, and held that honourable office for two years. To Magdalen College, Cambridge, he left that invaluable collection of ms naval memoirs, of prints, and ancient English poetry, which has so often been consulted by poetical critics and commentators, and is indeed unrivalled in its kind. One of its most singular curiosities is; a collection of English ballads, in five large folio volumes, begun by Mr. Selden, and carried down to the year 1700. The “Reliques of ancient English Poetry,” published by Dr. Percy, are for the most part taken from this collection. His nephew, John Jackson, esq. of the Temple, was Mr. Pepys’s heir to his personal property. It ought not to be omitted, that among other instances of his regard for the advancement of knowledge, he gave sixty plates to Ray’s edition of Willoughby’s “Historia Piscium,” published in 1686.

, a French author, whose character was not less esteemed for its candour and modesty, than his writings for their neatness of style and exactness of research, is most known for his continuation of the “Lives of illustrious men of France,” begun by D'Auvigne, but carried on by him, from the thirteenth volume to the twenty-third. He also wrote notes and prefaces to several works. His edition of the works of Bossuet was the best, till they were published by the Benedictines of St. Maur; and he was author of an esteemed life of Jerome Bignon, in 12mo, 1757. He died in March 1767, at the age of sixty-seven .

, fifth baronet of the family, and first earl of Egmont, was born at Barton, in the county of York, July 12, 1683, and received his education at Magdalen college, Oxford. On quitting the university, in June 1701, he made the tour of England, and was admitted F. R. S. at the age of nineteen. Upon the death of king William, and the calling of a new parliament in Ireland, he went over with the duke of Ormorid, and though not of age, was elected for the county of Cork, and soon after appointed a privy-counsellor. In July 1705, he began the tour of Europe, which he finished in October 1707; and returning to Ireland in May 1708, was again, representative for the county of Cork. In 1713, he erected a lasting monument of his charity, in a free-school at Burton. On the accession of George I. he was advanced to the peerage of Ireland by the title of baron Perceval, in 1715, and viscount in 1722. In the parliament of 1722 and 1727, he was member for Harwich, in Essex, and in 1728 was chosen recorder of that borough. Observing, by the decay of a beneficial commerce, that multitudes incapable of finding employment at home, mightbe rendered serviceable to their country abroad, he and a few others applied to the crown for the grant of a district of land in America, since called Georgia, which they proposed to people with emigrants from England, or persecuted Protestants from other parts of Europe, by means of private contribution and parliamentary aid. The charter being granted, in June 1732, Lord Perceval was appointed first president; and the king having long experienced his fidelity to his person and government, created him earl of Egmont in. Nov. 1733. Worn out by a paralytic decay, he died May 1, 1748. His lordship married Catherine, daughter of sir Philip Parker a Morley, by whom he had seven children, who all died before him, except his eldest son and successor, of whom we shall take some notice.

The first earl of Egmont, according to Mr. Lodge, appears to have been a man of an exemplary character, both in public and private life, and a writer of considerable elegance and acuteness. He published, 1. “A Dialogue between a member of the church of England and a Protestant Dissenter, concerning a repeal of the Test Act,” 1732. 2. “The Question of the Precedency of the Peers of Ireland in England,” 1739. Part only of this book was written by the earl of Egmont; which was in consequence of a memorial presented by his lordship to his majesty Nov. 2, 1733, upon occasion of the solemnity of the marriage of the princess-royal with the prince of Orange. 3. “Remarks upon a scandalous piece, entitled A brief account of the causes that have retarded the progress of the colony of Georgia,” 1743. His lordship published several other tracts about that time, relating to the colony; and many letters and essays upon moral subjects, in a paper called “The Weekly Miscellany.” His Lordship also formed a collection of the “Lives and Characters of eminent men in England, from very ancient to very modern times.” Dr. Kippis appears to have had the use of this collection, when employed on the Biographia. It is in the possession of lord Arden. The earl of Egmont wrote a considerable part of a genealogical history of his own family, which was afterwards enlarged and methodized by Anderson, author of the Royal Genealogies; and by Mr. W r histon, of the Tally Court. This book, which was printed by the second carl of Egmont, is entitled “A genealogical History of the house of I very,” and is illustrated by a great number of portraits and plates. It was not intended for sale; but a few copies are got abroad, and sell at a very high price. Lord Orford, in the first edition of his “Royal and Noble Authors,” attributed “The great Importance of a religious Life,” to this nobleman, which, however, was soon discovered to be from the pen of Mr. Melmoth.

, second earl of Egmont, and son to the preceding, was born at Westminster, Feb. 24, 1711; and after a learned education at home, and the advantages of travelling, was chosen in 1731 (though then under age) a burgess for Harwich; and on Dec. 31, 174T, unanimously elected representative for the city of Westminster; as he was in 1747 for Weobly in Herefordshire. In March 1747, he was appointed one of the lords of the bedchamber to Frederick prince of Wales, in which station he continued till the death of that prince. In 1754, he was elected a member of parliament for the borough of Bridgwater, in the county of Somerset; and on January 9, 1755, was sworn one of the lords of his majesty’s most honourable privy-council. He was likewise appointed one of the privy-council upon the accession of his present majesty to the throne; and was again elected in April 1761, for the borough of II­chester, in the county of Somerset, but was next day rechosen for the borough of Bridgwater, for which place he made his election. On May 7, 1762, his lordship was called up to the house of peers in Great Britain, by the title of lord Lovel and Holland, baron Lovel and Holland, of Enmore, in the county of Somerset, two of those baronies which were forfeited by attainder of Francis viscount Lovel, in the 1st of Henry VII. On Nov. 27, 1762, the king was pleased to appoint, him one of the postmastersgeneral, in the room of the earl of Besborough; but this he resigned on Sept. 10, 1763, in consequence of being appointed first lord of the admiralty, which office he resigned also in Sept. 1766. His Lordship died at his house in Pall Mall, Dec. 4, 1770, and was buried at Charlton, in Kent.

Mr. Coxe characterises this nobleman as “a fluent and plausible debater, warm in his friendship, and violent in his enmity.” Lord Orford, after mentioning some of his foibles, among which was a superstitious veneration for the feudal system, says, that, with all these, he. had strong parts, great knowledge of the history of this country, and was a very able, though not an agreeable orator. His domestic virtues more than compensated for some singularities that were very innocent: and had he lived in the age whose manners he emulated, his spirit would have maintained the character of an ancient peer with as much dignity, as his knowledge would have effaced that of others of his order.

As a writer, he deserves most credit for a very able and celebrated pamphlet, long attributed to lord Bath, entitled “Faction detected by the evidence of facts containing an impartial view of Parties at home and affairs abroad.” Of this a fifth edition was published in 1743, 8vo. The following also are said to have been written by him: 1. “An Examination of the principles, and an inquiry into the conduct of the two brothers (the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Pelham),” 1749. 2. “A second series of facts and arguments’ 1 on the same subject, 1749. 3.” An occasional Letter from a gentleman in the country to his friend in town, concerning the Treaty negociated at Hanau in the year 1743,“174k 4.” Memorial soliciting a grant of the whole island of St. John, in the gulph of St. Lawrence. This was not published, but copies were given by the author to ministers and some members of both houses. Lord Orford says, that its object was to revive the feudal system in this island. 5. “A Proposal for selling part of the Forest Land and Chaces, and disposing of the produce towards the discharge of that part of the national debt due to the Bank of England; and for the establishment of a National Bank, &c.” 1763, 41O.

, second son to the preceding, by his second lady, was born in Audley Square, Nov. 1, 1762. His infancy was spent at Charlton, the seat of his family, in Kent, where he went through the first rudidiments of learning, and also contracted an early attachment for the youngest daughter of the late Sir Thorn; Spencer Wilson, hart, who afterwards became his wife From Charlton he removed to Harrow, where he successfully prepared himself for the university. At the pro] age he entered of Trinity College, Cambridge, where th< present bishop of Bristol, Dr. William-Lort Mansell, his tutor. There unwearied application and splendid abilities led him to the highest academical honours. In 1782 he obtained the degree of master of arts, and on the 16th of December of the following year was admitted of Lincoln’s Inn; where, after performing the necessary studies, he was called to the bar in Hilary Term 1786. He commenced his professional career in the Court of King’s Bench, and accompanied the Judges through the Midland circuit. His chief opponents were then Mr. (now Sir S.) Romilly, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. serjeant Vaughan; and, notwithstanding a degree of modesty, which at that period almost amounted to timidity, he displayed encouraging promises of forensic excellence, on some of the first trials on which he was retained, particularly that of George Thomas, of Brackiey, Northamptonshire, for forgery. In this case he was retained for the prosecution; and had the honour of contending with Mr. Law, since Lord Chief Justice Ellenborough. This trial excited much public attention; and the ability evinced by Mr. Perceval increased the number of his clients. His advancement was now both regular and rapid. In Hilary term 1796, he obtained a silk gown, and became the leading counsel on the Midland circuit, not only in point of rank, but also, in quantity of business. He was soon after appointed counsel to the Admiralty; and the university of Cambridge acknowledged its sense of his merits by nominating him one of its two counsel. About this time, he had attracted the notice of an attentive observer and acute judge of men and talents, the late Mr. Pitt, by a pamphlet which he had written, to prove “that an impeachment of the House of Commons did not abate by a dissolution of parliament.” This work became the foundation of his intimacy with the premier, and his subsequent connexion with the government, and caused a sudden alteration in his prospects. His object now was to obtain a seat in parliament, where he might support those measures for which the situation of the country seemed to call, and a most favourable opportunity presented itself. His first cousin, lord Compton, succeeded to the earldom of Northampton in April 1796, on the demise of his maternal uncle, and consequently vacated his seat for the borough of that name. Mr. Perceval immediately offered himself to represent the vacant borough, and was too well known, and too universally esteemed, to meet with any opposition. He had been previously appointed deputy recorder; and so highly did his constituents approve of his political conduct and private worth, that they returned him to serve in three parliaments.

Mr. Perceval now endeavoured to become thoroughly master of every branch of policy; and particularly dedicated much of his attention to the subject of finance; and some of his plans, in that important department, are deserving of high commendation. In Hilary vacation, in 1801, at the formation of the Addington administration, Mr. Perceval, then in his 39th year, was appointed solicitor-general, on the resignation of sir William Grant, who succeeded sir Pepper Arden, afterwards lord Alvanley, as master of the rolls. In Hilary vacation, 1802, he was promoted to the situation of attorney-general, become vacant by the elevation of sir Edward Law (now lord Ellenborough) to the seat of chief justice of the Court of King’s Bench.

Mr. Perceval, on receiving the appointment of solicitorgeneral, relinquished the Court of King’s Bench, and practised only in that of Chancery. In taking this step, he was influenced chiefly by the wish of having more time to dedicate to his political duties. But it is doubtful whether he succeeded in this view. In the King’s Bench, though he was occasionally engaged in conducting causes of great importance, his business had never been so great as wholly to occupy his time. Nor is this to be wondered at, when it is considered, that at that time he had to contend with, as competitors in that court, Mr. Erskine, Mr. Mingay, Mr. Law, Mr. Garrow, and Mr. Gihbs, all of them king’s counsel, much older than himself, and established in great practice before even Mr. Perceval was called to the bar. It is no disgrace to him, that he did not, before the age of forty, dispossess these gentlemen of their clients. But when he came into Chancery, he found competitors less powerful; and though his disadvantages, in entering a court in the practice of which he had never been regularly initiated, were great, he advanced rapidly in practice; and long before his abandonment of the bar, he had begun to be considered as the most powerful antagonist of sir Samuel Romilly, the Coryphirus of Equity Draftsmen.

Mr. Perceval retained his situation as attorney-general, when Mr. Pitt resumed the reins of government, and continued to distinguish himself as a ready and staunch supporter of the measures of that great man. He had the honour sometimes to call down upon himself all the eloquence of the opposition, and proved a most useful partisan of the administration. On Mr. Pitt’s death, a coalition took place between the Fox and Grenville parties, in which Mr. Perceval declined to share; and having resigned his’ office, appeared for the first time on the benches of the opposition, on which he continued until Lord Howick, in 1807, brought forward the Catholic petition, and a bill was proposed to remove the political disabilities of which the members of that sect complain. Mr. Perceval, then, alarmed for the safety of the Protestant Church, rose in its defence; and Catholic emancipation being a measure generally obnoxious, the dissolution of the administration followed. As Mr. Perceval, at this time, was considered the ablest man of his party, it might have been expected that he would have claimed one of the first places in the new ministry as his right. On the contrary, the chancellorship of the exchequer was several times rejected by him, whose only wish was to resume the situation of attorneygeneral. This, however, not being satisfactory to his majesty, Mr. Perceval was offered the chancellorship of the duchy of Lancaster for life, as a compensation for his professional loss, and a provision for his family, provided he should agree to fill the office to which the esteem and confidence of the monarch called him. Notwithstanding that the value of the chancellorship proposed did not much exceed 2000l. a year, nearly one thousand less than Mr. Perceval’s profession produced per annum, his sense of public duty induced him to comply: and when, after his nomination, parliament expressed their dissatisfaction at the nature of the grant, he allowed it to be cancelled, and repeated in the house the assurance of his readiness to serve his majesty even without the chancellorship of the duchy of JLan caster, for life.

The new administration was no sooner formed, in March 1807, than it became necessary to consolidate it by an appeal to the sense of the people. Parliament was in consequence dissolved; and in the new one, Mr. Perceval found an increase of strength, which enabled him to carry on that system of public measures begun by Mr. Pitt. To recapitulate these, and notice every occasion in which he stood prominent in debate, belongs to future history. It may suffice here to mention, that he had the voice of the country with him and that when a regency became agaiu necessary, and when the general expectation was that the regent would call to his councils those men who had formerly been honoured with his confidence, his royal highness preferred retaining Mr. Perceval and his colleagues in his service.

As a public speaker, Mr. Perceval rose much in reputation and excellence, after he became minister. As the leading man in the house of commons, it was necessary that he should be able to explain and defend all his measures; and this duty, arduous under all circumstances, was particularly so in his case, as there was scarcely any other member of administration, in that house, competent to the task of relieving or supporting him. He, in a short time, proved that he stood in need of no assistance: he made himself so completely acquainted with every topic that was likely to be regularly discussed, that he was never taken unawares or at a loss. In the statement of his measures he was remarkably methodical and perspicuous. By many persons he was deemed particularly to excel in his replies; in rebutting any severe remark that came unexpectedly upon him, and in turning the fact adduced, or the argument used, against his opponent. Had his life been spared, it is probable he would have risen to the highest degree of reputation for historical and constitutional knowledge, and political skill.