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

Enter either the ID of an entry, or one or more words to find. The first match in each paragraph is shown; click on the line of text to see the full paragraph.

Currently only Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary is indexed, terms are not stemmed, and diacritical marks are retained.

ms of Petrarch, by which Aldus corrected the edition of them published by him in 1501. That printer, who lay under various other literary obligations to Bembo, in his

While he resided at Rome, he had many opportunities of indulging his taste for antiquities, and he is ranked among the most scientific collectors of statues, medals, and other ancient and classical remains. Besides other literary curiosities in his museum, particular mention is made of two beautiful and finely ornamented manuscripts of Virgil and Terence, which were supposed to have survived the ravages of upwards of a thousand years; the other is an autograph of the Italian poems of Petrarch, by which Aldus corrected the edition of them published by him in 1501. That printer, who lay under various other literary obligations to Bembo, in his preface to the edition of Pindar, published in 1513, terms him “Decus eruditorum retatis nostrae, et magnae spes altera Roma3.

rg, April 1, 1745, and received the first instructions in his art from his father, John Christopher, who was painter to the court. He then went to Nuremberg, and studied

, a landscape painter, was born at Bamberg, April 1, 1745, and received the first instructions in his art from his father, John Christopher, who was painter to the court. He then went to Nuremberg, and studied the works of the best masters, some of whose styles, as in the trees of Waterloo, and the rocks of Berghem, Salvator Rosa, Meyer, &c. he imitated with considerable success. His favourite subjects were sea-views, tempests, fires, and sun-rising and setting, which were in much request in England. He died at Nuremberg, Nov. 26, 1796, without having been able to finish some pictures bespoke for England.

ibuted with singular skill; and his skies are usually clear, warm, and natural. His son John George, who died in 1723, was also an artist of some eminence, especially

, also a landscape painter, and probably an ancestor of the preceding, was born at Utrecht in 1630, and was one of the best scholars of Herman Sachtleven, or Zaftleven. For improvement he afterwards visited Rome, and sketched every beautiful scene that occurred to him as he travelled in the neighbourhood of Rome, and particularly about Tivoli, by wnich means he furnished himself with excellent materials for his future compositions. He then settled at Nuremberg, where his principal works were long to be seen, and where he died Nov. 10, 1708. His colouring is lively and natural, if not sometimes a little too green; but his figures, and the boats, barges, and other vessels, which he always introduces on the rivers, or stationed near the banks, are well designed, and touched with spirit. His trees, indeed, are somewhat stiff and formal; but in general his pictures have a pleasing effect, as the distances are conducted with judgment, and every part handled in a masterly manner. The lights and shadows of his landscapes are distributed with singular skill; and his skies are usually clear, warm, and natural. His son John George, who died in 1723, was also an artist of some eminence, especially for his battle-pieces.

some occasions, as in his “Observationes legales,” is said to have been in compliment to his father, who was a native or' that city.

, in Latin Marcus Mantua Benavidius, an eminent lawyer, the son of John Peter Benavidio, a physician, was born at Padua, in 1489. He excelled in the study of polite literature and the civil and canon law, which last he taught for sixty years at Padua, with distinguished approbation. During this honourable career, he was often solicited to leave his situation for higher preferment, particularly by the university of Bologna, the king of Portugal, the pope, and other sovereigns, but he preferred living in his own country, where he received and deserved so much respect. He was three times honoured by the title of chevalier, by the emperor Charles V. in 1545, by Ferdinand 1. in 1561, and by pope Pius IV. in 1564. He died March 28, 1582, in the ninety-third year of his age. His principal works are: 1. “Dialogus de concilio,” Venice, 1541, 4to, in which he prefers the decision of a council to that of the pope in matters of faith. 2. “Epitome illustriumjurisconsultorum,” Padua, 1553, 8vo, printed afterwards in Fichard’s Lives of Lawyers, Padua, 1565, and in Hoffman’s edition of Pancirollus, Leipsic, 1721, 4to. 3. “Illustrium jurisconsultorum imagines,” Rome, 1566, fol. and Venice, 1567, with twentyfour portraits. 4. “Observationes legales,” Venice, 1545, 8vo. 5. “Polymatbise Libri duodecim,” Venice, 1558. 6. “Collectanea super jus Csesareum,” Venice, 1584, fol. All these works were highly esteemed for learning, and are now of r;ire occurrence. His adding the name of Mantua to his own on some occasions, as in his “Observationes legales,” is said to have been in compliment to his father, who was a native or' that city.

at the sight of the Moors’ heads, and no less astonished at the account of the captain’s adventure, who with so small a force had been able to defeat such a number

, a brave English admiral, descended of an ancient Shropshire family, reduced in fortune by its adherence to Charles I. was born about the year 1650, at Coton-hill, Shrewsbury, an ancient house now occupied by Mr. Bishop, a maltster of that place. His father, colonel John Benbow, dying when he was very young, this son had no other provision than being bred to the sea, a profession which he eagerly adopted, and in which he was so successful, that before he was thirty he became master, and partly owner, of a ship called the Benbow frigate, employed in the Mediterranean trade, in which he would have probably acquired a good estate, if an accident had not brought him to serve in the British navy. In the year 1686, he was attacked in his, passage to Cadiz by a Sallee rover, against whom he defended himself, though very unequal in' the number of men, with the utmost bravery, and, although the Moors boarded him, they were quickly beat out of the ship again, with the loss of thirteen men, whose heads captain Benbow ordered to be cut off, and thrown into a tub of pork pickle. When he arrived at Cadiz, he went ashore, and ordered a negro servant to follow him, with the Moors heads in a sack. He had scarcely landed before the officers of the revenue inquired of his servant, what he had in his sack? The captain answered, “Salt provisions for his own use.” The officers insisted upon seeing them, which captain Benbow refused. The officers told him that the magistrates were sitting, and he might appeal to them, but that it was not in their power to act otherwise. The captain consented to the proposal, and the magistrates treated him with great civility, told him they were sorry to make a point of such a trifle, but that since he had refused to shew the contents of his sack to their officers, the nature of their employments obliged them to demand a sight of them; and that as they doubted not they were salt provisions, the shewing them could be of no great consequence. “I told you,” said the captain sternly, “they were salt provisions for my own use. Caesar, throw them down upon the table, and, gentlemen, if you like them, they are at your service.” The Spaniards were exceedingly struck at the sight of the Moors’ heads, and no less astonished at the account of the captain’s adventure, who with so small a force had been able to defeat such a number of barbarians. This anecdote, in our opinion, reflects but little credit on the feelings of our seaman, nor does it clearly appear why he should think this barbarous display necessary for his reputation. These magistrates, however, sent an account of the matter to the court of Madrid, and Charles II. then king of Spain, invited Benbow to court, where he was received with great respect, dismissed with a handsome present, and his Catholic majesty wrote a letter in his 'behalf to king James, who, upon the captain’s return, gave him a ship, which was his introduction to the royal navy. After the revolution he was constantly employed, and frequently at the request of the merchants, was appointed to cruize in the channel, where he ably protected our own trade, and annoyed and distressed that of the enemy. He was likewise generally made choice of for bombarding the French ports, in which he shewed the most intrepid courage, by going in person in his boat to encourage and protect the engineers, sharing in all their hardships. It is certain that several of those dreadful bombardments spoiled several ports, and created a terror on the French coast, notwithstanding all the precautions their government could take to keep up their spirits. This vigour and activity recommended Benbow so effectually to king William, that he was very early promoted to a flag, and intrusted with the care of blocking up Dunkirk; the privateers from thence proving extremely detrimental to our trade during all that war. In 1695, we find him thus employed with a few English and Dutch ships, when the famous Du Bart had the good luck to escape him, with nine sail of clean ships, with which he did a great deal of mischief, both to our trade and to that of the Dutch. Rearadmiral Benbow, however, followed him as well as he could; but the Dutch ships having, or pretending to have no orders, quitted him, which hindered from going to the Dogger-bank, as he intended, and obliged him to sail to Yarmouth roads; and here he received advice that Du Bart had fallen in with the Dutch fleet of seventy merchantmen, escorted by five frigates, and that he had taken all the latter, and thirty of the vessels under their convoy; which might probably have been prevented, if the rear-admiral could have persuaded the Dutch to have continued with him. As it was, he safely convoyed a great English fleet of merchantmen to Gottenburgh, and then returned to Yarmouth roads, and from thence to the Downs, for a supply of provisions. He afterwards resumed his design of seeking Du Bart; but his ships being much cleaner than the rear-admiral’s, he escaped him a second time, though once within sight of him. In 1697, he sailed the 10th of April, from Spithead, with seven third-rates and two fireships, and after some time returned to Portsmouth for provisions; after which he had the good fortune to convoy the Virginia and West-India fleets safe into port. He then repaired to Dunkirk, where he received from captain Bowman two orders or instructions from the lords of the admiralty; one to pursue M. Du Bart, and to destroy his ships if possible, at any place, except under the forts in Norway and Sweden; the other to obey the king’s commands, pursuant to an order from his majesty for that purpose. On the 30th of July, rear-admiral Vandergoes joined him with eleven Dutch ships, when he proposed that one of the squadrons should be so placed, as that Dunkirk might be south of them, and the other in or near Ostend road, that if Du Bart should attempt to pass, they might the better discover him: but the Dutch commander objected that his ships being foul, they were not in a condition to pursue him. Rear-admiral Benbow being disappointed in this project, immediately formed another; for, observing in the beginning of August that ten French frigates were hauled into the bason to clean, he judged their design was to put to sea by the next spring-tide; and therefore, as his ships were all foul, he wrote up to the board, to desire that four of the best sailers might be ordered to Sheerness to clean, and that the others might come to the Downs, not only to take in water, but also to heel and scrub, which he judged might be done before the next spring-tide gave the French an opportunity of getting over the bar. But this was not then thought advisable, though he afterwards received orders for it, when it was too late. By this unlucky accident, the French had an opportunity of getting ut with five clean ships; which, however, did not hinder the admiral from pursuing them as well as he was able, and some ships of his squadron had the good luck to take a Dunkirk privateer of ten guns and sixty men, which had done a great deal of mischief. This was one of the last actions of the war, and the rear-admiral soon after received orders to return home with the squadron under his command. It is very remarkable, that as the disappointments we met with in the course of this war occasioned very loud complaints against such as had the direction of our maritime affairs, and against several of our admirals, there was not one word said, in any of the warm and bitter pamphlets of those times, to the prejudice of Mr. Benbow. On the contrary, the highest praises were bestowed upon him in many of those pieces, and his vigilance and activity made him equally the favourite of the seamen and the merchants; the former giving him always the strongest marks of their affection, and the latter frequently returning him thanks for the signal services he did them, and for omitting no opportunity that offered of protecting their commerce, even in cases where he had no particular orders. With respect to political parties, he never seems to have had any attachments, which probably made him be respected by them all. On one occasion king William consulted him about a question agitated in those times, respectingthe expediency of preferring tars, as they were called, or gentlemen in the navy; and though Mr. Benbow considered himself, and was considered by all the world, as one of the former, yet he told the king it was safest to employ both, and that the danger lay in preferring gentlemen without merit, and tars beyond their capacities.

ity of the Spanish governor, he would scarcely permit him to take. This highly incensed the admiral, who sent his own lieutenant to the governor, with a message, importing

Rear-admiral Benbow sailed in the month of November 1698, and did not arrive in the West Indies till the Feb. following, where he found that most of our colonies were in a bad condition, many of them engaged in warm disputes with their governors, the forces that should have been kept up in them for their defence so reduced by sickness, desertion, and other accidents, that little or nothing was to be expected from them; but the admiral carried with him colonel Collingwood’s regiment, which he disposed of to the best advantage in the Leeward Islands. This part of his charge being executed, he began to think of performing the other part of his commission, and of looking into the state of the Spanish affairs, as it had been recommended to him by the king; and a proper occasion of doing this very speedily offered, for, being informed that the Spaniards at Carthagena had seized two of our ships, with an intent to employ them in an expedition they were then meditating against the Scots at Darien, he resolved to restore those ships to their right owners. With this view he stood over to the Spanish coast, and coming before Boccacbica castle, he sent his men ashore for wood and water, which, though he asked with great civility of the Spanish governor, he would scarcely permit him to take. This highly incensed the admiral, who sent his own lieutenant to the governor, with a message, importing that he not only wanted those necessaries, but that he came likewise for the English ships that lay in the harbour, and had been detained there for some time, which, if not sent to him immediately, he would come and take by force. The governor answered him in very respectful terms, that if he would leave his present station, in which he seemed to block up their port, the ships would be sent out to him. With this request the admiral complied, but finding the governor trifled with him, and that his men were in danger of falling into the country distemper, he sent him another message, that if in twenty-four hours the ships were not sent him, he would have an opportunity of seeing the regard an English officer had to his word. The Spaniards immediately sent out the ships, with which the admiral returned to Jamaica. There he received an account, that the Spaniards at PortoBello had seized several of our ships employed in the slavetrade, on the old pretence, that the settlement at Darien was a breach of peace. At the desire of the parties concerned, the admiral sailed thither also, and demanded these ships, but received a rude answer from the admiral of the Barlovento fleet, who happened to be then at Porto-Bello. Rear-admiral Benbow expostulated with him, insisting, that as the subjects of the crown of England had never injured those of his Catholic majesty, he ought not to make prize of their ships for injuries done by another nation. The Spaniards replied shrewdly, that since both crowns stood on the same head, it wa; no wonder that he took the subjects of the one crown for the other. After many altercations, however, and when the Spaniards saw the colony at Darien received no assistance from Jamaica, the ships were restored. On his return to Jamaica, towards the latter end of the year, he received a supply of provisions from England, and, soon after, orders to return home, which he did with six men of war, taking New England in his way, and arrived safe, bringing with him from the Plantations sufficient testimonies of his having discharged his duty, which secured him from all danger of censure; for, though the house of commons expressed very high resentment at some circumstances that attended the sending this fleet, the greatest compliments were paid to his courage, capacity, and integrity, by all parties; and the king, as a signal mark of his kind acceptance of his services, granted him an augmentation of arms, which consisted in adding to the three bent bows he already bore, as many arrows. His majesty also consulted him as much or more than any man of his rank, and yet without making the admiral himself vain, or exposing him in any degree to the dislike of the ministers. When the new war broke out, his majesty’s first care was to put his fleet into the best order possible, and to distribute the commands therein to officers that he could depend upon, and to this it was that Mr. Benbow owed his being promoted to the rank of vice-admiral of the blue. He was at that time cruising off Dunkirk, in order to prevent an invasion; but admiral Benbow having satisfied the ministry that there was no danger on this side, it was resolved to send immediately a strong squadron to the West Indies, consisting of two third-rates and eight fourths, under the command of au officer, whose courage and conduct might be relied on. Mr. Benbow was thought on by the ministry, as soon as the expedition was determined, but the king would not hear of it. He said that Benbow was in a manner just come home from thence, where he had met with nothing but difficulties, and therefore it was but fit some other officer should take his turn. One or two were named and consulted; but either their health or their affairs were in such disorder, that they mo^t earnestly desired to be excused. Upon which the king said merrily to some of his ministers, alluding to the dress and appearance of these gentlemen, “Well then, I find we must spare our Beans, and send honest Benbow” His Majesty accordingly sent for him upon this occasion, and asked him whether he was willing to go to the West Indies, assuring him, that if he was not, he would not take it at all amiss if he desired to be excused. Mr. Benbow answered bluntly, that he did not understand such compliments, that bethought he had no right to druse his station, and that if his majesty thought fit to send him to the East or West Indies, or any where else, he would cheerfully execute his orders as became him. To conceal, however, the design of this squadron, and its force, sir George Rooke, then admiral of the fleet, had orders to convoy it as far as the Isles of Scilly, and to send a strong squadron with it thence, to see it well into the sea, aH which he punctually performed. It is certain that king William formed great hopes of this expedition, knowing well that Mr. Benbow would execute, with the greatest spirit and punctuality, the instructions he had received, which were, to engage the Spanish governors, if possible, to disown ling Philip, or in case that could not be brought about, to make himself master of the galleons. In this design it is plain that the admiral would have succeeded, notwithstanding the smallness of his force; and it is no less certain, that the anxiety the vice-admiral was under about the execution oi his orders, was the principal reason for his maintaining so strict a discipline, which proved unluckily the occasion of his coming to an untimely end. The French, who had the same reasons that we had to be very attentive to what passed in the West Indies, prosecuted their designs with great wisdom and circumspection, sending a force much superior to ours, which, however, would have availed them little, if admiral Benbow’s officers hatl done their duty. Bis squadron, consisting of two third and eight fourth rates, arrived at Barbadoes on the 3d of November, 1701, from whence he sailed to the Leeward Islands, in order to examine the state of the French colonies and our own. He found the former in some confusion, and the latter in so good a situation, that he thought he ran no hazard in leaving them to go to Jamaica, where, when he arrived, his fleet was in so good a condition, the admiral, officers, and seamen being most of them used to the climate, that he had not occasion to send above ten men to the hospital, which was looked upon as a very extraordinary thing. There he received advice of two French squadrons being arrived in the West Indies, which alarmed the inhabitants of that island and of Barbadoes very much. After taking 'care, as far as his strength would permit, of both places, he formed a design of attacking Petit Guavas; but before he could execute it, he had intelligence that Monsieur du Casse was in the neighbourhood of Hispaniola, with a squadron of French ships, in order to settle the Assiento in favour of the French, and to destroy the English and Dutch trade for negroes. Upon this he detached rear-admiral Whetstone in pursuit of him, and on the 11 th of July, 1702, he sailed from Jamaica, in order to have joined the rear-admiral; but having intelligence that du Casse was expected at Leogane, on the north side of Hispaniola, he plied for that port, before which he arrived on the 27th. Not far from the town he perceived several ships at anchor, and one under sail, who sent out her boat to discover his strength, which coming too near was taken; from the crew of which they learned that there were six merchant ships in the port, and that the ship they belonged to was a man of war of fifty guns, which the admiral pressed so hard, that the captain seeing no probability of escaping, ran the ship on shore and blew her up. On the 28th the admiral came before the town, where he found a ship of about eighteen gnns hauled under the fortifications, which, however, did not hinder his burning her. The rest of the ships had sailed before day, in order to get into a better harbour, viz. Cui de Sac. But some of our ships between them and that port, took three of them, and sunk a fourth. The admiral, after alarming Petit Guavas, which he found it impossible to attack, sailed for Donna Maria Bay, where he continued till the 10th of August, when, having received advice that Monsieur du Casse was sailed for Carthagena, and from thence was to sail to Porto Bello, he resolved to follow him, and accordingly sailed that day for the Spanish coast of Santa Martha. On the 19th of August, in the afternoon, he discovered ten sail near that place, steering westward along the shore, under their topsails, four of them from sixty to seventy guns, one a great Dutch-built ship of about thirty or forty, another full of soldiers, three small vessels, and a sloop. The vice-admiral coming up with them, about four the engagement began. He had disposed his line of battle in the following manner: viz. th^ Defiance, Pendennis, Windsor, Breda, Greenwich, Ruby, and Falmouth. But two of these ships, the Defiance and Windsor, did not stand above two or three broadsides before they loofed out of gun-shot, so that the two ster.imost ships of the enemy lay on the admiral, and galled him very much; nor did the ships in the rear come up to his assistance with the diligence they ought to have done. The fight, however, lasted till dark, and though the firing then ceased, the vice-admiral kept them company all night. The next morning, at break of day, he was near the French ships, but none of his squadron except the Ruby was with him, the rest being three, four, or five miles a-stern. Notwithstanding this, the French did not fire a gun at the vice-admiral, though he was within their reach. At two in the afternoon the French drew into a line, though at the same time they made what sail they could without fighting. However, the vice-admiral and the Ruby kept them company all night, plying their chase-guns. Thus the viceadmiral continued pursuing, and at some times skirmishing with the enemy, for four days more, but was never duly seconded by several of the ships of his squadron. The 23d, about noon, the admiral took from them a small English ship, called the Anne Galley, which they had taken off Lisbon, and the Ruby being disabled, he ordered her to Port Royal. About eight at night the whole squadron was up with the vice-admiral, and the enemy not two miles off. There was now a prospect of doing something, and the vice-admiral made the best of his way after them, but his whole squadron, except the Falmouth, fell astern again. At two in the morning, the 24th, the vice-admiral came up with the enemy’s stern most ship, and fired his broadside, which was returned by the French ship very briskly, and about three the vice-admiral’s right leg was broken to pieces by a chain-shot. In this condition he was carried down to be dressed, and while the surgeon was at work, one of his lieutenants expressed great sorrow for the loss of his leg, upon which the admiral said to him, “I am sorry for it too, but I had rather have lost them both, than have seen this dishonour brought upon the English nation. But, do ye hear, if another shot should take me off, behave like brave men, and fight it out.” As soon as it was practicable, he caused himself to be carried up, and placed, with his cradle, upon the quarter-deck, and continued the fight till day. They then discovered the ruins of one of the enemy’s ships, that carried seventy guns, her main-yard down and shot to pieces, her fore top-sail yard shot away, her mizen-mast shot by the board, all her rigging gone, and her sides tore to pieces. The admiral, soon after, discovered the enemy standing towards him with a strong gale of wind. The Windsor, Pendennis, and Greenwich, ahead of the enemy, came to the leeward of the disabled ship, fired their broadsides, passed her, and stood to the southward. Then came the Defiance, fired part of her broadside, when the disabled ship returning about twenty guns, the Defiance put her helm a-weather, and run away right before the wind, lowered both her top-sails, and ran. in to the leeward of the Fahnouth, without any regard to the signal of battle. The enemy seeing the other two ships stand to the southward, expected they would have tacked and stood towards them, and therefore they brought their heads to the northward; but when they saw those ships did not tack, they immediately bore down upon the admiral, and ran between their disabled ship and him, and poured in all their shot, by which they brought down his main top-sail yard, and shattered his rigging very much, none of the other ships being near him or taking the least notice of his signals, though captain Fogg ordered two guns to be fired at the ship’s head, in order to put them in mind of their duty. The French, seeing things in this condition, brought to, and lay by their own disabled ship, remanned, and took her into tow. The Breda’s rigging being much shattered, she was forced to lie by till ten o'clock, and being then refitted, the admiral ordered the captain to pursue the enemy, then about three miles to the leeward, his line of battle signal out all the while; and captain Fogg, by the admiral’s orders, sent to the other captains, to order them to keep the line and behave like men. Upon this captain Kirkby came on board the admiral, and told him, “He had better desist, that the French were very strong, and that from what had passed he might guess he could make nothing of it.” The brave admiral Benbow, more surprised at this language than at all that had hitherto happened, said very calmly, that this was but one man’s opinion, and therefore made a signal for the rest of the captains to come on board, which they did in obedience to his orders; but when they came, they fell too easily into captain Kirkby’s sentiments, and, in conjunction with him, signed a paper, importing, that, as he had before told the admiral, there was nothing more to be done; though at this very time they had the fairest opportunity imaginable of taking or destroying the enemy’s whole squadron; for ours consisted then of one ship of seventy guns, one of sixty-four, one of sixty, and three of fifty, their yards, masts, and in general all their tackle, in as good condition as could be expected, the admiral’s own ship excep-ted, in which their loss was considerable; but in the rest they had eight only killed and wounded, nor were they in any want of ammunition necessary to continue the fight. The enemy, on the other hand, had but four ships of between sixty and seventy guns, one of which was entirely disabled and in low, and all the rest very roughly handled; so that even now, if these officers had done their duty, it is morally certain they might have taken them all. But vice-admiral Benbow, seeing himself absolutely without support (his own captain having signed the paper before mentioned) determined to give over the fight, and to return to Jamaica, though he could not help declaring openly, that it was against his own sentiments, in prejudice to the public service, and the greatest dishonour that had ever befallen the English navy. The French, glad of their escape, continued their course towards the Spanish coasts, and the English squadron soon arrived safe in Port-Royal harbour, where, as soon as the vice-admiral came on shore, he ordered the officers who had so scandalously misbehaved, to be brought out of their ships and confined, and immediately after directed a commission to rear-admiral Whetstone to hold a court-martial for their trial, which was accordingly done, and upon the fullest and clearest evidence that could be desired, some of the most guilty were condemned, and suffered death according to their deserts. Although now so far recovered from the fever induced by his broken leg, as to be able to attend the trials of the captains who deserted him, and thereby vindicate his own honour, and that of the nation, yet he still continued in si declining way, occasioned partly by the heat of the climate, but chiefly from that grief which this miscarriage occasioned, as appeared by his letters to his lady, in which he expressed much more concern for the condition in which he was like to leave the public affairs in the West Indies, than for his own. During all the time of his illness, he behaved with great calmness and presence of mind, having never flattered himself, from the time his leg was cut off, with any hopes of recovery? but shewed an earnest desire to be as useful as he could while he was yet living, giving the necessary directions for stationing the ships of his squadron, for protecting commerce, and incommoding the enemy. He continued thus doing his duty to the last moment of his life. His spirits did not fail him until very near his end, and he preserved his senses to the day he expired, Nov. 4, 1702. He left several sons and daughters; but his sons dying without issue, his two surviving daughters became coheiresses, and the eldest married Paul Calton, esq. of Milton near Abington in Berkshire, who contributed much of the admiral’s memoirs to the Biographia Britannica. One of his sons, John, was brought up to the sea, but in the year his father died was shipwrecked on the coast of Madagascar, where, after many dangerous adventures, he was reduced to live with, and in manner of the natives, for many years, and at last, when he least expected it, he was taken on board by a Dutch captain, out of respect to the memory of his father, and brought safe to England, when his relations thought him long since dead. He was a young gentleman naturally of a very brisk and lively temper, but by a long series of untoward events, his disposition was so far altered that he appeared very serious or melancholy, and did not much affect speaking, except amongst a few intimate friends. But the noise of his remaining so long, and in such a condition, upon the island of Madagascar, induced many to visit him; for though naturally taciturn, he was very communicative on that subject, although very few particulars relating to it can now be recovered. It was supposed by Dr. Campbell, jn his life of the admiral, that some information might have been derived from a large work which Mr. John Benbow composed on the history of Madagascar, but it appears from a letter in the Gent. Mag. vol. XXXIX. p. 172, that this was little more than a seaman’s journal, the loss of which may perhaps be supplied by Drury’s description of Madagascar, one of the fellow-sufferers with Mr. Benbow, of which work a new edition was published a few years ago, Mr. Benbow’s ms. was accidentally burnt by a fire which took place in the house, or lodgings, of his brother William, a clerk in the Navy office, who died in 1729. The whole family is now believed to be extinct, and a great part of the admiral’s fortune is said to remain in the bank of England, in the name of trustees, among the unclaimed dividends. One William Briscoe, a hatter, and a member of the corporation of Shrewsbury, who was living in 1748, was supposed to be his representative, but was unable to substantiate his pretensions.

and flatterers, and in, buying curiosities. He gave a handsome fortune with a niece named Philippa, who was married to Blount, of Maple-Durham in Oxfordshire, esq.;

, a poet of considerable note in his day, was son and heir of Andrew Bendlowes, esq. and born in 1613. At sixteen years of age he was admitted a fellow-commoner of St. John’s college in Cambridge, to which he was afterwards a benefactor; and as such his portrait is hung up in the master’s lodge. From Cambridge he travelled through several countries, and visited seven courts of princes, and returned home a most accomplished gentleman both in behaviour and conversation, but a little tinctured with the principles of popery. Being very imprudent in the management of his worldly concerns, he made a shift (though he was never married) to squander away his estate, which amounted to seven hundred or a thousand pounds a year, on poets, musicians, buffoons, and flatterers, and in, buying curiosities. He gave a handsome fortune with a niece named Philippa, who was married to Blount, of Maple-Durham in Oxfordshire, esq.; but being security for the debts of some persons, which he was not able to discharge, he was put into prison at Oxford, and upon his release spent the remainder of his life, which was eight years, in that city. He was esteemed in his younger days a great patron of the poets, especially Quarles, Davenant, Payne, Fisher, &c. who either dedicated books to him, or wrote epigrams and poems on him. His flatterers used to style him “Benevolus,” byway of anagram on his name, in return for his generosity towards them. About the latter end of his life, he was drawn off from his inclination to popery, and would often take occasion to dispute against the Papists and their opinions, and particularly disliked the favourers of Arminius and Socinus. This gentleman, reduced, through his own indiscretion, to great want, died at Oxford, Dec. 18, 1686, and was buried in the north aile of St. Mary’s church, the expences of his funeral being defrayed by a contribution of several scholars who respected him. His picture is in the Bodleian gallery.

hors are often strained and far-fetched, and he sometimes loses himself in mystic divinity. Granger, who thinks his Latin verses better than his English, quotes a passage

Among his poetical pieces Wood mentions the following, 1. “Sphinx Theologica, seu Musica Templi, ubi discordia concurs,” Camb. 1626, 8vo. 2. “Honorifica armorurii cessatio, sive pacis et fidei associatio,” Feb. 11, 1643, 8vo. 3. “Theophila, or Love-Sacrifice,” a divine poem, Lond. 1652, folio, with the author’s picture before it. Several parts of this poem were set to music by Mr. John Jenkyns, an eminent musician whom Mr. Bendlowes patronized; and a whole canto of it, consisting of above three hundred verses, was turned into elegant Latin verse, in the space of one day, by Mr. John Hall of Durham. 4. “A summary of Divine Wisdom,” London, 1657, 4to. 5. “A glance at the glories of Sacred Friendship,” London, 1657, printed on one side of a large sheet of paper. 6. “De Sacra Amicitia,” printed with the former in Latin verse and prose. 7. “Threnothriambeuticon, or Latin poems on king Charles II.'s Restoration,” London, 1660, printed on a side of a large sheet of paper. A few were printed on white satin, one copy of which, in a frame suitable to it, he gave to the public library at Oxford. 8. “Oxonii Encomium,” Oxon. 1672 r in four sheets folio, mostly in Latin verse. 9. “Oxonii Elogia,” Oxon. 1673, printed on one side of a large sheet of paper it consists of twelve stanzas, and is followed by I, “Oxonii Elegia” II. “Academicis Serenitas” III. “Academicis Temperantia” IV. “Studiosis Cautela,” and some other pieces. 10. “Magia Caelestis,” Oxon. 1673, a Latin poem, printed on one side of a large sheet of paper. The three last-mentioned pieces were composed at Oxford. 11. “Echo veridica joco-seria,” Oxon. 1673, printed on one side of a large sheet of paper, a Latin poem, chiefly against the pope, the Papists, Jesuits, &c. 12. “Truth’s touch-stone,” consisting of an hundred distichs, printed on one side of a long sheet of paper, and dedicated to his niece Mrs. Phiiippa Blount. 13. “Annotations for the better confirming the several truths in the said poem;” uncertain when printed. 14. Mr. Bendlowes wrote a “Mantissa” to Richard 'Fenn’s “Panegyricon Inaugurale,” entitled, “De celeberrima et florentiss. Trinobantiados Augustoe Civ. Praetori, reg. senatui populoque,” Lond. 1673, 4to; in the title of which piece he styles himself “Turmae Equestris in Com. Essex. Prsefectus.” These writings, according to Wood, acquired Mr. Bendlowes the name of a Divine Author, but we fear the value of that character is considerably suok; although we cannot agree with Pope, that “Bendlowes, propitious to blockheads, bows,” nor with his commentator Warburton, that “Bendlowes was famous for his own bad poetry, and for patronising bad poets.” In his “Theophila” there are many uncommon and excellent thoughts, but it must be allowed that his metaphors are often strained and far-fetched, and he sometimes loses himself in mystic divinity. Granger, who thinks his Latin verses better than his English, quotes a passage from his prayer in “Theophila,” which has been deservedly admired for piety and sense.

etired life, and shut himself up in a cavern, where nobody knew any thing of him except St. Romanus, who, we are told, used to descend to him by a rope, and supply him

, the founder of the order of the Benedictin monks, was a native of Norcia, formerly an episcopal see in Umbria, and was born about the year 480. He was sent to Rome when he was very young, and there received the first part of his education. At fourteen years of age he was removed from thence to Sublaco, about forty miles distant. Here he lived a most retired life, and shut himself up in a cavern, where nobody knew any thing of him except St. Romanus, who, we are told, used to descend to him by a rope, and supply him with provisions; but being afterwards discovered by the monks of a neighbouring monastery, they chose him for their abbot. Their manners, however, not agreeing with those of Benedict, he returned to his solitude, whither many persons followed him, and put themselves under iiis direction, and in a short time he was enabled to build twelve monasteries. About the year 528, he retired to Mount Cassino, where idolatry was still prevalent, a temple of Apollo being erected there. He instructed the people in the adjacent country, and having converted them, broke the image of Apollo, and built two chapels on the mountain. Here he founded also a monastery, and instituted the order of his name, which in time became so famous, and extended over all Europe. It was here too that he composed his “Regula Monachorum,” which Gregory the Great speaks of as the most sensible and best written piece of that kind ever published. Authors are not agreed as to the place where Benedict died; some say at Mount Cassino, others affirm it to have been at Rome, when he was sent thither by pope Boniface. Nor is the year ascertained, some asserting it to have been in 542 or 543, and others in 547, but the calendar fixes the day on Saturday, March 25. St. Gregory the Great has written his life in the second book of his Dialogues, where he has given a long detail of his pretended miracles. Du Pin says, that the “Regula Monachorum” is the only genuine work of St. Benedict. There have been several editions of these rules. Several other tracts are, however, ascribed to him, as particularly a letter to St. Maurus; a sermon upon the decease of St. Maurus a sermon upon the passion of St. Placidus and his companions and a discourse “De ordine monasterii.

t one the first entitled “Vita Thomae Cantuariensis” the other, “Miracula Thomae Marty ris.” Leland, who mentions only “the Life of Becket” as written by our author,

, abbot of Peterborough in the twelfth century, was educated at Oxford, became a monk in the monastery of Christ’s church, Canterbury, and some time after was chosen prior by the members of that society. Though he had been a great admirer of archbishop Becket, and wrote a life of that prelate, he was so much esteemed by Henry II. that by the influence of that prince he was elected abbot of Peterborough, in 1177. He assisted at the coronation of Richard I. 1189, and was advanced to be keeper of the great seal in 1191, but he did not long enjoy this high dignity, as he died on Michaelmas day, 1193. He composed a history of Henry II. and Richard I. from 1170 to 1192, which has been esteemed by many of our antiquaries, as containing one of the best accounts of the transactions of those times. A beautiful edition of this work was published at Oxford by Hearne, 1735, 2 vols. 8vo. With respect to his life of Becket, Bale and Pits speak of two pieces, which probably are but one the first entitled “Vita Thomae Cantuariensis” the other, “Miracula Thomae Marty ris.” Leland, who mentions only “the Life of Becket” as written by our author, gives it the character of an elegant performance. But Bale treats it as a mere heap of lies and forgeries, in order to palm Becket on the multitude for a first-rate saint, and intercessor with God. Nor is this author’s zeal confined to Benedict, but extends itself to the monks of those times in general, whom he represents as a set of debauchees and impostors, concealing their vices under a mask of piety, and cheating the people with the most diabolical illusions. Dr. Cave tells us, that the author of the “Quadrilogus” transcribed a great part of Benedict’s Life of Becket into the third and fourth books of his work. This “Quadrilogus, or De Vita et Processu S. Thomse Cantuariensis et Martyris super Libertate ecelesiastica” (Nicolson tells us), is collected out of four historians, who were contemporary and conversant with Becket, in his height of glory, and lowest depression; namely, Herbert de Hoscham, Johannes Carnotensis, William of Canterbury, and Alan of Teuksbury; who are brought in us so many several relaters of matters of fact, interchangeably. Here is no mention of our Benedict in this list; so that either the doctor is mistaken in his assertion, or the bishop is not exact in his account of the authors from whence the Quadrilogus was compiled.

collection of the most valuable books. Then he went to the court of Egfrid, king of Northumberland, who had succeeded Oswi. That prince, with whom he was highly in

, a famous abbot in the seventh century, was born of a noble family among the English Saxons, and flourished under Oswi and Egfrid kings of Northumberland. In the twenty-fifth year of his age, he abandoned all temporal views and possessions, to devote himself wholly to religion, and for this purpose travelled to Rome in the year 653, where he acquired a knowledge of ecclesiastical discipline, which, upon his return home, he laboured to establish in Britain. In the year 665, he took a second journey to Rome; and after some months stay in that city, he received the tonsure in. the monastery of Lerins, where he continued about two years in a strict observance of the monastic discipline. He was sent back by pope Vitalian, and upon his return, took upon himself the government of the monastery of Canterbury, to which he had been elected in his absence. Two years after, he resigned the abbey to Adrian, an abbot, and went a third time to Rome, and returned with a very large collection of the most valuable books. Then he went to the court of Egfrid, king of Northumberland, who had succeeded Oswi. That prince, with whom he was highly in favour, gave him a tract of land on the east side of the mouth of the river Were; where he built a large monastery, called, from its situation, Weremouth; in which, it is said, he placed three hundred Benedictine monks. The church of this convent was built of stone after the Roman architecture, and the windows glazed by artificers brought from France, in the year of Christ 674, and the fourth of king Egfrid; and both the monastery and the church were dedicated to St. Peter. In the year 678, Benedict took a fourth journey to Rome, and was kindly received by pope Agatho. From this expedition he returned loaded with books, relics of the apostles and martyrs, images, and pictures, when, with the pope’s consent, he brought over with him John, arch-chanter of St. Peter’s, and abbot of St. Martin’s, who introduced the Roman manner of singing mass. In the year 682 kingEgfrid gave him another piece of ground, on the banks of the Tyne, four miles from Newcastle where he built another monastery called Girwy or Jarrow, dedicated to St. Paul, and placed therein seventeen monks under an abbot named Ceolfrid. About the same time he appointed a Presbyter named Easterwinus to be a joint abbot with himself of the monastery of Weremouth soou after which, he took his fifth and last journey to Rome, and, as before, came back enriched with a farther supply of ecclesiastical books and pictures. He had not been long at home before he was seized with the palsy, which put an end to his life on the 12th of January, 690. His behaviour during his sickness appears to have been truly Christian and exemplary. He was buried in his own monastery of Weremouth. He wrote some pieces, but Leland ascribes to him only a treatise on the Agreement of the rule of the Monastic life. Bale and Pits give this book N the title of “Concordia Regularum,” and the last-mentioned author informs us, that the design of this book was to prove, that the rules of all the holy fathers tallied exactly with that of St. Benedict, founder of the Benedictines. He wrote likewise “Exhortationes ad Monachos;” “De suo Privilegio.” And “De celebratione Festorum totius anni.” Mr. Warton, in his History of Poetry, mentions Benedict Biscop as one of the most distinguished of the Saxon ecclesiastics. The library which he added to his monastery, was stored with Greek and Latin volumes. Bede has thought it worthy to be recorded, that Ceolfrid, his successor in the government of Weremouth abbey, augmented this collection with three volumes of Pandects, and a book of cosmography, wonderfully enriched with curious workmanship, and bought at Rome. The historian Bede, who wrote the lives of four of the abbots of Weremouth and Jarrow, was one of the monks in those convents, and pronounced a homily on the death of Benedict. His body was deposited in the monastery of Thorney, in Cambridgeshire.

when Boniface was taken and imprisoned in his own palace at Anagni, he was one of the two cardinals who remained with him, when all the others fled. On the death of

, was a native of Trevigi, belonging to the state of Venice, and the son of a shepherd, or, as some say, of a notary. His name was Nicholas Bocasini. For some time he earned a livelihood by teaching children at Venice, but becoming afterwards a Dominican, he applied himself diligently to his studies, and acquired such superiority among his order, that in 1298 he was appointed general; and, by Boniface VIII. created cardinal bishop of Sabina, from which he was soon after translated to that of Ostia. He discharged likewise several embassies with great reputation, and having returned from Hungary when Boniface was taken and imprisoned in his own palace at Anagni, he was one of the two cardinals who remained with him, when all the others fled. On the death of that pope, in 1303, our cardinal bishop was chosen to succeed him, and took the name of Benedict, the Christian name of his predecessor, in honour of him who had been the cause of his advancement from a low station. Among his first measures he granted absolution to the king of France, and annulled the decrees of Boniface against him, which restored peace to that country, and this he farther promoted by reinstating the Colonna family in all their honours and possessions. He made it his study to quiet the disturbances that his predecessor had raised, not only in France, but in most other kingdoms, and to regain by conciliatory measures those whom the haughty and imperious behaviour of his predecessor had alienated from the apostolic see; but his pontificate was short. He died the year following his election, July 6, 1304, not without suspicion of poison, administered, as some think, by the relations of Boniface? in revenge for his having received that pope’s enemies into favour, but others impute this crime to the Florentines, whose city he had laid under an interdict, when it was distracted by two barbarous factions, called the Neri and the Bianchi. The writers of Benedict’s time concur in reporting that he was a man exemplary in every respect, inclined to peace and conciliation, and one who had no desire to enrich his family. One trait of his character seems to support this last instance of forbearance. His mother approaching him in a very rich dress to congratulate him on his promotion, he affected to consider her as an impostor, and said: “My mother is not a princess, but a poor woman;” but next day, when she returned in her ordinary dress, he embraced her with affection, and treated her with every mark of respect. He wrote comments on the gospel of St. Matthew, the book of Job, and the Revelations, besides several sermons, and letters to the king of France and other princes, concerning the reformation of abuses that had crept into the church in their respective kingdoms; but of his works, the only one printed is a comment on the fifth chapter of Matthew, and some letters in Rainald, Wadding, and Cherubini.

which we may be certain were beneficial and wise, because they raised the indignation of the monks, who have on that account painted his character in, the blackest

Benedict was as much surprised as any of his brethren, and either out of humility, or because he was conscious he knew little of public affairs, candidly told them that they had elected an ass. His actions, however, did not justify this comparison. He was indeed a stranger to the arts of the court, but he was a learned divine, well versed in the civil and canon law, and a man of exemplary life and probity. His first act was that of liberality. The day after his election, he distributed among the cardinals 100,000 florins out of the treasure left by his predecessor; and a few days after gave 50,000 for repairing the churches of Rome. In nis first public sermon he preached on the beatific vision, and maintained that the just on their death saw God face to face, before the day of the general resurrection, contrary to the doctrine held by his predecessor; and he was so impressed with the necessity of establishing this doctrine, that he published in 1336 a constitution, as it was called, directly in opposition to the notion of purgatory in any shape. The whole of his political administration appears to have been of the pacific kind, and in providing for the interests of the church, he preferred men of merit to vacant benefices, and was an enemy to pluralities; and in some of the religious orders he introduced reformations which we may be certain were beneficial and wise, because they raised the indignation of the monks, who have on that account painted his character in, the blackest colours. His last effort for the peace of Europe was to reconcile the kings of France and England, then at war, but while employed on this, he died of a short illness, the consequence of suppressed evacuation, April 25, 1342. Like his predecessor, he avoided aggrandizing his family, as most other popes had done, and could scarcely be prevailed upon to admit his relatives into his presence, when they came to congratulate him on his promotion. He used to say “James Fournier had relations, but pope Benedict has none,” and contented himself with ordering the expences of their journey to be defrayed out of the apostolic chamber. The monks whom he had reformed, however, contrary to all contemporary evidence, have accused him of avarice, debauchery, and in particular, of an intrigue with the sister of the celebrated Petrarch. On the other hand, all the best historians havei extolled him as a man of sanctity and a pattern of every virtue. He wrote two volumes on the state of the soul before the general judgment; eleven questions upon the same subject sermons for the chief festivals of the year; all which are in ms. in the Vatican library. He wrote, likewise, several constitutions relating to the reformation of some religious orders, commentaries upon the psalms, various letters, and some poetical pieces.

wrote to Benedict, commanding him to meet him, The doctor on this consulted with the pope’s legate, who was then at Paris, and advised him to answer the king, that

, a famous doctor of the Sorbonne, and curate of St. Eustathius at Paris in the sixteenth century, was born at Sevenieres near Angers. He was a secret favourer of the protestant religion; and that his countrymen might be able to read the Bible in their own tongue, he published at Paris the French translation which had been made by the reformed ministers at Geneva. This translation was approved by several doctors of the Sorbonne before it went to the press; and king Charles IX. had granted a privilege for the printing of it, yet when published it was immediately condemned. In 1587 king Henry III. appointed Benedict to be reader and regius professor of divinity in the college of Navarre at Paris. He had been before that time confessor to the unhappy Mary queen of Scotland, during her stay in France, and attended her when she returned into Scotland. Some time before the death of Henry III. Benedict, or some of his friends with his assistance, published a book, entitled “Apologie Catholique,” to prove that the protestant religion, which Henry king -of Navarre professed, was not a sufficient reason to deprive him of his right of succeeding to the crown of France; first, because the Huguenots admitted the fundamental articles of the catholic faith, and that the ceremonies and practices which they exploded had been unknown to the primitive church. Secondly, because the council of Trent, in which they had been condemned, was neither general, nor lawful, nor acknowledged in France. After the murder of Henry III. a factious divine wrote an answer to that book, which obliged Benedict to publish a reply. When king Henry IV. was resolved to embrace the Roman Catholic religion, he wrote to Benedict, commanding him to meet him, The doctor on this consulted with the pope’s legate, who was then at Paris, and advised him to answer the king, that he could not go to him without the pope’s leave, which exasperated the people at Paris, because they understood by this advice, that he favoured the Spanish faction, and endeavoured only to protract the civil war. However, Benedict assisted some time after at the conference which was held at St. Dennis, and in which it was resolved, that the king, having given sufficient proofs of his fa^h and repentance, might be reconciled to the church, without waiting for the pope’s consent. Benedict also assisted at that assembly, in which king Henry abjured the reformed religion, and having embraced the Roman Catholic faith, was absolved by the archbishop of Bourges. The king promoted him afterwards, about 15^7, to the bishopric of Troyes in Champagne, but he could never obtain the pope’s bulls to be installed, and only enjoyed the temporalities till 1604, when he resigned it with the king’s leave to Renatus de Breslay, archdeacon of Angers, He died at Paris, March 7, 1608, and was buried near the great altar in his parish church of St. Eustathius. Dr. Victor Cayet made his funeral oration. Besides the books, which we have mentioned, he wrote three or four other pieces, the titles of which are mentioned by father le Long, but they are of little note, except perhaps his history of the coronation of king Henry III. “Le Sacre et Couronnement du roi Henry III. Pan 1575, par Rene Benoit, docteur en theologie,” Reims, 1575, 8vo, and inserted in Godefrey’s “Ceremonial de France,” Paris, 1619, 4to.

ral was attended by persons of all religious denominations, and by many hundred negroes. An officer, who had served in the American army during the late war, in returning

, an American philanthropist, in early life was put apprentice to a merchant; but finding commerce opened temptations to a worldly spirit, he left his master, and bound himself apprentice to a cooper. Finding this business too laborious for his constitution, he declined it, and devoted himself to school-keeping; in which useful employment he continued during the greatest part of his life. He was author of “A Caution to Great Britain and her Colonies, in a short representation of the calamitous state of the enslaved negroes in the British dominions,1767, 8vo; “Some historical account of Guinea, with an enquiry into the rise and progress of the Slave Trade, its nature, and lamentable effects,1772, 8vo, and some other tracts on the same subject. He possessed uncommon activity and industry in every thing he undertook. He declared he did every thing as if the words of his Saviour were perpetually sounding in his ears, “Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?” He used to say, “the highest act of charity in the world was to bear with the unreasonableness of mankind.” He generally wore plush clothes; and gave as a reason for it, that after he had worn them for two or three years, they made comfortable and decent garments for the poor. He once informed a young friend, that his memory began to fail him “but this,” said he, “gives me one great advantage over you; for you can find entertainment in reading a good book only once but I enjoy that pleasure as often as I read it; for it is always new to me.” Few men since the days of the apostles ever lived a more disinterested life; and yet upon his death-bed he said, he wished to live a little longer, that “he might bring down self.” The last time he ever walked across his room, was to take from his desk six dollars, which he gave to a poor widow whom he had long assisted to maintain. He died at Philadelphia in 1784. His funeral was attended by persons of all religious denominations, and by many hundred negroes. An officer, who had served in the American army during the late war, in returning from the funeral, pronounced an eulogium upon him. It consisted only of the following words: “I would rather,” said he, “be Anthony Benezet in that coffin, than George Washington with all his fame.

. He was, says the writer of the meagre account in the Diet. Hist, the first of the Lutheran divines who published a learned, profound, and complete criticism on the

, a learned German divine, principally known in this country for his excellent edition of the Greek Testament, was born June 24, 1687, at Winneden in the duchy of Wirtemberg. He was, says the writer of the meagre account in the Diet. Hist, the first of the Lutheran divines who published a learned, profound, and complete criticism on the New Testament, or rather an accurate edition. He became a critic from motives purely conscientious. The various and anxious doubts which he entertained, from the deviations exhibited in preceding editions, induced him to examine the sacred text with great care and attention, and the result of his labours was, 1. his “Novi Testarmenti Graeci recte cauteque adornandi prodromus,” Stutgard, 1725, 8vo. 2. “Notitia Nov. Test. Grrcc. recte cauteque adornati,” ibid. 1731, 8vo, and 3. his edition entitled “Novum Test. Grace, cum introdnctione in Crisin N. T. Apparatu Critico, et Epilogo,” ibid. 1734, 4to. He afterwards published, 4. “Gnomon Nov. Test, in quo ex nativa verborum vi simplicitas, profunditas, concinnitas sensuum ccelestium indicatur,” ibid. 1742, and 1759, and lastly in 1763, at Ulm, in which same year, a new edition of his “Apparatus Criticus” was published, with many additions, by Phil. D, Burkius, 4to. Bengal’s most formidable enemies were Ernesti and Wet stein, neither of whom treated him with the courtesy that becomes men of letters. His edition of the New Testament is unquestionably a lasting monument of the author’s profound learning and solid piety, and has often been reprinted to gratify the public demand. In 1745, Bengel published “Cyclus, sive de anno magno solis, luna?, stellarum consideratio, ad incrementum doctrinse propheticre atque astronomies accommodata,” Ulm, 8vo, and after his death, which took place in 1752, appeared his “Ordo temporifm, a principio per periodos ceconomise divinoe historicas atque propheticas, at finem usque ita deductus, ut tota series et quarumvis partium analogia sempiternae virtutis ac sapientiae cultoribus ex script. Vet. et Nov. Test, tanquam uno revera documento proponatur,” Stutgard, 1753. Bengel maintained the doctrine of the millenium, or second appearance of Christ upon earth to reign with his saints a thousand years. His “Introduction to his Exposition to the Apocalypse,” was translated and published by John Robertson, M. D. London, 1757.

t from thence the other names flowed. He was the son of Sesgnen, a man of wealth and power in Meath, who, in the war in 433, hospitably entertained St. Patrick in his

, archbishop of Armagh in Ireland, was the immediate successor of St. Patrick in that see, anno 455 though it must be confessed, that this is a point which lias afforded some controversy. Writers differ as to his name: some call him Stephen, some Beneneus, others Beona, and by an Irish termination of the word Benin, in Latin Benignus. It is probable that St. Patrick baptized him by the name of Stephen, and that he obtained the name of Benin from his sweet disposition, and his great affection to St. Patrick, the word bin, in the Irish language, signifying sweet; and that from thence the other names flowed. He was the son of Sesgnen, a man of wealth and power in Meath, who, in the war in 433, hospitably entertained St. Patrick in his journey from the port of Colp, where he landed, to the court of king Leogair at Tarah, and, with his whole family, embraced Christianity and received baptism. The youth grew so fond of his father’s guest, that he could not be separated from his company. St. Patrick took him away with him at his departure, and taught him his first rudiments of learning and religion: Benin profited greatly under such a master, and became afterwards a man eminent for piety and virtue, whom St. Patrick thought worthy to fill the see of Armagh, which he resigned to him in the year 455. Benin died in the year 468, on the ninth of November, having also resigned his see three years before his death. The writers of the dark ages, however different they are from one another in other particulars, yet in the main agree as to the succession of St. Benin in the government of the see of Armagh, but there is some discordance among them as to the place of his death and burial, which we shall not attempt to reconcile; some contending he died and was buried at Armagh, and others at Glastonbury. The following writings are ascribed to him 1 “A book partly in Latin, and partly in Irish, on the virtues and miracles of St. Patrick” to which Jocelin confesses he was indebted. 2. “An Irish Poem, written on the Conversion of the people of Dublin to the Christian Faith.” 3. “The Minister Book of reigns,” called by some Leabhar Bening, or Bening’s Book, and by others Leabhar na Geart, qu. d. the book of Genealogy, which is ascribed to him by Nicolson.

, a celebrated poet of Florence, who died in 1542, aged eighty-nine, was one of the first who, following

, a celebrated poet of Florence, who died in 1542, aged eighty-nine, was one of the first who, following Lorenzo de Medici and Politian, contributed essentially to the advancement of Italian poetry. The greater part of his poems turn upon divine love. His “Canzone dell' Amor celeste e divino” was in great esteem, as containing, what now is thought its chief defect, the sublime ideas of the philosophy of Plato, on love. This work was printed at Florence in 1519, in 8vo, with other poetical pieces of the same author. There had already been an edition of his works, at Florence, in folio, 1500, which is extremely scarce. Another performance of his is entitled, “Commento di Hieronimo Benivieni, cittadino Florentine, sopra a piu sue Canzone e Sonnetti deilo amore e della belleza divina,” &c. printed at Florence in 1500, in folio: an edition much prized by the curious. Benivieni, not less estimable for the purity of his manners than for the extent of his talents, was intimately connected with the celebrated John Pico de Mirandola, and made it his request to be interred in the same grave with him, which was granted.

in Berkshire; but upon Mr. Bateman’s having got another presentation to the same living, a gentleman who was his contemporary at Oxford, they agreed jointly to perform

, a nonconformist clergyman of Dorsetshire, was born at or near Egremond, in Cumberland, Nov. 1600, and educated at St. Bees. Thence he entered Queen’s college, Oxford, Wood thinks, as a servitor, but left the university without taking a degree, on obtaining a presentation to the living of Oakingriain, in Berkshire; but upon Mr. Bateman’s having got another presentation to the same living, a gentleman who was his contemporary at Oxford, they agreed jointly to perform the duty, and divide the profits, rather than contest the matter at law. Mr. Benn became afterwards chaplain to the marchioness of Northampton, with whom he resided in Somersetshire, leaving Oakingham to Mr. Bateman In 1629, the celebrated Mr. White, usually called the patriarch of Dorchester, invited him to that town, by whose interest he obtained the rectory of All Saints; and, excepting two years ttiat he attended Mr. White at Lambeth, continued here until Bartholomew-day, when he was ejected for nonconformity. Not satisfied with his constant labours in the church, while he held his rectory, he preached gratis, on week-days, to prisoners in the gaol, and the room not being large enough for his auditory, he built a chapel within the prison limits, principally at his own expence. In 1654, he was one of the assistants to the commissioners for ejecting such as were called scandalous, ignorant, and insufficient ministers, and school-masters. After his own ejectment, he continued to preach occasionally, and was sometimes fined and imprisoned. He died March 22, 1680, and was buried in All Saints church-yard. Wood records three particulars of him the first, that he was, as already mentioned, assistant to the commissioners, &c. secondly, that although he lived to be eighty, he never used spectacles, and yet read and wrote much, writing all his sermons as he delivered them; and thirdly, that he prayed in his study seven times a day, and commemorated certain deliverances from dangers which he had experienced on certain days of his life. His only works were an “Answer to Mr. Francis Bamph'eld’s Letter, in vindication of the Christian Sabbath against the Jewish,” Lond. 1672, 8vo; and a volume of sermons, on “Soul prosperity,1683, 8vo.

ment some advances were evidently made towards the interest of Rome; since the new secretary was one who secretly espoused the cause of popery, and had much influenced

, earl of Arlington, was descended from an ancient family, and was second son of sir John Bennet of Arlington in Middlesex, by Dorothy, daughter of sir John Crofts of Saxham in the county of Norfolk. He was born in 1618, and educated at Christ-church in the university of Oxford, where he took the degree of master of arts, and distinguished himself by his poetical compositions, several of which were occasionally inserted in books of verses published under the name of the university, and in others in that time. In the beginning the civil war, when king Charles I. fixed his chief residence at Oxford, he was appointed under-secretary to lord George Digby, secretary of state; and afterwards entered himself as a volunteer in the royal cause, and served very bravely, especially at the sharp encounter near Andover in Hampshire, where he received several wounds. When the wars were ended, he did not leave the king, when success did, but attended his interest in foreign parts; and, in order to qualify himself the better for his majesty’s service, travelled into Italy, and made his observations on the several countries and states of Europe. He was afterwards made secretary to James, duke of York, and received the honour of knighthood from king Charles II. at Bruges in March, 1658, and was soon after sent envoy to the court of Spain; in which negociation he acted with so much prudence and success, that his majesty, upon his return to England, soon called him home, and made him keeper of his privy purse. On the 2d of October, 1662, he was appointed principal secretary of state in the room of sir Edward Nicholas; but by this preferment some advances were evidently made towards the interest of Rome; since the new secretary was one who secretly espoused the cause of popery, and had much influenced the king towards embracing-that religion, the year before his restoration, at Fontarabia on Which' account he had been so much threatened by lord Culpepper, that it was believed he durst not return into England, till after the death of that nobleman.

was one of the cabinet council, distinguished by the title of the Cabal, and one of those ministers, who advised the shutting up of the exchequer. April 22, 1672, he

In March 14, 1664, he was advanced to the degree of a baron, by the title of Lord Arlington of Arlington in Middlesex, and in 1670, was one of the cabinet council, distinguished by the title of the Cabal, and one of those ministers, who advised the shutting up of the exchequer. April 22, 1672, he was created viscount Thetford and earl of Arlington and on the 15th of June following, was made knight of the garter. On the 22d of the same month he was sent to Utrecht, with the duke of Buckingham and lord Hallifax, as ambassadors extraordinary and plenipotentiaries, to meet jointly with such as should be appointed by the king of France, and with the deputies from the States-General, but this negociation had no great effect. In April 1673, he was appointed one of the three plenipotentiaries from the court of Great Britain to Cologne, in order to mediate a peace between the emperor and king of France. In January following, the house of commons resolving to attack him, as well as the dukes of Lauderdale and Buckingham, who were likewise members of the Cabal, the last endeavoured to clear himself by casting all the odium upon the earl of Arlington; who being admitted to make his defence in that house, answered some parts of the duke of Buckingham’s speech, but was so far from giving them satisfaction with regard to his own conduct, that they immediately drew up articles of impeachment against him, in which he was charged to have been a constant and vehement promoter of popery and popish councils; to have been guilty of many undue practices in order to promote his own greatness; to have embezzled and wasted the treasure of the nation; and to have falsely and traiterously bet ayed the important trust reposed in him, as a counsellor and principal secretary of state. Upon this he appeared before the house of commons, and spoke much more than was expected; excusing himself, though without blaming the king. This had so good an effect, that though he, as secretary of state, was more exposed than any other, by the many warrants and orders which he had signed; yet he was acqu.tted by a small majority. But the care, which he took to preserve himself, and his success in it, lost him his high favour; with the king, as the duke of York was greatly offended with him; for which reason he quitted his post, and was made lord chamberlain on the lith of September 1671-, with this public reason assigned, that it was in recompence of his long and faithful service, and particularly for having performed the office of principal secretary of state for the space of twelve years to his majesty’s great satisfaction. But finding, that his interest began sensibly to decline, while that of the earl of Danby increased, who succeeded lord CiiHord in the office of lord high treasurer, which had ever been the height of lord Arlington’s ambition, he conceived an implacable hatred against that earl, and used his utmost effort* to supplant him, though in vain. For, upon his return from his unsuccessful journey to Holland in 1674-5, his credit was so much sunk, that several persons at court took the liberty to mimic his person and behaviour, as had been formerly done against lord chancellor Clarendon; and it became a common jest for some courtier to put a black patch upon his nose, and strut about with a white staff in his hand, in order to divert the king. One reason of his majesty’s disgust to him is thought to have been the earl’s late inclining towards the popular opinions, and especially his apparent zealous proceedings against the papists, while the court knew him to be of their religion in his heart, [n confirmation of this a remarkable story is told; that col. Richard Talbot, afterwards earl of Tyrconnel, having been some time absent from the court, upon his return found lord Arlington’s credit extremely low; and seeing him one day acted by a person with a patch and a staff, he took occasion to expostulate this matter with the king, with whom he was very familiar, remonstrating, how very hard it was, that poor Harry Ben net should be thus used, after he had so long and faithfully served his majesty, and followed him every where in his exile. The king hereupon began to complain too, declaring what cause he had to be dissatisfied with his conduct, “who had of late behaved himself after a strange manner; for, not content to come to prayers, as others did, he must be constant at sacraments too.” “Why,” said colonel Taibot interrupting, “does not your majestydo the same thing?” “God’s fish,” replied the king with some warmth, “I hope there is a difference between Harry Bennet and me.” However, in 1679, lord Arlington was chosen one of the new council to his majesty; and upon the accession of king James II. to the throne, was confirmed by him in the office of lord chamberlain. He died July J8, 1685, aged sixty-seven years, and was interred at Euston in Suffolk. By his lady Isabella, daughter of Lewis de Nassau, lord Beverwaert, he had one only daughter, Isabella, married to Henry, duke of G ration.

as Bennet, knt. second son, doctor of the civil law, and master in chancery; and Matthew, third son, who died unmarried. His eldest son, sir John Bennet of Dawley, received

, knt. grandfather to the preceding, and second son of sir Richard Bennet, was created on the 6th of July, 1589, doctor of laws by the university of Oxford, having been one of the proctors there. He was afterwards vicar-general in spirituals to the archbishop of York, and prebendary of Langtoft in the church of York. In the 24th of ELz. bearing the title of doctor of laws, he was in commission with the lord-keeper Egerton, the lord-treasurer Buckhurst, and several other noblemen, for the suppression of heresy. He was also in that reign returned to parliament for the city of York, and was a leading member of the house of commons, as appears from several of his speeches in Townshend’s collections. He received the honour of knighthood from king James before his coronation, on the 23d of July 1603, at Whitehall, and was made in that reign chancellor to queen Anne (consort of king James), judge of the prerogative court of Canterbury, and chancellor to the archbishop of York. In the beginning of 1617, he was sent ambassador to Brussels to question the archduke, in behalf of his master the king of Great Britain, concerning a libel written and published, as it was supposed, by Erycius Puteanus, but he neither apprehended the author, nor suppressed the book, until he was solicited by the king’s agent there: he only interdicted it, and suffered the author to fly out of his dominions. In 1620, sir John Bennet being entitled judge of the prerogative court of Canterbury, was in a special commission with the archbishop of Canterbury, and other noblemen, to put in execution the laws against all heresies, great errors in matters of faith and religioH, &c. and the same year bearing the title of chancellor to the archbishop of York, he was commissioned with the archbishop of York, and others, to execute all manner of ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the province of York. He died in the parish of Christ church in London, in the beginning of 1627, having had issue by Anne his wife, daughter of Christopher Weekes of Salisbury, in the county of Wilts, esq. sir John lien net, his son and heir; sir Thomas Bennet, knt. second son, doctor of the civil law, and master in chancery; and Matthew, third son, who died unmarried. His eldest son, sir John Bennet of Dawley, received the honour of knighthood in the life-time of his father, at Theobalds, on the 15th of June, 1616. He married Dorothy, daughter of sir John Crofts of Saxham, in the county of Norfolk, knt. by whom he had issue six sons, the second of whom was afterwards created earl of Arlington. This account drawn up also by Dr. Campbell as a note to his life of Arlington, partakes of the partiality of that account by suppressing that in 1621, certain mal-practices were detected in the judicial conduct of sir John, and he was committed to the custody of the sheriffs of London, and afterwards to prison, fined 20,000l. and deprived of his offices. In consequence of this, according to Mr. Lodge, he died in indigence and obscurity, in the parish of Christ church, in Surrey, not in London, at the time mentioned above; but another account says that he was merely required to find security to that amount for his appearance to answer to the charges brought against him. If the fine was imposed, we may conclude it was remitted; for in a letter from lord Bacon to king James, we read these words, “Your majesty hath pardoned the like (corruption) to sir John Bennet, between whose case and mine (not being partial to myself, but speaking out of the general opinion), there was as much difference, I will not say, as between black and white, but as between black and grey or ash-coloured.”

receiving the Lord’s Supper, taken out of the confutation of Quakerism,“Cambr. For the sake of those who wanted either money to purchase, or time to peruse, the Confutation

, an eminent divine in the eighteenth century, was born at Salisbury, May 7, 1673, and educated in the free-school there; where he made so great a progress in learning, that he was sent to St. John’s college, Cambridge, in the beginning of 1688, before he was full fifteen years of age. He regularly took the degrees of bachelor and master of arts; the latter in 1694, when but twenty-one years old; and was chosen fellow of his college. In 1695, he wrote a copy of Hebrew verses on the death of queen Mary, printed in the collection of poems of the university of Cambridge upon that occasion. The first of his publications was “An answer to the dissenters pleas for Separation, or an abridgment of the London cases; wherein the substance of those books is digested into one short and plain discourse,” Lond. 1699, 8vo. About the end of 1700, he took a journey to Colchester, to visit his friend Mr. John Rayne, rector of St. James’s in Colchester; and finding him dead when he came, he undertook the office of preaching his funeral sermon, which was so highly approved of by the parishioners, that their recommendation was no small inducement to Dr. Compton, then bishop of London, to present him to that living. He had institution to it January 15, 1700-1, and applied himself with great diligence and success to the several duties of his function. Possessing great learning, a strong voice, and good elocution, he was extremely followed and admired; and the more, as most of the other livings were but indifferently provided for: so that he became minister, not only of his own two parishes, but in a manner of that whole town, and the subscriptions and presents he had from all parts, raised his income to nearly three hundred pounds a year. But that afterwards was very much reduced, as xvill appear in the sequel. In the beginning of 1701, he published “A confutation of Popery, in three parts,” Canibr. 8vo. About the same time, he was engaged in a controversy with some dissenters, which produced the following book of his, “A discourse of Schism shewing, 1 What is meant by schism. 2. That schism is a damnable sin. 3. That there is a schism between the established church of England and the dissenters. 4. That this schism is to be charged on the dissenters’ side. 5. That the modern pretences of toleration, agreement in fundamentals, &c. will m;t excuse the dissenters from being guilty of schism. Written by way of letter to three dissenting ministers in Essex, viz. Mr. Gilson and Mr. Gledhili ol Colchester, and Mr. Shepherd of Brain tree. To which is annexed, an answer to a book entitled” Thomas against Bennet, or the Protestant dissenters vindicated from the charge of schism,“Cambr. 1702, 8vo. This book being animadverted upon by Mr. Shepherd, our author published” A defence of the discourse of Schism; in answer to those objections which Mr. Shepherd has made in his three sermons of Separation, &c.“Cambr. 1703, 8vo. And, towards the end of the same year,” An answer to Mr. Shepherd’s considerations on the defence of the discourse of Scnism,“Cambr. 8vo. As also a treatise entitled” Devotions, viz. Confessions, Petitions, Intercessions, and Thanksgivings, for every day in the week and also before, at, and after, the Sacrament with occasional prayers for all persons whatsoever,“8vo. In 1705, he published” A confutation of Quakerism; or a plain proof of the falsehood of what the principal Quaker writers (especially Mr. R. Barclay, in his Apology and other works) do teach concerning the necessity of immediate revelation in order to a saving Christian faith, &c.“Cambr. 8vo. In 1707 he caused to be printed in a small pamphlet, 12mo,” A discourse on the necessity of being baptized with Water and receiving the Lord’s Supper, taken out of the confutation of Quakerism,“Cambr. For the sake of those who wanted either money to purchase, or time to peruse, the Confutation of Quakerism, the year following he published” A brief history of -the joint use of precomposed set forms of Prayer,“Cambr. 8vo. The same year he published likewise” A discourse of joint Prayer,“Cambr. 8vo. Towards the end of the same year he published” A paraphrase with annotations upon the book of Common Prayer, wherein the text is explained, objections are answered, and advice is humbly offered, both to the clergy and the laity, for promoting true devotion in the use of it,“Lond. 8vo. The next thing he printed was” Charity Schools recommended, in a sermon preached in St. James’s church in Colchester, on Sunday, March 26, 1710,“8vo. The same year he wrote” A letter to Mr. B. Robinson, occasioned by iiis * Review of the case of Liturgies, and their imposition';“and” A second letter to Mr. B. Robinson, &c. on the same subject,“Lond. 1710, 8vo. In 17 11 he published” The rights of the Clergy of the Christian church; or, a discourse shewing that God has given and appropriated to the clergy, authority to ordain, baptize, preach, preside in church-prayer, and consecrate the Lord’s supper. Wherein also the pretended divine right of the laity to elect either the persons to be ordained, or their own particular pastors, is examined and disproved,“London, 1711, 8vo. He had begun a second part of this work, but it was never published, in which he intended to shew, that the clergy are, under Christ, the sole spiritual governors of the Christian church, and that God has given and appropriated to them authority to enact laws, determine controversies, inflict censures, and absolve from them. The pre^­tended divine institution of lay elders was also disproved, and the succession of the present clergy of the established church vindicated. And to this was annexed a” Discourse of the Independency of the Church on the State, with an account of the sense of our English laws, and the judgment of archbishop Cranmer touching that point.“About this time he took the degree of D. D. In 1714 he published <c Directions for studying, I. A general system or body of divinity; II. The thirty-nine articles of religion. To which is added St. Jerom’s epistle to Nepotianus,” London, 8vo. The year following was published his “Essay on the thirty-nine articles of Religion, agreed on in 1562, and revised in 1571, wherein (the text being first exhibited in Latin and English, and the minutest variations of eighteen the most ancient and authentic copies carefully noted) an account is given of the proceedings of convocation in framing and settling the text of the articles, the controverted clause of the twentieth article is demonstrated to be genuine, and the case of subscription to the articles is considered in point of law, history, and conscience; with a prefatory epistle to Anthony Collins, esq. wherein the egregious falsehoods and calumnies of the author of ‘Priestcraft in perfection’ are exposed,” London, 1713, 8vo. Before the publication of this book, he found it necessary to leave Colchester; for, the other livings being filled up with persons of good reputation and learning, his large congregation and subscriptions fell off, and his income fell to threescore pounds a-­year, on which account, by the advice of his friends, he accepted the place oi' deputy-chaplain to Chelsea hospital, under Dr. Cannon. Soon after, preaching the funeral sermon of his friend Mr. Erington, lecturer of St. Olave’s in South wark, it was so highly approved of by that parish, that he was unanimously chosen lecturer in the next vestry, without the least canvassing. Upon that he entirely left Colchester, in January 1715-16, and fixed himself in London, where he was likewise appointed morning preacher at St. Lawrence Jewry, under Dr. Mapletoft. In 1716 he published a pamphlet entitled “The Non juror’s separation from the public assemblies of the church of England examined, and proved to be schismatical upon their own principles,” London, 8vo. And “The case of the Reformed Episcopal Churches in Great Poland and Polish Prussia, considered in a sermon preached on Sunday, November 18, 1716, at St. Lawrence-Jewry, London, in the morning, and St. Olave’s, Southwark, in the afternoon,” London, 8vo. Soon after, he was presented by the dean and chapter of St. Paul’s, to the vicarage of St. Giles’s, Cripplegate, London, which afforded him a plentiful income of nearly five hundred pounds a-year. But he had little quiet enjoyment of it; for, endeavouring to recover some dues that unquestionably belonged to that church, he was obliged to engage in tedious law-suits, which, hesides the immense charges they were attended withal, gave him a great deal of vexation and uneasiness, and very much embittered his spirits; however, he recovered a hundred and fifty pounds a-year to that living. After he was settled in it, in 1717, he married Mrs. Elizabeth Hunt of Salisbury, a gentlewoman of great merit, and by her he had three daughters. The same year he published “A Spital sermon preached before the lord mayor, aldermen. &c. of London, in St. Bridget’s church, on April 24, 1717,” London, 8vo; and in 1718, “A discourse of the ever-blessed Trinity in Unity, with an examination of Dr. Clarke’s Scripture doctrine of the Trinity,” London, 8vo. But, from this time, the care of his large parish, and other affairs, so engrossed his thoughts, that he had no time to undertake any new work, except an Hebrew grammar, which was published at London in 1726, 8vo, a,ud is reckoned one of the best of the kind. He mentions, indeed, in one of his books written about 1716, that he had then “several tasks” in his hands, “which would find him full employment for many years;” but whatever they might be, none of them were ever finished or made public. He died of an apoplexy at London, October 9th, 1728, aged fifty-live years, five months, and two days, and was buried in his own church.

d being told, in his youth, by Dr. Doddridge, that the dissenting ministers, in and near Colchester, who endeavoured to answer Dr. Bennet, and particularly Mr. Shepherd,

Dr. Bennet was undoubtedly a divine of eminent piety and distinguished learning. The zeal and diligence with which he engaged in the studies and duties of his profession were highly commendable, and shew that h had no conception that the life of a clergyman was to be an idle or trifling life. Several of his works, however, being upon subjects of temporary controversy, are, we apprehend, not much read at present. This will ever be the case when disputes turn upon matters which are not of lasting importance, or upon some trivial circumstances in questions otherwise momentous, and it will especially be the case, when a man of abilities has to contend with insufficient adversaries. Dr. Kippis remembered being told, in his youth, by Dr. Doddridge, that the dissenting ministers, in and near Colchester, who endeavoured to answer Dr. Bennet, and particularly Mr. Shepherd, were persons of very mean talents. The doctor, in some of his subsequent writings, met with far abler 'antagonists. The question concerning-schism was deemed of gr^at importance during the last century, and in the beginning of the present. The Papists charged this crime upon the Protestants, and the members of the church of England upon the Dissenters. A concise and rational account of the general controversy with regard to schism, and of the variations and inconsistencies to which it hath given rise, would be no incurious subject in the history of theological literature.

ly wished to avoid, but, no doubt, sincerely abhorred. This was an unfortunate circumstance in a man who, in another work, had employed himself in vindicating the Athanasian

Dr. Bennet was perhaps too ready to engage in the debates of his time, upon questions of divinity, which led him sometimes into difficulties, obliged him to have recourse to distinctions and refinements which would not always bear examination, and laid him open to the attacks of his adversaries. Of all the doctor’s controversial pieces, those on the doctrine of the Trinity, and on subscription to the articles of the church of England, have been the most brought into view in the present age. This is owing to these subjects being still eagerly debated, and on account of their acknowledged importance, will probably long continue to be debated. Dr. Bennet’s explication of the Trinity is singular; and it would require much logical nicety to defend it from that heterodoxy which the learned author not only wished to avoid, but, no doubt, sincerely abhorred. This was an unfortunate circumstance in a man who, in another work, had employed himself in vindicating the Athanasian creed. However, he was but in the same case with many other eminent and learned divines, who, while they have imagined that they were defending Athanasianism, have, in fact, run into Sabellianism or Socinianism.

Another Benning or Benningius (John), president of the provincial court of Luxemburgh, and who died Jan. 30, 1638, wrote a history of the duchy of Luxemburgh,

Another Benning or Benningius (John), president of the provincial court of Luxemburgh, and who died Jan. 30, 1638, wrote a history of the duchy of Luxemburgh, which has not been printed.

, or Benno, a writer of the eleventh century, was created a cardinal by the anti-pope Guibert, who assumed the name of Clement III. Benno, who was one of his most

, or Benno, a writer of the eleventh century, was created a cardinal by the anti-pope Guibert, who assumed the name of Clement III. Benno, who was one of his most zealous partisans, made many attacks on the popes, accusing Sylvester II. of magic, Gregory VI. of simony, &c. and wrote, under the title of a “Life of Gregory VII.” a bitter satire against that pontiff. He died about the close of the eleventh century. His life of Gregory was printed in the “Fasciculus rerum Expetendarum et Fugiendarum,1535, by Gratius, and in a collection of pieces, in favour of tUe emperor Henry IV. against Gregory, published by Goldastus.

, the son of a Calvinist, who was keeper of the hotel de laTremouille, was born in 1640. In

, the son of a Calvinist, who was keeper of the hotel de laTremouille, was born in 1640. In his youth he appears not to have been exempt from dissipation, but the love of study predominated, and after the regular course he was chosen minister of Alenc.on. While there, he had a dispute with father Larue, a Jesuit, on the pretended falsifications in the Geneva translation of the Bible, and the celebrated Huet took his part so far as to blame the intemperance of this Jesuit. The letters which passed on this occasion may be seen in the first volume of a collection published by the abbe Tilladet. On the revocation of the edict of Nantes, Benoit went to Delft, and became minister of the Walloon church, in which situation he remained until his death in 1728. Much of this long life was embittered by his marrying a woman of a mean, sordid, and irritable temper, and some part of it was disturbed by controversy. Besides the dispute already mentioned, he had another with Jacquelot, respecting the union of the two churches; one likewise with Le Clerc, on the first chapter of the gospel of St. John, and one with Van der Honert, on the style of the New Testament. His principal works were, 1. “Histoire de Pedit de Nantes,” Delft, 1693 95, 5 vols. 4to. 2. “Histoire et Apologie de la retraite des pasteurs a cause de la persecution,” Francfort, 1687, 12mo. 3. “Defense” of this apology against d'Artis, ibid. 1688, 12mo. 4. “Melanges de remarques critiques, historiques, philosophiques, et theologiques,” against some of Toland’s writings, Delft, 1712, 8vo. 5. “Sermons et des Lettres.

n he was very young; and when about seven or eight years of age, he went to be confirmed, the bishop who performed the ceremony asked him “if he was not willing to change

, a French poet and wit of the seventeenth century, was born at Lyons-la-Foret, a small town in Upper Normandy, in 1612. He was born but not educated a Protestant, his father having turned Catholic when he was very young; and when about seven or eight years of age, he went to be confirmed, the bishop who performed the ceremony asked him “if he was not willing to change his name of Isaac for one more Christian.” *' With all my heart,“replied he,” provided I get any thing by the exchange.“The bishop, surprized at such a ready answer, would not change his name.” Let his name be Isaac still,“said he,” for whatever it is, he will make the most of it." Benserade lost his father when he was very young; and being left with little fortune, and this much involved in law, he chose rather to give it up than sue for it. His mother’s name, however, being Laporte, he claimed relationship to the cardinal Richelieu, who without examining too nicely into the matter, had him educated, and would have provided for him in the church if he had not preferred the court, where he soon became famous for his wit and poetry; and Richelieu granted him a pension, which was continued till the death of this cardinal. It is probable that Benserade would have found the same protection in the duchess of Aiguillon, if the following four verses, which he had made on the death of the cardinal, had not given her great offence:

re was an original turn in them which characterised at once the poetical divinities, and the persons who represented them. “With the description of the gods and other

Benserade had surprising success in what he composed for the court dramatic entertainments. There was an original turn in them which characterised at once the poetical divinities, and the persons who represented them. “With the description of the gods and other personages,” says the author of the “Recueil de bons contes,” supposed to be M. de Calliere, “who were represented in these interludes, he mixed lively pictures of the courtiers, who represented them, discovering their inclinations, attachments, and even their most secret adventures; but in a manner so agreeable and delicate, that those who were rallied were pleased, and his jests left no resentment or concern in their minds.” The sonnet which Benserade sent to a young lady, with his paraphrase on Job, implying that Job could reveal his griefs, but he was obliged to suffer in silence, rendered his name very famous. A parallel was drawn betwixt it and the Urania of Voiture; and a dispute thence arose, which divided the wits, and the whole court. Those who gave the preference to that of Benserade were styled the Jobists, and their antagonists the Uranists. The prince of Conti declared himself a Jobist, and the duchess de Longueville, an Uranist. Benserade wrote rondeaus upon Ovid, some of which are reckoned tolerable, but upon the whole the attempt was too absurd for serious approbation; and his Ovid, without occasioning any controversy, dropt into oblivion almost as soon as it was published, although it appeared in a highly ornamented 4to, printed at Paris, 1676, with engravings to theexpence of which the king contributed 10,000 livres. So much was he attached to the rondeau, that his preface and even his errata are in the same species of composition. The latter is perhaps the best of the whole; as he candidly acknowledges that he can discover but two errors of any consequence, viz. the plan and the execution:

deavouring to stop the effusion of blood, Fan away Commire, his friend and confessor, was called in, who arrived in time to witness his death, Oct. 19, 1691. He had

Mr. Voltaire is of opinion that these inscriptions were the best of his productions, and he regrets that they have not been collected. Benserade suffered at last so much from the stone, that, notwithstanding his great age, he resolved to submit to the operation of cutting. But his constancy was not put to this last proof, for a surgeon letting him blood by way of precaution, pricked an artery, and, instead of endeavouring to stop the effusion of blood, Fan away Commire, his friend and confessor, was called in, who arrived in time to witness his death, Oct. 19, 1691. He had been a member of the French academy from 1674. Pascal says he was the repeater of many bad bons-mots, and those which his biographers have recorded are certainly of that description. His theatrical pieces, Cleopatra, the death of Achilles, &c. were printed singly from 1636 to 1641, 4to; but his whole works, including a selection from his rondeaus taken from Ovid, were printed at Paris, 1697, 2 vols. 12mo.

ministers, he began to preach; first at Chertsey, and afterwards in London. The learned Dr. Calamy, who was his great friend, and kindly took him for a time into his

, a learned and eminent dissenting teacher, was born at Great Salkeld, in Cumberland, September 1699. He was early destined by his parents for the ministry, on account of the seriousness of his disposition and his love of learning; which was so strong and successful, that at eleven years of age he was able to read the Greek testament. After finishing his grammar learning, he went to an academy kept by Dr, Dixon at Whitehaven, from whence he removed to Glasgow; where, with great application and success, he pursued his studies until May 1721, when he left the university. Towards the close of the year he came to London; and having been examined and approved by several of the most eminent presbyterian ministers, he began to preach; first at Chertsey, and afterwards in London. The learned Dr. Calamy, who was his great friend, and kindly took him for a time into his family, recommended him to go to Abingdon in Berkshire; where, after preaching as a candidate, he was unanimously chosen their pastor, by the congregation of protestant dissenters in that town. During his stay here, which was about seyen years, he preached and published three serious practical discourses, addressed to young persons, which were well received. But he afterwards suppressed them, as not containing what be thought on further inquiry the exact truth, in relation to some doctrines of Christianity. He had been educated a Calvinist, but was now, like many of his brethren, receding from those principles. In 1729 he received a call from a society of protestant dissenters in Southwark, among whom he laboured with diligence and fidelity for eleven years, and was greatly beloved by them. In 1740 he was chosen by the congregation at Crutched Friars, colleague to Dr. Lardner; and when infirmities obliged Dr. Lardner to quit the service of the church, the whole care of it devolved on him.

r meeting, when it was suggested that it would be proper to take the opinion of some other builders, who reported that the building was in very good condition. The lords,

He became member of parliament for Shaftesbury in the first parliament of George I. and in 17 Is was made surveyor general, in the place of sir Christopher Wren, on which occasion he vacated his seat in parliament. Why such a disgrace should be inBicted on sir Christopher Wren, now full of years and honours, cannot be ascertained. Benson, however, gained only an opportunity, and that soon, to display his incapacity, and the amazing contrast between him and his predecessor. Being em-­ployed to survey the house of lords, he gave in a report that that house and the painted-chamber adjoining were in immediate danger of falling. On this the lords were about to appoint some other place for their meeting, when it was suggested that it would be proper to take the opinion of some other builders, who reported that the building was in very good condition. The lords, irritated at Benson’s ignorance and incapacity, were about to petition the king to remove him, when the earl of Sunderland, then secretary, assured them that his majesty would anticipate their wishes. Benson was accordingly dismissed. He was in some measure consoled, however, by the assignment of a considerable debt due to the crown in Ireland, and by the reversion of one of the two offices of auditor of the imprests, which he enjoyed after the death of Mr, Edward Harley. In 1724, he published “Virgil’s Husbandry, with notes critical and rustic;” and in 1739, “Letters concerning poetical translations, and Virgil’s and Milton’s arts of verse.” This last was followed by an edition of “Arthur Johnston’s Psalms,” accompanied with the Psalms of David, according to the translation in the English Bible, printed in 4to, 8vo, and 12mo; with a “Prefatory discourse,1740; in 1741 “A conclusion to his prefatory discourse” and in the same year, “A supplement to it, in which is contained, a comparison betwixt Johnston and Buchanan.” In this comparison, given in favour of Johnston, he was so unlucky, or, rather for the sake of taste, so lucky as to excite the indignation of the celebrated Ruddiman, who wrote an elaborate and unanswerable defence of Buchanan, in a letter to Mr. Benson, under the title of “A Vindication of Mr. George Buchanan’s Paraphrase of the Book of Psalms,” Edinburgh, 1745, 8vo. Benson, although a man who had spent the greater part of his life among books, yet a short time before his death, contracted an unconquerable aversion to them, and perhaps to society likewise, as the latter years of his life were passed in close retirement at his house at Wimbledon, where he died Feb. 1754. His character has been variously represented. It was his misfortune, if not his fault, in the outset, that he was placed in the invidious situation of suc-s cessor to sir Christopher Wren, who was most improperly dismissed; and this procured him a place in the Dunciad, which probably served to keep up the remembrance of whaj he would willingly have forgot. Dr. Warton, however, has endeavoured to do him justice in his notes on Pope. “Benson,” says that amiable critic, “is here spoken of too contemptuously. He translated faithfully, if not very poetically, the second book of the Georgics, with useful notes he printed elegant editions of Johnston’s psalms; he wrote a discourse on versification he rescued his country from the disgrace of having no monument erected to the memory of Milton in Westminster-abbey; he encouraged and urged Pitt to translate the yEneid; and he gave Dobson of.1000 for his Latin translation of Paradise Lost.” Another testimony we have of his liberality which ought not to be suppressed. In 1735, a book was published, entitled “The cure of Deism.” The author, Mr. Elisha Smith, was at that time confined in the Fleet prison for a debt of ^^Oo. Benson, pleased with the work, inquired who was the author, and having received an account of his unfortunate state, not only sent him a handsome letter, but discharged the whole debt, fees, &o. and set him at liberty.

Samuel Bentham, was a very worthy clergyman, and vicar of Witchford, a small living near that city; who having a numerous family, his son Edward, on the recommendation

, canon of Christ-church, Oxford, and king’s professor of divinity in that university, was born in the college at Ely, July 23, 1707. His father, Mr. Samuel Bentham, was a very worthy clergyman, and vicar of Witchford, a small living near that city; who having a numerous family, his son Edward, on the recommendation of Dr. Smalridge, dean of Christ-church, was sent in 1717 to the school of that college. Having there received the rudiments of classical education, he was in Lent term 1723, when nearly 16 years of age, admitted of the university of Oxford, and placed at Corpus-Christi college under his relation Dr. John Burton. In this situation, his serious and regular deportment, and his great proficiency in all kinds of academical learning, recommended him to the notice of several eminent men; and, among others, to the favour of Dr. Tanner, canon of Christ-church, by whose death he was disappointed of a nomination to a studentship in that society. At CorpusChristi college he formed a strict friendship with Robert Hoblyn, esq. of Nanswydden in Cornwall, afterwards representative for the city of Bristol, whose character, as a scholar and a member of parliament, rendered him deservedly esteemed by the lovers of literature and of their country. In company with this gentleman and another intimate friend, Dr. Ratcliff, afterwards master of Pembroke college, Mr. Bentham made, at different times, the tour of part of France, and other countries. Having taken the degree of B. A. he was invited by Dr. Cotes, principal of Magdalen-hall, to be his vice-principal; and was accordingly admitted to that society, March 6, 1730. Here he continued only a short time, for, on the 23d of April in the year following, he was elected fellow of Oriel college. In act term, 1732, he proceeded to the degree of M. A. and, about the same time, was appointed tutor in the college; in which capacity he discharged his duty, in the most laborious and conscientious manner, for more than twenty years. March 26, 1743, Mr. Bentham took the degree of B. D.; and April 22, in the same year, was collated to the prebend of Hundreton, in the cathedral church of Hereford. July 8, 1749, he proceeded to the degree of D. D.; and in April 1754 was promoted to the fifth stall in that cathedral. Here he continued the same active and useful course of life for which he had always been distinguished. He served the offices of sub-dean and treasurer, for himself and others, above twelve years. The affairs of the treasury, which Dr. Bentham found in great confusion, he entirely new modelled, and put into a train of business in which they have continued ever since, to the great ease of his successors, and benefit of the society. 80 intent was he upon the regulation and management of the concerns of the college, that he refused several preferments which were offered him, from a conscientious persuasion that the avocations they would produce were incompatible with the proper discharge of the offices he had voluntarily undertaken. Being appointed by the king to fill the divinity chair, vacant by the death of Dr. Fanshavve, Dr. Bentham was, with much reluctance, and after having repeatedly declined it, persuaded, by archbishop Seeker and his other learned friends, to accept of it; and, on the 9th of May, 1763, he was removed to the 8th stall in the cathedral. His unwillingness to appear in this station was increased by the business he had to transact in his former situation, and which he was afraid would be impeded by the accession of new duties: not to say that a life spent in his laborious and sedentary manner had produced some unfavourable effects on his constitution, and rendered a greater attention than he had hitherto shewn to private ease and health, absolutely necessary. Besides, as the duties, when properly discharged, were great and interesting, so the station itself was of that elevated and public nature to which his ambition never inclined him: 66 latere maluit atque prodesse.“The diffidence he had of his abilities had ever taught him to suspect his own sufficiency; and his inauguratory lecture breathed the same spirit, the text of which was,Who is sufficient for these things?" But whatever objections Dr. Bentham might have to the professorship before he entered upon it, when once he had accepted of it, he never suffered them to discourage him in the least from exerting hi* most sincere endeavours to render it both useful and honourable to the university. He set himself immediately to draw out a course of lectures for the benefit of young students in divinity, which he constantly read at his house at Christ-church, gratis-^ three times a week during term-time, till his decease. The course took up a year; and he not only exhibited in it a complete system of divinity, but recommended proper books, some of which he generously distributed to his auditors. His intense application to the pursuit of the plan he had laid clown, together with those concerns in which his affection for his friends, and his zeal for the public good in every shape, involved him, proved more than a counterbalance for all the advantages of health and vigour that a strict and uniform temperance could procure. Jt is certain that he sunk under the rigorous exercise of that conduct he had proposed to himself: for though 6-; years are a considerable proportion in the strongest men’s lives, yet his remarkable abstemiousness and self-denial, added to a disposition of body naturally strong, promised, in the ordinary course of things, a longer period. Dr. Bentham was a very early riser, and had transacted half a day’s business before many others begin their day. His countenance was uncommonly mild and engaging, being strongly characteristic of the piety and benevolence of his mind; and at the same time it by no means wanted expression, but, upon proper occasions, could assume a very becoming and affecting authority. In his attendance upon the public duties of religion, he was exceedingly strict and constant; not suffering himself ever to be diverted from it by any motives, either of interest or pleasure. Whilst he was thus diligent in the discharge of his own duty, he was not severe upon those who were not equally so in theirs. He could scarcely ever be prevailed upon to deliver his opinion upon subjects that were to the disadvantage of other men; and when he could not avoid doing it, his sentiments were expressed with the utmost delicacy and candour. No one was more ready to discover, commend, and reward every meritorious endeavour. Of himself he never was he? rd to speak and if his own merits were touched upon in the slightest manner, he felt a real uneasiness. Though he was not fond of the formalities of visiting, he entered into the spirit of friendly society and intercourse with great pleasure. His constant engagements, indeed, of one kind or other, left him not much time to be devoted to company; and the greater part of his leisure hours he spent in the enjoyment of domestic pleasures, for which his amiable and peaceable disposition seemed most calculated.

eminent example of bishop Tanner (a prebendary of the same stall which Mr. Bentham afterwards held), who had honoured the family with many marks of his kindness and

, M. A. and F. A. S. prebendary of Ely, rector of Bow-brick-hill in the county of Bucks, and domestic chaplain to the right-hon. lord Cadogan, was the brother of the above-mentioned Edward. Having received the rudiments of classical learning in the grammar-school of Ely, he was admitted of Trinity college, Cambridge, March 26,1727, where he proceeded B. A. 1730, and M. A. 1738, and was elected F. A. S. 1767. In the year 1733 he was presented to the vicarage of Stapleford in Cambridgeshire, which he resigned in 1736, on being made minor canon in the church of Ely. In 1767 he was presented by bishop Mavvson to the vicarage of Wymondharn in Norfolk, which he resigned in the year following for the rectory of Feltwell St. Nicholas, in the same county. This he resigned in 1774 for the rectory of Northwold, which in 1779 he was induced by bishop Keene to change for aprebendal stall in the church of Ely, though he was far from improving his income by the change. But his attachment to his native place, with which church the family had been connected without any intermission for more than 100 years, surmounted every other consideration. In 1783 he was presented to the rectory of Bow-brick-hill, by the rev. Edward Guellaume. From his first appointment to an office in the church of Ely, he seems to have directed his attention to the study of church architecture. It is probable that he was determined to the pursuit of ecclesiastical antiquities by the eminent example of bishop Tanner (a prebendary of the same stall which Mr. Bentham afterwards held), who had honoured the family with many marks of his kindness and friendship. For researches of this kind Mr. Bentham seems to have been excellently qualified. To a sound judgment and a considerable degree of penetration, accompanied by a minuteness and accuracy of inquiry altogether uncommon, Mr. Bentham added the most patient assiduity and unwearied industry. The history of the church with which he was connected afforded him full scope for the exercise of his talents. It abounds with almost all the various specimens of church architecture used in England to the time of the reformation. Having previously examined with great attention every historical monument and authority which could throw any light upon his subject, after he had circulated, in 1756, a catalogue of the principal members of this church (Ely), viz. abbesses, abbots, bishops, priors, deans, prebendaries, and archdeacons, in order to collect further information concerning them, he published “The History and Antiquities of the conventual and cathedral Church of Ely, from the foundation of the monastery, A. D. 675, to the year 1771, illustrated with copper-plates,” Cambridge, 1771, 4to. The sheets of Mr. Bentham’s work were carefully revised by his brother Dr. Bentham, and by the Rev. W. Cole, of Milton; and both were considerable contributors to it. This was probably the cheapest book ever published, the subscription price being only eighteen shillings, which was raised to non-subscribers to a guinea and a half. It has of late years seldom been sold under twelve or fourteen guineas, but a new edition has just been published, 1812, which, for paper and typography, reflects honour on the Norwich press.

nd ingenious remarks, which occurred in this part of the work, soon attracted the attention of those who had turned their thoughts to the subject. This short essay was

In the introduction the authorthought it might be useful to give some account of Saxon, Norman, and what is usually called Gothic architecture. The many novel and ingenious remarks, which occurred in this part of the work, soon attracted the attention of those who had turned their thoughts to the subject. This short essay was favourably received by the public, and has been frequently cited and referred to by most writers on Gothic architecture. By a strange mist-ike, these observations were hastily attributed to the celebrated Mr. Gray, merely because Mr. Bentham has mentioned his name among that of others to whom he conceived himself indebted for communications and hints. Mr. Bentham was never informed of this extraordinary circumstance till the year 1783, when he accidentally met with it in the Gentleman’s Magazine for the month of February in that year; upon which he immediately thought it necessary to rectify the mistake, and to vindicate his own character and reputation as an author from the charge of having been obliged to Mr. Gray for that treatise, when he had published it as his own; and this he was enabled to do satisfactorily, having fortunately preserved the only letter which he had received from Mr. Gray on the subject. The truth was, that Mr. Bentham had written the treatise long before he had the honour of any acquaintance with Mr. Gray, and it was that which first introduced him to Mr. Gray. What his obligations were will appear by reference to a copy of that letter, which he received from Mr. Gray when he returned the six sheets which Mr. Bentham had submitted to him at his own request. It happened that the two last sheets, though composed, were not worked off, which gave Mr. Bentham an opportunity of inserting some additions alluded to in Mr. Gray’s letter. In the Magazine for July 1784, may be seen the full and handsome apology which this explanation produced from a correspondent, who, under the signature of S. E. had inadvertently ascribed these remarks to Mr. Gray. These remarks have been since printed in an excellent collection of “Essays on Gothic Architecture,” published by Mr. Taylor, of Holborn. When the dean and chapter of Ely had determined upon the general repair of the fabric of their church, and the judicious removal of the choir from the dome to the presbytery at the east end, Mr. Bentham was requested to superintend that concern as clerk of the works. With what indefatigable industry and attention he acquitted himself in that station, and how much he contributed to the improvement and success of the publ.c works then carrying on, appears as well by the minutes of those transactions, as by the satisfaction with which the body recognized his services. This employment gave him a thorough insight into the principles and peculiarities of these antient buildings, and suggested to him the idea of a general history of antient architecture in this kingdom, which he justly considered a desideratum of the learned and inquisitive antiquary. He was still intent upon this subject, and during the amusement of his leisure hours continued almost to the last to make collections with a view to some further illustration of this curious point, though his avocations of one kind or another prevented him from reducing them to any regular form or series. But he did not suffer these pursuits to call him off from the professional duties of his station, or from contributing his endeavours towards promoting works of general utility to the neighbourhood. To a laudable spirit of this latter kind, animated by a zeal for his native place, truly patriotic, is to be referred his steady perseverance in recommending to his countrymen, under all the discouragements of obloquy and prejudice, the plans suggested for the improvement of their fens by draining, and the practicability of increasing their intercourse with the neighbouring counties by means of turnpike roads; a measure till then unattempted, and for a long time treated with a contempt and ridicule due only to the most wild and visionary projects, the merit of which he was at last forced to rest upon the result of an experiment made by himself. With this view, in 1757, he published his sentiments under the title of “Queries offered to the consideration of the principal inhabitants of the city of Ely, and towns adjacent, &c.” and had at length the satisfaction to see the attention of the public directed to the favourite object of those with whom he was associated. Several gentlemen of property and consideration in the county generously engaged in contributing donations towards setting on foot a scheme to establish turnpike roads. By the liberal example of lord-chancellor Hardwicke, lord Royston, and bishop Mawson, and the seasonable bequest of 200l. by Geo. Riste, esq. of Cambridge, others were incited to additional subscriptions. In a short time these amounted to upwards of 1000l. and nearly to double that sum on interest. The scheme being thus invigorated by these helps, and by the increasing loans of those whose prejudices began now to wear away, an act was obtained in 1763 for improving the road from Cambridge to Ely. Similar powers and provisions were in a few years obtained by subsequent acts, and the benefit extended to other parts of the isle in all directions, the success of which hath answered the most sanguine expectations of its advocates. With the same beneficent disposition, Mr. Bentham in 1773 submitted a plan for inclosing and draining a large tract of common in the vicinity of Ely, called Gruntiten, containing near 1300 acres, under the title of “Considerations and Reflections upon the present state of the fens near Ely,” &c. Cambridge, 1778, 8vo. The inclosure, however, from whatever cause, did not then, take place; but some of the hints therein suggested have formed the groundwork of many of the improvements which have since obtained in the culture and drainage of the fens. Exertions of this kind could not fai^o procure him the esteem and respect of all who knew him, especially as they were wholly unaccompanied with that parade and ostentation by which the best public services are sometimes disgraced. Mr. Bentham was naturally of a delicate and tender constitution, to which his sedentary life and habits of application were very unfavourable; but this was so far corrected by rigid temperance and regularity, that he was rarely prevented from giving clue attention either to the calls of his profession or to the pursuits of his leisure hours. He retained his faculties in full vigour to the last, though his bodily infirmities debarred him latterly from attendance upon public worship, which he always exceedingly lamented, having been uniformly exemplary in that duty. He read, with full relish and spirit, most publications of note or merit as they appeared, and, till within a few days of his death, continued his customary intercourse with his friends. He died Nov. 17, 1794, in the eightysixth year of his age. He left only one son, the Rev. James Bentham, vicar of West Braddenham in Norfolk, a preferment for which he was indebted to the kind patronage of the late bishop of Ely, the hon. Dr. James Yorke. Mr. Joseph Bentham, brother to the Historian and to Dr. Bentham, and an alderman of Cambridge, was many years printer to the university, and died in 1778. The History of Ely being the last work he printed, this circumstance is recorded on the last page by the words “Finis hie officii atque laboris.” A fourth brother, the Rev. Jeffery Bentham, precentor of the church of Ely, &c. died in 1792, aged seventy two. A fifth, the Rev. Edmund Bentham, B.D. rector of Wootton-Courtnay, Somersetshire, died in Oct. 1781, at Moulsey Grove, near Hampton. Mr. Cole, who in his ms Athenae, gives some account of the Benthams, with a mixture of spleen and respect, remarks that this Edmund died in a parish in which he was not buried, was buried in a parish with which he had no connexion, and has a monument in a church (Sutton) where he was not buried, but of which he had been curate for near forty years.

th some others, professor of divinity at London, by Laurence Humphrey, S.T.P. and John Kenal, LL. D. who were deputed by the university of Oxford for that purpose; and

, a learned and pious English divine, bishop of Litchfield and Coventry in the sixteenth century, was born about the year 1513, at Shirebourne in Yorkshire, and educated at Magdalen-college in Oxford. He took his bachelor’s degree in arts, Feb. 20, 1543, and was admitted perpetual fellow of that college, November 16, 1546, and took his master’s degree in arts the year following, about which time he applied himself wholly to the study of divinity and the Hebrew language, in which he was extremely well skilled, as well as in the Latin and Greek tongues. The compiler of “Anglorum Speculum” tells us, that he was converted from popery in the first year of queen Mary; but we find him very zealous against the popish religion during the reign of king Edward VI. upon which account, and his assisting one Henry Bull of the same college, in wresting the censer out of the bands of the choristers, as they were about to offer their superstitious incense, he was ejected from his fellowship by the visitors appointed by queen Mary to regulate the university; soon after which he retired to Zurich, and afterwards to Basil in Switzerland, and became preacher to the English exiles there, and expounded to them the entire book of the Acts of the Apostles; a proper subject and portion of scripture, Fuller observes, to recommend patience to his banished countrymen; as the apostle’s sufferings so far exceeded theirs. This exposition was left by him at the time of his death, very fairly written, and fit for the press, but it does not appear to have been printed. In exile, as at home and in college, he led a praise-worthy, honest, and laborious life, with little or no preferment. Afterwards, being recalled by some of his brethren, he returned to London under the same queen’s reign, where he lived privately and in disguise, and was made superintendent of a protestant congregation in that city; whom Bentham, by his pious discipline, diligent care and tuition, and bold and resolute behaviour in the protestant cause, greatly confirmed in their faith and religion; so that they assembled with the greatest constancy to divine worship, at which there often appeared an hundred, sometimes two hundred persons; no inconsiderable congregation this to meet by stealth, notwithstanding the danger of the times, daily, together at London, in spite of the vigilant and cruel Bonner. At length, when queen Elizabeth came to the throne, he was, in the second year of her reign, nominated for the see of Litchfield and Coventry, upon the deprivation of Dr. Ralph Bayne, and had the temporalities of that see restored to him, Feb. 20, 1559, being then about forty-six years of age. On the 30th of October 1556, he was created, with some others, professor of divinity at London, by Laurence Humphrey, S.T.P. and John Kenal, LL. D. who were deputed by the university of Oxford for that purpose; and in the latter end of October 1568, he was actually created doctor of divinity, being then highly esteemed on account of his distinguished learning. He published a Sermon on Matth. iv. 1—11, printed at London, 8vo. Bishop Burnet, in his History of the Reformation, tells us, that our author translated into English the Book of Psalms, at the command of queen Elizabeth, when an English version of the Bible was to be made, and that he likewise translated Ezekiel and Daniel. He died at Eccleshal in Staffordshire, the seat belonging to the see, Feb. 19, 1578, aged sixty-five years, and was buried under the south wall of the chancel of that church.

ge the negociations that were set on foot, betwixt his highness and the English nobility and gentry, who had recourse to him to rescue them from the danger they were

, earl of Portland, &c. one of the greatest statesmen of his time, and the first that advanced his family to the dignity of the English peerage, was a native of Holland, of an ancient and noble family in the province of Guelderland. After a liberal education, he was promoted to be page of honour to William, then prince of Orange (afterwards king William III. of England), in which station his behaviour and address so recommended him to the favour of his master, that he preferred him to the post of gentleman of his bedchamber. In this capacity he accompanied the prince into England, in the year 1670, where, going to visit the university of Oxford, he was, together with the prince, created doctor of civil law. In 1672, the prince of Orange being made captain-general of the Dutch forces, and soon after Stadtholder, M. Bentinck was promoted, and had a share in his good fortune, being made colonel and captain of the Dutch regiment of guards, afterwards esteemed one of the finest in king William’s service, and which behaved with the greatest gallantry in the wars both in Flanders and Ireland. In 1675, the prince falling ill of the small-pox, M. Bentinck had an opportunity of signalizing his love and affection for his master in an extraordinary manner, and thereby of obtaining his esteem and friendship, by one of the most generous actions imaginable: for the small-pox not rising kindly upon the prince, his physicians judged it necessary that some young person should lie in the same bed with him, imagining that the natural heat of another would expel the disease. M. Bentinck, though he had never had the small-pox, resolved to run this risque, and accordingly attended the prince during the whole course of his illness, both day and night, and his highness said afterwards, that he believed M. Bentinck never slept; for in sixteen days and nights, he never called once that he was not answered by him. M. Bentinck, however, upon the prince’s recovery, was immediately seized with the same distemper, attended with a great deal of danger, but recovered soon enough to attend his highness into the field, where he was always next his person; and his courage and abilities answered the great opinion his highness had formed of him, and from this time he employed him in his most secret and important affairs. In 1677, M. Bentinck was sent by the prince of Orange into England, to solicit a match with the princess Mary, eldest daughter of James, at that time duke of York (afterwards king James II.) which was soon after concluded. And in 1685, upon the duke of Monmouth’s invasion of this kingdom, he was sent over to king James to offer him his master’s assistance, both of his troops and person, to head them against the rebels, but, through a misconstruction put on his message, his highness’s offer was rejected by the king. In the year 1688, when the prince of Orange intended an expedition into England, he sent M. Bentinck, on the elector of Brandenburgh'a death, to the new elector, to communicate to him his design upon England, and to solicit his assistance. In this negociation M. Bentinck was so successful as to bring back a more favourable and satisfactory answer than the prince had expected; the elector having generously granted even more than was asked of him. M. Bentincfc had also a great share in the revolution; and in this difficult and important affair, shewed all the prudence and sagacity of the most consummate statesman. It was he that was applied to, as the person in the greatest confidence with the prince, to manage the negociations that were set on foot, betwixt his highness and the English nobility and gentry, who had recourse to him to rescue them from the danger they were in. He was also two months constantly at the Hague, giving the necessary orders for the prince’s expedition, which was managed by him with such secrecy, that nothing was suspected, nor was there ever so great a design executed in so short a time, a transport fleet of 500 vessels having been hired in three days. M. Bentinck accompanied the prince to England, and after king James’s abdication, during the interregnum, he held the first place among those who composed the prince’s cabinet at that critical time, and that, in such a degree of super-eminence, as scarcely left room for a second: and we may presume he was not wanting in his endeavours to procure the crown for the prince his master; who, when he had obtained it, was as forward on his part, in rewarding the faithful and signal services of M. Bentinck, whom he appointed groom of the stole, privy purse, first gentleman of the royal bedchamber, and first commoner upon the list of privy counsellors. He was afterwards naturalised by act of parliament; and, by letters patent bearing date the 9th of April 1689, two clays before the king and queen’s coronation, he was created baron of Cirencester, viscount Woodstock, and earl of Portland. In 1690, the earl of Portland, with many others of the English nobility, attended king William to Holland, where the earl acted as envoy for his majesty, at the grand congress held at the Hague the same year. In 1695, king William made this nobleman a grant of the lordships of Denbigh, Bromtield, Yale, and other lands, containing many thousand acres, in the principality of Wales, but these being part of the demesne thereof, the grant was opposed, and the house of commons addressed the king to put a stop to the passing it, which his majesty accordingly complied with, and recalled the grant, promising, however, to find some other way of shewing his favour to lord Portland, who, he said, had deserved it by long and faithful services. It was to this nobleman that the plot for assassinating king William in 1695 was first discovered; and his lordship, by his indefatigable zeal, was very instrumental in bringing to light the whole of that execrable scheme. The same year another affair happened, in which he gave such a shining proof of the strictest honour and integrity, as has done immortal honour to his memory. The parliament having taken into consideration the affairs of the East India company, who, through mismanagement and corrupt dealings, were in danger of losing their charter, strong interest was made with the members of both houses, and large sums distributed, to procure a new establishment of their company by act of parliament. Among those noblemen whose interest was necessary to bring about this affair, lord Portland’s was particularly courted, and an extraordinary value put upon it, much beyond that of any other peer; for he was offered no less than the sum of 50,000l. for his vote, and his endeavours with the king to favour the design. But his lordship treated this offer with all the contempt it deserved, telling the person employed in it, that if he ever so much as mentioned such a thing to him again, he would for ever be the company’s enemy, and give them all the opposition in his power. This is an instance of public spirit not often mst with, and did not pass unregarded; for we find it recorded in an eloquent speech of a member of parliament, who related this noble action to the house of commons, much to the honour of lord Portland. It was owing to this nobleman, also, that the Banquetting-house at Whitehall was saved, when the rest of the Palace was destroyed by fire. In February 1696, he was created a knight of the garter, at a chapter held at Kensington, and was installed at Windsor on the 25th of March, 1697, at which time he was also lieutenant-general of his majesty’s forces: for his lordship’s services were not confined to the cabinet; he likewise distinguished himself in the field on several occasions, particularly at the battle of the Boyne, battle of Landen, where he was wounded, siege of Limerick, Namur, &c. As his lordship thus attended his royal master in his wars both in Ireland and Flanders, and bore a principal command there, so he was honoured by his majesty with the chief management of the famous peace of Ryswick; having, in some conferences with the marshal BoufHers, settled the most difficult and tender point, and which might greatly have retarded the conclusion of the peace. This was concerning the disposal of king James; the king of France having solemnly promised, in an open declaration to all Europe, that he would never lay down his arms tilt he had restored the abdicated king to his throne, and consequently could not own king William, without abandoning him. Not long after the conclusion of the peace, king William nominated the earl of Portland to be his ambassador extraordinary to the court of France; an, honour justly due to him, for the share he had in bringing about the treaty of Hysvvick; and the king could not have fixed upon a person better qualified to support his high character with dignity and magnificence. The French likewise had a great opinion of his lordship’s capacity and merit; and no ambassador was ever so respected and caressed in France as his lordship was, who, on his part, filled his employment with equal honour to the king, the British nation, and himself. According to Prior, however, the earl of Portland went on this embassy with reluctance, having been for some time alarmed with the growing favour of a rival in king William’s affection, namely, Keppel, afterwards created earl of Albermarle, a DutchmLin, who had also been page to his majesty. “And,” according to Prior, “his jealousy was not ill-grounded for Albemarle so prevailed in lord Portland’s absence, that he obliged him, by several little affronts, to lay down all his employments, after which he was never more in favour, though the king always shewed an esteem for him.” Bishop Burnet says “That the earl of Portland observed the progress of the king’s favour to the lord Albemaiie with great uneasiness they grew to be not only incompatible, as all rivals for favour must be, but to hate and oppose one another in every thing; the one (lord Portland) had more of the confidence, the other more of the favour. Lord Portland, upon his return from his embassy to France, could not bear the visible superiority in favour that the other was growing up to; so he took occasion, from a small preference given lord Albemarle in prejudice of his own post, as groom of the stole, to withdraw from court, and lay down all his employments. The king used all possible means to divert him from this resolution, but could not prevail on him to alter it: he, indeed, consented to serve his majesty still in his state affairs, but would not return to any post in the household.” This change, says bishop Kennet, did at first please the English and Dutch, the earl of Albermarle having cunningly made several powerful friends in both nations, who, out of envy to lord Portland, were glad to see another in his place; and it is said that lord Albemarle was supported by the earl of Sutherland and Mrs. Villiers to pull down lord Portland: however, though the first became now the reigning favourite, yet the latter, says bishop Kennet, did ever preserve the esteem and affection of king William. But king William was not one of those princes who are governed by favourites. He was his own minister in all the greater parts of government, as those of war and peace, forming alliances and treaties, and he appreciated justly the merit of those whom he employed in his service. It is highly probable, therefore, that lord Portland never Jost the king’s favourable opinion, although he might be obliged to give way to a temporary favourite. The earl of Albemarle had been in his majesty’s service from a youth, was descended of a noble family in Guelderland, attended king William into England as his page of honour, and being a young lord of address and temper, with a due mixture of heroism, it is no wonder his majesty took pleasure in his conversation in the intervals of state business, and in making his fortune, who had so long followed his own. Bishop Burnet says, it is a difficult matter to account for the reasons of the favour shewn by the king, in the highest degree, to these two lords, they being in all respects, not only of different, but of quite opposite characters; secrecy and fidelity being the only qualities in which they did in any sort agree. Lord Albetnarle was very cheerful and gay, had all the arts of a court, was civil to all, and procured favours for many; but was so addicted to his pleasures that he could scarcely submit to attend on business, and had never yet distinguished himself in any thing. On the other hand, lord Portland was of a grave and sedate disposition, and indeed, adds the bishop, was thought rather too cold and dry, and had not the art of creating friends; but was indefatigable in business, and had distinguished himself on many occasions. With another author, Mackey, his lordship has the character of carrying himself with a very lofty mien, yet was not proud, nor much beloved nor hated by the people. But it is no wonder if the earl of Portland was not acceptable to the English nation. His lordship had been for ten years entirely trusted by the king, was his chief favourite and bosom-friend, and the favourites of kings are seldom favourites of the people, and it must be owned king William was immoderately lavish to those he personally loved. But as long as history has not charged his memory with failings that might deservedly render him obnoxious to the public, there can be no partiality in attributing this nobleman’s unpopularity partly to the above reasons, and partly to his being a foreigner, for which he suffered not a little from the envy and malice of his enemies, in their speeches, libels, &c. of which there were some levelled as well against the king as against his lordship. The same avereion, however, to foreign favourites, soon after shewed itself against lord Albemarle, who, as he grew into power and favour, like lord Portland, began to be looked upon with the same jealousy; and when the king gave him the order of the garter, in the year 1700, we are told it was generally disliked, and his majesty, to make it pass the better, at the same time conferred the like honour on Jord Pembroke (an English nobleman of illustrious birth). Yet it was observed, that few of the nobility graced the ceremony of their installation with their presence, and that many severe reflections were then made on his majesty, for giving the garter to his favourite. The king had for a long time given the earl of Portland the entire and absolute government of Scotland; and his lordship was also employed, in the year 1698, in the new negociation set on foot for the succession of the Crown of Spain, called by the name of the partition treaty > the intention of which being frustrated by the treachery of the French king, the treaty itself fell under severe censure, and was looked upon as a fatal slip in the politics of that reign; and lord Portland was impeached by the house of commons, in the year 1700, for advising and transacting it, as were also the other lords concerned with him in it. This same year, lord Portland was a second time attacked, together with lord Albemarle, by the house of commons, when the affair of the disposal of the forfeited estates in Ireland was under their consideration; it appearing upon inquiry, that the king had, among many other grants, made one to lord Woodstock (the earl of Portland’s son) of 135,820 acres of land, and to lord Albemarle two grants, of 108,633 acres in possession and reversion; the parliament came to a resolution to resume these grants; and also resolved, that the advising and passing them was highly reflecting on the king’s honour; and that the officers and instruments concerned in the procuring and passing those grants, had highly failed in the performance of their trust and duty; and also, that the procuring or passing exorbitant grants, by any member now of the privy-council, or by any other that had been a privy -counsellor, in this, or any former reign, to his use or benefit, was a high crime and misdemeanour. To carry their resentment still farther, the commons, immediately impeached the earls of Portland and Albemarle, for procuring for themselves exorbitant grants. This impeachment, however, did not succeed, and then the commons voted an address to his majesty, that no person who was not a native of his dominions, excepting his royal highness prince George of Denmark, should be admitted to his majesty’s councils in England or Ireland, but this was evaded by the king’s going the very next day to the house of lords, passing the bills that were ready, and putting an end to the session. The partition treaty was the last public transaction we find lord Portland engaged in, the next year after his impeachment, 1701, having put a period to the life of his royal and munificent master, king William III.; but not without having shewn, even in his last moments, that his esteem and affection for lord Portland ended but with his life: for when his majesty was just expiring, he asked, though with a faint voice, for the earl of Portland, but before his lordship could come, the king’s voice quite failed him. The earl, however, placing his ear as near his majesty’s mouth as could be, his lips were observed to move, but without strength to express his mind to his lordship; but, as the last testimony of the cordial affection he bore him, he took him by the hand, and carried it to his heart with great tenderness, and expired soon after. His lordship had before been a witness to, and signed his majesty’s last will and testament, made at the Hague in 1695; and it is said, that king William, the winter before he died, told lord Portland, as they were walking together in the garden at Hampton court, that he found his health declining very fast, and that he could not live another summer, but charged his lordship not to mention this till after his majesty’s death. We are told, that at the time of the king’s death, lord Portland was keeper of Windsor great park, and was displaced upon queen Anne’s accession to the throne: we are not, however, made acquainted with the time when his lordship became first possessed of that post. After king William’s death, the earl did not, at least openly, concern himself with public affairs, but betook himself to a retired life, in a most exemplary way, at his seat at Bulstrode in the county of Bucks, where he erected and plentifully endowed a free-school; and did many other charities. His lordship had an admirable taste for gardening, and took great delight in improving and beautifying his own gardens, which he made very elegant and curious. At length, being taken ill of a pleurisy and malignant fever, after about a week’s illness he died, November 23, 1709, in the sixty-first year of his age, leaving behind him a very plentiful fortune, being at that time reputed one of the richest subjects in Europe. His corpse being conveyed to London, was, on the third of December, carried with, great funeral pomp, from his house in St. James’s square to Westminster-abbey, and there interred in the vault under the east window of Henry the Seventh’s chapel.

er as governor to Jamaica, 1722, and died there 1726, aged forty-five. William his son, second duke, who died in 1762, married lady Margaret Cavendish Harley, only child

Henry, his son, second earl, was created duke of Portland, 1716, and having incurred great loss of fortune by the South Sea bubble, went over as governor to Jamaica, 1722, and died there 1726, aged forty-five. William his son, second duke, who died in 1762, married lady Margaret Cavendish Harley, only child of the second earl of Oxford, and heiress to the vast estates of the Cavendishes, formerly dukes of Newcastle. This lady, after the duke’s death, lived with splendid hospitality at Bulstrode, which was the resort not only of persons of the highest rank, but of those most distinguished for talents and eminence in the literary world. To her, posterity will ever be indebted, for securing to the public the inestimable treasures of learning contained in the noble manuscript library of her father and grandfather, earls of Oxford, now deposited in the British museum, by the authority of parliament, under the guardianship of the most distinguished persons of the realm, easy of access, and consequently of real use to the philosopher, the statesman, the historian, and the scholar. She died July 17, 1785, and the following year her own museum, collected at vast expence to herself', and increased by some valuable presents from her friends, was disposed of by auction, by the late Mr. Alderman Skinner. The sale lasted thirty-seven days. Among the books was the fine Missal, known by the name of the Bedford Missal, of which Mr. Gough published an account, as will be noticed in his life. This splendid volume was purchased by, and is now in the very curious and valuable library of James Edwards, esq. of Harrow-on-the-hill.

egal. During the progress of the Ameiican war, his grace continued invariably to vote with the party who opposed the measures of administration, and became perhaps more

, third duke of Portland, was born in 1738, and educated at Christchurch, Oxford, where he was created M. A. Feb. 1, 1757. He afterwards travelled for some time on the continent, and on his return was elected M. P. for Weobly, but in 1762 was called up to the house of peers on the death of his father. From that period, we find him generally dividing on important questions with the minority, and having connected himself with the late marquis of Rockingham, during that nobleman’s short-lived administration in 1765, he held the office of lord chamberlain. In 1767-8, his grace was involved in a long dispute with government respecting the grant of the forest of Inglewood to sir James Lowther, which had been part of the estates belonging to the duke’s ancestors, but by a decision of the court of exchequer in 1771, the grant was declared to be illegal. During the progress of the Ameiican war, his grace continued invariably to vote with the party who opposed the measures of administration, and became perhaps more closely united to them by his marriage with lady Dorothy Cavendish, sister to the duke of Devonshire. When the administration of lord North, which had conducted that unfortunate war, was dissolved in 1782, and replaced by the marquis of Rockingham, and his friends, the duke of Portland was appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland, but owing to the death of the marquis, he remained in this office only about three months. In consequence of the same event, some of the party were for earl Fitzwilliam, and some for the duke of Portland, as the ostensible head of the new arrangement, but in the mean time his majesty preferred the earl of Shelburne, Mr. Pitt, &c. The memorable coalition then took place between lord North and Mr. Fox, supported by many of the friends of the latter; but soon was not more unacceptable to his majesty than to the nation, whose confidence in public professions was shaken to a degree of indifference from which perhaps it has never since recovered. The coalition-ministry, however, having the voice of the house of commons in their favour, his majesty determined to appeal to the people by a general election, the issue of which was completely unfavourable to his grace’s friends; and Mr. Pitt, who had been appointed first lord of the treasury and chancellor of the exchequer, found a decided majority of the parliament and of the country on his side. An attempt was indeed made to engage Mr. Pitt and the duke in the same administration, but as the latter insisted as a preliminary, that Mr. Pitt should resign, the negociation was soon broken off.

Clement VIII. was determined to take possession of Ferrara, under the pretence that Caesar of Este, who succeeded the childless duke Alphonsus, was of an illegitimate

, celebrated in the Romish church as a cardinal, and in literature as a historian, was of the same family with the preceding, and born at Ferrara in 1579. After studying there for some time, he went to Padua, where he soon had occasion to display his prudence and address. When pope Clement VIII. was determined to take possession of Ferrara, under the pretence that Caesar of Este, who succeeded the childless duke Alphonsus, was of an illegitimate branch, the marquis Hippolyto Bentivoglio, brother to Guy, a general officer in the service of Alphonsus, and attached to Caesar, excited the anger of cardinal Aldobrandini, who commanded the expedition, under the title of General of the holy church. Guy, who was now only nineteen years old, went immediately to the cardinal, to negociate for his brother, by the mediation of cardinal Bandini, a friend to his family, and contributed very essentially to make his brother’s peace, after the treaty had been concluded between the pope and the duke in January 1598. The pope having gone in person to take possession of Ferrara, admitted young Bentivoglio into his presence, and gave him the title of his private chamberlain.

gent of France at the court of Rome. Here he soon became the confidential friend of pope Urban VIII. who, in 1641, bestowed on him the bishopric of Palestrina. On the

After he had passed some years at Rome, where he made many friends, pope Paul V. appointed him his referendary, and sent him, with the title of archbishop of Rhodes, as apostolic nuncio, into Flanders, where he arrived in 1607. After remaining there nine years, he was, in 1617, appointed nuncio in France, and acted with so much dexterity with respect to the affairs of both courts, that when he was made cardinal, Jan. 11, 1621, Louis XIII. chose him to be the agent of France at the court of Rome. Here he soon became the confidential friend of pope Urban VIII. who, in 1641, bestowed on him the bishopric of Palestrina. On the death of this pope in 1644, it was generally thought that cardinal Bentivoglio would be his successor; but he had scarcely entered the conclave when the heat overpowered him, and brought on a fever, of which he died September 7, of that year. He was interred in the church of the Theatins of St. Silvester, in a private manner, agreeably to his own desire, owing to his affairs being deranged. He owed large sums at his death, in order to pay part of which he had been obliged, some time before, to sell his palace at Rome. A magnificent style of living was then one of the means by which the Romish ecclesiastics endeavoured to acquire the humble title of “Servant of servants,” and Bentivoglio had not neglected this or any other expedient. He was in truth a consummate politician, knew how to re^ concile clashing interests, and how to assume every necessary change of character; his historical memoirs partake of this character, being cautious, reserved, yet amusing and illustrative of the characters and events of the times in which he lived. His works are, 1. “Relazioni del card. Bentivoglio in tempo delle sue nunziature di Fiandra e di Francia, date in luce da Ericio Puteano (Henry Dupuy), Antwerp, 1629; Cologne, 1630; Paris, 1631; all in 4to; translated into English by Henry earl of Monmouth, London, 1652, folio. 2.” Delia guerra di Fiandra,“in six books, printed at various times, but all included in the edition of Cologne, 1639, 4to, which is considered as the best. This likewise was translated into English by the earl of Monmouth, 1654, folio. 3.” Kaccolta di lettere scritte in tempo delle sue nunziature di Fiandra et di Francia,“Cologne, 1631, 4to. A fine edition of this was lately published by M. Biagioli, at Didot’s press, Paris, 1807, 12mo, with French notes, grammatical and philosophical, and a literal translation was published at London, 1764, for the use of learners of the Italian tongue, but it was feebly executed. In 1727, an edition of the original was printed at Cambridge. 4.” Memorie^ owero diario del cardinal Bentivoglio,“Amst. 1648, 8vO. He wrote these memoirs in 1642, with a view, as he says in his preface, to please himself, and he relates what he would wish posterity to know of his history and character. The whole of his works, with the exception of his” Memoirs," were published together at Paris, 1645, folio, and apparently reprinted 1648, but this is the same publication with a new title-page. They were also printed, including the Memoirs, at Venice, 1668, 4to.

collections. His brother Louis and his sister Cornelia were also cultivators of poetry. The latter, who died in 1711, is highly spoken of by Crescembini in his history

, of Arragon, a cardinal and poet, one of the sons of the preceding, was born at Ferrara, March 27, 1668, and in the course of his studies, distinguished himself by the progress he made in the belleslettres, philosophy, theology, and law, and was an able and successful supporter of the literary establishments of his country. Having afterwards gone to reside at Rome, he was promoted by Clement XI. to be his domestic prelate, and clerk of the apostolic chamber, and in 1712 was sent as nuncio to France, with the title of archbishop of Carthage. There, having discovered much zeal in the affair of the bull Unigenitus, he acquired high favour at the court of Louis XIV. vvhicii he did not preserve after the death of that monarch. The pope, on that event, recalled him from Paris, and at Ferrara he was made cardinal in November, 1719. He then settled at Rome, where many other dignities were conferred upon him, and where he died, December 30, 1732. Amidst his whole career of ecclesiastical promotions and duties, he found leisure to cultivate his taste for polite literature. There are extant several of his harangues pronounced on various occasions; that which he delivered at Rome, in the academy of design, in which he investigates the uses, to taste and morals, of the arts of painting, sculpture, and architecture, was printed under the title “Utile delle belle arti riconosciuto per l'accademia del disegno, orazione,” &c. liome, 1707, and reprinted in vol. II. of the “Prose degli A-rcadi.” The work, however, which entitles him to a place among the poets of Italy, is his beautiful translation of Statius, “La Tebaidadi Stazio tradotto in verso sciolto da Seivaggio Porpora,” (a fictitious name), Rome, 1729, 4to; Milan, 1731, 2 vols. 4to. There are besides some of his sonnets in the collections. His brother Louis and his sister Cornelia were also cultivators of poetry. The latter, who died in 1711, is highly spoken of by Crescembini in his history of the academy of the Arcadians of Rome.

y 27, 1661-2, at Oulton, in the parish of Wakefield, in the West Riding of Yorkshire. His ancestors, who were of some consideration, possessed an estate, and had a seat

, regius professor of divinity, and master of Trinity college, Cambridge, a very eminent critic of*he last age, was born January 27, 1661-2, at Oulton, in the parish of Wakefield, in the West Riding of Yorkshire. His ancestors, who were of some consideration, possessed an estate, and had a seat at Hepenstall, in the parish of Halifax. His grandfather, James Bentley, was a captain in king Charles I.'s army, at the time of the civil wars, and being involved in the fate of his party, had his house plundered, his estate confiscated, and was himself carried prisoner to Pomfret castle, where he died. Thomas Bentley, the son of James, and father of Dr. Bentley, married the daughter of Richard Willis of Oulton, who had been a major in the royal army. This lady, who was a woman of exceeding good understanding, taught her son Richard his accidence. To his grandfather Willis, who was left his guardian, he was, in part, indebted for his education; and having gone through the grammar-school at Wakefield with singular reputation, both for his proficiency and his exact and regular behaviour, he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. Johnson, on the 24th of May, 1676, being then only four months above fourteen years of age. On the 22d of March, 1681-2, he stood candidate for a fellowship, and would have been unanimously elected, had he not been excluded by the statutes, on account of his being too young for priest’s orders. He was then a junior bachelor, and but little more than nineteen years old. It was soon after this that he became a schoolmaster at Spalding. But that he did not continue Jong in this situation is certain from a letter of his grandfather Willis’s, still preserved in the family, from which it appears that he was with Dr. Stillingfleet, at the deanery of St. Paul’s, on the 25th of April, 1683. He had been recommended by his college to the dean, as preceptor to his son and Dr. Stillingfleet gave Mr. Bentley his choice, whether he would carry his pupil to Cambridge or Oxford. He fixed upon the latter university, on account of the Bodleian library, to the consulting of the manuscripts of which he applied with the closest attention. Being now of age, he made over a small estate, which he derived from his family, to his elder brother, and immediately laid out the money he obtained for it in the purchase of books. It is recorded of him, that having, at a very early age, made surprising progress in the learned languages, his capacity for critical learning soon began to display itself. Before the age of twenty-four, he had written with his own hand a sort of Hexapla, a thick volume in 4to, in the first column of which was every word of the Hebrew bible, alphabetically disposed, and in five other columns all the various interpretations of those words, in the Chalclee, Syriac, Vulgate Latin, Septuagint, and Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodosian, that occur in the whole Bible. This he made for his own private use, to know the Hebrew, not from the late rabbins, but the ancient versions, when, excepting Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic, he must then have read over the whole Polyglott. He had also at that time made, for his own private use, another volume in 4 to, of the various lections and emendations of the Hebrew text, drawn out of those ancient versions, which, though done at such an early age, would have made a second part to the famous Capellus’s “Critica Sacra.

on’s “Principia Mathematica,” to demonstrate the being of God, and altogether silenced the Atheists, who, in this country, have since that time, for the most part, sheltered

On the 4th of July, 1.689, being already M.A. in the university of Cambridge, he was incorporated as such in the university of Oxford, in Wadham college, and is mentioned by Anthony Wood (though then but a young man, a good deal under thirty) as a genius that was promising, and to whom the world was likely to be obliged, for his future studies and productions. In 1691 he published a Latin epistle to John Mill, D.D. containing some critical observations relating to Johannes Malala, Greek historiographer, published at the end of that author, at Oxon, in 1691, in a large 8vo. This was the first piece that our author published. Nor was religion less indebted to him than learning, for in 1691-2, he had the honour to be selected as the first person to preach at Boyle’s lectures (founded by that honourable gentleman, to assert and vindicate the great fundamentals of natural and revealed religion), upon which occasion he successfully applied sir Isaac Newton’s “Principia Mathematica,” to demonstrate the being of God, and altogether silenced the Atheists, who, in this country, have since that time, for the most part, sheltered themselves under Deism. The subject of his discourses was the folly of atheism, even with respect to the present life, and that matter and motion cannot think; or a confutation of atheism from the faculties of the soul, from the structure and origin of human bodies, and the origin and trame of the world itself; and though he was bnt young, and even only in deacon’s orders, he laid the basis and foundation upon which all the successors to that worthy office have since built. Though this was a task of great extent, and no small difficulty, yet Mr. Bentley acquitted himself with so much reputation, that the trustees not only publicly thanked him for them, but did moreover, by especial command and desire, prevail upon him to make the said discourses public, upon which he gave the world a volume, 1693, 4to, containing eight sermons, which have not only undergone a number of editions, but have been translated abroad into several languages. On the 2d of October, 1692, he was installed a prebendary of Worcester by bishop Stillingfleet. Upon the death of Mr. Justel, Mr. Bentley was immediately thought upon to succeed him, as keeper of the royal library at St. James’s; and accordingly, a few months after his decease, he had a warrant made out for that place, from the secretary’s office, December 23, 1693, and had his patent for the same in April following. Soon after he was nominated to that office, before his patent was signed, by his care and diligence he procured no less than a thousand volumes of one sort or other, which had been neglected to be brought to the library, according to the act of parliament then subsisting, which prescribed that one copy of every book printed in England, should be brought and lodged in this library, and one in each university library. It was about this time and upon this occasion of his being made library-keeper, that the famous dispute between him and the honourable Mr. Boyle, whether the epistles of Phalaris were genuine or riot, in some measure, at first took rise, which gave occasion to so maiw books and pamphlets, and has made so much noise in the world. This controversy upon a point of learning, in itself not very entertaining, was managed with a wit and humour which rendered it interesting to the public. The world was at that time a little biassed in favour of the production of the young nobleman, at least as to the genteel raillery of his pieces; for as to the dispute itself, viz. the genuineness of the Epistles of Phalaris, the best judge^s almost universally now give the preference to Dr. Bentley; nor does he much, if at all, fall short of Mr. Boyle, in throwing a deal of life and spirit into the controversy, particularly in his answer to Mr. Boyle, which is interspersed, as well as Mr. Boyle’s piece, with abundance of wit and humour, and is, upon the whole, reckoned much the best book. When, in 1696, he was admitted to his degree of D. D. he preached, on the day of the public commencement, from 1 Peter iii. 15. “Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you.” About this time the university entered upon a design of publishing some editions, in 4to, of some classic authors, for the use of the duke of Gloucester. Dr. Bentley, who was consulted upon the occasion, advised Laughton, to whose care the edition of Virgil was committed, to follow Heinsius very close, but his advice was not complied with. Terence was published by Leng, Horace byTalbot, and Catullus, Tibnllus, and Propertius, by Mr. Annesley, afterwards earl of Anglesey. Dr. Bentley procurecUfrom Holland the types with which these books were printed. At the express desire of his friend Mr. Graevius, he published his “Animadversions and remarks on the poet Callimachus,” making, at the same time, a collection of some scattered pieces or fragments of that author. These he finished and sent over to Mr. Grarmus, towards the latter end of his dispute with Mr. Boyle, and Mr. Graevius published them abroad in 1697. in 1700, upon the death of Dr. Montague, he was by the crown presented to the mastership of Trinity-college, Cambridge, which is reckoned worth near 1000l. per annum, upon obtaining which preferment he resigned his prebend of Worcester; but June 12, 1701, on Dr. Say well’s death, he was collated archdeacon of Ely. What next employed his critical genius were the two first comedies of Aristophanes. Upon these he made some curious annotations, which were published at Amsterdam in 1710; as was much about the same time, at Rheims, his emendations, &c. on the fragments of Menancler and Philemon, in the feigned name of “Philcleutherus Lipsiensis.” Under this character he appeared again, in 1713, in remarks upon Collins’s discourse of free-thinking, a book which had made no small noise in the world at that time. This he handles and confutes in a critical, learned, and yet familiar manner. Before his Remarks on Freethinking, in 1711, came forth his so long-expected and celebrated edition of Horace. What he intended, was not properly to explain his author, but only to correct what he judged remained still corrupted in the text, as he himself tells us in his preface; and this by the help and assistance, either of ancient manuscripts, old editions, or by conjecture. This, it must be confessed, was a nice and dangerous undertaking, but he succeeded at least in correcting a much greater number of passages than any, or all his former interpreters, ever had done; furnishing us, in this his new edition of our elegant Roman poet, with a great number of very plausible, and probable, and unquestionably, some genuine emendations. Le Clerc abroad was Bentley’s chief opponent in this edition. At home, in the year following the doctor’s edition, viz. 1712, came out, by various hands, the odes and epodes of Horace, in sixpenny numbers, making in the whole two volumes in 8vo; the titles of which are “The odes and epodes of Horace in Latin and English, with a translation of Dr. Bentley’s notes. To which are added notes upon notes, done in the Bentleian style and manner.” In the preface they “humbly hope that the reader will encourage the following essays, upon several accounts. First, as they are designed to shew him the best author of Augustus’s age in his native purity. Secondly, to give him a further proof how far all attempts to render him into English, even after the best version now extant has succeeded no better, must fall short of the original. Thirdly, to convince him how ridiculous it is to presume to correct Horace without authority, upon the pretended strength of superior judgment in poetry. And lastly, how easily such a presumption may be turned upon the authors, and sufficiently expose them in their own way.” This last paragraph seems indeed to express the greatest part of the design of this work, which is executed with a great deal of spirit and humour. On the 5th of November, 1715, the doctor preached a sermon before the university against popery, on which somebody soon after published remarks, which occasioned Dr, Bentley’s answer, entitled “Reflections on the scandalous aspersions cast on the Clergy, by the author of the Remarks on Dr. Bentley’s Sermon on Popery, &c.” This was printed in 1717, in 8vo. In 1716, at which time he succeeded to the chair of Regius professor of divinity, the doctor had two printed letters inscribed to him, dated Jan. 1, to which also was added his answer, concerning his intended edition of the Greek Testament, giving some account of what was to be expected in that edition; and in them we are informed, that he intended to make no use of any manuscript in this edition that was not a thousand years old or above; of which sort he had got at that time twenty together in his study, which made up, one with another, 20,000 years. After having had this affair in agitation for about four years, he at last published proposals for it, which met with great encouragement. But soon after came out Remarks, paragraph by paragraph, on these proposals, by Dr. Conyers Middleton, as it afterwards appeared, who sets out by assuring his reader, that it was neither personal spleen, nor envy to the author of the Proposals, that drew the following remarks from him, but a serious conviction that Dr. Bentley had neither talents nor materials proper for the work, and that religion was much more likely to receive detriment than service from it. “The time, manner, and other circumstances of these proposals,” says he, “make it but too evident, that they were hastened out to serve quite different ends than those of common Christianity; and I think it my duty to obviate, as far as I am able, the influence they might have on some, whom big words, and bold attempts, are apt to lead implicitly into an high opinion and admiration of the merit and abilities of the undertaker.” Dr. Middleton then proceeds to criticise, paragraph by paragraph, Dr. Bentley’s proposals. Soon after these Remarks, paragraph by paragraph, the Proposals appeared, with a pamphlet entitled “A full answer to all the Remarks of a late pamphleteer, by a member of Trinity college, Cambridge,1721, signed J. E. This Dr. Middleton, and all, imagined could be none but the doctor himself, as well from the style, as the letters J. E. the two first vowels of Richard Bentley: and, upon this supposition, Dr. Middleton and others, in their future remarks, make that one great handle for abusing him. It is, however, somewhat uncertain, whether Dr. Middleton might not be as much mistaken as to the author of those Remarks, as the very author of those Remarks was with respect to the author of the Remarks paragraph by paragraph, who supposed them to be made by Dr. Colbatch. Soon after this came out a pamphlet, with some further “Remarks, &c. containing a full answer to the editor’s late defence -of his Proposals, as well as all his objections there made against my former remarks, by Conyers Middleton, D. D.” As also, an anonymous letter to the reverend master of Trinity college, Cambridge, editor of a new Greek Testament. We also find, under the Catalogue of the doctor’s works in the Bibliotheca Bodleiana,-much about this time, another publication, somewhat analogous, and relating to this affair, viz. “An enquiry into the authority of the primitive Complutensian edition of the New Testament, in a letter to archdeacon Bentley,1722, 8vo. As to these proposals, Dr. Middleton takes upon him to say, that they were only published with a view “that some noise should be made in the world in his favour, to support his declining character by something great and popular, to recover esteem and applause to himself, and throw an odium and contempt upon his prosecutors, &c.” In 1725, at a public commencement on the 6th of July, the doctor made an elegant Latin speech, on creating seven doctors of divinity, in which, at the several periods, by little notes below, is set forth the whole form of the creation of a doctor of divinity. This piece is usually joined to his edition of Terence and Phsedrus: at least it is added to the Amsterdam edition of them in 1727, a very neat edition, corrected for the press by the doctor. To these notes on Terence, he has also added those of the learned Gabriel Faernius, and taken great pains in amending and correcting the author, not only from those ancient manuscripts which Gabriel Faernius had procured, but also from whatever manuscripts the royal library, those of Cambridge, or any of his friends, could afford; some of which, he assures us, were of great antiquity, and at least next, and very little inferior, to those of Faernius, the orthography of which, as the most ancient manuscript, he altogether follows. He has likewise altered the text in abundance of places, and assigns in the notes the reason for such alteration. Then follows the Schediasma of the metre and accents of Terence, by which the doctor proves that Terence is written all in Verse. This, however', was a matter of some controversy betw-een the learned bishop Hare and our author; and during the warmth of the debate. Will. Whiston remarked how intolerable it was, that while Grotius, Newton, and Locke, all laymen, were employing their talents on sacred studies, such clergymen as Dr. Bentley and bishop Hare were fighting about a play-book. About 1732, the doctor published his Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” when he was, as he says in his preface, about seventy years old. This is a very elegant and beautiful edition of that poem, but cannot be said to have contributed much to the editor’s deputation. Dr. Bentley tells us, that he had prepared a new edition of the poet Manillas for the press, which he would have published, had not the clearness of paper, and the want of good types, and some other occasions, hindered him. He had also some design of publishing an edition of Hesychius, as we find by Mr. Graevius’s letter to him, and assured Dr. Mill, he could, if he pleased, correct five thousand faults in that author. His emendations on the Tusculan Questions of Cicero are adjoined to Mr. Davis’s edition of that author. From this produce of his studious, we must now pass to that of his more active, life, in the memorable complaints of rrial -administration urged against him by the college, which were the occasion of a long suit, whether the Crown‘ or the bishop of Ely was general visitor. A party in the college, displeased at some of his regulations, began to talk of the fortieth statute, de Magistri (si res exigat) Amotionc, and meditated a complaint to the bishop of Ely. The master hearing this, went to bishop Patrick, then at Ely, who told him, he had never heard before, that, as bishop of Ely, he had any thing to do in the royal college of Trinity; called his secretary to him, and bid him seek if there was any precedent for it in the bishop’s archives; but not one was found, nor so much as a copy of Trinity college statutes. Upon that, the doctor lent him one; and during that bishop’s time the matter was dropped. But in his successor Dr. Moore’s time, the party were encouraged to apply to the bishop, in 1709, and avast number of articles about dilapidations, but not one of immorality, bribery, or fraud, were exhibited against the master. These were, however, the subject of many pamphlets on both sides. His lordship received the charge, intending to proceed upon it, which he conceived himself sufficiently authorised to do, and required Dr. Bentley’ s answer, which he declined for some time to give, pleading want of form in the charge; because other members of the college, besides the seniors, had joined in the accusation, and the seniors themselves, as he alleged, had never yet admonished him; from whence he inferred, that all proceedings on such a charge, and whatsoever should follow on the same foot, would be ipso facto null and void. The bishop, however, did not, it seems, think this plea to be material; for he insisted upon Dr. Bentley’s answer to the charge; who, upon that, began to question what authority his lordship had over him; and, by a petition presented to queen Anne, prayed “that her majesty would take him and the college into her protection, against the bishop’s pretensions, and maintain her sole power and jurisdiction over her royal foundation, and the masters thereof.” This petition was referred to the then attorney and solicitor-general, and they were ordered fully to consider the matter, and report their opinions. Notice was given at the same time to the bishop, that her majesty having taken this affair into her cognizance, his lordship was to stay proceedings till the queen’s pleasure was farther known. Mr. attorney and solicitor-general took some time to consider; and were of opinion, the bishop had power over the master. But this report not proving satisfactory to some persons then in administration, a letter was brought to the bishop from Mr. secretary St. John, dated 18th June, 1711, acquainting him, “that the matter of the petition of Dr. Richard Bentley, master of Trinity-college in Cambridge, together with the report of Mr. attorney and Mr. solicitorgeneral, being then before the queen, and ordered to be taken into consideration by my lord keeper, assisted by her majesty’s counsel learned in the law, her majesty thought it to be a business of such weight and consequence, that she had commanded him (the secretary) to signify her pleasure to his lordship, that he should stop all further proceedings, according to her majesty’s direction.” But the master seeing that all discipline and studies would be lost in the college, if that controversy were not one way or other decided, requested of the ministry that he might be permitted to take his trial under any visitor the queen should appoint; or if none could be so appointed, that he might have leave, salvo jure regio, to be voluntarily tried under the bishop. Upon this the inhibition was taken off by Mr. secretary St. John, by order of the queen, signifying, “that his lordship was at liberty to proceed, so far as by the law he might.” But his lordship did not think fit to proceed, till he was served uith a rule of court from the king’s-bench, in Easter-term 1714, to shew cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue out against him. The bishop, being then at Ely, was applied to by joint messengers on both sides, to go to the college, where he might have ended the matter in two days. But this was not thought so proper, and Ely-house at London was pitched on, where, instead of two days, the trial lasted at least six weeks, and the college paid a thousand pounds for it; three learned lawyers, who could know but very little of the matter, being admitted on each side, to make eloquent harangues, answers, and replies, upon questions arisingfrom above fifty articles, in which there was scarcely any thing material that might not easily be determined upon a bare inspection of the college statutes, registers, and books of accounts. The trial being ended, and the cause ripe for sentence, the bishop’s death prevented his giving judgment. Thus the matter dropped for the present; but was afterwards revived in 1728, when new articles of complaint against Dr. Bentley, charging him with having in many instances made great waste of the college revenue, and violated the statutes, all founded on the 40th of Elizabeth, were again exhibited to the bishop of Ely, as specially authorised and appointed to receive the same, and to proceed thereupon; though the matter had been long before decided in favour of the crown, as having the general visitatorial power. Upon this, a petition was subscribed by the college, and presented to his majesty under the common-seal, the 10th of August 1728, and the cause carried before the king in council for the college itself now engaged as party in the cause against the bishop, and above fifteen hundred pounds out of the revenues of the college, were spent in carrying it on. This being referred to a committee of his majesty’s most honourable privy-council, Dr. Fleetwood, the lord bishop of Ely, on the 2nd of November, 1728, also presented a petition to his majesty, to be heard touching his right, which was likewise referred to the said committee. The lords committee, just before the clay appointed for a hearing, viz. March 13, 1728, had a printed pamphlet put into their hands, entitled, “The Case of Trinity-college; whether the Crown or the Bishop of Ely be General Visitor;” at the end of which, as well as in their petition, the college applied to the king, to take the visitatorial power (as by the opinion of council he might with their consent) into his own hands, that they might b0 only visited by the crown, but not with a view or intent of avoiding a visitation or inquiry into the state of the society, for which they were very pressing, both in their petition, and at the end of this pamphlet. On the fifteenth the cause came on before the lords of the committee of privy-council, but was from thence referred to the king’s bench, where the May following it was tried by way of prohibition, and after a long pleading, the judges unanimously determined it in favour of the bishop, as to his visitatorial power over the doctor; and the June following, the fellows exhibited their articles of complaint against him before the bishop of Ely, his lordship having two assistants, viz. sir Henry Penrice, and Dr. Bettesworth. But it being urged, that the bishop was going to exercise a general visitatorial power, another petition was preferred to his majesty and council, by the master and fellows, and a farther hearing appointed in the cause, in the court of king’s bench, in November, 1729, &c. and in November, 1731, we find the cause had gone against the bishop of Ely, by his taking out a writ of error, for carrying the' cause by appeal into the house of lords. The crown, however, at last, to put an end to the dispute and disturbance, (as fully impowered to do) took both college and master, according to their petition, into its own jurisdiction and visitation, and here the matter ended.

ld restore the money if it wasjiot afterwards determined to be his right. In the next meeting, those who had paid the fee were created, but he refused, to create such

The proceedings of the university against Dr. Bentley in 1717 also, which were represented as violent and unjustifiable, as the effects of a power falsely usurped, or scandalously abused, and as arising from the malice of a party disaffected to the government, were the cause of great ferment and uneasiness in the university, and raised the curiosity, and drew the eyes of the whole nation upon them; for which reason we shall be a little particular in our account, that we may give the reader a just idea of the affair. In October 1717, the day after his majesty’s visit to the university, when several doctors in divinity, named by mandate, were attending in the senate-house to receive their degrees, Dr. Bentley, on creation, made a demand of four guineas from each of them, as a fee due to him as professor, over and above a broad -piece, which had by custom been allowed as a present on this occasion; and absolutely refused to create any doctor till this fee was paid him. This occasioned a long and warm dispute, till at last many of the doctors, and Dr. Middleton among the rest, consented to pay the fee in question, upon this condition, that Dr. Bentley should restore the money if it wasjiot afterwards determined to be his right. In the next meeting, those who had paid the fee were created, but he refused, to create such as would not pay it; upon which Dr. Grigg, then vice-chancellor, gave orders that some other doctor should perform the ceremony instead of him; and accordingly Dr. Fisher, the master -of Sydney-college, created several for the usual gratuity of a broad-piece. Upon this, they sent a state of the case to the chancellor, the duke of Somerset. Dr. Bentley still insisted upon his claim; but at last, instead of money, was content with a note from the rest, promising the payment of it, if it should be determined for him by the king, or any authority delegated from him; and at last submitted to create one of the king’s doctors, who came last, and some others who commenced afterwards, without either fee or note. Matters went on thus for near a twelvemonth, the doctor being in quiet possession of the money and notes: but nothing being determined about his right or title to it, Dr. Middleton thought he had reason to expect his money again; and accordingly (as it is said) he made a demand of it, first by letter, which was taken no notice of, and afterwards in person, and then applied to the vice-chancellor for a decree, which, from the tender regard the vice-chancellor had for Dr. Bentley, he was some time before he could obtain. At length, however, the decree was granted, and a known enemy of Dr. Bentley’s employed to serve it, who went to Trinity-lodge on Tuesday the 23d of September; but whether through ignorance in his own business, or that he believed Dr. Bentley, who told him that it signified nothing, not having the consent of nine heads to it, or that he had some other design than that of arresting him, he left the arrest, decree, &c. with theloctor, and came away without executing the vice-chancellor’s orders at all. Dr. Bentley was afterwards arrested by another beadle, on the 1st of October, with a second decree, which doubtless argued the invalidity of the first. The professor supposing the authority of the arrest not sufficient, refused to submit to it; but on farther consideration obeyed the writ, and put in bail. Every one, but such as were let into the secret, expected this four guineas affair would end here. Friday, the 3d of October, being appointed for the trial, the doctor only appeared there by his proctor, which was looked upon as a contempt of the vice-chancellor’s jurisdiction. Dr. Middleton, therefore, by the leave of the court, appointed Mr. Cook his proctor, who accused Dr. Bentley of contempt for not appearing, and moved for some censure upon it, and called for the beadle to make a return of the first decree. But he being confined in his chamber by a lit of the gout, there made an affidavit, by improving some circumstantial talk he had with the doctor and some other gentlemen, the subject of which was, a complaint of the ill usage he had met with in his attending at Dr. Bentley’s lodgings. Among other things, the beadle deposed, That Dr. Bentley said to him, “I will not be concluded by what the vice-chancellor and two or three of his friends shall determine over a bottle;” (thereby reflecting on the clandestine way in which they had proceeded against him, without the formal consent of such a number of heads as he thought necessary to make a statutable arrest). For this expression, the vice-chancellor suspended the doctor from all his degrees, who had no citation, no hearing, not so much as any notice, from any hand, of what was then doing; and the vice-chancellor declared that he would vacate the doctor’s professorship in two or three days, if he did not make his humble submission. Three court days are allowed for this submission, viz. the 7th, 9th, and 15th of October. On the two former days his name was not mentioned, and on the last, the vice-chancellor would certainly have forgot to summon him, if he had not been reminded by his brother the clean of Chichcster. That same day the vice-chancellor required the professor to submit, and own himself rightly suspended, which he refused, but had recourse to the only remedy that was now left, viz. an appeal to the delegates of the university which was arbitrarily refused him. On this the vice-chancellor, thinking it prudent to have the sanction of the university to back him, called a congregation, and on the third court day after the suspension, informed the university of the steps he had taken, and the message he had sent the professor, which was, that he required him to come and acknowledge his crime, the legality of his suspension, and humbly beg to be restored to his degrees; to which the gentleman (he said) had returned no answer; and then he commanded it to be registered, that he would deliberate farther of what was to be done, towards the maintenance of the university privileges and his own authority. Eight heads were present in the consistory, viz. two visitors of Bene't-college, Dr. Cove! and Dr. Balderston three late chaplains to his majesty, Dr. Laney, Dr. Adams, and Dr. Sherlock; the rival professor, Dr. Fisher; the masters of Clhre-ha!l and St. John’s college, Dr. Grigg and Dr. Jenkin. These gentlemen, at a consultation the same afternoon, in the master of Peterhouse’s lodge, appointed a congregation the next morning to degrade the professor. But,“”when the time came, a friend of the professor’s being that day one of the caput, other business was proposed, but not concluded. On Friday morning, no mention was made, as ought to have been, of the proceedings at the last congregation; but, in the afternoon, Oct. 3, 1718, a vote of the body deprived Dr. Bentley of all the privileges, honours, and degrees, that he had received from it. Upon this, Dr. Bentley drew up a petition, which he presented to his majesty Oct. 30, 1718, complaining of the proceedings of the vice-chancellor and university, and begging his majesty’s relief and protection, as supreme visitor of the university. The king in council taking the said petition into consideration, was pleased to order the same to be sent to the reverend Dr. Gooch, vice-chancellor; who was thereby directed to attend his majesty in council on Thursday the 6th of November 1718, to give an account of the proceedings which occasioned this complaint. On this day the case was heard between the university and the doctor, before the king and council, and afterwards referred to a committee of council; but the ministry being unwilling to interpose their authority with regard to the proceedings, the matter was farther referred, in a judicial way, to the court of king’s bench, where it was kept some time in agitation. At length, however, the proceedings of the university were reversed by that court; and on February the 7th, 1723-4, the court of king’s bench sent down a mandamus to the university of Cambridge, to restore Mr. Bentley, master of Trinity college, to all his degrees, and whatever he had been deprived of, &c. This was agreeable to a prophetic passage at the end of one of the pamphlets, at that time printed in his defence: “When our present heats are over, I question not but our professor’s case will be looked upon with another eye, if it be not already seen, that the honour of the university was made a pretext only to cover the resentments of some particular persons amongst its members. As the determination of it lies at present before a judgment where merit and not malice is likely to be regarded, we shall in a little time, I make no doubt, with a more scholar-like pleasure than can be perceived in this usage of the learned Bentley, congratulate ourselves upon his restoration to his well -merited honours.

dant without genius. The unjust light in which he was placed, was not entirely owing to the able men who opposed him in the Boylean controversy. It arose, perhaps, principally

The life of this eminent scholar and critic, as given in the Biographia Britannica, although professedly corrected from the first edition of that work, remains a confused collection of materials, from which we have found it difficult to form anything like a regular sketch. Few names were more familiar to the scholar and the wit in the first three reigns of the eighteenth century, than that of Bentley, but no approach has yet been made to a regular and impartial narrative of his life. This is the more to be regretted, because he occupied a large space of the literary world, and was connected by friendship or controversy with some of the most eminent writers of his age, both at home and abroad. It has been justly observed, that when we consider the great abilities and uncommon eruvlition of Dr. Bentley, it reflects some disgrace on our country, that even his literary reputation should so long be treated with contempt, that he should be represented as a mere verbal critic, and as a pedant without genius. The unjust light in which he was placed, was not entirely owing to the able men who opposed him in the Boylean controversy. It arose, perhaps, principally from the poets engaging on the same side of the question, and making him the object of their satire and ridicule. The “slashing Bentley” of Pope will be remembered and repeated by thousands who know nothing of the doctor’s real merit. Perhaps it may be found that this asperity of Mr. Pope was not entirely owing to the combination of certain wits and poets against Dr. Bentley, but to personal resentment. We are told that bishop Atterbury having Bentley and Pope both at dinner with him, insisted on knowing what opinion the doctor entertained of the English Homer; he for some time eluded the question, but, at last, being urged to speak out, he said: “The verses are good verses; but the work is not Homer, it is Spondanus.

his private character we have lately had some information from his grandson Richard Cumberland, esq. who in his own Memoirs, published a few years since, has given the

Of his private character we have lately had some information from his grandson Richard Cumberland, esq. who in his own Memoirs, published a few years since, has given the following particulars: His " ordinary style of conversation was naturally lofty, and his frequent use of thee and thou with his familiars, carried with it a kind of dictatorial tone that savoured more of the closet than the court. This is readily admitted; and this, on first approaches, might mislead a stranger but the native candour and inherent tenderness of his heart could not long be veiled from observation, for his feelings and affections were at once too impulsive to be long repressed, and he too careless of concealment to attempt at qualifying them. Such was his sensibility towards human sufferings, that it became a duty with his family to divert the conversation from all topics of that sort; and if he touched upon them himself, he was betrayed into agitations, which, if any one ascribes to paralytic weakness, he will greatly mistake a man, who, to the last hour of his life, possessed his faculties firm and in their full vigour. His emotions on these occasions had no other source and origin but in the natural and pure benevolence of his heart.

8vo.; and previous to that,” A short account of Dr. Bentley’s humanity and justice to those authors who have written before him, with an honest vindication of Thomas

We shall now attempt a catalogue of Dr. Bentley’s works, not hitherto noticed, and of the principal of those published respecting his controversies, as far as the latter can be ascertained. His first publication, as already noticed, was his epistle to Dr. Mill, under the title: 1. “Johannis Antiocheni Cognomento Malaise Historia Chronica e Mss. Cod. Bibliothecre Bodleianae, nunc primum edita, cum interp. et notis Edm. Chilmeadi et triplice indice rerum, autorum et vocum barbarum. Prsemittitur dissertatio de autore, per Humfredum Hodium, S. T. B. Coll. Wadhami Socium. Accedit Epistola Richardi Bentleii ad CI. V. Jo. Millium, S. T. P. cum indice scriptorum, qui ibi emendantur,” Oxonii, 1691, 8vo. 2. His “Sermons at Boyle’s Lectures,1693-4, 4to. His controversy with Mr. Boyle on the edition of Phalaris, which produced in 1697, 3. His “Dissertation upon the Epistles of Themistocles, Socrates, Euripides, Phalaris, and the Fables of Æsop,” at the end of the second edition of Wotton’s “Reflections on ancient and modern learning.” This occasioned Mr. Boyle’s work, “Dr. Bentley’s Dissertation on the Epistles of Phalaris and the Fables of Æsop examined, 1698; usually known by the title of” Boyle Against Bentley.“Dr. fientley then published, 4.” Dr. Bentley’s answer to the above,“commonly known by the name of” Bentley against Boyle,“a curious piece, interspersed with a great deal of true wit and humour. This was for some time a scarce book; but it was reprinted in 1777, by Bowyer and Nichols, with the advantage of several valuable notes and observations, either collected from, or communicated by, bishops Warburton and Lowth, Mr. Upton, Mr. W. Clarke, Mr. Markland, Dr. Salter, Dr. Owen, and Mr. Toup. These were the several pieces which appeared in this great dispute, excepting some few that were published against the doctor, hardly any of which are now known, except” A short review of the controversy between Mr. Boyle and Dr. Bentley,“1701, 8vo.; and previous to that,” A short account of Dr. Bentley’s humanity and justice to those authors who have written before him, with an honest vindication of Thomas Stanley, esq. and his notes on Callimachus. To which are added some other observations on that poet, in a letter to the honourable Charles Boyle, esq. with a Postscript, in relation to Dr. Bentley’s late book against him. To which is added an Appendix, by the bookseller, wherein the doctor’s misrepresentations of all the matters of fact, wherein he is concerned, in his late book about Phalaris’s Epistles, are modestly considered, with a letter from the honourable Charles Boyle on that subject,“Lond. 1699, 8vo. 5.” Annotationes, in Callimachum ultra, 1697. Collectio fragmentorum Callimachi et Annotationes ad eadem.“Of this an edition was published in 1741, 8vo. 6.” Remarks upon a late discourse on Free-thinking (by Collins) in two parts, by Phileleutherus Lipsiensis,“Lond. 1713, 8vo 1719, 1725. 7.” Q. Horatius Flaccus ex recensione, et cum notis et emendationibus R. Bentleii,“Camb, 1711, 4to; Amst. 1713 and 1728, 8vo Leipsic, 1763, 2 vols. 8.” Proposals for printing a new edition of the Greek Testament,“Lond. 1721, 4to. Of the pamphlets pro and con respecting his disputes with his college and with the university, a very correct catalogue may be seen in Gough’s” British Topography."

he does not specify. He adds, however, that there was not a man of literary talents in the kingdom, who stood so high in favour with the premier, lord Bute, as Mr.

About the conclusion of the last reign, his nephew, Mr. Cumberland, brought him acquainted with the celebrated Bubb Doddington, afterwards lord Melcombe, and by his means he got some situation under administration, which he does not specify. He adds, however, that there was not a man of literary talents in the kingdom, who stood so high in favour with the premier, lord Bute, as Mr. Bentley, and though, when his lordship went out of office, Mr. Bentley lost every place of profit that could be taken from him, he continued to enjoy a pension of 500 per annum, in which his widow had her life, and received it many years after his decease. It was in consequence of this connection that he wrote in 1765, “Patriotism,” a satirical poem, attacking Wilkes and his friends; reprinted in Dilly’s Repository, vol. IV. Before this he had composed his drama of “The Wishes,” which was privately rehearsed at lord Melcombe’s villa, but was unsuccessful on the stage. Mr. Bentley in 1761 wrote his poetical “Epistle to lord Melcolmbe,” and Mr. Cumberland regrets that, if it be in the hands of any of Mr. Bentley' s family, it should be withheld from the public, not knowing that Mr. Bentley published it himself in the St. James’s Chronicle in April 1763, in consequence of Lloyd, the poet, having printed an incorrect copy in his “St. James’s Magazine.” Mr. Bentley’s other dramas were, “Philodamus,1767, which was also unsuccessful; and the “Prophet,” a posthumous comedy, 1788, performed for a few nights. He died in Abingdon-street, Westminster, Oct. 2S, 1782.

nd, a party of whom had declared themselves at Cracow, observing that the count was one of the first who had signed their union at Warsaw, wrote to him to join them

, an adventurer of very dubious, but not uninteresting character, one of the Magnates of the kingdoms of Hungary and Poland, was born in the year 1741, at Verbowa, the hereditary lordship of his family, situated in Nittria, in Hungary. After receiving the education which the court of Vienna affords to the youth of illustrious families, at the age of fourteen years, he fixed on the profession of arms. He was accordingly received into the regiment of Siebenschien, in quality of lieutenant; and joining the Imperial army, then in the field against the king of Prussia, was present at the battles of Lowositz, Prague, Schweidnitz, and Darmstadt. In 17,38, he quitted the Imperial service and hastened into Lithuania, at the instance of his uncle the starost of Benyowsky, and succeeded as his heir to the possession of his estates. The tranquillity, however, which he now enjoyed was interrupted by intelligence of the sudden death of his father, and that his brothers-in-law had taken possession of his inheritance. These circumstances demanding his immediate presence in Hungary, he quitted Lithuania with the sole view of obtaining possession of the property of his family; but his brothers-in-law by force opposed his entrance into his own castle. He then repaired to Krussava, a lordship dependant on the castle of Verbowa, where, after having caused himself to be acknowledged by his vassals, and being assured of their fidelity, he armed them, and by their assistance gained possession of all his effects; but his brothers, having represented him at the court of Vienna as a rebel and disturber of the public peace, the empress queen issued a decree in chancery against him, by which he was deprived of his property, and compelled to withdraw into Poland. He now determined to travel; but after taking several voyages to Hamburgh, Amsterdam, and Plymouth, with intention to apply himself to navigation, he received letters from the magnates and senators of Poland, which induced him to repair to Warsaw, where he joined the con?­federation then forming, and entered into an obligation, upon oath, not to acknowledge the king, until the confederation, as the only lawful tribunal of the republic, should have declared him lawfully elected to oppose the Russians by force of arms and not to forsake the colours of the confederation so long as the Russians should remain in Poland. Leaving Warsaw, in the month of December, he attempted to make his rights known at the court of Vienna; but disappointed in this endeavour, and deprived of all hope of justice, he resolved to quit for ever the dominions of the house of Austria. On his return to Poland, he was attacked, during his passage through the county of Zips, with a violent fever and being received into the house of Mr. Hensky, a gentleman of distinction, he paid his addresses and was married to one of his three daughters, but did not continue long in possession of happiness or repose. The confederate states of Poland, a party of whom had declared themselves at Cracow, observing that the count was one of the first who had signed their union at Warsaw, wrote to him to join them and, compelled by the strong tie of the oath he had taken, he departed without informing his wife, and arrived at Cracow on the very day count Panin made the assault. He was received with open arms by martial -Czarnesky, and immediately appointed colonel general, commander of cavalry, and quarter-master-general. On the 6th of July 1768, he was detached to Navitaig to conduct a Polish regiment to Cracow, and he not only brought the whole regiment, composed of six hundred men, through the camp of the enemy before the town, but soon afterwards defeated a body of Russians at Kremenka rechiced Landscroen, which prince Lubomirsky, who had joined the confederacy with two thousandregular troops, had attempted in vain and, by his great gallantry and address, contrived the means of introducing supplies into Cracow when besieged by the Russians but the count, having lost above sixteen hundred men in affording this assistance to the town, was obliged to make a precipitate retreat the moment he had effected his purpose; and being pursued by the Russian cavalry, composed of cossacks and hussars, he had the misfortune to have his horse killed under him, and fell at last, after receiving two wounds, into the hands of the enemy. Apraxin, the Russian general, being informed of the successful manoeuvre of the count, was impressed with a very high opinion of him, and proposed to him to enter into the Russian service but rejecting the overture with disdain, he was only saved from being sent to Kiovia with the other prisoners by the interposition of his friends, who paid 962 1. sterling for his ransom. Thus set at liberty, he considered himself as released from the parole which he had given t the Russians; and again entering the town of Cracow, he was received with the most perfect satisfaction by the whole confederacy. The town being no longer tenable, it became an object of the utmost consequence to secure another place of retreat and the count, upon his own proposal and request, was appointed to seize the castle of Lublau, situated on the frontier of Hungary; but after visiting the commanding officer of the castle, who was not apprehensive of the least danger, and engaging more than one half of the garrison by oath in the interests of the confederation, an inferior officer, who was dispatched to assist him, indiscreetly divulged the design, and the count was seized and carried into the fortress of Georgenburgh, and sent from thence to general Apraxin. On his way to that general, however, he was rescued by a party of confederates, and returned to Lublin, a town where the rest of the confederation of Cracow had appointed to meet, in order to join those of Bar, from which time he performed a variety of gallant actions, and underwent great vicissitudes of fortune. On the 19th of May, the Russian colonel judging that the count was marching towards Stry, to join the confederate parties at Sauok, likewise hastened his march, and arrived thither half a day before the count, whose forces were weakened by fatigue and hunger. In this state he was attacked about noon by colonel Brincken, at the head of four thousand men. The count was at first compelled^ to give way but, on the arrival of his cannon, he, in his turn, forced the colonel to retire, who at last quitted the field, and retreated towards Stry. The advantage of the victory served only to augment the misery of the count, who iivthis single action had threahundred wounded and two hundred and sixty-eight slain, and who had no other prospect before him than either to perish by hunger with his troops in the forest, or to expose himself to be cut to pieces by the enemy. On the morning of the 20th, however, by the advice of his officers and troops, he resumed his march, and arrived about ten o‘clock at the village of Szuka, where, being obliged to halt for refreshment, he was surprised by a party of cossacks, and had only time to quit the village and form his troops in order of battle on the plain, before he was attacked by the enemy’s cavalry, and soon, after by their infantry, supported by several pieces of cannon, which caused the greatest destruction among his forces. At length, after being dangerously wounded, the Russians took him prisoner. The count was sent to the commander in chief of the Russian armies, then encamped at Tam’pool, who not only forbade the surgeons to dress his wounds, but, after reducing him to bread and water, loaded him with chains, and transported him to Kiow. On his arrival at Polene, his neglected wound had so far endangered his life, that his conductor'was induced to apply to colonel Sirkow. the commanding officer at that place, and he was sent to the hospital, cured of his wounds, and afterwards lodged in the town, with an advance of fifty roubles for his subsistence. Upon the arrival, however, of brigadier Bannia, who relieved colonel Sirkow in his command, and who had a strong prejudice against the count, he was ac^ain loaded with chains, and conducted to the dungeon with the rest of the prisoners, who were allowed no other subsistence than bread and water. Upon his entrance he recognized several officers and soldiers who had served under him and their friendship was the only consolation he received in his distressed situation. Twentytwo days were thus consumed in a subterraneous prison, together with eighty of his companions, without light, and even without air, except what was admitted through an aperture which communicated with the casements. These unhappy wretches were not permitted to go out even on their natural occasions, which produced such an infection, that thirty-five of them died in eighteen or twenty days; and such were the inhumanity and barbarity of the commander, that he suffered the dead to remain and putrefy among the Ining. On the 16th of July the prison was opened, and one hundred and forty- eight prisoners, who had survived out of seven hundred and eighty-two, were driven, under every species of cruelty, from Polene to Kiow, where the strength of the count’s constitution, which had hitherto enabled him to resist such an accumulation of hardships and fatigue, at length gave way, and he was attacked with a malignant fever, and delirium. The governor, count Voicikow, being informed of his quality, ordered that i-.e should be separately lodged in a house, and that two roubles a day should he paid him for subsistence but when he was in a fair way of recovery, an order arrived from Petersburgh to send all the prisoners to Cazan, and this severity bringing on a relapse, the officer was obliged co leave the count at Nizym, a town dependant on the government of Kiow. At this place, a Mr. Lewner, a German merchant, procured him comfortable accommodation, superintended the restoration of his health, and on his departure made him a present of two hundred roubles, which he placed for safety in the hands of the officer until his arrival at Cazan, but who had afterwards the effrontery to deny that he had ever received the mont.y, accused the count of attempting to raise a revolt among the ^riauners, and caused him. to be loaded with chains and committed to the prison of Cazan, from which he was delivered at the pressing instances of marshal Czarnesky Potockzy, and the young Palanzky. He was then lodged at a private house, and being invited to dine with a man of quality in the place, he was solicited, and consented to join in a confederacy against the government. But on the 6th of November 1769, on a quarrel happening between two Russian lords, one of them informed the governor that the prisoners, in concert with the Tartars, meditated a design against his person and the garrison. This apostate lord accused the count, in order to save his friends and countrymen, and on the 7th, at eleven at night, the count not suspecting any such event, heard a knocking at his door. He came down, entirely undressed, with a candle in his hand, to inquire the cause; and, upon opening his door, was surprised to see an officer with twenty soldiers, who demanded if the prisoner was at home. On his replying in the affirmative, the officer snatched the candle out of his hand, and ordering his men to follow him, went hastily up to the count’s apartment. The count immediately took advantage of his mistake, quitted his house, and, after apprising some of the confederates that their plot was discovered, he made his escape, and arrived at Petersburgh on the 19th of November, where he engaged with a Dutch captain to take him to Holland. The captain, however, instead of taking him on-board tho ensuing morning, pursuant to his promise, appointed him to meet on the bridge over the Neva at midnight, and there betrayed him to twenty Russian soldiers collected for the purpose, who carried him to count Csecserin, lieutenantgeneral of the police. The count was conveyed to the fort of St. Peter and St. Paul, confined in a subterraneous dungeon, and after three days fast, presented with a morsel of bread and a pitcher of water; but, on the 22d of November 1769, he at length, in hopes of procuring his discharge, was induced to sign a paper promising for ever to quit the dominions of her imperial majesty, under pain of death.

re with great solemnity mutual friendship and eternal fidelity. Among the number of unhappy wretches who had long groaned under the miseries of banishment, was a Mr.

The count having signed this engagement, instead of being set at liberty, was re-conducted to his prison, and there confined till 4th December 1769, when, about two hours after midnight, an officer with seven soldiers came to him and he was thrown upon a sledge to which two horses were harnessed, and immediately driven away with the greatest swiftness. The darkness of the night prevented the count from discerning the objects around him but on the approach of day-light he perceived that major Wynblath, Vassili Panow, Hippolitus Stephanow, Asaph Baturin, Ivan Sopronow, and several other prisoners, were the companions of his misfortunes and after suffering from the brutality of their conductor a series of hardships, in passing through Tobolzk, the capital of Siberia, the city of Tara, the town and river of Tomsky, the villages of Jakutzk and Judorua, they embarked in the harbour of Ochoczk, on the 26th October 1770, and arrived at Kamschatka on the 3d December following. The ensuing day they were conducted before Mr. Nilow, the governor; when it was intimated to them that they should be set at liberty on the following day, and provided with subsistence for three days, after which they must depend upon themselves for their maintenance that each person should receive from the chancery a musket and a lance, with one pound of powder, four pounds of lead, a hatchet, several knives and other instruments, and carpenter’s tools, with which they might build cabins in any situations they chose, at the distance of one league from the town but that they should be bound to pay in furs, during the first year, each one hundred roubles, in return for these advantages; that every one must work at the corvee one day in the week for the service of government, and not absent themselves from their huts for twenty-four hours without the governor’s permission and after some other equally harsh terms, it was added, that their lives being granted to them for no other purpose than to implore the mercy of God, and the remission of their sins, they could be employed only in the meanest works to gain their daily subsistence. Under these regulations the exiles settled the places of their habitations, built miserable huts to shelter, themselves from the inclemency of the weather, formed themselves into a congress, and after choosing the count de Benyowsky their chief or captain, they swore with great solemnity mutual friendship and eternal fidelity. Among the number of unhappy wretches who had long groaned under the miseries of banishment, was a Mr. Crustiew, who had acquired considerable ascendancy over his fellow-sufferers; and to obtain the particular confidence and esteem of this man was the first object of the count’s attention in which he sogn succeeded,. The pains and perils incident to the situation to which these men were reduced, were borne for some time in murmuring sufferance, until the accidental finding an old copy of Anson’s Voyage inspired them with an idea of making an escape from Kamschatka to the Marian islands; and the count, Mr. Panow, Baturin, Stephanow, Solmanow, majors Wynblath, Crustiew, and one Wasili, an old and faithful servant of the count’s, who had followed his master into exile, formed a confederacy for this purpose. While these transactions were secretly passing, the fame of count Benyowsky’s rank and abilities reached the ear of the governor and as he spoke several languages, he was after some time admitted familiarly into the house, and at length appointed to superintend the education of his son. and his three daughters. “One day,” says the count, ft while I was exercising my office of language-master, the youngest of the three daughters, whose name was Aphanasia, who was sixteen years of age, proposed many questions concerning my thoughts in my present situation^ which convinced me that her father had given them some information concerning my birth and misfortunes. I therefore gave them an account of my adventures, at which my scholars appeared to be highly affected, but the youngest wept very much. She was a beautiful girl, and her sensibility created much emotion in my mind but, alas, I was an exile" The merits of the count, however, soon surmounted the disadvantages of his situation, in the generous mind of miss Nilow, and the increasing intimacy and confidence which he daily gained in the family, joined to the advantages of a fine person and most insinuating address, soon converted the feelings of admiration into the flame of love; and on the llth of January 1771, madame Nilow, the mother, consented that her daughter should do the honours of an entertainment then in contemplation, and be publicly declared his future spouse. But the count, though he had cultivated and obtained the affections of his fair pupil, had acted more from policy than passion, and, intending to use her interest rather as a means of effectuating the meditated escape of himself and his companions, than as any serious object of matrimonial union, contrived to suspend the nuptials, by persuading the governor to make an excursion from Kamschatka to the neighbouring islands, with a view or under pretence of establishing a new colony. During these transactions the exiles were secretly at work; and in order to conceal their design from all suspicion, Mr. Crustiew and Mr. Panow were on the 30th of March deputed to wait on the governor with five and twenty of their associates, to request that he would be pleased to receive the title of Protector of the new colony; and the embassy was not only favourably received, but orders were given to prepare every thing that might be necessary for the execution of the project. At this crisis, however, an accident occurred which had nearly overturned the success of the scheme; and as it tends to discover the disposition of the count, we shall relate it in his own words.

that such was my resolution.” “Why then,” interrupted she, “did you conceal your intention from me, who am ready to follow you to the farthest limits of the universe?”

You may recollect, my dear friend, the account I gave you of tny birth, and the rank I held in Europe I remember the tears you shed on that occasion. The misfortune of being exiled to Kamschatka would long since have compelled me to deliver myself from tyranny by death, if your acquaintance and attachment had not preserved me: I have lived for you, and if you could read my heart, I am sure I should have your pity; for the possession of your person is become as necessary to my existence as liberty itself. The liberty I speak of is not that which your worthy father has given me, but implies the possession of my estate and rank. J have hoped for the possession of your person, with a view of rendering you happy in the participation of my fortune and dignity. These views cannot be accomplished at Kamschatka. What rank can I bestow on rny lore but that of an exile The favours of your worthy father may be of the shortest duration. His successor may soon recal his ordinances, and plunge me again into that state of suffering and contempt, from which I was delivered for a short moment. Represent to yourself, my dearest friend, the affliction and despair that would overwhelm my soul, when I beheld you a sharer in my pain and disgrace; for you well know that all the Russians esteem the exiles as dishonoured persons. You have forced me to this declaration of my intentions, in which I have been guided by the attachment and sincerity of my heart. I deferred the communication to you, but I swear that such was my resolution.” “Why then,” interrupted she, “did you conceal your intention from me, who am ready to follow you to the farthest limits of the universe?” This assurance encouraged me to proceed, and engage this charming young lady in my interests. I told her, therefore, that I was prevented only by the fear lest she should refuse my proposals on account of her attachment to her parents; but that, as I now had nothing to fear in that respect, I could inform her, that my intention being to leave Kamschatka, I had determined to carry her off; and in order to convince her, I was ready to call Mr. Crustiew, who would confirm the truth. On this assurance she embraced me, and entreated me to forgive her want of confidence, at the same time that she declared her readiness to accompany me.

at arose from the communication having been made to her servant. I mentioned my fears to miss Nilow, who removed them, by assuring me that her servant was too much attached

This degree of confidential intercourse being established, I persuaded her to dismiss every fear from her mind. Many were the trials I made of her resolution, and the event convinced me that she was perfectly determined to follow my fortunes. The secret being thus secure, by her promise to keep it inviolably, I had no other uneasiness remaining but what arose from the communication having been made to her servant. I mentioned my fears to miss Nilow, who removed them, by assuring me that her servant was too much attached to her to betray her secret, and had, besides, an affection for Kudrin, so that she could answer for her discretion. Thus agreeably ended our conversation, though the commencement was rather tragical, and I received the vows of attachment and fidelity from an artless and innocent mind.

e night, in case an attack should be made by the cossacks of the town, and soldiers of the garrison, who, it was rumoured, were busied in preparing their arms. At five

The apprehensions of this faithful girl for the safety of the man she loved, were far from being without foundation; and on the 26th of April she sent the count two red ribbands, to signify the double danger to which she perceived he was exposed. The count, however, coolly prepared to brave the impending storm, and gave orders to the leaders of his associates, amounting in all to fifty-nine persons, to place themselves at the head of their divisions, and station themselves round his house, in readiness to act in the night, in case an attack should be made by the cossacks of the town, and soldiers of the garrison, who, it was rumoured, were busied in preparing their arms. At five o'clock in the evening, a corporal, with four grenadiers, stopped at the count’s door, demanding admittance in the name of the empress, and ordered him to follow the guard to the fort. The count, however, proposed, from a window, to the corporal, that he should enter alone and drink a glass of wine; but, on his being admitted, the door was instantly shut upon him, and four pistols clapped to his breast, by the terror of which he was made to disclose every thing that was transacting at the fort, and at length obliged to call the four grenadiers separately into the house, under pretence of drinking, when they were all five bound together, and deposited safely in the cellar.

This measure was, of course, the signal of resistance, and the count marshalling his associates, who had secretly furnished themselves with arms and ammunition by

This measure was, of course, the signal of resistance, and the count marshalling his associates, who had secretly furnished themselves with arms and ammunition by the treachery of the store-keepers, issued forth from the house to oppose, with greater advantage, another detachment who had been sent to arrest him. After levelling several soldiers to the ground, the count, by the mismanagement of their commander, seized their cannon, turned them with success against the fort itself, and, entering by means of the drawbridge, dispatched the twelve remaining guards who were then within it. “Madame Nilow and her children,” says the count, “at sight of me implored my protection to save their father and husband. I immediately hastened to his apartment, and begged him to go to his children’s room to preserve his life, but he answered that he would first take mine, and instantly fired a pistol, which wounded me. I was desirous nevertheless of preserving him, and continued to represent that all resistance would be useless, for which reason I entreated him to retire. His wife and children threw themselves on their knees, but nothing would avail he flew upon me, seized me by the throat, and left me no other alternative than either to give lip my own life, or run my sword through his body. At this period the petard, by which my associates attempted to make a breach, exploded, and burst the outer gate. The second was open, and I saw Mr. Panow enter at the head of a party. He entreated the governor to let me go, but not being able to prevail on him, he set me at liberty by splitting his skull.” The count by this event became complete master of the fort, and by the cannon and ammunition which he found on the rampart, was enabled, with the ready and active assistance of his now increased associates, to repel the attack which was made upon him by the cossacks; but flight, not resistance, was the ultimate object of this bold commander; and in order to obtain this opportunity, he dispatched a drum and a woman as a sign of parley to the cossacks, who had quitted the town and retired to the heights, with a resolution to invest the fort and starve the insurgents, informing them of his resolution to send a detachment of associates into the town to drive all the women and children into the church, and there to burn them all to death, unless they laid down their arms. While this embassy was sent, preparation was made for carrying the threat it contained into immediate execution; but by submitting to the proposal, the execution of this horrid measure was rendered unnecessary, and the count not only received into the fort fifty-two of the principal inhabitants of the town, as hostages for the fidelity of the rest, but procured the archbishop to preach a sermon in the church in favour of the revolution. The count was now complete governor of Kamschatka; and having time, without danger, to prepare every thing necessary for the intended departure, he amused himself with ransacking the archives of the town, where he found several manuscripts of voyages made to the eastward of Kamschatka. The count also formedt chart, with details, respecting Siberia and the sea-coast of Kamschatka, and a description of the Kurelles and Aleuthes islands. This chart has not survived the fate of its composer.

on the coast of Beering’s island, where they found the celebrated captain Ochotyn and his followers, who had also escaped from exile in Siberia, and were wandering in

The conspirators, previous to their hostilities against the governor, had prudently secured a corvette of the name of St. Peter and St. Paul, which then rode at anchor in the port of Bolsha, and their subsequent success afforded them the means of providing her with such stores as were necessary for the intended voyage. On the llth of May 1771, the count, as commander in chief, attended by Mr. Crustiew as second, by sixteen of his fellow-captives as quarterguards, and by fifty-seven foremast men, together with twelve passengers and nine women, among whom was the lovely Aphanusia, disguised in sailor’s apparel, went on board this vessel; and on the next day weighed anchor, and sailed out of the harbour on a southern course, intending to continue their voyage to China. On the 20th of May, they anchored their vessel in a bay on the coast of Beering’s island, where they found the celebrated captain Ochotyn and his followers, who had also escaped from exile in Siberia, and were wandering in search of that settlement which, from their restless dispositions, they were doomed never to find.

and civility, particularly don Hieronymo Pacheco, formerly captain at the port of Cavith at Manilla, who had fled from that employment to the island of Formosa, in consequence

The count, however, was not to be detained by the blandishments of friendship he departed from this island, and arrived, after experiencing many hardships and dangers at sea, at the harbour of Usilpatchar in Japan on the 2d of August from whence, not meeting with a very friendly reception, he again immediately set sail, and arrived oirSunday the 28th of August at the island of Formosa. The inhabitants of Formosa at first appeared inclined to treat him with respect and civility, particularly don Hieronymo Pacheco, formerly captain at the port of Cavith at Manilla, who had fled from that employment to the island of Formosa, in consequence of his having in a moment of rage massacred his wife and a Dominican whom he had found in her company but these professions were soon found to be deceitful; for on sending his men on shore to fetch water, they were attacked by a party of twenty Indians, many of them dangerously wounded, and Mr. Panow, the count’s most faithful friend, killed. Don Hieronymo, however, contrived to exculpate himself from any concern in this treachery, and to advise the count to seek revenge by a> conquest of the island but he contented himself with provoking the natives to a second attack, and repulsing them with considerable slaughter. His men, however, insisted on going in quest of the Indians, in order to make them feel their further vengeance. The remonstrances of the count were to no effect; and at length, complying with their desires, he requested don Hieronymo to guide them towards the principal residence of the nation who had given him so bad a reception, where, after a short and unequal conflict, he killed eleven hundred and fifty-six, took six hundred and forty-three prisoners, who had prostrated themselves on the ground to beg for mercy from their assailants, and set fire to their town. The prince of the country, notwithstanding this massacre of his subjects, was introduced to the count by his Spanish friend, and a cordiality at length took place between them to such a degree, that the count entered into a formal treaty for returning and settling at Formosa; but his secret motives for making this engagement appear to have been, the execution of a project he had silently conceived of establishing a colony on the island.

erpreter, informed me, that the old negress Susanna, whom I had brought from the isle of France, and who in her early youth had been sold to the French, and had lived

The island of Madagascar, as is well known, is of vast extent, and is inhabited by a great variety of different nations. Among these is the nation of Sambarines, formerly governed by a chief of the name and titles of Rohandrian Ampansacab6 Ramini Larizon whose only child, a lovely daughter, had, it seems, been taken prisoner, and sold as a captive and from this circumstance, upon the death of Ramini, his family was supposed to be extinct. “On the 2d of February,” says the count, “M. Corbi, one of my most confidential officers, with the interpreter, informed me, that the old negress Susanna, whom I had brought from the isle of France, and who in her early youth had been sold to the French, and had lived upwards of fifty years at the isle of France, had reported, that her companion, the daughter of Ramini, having likewise been made a prisoner, was sold to foreigners, and that she had certain marks that I was her son. This officer likewise represented to me, that in consequence of her report the Sambarine nation had held several cabars to declare me the heir of Ramini, and consequently proprietor of the province of Manahar, and successor to the title of Ampansacabe, or supreme chief of the nation. This information appeared to me of the greatest consequence, and I determined to take the advantage of it, to conduct that brave and generous nation to a civilized state. But as I had no person to whom I could entruLo the secret of my mind, I lamented how blind the minister of Versailles was to the true interests of France. On the same day I interrogated Susanna on the report she had spread concerning my birth. The good old woman threw herself at my knees, and excused herself by confessing that she had acted entirely upon a conviction of the truth. For she said that she had known my mother, whose physiognomy resembled mine, and that she had herself been inspired in a dream by the Zahanhar to publish the secret. Her manner of speaking convinced me that she really believed what she said. J therefore embraced her, and told her that I had reasons for keeping the secret respecting my birth; but that nevertheless if she had any confidential friends she might acquaint them with it. At these words she arose, kissed my hands, and declared that the Sambarine nation was informed of the circumstances, and that the Rohandrian Raffangour waited only for a favourable moment to acknowledge the blood of Ramini.

count, however, was not abated by these disappointments he pretended to look with contempt on kings who could be so blind to^the interests and advantages oftheir people

This account concludes his narrative; but among the memoirs and papers which fill the remaining part of the volume, it appears, that on his arrival in Europe his proposals to the court of France were rejected that he made subsequent offers of his service to the emperor of Germany, which met with no better success; and that on the 25th of December, 1783, he offered, in the character of sovereign of the island of Madagascar, terms for an offensive and defensive alliance with the king of Great Britain but this proposal was also declined. The ardour of the count, however, was not abated by these disappointments he pretended to look with contempt on kings who could be so blind to^the interests and advantages oftheir people and, sending for his family from Hungary, he sailed from London with some of his associates for Maryland, on the 14th of April, 1784, with a cargo of the value of near 4,00p/. sterling, consisting, it seems, of articles intended for the Madagascar trade. A respectable commercial house in Baltimore was induced to join in his scheme, and supplied him with a ship of 450 tons, whose lading was estimated at more than 1,000l. in which he sailed from that place on the 2.5th of Oct. 1784, and landed at Antangara on the island of Madagascar, on the 7th of July 1785, from whence he departed to Angouci, and commenced hostilities against the French by seizing their storehouse. Here he busied himself in erecting a town after the manner of the country, and from hence he sent a detachment of one hundred men to take possession of the French factory at Foul Point but they were prevented from carrying their purpose into execution by the sight of a frigate which was at anchor off the Point. In consequence of these movements, the governor of the isle of France sent a ship with sixty regulars 'on board, who landed and attacked the count on the morning of the 23d of May 1786. He had constructed a small redoubt defended by two cannon, in which himself, with two Europeans and thirty natives, waited the approach of the enemy. The blacks fled at the first fire, and Benyowsky, having received a ball in his right breast, fell behind the parapet whence he was dragged by the hair, and expired a few minutes afterwards.

During his subsequent travels he happened to arrive at Bender, where Charles XII. was. This prince, who had more taste for the pursuit of scientific knowledge than

, archbishop of Upsal, and brother tc the preceding, was born at Strengnes in 1689, and studied at Upsal. During his subsequent travels he happened to arrive at Bender, where Charles XII. was. This prince, who had more taste for the pursuit of scientific knowledge than is generally supposed, was desirous at this tim to send some men of learning to the East, and Benzehus was one whom he applied to, and who accordingly began his travels in 1714, visiting Syria, Palestine, and Egypt, and returning to Sweden through Italy, Germany, and Holland. The journal of this tour is preserved in manuscript at Upsal but a considerable part of Benzelius’s observations were printed in a Latin collection, under the title of “Syntagma dissertationum in Academia Lundensi habitarum,” Leipsic, 1745, 4to. Benzelius, after his return to Sweden, was made professor of theology, bishop of Lunden, and archbishop of Upsal, where he died in 1758. He was succeeded in the archbishopric by his brother Jacob, who wrote in Latin, an abridgment of theology, and a description of Palestine, and some other works. H. Jasper Benzelius, of the same learned family, who died about the end of the last century, bishop of Strengnes, had studied under Mosheim, and published in 1744 at Helmstadt, a Latin life or dissertation on John Dury, who in the seventeenth century, travelled over a considerable part of Europe, in hopes of reconciling the Lutherans and Calvinists.

, a Milanese, was born about 1519. His father, who was not rich, having suffered by the war, sent him on his travels,

, a Milanese, was born about 1519. His father, who was not rich, having suffered by the war, sent him on his travels, to seek his fortune in Italy, France, Spain, and Germany. He did not find what he sought, but became so captivated with the accounts recently received from the new world, that he determined to go there. Accordingly in 1541, he went to Spain, and embarked for America, where he remained fourteen years. In 1556, he returned to his country, rich only in the observations he had made, and which he communicated to the public, in a “History of the New World,” in Italian, Venice, 1565, 4to, reprinted 1572, 8vo, and afterwards translated into Latin, French, German, and Flemish.

cted in the above assembly, where he signed the famous protest of Sept. 12, 1791. CamilleDesmoulins, who had been his pupil, celebrated him in his verses entitled “Mes

, a doctor of the Sorbonne, formerly professor of eloquence, and afterwards grand master of the college of Louis-le-Grand, was born at Paris in 1720. He was deputy from the clergy of Paris, in the constituent assembly, and died at Paris in 1794. He had acquired great reputation in the university, and was not less respected in the above assembly, where he signed the famous protest of Sept. 12, 1791. CamilleDesmoulins, who had been his pupil, celebrated him in his verses entitled “Mes adieux an college” and from a singular caprice, this revolutionist chose to receive the nuptial benediction from Berardier, although one of the nonjuring priests, and of totally opposite principles. St. Just and Robespierre were the witnesses on this occasion and such was the regard Camille-Desmoulins had for him, that he protected him from the massacres of the 2d of September 1792. Berardier wrote, 1. “Precis de l'Histoire universelle,” a very excellent introduction to the study of history, which has gone through several editions. 2. “Essai sur le recit,1776, 12mo, also very successful, but not written with so much perspicuity. 3. “Anti-Lucrece en vers Francais,1786, 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “Principes de la foi sur le gouvernment de l‘Eglise, en opposition a la constitution civile du clerge, ou refutation de l’opinion de M. Camus,” 8vo. Of this fourteen editions were printed within six months, and it has likewise been published under the title of “Vrais Principes de la Constitution du Clerge.

ce of all the astronomers for ten years before. In all his results, he entirely agreed with Lalande, who had made the same observations at Paris, and with the celebrated

, a French mathematician and astronomer, was born at Lyons, March 5, 1703, entered among the Jesuits, and became professor of humanity at Vienne and at Avignon, and of mathematics and philosophy at Aix. In 1740 he was invited to Lyons and appointed professor of mathematics, director of the observatory, and keeper of the medals and the same year he became astronomer to the academy, the memoirs of which are enriched by a great many of his observations, particularly that on the passage of Mercury on the Sun, May 6, 1753, during which he saw and demonstrated the luminous ring round that planet, which had escaped the notice of all the astronomers for ten years before. In all his results, he entirely agreed with Lalande, who had made the same observations at Paris, and with the celebrated Cassini. All his observations, indeed, are creditable to his talents, and accord with those of the most eminent astronomers. Among his other papers, inserted in the memoirs of the academy, we find several on vegetation, on the evaporation of liquids, and the ascent of vapours, on light, a physical theory on the rotation of the earth and the inclination of its axis, &c. In meteorology, he published observations on the tubes of thermometers, with an improvement in the construction of them, which was the subject of three memoirs read in the academy of Lyons in 1747. He has also endeavoured to account for metals reduced to calcination weighing heavier than in their former state, and maintains, against Boyle, that fire is incapable of giving this additional weight, and likewise refutes the opinion of those who attribute it to air, or to substances in the air which the action of fire unites to the metal in fusion. This memoir was honoured with the prize by the academy of Bourdeaux in 1747, and contained many opinions which it would have been difficult to contradict before the experiments of Priestley, Lavoisier, and Morveau. In 1748, he received the same honour, from that academy, for a paper in which he maintained the connexion between magnetism and electricity, assigning the same cause to both. In 1760, he received a third prize from the same academy, for a dissertation on the influences of the moon on vegetation and animal oeconomy. Beraud was also a corresponding member of the academy of sciences in Paris, and several of his papers are contained in their memoirs, and in those of the academy of Lyons. He wrote several learned dissertations on subjects of antiquity. On the dissolution of the society of Jesuits, he left his country for some time, as he could not conscientiously take the oaths prescribed, and on his return, notwithstanding many pressing offers to be restored to the academy, he preferred a private life, never having recovered the shock which the abolition of his order had occasioned. In this retirement he died June 26, 1777. His learning and virtues were universally admired he was of a communicative disposition, and equal and candid temper, both in his writings and private life. Montucla, Lalande, and Bossu, were his pupils and father Lefevre of the Oratory, his successor in the observatory of Lyons, pronounced his eloge in that academy, which was printed at Lyons, 1780, 12mo. The Dict. Hist, ascribed to Beraud, a small volume, “La Physique des corps animus,” 12mo.

, a French artist, who practised in England, was born in France, in 1659, and at the

, a French artist, who practised in England, was born in France, in 1659, and at the age of fifteen was placed under the care of La Fosse, with whom his improvement was so considerable, that in three years he was qualified to be employed in one of the royal palaces. In 1681 he went to England, where he worked under Rambour, a French painter of architecture; and afterwards he was engaged in different works for several of the English nobility. The ceiling in the chapel of Trinity college, in Oxford, was painted by this master; he also painted the staircase at the duke of Schomberg’s in London, and the summer-house at Ranelagh. His drawings in the academy were much approved but towards the latter part of his life, he only painted small pieces in the historical style, for which the subjects were taken from fabulous history; -ind his last performance was a Bacchanalian, to which he affixed his name the very day before he died, in 1720.

glected or proscribed by graver writers, or rather as having been probably disclaimed by its author, who saw it at length in the light of a juvenile performance, abounding

, whose name we find disguised under Bercheure, Berchoire, Bercorius, Bercherius, &c. was born in the beginning of the fourteenth century, at St. Pierre-du-Chemin, near Mailiezais, in Poitou. He entered the order of the Beredictines, and became celebrated for his learning, and attached hi n self to cardinal Duprat, archbishop of Aix, whose advice was very useful to him in his writings. Among his other accomplishments, he is said to have been so well acquainted with his Bible, as to be able to quote texts and authorities on all subjects without any assistance but from memory. He died at Paris in 1362, prior of the monastery of St. Eloy, since occupied by the Barnabites, which has induced some biographers to think him a member of that order, but the Barnabites were not an order until a century after this period. Berchorius wrote several works which are lost those which remain are in 3 vols. fol. under the title of “Reductorium, Repertorium, et Dictionarium morale utriusque Testamenti, Strasburgh,” 1474; Nuremberg, 1499; and Cologne, 1631—1692. “Whoever,” says Warton, in his “History of Poetry,” “shall have the patience to turn over a few pages of this immense treasure of multifarious erudition, will be convinced beyond a doubt, from a general coincidence of the plan, manner, method, and execution, that the author of these volumes, and of the” Gesta Romanorum,“must be one and the same. The” Reductorium“contains all the stories and incidents in the Bible, reduced into allegories. The” Repertorium“is a dictionary of things, persons, and places all which are supposed to be mystical, and which are therefore explained in their moral or practical sense. The” Dictionarium Morale“is in two parts, and seems principally designed to be a moral repertory for students in theology.” Mr. Warton successfully pursues this argument in his” Dissertation on the Gesta Romanorum,“to which we refer the reader. He mentions also that Berchorius was author of a comment on a prosody called” Doctrinale metricum,“which was used as a schoolbook in France, till Despauter’s manual on that subject appeared. Some biographers mention his” Tropologia,“his” Cosmographia,“and his” Breviarium“but the” Tropologia“is nothing more than his” Reductorium“on the Bible, and probably the” Breviarium“is the same. The” Cosmographia“seems to be the fourteenth book -of his” Repefforiom Moraie.“He is said by his biographers to have written other smaller pieces, which they have not named nor described. Among these, Mr. Warton thinks his” Gesta" is comprehended which we may conceive to have been thus undistinguished, either as having been neglected or proscribed by graver writers, or rather as having been probably disclaimed by its author, who saw it at length in the light of a juvenile performance, abounding in fantastic and unedifying narrations, which he judged unsuitable to his character, studies, and station. Besides the works above-mentioned, Berchorius translated Livy, by order of king John, of which there was a beautiful ms. in the library of the oratory of Troyes, and other copies, not less beautiful, are in the imperial library at Paris. This translation was published in 1514 1515, at Paris, 3 vols. fol.

who was born, according to Vossius, in the Palatinate, studied at

, who was born, according to Vossius, in the Palatinate, studied at Groningen. He became tutor to the children of the king of Bohemia, and was by the queen’s interest appointed professor of philosophy at Utrecht, 1640, and eight years afterwards professor of eloquence. He succeeded also in poetry, but his style has been objected to as containing many new-coined words and affected phrases. He died July 24, 1667, leaving several works, of which the principal were, l.“Exercitationes ethicae, ceconomicge, politicae,” Utrecht, 1664. 2. “Dissertatio de Cometis, utrum sint signa, an causae, an utrumque, an neutrum,” Utrecht, 1365, 12mo. He wrote also against Hobbes, “Examen elementorurn philosophicorum de bono cive,” which remains in manuscript.

taught the same studies. He was there, however, accused of having intended to dissect two Spaniards who had the venereal disorder, and had applied to him for advice,

, a physician and anatomist of the sixteenth century, was a native of Carpi in Modena, whence some biographers have called him by the name of Carpius, or Carpensis. He took his doctor’s degree at Bologna, and first taught anatomy and surgery at Pavia. He afterwards returned to Bologna in 1520, and taught the same studies. He was there, however, accused of having intended to dissect two Spaniards who had the venereal disorder, and had applied to him for advice, which, it was said, he meant to perform while they were alive, partly out of his hatred to that nation, and partly for his own instruction. Whatever may be in this report, it is certain that he was obliged to leave Bologna, and retire to Ferrara, where he died in 1550. By his indefatigable attention to the appearances of disease, and especially by his frequent dissections, which in his time, were quite sufficient, without any other demerit, to raise popular prejudices against him, he was enabled to advance the knowledge of anatomy by many important discoveries. His works were, 1. “Commentaria, cum amplissimis additionibus, super anatomia Mundini,” Bologna, 1521, 1552, 4to, and translated into English by Jackson, London, 1664. 2. “Isagogtc breves in anatomiam corporis humani, cum aliquot figuris anatomicis,” Bologna, 1522, 4to, and often reprinted. 3. “De Cranii fractura, tractatus,” Bologna, 1518, 4to, also often reprinted. He was one of the first who employed mercury in the cure of the venereal disease.

, surnamed the Bastard, but that young prince summonsed a meeting of the ablest bishops and divines, who again condemned Berengarius, and the council of Paris, in Oct.

, or Berenger, the celebrated archdeacon of Angers, was born at Tours in the beginning of the eleventh century, of an opulent family, and became the disciple of the famous Fulbert of Chartres, under whom he made rapid progress in grammar, rhetoric, dialectic, and what were then called the liberal arts. On his return to his country in 1030, he was appointed scholastic, or master of the school of St. Martin. His reputation soon reaching foreign parts, the number of his scholars greatly increased, and many of them were afterwards advanced to high rank in the church; nor did he quit his school when made archdeacon of Angers in 1039. The opinions, which have given him a name in ecclesiastical history, were said to have been first occasioned by a pique. In a dispute with Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, on a very trivial question, he happened to be defeated, and what was worse, his scholars began to go over to that rival. Berengarius, on this, took Erigena for his model, and attacked the mystery of the eucharist, as the popish writers term it, but in plain language, the doctrine of transubstantiation. Bruno, bishop of Angers, Hugh, of Langres, and Adelman, of Brescia, in vain endeavoured to cure him of his heresy, and his writings, which were taken to Rome, were condemned in two councils held by pope Leo IX. in 1050, and himself excommunicated. He then went to the abbey of Preaux in Normandy, hoping to be protected by duke William, surnamed the Bastard, but that young prince summonsed a meeting of the ablest bishops and divines, who again condemned Berengarius, and the council of Paris, in Oct. 1050, deprived him of all his benefices. This loss he is said to have felt more severely than their spiritual inflictions, and it disposed him to retract his sentiments in the council of Tours, in 1055, in consequence of which he was received into church-communion. In 1059 he was cited to the council at Rome, by pope Nicholas II. and having been confuted by Abbo and Laniranc, he abjured his errors, burnt his books, yet had no sooner reached France, than he protested against his recantation, as extorted by fear, and returned to his studies with the same spirit of inquiry. At length, however, Gregory VII having called a new council at Rome in 1078, Berengei more seriously abjured his opinions, returned to France, and passed the remaining years of his life in privacy and penance. He died Jan. 6, 1088, aged ninety. There have been many disputes betwixt protestant and popish authors, as to the reality or sincerity of his final recantation. His sentiments, however, did not perish on his recantation, or his death, and he may be considered as having contributed to that great reformation in the church which afterwards was carried into lasting effect by his successors. The greater part of his works are lost, but some are preserved among the works of Lanfranc, in the collections of d'Acheri and Martenne; and, in 1770, Lessing discovered and published his answer to Lanfranc, “De corpore et sanguine Jesu Christi.

hich he was invited by the political troubles of his country. As by birth he was classed among those who are at Geneva called natives, but who do not acquire the rank

, a French miscellaneous writer, was born at Geneva in 1740, and in early life quitted the mechanical employment to which he had been deslined by his parents, for those studies to which he was invited by the political troubles of his country. As by birth he was classed among those who are at Geneva called natives, but who do not acquire the rank of citizens, because born of foreign parents, his first effort was to establish, in some of his writings, the necessity of equal political rights. This dispute being referred to arms, Berenger, after his party was defeated, was banished, along with many others, by a decree of the sovereign power, February 10, 1770. On this he retired to Lausanne, and employed his time in various literary undertakings, until his return to Geneva, where he died in June, 1807. He published, 1. An edition of the works of Abauzit. 2. “Histoire de Geneve, depuis son origine jusqu'a nos jours,1772 75, 6 vols. 12 mo. In this, the more distant ages are given in a summary manner, having been sufficiently detailed by Spon, but much light is thrown upon the political history of the last century, which he brings down to 1761, and to which sir F. D'Yvernois’ work, “Tableau historiquede revolutions de Geneve,” may be considered as a sequel. 3. “Geographic de Busching abregee, &c.” Busching’s work is here abridged in some parts and enlarged in others, Lausanne, 1776 79, 12 vols. 8vo. 4. “Collection de tous les voyages faits autour de monde,1788 90, 9 vols. 8vo, reprinted in 1795. 5. “Amants Republicains, ou Lettrea de Nicias et Cynire,1782, 2 vols. 8vo, a political romance relating to the troubles of Geneva. 6. “Cours de geographic historique, ancienne et moderne de feu Ostervald,1803 and 1805, 2 vols. 12mo. 7. An edition of the “Dictionnaire geographique” of Vosgien (Ladvocat), 1805, 8vo. 8. Translations from the English of “Laura and Augustus,” and of“Cook’s Voyages.” 9. “J. J. Rousseau justifie envers sa patrie” and some lesser pieces mentioned in Ersch’s “France Litteraire.” M. Bourrit attributes to him a translation of Howard’s history of Prisons, but this, it is thought, was executed by mademoiselle Keralio.

, a man utterly unknown, who appeared in Holland in 1670, was thought to be a Jesuit, or

, a man utterly unknown, who appeared in Holland in 1670, was thought to be a Jesuit, or a renegade from some other religious fraternity. He got his bread by sweeping chimnies and grinding knives, and died at length in a bog, suffocated in a fit of drunkenness. His talents, if the historians that mention him are to be credited, were extraordinary. He versified with so much ease, that he could recite extempore, and in tolerably good poetry, whatever was said to him in prose. He has been known to translate the Flemish gazettes from that language into Greek or Latin verse with the utmost facility. The dead languages, the living languages, Greek, Latin, French, and Italian, were us familiar to him as his mother tongue. He could repeat by heart Horace, Virgil, Homer, Aristophanes, and several pieces of Cicero and of the Plinies; and, after reciting long passages from them, point out the book and the chapter from whence they were taken. It is supposed that the “Georgarchontomachia sive expugnatae Messopolis” is by him.

, and was employed there, either? as a workman, or as a corrector of the press. John Conrad Zeltner, who is of this last opinion, has accordingly asigned him a short

, the author of a poem, in praise of printing, written in Latin hexameters and pentameters, has escaped tlfe researches of biographers as to much personal history. It is, however, conjectured, that his proper name was Arnold or Arnold i, and that he was called Bergellauus from his country. It is supposed also that he came to Mentz, and was employed there, either? as a workman, or as a corrector of the press. John Conrad Zeltner, who is of this last opinion, has accordingly asigned him a short article in his Latin history of the correctors of the press, p. 79, 80, where he calls him John Anthony, instead of John Arnold. Struvius (Introd. in not. rei litterariae, p. 892) considers Bergellanus as the first historian of printing, but in this he is mistaken. Mentel, in his “Paraenesis de vera origine Typographic, p. 52, says that Bergellanus’s poem was printed in 1510, which could not be the case, as mention is made in it of Charles V, who was not emperor until 1519. Walkius, who wrote in 1608, asserts that Bergellanus wrote or published his poem eighty years before, which brings us to 1528, but in tact it was not written or published until 1540 and 1541, as appears clearly by the author’s dedication to cardinal Albert, archbishop of Mentz and marquis of Brandebourg. There have been six editions of it, separate or joined to other works on the subject. The two last are by Prosper Marchand in his History of Printing, Hague, 1740, 4to, and by Woltius in his” Monumenta typographica."

irs on various plants and animals. His academical dissertations on anatomy were published by Haller, who particularly praises those on the intercostal nerve and on the

Bergen is the author of a great many works on botany, and various branches of natural history. In 1742 he published a dissertation to prove the superiority of the system of Linnæus to that of Tournefort, but afterwards he changed his opinion, and his “Francfort Flora,” published in 1750, is arranged on the Tournefortian system, although with improvements. This Flora was originally only a new edition of the “Vade Mecum” of Johrenius, one of his predecessors in the botanical chair, but unquestionably his additions were then new and important. He also proposed a new classification of shells, published observations on the anatomy of frogs, and several dissertations or memoirs on various plants and animals. His academical dissertations on anatomy were published by Haller, who particularly praises those on the intercostal nerve and on the cellular membrane. His works not included in that collection are, 1. “Icon nova ventriculorum cerebri,” Francfort, 1734. 2. “Programma de pia matre,” Nuremberg, 1736, 4to. 3. “Programma de nervis quibusdam cranii ad novem paria hactenus non relatis,” Francfort, 1738. 4. “Methodus cranii ossa dissuendi, et machinse hunc in finem constructs, delineatio,1741, 4to. 5. “Pentas obervationum anatomico-physiologicarum,1743, 4to. 6. “Elementa physiologias,” Geneva, 1749, 8vo, after the manner of Boerhaave’s Institutes. 7. “Anatomes experimentalis, pars prima et s’ecunda,” Francfort, 1755, 17.58, 8vo. 8. Several dissertations and theses, in the medical journals. 9. “Programma,” already mentioned, on the comparative merits of the Linnsean and Tournefortian systems, Francfort, 1742, 4to Leipsic, 1742, 4to. 10. “Dissertatio de Aloide,” Francfort, 1753, 4to, with a supplement in the Nova Act. Acad. Nat. Curiosor. vol. II. 11. “Catalogus stirpium quas hortus academiie Viadrinae (Francfort) cotnplectitur,” 1744, 8vo. 12. “Flora Francofurtanaj” ibid. 1750, 8vo. 13. “Classes conchy liorum,” Nuremberg, 1760, 4to. Adanson consecrated a genus to the memory of Bergen under the name of Bergena, but it was not adopted by Linnæus.

juris," 1731, folio'. Berger left three sons, Christopher Henry, Frederic Louis, and John Augustus, who all followed the profession of the law with distinguished merit.

, a learned lawyer, was born at Gera, Jan. 27, 1657, and studied at Halle, Leipsic, and Jena. He afterwards was appointed professor of law at Wittemberg, and counsellor at Dresden. In 1713, Charles VI. invited him to Vienna in quality of aulic counsellor of the empire, and he died there November 25, 1732. Of his numerous works, which have been often reprinted, the following are the principal: 1. “Electa processus executivi, processorii, provocatorii et matrimonialis,” Leipsic, 1705, 4to. 2. “Electa disceptationum forensium,” the best edition of which is that of Th. Hayme, 1738, 3 vols. 4to. 3. “Electa jurisprudentise criminalis,” Leipsic, 1706, 4to. 4. “Responsa ex omni jure,1708, folio. 5. CEconomia juris," 1731, folio'. Berger left three sons, Christopher Henry, Frederic Louis, and John Augustus, who all followed the profession of the law with distinguished merit.

, 4to. 7. “De Trajano non Optimo,” 1725, 4to. 8. “De Stephanophoris veterum,” 1725, 4to, &c. Saxius, who has given a much fuller list of his dissertations, praises him

, brother to the preceding, was professor of eloquence at Wittemberg, aulic counsellor to the elector of Saxony, Augustus It. king of Poland, and died in 1751. He wrote several interesting dissertations, mostly on points of ancient history and literature, among which are, 1. “Dissert. Sex de Libanio,” Wittemberg, 1696, 1698, 4to. 2. “De antiqua poetarum sapientia1699, 4to. 3. “De Virgilio oratore,1705, 4to. 4. “Dissert, tres de Lino,1707, 4to. 5. “Disciplina Longini selecta,1712, 4to. 6. “De Mysteriis Cereris et Bacchi,1723, 4to. 7. “De Trajano non Optimo,1725, 4to. 8. “De Stephanophoris veterum,1725, 4to, &c. Saxius, who has given a much fuller list of his dissertations, praises him as a man of most extensive learning, and who had scarcely his equal in Germany. Yet from one of his works we should be inclined to doubt his taste. Among those enumerated by Saxius is one, “De naturali pulchritudine orationis,1719, in which he attempts to prove that Cæsar’s Commentaries (the pure, simple, and elegant style of which is more remote from the sublime than that of any of the classical authors) contain the most complete exemplification of all Longinus’s rules relating to sublime writing. After his death was published “Conspectus Bibliothecae Bergerianae;” also “Libri Manuscript! et irnpressi, collati curn Manuscriptis ex Bibliotheca Jo. Gul. de Berger,1752, 8vo. Another brother, John Godfrey de Berger, was an eminent physician, and published, 1. “Physiologica medica,” Wittemberg, 1701, and often reprinted. 2. “De Thennis Carolmis commentatio,” ibid. 1709, 4to. He died October 3, 1736.

mposed many works, in which he shewed some genius and extravagance of imagination, Marshal. Gassion, who loved men of wit and courage, because he had both himself, would

, was born about 1620, in the castle of Bergerac in Perigord, and was at first very indifferently educated by a poor country priest. He afterwards came to Paris, and gave himself up to every kind of dissipation. He then entered as a cadet in the regiment of guards, and endeavoured to acquire reputation on the score of bravery, by acting as second in many duels, besides those in which he was a principal, scarce a day passing in which he had not some affair of this kind on his hands. Whoever observed his nose with any attention, which was a very remarkable one, was sure to be involved in a quarrel with him. The courage he shewed upon these occasions, and some desperate actions in which he distinguished himself when in the army, procured him the name of the Intrepid, which he retained to the end of his life. He was shot through the body at the siege of Mouzon, and run through the neck at the siege of Arras, in 1640; and the hardships he suffered at these two sieges, the little hopes he had of preferment, and perhaps his attachment to letters, made him renounce war, and apply himself altogether to certain literary pursuits. Amidst all his follies he had never neglected literature, but often withdrew himself, during the bustle and dissipation of a soldier’s life, to read and to write. He composed many works, in which he shewed some genius and extravagance of imagination, Marshal. Gassion, who loved men of wit and courage, because he had both himself, would have Bergerac with him but he, being passionately fond of liberty, looked upon this advantage as a constraint that would never agree with him, and therefore refused it. At length, however, in compliance with his friends, who pressed him to procure a patron at court, he overcame his scruples, and placed himself with the duke of Arpajon in 1653. To this nobleman he dedicated his works the same year, fur he had published none before, consisting of some letters written in his youtH, with a tragedy on the death of Agrippina, widow of Germanicus. He afterwards printed a comedy called “The Pedant,” but his other works were not printed till after his death. His “Comic history of the states and empires of the Moon” was printed in 1656. His “Comic history of the states and empires of the Sun,” several letters and dialogues, and a fragment of physics, were all collected and published afterwards in a volume. These comic histories and fragments shew that he was well acquainted with the Cartesian philosophy. He died in 1655, aged only thirtyfive years, his death being occasioned by a blow upon his head which he unluckily received from the fall of a. piece of wood a few months before.

speak of him in the following manner “Cyrano de Bergerac is a French author of a singular character, who had a very peculiar turn of wit and humour, in many respects

The earl of.Orrery, in his “Remarks on the life and writings of Swift,” has taken occasion to speak of him in the following manner “Cyrano de Bergerac is a French author of a singular character, who had a very peculiar turn of wit and humour, in many respects resembling that of Swift. He wanted the advantages of learning and a regular education; his imagination was less guarded and correct, but more agreeably extravagant. He has introduced into his philosophical romance the system of des Cartes, which was then much admired, intermixed with several fine strokes of just satire on the wild and immechanical inquiries of the philosophers and astronomers of that age; and in many parts he has evidently directed the plan which the dean of St. Patrick’s has pursued.” This opinion was first quoted in the Monthly Review (vol. X), when Derrick translated a. id published Bergerac’s “Voyage to tha Moon,1753, 12mo. But Swift is not the only person indebted to Bergerac. His countrymen allow that Moliere, in several of his characters, Fontenelie, in his “Plurality of Worlds,” and Voltaire, in his “Micromegas,” have taken many hints and sketches from this eccentric writer. There have been various editions of his works at Paris, Amsterdam, Trevoux, &c. the last was printed at Paris, 1741, 3 vols. 12 mo.

studies at the university of that city, he became preceptor to the children of count de St. Souplet, who always testified his respect for him on account of the pains

, an eminent French antiquary, was born at Rheims, March 1, 1567, and not 1557, as asserted by Bayle, Moreri, and Niceron. After finishing his studies at the university of that city, he became preceptor to the children of count de St. Souplet, who always testified his respect for him on account of the pains he bestowed on their education. He then was admitted an advocate, and appointed law-professor and syndic of the city, a place which he filled during many of the elections. His talents and virtues were so highly estimated by his fellow-citizens, that as a mark of their confidence they employed him on their affairs at Paris. During his visits to that metropolis, he commenced a friendship with Dupuy and Peiresc, and formed an acquaintance with the president de Bellievre, who obtained for him the place of historiographer by brevet, with a pension of two hundred crowns. He was on a visit at the country-house of this celebrated magistrate, when he was attacked by a fever, which terminated fatally, August 18, 1623, in his fifty -seventh year. The president honoured him with an affectionate epitaph, which is printed in his two principal works. He is particularly known in the literary world by his “Histoire des grands chemins de l'empire Remain,” a work in which he was assisted by his friend Peiresc, who furnished him with many necessary documents. It was first printed in 4to, 1622, and in the course of a century became very scarce. In 1712 the first book of it was translated into English, and published at London, in 8vo, entitled “The general history of the Highways in all parts of the world, particularly in Great Britain.” In 1728, John Leonard, bookseller and printer at Brussels, published a new edition of the original, 2 vols. 4to, from a copy corrected by the author; and one yet more improved was printed at the same place, in 1736, 2 vols. 4to. They are both scarce, but the first is reckoned the best printed. It has also been translated into Latin by Henninius, professor in the university of Duisbourg, with learned notes, and the remarks of the abbé Du Bos, for Graevius’s antiquities, vol. X. but Bayle is mistaken in supposing that this work was translated into Latin and Italian by Benedict Baccliini, who, however, made some progress himself in a work “De viis antiquorum Romanorum in Italia,” and doubtless would have availed himself of Bergier’s labours. Besides this history of the Roman roads, Bergier had begun a history of Rheims, the manuscript of which the president de Bellievre wished Andre Duschesne to complete, but some obstruction arising on the part of the chapter of Rheims, who refused Duschesne access to their archives, he declined proceeding with the undertaking. The son of the author, however, John Bergier, unwilling that the whole should be lost, published the two books left complete by his father, with a sketch of the other fourteen of which it^as to consist. This wasentitled “Dessein de I'Histoire de Reims,” ibid. 1635, 4fo. Bergier was also author of 1. “Le point du Jour, ou Traite du Commencement des Jours et de l'endroit ou il est etabli sur la terre,” Rheims, 1629, 12 mo. The first, a Paris edition, 1617, wasentitled “Archemeron.” His object is to attain some general rule for avoiding the disputes respecting the celebration of the Catholic festivals. 2. “Le Bouquet royal,” Paris, 1610, 8vo; Rheims, 16:57, 4to, enlarged, an account of the devises and inscriptions which graced the entrance of Louis XIII. into Rheims. 3. “Police generale de la France,1617. 4. Various Latin and French poems inserted in the collections, but we cannot pronounce him very successful as a poet.

his adversaries in public. He had another more contemptible antagonist, the noted Anacharsis Cloots, who published what he, and perhaps no man else, would have called

, a French writer of considerable note, was born at Darnay in Lorraine, December 31, 1718. In the career of promotion he was first curate of Flangebouche, a small village in Frunche-Comte, then professor of theology, principal of the college of Besai^on, a canon of the church of Paris, and confessor to the king’s aunts. Throughout life he was one of the most strenuous opponents of the modern philosophers of France. He acquired an early name by some essays on various literary subjects, to which the prizes were adjudged at Besanon and his reputation was considerably heightened by his very ingenious and plausible work, entitled “Elements primitifs des Langues, &c.” Paris, 1764, 12mo. Soon after he published another, which was favourably received by the learned world, “Origine des Dieux du Pagunisme et les sens des Fables decouvert, par une explication suivie des Poesies d'Hesiode,” Paris, 1767, 2 vols. 12mo. When about the same time he found religion attacked in every quarter by a combination of men of talents in France, he determined to endeavour to counteract their schemes. With this view he wrote “La Certitude des Preuves du Christianisme,1768, 12mo, particularly directed against the “Examen critique des Apologistes de la religion Chretienne,” improperly attributed to Freret; and it was allowed to have been written with much sense, precision, and moderation. This work, which occasioned more friends and more enemies to Bergier than any other, passed through three editions in the same year, besides being translated into Italian and Spanish. Voltaire, to whom the popularity of any writings of this tendency must have been peculiarly unpleasant, affected to answer it in his “Conseils raisonables,” written with his usual art, but more remarkable for wit than argument. Bergier answered the “Conseils,” the only instance in which he noticed any of his adversaries in public. He had another more contemptible antagonist, the noted Anacharsis Cloots, who published what he, and perhaps no man else, would have called “Certitude des Preuves du Mahometisme.” About this time the clergy of France, sensible of Bergier’s services, gave him a pension of two thousand livres, and offered him some valuable benefices, but he would only accept of a canonry in Notre Dame, and it was even against his inclination that he was afterwards appointed confessor to the mesdames, the last king’s aunts. Free from ambition, modest and simple in dress and manners, he was desirous only of a retired life, and at Paris he lived as he had done in the country, in the midst of his books. This study produced, successively, 1. “Le Deisme refute par lui-meme,” Paris, 1765, 1766, 1768, 2 vols. 12mo, an examination of the religious principle of Rousseau. 2. “Apologie de la Religion Chretienne contre l'auteur du Christianisme devoid,” (the baron Holbach) Paris, 1769, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “Examen du Materialisme, ou refutation du systeme de la Nature,” Paris, 1771, 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “Traite historique et dogmatique de la vraie Religion, &c.” Paris, 1780, 12 vols. 12mo. This is, in some respect, a collection of the sentiments of the ablest writers against infidelity. 5. “Discours sur le Manage des Protestants,1787, 8vo. 6. “Observations surle Divorce,” ibid. 1790, 8vo. He also compiled a thelogical dictionary, which makes a part of the “Encyclopedic methodique,” 3 vols. 4to. The abbé“Barruel says, that when this work was first undertaken, some deference was still paid to religion, and Bergier thought it incumbent on him to yield to the pressing solicitations of his friends, lest the part treating of religion should fall into the hands of its enemies, but in this they were deceived. Bergier, indeed, performed his task as might have been expected but in other parts of the work the compilers exceeded their predecessors in licentious sentiments, and at the same time availed themselves of the name of Bergier as a cloak. M. Barbier attributes to our author the sketch of Metaphysics inserted in the” Cours d‘etude de l’usage de l'Ecole militaire." In all his works there is a logical arrangement and precision, and the only objection the French critics have is to his style, which is sometimes rather diffuse. He died at Paris, April 9, 1790. He was a member of the academy of Besangon, and an associate of that of inscriptions and belleslettres.

that the coccus aquaticus is the egg of this animal, from whence issue ten or twelve young. Linnæus, who had at first denied this fact, was struck with astonishment

, a celebrated chemist and natural philosopher, was born March 20, 1735, at Catharineberg in Westgothland. His father was receiver-gene^ ral of the finances, and had destined him to the same employment but nature had designed him for the sciences, to which he had an irresistible inclination from his earliest years. His first studies were confined to mathematics and physics, and all efforts that were made to divert him from science having proved ineffectual, he was sent to Upsal with permission to follow the bet of his inclination. Linnaeus at that time filled the whole kingdom with his fame. Instigated by his example, the Swedish youth flocked around him; and accomplished disciples leaving his school, carried the name and the system of their master to the most distant parts of the globe. Bergman, struck with the splendour of this renown, attached himself to the man whose merit had procured it, and by whom he was very soon distinguished. He applied himself at first to the study of insects, and made several ingenious researches into their history; among others into that of the genus of tenthredo, so often and so cruelly preyed on by the larvae of the ichneumons, that nestle in their bowels and devour them. He discovered that the leech is oviparous, and that the coccus aquaticus is the egg of this animal, from whence issue ten or twelve young. Linnæus, who had at first denied this fact, was struck with astonishment when he saw it proved. “Vidi et obstupui” were the words he pronounced, and which he wrote at the foot of the memoir when he gave it his sanction. Mr. Bergman soon distinguished himself as an astronomer, naturalist, and geometrician; but these are not the titles by which he acquired his fame. The chair of chemistry and mineralogy, which had been filled by the celebrated Wallerius, becoming vacant by his resignation, Mr. Bergman was among the number of the competitors and without having before this period discovered any particular attention to chemistry, he published a memoir on the preparation of alum, that astonished his friends as well av his adversaries but it was warmly attacked in the periodi­^cal publications, and Wallerius himself criticised it without reserve. The dispute, we may suppose, was deemed of high importance, since the prince Gustavus, afterwards king of Sweden, and then chancellor of the university, took cognizance of the affair, and after having consulted two persons, the most able to give him advice, and whose testimony went in favour of Bergman, he addressed a memorial, written with his own hand, in answer to all the objections urged against the candidate, to the consistory of the university and to the senate, who elected him agreeably to his highness’s wishes.

Bergman had now to satisfy the hopes that were conceived of him to justify the opinion of those who recommended him to fill the place of Wallerius uud to put ecivy

Bergman had now to satisfy the hopes that were conceived of him to justify the opinion of those who recommended him to fill the place of Wallerius uud to put ecivy to silence; nor was he unsuccessful in any of these attempts. He did not follow the common track in the study of chemistry. As he had received the lessons of no master, he was tainted with the prejudices of no school. Accustomed to precision, and having no time to lose, he applied himself to experiments without paying any attention to theories; he repeated those often which he considered as the most important and instructive, and reduced them to method, an improvement till then unknown. He first introduced into chemistry the process by analysis, which ought to be applied to every science for there should be but one method of teaching and learning, as there is but one of judging well. These views have been laid down by Mr. Bergman in an excellent discourse, which contains, if we may use the phrase, his profession of faith in what relates to the science. It is here that he displays himself without disguise to his reader, and here it is of importance to study him with attention. The productions of volcanoes had never been analysed when Messrs. Ferber and Troil brought a rich collection of them into Sweden, at the sight of which Mr. Bergman conceived the design of investigating their nature. He examined first of all the matters least altered by the fire, and the forms of which were still to be discerned he followed them in their changes progressively; he determined, he imitated their more complicated appearances he knew the effects which would result from the mixture and decomposition of the saline substances whick are found abundantly in these productions. He discovered such as were formed in the humid way and then in his laboratory he observed the process of nature that combat of flames and explosions that chaos in which the Clements seem to clash and to confound one another, unveiled themselves to his eyes. He saw the fire of volcanoes kindled in the midst of pyritical combinations, and sea-salt decomposed by clays he saw fixed air disengaged from calcined calcareous stones, spreading upon the snrface of the earth, and filling caverns in which flame and animal life are equally extinguished he saw the sulphureous acid thrown out in waves, convert itself into the vitriolic by mere contact with the air and distillinothrough the rocks, from the alum veins of the solfatara. He saw the bitumens as they melted the inflammable and sulphureous airs exhaling and the waters become mineral and impregnated with the fire and vapours of those stu2 pendous furnaces, preparing for the beings that move and dispute on the crust of the abyss, a remedy for pain and a balsam for disease.

t Odensee, the ca-, pital of Funen, at the private press of Thomas Kingorius, bishop of that island, who spared no expence to make an elegant book. The bookseller, however,

, a Latin poet, born in Denmark in 1627, whose taste for letters does not appear to have impeded his fortune, was a member of the royal council of finances, and historiographer to his majesty. It was to justify his promotion to this last office, that he published “Florus Danicus, sive Danicarum rerum a primordio regni ad tempera usque Christian! I. Oldenburgici Breviarium.” This work was printed in fol. 1698, at Odensee, the ca-, pital of Funen, at the private press of Thomas Kingorius, bishop of that island, who spared no expence to make an elegant book. The bookseller, however, to whom thesale was consigned, eager to get rid of the unsold copies, printed a new title with the date of 1700, and when that did not quite answer his expectations, he printed another with the date of 1709, and notwithstanding this obvious trick, there are connoisseurs who think the pretended edition of 1709 preferable to that of 1698. In 1716, however, a second edition was published in 8vo, at Tirnaro, under the direction of the Jesuits of that place. Bering’s poetry, printed separately, was collected in the 2d vol. of “Deliciae quorundam Danorum,” Leyden, 1693, 12mo. The smaller pieces, lyrics, sonnets, &c. are the best; he had not genius for the more serious efforts of the muse. He died in 1675.

every paper he wrote in the Guardian. Swift recommended him to the celebrated earl of Peterborough, who being appointed ambassador to the king of Sicily and the Italian

In 1710 appeared “The Principles of human knowledge;” and, in 1713, “Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous” but to them the same praise has not been given, and to this day their real tendency is a disputed point. The object of both pieces is to prove that the commonly received notion of the existence of matter is false that sensible material objects, as they are called, are not external to the mind, but exist in it, and are nothing more than impressions made upon it by the immediate act of God, according to certain rules termed laws of nature, from which, in the ordinary course of his government, he never deviates and that the steady adherence of the Supreme Spirit to these rules is what constitutes the reality of things to his creatures. These works are declared to. Lave been written in opposition to sceptics and atheists and the author’s inquiry is into the chief cause of error and difficulty in the sciences, with the grounds of scepticism, atheism, and irreligion which cause and grounds are found to be the doctrines of the existence of matter. He seems persuaded that men never could have been deluded into a false opinion of the existence of matter, if they had not fancied themselves invested with a power of abstracting substance from the qualities under which it is perceived and hence, as the general foundation of his argument, he is led to combat and explode a doctrine maintained by Locke and others, of there being a power in the mind of abstracting general ideas. Mr. Hume says, that these works “form the best lessons of scepticism, which are to be found either among the ancient or modern philosophers, Bayle not excepted.” Dr. Beattie also considers them as having a sceptical tendency. He adds, that if Berkeley’s argument be conclusive, it proves that to b false which every man must necessarily believe, every moment of his life, to be true, and that to be true which no man since the foundation of the world was ever capable of believing for a single moment. Berkeley’s doctrine attacks the most incontestable dictates of common sense, and pretends to demonstrate that the clearest principles of human conviction, and those which have determined the judgment of men in all ages, and by which the judgment of all reasonable men must be determined, are certainly fallacious. It may just be observed, that Berkeley had not reached his 27th year when he published this singular system. The author of his life in the Biog. Brit, asserts that “the airy visions of romances, to the reading of which he was much addicted, disgust at the books of metaphysics then received in the university, and that inquisitive attention to the operations of the mind which about this time was excited by the writings of Locke and Malebranche, probably gave birth to his disbelief of the existence of matter.” Whatever influenre the oth^r causes here assigned might have had, we have the authority of his relict, Mrs. Berkeley, that he had a very great dislike to romances, and indeed it would be difficult to discover in any of these volumes of absurd fiction the grounds of such a work as Berkeley’s. In 1712 he published three sermons in favour of passive obedience and non-resistance, which underwent at least three editions, and afterwards had nearly done him sonic injury in. his fortune. They caused him to be represented as ajlacobite, and stood in his way with the house of Hanover, till Mr. Molineux, above-mentioned, took off the impression, and first made him known to queen Caroline, whose secretary, when princess, Mr. -Molineux had been. Acuteness of parts and beauty of imagination were so conspicuous in his writings, that his reputation was now established, and his company courted even where his opinions did not find admission. Men of opposite parties concurred in recommending him sir Richard Steele, for instance, and Dr. Swift. For the former he wrote several papers in the Guardian, and at his house became acquainted with Pope, with whom he afterwards lived in friendship. It is said he had a guinea and a dinner with Steele for every paper he wrote in the Guardian. Swift recommended him to the celebrated earl of Peterborough, who being appointed ambassador to the king of Sicily and the Italian states, took Berkeley with him as chaplain and secretary in November 1713. He returned to England with this nobleman in August 1714, and towards the close of the year had a fever, which gave occasion to Dr. Arbuthnot to indulge a little pleasantry on Berkeley’s system. “Poor philosopher Berkeley,” says he to his friend Swift, “has now the idea of health, which was very hard to produce in him; for he had an idea of a strange fever on him so strong, that it was very hard to destroy it by introducing a contrary one.

urious tract “De Motu,” which was inserted in the memoirs of the royal academy of sciences at Paris, who had proposed the subject. He arrived at London in 1721; and,

His hopes of preferment expiring with the fall of queen Anne’s ministry, he some time after embraced an offer made him by Dr. St. George Ashe, bishop of Clogher, of accompanying his son in a tour through Europe. When he arrived at Paris, having more leisure than when he first passed through that city, Mr. Berkeley took care to pay his respects to his rival in metaphysical sagacity, the illustrious Pere Malebranche. He found this ingenious father in his cell, cooking in a small pipkin a medicine for a disorder with which he was then troubled, an inflammation on the lungs. The conversation naturally turned on our author’s system, of which the other had received some knowledge from a translation just published. But the issue of this debate proved tragical to poor Malebranche. In the heat of disputation he raised his voice so high, and. gave way so freely to the natural impetuosity of a man of parts and a Frenchman, that he brought on himself a violent increase of his disorder, which carried him off a few days after. In this excursion Mr. Berkeley employed four years and, besides those places which fall within, the grand tour, visited some that are less frequented. He travelled over Apulia (from which he wrote an account of the tarantula to Dr. Freind), Calabria, and the whole island of Sicily. This last country engaged his attention so strongly, that he had with great industry collected very considerable materials for a natural history of it, but unfortunately lost them in the passage to Naples. What injury the literary world has sustained by this mischance, may be collected from the specimen of his talents for observation and description, in a letter to Mr. Pope concerning the island of Inarime (now Ischia) dated October 22, 1717; and in another from the same city to Dr. Arbuthnot, giving an account of an eruption of Vesuvius. On his way homeward, he drew up at Lyons a curious tract “De Motu,” which was inserted in the memoirs of the royal academy of sciences at Paris, who had proposed the subject. He arrived at London in 1721; and, being much affected with the miseries of the nation, occasioned by the South Sea scheme in 1720, published the same year “An essay towards preventing the ruin of Great Britain;” reprinted in his miscellaneous tracts.

. Pope introduced him to lord Burlington, and lord Burlington recommended him to the duke of Grafton who, being lord-lieutenant of Ireland, took him over as one of his

His way was open now into the very first company. Mr. Pope introduced him to lord Burlington, and lord Burlington recommended him to the duke of Grafton who, being lord-lieutenant of Ireland, took him over as one of his chaplains in 1721, and November this year he is said to have accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor in divinity; but a writer in the Gent. Mag. 1776 asserts that he never went to Ireland as chaplain to any lieutenant, and that he was created D. D. by his college in 1717, when he was in Italy. The year following he had a very unexpected increase of fortune from Mrs. Vanhomrigh, the celebrated Vanessa, to whom he had been introduced by Swift this lady had intended Swift for her heir, but, perceiving herself to be slighted by him, she left near 8000l. between her two executors, of whom Berkeley was one. In his life in the Biog. Brit, it is said that Swift had often taken him to dine at this lady’s house, but Mrs. Berkeley, his widow, asserts that he never dined there but once, and that by chance. Dr. Berkeley, as executor, destroyed as much of Vanessa’s correspondence as he could find. Mr. Marshal, the other executor, published the “Cadenus and Vanessa,” which, according to Dr. Delany, proved fatal to Stella. May 18, 1724, he was promoted to the deanery of Derry, worth 1100l. per annum, and resigned his fellowship.

r a settlement in the Atlantic ocean at 40l. a year he procured his plan to be laid before George I. who commanded sir Robert Walpole to lay it before the commons and

In 1725 he published, and it has since been re-printed in his miscellaneous tracts, “A proposal for converting the savage Americans to Christianity, by a college to be erected in the Summer Islands, otherwise called the Isles of Bermuda” a scheme which had employed his thoughts for three or four years past; and for which he was disposed to make many personal sacrifices. As what he deemed necessary steps he offered to resign all his preferment, and to dedicate the remainder of his life to instructing the American youth, on a stipend of 100l. yearly; he prevailed with three junior fellows of Trinity college, Dublin, to give up all their prospects at home, and to exchange their fellowships for a settlement in the Atlantic ocean at 40l. a year he procured his plan to be laid before George I. who commanded sir Robert Walpole to lay it before the commons and further granted him a charter for erecting a college in Bermuda, to consist of a president and nine fellow?:, who were obliged to maintain and educate Indian scholars atlO/. a year each he obtained a grant from the commons of a sum, to be determined by the king and accordingly 20,000l. was promised by the minister, for the purchase of lands, and erecting the college. Trusting to these promising appearances, he married the daughter of John Forster, esq. speaker of the Irish house of commons, the 1st of August 3728; and actually set sail in September following for Rhode Island, which lay nearest to Bermuda, taking with him his wife, a single lady, and two gentlemen of fortune. Yet the scheme entirely failed, and Berkeley was obliged to return, after residing near two years at Newport. The reason given is, that the minister never heartily embraced the project, and the money was turned into another channel. During his residence in America, when he was not employed as an itinerant preacher, which business could not be discharged in the winter, he preached every Sunday at Newport, where was the nearest episcopal church, and to that church he gave an organ. When the season and his health permitted, he visited the continent, not only in its outward skirts, but penetrated far into its recesses. The same generous desire of advancing the best interests of mankind which induced him to cross the Atlantic, uniformly actuated him whilst America was the scene of his ministry. The missionaries from thfe English society, who resided within about a hundred miles of Rhode Island, agreed among themselves to hold a sort of synod at Dr. Berkeley’s house there, twice in a year, in order to enjor the advantages of his advice and exhortations. Four of these meetings were accordingly held. One of the principal points which the doctor then pressed upon his fellowlabourers, was the absolute necessity of conciliating, by all innocent means, the affection of their hearers, and also of their dissenting neighbours. His own example, indeed, very eminently enforced his precepts upon this head for it is scarcely possible to conceive a conduct more uniformly kind, tender, beneficent, and liberal than his xvas. He seemed to have only one wish in his heart, which was to alleviate misery, and to diffuse happiness. Finding, at length, that the fear of offending the dissenters at home, and of inclining the colonies to assert independency, had determined the minister to make any use, rather than the best use, of the money destined for, and promised to St. Paul’s college, the dean of Derry took a reluctant leave of a country, where the name of Berkeley was long and justly revered more than that of any European whatever. At his departure, he gave a farm of a hundred acres, which 1,-jy round his house, and his house itself, as a benefaction to Yale and Harvard colleges: and the value of that land, then not insignificant because cultivated, became afterwards very considerable. He gave, of his own property, to one of these colleges, and to several missionaries, books to the amount of five hundred pounds. To the other college he made a large donation of books purchased by others, and trusted to his disposal.

ffected to consider his philosophy and his Bermuda project as the reveries of a visionary. Sherlock (who was afterwards bishop of London) on the other hand warmly espoused

We have already related by what means, and upon what occasion, Dr. Berkeley had first the honour of being known to queen Caroline. This princess delighted much in attending to philosophical conversations between learned and ingenious men for which purpose she had, when princess of Wales, appointed a particular day in the week, when the most eminent for literary abilities at that time in England were invited to attend her royal highness in the evening a practice which she continued after her accession to the throne. Of this company were doctors Clarke,­Hoadly, Berkeley, and Sherlock.- Clarke and Berkeley were generally considered as principals in the debates that arose upon those occasions; and Hoadly adhered to the former, as Sherlock did to the latter. Hoadly was no friend to our author: he affected to consider his philosophy and his Bermuda project as the reveries of a visionary. Sherlock (who was afterwards bishop of London) on the other hand warmly espoused his cause and particularly, when the “Minute Philosopher” came out, he carried a copy of it to the queen, and left it to her majesty to determine, whether such a work could be the production of a disordered understanding. After dean Berkeley’s return from Rhode Island, the queen often commanded his attendance to discourse with him on what he had observed worthy of notice in America. His agreeable and instructive conversation, engaged that discerning princess so much in his favour, that the rich deanery of Down in Ireland falling vacant, he was at her desire named to it, and the king’s letter actually came over fqr his appointment. But his friend lord Burlington having neglected to notify the royal intentions in proper time to the duke of Dorset, then lord lieutenant of Ireland, his excellency was so offended at this disposal of the richest deanery in Ireland, without his concurrence, that it was thought proper not to press the matter any farther. Her -majesty upon this declared, that since they would not suffer Dr. Berkeley to be a dean in Ireland, he should be a bishop and accordingly, in 1733,­the bishopric of Cioyne becoming vacant, he was by letters patent, dated March 17, promoted to that see, and was consecrated at St. Paul’s church in Dublin, on the 19th of May following, byTheophilus archbishop of Cashel, assisted by the bishops of Raphoe and Killaloe. His lordship repaired immediately to his manse-house at Cioyne, where he constantly resided (except one winter that he attended the business of parliament in Dublin) and applied himself with vigour to the faithful discharge of all episcopal duties. He revived in his diocese the useful office of rural dean, which had gone into disuse visited frequently parochially and confirmed in several parts of his see.

Addison,” replied he, “I have good reason not to believe those trifles, since my friend Dr. Halley, who has dealt so much in demonstration, has assured me, that the

About this time he engaged in a controversy with the mathematicians, which made a good deal of noise in the literary world and the occasion of it is said to have been, this: Mr. Addison had, many years before this, given him an account of their common friend Dr. Garth’s behaviour in his last illness, which was equally un pi easing to both these advocates of revealed religion. For, when Addison. went to see the doctor, and began to discourse with him seriously about another world, “Surely, Addison,” replied he, “I have good reason not to believe those trifles, since my friend Dr. Halley, who has dealt so much in demonstration, has assured me, that the doctrines of Christianity are incomprehensible, and the religion itself an imposture.” The bishop, therefore, addressed to him, as to an infidel mathematician, a discourse called the “Analyst” with-a view to show that mysteries in faith were unjustly objected to by mathematicians, who admitted much greater mysteries, and even falsehoods in science, of which he endeavoured to prove, that the doctrine of fluxions furnished a clear example. This attack gave occasion to a smart controversy upon the subject of fluxions the principal answers to the “Analyst” were written by a person under the name of Philalethes Cantabrigiensis, generally supposed to be Dr. Jurin, who published a piece entitled “Geometry no friend to Infidelity,1734. To this the bishop replied in “A Defence of Freethinking in Mathematics,1735; which drew a second answer the same year from Philalethes, styled “The minute Mathematician, or the Freethinker no just thinker” and here the controversy ended, and whatever fault, mathematicians may find in this hostile attempt of our bishop, it must be acknowledged they have reaped no inconsiderable advantage from it, inasmuch as it gave rise to the Treatise of Fluxions by Maclaurin, in which the whole doctrine is delivered with more precision and fulness than ever was done before, or probably than ever would have been done, if no attack had been made upon it.

t time at least 1400l. per annum. So uncommon a. petition excited his majesty’s curiosity to inquire who was the extraordinary man that preferred it: being told that

But the bishop, ever, active and attentive to the public good, was continually sending forth something or o-ther in 1735, the “Querist;” in 1736, “A Discourse addressed to Magistrates,” occasioned by the enormous licence and irreligion of the times and many other things afterwards of a smaller kind. In 1744 came forth his celebrated and curious book, entitled, “Siris a chain of philosophical reflections and inquiries concerning the virtues of Tar Water” a medicine which had been useful to himself in a case of nervous colic. This work, he has been heard to declare, cost him more time and pains than any other he had ever been engaged in. It underwent a second impression, with additions and emendations, in 1747 and was followed by “Farther thoughts on Tar Water,” in 1752. In July, the same year, he removed with his lady and family to Oxford, partly to superintend the education of his son, the subject of the following article, but chiefly to indulge the passion for learned retirement, which had ever strongly possessed him, and was one of his motives to form the Bermuda project. But as none could be more sensible tban his lordship of the impropriety of a bishop’s nonresidence, he previously endeavoured to exchange his high preferment for some canonry or headship at Oxford. Failing of success in this, he actually wrote over to the secretary of state, to request that he might have permission to resign his bishopric, worth at that time at least 1400l. per annum. So uncommon a. petition excited his majesty’s curiosity to inquire who was the extraordinary man that preferred it: being told that it was his old acquaintance Dr. Berkeley, he declared that he should die a bishop in spite of himself, but gave him- full liberty to reside where he pleased. The bishop’s last act before he left Cloyne was to sign a lease of the demesne lands in that neighbourhood, to be renewed yearly at the rent of 200l. which sum he directed to be distributed every year, until his return, among poor house-keepers of Cloyne, Youghal, and Aghadtla. The author of his life in the Biog. Brit, magnifies his love for the beauties of Cloyne, but the fact was, that he had never any idea of Cloyne as a beautiful situation, and we are happy to draw from the same authority which corrects this error, some additional particulars of his disinterested spirit. He declared to Mrs. Berkeley, soon after he was advanced to the prelacy, that his resolution was never to change his see; because, as he afterwards confessed to the archbishop of Tuam, and the late earl of Shannon, he had very early in life got the world under his feet, and he hoped to trample on it to his latest moment. These two warm friends had been pressing him to think of a translation but he did not love episcopal translations. He thought that they were sometimes really hurtful to individuals, and that they often gave, though unjustly, a handle to suspect of mean views, an order to which that holy and humble man was himself an honour, and to which it may be said, without adulation, that he would have been an honour in any age of the church. Humble and unaspiring as was the bishop of Cloyne, the earl of Chesterfield sought him out and when, as a tribute to exalted merit, that nobleman offered to him tl e see of Clogher, where he was told he might immediately receive fines to the amount of ten thousand pounds, he consulted Mrs. Berkeley, as having a family, and, with her full approbation, not only declined the bishopric of Clogher, but the offer which accompanied that proposal, of any other translation which might become feasible during lord Chesterfield’s administration. The primacy was vacated before the expiration of that period. On that occasion, the bishop said to Mrs. Berkeley, “I desire to add one more to the list of churchmen, who are evidently dead to ambition and avarice.” Just before his embarkation for America, queen Caroline endeavoured to stagger his resolution, by the offer of an English mitre but, in reply, he assured her majesty, that he chose rather to be president of St. Paul’s college, than primate of all England.

n account of him was drawn up by his brother, the Rev. Dr. Robert Berkeley, vicar-general of Cloyne, who died in 1787. This was first inserted in the Biog. Britannica,

Dr. Berkeley has not been very fortunate in his biographers. An account of him was drawn up by his brother, the Rev. Dr. Robert Berkeley, vicar-general of Cloyne, who died in 1787. This was first inserted in the Biog. Britannica, and many mistakes pointed out, and additions made to it in a subsequent volume of that work. Previously to this, in 1776, an “Account of his Life” was published in a thin octavo volume, at London, which probably was drawn up from family information. Of this a second edition was published in 1784, professedly “with improvements,” but the errors both of the first edition and of the Biog. Brit, which had then appeared, are retained. In 1784 a new edition of the bishop’s entire works was published at Dublin and London, 2 vols. 4to, with the octavo life prefixed. The third vol. of the Biog. Brit, contains some important information from the bishop’s widow (who died 1786) and which we have endeavoured to incorporate. It remains only to be noticed that the romance called the “Adventures of Signer Gaudentio di Lucca,” often attributed to our author, was certainly not his production.

since the reformation. In 1759, also, he took the degree of M. A. The kindness of archbishop Seeker (who testified the highest respect for bishop Berkeley’s memory by

, second son of the preceding, by Anne, eldest daughter of the right hon. John Forster, a privy-counsellor and speaker of the Irish house of commons, by Anne, daughter to the right hon. John Monck, brother to the duke of Albemarle, was born on the 28th of September 1733, old style, in Grosvenor-street, Grosvenor-square. In his infancy he was removed with the family to Ireland, where he was instructed in the classics by his father only, the bishop taking that part of the education of his sons on himself. Instructed in every elegant and useful accomplishment, Mr. Berkeley was, at the age of nineteen, sent over to Oxford his father leaving it to his own choice to enter a gentleman commoner, either at Christ church or St. John’s college. But bishop Conybeare, then dean of Christ church, on his arrival offering him a studentship in that society, he accepted it, finding many of the students to be gentlemen of the first character for learning and rank in the kingdom. His first tutor was the late learned archbishop of York, Dr. Markham; on whose removal to Westminsterschool, he put himself under the tuition of Dr. Smallwell, afterwards bishop of Oxford. Having taken the degree of B. A. he served the office of collector in the university, and as he was allowed by his contemporaries to be an excellent Latin scholar, his collector’s speech was universally admired and applauded. In 1758 he took a small living from his society, the vicarage of East Garston, Berks, from which he was removed, in 1759, by archbishop Seeker, his sole patron, to the vicarage of Bray, Berks of which he was only the fifth vicar since the reformation. In 1759, also, he took the degree of M. A. The kindness of archbishop Seeker (who testified the highest respect for bishop Berkeley’s memory by his attention to his deserving son) did not rest here he gave him also the chancellorship of Brecknock, the rectory of Acton, Middlesex, and the sixth prebendal stall in the church of Canterbury. In 1768 he had taken the degree of LL. D. for which he went out grand compounder, and soon afterwards resigned the rectory of Acton. Some time after he had obtained the chancellorship of Brecknock, he put himself to very considerable expence in order to render permanent two ten pounds per annum, issuing out of the estate, to two poor Welch curacies. The vicarage of Bray he exchanged for that of Cookham near Maidenhead, and had afterwards from the church of Canterbury the vicarage of East-Peckham, Kent, which he relinquished on obtaining the rectory of St. Clement’s Danes which with the vicarage of Tyshurst, Sussex (to which he was presented by the church of Canterbury in 1792, when he vacated Cookham), and with the chancellorship of Brecknock, he; held till his death. His illness had been long and painful, but borne with exemplary resignation and his death was so calm and easy that no pang was observed, no groan was heard, by his attending wife and relations. He died Jan. 6, 1795, and was interred in his father’s vault in Christ church, Oxford. Not long before his death, he expressed his warmest gratitude to Mrs. Berkeley, of whose affection he was truly sensible, and of whom he took a most tender farewell. Dr. Berkeley’s qualifications and attainments were such as occasioned his death to be lamented by many. He was the charitable divine, the affectionate and active friend, the elegant scholar, the accomplished gentleman. He possessed an exquisite sensibility. To alleviate the sufferings of the sick and needy, and to patronize the friendless, were employments in which his heart and his hand ever co-operated. In the pulpit his manner was animated, and his matter forcible. His conversation always enlivened the social meetings where he was present; for he was equalled by few in affability of temper and address, in the happy recital of agreeable anecdote, in the ingenious discussion of literary subjects, or in the brilliant display of a lively imagination.

have some reason to think, was drawn up for the preceding edition of this work, by his widow, a lady who claims some notice on her own account. She died at Kensington,

This memoir, we have some reason to think, was drawn up for the preceding edition of this work, by his widow, a lady who claims some notice on her own account. She died at Kensington, Nov. 4, 1800, leaving a character rather difficult to appreciate. In 1797, she published the “Poems” of her son George Monck Berkeley, esq. in a magnificent quarto volume, with a very long, rambling preface of anecdotes and remarks, amidst which she exhibits many traits of her own character. She was unquestionably a lady of considerable talents, but her fancy was exuberant, and her petty resentments were magnified into an importance visible perhaps only to herself. She had accumulated a stock of various knowledge, understood French perfectly and spoke it fluently. She likewise read Spanish and Hebrew, and always took her Spanish Prayer-book with her to church. This was but one of her peculiarities. In conversation, as in writing, she was extremely entertaining, except to those who wished also to entertain; and her stories and anecdotes, although given in correct and fluent language, lost much or their effect, sometimes from length, and sometimes from repetition. She had, however, a warm friendly heart, amidst all her oddities and her very numerous contributions to the Gentleman’s Magazine contain no small portion of entertainment and information. Her son, the above-mentioned George Monck Berkeley, published in 1789, an amusing volume of anecdote and biography, under the title of “Literary Kelics.

, descended in a direct line from Robert Fitzharding, who was of the royal house of Denmark. He with his nephew, Charles

, descended in a direct line from Robert Fitzharding, who was of the royal house of Denmark. He with his nephew, Charles Berkeley, had the principal management of the duke of York’s family, and was one of the privy council in the reign of Charles II. James II. and William III. At the restoration he manifested great loyalty for Charles II. and was advanced to the dignity of viscount Dursley and earl of Berkeley in 1679. One of his most munificent acts was his bestowing on the public library of Sion college, a valuable collection of books formed by sir Robert Coke. He died Oct. 14, 1698, aged seventy-one, and was buried at Cranford in Middlesex. Lord Orford attributes to him, on good authority, a curious and scarce work of the religious cast, entitled “Historical applications and occasional meditations upon several subjects. Written by a person of honour,1670, 12mo. In this book are several striking instances of the testimony which some men of eminence have borne to the importance of religious life, and the consolation to be received from it, especially at the approach of death. Fenton, in his observations on a short poem, prefixed to this work by Waller, says that his lordship was a person of strict virtue and piety, but of such undistinguishing affability to men of all ranks and parties, that Wycherley has been supposed to have drawn his character of “Lord Plausible,” in the Plain Dealer, from him a circumstance that cannot detract much from his lordship’s reputation, for Wycherley was a poor judge of men of “strict virtue and piety.” Besides the above work, of which a third edition appeared in 1680, lord Berkeley published, the same year, “A speech to the Levant Company at their annual election, Feb. 9, 1680.

his descendants yet live and was by the female line, descended from Thomas Mowbray, duke of Norfolk, who flourished in the reigns of Henry IV. and V. In the 12 James

, one of the justices of the king’s bench in the time of Charles I. was born in 1584, the second son of Rowland Berkeley, esq. of Spetchly in Worcestershire, where his descendants yet live and was by the female line, descended from Thomas Mowbray, duke of Norfolk, who flourished in the reigns of Henry IV. and V. In the 12 James I. he served the office of high sheriff for the county of Worcester in the 3d Charles I. was made king’s serjeant, and in the 8th of the same reign, was made a justice of the court of king’s bench. While in this office, he, with eleven of his brethren, gave his opinion in favour of ship-money; and if we may judge from the tenor of his conduct in private life, as well as upbn the bench, from honest motives but as he had been active on other occasions in what he seems to have thought his duty, and was a man of fortune, he was singled out by parliament as a proper object of their vengeance. He was accordingly impeached of high treason, and adjudged to pay a fine of 20,000l. to be deprived of his office of judge, and rendered incapable of holding any place, or receiving any honour in the state or commonwealth: he was also to be imprisoned in the Tower during the pleasure of the house of lords. Having made some “satisfaction” for his fine to the parliament, he was by their authority, discharged from the whole, and set at liberty, after he had been upwards of seven months in the Tower. But he af terwards suffered greatly by the plunderings and exactions of the rebels, and a little before the battle of Worcester, the Presbyterians, though engaged in the king’s service, retained their ancient animosity against him, and burnt his house at Spetchly to the ground. He afterwards converted the stables into a dwelling-house, and lived with content, and even dignity, upon the wreck of his fortune. He was a true son of the church of England, and suffered more from the seduction of his only son Thomas to the church of Home, at Brussels, than from all the calamities of the civil war. He died Aug. 5, 1656.

irginia, however, was not long a place of safety; the parliament sent some ships with a small force, who took possession of the province without difficulty, and removed

, a native of London, was the youngest son of sir Maurice Berkeley, and brother of John lord Berkeley of Stratton. He was elected probationer fellow of Merton college, Oxford, in 1625, and four years after was admitted M. A. In 1630, he set out on his travels, where he seems to have acquired that knowledge which fitted him for public business, and on his return, became gentleman of the privy-chamber to Charles I. In 1646, he went on some commission to Virginia, of which province he had afterwards the government. He invited many of the royalists to retire thither as a place of security, and hinted in a letter to king Charles I. that it would not be an unfit place as a retreat for his majesty depending, perhaps, more upon the improbability of its being attacked, than on its means of defence. Virginia, however, was not long a place of safety; the parliament sent some ships with a small force, who took possession of the province without difficulty, and removed sir William Berkeley from the government, but suffered him to remain unmolested upon his private estate. In 1660, on the death of colonel Matthews, in consideration of his services, particularly in defending the English from being killed by the natives, and in destroying great numbers of the Indians without losing three of his own men, he was again made governor, and continued in that office until 1676, when, he returned to England, after an absence of thirty years. He died the following year, and was buried July 13, in the parish church of Twickenham. His writings are, “The Lost Lady,” a tragi-comedy, Lond. 1639, foil, and, as the editor of the Biog. Dram, thinks, another play called “Cornelia,1662, not printed, but ascribed to a “sir William Bartley.” He wrote also a “Description of Virginia,” fol. In Francis Moryson’s edition of “The Laws of Virginia,” Lond. 1662, fol. the preface informs us that sir William was the author of the best of them.

e son of Tecelinus, a military nobleman, renowned for what was then deemed piety. His mother, Aleth, who has the same character, had seven children by her husband, of

, one of the most, if not the most distinguished character of the twelfth century, was born at Fountaine, a village of Burgundy, in 1091, and was the son of Tecelinus, a military nobleman, renowned for what was then deemed piety. His mother, Aleth, who has the same character, had seven children by her husband, of whom Bernard was the third. From his infancy he was devoted to religion and study, and made a rapid progress in the learning of the times. He took an early resolution, to retire from the world, and engaged all his brothers, and several of his friends in the same monastic views with himsell. The most rigid rules were most agreeable to his inclination, and hence he became a Cistertian, the strictest of the orders in France. The Cistertians were at that time but few in number, men being discouraged from uniting with them on account of their excessive austerities. Bernard, however, by his superior genius, his eminent piety, and his ardent zeal, gave to this order a lustre and a celebrity, which their institution by no means deserved. At the age of twenty-three, with more than thirty companions, he entered into the monastery. Other houses of the order arose soon after, and he himself was appointed abbot of Clairval. To those noviciates who desired admission, he used to say, “If ye hasten to those things which are within, dismiss your bodies, which ye brought from the world let the spirits alone enter the flesh profiteth nothing.” Yet Bernard gradually learned to correct the harshness and asperity of his sentiments, and while he preached mortification to his disciples, led them on with more mildness and clemency than he exercised towards himself. For some time he injured his own health exceedingly by austerities, and, as he afterwards confessed, threw a stumbling block in the way of the weak, by exacting of them a degree of perfection, which he himself had not attained. After he had recovered from these excesses, he began to exert himself by travelling and preaching from place to place, and such were his powers of eloquence, or the character in which he was viewed, that he soon acquired an astonishing prevalence, and his word became a law to princes and nobles. His eloquence, great as it was, was aided in the opinion of his hearers by his sincerity and humility, and there can be no doubt that his reputation for those qualities was justly founded. He constantly refused the highest ecclesiastical dignities, among which the bishoprics of Genoa, Milan, andRheims, may be instanced, although his qualifications were indisputable. Such was his influence, that during a schism which happened in the church of Rome, his authority determined both Louis VI. king of France and Henry I. king of England, to support the claims of Innocent II., one instance, among many, to prove the ascendancy he had acquired. Yet although no potentate, civil or ecclesiastical, possessed such real power as he did, in the Christian world, and though he stood the highest in the judgment of all men, he remained in his own estimation the lowest, and referred all he did to divine grace.

lways employed to the best purposes. The crusade of Louis VII. was supported by Bernard’s eloquence, who unhappily prevailed to draw numbers to join that monarch in

His power, however, was not always employed to the best purposes. The crusade of Louis VII. was supported by Bernard’s eloquence, who unhappily prevailed to draw numbers to join that monarch in his absurd expedition, which was, in its consequences, pregnant with misery and ruin. In his dispute with the celebrated Abelard, he appears more in character. At a council called at Soissons in 1121, Abelard was’ charged with tritheism, and with having asserted, that God the father was alone Almighty. He was ordered to burn his books, and to recite the symbol of Athanasius, with all which he complied, and was set at liberty: but it was long after this before Bernard took any particular notice of Abelard, having either heard little of the controversy, or not being called upon to deliver his sentiments. Abelard, however, notwithstanding his retractations, persevered in teaching his heresies, and it became, at length, impossible for his errors to escape the observation of the abbot of Clairv.il. Having studied the subject, his first step was to admonish Abeiard in a private conference, but finding that that had no effect, he opposed him in some of his writings, on which Abelard challenged him to dispute the matter at a solemn assembly which was to be held at the city of Sens in 1140. Bernard was at first unwilling to subu-it these important doctrines to a decision which was rather that of personal talent, than of deliberative wisdom, and would have declined appearing, had not his friends represented that his absence might injure the cause. He accordingly met his antagonist, and began to open the case, when Abelard very unexpectedly put an end to the matter by appealing to the pope. Bernard, who afterwards wrote to the same pope an account of Abelard’s conduct, very justly blames him for appealing from judges whom he had himself chosen. Notwithstanding this tippeal, however, Abelard’s sentiments were condemned, and the pope ordered his books to be burned, and himself confined in some monastery; and that of Cluni being chosen, he remained in it until his death about two years after.

acter. On the other hand, although his learning was but moderate, he could have been no ordinary man who attained such influence, not only over public opinion, but over

Bernard has had the fate of most of the eminent characters during the early ages of the church, to be excessively applauded by one party, and. as much and as unjustly depreciated by the other. Of his austerities and his miracles, little notice need be now taken. The former he was himself willing to allow were unjustifiable, and the latter are probably the forgeries of a period later than his own. In his conduct as well as his writings we see many intolerant prejudices and much superstition a strong predilection for the Roman hierarchy, and particularly for the monastic character. On the other hand, although his learning was but moderate, he could have been no ordinary man who attained such influence, not only over public opinion, but over men of the highest rank and power and he has been praised by the protestant writers for deviating in many respects from the dogmas of the popish religion, and maintaining some of those essential doctrines which afterwards occasioned a separation between the two churches. He denied transubstantiation, allowed of only two sacraments, and placed salvation on the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, denying all works of supererogation, &c. As to his talents, one of his modern biographers allows that his style was lively and florid, his thoughts noble and ingenious, his imagination brilliant^ and fertile in allegories. He is full of sensibility and tenderness, first gains the mind by a delicate and insinuating manner, then touches the heart with force and vehemence. The Holy Scripture was so familiar to this writer, that he adopts its words and expressions in almost every period and every phrase. St. Bernard’s sermons are considered as master-pieces of sentiment and force. Henry de Valois preferred them to all those of the ancients, whether Greek or Latin. It appears that he preached in French that monks who were not learned assisted at his conferences, and that Latin was then not understood by the people. His Sermons are to be seen in old French at the library of the fathers Fuillautines, rue St. Honore at Paris, in a ms. which is very near St. Bernard’s time; and the council of Tours, held in the year 813, ordered the bishops when they delivered the homilies of the fathers, to translate them from Latin into Langue romance, that the people might understand them. This proves that it was the custom to preach in French long before the time of St. Bernard. The best edition of the works of St. Bernard, who is regarded as the last of the fathers, is that of Mabillon, 2 vots. 1690, fol. the first of which contains such pieces as are undoubtedly Bernard’s. Those in the second volume are not of equal authority. Besides the lives prefixed to this edition by various writers, there are three separate lives, one by Lemaistre, Paris, 1649, 8vo; another by Villefore, 1704, 4to and a third by Clemencet, 1773, 4to, which is usually considered as the thirteenth volume of the literary history of France.

, a monk in the tenth century, who was born in the year 923, in the neighbourhood of Annecy, of

, a monk in the tenth century, who was born in the year 923, in the neighbourhood of Annecy, of one of the most illustrious houses of Savoy, rendered himself not more celebrated in the annals of religion than of benevolence, by two hospitable establishments which he formed, and where, for nine hundred years, travellers have found relief from the dangers of passing the Alps in the severe part of the season. Bernard, influenced by pious motives and a love of study, refused in his early years a proposal of marriage to which his parents attached great importance, and embraced the ecclesiastical life. He afterwards was promoted to be archdeacon of Aoste, which includes the places of official and grand-vicar, and consequently gave him considerable weight in the government of the diocese. This he employed in the laudable purposes of converting the wretched inhabitants of the neighbouring mountains, who were idolaters, and made very great progress in ameliorating their manners, as well as religious opinions. Affected at the same time with the dangers and hardships sustained by the French and German pilgrims in travelling to Rome, he resolved to build on the summit of the Alps two hospitia, or hotels, for their reception, one on mount Joux (mons Jcrffis, so called from a temple of Jupiter erected there), and the other, the colonnade of Jove, so called from a colonnade or series of upright stones placed on the snow to point out a safe track. These places of reception were afterwards called, and are still known by the names of the Great and Little St. Bernard. The care of them the founder entrusted to regular canons of the order of St. Augustin, who have continued without interruption to our days, each succession of monks during this long period, zealously performing the duties of hospitality according to the benevolent intentions of St. Bernard. The situation is the most inhospitable by nature that can be conceived even in spring, the cold is extreme; and the whole is covered with snow or ice, whose appearances are varied only by storms and clouds. Their principal monastery on Great St. Bernard, is probably the highest habitation in Europe, being two thousand five hundred toises above the sea. Morning and evening their dogs, trained for the purpose, trace out the weary and perishing traveller, and by their means, many lives are saved, the utmost care being taken to recover them, even when- recovery seems most improbable. After thus establishing these hospitia, Bernard returned to his itinerant labours among the neighbouring countries until his death in May 28, 1008. The Bollandists have published, with notes, two authentic lives of St. Bernard de Menthon, one written by Richard, his successor in the archdeaconry of Aoste y by which it appears that he was neither a Cistertian, nor of the regular canons, as some writers have asserted. The two hospitals possessed considerable property in Savoy, of which they were deprived afterwards, but the establishment still subsists, and the kind and charitable duties of it have lately been performed by secular priests.

in 1690. It is thought she composed these pieces conjointly with Fontenelle and the two Corneille’s, who were her relations. She wrote also some other poems with ease

, of the academy of the Ricovrati of Padua, was born at Rouen, and died at Paris in J7 12. She acquired some poetical fame, her works being everal times crowned by the French academy, and that of the Jeux floraux. Two of her tragedies were represented at the French theatre, “Laodamia,” in 1689, and “Brutus” in 1690. It is thought she composed these pieces conjointly with Fontenelle and the two Corneille’s, who were her relations. She wrote also some other poems with ease and delicacy. Some distinction is set upon her poetical petition, which has some wit, to Louis XIV. to ask for the 200 crowns, the annual gratification given her by that prince it is inserted in thfc “Recueil de vers choisis du pere Bouhours.” She discontinued writing for the theatre at the instance of madame de Pont-Chartrain, who gave her a pension. She even suppressed several little pieces, which might have given a bad impression of her manners and religion. Three romances are likewise ascribed to her “The count d'Amboise,” in 12mo “The miseries of Love;” and “Ines of Cordova,” 12mo. Some of the journalists have attributed to mademoiselle Bernard the account of the isle of Borneo, and others to FonteneHe. “It may be doubted,” says the abbé Trublet, “whether it be hers and it is to be wished that it is not.” It is an allegorical account of the religious disputes of that period. Beauchamps says she wrote the tragedy of “Bradamante,” represented in 1695, which is certainly the same with that in the works of Thomas Corneille. Her Eloge is in the “Histoire du Theatre Francois.

” ibid.' 1646, fol. This account of the life of the author was written by Charles Sorel, his nephew, who also continued the work down to 1643. The abbé de Gendre says

, king’s counsellor, and historiographer of France, was born at Paris Dec. 25, 1571, and died in 1640. The chief part of his labours were directed to the history of France; on which he wrote, l.“La Conjunction des mers,” on the junction of the ocean with the Mediterranean by the Burgundy canal, 1613, 4to. 2. “Discours surl'etatdes Finances,” Paris, 1614, 4to. 3. “Histoire des guerres de Louis XIII. centre les religionnaires rebelles,” ibid. 1633, fol. Of this only abont three dozen copies were printed, but the whole was afterwards inserted in his history of Louis XIII. 4. “Carte genealogique de la royale maison de Bourbon, avec des Eloges des princes, &c.” ibid. 1634, fol. and 1646, under the title of “Genealogie de la maison de Bourbon.” 5. “Histoire de Louis XIII. jusqu‘a la guerre declaree contre les Espagnols, avec un Discours sur la vie de l’auteur,” ibid.' 1646, fol. This account of the life of the author was written by Charles Sorel, his nephew, who also continued the work down to 1643. The abbé de Gendre says that Bernard is deficient both in style and taste, dealing too much in trifles and digressions, and too prolix in his descriptions of works of architecture, as well as in common-place reflections. He allows, however, that he gives a good account of military affairs, and developes with great skill the intrigues of the court, with which he had a good opportunity of being acquainted.

appy hy his good offices, for which purpose he one day presented a petition to, a nobleman in place, who being of a Very hasty temper, flew into a violent passion, and

, called Father Bernard, or the Poor Priest, was born December 26, 1588, at Dijon, sou of Stephen Bernard, lieut.-gen. of Chalons-sur-Saone. He had a lively imagination and wit, which, joined to a jovial temper, made him a welcome guest in all gay companies. Going to Paris with M. de Bellegarde, governor of Dijon, he gave himself up to public amusements, and all the vanities of the age, making it his business to act comedies for the diversion of such persons of quality as he was acquainted with but at length he grew disgusted with the world, and devoted himself wholly to relieving and comforting the poor. He assisted them by his charities and exhortations to the end of his days, with incredible fervour, stooping and humbling himself to do the meanest offices for them. Father Bernard having persisted in refusing all the benefices offered him by the court, cardinal Richelieu told him one day, that he absolutely insisted on his asking him for something, and left him alone to consider of it. When the cardinal returned half an hour after, Bernard said, “Monseigneur, after much study, I have at last found out a favour to ask of you When I attend any sufferers to the gibbet to assist them in their last moments, we are carried in a cart with so bad a bottom, that we are every moment in danger of falling to the ground. Be pleased, therefore, Monseigneur, to order that some better boards may be put to the cart.” Cardinal Richelieu laughed heartily at this request, and gave orders directly that the cart should be thoroughly repaired. Father Bernard was ever ready to assist the unhappy hy his good offices, for which purpose he one day presented a petition to, a nobleman in place, who being of a Very hasty temper, flew into a violent passion, and said a thousand injurious things of the person for whom the priest interested himself, but Bernard still persisted in his request; at which the nobleman was at last so irritated, that he gave him a box on the ear. Bernard immediately fell at his feet, and, presenting the other ear, said, “Give me a good blow on this also, my lord, and grantmy petition.” The nobleman was so affected by this apparent humility as to grant Bernard’s request. He died March 23, 1641. The French clergy had such a veneration for him as often to solicit that he might be enrolled in the calendar of saints. In 1638 he founded the school of the Thirty-three, so called from the number of years our Saviour passed on earth, and a very excellent seminary. Immediately after his death appeared “Le Testament du reverend pere Bernard, et ses pensdes pieuses,” Paris, 1641, 8vo, and “Le Recit des choses arrivees a la mort du rev. pere Bernard,” same year. The abbé Papillon also quotes a work entitled “Entretiens pendant sa derniere maladie.” His life was written by several authors, by Legauffre, Giry, de la Serre, Gerson, and Lempereur the Jesuit. This last, which was published at Paris, 1708, 12mo, is too full of visions, revelations, and miracles, to afford any just idea of Bernard.

Northampton but his father dying when he was very young, his mother sent him to an uncle in London, who entered him at Merchant-taylors-school, in 1648 here he continued

, a learned critic and astronomer, was born at Perry St. Paul, commonly called Pauler’s Perry, near Towcester in Northamptonshire, the 2d of May 1638. He received some part of his education at Northampton but his father dying when he was very young, his mother sent him to an uncle in London, who entered him at Merchant-taylors-school, in 1648 here he continued tillJune 1655, when he was elected scholar of St. John’s college in Oxford, of which also he became afterwards fellow. DuTing his stay at school, he had accumulated an uncommon fund of classical learning, so that when he went to the university, he was a great master of the Greek and Latin tongues, and not unacquainted with the Hebrew. He had also previously acquired a good Latin style, could compose verses well, and often used to divert himself with writing epigrams, but he quitted these juvenile employments when at the university, and applied himself to history, philology, and philosophy, and made himself master of the Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, and Coptic. He applied himself next to the mathematics, under the famous Dr. J. Wallis. He took the degree of B. A. Feb. the 12th, 1659 that of master, April 16, 1662 and that of B. D. June 9, 1668. Decem,ber following he went to Leyden, to consult several Oriental manuscripts left to that university by Joseph Scaliger and Levinus Warner, and especially the 5th, 6th, and 7th books of Apollonius Pergieus’s conic sections; the Greek text of which is lost, but which are preserved in the Arabic version of that author. This version had been brought from the East by James Golius, and was in the possession of his executor, who, pleased that Mr. Bernard’s chief design in coming to Holland was to examine this manuscript, allowed him the free use of it. He accordingly transcribed these three books, with the diagrams, intending to publish them at Oxford, with a Latin version, and proper commentaries; but was prevented from completing this design. Abraham Echellensis had published a Latin translation of these books in 1661, and Christianus Ravius gave another in 1669: but Dr. Smith remarks, that these two authors, though well skilled in the Arabic language, were entirely ignorant of the mathematics, which made it regretted that Golius died while he was preparing that work for the press; and that Mr. Bernard, who understood both the language and the subject, and was furnished with all the proper helps for such a design, was abandoned by his friends, though they had before urged him to. undertake it. It was, however, at last published by Dr. Halley in 1710.

he examined and collated the most valuable manuscripts in the Bodleian library; which induced those who published ancient authors, to apply to him for observations

At his return to Oxford, he examined and collated the most valuable manuscripts in the Bodleian library; which induced those who published ancient authors, to apply to him for observations or emendations, which he readily imparted, and by this means became engaged in a very extensive correspondence with the learned in most countries. In 1669, the celebrated Christopher Wren, Savilian professor of astronomy at Oxford, having been appointed surveyor-general of his majesty’s works, and being much detained at London by this employment, obtained leave to name a deputy at Oxford, and pitched upon Mr. Bernard, which obliged the latter to confine his application more particularly to the study of astronomy. In 1672, the master and fellows of his college presented him to the rectory of Cheame in Surrey and February following, Dr. Peter Mews, the master, being advanced to the bishopric of Bath, and Wells, appointed Mr. Bernard one of his chaplains. But the following year he quitted all views of preferment, by accepting the Savilian professorship of astronomy, vacant by the resignation of sir Christopher Wren for, by the statutes of the founder, sir Henry Savile, the professors are not allowed to hold any other office either ecclesiastical or civil.

eme was set on foot at Oxford, of collecting and publishing the ancient mathematicians. Mr. Bernard, who had first formed the project, collected all the books published

About this time a scheme was set on foot at Oxford, of collecting and publishing the ancient mathematicians. Mr. Bernard, who had first formed the project, collected all the books published on that subject since the invention of printing, and all the Mss. he could discover in the Bodleian and Savilian libraries, which he arranged in order of time, and according to the matter they contained. Of this he drew up a synopsis or view, which he presented to bishop Fell, a great encourager of the undertaking. This was published by his biographer, Dr. Thomas Smith, at the end of his life. As a specimen, Mr. Bernard published also a few sheets of Euclid, in folio, containing the Greek text, and a Latin version, with Proclus’s commentary in Greek and Latin, and learned scholia and corollaries. He undertook also an edition of the “Parva syntaxis Alexandrina” in which, besides Euclid, are contained the small treatises of Theodosius, Autolycus, Menelaus, Aristarchus, and Hipsicles but it was never published. In 1676, he was sent to France by Charles II. to be tutor to the dukes of Grafton and Northumberland, natural sons of the king, by the duchess of Cleveland, with whom they then lived at Paris; but the plainness and simplicity of his manners not suiting the gaiety of the duchess’s family, he continued with them only one year, when he returned to Oxford having reaped however the advantage, during his stay at Paris, of becoming acquainted with most of the learned men in that city, particularly Justel, Huet, Mabillon, Quesnel, Dacier, Renaudot, and others.

s, Perizonius, Ryckius, Gallaeus, Rulaeus, and especially Nicholas Witsen, burgomaster of Amsterdam, who presented him with a Coptic dictionary, brought from Egypt by

In 1683, he went again to Leyden, to be present at the sale of Nicholas Heinsius’s library; where he purchased, at a great price, several of the classical authors, thut had been either collated with manuscripts, or illustrated with the original notes of Joseph Scaliger, Bonaventure Vulcanius, the two Heinsiuses, and other celebrated critics. Here he renewed his acquaintance with several persons of eminent learning, particularly Gruevius, Spanheim, Triglandius, Gronovius, Perizonius, Ryckius, Gallaeus, Rulaeus, and especially Nicholas Witsen, burgomaster of Amsterdam, who presented him with a Coptic dictionary, brought from Egypt by Theodore Petraeus of Holsatia; and afterwards transmitted to him in 1686, the Coptic and Ethiopic types made of iron, for the use of the printingpress at Oxford. With such civilities he was so much pleased, and especially with the opportunities he had of making improvements in Oriental learning, that he would have settled at Leyden, if he could have been chosen professor of the Oriental languages in that university, but not being able to compass this, he returned to Oxford. He began now to be tired of astronomy, and his health declining, he was desirous to resign but no other preferment offering, he was obliged to hold his professorship some years longer than he intended; in 1684 he took his degree of D. D. and in 1691, being presented to the rectory of Brightwell in Berkshire, he quitted his professorship, and was succeeded by David Gregory, professor of mathematics at Edinburgh. In 1692, he was employed in drawing up a catalogue of the manuscripts in Great Britain and Ireland, which was published at Oxford 1697, fol. Dr. Bernard’s share in this undertaking was the drawing up a most useful and complete alphabetical Index to which he prefixed this title, “Librorum manuscriptorum Magnae Britanniae et Hibernise, atque externarum aliquot Bibliothecarum Index secundum alphabetum Edwardus Bernardus construxit Oxonii.” In this Index he mentions a great number of valuable Greek manuscripts, which are to be found in several foreign libraries, as well as our own. Towards the latter end of his life, he was much afflicted with the stone, yet, notwithstanding this and other infirmities, he took a third voyage to Holland, to attend the sale of Golius’s manuscripts. After six or seven weeks absence, he returned to London, and from thence to Oxford. There he fell into a languishing consumption, which put an end to his life, Jan. 12, 1696, before he was quite fifty-nine years of age. Four days after, he was interred in St. John’s chapel, where a monument of white marble was soon erected for him by his widow, to whom he had been married only three years. In the middle of it there is the form of an Heart carved, circumscribed with these words, according to his own direction a little before he died, Habemus Cor Bernard!: and underneath E. B. S. T. P. Obiit Jan. 12, 1696. The same is also repeated on a small square marble, under which he was buried. As to this learned man’s character, Dr. Smith, who knew him well, gives him a very great one. “He was (says he) of a mild disposition, averse to wrangling and disputes and if by chance or otherwise he happened to be present where contests ran high, he would deliver his opinion with great candour and modesty, and in few words, but entirely to the purpose. He was a candid judge of other men’s performances; not too censorious even on trifling books, if they contained nothing contrary to good manners, virtue, or religion and to those which displayed wit, learning, or good sense, none gave more ready and more ample praise. Though he was a true son of the Church of England, yet he judged favourably and charitably of dissenters of all denominations. His piety and prudence never suffered him to be hurried away by an immoderate zeal, in declaiming against the errors of others. His piety was sincere and unaffected, and his devotions both in public and private very regular and exemplary. Of his great and extensive learning, the works he published, and the manuscripts he has left, are a sufficient evidence.” This character is supported by the concurring evidence of all his learned contemporaries. The works he published were 1. “Tables of the longitudes and latitudes of the fixed Stars.” 2. “The Obliquity of the Ecliptic from the observations of the ancients, in Latin.” 3. “A Latin letter to Mr. John Flamsteed, containing observations on the Eclipse of the Sun, July 2, 1684, at Oxford.” All these are in the Philosophical Transactions, 4, “A treatise of the ancient Weights and Measures,” printed first at the end of Dr. Edward Pocock’s Commentary on Hosea, Oxford, 1685, fol. and afterwards reprinted in Latin, with very great additions and alterations, under this title, “De mensuris & ponderibus antiquis, libri tres,” Oxon. 1688, 8vo. 5. “Private Devotions, with a brief explication of the Ten Commandments,” Oxford, 1689, 12mo. 6. “Orbis eruditi Literatura a charactere Samaritico deducta” printed at Oxford from a copper-plate, on one side of a broad sheet of paper: containing at one view, the different forms of letters used by the Phoenicians, Samaritans, Jews, Syrians, Arabs, Persians, Brachmans, and other Indian philosophers, Malabarians, Greeks, Cophts, Russians, Sclavonians, Ethiopians, Francs, Saxons, Goths, &c. all collected from ancient inscriptions, coins, and manuscripts together with the abbreviations used by the Greeks, physicians, mathematicians, and chymists. 7. “Etymologicum Britannicum, or derivations of the British and English words from the Russian, Sclavonian, Persian, and Armenian languages printed at the end of Dr. Hickes’s Grammatica Anglo- Saxonica & Moeso-Gotthica,” Oxon. 1689, 4to. 8. He edited Mr. William Guise’s “Misnoe pars prima, ordinis primi Zeraim tituli septem,” Oxon. 1690, 4to. 9. “Chronologiae Samaritanae Synopsis,” in two tables the first containing the most famous epochas, and remarkable events, from the beginning of the world the second a catalogue of the Samaritan High Priests from Aaron, published in the “Acta Eruditqrum Lipsiensia,” April 1691, p. 167, &c. He also was author of the following: 10. “Notse in fragmentum Seguierianum Stephani Byzantini” in the library of monsieur Seguier, chancellor of France part of which, relating to Dodone, were published by Gronovius, at the end' of his “Exercitationes de Dodone,” Leyden, 1681. 11. “Adnotationes in Epistolam S. Barnabce,” published in bishop Fell’s edition of that author, Oxon. 1685, 8vo. 12. “Short notes, in Greek and Latin, upon Cotelerius’s edition of the Apostolical Fathers, printed in the Amsterdam edition of them. 13.” Veterum testimonia de Versione LXXII interpretum," printed at the end of Aristeae Historia LXXII interpretum, published by Pr. Henry Aldrich, Oxon. 1692, 8vo. 14. He translated into Latin, the letters of the Samaritans, which Dr. R. Huntington procured them to write to their brethren, the Jews in England, in 1673|­while he was at Sichem. Dr. Smith having obtained a copy of this translation, gave it to the learned Job LudoL fus, when he was in England, who published it in the collection of Samaritan Epistles, written to himself and other learned men. Besides these works, he also assisted several learned men in their editions of books, and collated manuscripts for them and left behind him in manuscript many books of his own composition, with very large collections which, together with the books enriched in the margin with the notes of the most learned men, and collected by him in France and Holland, were purchased by the curators of the Bodleian library, for the sum of two hundred pounds. They likewise bought a considerable number of curious and valuable books out of his library, which were wanting in the Bodleian, for which they paid one hundred and forty pounds. The rest of his books were sold by auction, all men of letters striving to purchase those which had any observations of Dr. Bernard’s own hand.

ellor of the diocese of Durham, is well known as a scholar and philanthropist. In 1752, sir Francis, who cultivated a highly classical taste, published “Antonii Alsopi

The favourable sentiments which the province entertained for sir Francis before the controversy took place between Great Britain and the colonies, are shown by the expressions of acknowledgement and affection in their several addresses to him up to that period, and the constant approbation with which he was honoured by his majesty, appears from the dispatches of the different secretaries of state laid before the House of Commons, and printed by their order. His “Case before the Privy Council,” printed in 1770; and his “Select Letters,” in 1774; explain in a very satisfactory manner his conduct during the progress of the American revolution. After the war commenced, sir Francis returned to England, and resided mostly at Nether Wichendon, or Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire. He died June 16, 1779, leaving a numerous family, of whom his third son, sir Thomas, the present baronet, chancellor of the diocese of Durham, is well known as a scholar and philanthropist. In 1752, sir Francis, who cultivated a highly classical taste, published “Antonii Alsopi Odarum libri duo,” 4to. (See Alsop), dedicated in an elegant copy of verses to Thomas duke of Newcastle.

ent to Ganda to preach in his turn, which was about four times a year. About the same time Le Clerc, who was his relation, procured him a small supply from the town

, professor of philosophy and mathematics, and minister of the Walloon church at Leyden, was born Sept. 1, 1658, at Nions in Dauphine. He received the rudiments of his education in a protestant academy, at Die in Dauphine, and went afterwards to Geneva, where he studied philosophy, and acquired a critical knowledge of the Hebrew language under the professor Michael Turretin. He returned to France in 1679, and was chosen minister of Venterol, a village in Dauphine. Some time after he was removed to the church of Vinsobres in the same province but the persecutions raised agaiitst the protestants in France having obliged him to leave his native country, he retired to Geneva in 1683, and as he did not think himself sufficiently secure there, he went to Lausanne, where he remained until the revocation of the edict of Nantes. He then proceeded to Holland, where he was appointed one of the pensionary ministers of Ganda, and taught philosophy but having married after he came to Holland, and the city of Ganda not being very populous, he had not a sufficient number of scholars to maintain his family; and therefore obtained leave to reside at the Hague, but went to Ganda to preach in his turn, which was about four times a year. About the same time Le Clerc, who was his relation, procured him a small supply from the town of Tergow, as preacher; and at the Hague he farther improved his circumstances by teaching philosophy, belles-lettres, and mathematics. Before he went to live at the Hague, he had published a kind of political state of Europe, entitled “Histoire abregee de l'Europe,” &c, The work was begun in July 1686, and continued monthly till December 1688; making five volumes in 12mo. In 1692, he began his “Lettres Historiques,” containing an account of the most important transactions in Europe, with reflections, which was also published monthly, till 1698: it was afterwards continued by other hands, and contains a great many volumes. Mr. Le Clerc having left off his “Bibliotheque Universelle,” in 1691, Mr. Bernard wrote the greatest part of the 20th volume, and by himself carried on the five following, to the year 1693; but as the French critics think, not with equal ability and spirit. In 1699, he collected and published “Actes et negotiations de la Paix de Ryswic,” four vols. 12mo a new edition of this collection was published in 1707, five vols. 12mo. He did not put his name to any of these works, nor to the general collection of the treaties of peace, which he publ.shed in 1700; and which consists of the treaties, contracts, acts of guaranty, &c. betwixt the powers of F.urope, four vols. fol. The first contains the preface, and the treaties made since the year 536 to 1.500. The second consists of Mr. Amelot‘de la Houssay’s historical and political reflections, and the treaties from. 150’-) to 1600. The third includes the treaties from 1601 to 1661 and the fourth, those from 1661 to 1700, with a general alphabetical index to the whole. He prefixed his name, however, to his continuation of Bayle’s “Nouvelles de la llepublique des Lettres,” which was begun in 1698, and continued till December 1710. This undertaking engaged him in some disputes, particularly with one Mr. de Vallone, a monk, who having embraced the reformed religion, wrote some metaphysical books concerning predestination. Mr. Bernard having given an account of one of these books, the author was so displeased with it, that he printed a libel against Mr. Bernard, and gave it about privately amongst his friends. He was also engaged in a long dispute with Mr. Bayle upon the two following questions 1. Whether the general agreement of all nations in. favour of a deity, be a good proof of the existence of a deity? 2. Whether atheism be worse than idolatry?

him for one of their ministers but they could not accomplish their desire whilst king William lived, who refused twice to confirm the election of Mr. Bernard, as being

Mr. Bernard having acquired great reputation by his works, as well as by his sermons at Ganda and the Hague, the congregation of the Walloon church at Leyden were desirous to have him for one of their ministers but they could not accomplish their desire whilst king William lived, who refused twice to confirm the election of Mr. Bernard, as being a republican in his principles, and having delivered his sentiments too freely in a sermon before this prince yet these appear to have been the same sentiments which justified the revolution to which that sovereign owed the crown of these kingdoms. After king William’s death, however, he was unanimotisly chosen in 1705; and about the same time appointed professor of philosophy and mathematics at Leyden the university presenting him with the degrees of doctor of philosophy, and master of arts. In 1716, he published “A Supplement to Moreri’s dictionary,” in two vols. folio. The same year he resumed his “Nouvelles de la Republique des Lettres,” and continued it till his death, which happened the 27th of April 1718, in the 60th year of his age. Mr. Bernard was well skilled in polite literature, and a perfect master of the Hebrew tongue. He studied the scriptures with great attention and though he was not reckoned of the first class of mathematicians, yet he could explain the principles of that science in a very clear and able manner. As to philosophy, he had applied himself to that of Des Cartes yet alter he came into Holland, having learned the EngLsh tongue, he used to read the best books from England, and had acquired some taste for the Newtonian philosophy. Besides the works above mentioned, he published, 1. “Le Theatre des etats du due de Savoie, traduit du Latin de Bleau,” Hague, 1700, 2 vols. fol. a beautiful book, with elegant engravings. 2. “Traite de la repentance tardive,” Amst. 1712, 12mo. 3. “De I'excellence de la religion Chretienne,” ibid. 1714, 2 vols. 8vo a translation of which was published by his grandson, Mr. Bernard, of Doncaster, Load. 1793, 8vo, with the life of the author, and notes.

tions of the text. As he did not put his name to this edition, Messrs. Boden, Dutens, and Villoison, who were also editors of Longus after him, knew no other way of

, a learned Dutch physician, was born in 1718, at Berlin, where his father, Gabriel Bernard, was a minister of the reformed church. His son came to Holland to study physic and determined to remain there. Having an extraordinary fondness for the study of Greek, in which he had made great progress, he wished to render this knowledge subservient to his profession, and with that view projected a new edition of the lesser Greek physicians, whose works were become very scarce and dear. He began first at Leyden, in 1743, with Demetrius Pepagomenus on the gout; and next year published an introduction to anatomy by an anonymous author, and a nomenclature of the parts of the human body by Hypatius, both in one volume. In 1745, he published Palladius on fevers, and an inedited Chemical glossary, with some extracts, likewise inedited from the different poetical chemists. The same year appeared his edition of Psellus on the virtues of stones. In 1749, he published Synesius on fevers, hitherto inedited, and wrote, in the ninth volume of Dorville’s “Miscellaneae Observationes Novae,” an account of the variations of a manuscript copy of the lexicons or glossaries of Erotian, and Galen. In 1754, when Neaulme, the Dutch bookseller, designed a new edition of Longus’s romance, Bernard read the proofs, and introduced some important corrections of the text. As he did not put his name to this edition, Messrs. Boden, Dutens, and Villoison, who were also editors of Longus after him, knew no other way of referring to him than as the “Paris editor,” being deceived hy Neaulrne’s dating the work from Paris, instead of Amsterdam, where it was printed. In 1757, he superintended an edition of Thomas Magister, but his professional engagements not allowing him sufficient leisure, the preface was written by Oudendorp. From this time, Bernard having ceased to write, and having retired to Arnheim, was completely forgot until, says the editor of the Biog. Universelle, his death was announced by Saxius in 1790 but this seems a mistake. Saxius gives an account of him, as of some other living authoi’s, but leaves his death blank. Bernard, however, to contradict such a rumour, or, as his biographer expresses himself, in order to “show some signs of life,” published a Greek fragment on the dropsy. It was his purpose next to publish Theophilus Nonnus, “De curatione morborum.” This work, on which he had bestowed the labour of many years, and which is one of his best editions, was published at Gotha in 1794, a year after his death. A short time before this event, he sent to the society of arts and sciences at Utrecht, remarks on some Greek authors, which appeared in the first volume of the “Acta Litteraria” of that society. In 1795, Dr. Gruner published various letters and pieces of criticism, which Bernard, who was his intimate friend, had sent to him, under the title of “Bernardi Reliquiae medico-criticae.” Several very learned and curious letters from Bernard were also published in Reiske’s Memoirs, Leipsic, 1783.

n of Rabelais, 1741, 3 vols. 4to, with Picart’s cuts, a well-known and most beautiful book. Bernard, who nourished as a bookseller of great eminence from the year 1711,

, an industrious and learned bookseller of Amsterdam, distinguished himself about the beginning of the last century, both as author and editor of various works of considerable importance. He wrote rather learnedly than elegantly, yet with so much impartiality and candour, that he had many readers. The following list has been given of the principal works of which he was editor 1. “Recueil de voyages au Nord, contehant divers memoires tres-utiles an commerce et a la navigation,” Amst. 1715 38, 10 vols. 12mo. To these hft wrote the preliminary dissertation, the two dissertations on the means of useful travel, and the account of Great Tartary. 2. “Memoires du comte de Brienne, rninistre d'etat sous Louis XIV. avec des notes,” ibid. 1719, 3 vols. 12mo. 3. “Picart’s Religious Ceremonies,” ibid. 1723—43, 9 vols. fol. 4. “Superstitions anciennes et modernes,1733 36, 2 vols. fol. The second Amsterdam edition of these two works was printed in 1739 4-3, 11 vols. folio; and in 1741 the abbes Banier and le Mascrier published another edition at Paris, 7 vols. folio, with Picart’s designs, but the articles differently arranged; and M. Poucelin gave afterwards an abridgment, with the same cuts, Paris, 4 vols. fol. Lastly, M. Prudhomme undertook a new edition of the Dutch copy, with many additions respecting the history of' religion from the commencement of the eighteenth century, and additional plates to those of Picart, comprised in 13 folio volumes, besides an additional volume of new matter. 5. “Dialogues critiques et philosophiques, par D. Charte-Livry (J.F.Bernard),” ibid. 1730, 12mo. 6. “Reflections morales, satyriques et comiques,” Liege, 1733, 12mo. This work has been attributed to D. Durand, but he absolutely denied it, and Desfontaines assures us that it was written by Bernard. 7. “Histoire critique des Journaux, par Camusat,” Amst. 1734, 2 vols. 12mo. 8. “Dissertations melees sur divers sujets importans et curieux,” Amst. 1740, 2 vols. 12 mo. Of these two last Bernard is only the editor. 9. An edition of Rabelais, 1741, 3 vols. 4to, with Picart’s cuts, a well-known and most beautiful book. Bernard, who nourished as a bookseller of great eminence from the year 1711, died at Amsterdam in 1752.

ath of a woful Sinner; or, the penitent death of John Atherton, late bishop of Waterford in Ireland, who was executed at Dublin the fifth of December, 1640; with some

, a learned English divine of the seventeenth century, was educated in the university of Cambridge, where he took the degree of M. A. and was incorporated to the same degree at Oxford, July 15, 1628. He was probably created D. D. of the university of Dublin, but this has not been exactly ascertained. He was ordained by primate Usher, in 1626, in St. Peter’s church, Drogheda, while he was only B. A. and made his chaplain, and soon after, by his interest, was promoted to the deanery of Ardagh. His Grace having daily opportunities ojf taking notice of the learning and judgment of Mr. Bernard, employed him in making collections for some works he was then meditating, particularly for the antiquities of the British churches; which did not appear till 1639. The primate always expressed great friendship and esteem for him; and upon taking his leave of him at Drogheda in 1640, gave him “A serious preparative against the heavy sorrows and miseries that he should feel before he saw him again, and spoke of them with that confidence, as if they had been within his view.” This serious discourse proved in the event to be a prophecy, as will be noticed in the life of that prelate. The year following, Dr. Bernard published a book and a sermon which gave offence. These were entitled, 1. “The penitent death of a woful Sinner; or, the penitent death of John Atherton, late bishop of Waterford in Ireland, who was executed at Dublin the fifth of December, 1640; with some annotations on several passages,” London, 1641, 4to 1642, 8vo. 2. “A sermon preached at the burial of John Atherton, the next night after his execution, in St. John’s church, Dublin,” Lond. 1641, 4to 1642, 8vo. Dr. Bernard had the best opportunity in the world of knowing the truth of the fact for which bishop Atherton suffered, having attended him in his exemplary preparation for death, and in his last moments, and he gives us his behaviour and confession fairly and honestly. The cause of offence seems, upon the whole, to have been an opinion that this disgraceful affair had better be buried in oblivion. Archbishop Usher, however, who saw Dr. Bernard’s good intentions, did not withdraw from him his favour or countenance. The same year was published a pamphlet of his writing, upon the siege of Drogheda, of which he was an eye-witness. In the summer of 1642, having lost most of his substance, he returned safe to England to attend on the lord primate, and carried with him Usher’s valuable library, which was afterwards removed to Ireland, and is now in Trinity-college, Dublin. Upon his arrival in England, he was presented, by the earl of Bridgwater, to the rich rectory of Whitchurch in Shropshire, and after the declension of the royal cause, was made chaplain to the Protector, one of his almoners, and preacher to the society of Gray’s inn. Being thus comfortably settled, in 1642 he found leisure, from his pastoral charge, to publish “The whole proceedings of the siege of Drogheda,” London and Dublin, 1642, 4to and Dublin, 1736; and “A Dialogue tetweeu Paul and Agrippa,” London, 1642, 4to. After the restoration of king Charles II. in 1660, having no confidence in the settlement of the state of Ireland, he declined returning and taking possession of his deanery, and contilined at VV hitchurch to his death, which iiappened in winter, 1661. His other works were, 1. “A farewell sermon of comfort and concord, preached at Drogheda,1651, 8vo. 2. “The life and death of Dr. James Usher, late archbishop of Armagh, primate and metropolitan of all Ireland, in a sermon preached at his funeral in the abbey of Westminster, on the 17th of April, 1656,” London, 1656, 12mo, afterwards enlarged. 3. “The judgment of the late archbishop of Armagh and primate of Ireland concerning first, the extent of Christ’s death and satisfaction secondly, of the Sabbath, and observation of the Lord’s day,” &c. London, 1657, 8vo. This treatise was answered by Dr. Peter Heylyn, in a book entitled “Respondet Petrus or, the answer of Peter Heylyn, D. D. to so much of Dr. Bernard’s book entitled” The judgment of the late primate of Ireland, &c. as he is made a party by the said lord primate in the point of the Sabbath,“London, 1658, 4to. He also published several letters which passed between him and Dr. Heylyn, and published and enlarged several posthumous works of Dr. Usher as,” His judgment on Babylon being the present see of Rome, Rev. xviii. 4, with a sermon of bishop Bedell’s upon the same words,“London, 1659.” Devotions of the ancient church, in seven pious prayers,“&c. London, 1660, 8vo.” Clavi trabales, or nails fastened by some great masters of assemblies, confirming the king’s supremacy, the subject’s duty, and church government by bishops being a collection of some pieces written on these subjects by archbishop Usher, Mr. Hooker, bishop Andrews, and Dr. Hadrian Saravia; with a preface by the bishop of Lincoln," London, 1661, 4to.

n in 1710. Being sent to the college of Jesuits at Lyons, he made rapid progress under able masters, who were desirous of attaching him to their body but the young scholar,

, a French poet, was the son of a sculptor at Grenoble in Dauphine, and born in 1710. Being sent to the college of Jesuits at Lyons, he made rapid progress under able masters, who were desirous of attaching him to their body but the young scholar, too fond of liberty and pleasure, would not consent to that Confinement. Being drawn to Paris by the wish to make a figure in the poetical world, he was obliged to employ himself for two years as clerk to a notary. The light pieces of poetry he sent abroad at intervals, of which the best are the epistle to Claudine, and the song of the Rose, procured him a patron in the marquis de Pezay, who took him with him to the campaign of Italy. Bernard was at the battles of Parma and Guastalla and behaved with considerable bravery. Being presented to the marechal de Coigni, who commanded there, he was lucky enough to please him by his wit and agreeable manners. The marechal took him to be his secretary, admitted him to his intimacy, and some time afterwards procured him the place of secretarygeneral of the dragoons. From gratitude he attached himself constantly to this Maecenas, till 1756, when he was deprived of him by death. He was in great request in all the select companies of the court and of Paris; whom he delighted by the brilliant wit, and warmth of his verses and airs, of which some are worthy of Anacreon. In 1771 the sudden loss of his memory put an end to his happiness, and he fell into a state of mental imbecillity. In this condition he went to a revival of his opera of Castor, and was incessantly asking, “Is the king come Is the king pleased with it Is madame de Pompadour pleased with it” thinking he was all the while at Versailles and rioting in the delirium of a courtly poet. He died in this unhappy state, Nov. 1, 1775. Besides his lighter pieces of poetry, which got him the appellation of le gentil Bernard, several operas added much to his reputation. In 1803 an edition of his works was published in 2 vols. 8vo, and 4 vols. 18mo, comprehending several pieces not before published; but upon the whole, according to the opinion of his countrymen, his talents were not of the first order, and his popularity appears to have been owing more to his gratifying the passions than the taste of his companions and readers.

uis XV. when in need of similar help, sent certain persons to Bernard, whose answer was, that “those who wanted his assistance might at least take the trouble to apply

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

dinal Hyppolito de Medicis, whose friendship he preferred to the brilliant offers made by Charles V. who was very desirous of his residing in Spain. At Rome, Bernard

, so called from Castel Bolognese in the Romania, where he was born in 1495, distinguished himself for his admirable skill in engraving on precious stones. After having resided for several years with Alphonso duke of Ferrara, where his works excited universal admiration, he went to Rome, and attached himself to the cardinal Hyppolito de Medicis, whose friendship he preferred to the brilliant offers made by Charles V. who was very desirous of his residing in Spain. At Rome, Bernard executed some medals in honour of Clement VII. of such exquisite beauty, as to meet with the applause even of his rivals. Among the chefsd'oeuvre which he left, are two engravings on crystal, which have been particularly noticed by connoisseurs. The subjects are the “Fall of Phaeton,” and “Tityus with the vulture,” from designs by Michael Angelo, both which were thought to approach to the perfection of the ancients. Enriched by the patronage of cardinal de Medicis, and esteemed by all who knew him, he passed his latter days in a charming retreat, at Faenza, which he had enriched with a fine collection of pictures, and where he died in 1555.

her alternative, and probably wishing for no other, he followed the abdicated James II. into Ireland who, soon after, sent him on some commission into Scotland, from

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

nt with such resignation and evenness of temper, as to have excited much respect and love in the few who enjoyed his acquaintance. In the earlier part of life he had

In his confinement he had the courage to venture on a second marriage, which proved a very fortunate event to him, as he thus not only enjoyed the soothing converse of a true friend, but was even supported during his whole imprisonment by the care and industry of his wife. Ten children were the produce of this marriage, the inheritors of misery and confinement. In the mean time he is said to have borne his imprisonment with such resignation and evenness of temper, as to have excited much respect and love in the few who enjoyed his acquaintance. In the earlier part of life he had received several dangerous wounds, which now breaking out afresh, and giving him great torment, afforded a fresh trial of his equanimity and firmness. At length he died Sept. 20, 1736, leaving his wife and numerous family probably in a destitute state; but what became of them afterwards is not known. Bernard! was a little, brisk, and active man, of a very cheerful disposition;, and, as may appear even from this short narrative, of great courage and constancy of mind.

who was born Feb. 8, 1582, at Hallstadt, in Austria, became rector

, who was born Feb. 8, 1582, at Hallstadt, in Austria, became rector of the college, and professor of history at Strasburgh, where he died Feb. 3, 1640. He was esteemed one of the best critics of his time, and had particularly studied the works of Thucydides, Tacitus, Suetonius, and Sallust. Niceron (vol. XXVII) has a large catalogue of his writings, of which the principal are: 1. “Hypobolimaea D. Maria? Deiparoe Camera, seu Idolum Lauretanum, &c. dejectum,” Strasburgh, 1619, 4to. 2. “De jure eligendi reges et principes,” ibid. 1627, 4to. He edited an edition of Tacitus, 1638, 4to, and one of Pliny the younger, with a selection of notes, 1635, 4to. He likewise translated Galileo from the Latin. Bernegger corresponded with Kepler and Grotius, and their letters were published under the titles “Epistolae mutuas H. Grotii et Matt. Berneggeri,” Strasburgh, 1667, 12mo; and “Epistolae Joannis Kepleri, &c.” ibid. 1672, 12mo. Freinshem was his nephew. His “Observationes miscellanei” on history, &c. were published by his son in 1669, 8vo.

the field were not thought inconsistent with the character of a religious lady of this eminent rank, who resembled an abbot in respect of exercising an extensive manerial

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

ished family of Florence. In his nineteenth year he went to Koine, to his relation cardinal Bibiena, who according to his own account, did him neither good nor harm.

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

exander would have caused him to be poisoned, for not having concurred in the destruction of a rival who had been dead probably a year; but there is nothing in the character

Berni was at Rome in 1527, when it was plundered by the army of the constable of Bourbon, and lost all he possessed. He then travelled with his patron Giberti to Verona, Venice, and Padua, but being tired of the service, and having no longer any hopes of adding to a canonry in the church of Florence, which he had possessed some years, he retired to that city with a view to a life of independence and moderation. Here an acquaintance which he unhappily formed with two great men proved fatal to him, Alexander de Medici, duke of Florence, and the young cardinal Hippolito de Medici, each of whom is supposed to have contended with the other, which should first destroy his rival by poison. One of them is said to have been desirous of employing Berni in this detestable project, and he having refused his assistance, fell a victim to the revenge of his patron, by a death of similar treachery. The cardinal certainly died in 1535, and, according to all historians, by poison. The death of Berni is fixed on July 26, 1536, from which long interval it has been thought improbable that the duke Alexander would have caused him to be poisoned, for not having concurred in the destruction of a rival who had been dead probably a year; but there is nothing in the character of Alexander to make us think he would scruple at this additional crime, and that for a very good reason, to get rid of one who was privy to his desiga upon the cardinal.

l as with Alexander VII. and Clement IX. his successors, and the dukes of Mantua, Charles I. and II. who conferred upon him the title of Count. His poetical talents

, a lawyer, philosopher, orator, and poet, of Ferrara, was born in 1610. After having pursued his studies with great success, and taken his law degrees, in the university of his native city, he was chosen professor of the belles lettres, then first secretary, and in that quality was sent to compliment pope Innocent X. on his election to the papal chair. He lived in considerable favour with that pope, as well as with Alexander VII. and Clement IX. his successors, and the dukes of Mantua, Charles I. and II. who conferred upon him the title of Count. His poetical talents were principally devoted to the drama and one of his plays “Gli Sforzi del Desiderio,” represented at Ferrara in 1652, was so successful, that the archduke Ferdinand Charles, struck with its popularity, no sooner returned home than he sent for the author and some architects from Ferrara, to build two theatres for similar representations. Berni was married seven times, and had, as might be expected, a numerous family, of whom nine sons and daughters survived him. He died Oct. 13, 1673. Eleven of his dramas, formerly published separately, were printed in one volume, at Ferrara, 1666, 12mo. He published also a miscellany of discourses, problems, &c. entitled “Accademia,” Ferrara, 2 vols. 4to, without date, and reprinted in 1658. Many of his lyric poems are in the collections.

elebrated Ninon de Lenclos, madame de la Sabliere, Chapelle, whose eloge he wrote, and St. Evremont, who represents him as deserving, by his fine figure, manners and

was distinguished in the brilliant age of Louis XIV. as a philosopher and traveller, and his merit, in both respects, was enhanced by his personal accomplishments, which procured him a degree of celebrity when living, that has not yet perished. His treatises on philosophy, it is true, are no longer read, for which the progress of science since the seventeenth century may account, but his voyages and travels are still in high estimation. They made the world acquainted with countries which no European had before visited, and none have since described so well, and threw light on the revolutions of India at a very interesting period, the time of AurengZeb. George Forster places Bernier in the first class of Indian historians, praises his simple and engaging style, his judgment and his accuracy; and the letter in which Forster bestows this encomium was written from Cachemire, which Bernier has so well described. Bernier lived in intimacy with the most illustrious characters of his time, and was particularly intimate with the celebrated Ninon de Lenclos, madame de la Sabliere, Chapelle, whose eloge he wrote, and St. Evremont, who represents him as deserving, by his fine figure, manners and conversation, the title of the Genteel Philosopher. He assisted Boiieau in fabricating a burlesque decree in favour of Aristotle, which the president Lamoignon had almost signed, when he saw through the joke, and candidly confessed that it had prevented him from signing a decree that would have been fully as ridiculous.

he sequel he did not follow their track. The pope expressed a desire to see this extraordinary child who had astonished the artists, and when introduced, asked him if

, called the Cavalier Ber­NiN, and by some styled the modern Michael Angelo, because he united the knowledge and practice of painting, statuary, and architecture, owes his extensive reputation prinqipally to his excellence in the latter, branch. His father Peter Bernini, left Tuscany when young, and went to Rome to study painting and sculpture. Having acquired considerable skill in both, he removed to Naples, and practised with great success. There in, 15.98, his son, the subject of this memoir, was born, and from his earliest years discovered a surprising capacity for the fine arts, having at the age of eight executed a head in marble, which was considered as a prodigy. His father, desirous of cultivating so promising a genius, brought him to Rome, and imparted to him a taste for the great masters, which he never altogether lost, although in the sequel he did not follow their track. The pope expressed a desire to see this extraordinary child who had astonished the artists, and when introduced, asked him if he knew how to sketch a head, “Whose head” said Bernini. “You know then how to draw any let it be that of St. Paul,” replied the pope.' The boy performed the task before him in about half an hour, and the pope, enchanted with the specimen, recommended him warmly to cardinal Barberini, that celebrated patron of the arts. “Direct his studies,” added his holiness, “and he will become the Michael Angelo of the age.” About the same time, happening to be in St. Peter’s church, with Annibal Carrache, and some other celebrated artists, Carrache, looking to the cupola, said it would be very desirable to find a man of genius great enough to form and erect two objects in the middle, and at the end of that temple, which should correspond to its dimensions.“The young Bernini instantly exclaimed with enthusiasm,” Would I were that man," little thinking that one day he was to fulfil Carrache’s wish.

p, which is far from being a general expression, and still farther from being dignified but Bernini, who was as yet young, might have seen it in one or two instances,

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

His success in the mean time was great, and Gregory XV. who succeeded Paul V. being equally struck with his merit, created

His success in the mean time was great, and Gregory XV. who succeeded Paul V. being equally struck with his merit, created him a knight; but it was left for cardinal Barberini, when he came to the pontificate, to complete Bernini’s good fortune. Immediately after that event he said to Bernini, “If you are happy to see me pope, I am more proud yet that you live under my pontificate,” and from that time began to employ him in designs for embellishing Rome, and gave him a pension of three hundred crowns per month. Without altogether quitting statuary, therefore, Bernini now employed his talents on architecture, and recollecting Carrache’s wish, he designed the canopy for the principal altar, called the confessional of St. Peter, supported by four wreathed columns, enriched with figures and ornaments of exquisite taste. When this magnificent work was completed, in about nine years, the pope rewarded him with six thousand crowns, besides increasing his pensions, and extending his liberality to Bernini’s brothers. Another work of his was the fountain of Barcaccia, which has been praised more than it merits, at least it is inferior to that of the Barberini palace.

In 1644, cardinal Mazarin, who had known Bernini at Rome, endeavoured, but in vain, to induce

In 1644, cardinal Mazarin, who had known Bernini at Rome, endeavoured, but in vain, to induce him to visit France, and offered him, on the part of Louis XIV. places to the value of 12,000 crowns. Yet he was not happy at home. When Urban VIII. his steady patron, died, and Innocent X. succeeded, envy at his superior talents and high favour with the pontiff, began to appear. The campanile which he had constructed for St. Peter’s, over the portico, which it appeared was not on a secure foundation, threatened to fall, and immediately it was industriously reported that the weight of the campanile would endanger the portico, and perhaps even the dome itself. Although all this was exaggerated, it became necessary to remove the campanile, and the enemies of Bernini triumphed, while the pope, prejudiced against him, deprived him of one part of his labours, and allowed the rest to be suspended. In the mean time he executed for the church of St. Mary the fine groupe of St. Theresa and the angel, one of his most admired works; and became at length a favourite with the pope by a stratagem of his holiness’s nephew. The pope, having an intention of building a new fountain in the piazza. Navona, consulted all the artists of Rome, with the exception of Bernini, whom he affected to forget but his nephew prince Ludovisi having procured a model from our artist, contrived to shew it to the pope, who was so much struck with it, as to receive Bernini into favour, and appoint him to the work, which he executed with his usual taste. About the same time he built the palace of Monte Citorio.

Alexander VII. who succeeded pope Innocent X. and who had a high respect for Bernini,

Alexander VII. who succeeded pope Innocent X. and who had a high respect for Bernini, and was an encourager of the arts, requested him to make a design for the further decoration of St. Peter’s, which produced the celebrated circular colonnade, so appropriate to the building as to seem part of the scheme of the original architect. Ha was not, however, so successful in the composition of the pulpit of St. Peter’s, supported by colossal figures representing the four doctors of the church, which, although altered from his first model, has neither the freedom nor spirit of his other works among which may now be enumerated the Odechalchi palace, the rotunda of St. Riccio, and the noviciate of the Jesuits at Monte Cavallo.

lready built, Perrault’s plan was afterwards^adopted: In the mean time, he made a bust of Louis XIV. who frequently sat to him, and took pleasure in his conversation,

Bernini now began his operations on the Louvre, but he did not see, as has been reported, Perrault’s celebrated colonnade, the design of which was not presented to the king until after his departure, nor was it finished until live years after, so that the surprize with which it is said to have struck him, and the liberal praise he bestowed upon it, to which Voltaire has given currency in his poems, are founded on a mistake. During Bernini’s five months residence at Paris, he laid the foundation, from his own design, of the colonnade of the Louvre, which was to join it to the Tuileries by a gallery but as this could have been executed only by destroying all that had been already built, Perrault’s plan was afterwards^adopted: In the mean time, he made a bust of Louis XIV. who frequently sat to him, and took pleasure in his conversation, which sometimes appears to have been rather familiar. One day after his majesty had sat a whole hour, the artist, delighted with so great an honour, exclaimed “A miracle a great monarch, young, and a Frenchman, has sat quiet for an hour” Another time, wishing to see more of the king’s forehead, he put back the curis of hair which covered the place, and said, “Your majesty can shew your face to all the world;” and the courtiers, always intent upon some frivolous compliment, made a fashion of this disposition of the hair, which they called “la coeffure a la Bernin

rn to Rome. Accordingly, on pretence that the pope required his presence, he took leave of the king, who made him a present of ten thousand crowns, and settled a pension

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

to have been for some time an obstruction to promotion. The cardinal de Fleury, then prime-minister, who had the patronage of all favours, and who had promised him his

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

figures andflowers. Voltaire used to call him Eabet-la-Bouquetiere, the name of a fat nosegay woman, who used to ply at the door of the Opera. In other respects, Voltaire

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

, and from that to Basil, where some of them arrived at the chief offices of the republic. The first who occurs in biographical collections is, [see Bernoulli, James]

, the name of a family which has produced a succession of learned men, eminent in the study of mathematics. Eight of its members, within the space of a century, have been particularly distinguished in this science. The Bernoulli’s were originally of Antwerp, but were obliged to leave their country for the sake of religion, during the persecution raised by the duke of Alva. They then came to Francfort, and from that to Basil, where some of them arrived at the chief offices of the republic. The first who occurs in biographical collections is, [see Bernoulli, James]

who was born at Basil, Dec. 27, 1654. After he had studied polite

, who was born at Basil, Dec. 27, 1654. After he had studied polite literature, he learned the old philosophy of the schools and, having taken his degrees in the university of Basil, applied himself to divinity, not so much from inclination, as complaisance to his father. He gave very early proofs of his genius for mathematics, and soon became a geometrician, without any assistance from masters, and at first almost without books for he was not allowed to have any books of this kind and if one fell by chance into his hands, he was obliged to conceal it, that he might not incur the displeasure of his father, who designed him for other studies. This severity made him choose for his device, Phaeton driving the chariot of the sun, with these words, “Invito patre sidera verso,” “I traverse the stars against my father’s inclination” it had a particular reference to astronomy, the part of mathematics to which he at first applied himself. But these precautions did not avail, for he pursued his favourite study with great application. In 1676 he began his travels. When he was at Geneva, he fell upon a method to teach a young girl to write, though she had lost her sight when she was but two months old. At Bourdeaux he composed universal gnomonic tables, but they were never published. He returned from France to his own country in 1680. About this time there appeared a comet, the return of which he foretold, and wrote a small treatise upon it, which he afterwards translated into Latin. He went soon after to Holland, where he applied himself to the new philosophy, and particularly to that part of the mathematics which consists in resolving problems and demonstrations. After having visited Flanders and Brabant, he went to Calais, and passed over to England. At London he contracted an acquaintance with all the most eminent men in the several sciences and had the honour of being frequently present at the philosophical societies held at the house of Mr. Boyle. He returned to his native country in 1682; and exhibited at Basil a course of experiments in natural philosophy and mechanics, which consisted of a variety of new discoveries. The same year he published his “Essay on a new system of Comets” and the year following, his “Dissertation on the weight of the Air.” About this time Leibnitz having published, in the Acta Eruditorum at Leipsic, some essays on his new “Caiulus Differentialis,” but concealing the art and method of it, Mr. Bernoulli and his brother John discovered, by the little which they saw, the beauty and extent of it: this induced them to endeavour to unravel the secret; which they did with such success, that Leibnitz declared that the invention belonged to them as much as to himself.

principles of the Integral Calculus. Our author, with messieurs Huygens and Leibnitz, was the first who gave the solution of the problem proposed by James Bernoulli,

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

invitations of the magistrates of Utrecht to come to that city, and of the university of Groningen, who wished to retain him. The academic senate of Basil soon appointed

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

sciences, which were contended for by the most illustrious mathematicians in Europe. The only person who has had similar success of the same kind, is Euler, his countryman,

Daniel Bernoulli wrote a multitude of other pieces, which have been published in the Mem. 'Acad. of Sciences at Paris, and in those of other academies. He gained and divided ten prizes from the academy of sciences, which were contended for by the most illustrious mathematicians in Europe. The only person who has had similar success of the same kind, is Euler, his countryman, disciple, rival, and friend. His first prize he gained at twenty-four years of age. In 1734 he divided one with his father; which hurt the family union for the father considered the contest itself as a want of respect and the son did not sufficiently conceal that he thought (what was really the case) his own piece better than his father’s. And besides, he declared for Newton, against whom his father had contended all his life. In 1140 our author divided the prize, “On the Tides of the Sea,” with Euler and Maclaurin. The academy at the same time crowned a fourth piece, whose chief merit was that of being Cartesian but this was the last public act of adoration paid by the academy to the authority of the author of the Vortices, which it had obeyed too long. In 1748 Daniel Bernoulli succeeded his father John in the academy of sciences, who had succeeded his brother James; this place, since its first erection in 1699, having never been without a Bernoulli to fill it.

en him more pleasure than all the other honours he had received. Travelling with a learned stranger, who, being pleased with his conversation, asked his name “I am Daniel

Our author was extremely respected at Basil; and to bow to Daniel Bernoulli, when they met him in the streets, was one of the first lessons which every father gave every child. He was a man of great simplicity and modesty of manners. He used to tell two little adventures, which he said had given him more pleasure than all the other honours he had received. Travelling with a learned stranger, who, being pleased with his conversation, asked his name “I am Daniel Bernoulli,” answered he with great modesty “And I,” said the stranger (who thought he meant to laugh at him), “am Isaac Newton.” Another time having to dinner with him the celebrated Koenig the mathematician, who boasted, with some degree of self-complacency, of a difficult problem he had resolved with much trouble, Bernoulli went on doing the honours of his table, and when they went to drink coffee he presented Koenig with a solution of the problem more elegant than his own. After a long, useful, and honourable life, Daniel Bernoulli died the 17th of March 1782, in the eighty-third year of his age.

gen. Bernstorf was likewise a liberal patron of manufactures, commerce, and the fine arts. It was he who induced Frederick V. to give a pension for life to the poet

, minister of state in Denmark, was born at Hanover, May 13, 1712. Some relations he happened to have in Denmark invited him thither, where his talents were soon noticed, and employed by the government. After having been ambassador in several courts, he was placed by Frederick V. at the head of foreign affairs. During the seven years war (1755 62) he preserved a system of strict neutrality, which proved eminently serviceable to the commerce and internal prosperity of Denmark. In 1761, when the emperor of Russia, Peter III. threatened Denmark with war, and inarched his troops towards Holstein, Bernstorf exerted the utmost vigour in contriving means for the defence of the country, and the“sudden death of Peter having averted this storm, he employed his skill in bringing about an alliance between the courts of Copenhagen and St. Petersburgh. In 1767 he succeeded in concluding a provisional treaty, by which the dukedom of Holstein, which Paul, the grand duke of Russia, inherited by the death of Peter III. was exchanged for Oldenburgh, which belonged to the king of Denmark. This finally took place in 1773, and procured an important addition to the Danish territories. Soon after Bernstorf put a stop to the long contest that had been maintained respecting the house of Holstein having a right of sovereignty over Hamburgh, and that city vVas declared independent on condition of not claiming repayment of the money the city had advanced to the king of Denmark and the dukes of Holstein. These measures contributed highly to the reputation of count Bernstorf as a politician, but perhaps he derived as much credit from his conduct in other respects. He had acquired a large estate in the neighbourhood of Copenhagen, the peasants on which, as was the case in Denmark at that time, were slaves, and transferred like other property. Bernstorf, however, not only gave them their liberty, but granted them long leases, and encouraged them to cultivate the land, and feel that they had an interest in it. His tenants, soon sensible of the humanity and wisdom of his conduct, agreed to express their gratitude by erecting an obelisk in honour of him on the side of the great road leading to Copenhagen. Bernstorf was likewise a liberal patron of manufactures, commerce, and the fine arts. It was he who induced Frederick V. to give a pension for life to the poet Klopstock. On the death of that monarch, Bernstorf was continued in the ministry lor the first years of the new reign, until 1770, when Struenzee being placed at the head of the council, Bernstorf was allowed to resign with a pension. He then retired to Hamburgh, but, after the catastrophe of Struenzee, he was recalled, and was about to set out for Copenhagen when he died of an apoplexy, Feb. 19, 1772. The political measures of this statesman belong to history, but his private character has been the theme of universal applause. Learned, social, affable, generous, and high spirited, he preserved the affections of all who knew him, and throughout his whole administration had the singular good fortune to enjoy at the same time courtly favour and popular esteem. His nephew, count Andrew Peter Bernstorf, who was born in 1735, and eventually succeeded him as foreign minister for Denmark, displayed equal zeal and knowledge in promoting the true interests of his country, which yet repeats his name with fervour and enthusiasm. It was particularly his object to preserve the neutrality of Denmark, after the French revolution had provoked a combination of most of the powers of Europe; and as long as neutral rights were at all respected, he succeeded in this wise measure. His state papers on the” principles of the court of Denmark concerning neutrality,“in 1780, and his” Declaration to the courts of Vienna and Berlin," in 1792, were much admired. In private life he followed the steps of his uncle, by a liberal patronage of arts, commerce, and manufactures, and like him was as popular in the country as in the court. He died Jan. 21, 1797.

onstance and condemned to be burnt, a fate from which he was preserved by the kindness of an officer who favoured his escape. He then went to Orleans, Rochelle, and

, was born at St. Denis near Paris, and was educated at the college of the cardinal Lemoine, where he made great proficiency in the learned languages, and became an able theologian, mathematician, philosopher, and historian. In 1550 he was at Agen as preceptor to Hector Fregosa, afterwards bishop of that city, and here he was converted to the Protestant religion along with Scaliger and other learned men. When he arrived at Paris in 1558, he was chosen preceptor to Theodore Agrippa d' Aubigne“but the persecution arising, he was arrested at Constance and condemned to be burnt, a fate from which he was preserved by the kindness of an officer who favoured his escape. He then went to Orleans, Rochelle, and Sancerre, and distinguished himself by his courage during the siege of this latter place by the marshal de Lachatre. In 1574 we find him at Geneva, officiating as minister and professor of philosophy. His death is supposed to have taken place in 1576. He wrote a curious book entitled” Chronicon, sacrse Scripture auctoritate constitutnm,“Geneva, 1575, fol. In this he maintains that all chronological authorities must be sought in the holy scriptures Vossius and Scaliger speak highly of his talents. Draudius, in his” Bibliotheca Classica,“mentions another work in which he was concerned,” G. Mercatoris et Matthei Beroaldi chronologia, ab initio mundi ex eclipsis et observationibus astronomicis demonstrata," Basil, 1577, Cologne, 1568, fol. We have some doubts whether this is not the same as the work mentioned above.

etonius, Apuleius, Aulus Gellius, Lucan, and some other classics, with notes. He had a son, Vincent, who is ranked among the Bolognese writers, only for having given

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

the city of Rome as his residence, he there attracted the notice of Leo X. then cardinal de Medici, who received him into his service, as his private secretary and

, the younger, a noble Bolognese, was born at Bologna, Oct. 1, 1472. He was the nephew and pupil of the elder Beroaldo, the subject of the preceding article, under whose instructions he made such early proficiency in the Greek and Latin languages, that in 1496, when he was only twenty-four years of age, he was appointed public professor of polite literature at Bologna. Having afterwards chosen the city of Rome as his residence, he there attracted the notice of Leo X. then cardinal de Medici, who received him into his service, as his private secretary and when Leo arrived at the pontificate, Beroaldo was nominated president of the Roman academy, but probably relinquished this office on being appointed librarian of the Vatican. Bembo, Bibiena, Molza, Flaminio, and other learned men of the time, were his particular friends at Rome. He appeared also among the admirers of the celebrated Roman courtesan Imperiali, and is said to have been jealous of the superior pretensions of Sadoleti (afterwards cardinal) to her favour. The warmth of his temperature, indeed, sufficiently appears in some of his poems, but such was the taste of that age, and particularly of the licentious court of LeoX. His death, which happened in 1518, is said to have been occasioned by some vexations which he experienced from that pontiff, as librarian, but this seems doubtful.

Paris, 1608, all in fol. This edition is dedicated to LeoX. at whose request it was undertaken, and who gave five hundred sequins for the manuscript, from which it

He was equally learned with the elder Beroaldo, and wrote with more taste, particularly in poetry, but he was less laborious, his only productions being, 1. “Taciti Annalium libri quinque priores,” Home, 1515, Lyons,1542, Paris, 1608, all in fol. This edition is dedicated to LeoX. at whose request it was undertaken, and who gave five hundred sequins for the manuscript, from which it was copied, to Angelo Arcomboldo, who brought it from the abbey of Corvey in Westphalia. Leo was likewise so pleased with what Beroaldo had done, that he denounced the sentence of excommunication, with the penalty of two hundred ducats, and forfeiture of the books, against any persons who should reprint the book within ten years without the express consent of the editor. The other books of Tacitus, formerly published, are added to the editions above specified. 2. “Odarum libri tres, et epigrammatum liber unus,” Rome, 1530, 4to. These were received with such applause, particularly by the French nation, that he has had no less than six translators in that country, among whom is the celebrated Clement Marot. A part of them were incorporated in the “Delitiae poet. Italorum” of Toscano.

nothing; and in all probability would at this time have suffered death, had not some of the judges, who perceived the violence of his accusers, procured the affair

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

ees of bachelor and doctor in divinity. In 1723, Dr, Berriman lost his patron, the bishop of London, who, in testimony of his regard to his chaplain, bequeathed him

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

nt proofs of his talents in the Prado of Madrid, and the Alhambra of Grenada. The emperor Charles V. who admired his extensive and various talents, bestowed on him the

, an eminent Spanish painter, sculptor, and architect, was born at Parades de Nava, near Valladolid. He went when young into Italy, studied under Michael Angelo, and became the friend and intimate of Andrea del Sarto, Baccio, Bandine*lli, and other celebrated artists. After having finished his education, he returned to Spain, and afforded eminent proofs of his talents in the Prado of Madrid, and the Alhambra of Grenada. The emperor Charles V. who admired his extensive and various talents, bestowed on him the order of knighthood, and appointed him gentleman of his chamber. After establishing a high reputation and a great fortune, Berruguete died at Madrid in 1545, advanced in years. In the cathedral of Toledo, is one of his finest sculptures, the Transfiguration, and some other beautiful carvings in the choir, one side of which was thus decorated by him, the other by Philip de Borgona. His style possessed much of the sublime manner of his great master, and he was justly admired by his countrymen, as being the first who introduced the true principles of the fine arts into Spain.

ommander, a native of evonshire, where he was born in 1635, became successful against the Buccaneers who infested the Atlantic ocean, and distinguished himself at the

, a naval commander, a native of evonshire, where he was born in 1635, became successful against the Buccaneers who infested the Atlantic ocean, and distinguished himself at the famous battle of Southwold-bay, for which he was knighted. In 1682, he commanded the Gloucester frigate, on board of which the duke of York embarked for Scotland; but by the carelessness of the pilot, the vessel was lost at the mouth of the Humber. In the midst of this confusion, sir John retained that presence of mind for which he was always remarkable, and by that means preserved the duke and as many of his retinue as the long-boat would carry. Soon after he was promoted to a flag, and commanded as vice-admiral under lord Dartmouth, at the demolition of Tangier, and on his return was made a commissioner of the navy; which post he enjoyed till his death. He was in great favour with king James II. who made choice of him to command under lord Dartmouth, when the prince of Orange landed in England; and when his lordship left the fleet, the whole command devolved on sir John Berry, who held it till the ships were laid up. After the revolution sir John continued in his posts, and was frequently consulted by king William, who entertained a high opinion of his abilities in military affairs; but he was poisoned in the beginning of February, 1691, on board one of his majesty’s ships at Portsmouth, where he was paying her off, in the 56th year of his age. The cause of this catastrophe was never discovered, and it was probably accidental. His body v/as brought to London and interred at Stepney, and a fine monument afterwards erected to his memory.

, an ingenious Scotch artist, was one of those who owe more to nature than to instruction of his parentage we have

, an ingenious Scotch artist, was one of those who owe more to nature than to instruction of his parentage we have no account, but he appears to have been born about 1730, and at the usual time bound apprentice to Mr. Proctor, a seal engraver in Edinburgh. How long he remained with him is uncertain, but for some years after he began business for himself, he pursued the same branch with his teacher. At this time, however, his designs were so elegant, and his mode of cutting so clean and sharp, as soon to make' him be taken notice of as a superior artist. At length by constantly studying and admiring the style of the antique entaglios, he resolved to attempt something of that sort himself; and the subject he chose was a head of sir Isaac Newton, which he executed in a style of such superior excellence, as astonished all who had an opportunity of observing it. But as he was a man of the most unaffected modesty, and as this head was given to a friend in a retired situation in life, it was known only to a few in the private circle of his acquaintance; and for many years was scarcely ever seen by any one who could justly appreciate its merit. Owing to these circumstances, Mr. Berry was permitted to waste his time, during the best part of his life, in cutting heraldic seals, for which he found a much greater demand than for fine heads, at such a price as could indemnify him for the time that was necessarily spent in bringing works of such superior excellence to perfection. He often told the writer of this account, that though some gentlemen pressed him very much to make fine heads for them, yet he always found that, when he gave in his bill for an article of that kind, though he had charged perhaps not more than half the money that he could have earned in the same time at his ordinary work, they always seemed to think the price too high, which made him exceedingly averse to employment of that sort.

were admired, as superior to every thing produced in modern times, unless it was by Piccler of Rome, who in the same art, but with much greater practice in it, had justly

Mr. Berry possessed that very nice perceptive faculty, which constitutes the essence of genius in the fine arts, in such a high degree, as to prove even a bar to his attaining that superior excellence in this department, which nature had evidently qualified him for. Even in his best performance he thought he perceived defects, which no one else remarked, and which the circumstances above alluded to prevented him from correcting. While others admired with unbounded applause, he looked upon his own performances with a kind of vexation, at finding the execution not to have attained the high perfection he conceived to be attainable. And not being able to afford the time to perfect hirnself in that nice department of his art, he became extremely averse to attempt it. Yet, in spite of this aversion, the few pieces above named, and some others, were extorted from him by degrees, and they came gradually to be known: and wherever they were known, they were admired, as superior to every thing produced in modern times, unless it was by Piccler of Rome, who in the same art, but with much greater practice in it, had justly attained a high degree of celebrity. Between the excellence of these two artists, connoisseurs differed in opinion; some being inclined to give the palm to Berry, while others preferred Piccler. The works of these two artists were well known to each other and each declared, with that manly ingenuousness, which superior genius alone can confer on the human mind, that the other was greatly his superior.

pression of a seal that the duchess dowager had got cut a good many years before by a Jew in London, who was dead before the duke thought of his seal, and which had

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

mineral waters of France, a correspondent of the academy of sciences, and member of that of Auxerre, who died in 1754, is chiefly known as the projector of the “Collection

, physician in ordinary to the king, and intendaut of the mineral waters of France, a correspondent of the academy of sciences, and member of that of Auxerre, who died in 1754, is chiefly known as the projector of the “Collection Academique,” containing extracts of the most important articles in the memoirs of various learned societies. He published the first two volumes at Dijon, 1754, 4to. The plan was good, but he gave the articles so much at length, that an abridgment would be necessary to render it useful. It was continued by Messrs. Guenau de Montbeillard, Buffon, Daubenton, Larcher, &c. and forms 33 vols. 4to, with the tables of the abbé“Rozier. Berryat also published” Observations physiques et medicinales sur les eaux mineraies d'Epoigny," in the neighbourhood of Auxerre, and printed at Auxerre, 1752, 12mo.

and Greek, and took delight in travelling over France and Italy for forming acquaintance with those who were in most reputation among the literati. On his return, he

, a native of Germany, was born March 11, 1538, at Annaberg, a little town of Misnia, near the river Schop, on the side of Bohemia. He waseducated with care, and made great progress in the sciences. He was particularly fond of the study of medicine, physics, the belles-lettres, and the learned languages. He excelled in Latin and Greek, and took delight in travelling over France and Italy for forming acquaintance with those who were in most reputation among the literati. On his return, he was successively professor of poetry and Greek at Wittemberg and Leipsic, but being unwilling to sign the formulary of concord, he was dismissed in 1580, and went into the territories of the priuce of Anhalt-Zerbst, where he died the 5th of October 1611, in the seventy-third year of his age. Bersmann put into verse the Psalms of David, and published editions of Virgil, 1581, Ovid, 1582, JEsop,1590, and of Horace, Lucan, Cicero, and other authors of antiquity. He was not less fertile in body than in mind having fourteen sons and six daughters by his marriage with a daughter of Peter Hellebron. Freyer, however, says that he had only four sons.

ributed. He was uncle to madame de Motteville, first woman of the bedchamber to Anne of Austria, and who published the memoirs of that princess. His “Oeuvres poetiques”

, first chaplain to queen Catherine de Medicis, secretary of the cabinet and reader to Henry III. counsellor of state, abbot of Aulnai, and lastly bishop of Seez, was born at Caen in the year 1522, and died the 8th of June 1611, aged fifty-nine. He was the contemporary and friend of Ronsard and Desportes, and was thought superior to either. Some of his stanzas are written with ease and elegance and have not been excelled by the best poets of our own times. He has left poems sacred and profane, canticles, sengs, sonnets, and psalms. They.re interspersed with several happy thoughts, but turned in points, a taste which he caught from Seneca. He seems to have conducted himself with great propriety after his being advanced to the prelacy, and the bishop blushed at the gaiety of the courtier, but he had too much fondness for his early productions to consign them to oblivion, and he published them with his pious pieces, “the bane and antidote.” He left also a translation of some books of St. Ambrose, several controversial tracts, imperfect sermons for the principal festivals of the church, and a funeral discourse on Henry IV. to whose conversion he had greatly contributed. He was uncle to madame de Motteville, first woman of the bedchamber to Anne of Austria, and who published the memoirs of that princess. His “Oeuvres poetiques” were printed at Paris, 1602, 8vo, and with additions in 1605 but the Paris editions of 1620 and 1623, 8vo, are the most complete.

as educated, 1631, 8vo, and the deliverance of Casal, “Casalluni bis liberatum.” Cardinal Richelieu, who valued him, would have promoted him to a bishopric, but he was

, a French historian, was born at Sens in 1600, and entered early into the congregation of the oratory, where he taught rhetoric at Marseilles, after that college had been founded in 1625. In 1659, he became titular of the archdeaconry of Dunois in the church of Chartres, and next year he obtained a canonry, and in 1666 was promoted to the deanery of the same church. His “Florus Gallicus,” and “Florus Franciscus,” which were long popular works, and esteemed the best abridgments of French history, are praised by Le Long for their style but the work from which he derived most reputation was his learned dissertation “De Ara,” Nantes, 1633. He had some talent also for Latin poetry, and published occasional pieces of that kind, as his encomium on the city of Troyes, where he was educated, 1631, 8vo, and the deliverance of Casal, “Casalluni bis liberatum.” Cardinal Richelieu, who valued him, would have promoted him to a bishopric, but he was dissuaded by father Sancy de Marlay, who, among all Berthaulcl’s powers, did not discover that of governing a diocese. He died Oct. 19, 1681.

the Jesuits by order of Louis XIV. for having bad the weakness or curiosity to consult a prophetess who made a noise among the credulous at Paris. He then entered among

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

his panegyric on Louis XV. pere Berthier saw it in no other light than as the attempt of a young man who was hunting after antitheses, though not destitute of ingenuity.

, a French writer of considerable note, was born at Issoudun en Berri April 7, 1704, and entered among the Jesuits in 1722. He was professor of humanity at Blois, of philosophy at Rennes and Rouen, and of divinity at Paris. The talents he displayed in these offices made him be chosen in 1742 to succeed father Brumoy, in the continuation of his “History of the Gallican Church.” This he executed with general approbation. In 1745 his superiors employed him on the Journal de Trevoux, which he conducted for seventeen years, to the satisfaction of the learned and the public in general. This employment, says the abbé de Fontenay, procured him a high reputation, by the care and accuracy evident in the analysis of the works that came before him, and by the style of a masterly, impartial, and intrepid critic. But this exact impartiality was displeasing to several writers, and especially to Voltaire. When that poet published, without his name, his panegyric on Louis XV. pere Berthier saw it in no other light than as the attempt of a young man who was hunting after antitheses, though not destitute of ingenuity. So humiliating a critique was sensibly felt by Voltaire, who made no hesitation to declare himself the author of the work so severely handled. His mortification was increased when pere Berthier having given an account of a publication, wherein the poet was characterised under the title of “the worthy rival of Homer and Sophocles,” the journalist put coldly in a note, “We are not acquainted with him.” But what raised the anger of Voltaire to its utmost pitch, was a very just censure of several reprehensible passages in his essay on general history. The irritated poet declared openly in 1759 against the Jesuit in a sort of diatribe, which he placed after his ode on the death of the margravine of Bareith. The Jesuit repelled his shafts with a liberal and manly spirit in the Journal de Trevoux. Upon this the poet, instead of a serious answer, brought out in 1760 a piece of humour, entitled “An account of the sickness, confession, and death of the Jesuit Berthier.” The learned Jesuit did not think proper to make any reply to an adversary who substituted ridicule for argument, and continued the Journal de Trevoux till the dissolution of the society in France. He then quitted his literary occupations for retirement. At the close of 1762 the dauphin appointed him keeper of the royal library, and adjunct in the education of Louis XVI. and of monsieur. But eighteen months afterwards, when certain events occasioned the dismission, of all ex-jesuits from the court, he settled at Ossenbourg, from which the empress queen invited him to Vienna and he was also offered the place of librarian at Milan, but he refused all and after residing here for ten years, obtained permission to go to Bourges, where he had a brother and a nephew in the church. Here he died of a fall, Dec. 15, 1782, just after being informed that the French clergy had decreed him a pension of a thousand livres. The chapter of the metropolitan church gave him distinguished honours at his interment; a testimony due to a man of such eminent piety, extensive erudition, and excellent judgment.

, a French philosopher, a native of Lyons, who died in 1799, was first distinguished at Montpelier, as professor

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

ndon, and of the legion of honour, was born March 19, 1727, at Plancemont in Neufchatel. His father, who was an architect and justiciary, had destined him for the church;

, an eminent French marine clock-maker, a member of the institute, of the royal society of London, and of the legion of honour, was born March 19, 1727, at Plancemont in Neufchatel. His father, who was an architect and justiciary, had destined him for the church; but the youth having had an opportunity, when only sixteen years of age, to examine the mechanism of a clock, became so fond of that study as to attend to nothing else. His father then very wisely encouraged an enthusiasm so promising, and after having employed an able workman to instruct his son in the elements of clockmaking, consented that he should go to Paris to perfect his knowledge of the art. He accordingly came to Paris in 1745, and there constructed his first specimens of marine clocks, which soon were universally approved and adopted. Bjerthoud and Peter Leroi were rival makers of these longitudinal clocks, and came very near each other, although by different methods, in the construction of them but Berthoud’s superior experience made the preference be

i luoghi,” Rome, 1747, 4to. It is the more necessary to notice this work, because the editor Giorgi, who has given very little of his own, does not once mention Berti'

, a learned Italian, was born at Lucca, Dec. 23, 1686. He entered when sixteen into the congregation, called the Mother of God at Naples, and prosecuted his studies with success and perseverance. On his return to Lucca he acquired great reputation as a general scholar and preacher, and in 1717, taught rhetoric at Naples. The marquis cie Vasto having appointed him to be his librarian, he increased the collection with a number of curious books, of which he had an accurate knowledge, and also greatly enlarged the library of his convent. He introduced among his brethren a taste for polite literature, and t brined a colony of Arcadians. In 1739, he settled finally at Rome, where he was appointed successively vice-rector, assistant-general, and historian of his order. He was one of the most distinguished members of the society of the Arcadians at Home, and of many other societies. He died at Rome, of an apoplexy, March 23, 1752. Mazzuihelli has given a catalogue of twentyfour works published by him, and of twenty-one that remain in manuscript. Among these we^may notice, I. “La Caduta de' decemviri clella Roman a republica per la funzione della serenissima republica di Lucca,” Lucca, 1717. 2. “Canzone per le vittorie coritro il Turco del principe Eugenio,” ibid, without date, 4to. 3. The lives of several of the Arcadians, printed in the prose memoirs of that academy, under his academic name of Nicasio Poriniano. 4. Translations into the Italian of several French authors and poetical pieces in various collections. 5. We owe to him chiefly an important bibliographical work, “Catalogo della iibreria Capponi, con annotazioni in diversi luoghi,” Rome, 1747, 4to. It is the more necessary to notice this work, because the editor Giorgi, who has given very little of his own, does not once mention Berti' name. Among his unpublished works is one of the biographical kind, “Memorie degli scrittori Lucchesi,” a collection of the lives of the writers of Lucca. It being well known, as early as 1716, that this was ready for the press, Mazzuchelii, who had waited very patiently for what was likely to be of so much service to himself, at length, in 1739, took the liberty to inquire of Berti the cause of a delay so unusual. Berti answered that the difficulties he had met -with had obliged him to re- write his work, and dispose it in a new order that the names were ranged according to the families the most ancient families had been replaced by new ones in the various offices of dignity in that little republic, and the new heads and all, their relations were not very fond of being reminded that their ancestors were physicians, men of learning, and “people of that sort.

the example of Bellelli his brother- monk. The archbishop of Vienna [Salmon], or rather the Jesuits who managed him, published under his name in 1744, two pieces against

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

of his own regiment of foot being commanded by the principal knights and gentlemen of Lincolnshire, who engaged themselves in the service principally out of their personal

The fortune, which he inherited from his ancestors, was a very considerable one; and though he did not manage it with such care, as if he desired much to improve it, yet he left it in a very fair condition. He was a man of great honour, and spent his youth and the vigour of his age in military actions and commands abroad. And though he indulged himself in great liberties, yet he still preserved a very great interest in his country; as appears by the supplies, which he and his son brought to the king’s army, the companies of his own regiment of foot being commanded by the principal knights and gentlemen of Lincolnshire, who engaged themselves in the service principally out of their personal affection to him. He was of a very generous nature, and punctual in what he undertook, and in exacting what was due to him which made him bear the restriction so heavily, which was put upon him by the commission granted to prince Rupert, who was general of the horse, in which commission there was a clause exempting him from receiving orders from any but the king himself; and by the king’s preferring the prince’s opinion in all matters relating to the war before his. Nor did he conceal his resentment for the day before the battle, he said to some friends, with whom he had used freedom, that he did not look upon himself as general; and therefore he was resolved, when the day of battle should come, that he would be at the head of his regiment as a private colonel, where he would die. He was carried out of the field to the next village; and if he could then have procured surgeons, it was thought his wound would not have proved mortal. As soon as the other army was composed by the coming on of the night, the earl of Essex about midnight sent sir William Balfour, and some other officers, to see him, and designed himself to visit him. They found him upon a little straw in a poor house, where they had laid him in his blood, w.hich had run from him in great abundance. He said, he was sorry to see so many gentlemen, some whereof were his old friends, engaged in so foul a rebellion wishing them to tell the earl of Essex, that he ought to throw himself at the king’s feet to beg his pardon which if he did not speedily do, his memory would be odious to the nation. He continued his discourse with such vehemence, that the officers by degrees withdrew themselves, and prevented the visit, which the earl of Essex intended him, who only sent him the best surgeons; but in the very opening of his wounds he died, before the morning, by the loss of blood. He had very many friends, and very few enemies, and died generally lamented. His body was interred at Edenham in Lincolnshire.

er nine sons and five daughters, and was succeeded in his titles and estate by his eldest, Mountagu, who at the battle of Edge-hill, where he commanded the royal regiment

He married Elizabeth, only child of Edward, the first lord Mountagu of Boughton in Northamptonshire, and had issue by her nine sons and five daughters, and was succeeded in his titles and estate by his eldest, Mountagu, who at the battle of Edge-hill, where he commanded the royal regiment of guards, seeing his father wounded and taken prison, was moved with such filial piety, that he voluntarily yielded himself to a commander of horse of the enemy, in order to attend upon him. He afterwards adhered firmly to his majesty in all his distresses, and upon the restoration of king Charles II. was made knight of the garter.

France. He was intimately connected with chevalier de Parny, another poet of the amatory class, and who was termed the French Tibullus, and they lived together in the

, a modern French poet of the Ovidian cast, was born in the isle of Bourbon, Oct. 10, 1752, and died at St. Domingo June 1790. He was brought to France for education at the age of nine, and after studying for some time in the college of Plessis, entered the military service, and became a captain of horse and a chevalier of St. Louis. In his twentieth year he distinguished himself as a poet, although his effusions were circulated principally among his friends; but in 1782, when he published four books of elegies under the title of “Amours,” a very honourable rank appears to have been assigned to him among the minor poets of France. He was intimately connected with chevalier de Parny, another poet of the amatory class, and who was termed the French Tibullus, and they lived together in the utmost amity, although rivals in the public favour. About the end of the year 1789, Bertin went to St. Domingo to marry a young creole, with whom he had formed an acquaintance in Paris, but on the day of marriage he was seized with a violent fever, of which he died in a few days. His works were collected and published at Paris in 1785, 2 vols. 18mo, and reprinted in 1802 and 1306.

disputes with his brethren, by which neither party gained much credit. His son Joseph Maria Xavier, who died in 1756, was also a physician, and of far more celebrity

, an Italian physician, and a man of learning and skill, yet perhaps less known for these qualities, than for his literary disputes, was born at Castel Fiorentino Dec. 28, 1658. After studying at Sienna and Pisa a complete course, not only of medicine, but mathematics, astronomy, belles-lettres, &c. he was, in 1678, created doctor in philosophy and medicine, and then settled at Florence, where after very successful practice for many years, he died Dec. 10, 1726. His first publication was entitled “La Medicina difesa contra la calunnie degli nomini volgari e dalle opposizioni del dotti, divisa in due dialoghi,” Lucca, 1699, 4to. and ibid. 1709. In the second of these dialogues he pays high compliments to three physicians belonging to the court of Tuscany, but omits Moneglia, the fourth, which brought on a controversy between Bertini and him and some time afterwards he was involved in two other disputes with his brethren, by which neither party gained much credit. His son Joseph Maria Xavier, who died in 1756, was also a physician, and of far more celebrity as a practitioner but he published only a discourse pronounced in 1744, on the medical use of mercury in general, which at that time excited the attention of the learned in no small degree. It was entitled “Dell' uso esterno e interno del Mercurio, discorso, &c.” 4to.

ges and Ypres, Nov. 14, 1565. He was brought into England when but three months old, by his parents, who dreaded the persecution of the protestants which then prevailed

, cosmographer and historiographer to Louis XIII. of France, and regius professor, of mathematics, was born at Beveren in Flanders, on the confines of the dioceses of Bruges and Ypres, Nov. 14, 1565. He was brought into England when but three months old, by his parents, who dreaded the persecution of the protestants which then prevailed in the Netherlands. He received the rudiments of his education in the suburbs of London, under Christian Rychius, and his learned daughter-in-law, Petronia Lansberg. He afterwards completed his education at Leyden, whither his father, then become protestant minister at Rotterdam, removed him in his twelfth year. In 1582, when only seventeen years of age, he began the employment of teaching, which he carried on at Dunkirk, Ostend, Middleburgh, Goes, and Strasburgh but a desire for increasing his own stock of learning induced him to travel into Germany with Lipsius, and the same object led him afterwards into Bohemia, Silesia, Poland, Russia, and Prussia. On his return to Leyden he was appointed to a professor’s chair, and to the care of the library, of which, after arranging it properly, he published a' catalogue. In 1606, he was appointed regent of the college, but afterwards, having taken part with the disciples of Arminius, and published several works against those of Gomarus, he was dismissed from all his employments, and deprived of every means of subsistence, with a numerous family. In March 1620, he presented a petition to the states of Holland for a pension, which was refused. Two years before, Louis XIII. had honoured him with the title of his cosmographer, and now constrained by poverty and the distress of his family, he went to France and embraced the popish religion, a change which gave great uneasiness to the protestants. Some time after he was appointed professor of rhetoric in the college of Boncourt, then historiographer to the king, and lastly assistant to the regius professor of mathematics. He died Oct. 3, 1629. A veryline engraving of him occurs at the back of the dedication to Louis XIII. of his “Theatrum Geographise veteris,” but (the collectors will be glad to hear) only in some copies of that work, which are supposed to have been presents from the author.

most of which, however, had been greatly neglected, and even destroyed by the ignorant inhabitants, who converted every remains of antiquity in stone to the common

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

r of mendicants, and six seculars, consisting of divines and lawyers, to examine Wickliff’s opinions who accordingly declared him an heretic. He wrote likewise several

, an eminent divine of the fourteenth century, and doctor in that faculty, flourished about the year 1381, in the reign of Richard II. and was some time chancellor of the university of Oxford. He is chiefly remarkable for his opposition to the doctrines of Wickliff: for, by virtue of his office, as governor of the university, he appointed twelve censors, six of the order of mendicants, and six seculars, consisting of divines and lawyers, to examine Wickliff’s opinions who accordingly declared him an heretic. He wrote likewise several pieces upon the subject of Wickliff’s pretended heresy particularly “Determinations against Wickliff; a treatise concerning his just condemnation” and another “against the Articles extracted from his writings.” Bale and Pits give him very different characters, according to their principles.

, an eminent anatomist and surgeon, was born at Turin, Oct. 18, 1723. His father, who was only a poor phlebotomist and barber, contrived to give him

, an eminent anatomist and surgeon, was born at Turin, Oct. 18, 1723. His father, who was only a poor phlebotomist and barber, contrived to give him an education, and intended to bring him up to the church, which was thought most likely to afford him a maintenance, but one of their friends Sebastian Klingher, then professor of surgery, induced him to study that branch, in which he soon evinced great talents. He was only twenty- two when he read a dissertation on Ophthalmography, on which Haller and Portal bestowed the highest praise. The celebrated Bianchi connected himself with him, but after a few years their friendship was interrupted by the literary disputes which took place between Bianchi and Morgagni, and Bertrandi preferring“what he thought truth to a friendship which was of great importance to him, was obliged to leave Bianchi. In 1747 he was elected an associate of the college of surgery, and the same year published his” Dissertation on the Liver,“which, Haller says, contains many useful observations. In, 1752, the king, Charles Emmanuel, offered to bear his expenses to Paris and London. He accordingly went to Paris, where he increased his knowledge and practice of the art of surgery, and in consequence of his two papers read in the academy,” De Hydrocele,“and” De hepatis abscessibus qui vulneribus capitis superveniunt,“was admitted as a foreign member. In 1754 he went to London, and lodged for a year with sir William Bromfield, our late eminent surgeon, during which time, as at Paris, he studied hospital practice, and cultivated the acquaintance of men of science. On his return to Turin, the king founded for his sake a new professorship of practical surgery and anatomy, and at Bertrandi’s request, built a handsome amphitheatre in the hospital of St. John. He was afterwards appointed first surgeon to the king, and professor of chemistry in the university. Surgery now, which had been practised in Piedmont only by regimental surgeons, began to wear a new face and a literary society, which was afterwards completely established under the title of the” Royal Academy of Sciences,“began now to hold its meetings, and Bertrandi contributed some valuable papers to the first volume of their Memoirs. His principal publication was his” Trattato delle operazioni di Chirurgia," Nice, 1763, 2 vols. 8vo, which was afterwards translated into French and German. He was employed on a treatise on anatomy and a comparative history of ancient and modern surgery, when death deprived science and humanity of his valuable labours, in 1765, in his forty-second year. His works already published, and his posthumous works, edited by Penchienati and Brugnone form 13 vols. 8vo.

, a botanist, who was born in 1561, at Nuremberg, where he carried on the business

, a botanist, who was born in 1561, at Nuremberg, where he carried on the business of an apothecary, and died there in 1629, is entitled to notice chiefly for having published the most beautiful botanical work that had then appeared, the celebrated “Hortus Eystettensis,” Nuremberg, 1613, folio. It contains a description and plates of the greater part of the plants which the bishop of Aichstsedt, John Conrad de Gemmingen, a liberal patron, of the arts, had cultivated in his gardens and orchards on mount St. Willibald, on the top of which is his episcopal seat. This work, executed with uncommon magnificence, at the expence of the bishop, made a new aera in the history both of botany and engraving. It is illustrated by three hundred and sixty- five plates of the atlas folio size, descriptive of one thousand and eighty-six plants, the first, after the “Phytobasanos” of Columna, that were engraved on copper, all botanical engravings being formerly on wood. They are in general well designed, but do not point out the parts of fructification, and are classed only according to the seasons. Basil Besler had the care of this work, and although he was deficient in literature, and was not even acquainted with Latin, yet his zeal and love of the science enabled him to perform his task with considerable skill. Jerome Besler, his brother, a man of more learning, supplied the synonymy of the plants, and part of the descriptions, and Louis Jungermann, professor at Giessen, was the author of the text. A second edition appeared at Nuremberg in 1640, at the expence of Marquard II. bishop of Aichstaedt, in large folio, but is inferior to the first. Basil Besler also collected a museum of many of the curiosities of the three kingdoms of nature, which he had engraven at his own expence, and published under the title of “Fasciculus rariorum et aspectu digniorum, varii generis quae collegit et suis impensis aeri ad vivum incidi curavit Basilius Besler,” Nuremberg, 1616 1622. In honour of Besler, Plumier named a genus of plants Besleria.

, a physician at Nuremberg, the son of Jerome and nephew of Basil, who was born in 1601, and died in 1661, wrote, 1. “Gazophylacium

, a physician at Nuremberg, the son of Jerome and nephew of Basil, who was born in 1601, and died in 1661, wrote, 1. “Gazophylacium rerum naturalium,” Nuremberg, 1642, with thirtyfjur plates; Leipsic, 1733, fol. with thirty-five plates, forming a continuation of his uncle Besler’s work. In 1716, J. Henry Lochner repaired the plates, and with some additions to the text, published them under the title of “Rariora mussel Besleriani,” Nuremberg, 1716, fol. 2. “Admirandae fabrics humanae mulieris partium, &c. delineatio,” Nuremberg, 1640, folio, the figures as large as life, and on copper- plate. 3. “Observatio anatomico-medica, &c.” an account of a monstrous birth, Nuremberg, 1642, 4to. 4. “Mantissa ad viretum stirpium Eystettense-Beslerianum,” ibid. 1646 and 1648, fol. forming a supplement to the “Hortus Eystettensis.

e, which he refused. Orsini, however, tendered his vote on the same terms to the cardinal de Rovere, who had none of Bessarion’s scruples, and was elected. Paul Jovius

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

espect for these two sages, he rebuked, in strong terms, the inconsiderate zeal of young Apostoiius, who, without understanding the question, had written a violent and

Bessarion’s writings are numerous. Almost all those on theological subjects remain in manuscript, except some that are inserted in the acts of the council of Florence, in vol. XIII. of Labbe’s collection, and in vol. IX. of Hardouin’s. Complete catalogues of his philosophical treatises, discourses, an,d letters, may be consulted inFabricius’sBibl. Grace, and in Body. His most celebrated works were his Latin translations of Xenophon’s Memorabilia, and Aristotle’s Metaphysics, and his treatise “Contra calumniatorem Platonis.” That calumniator was George of Trebisond, and Bessarion composed the work during the heat of the violent contest supported about the middle of the fifteenth century, between the followers of Plato and those of Aristotle, of wHich Boivin wrote the history in the second volume of the Academy of Belles Lettres. Gemistus Pletho, an enthusiastic admirer of Plato, wrote a small tract in which he attacked the Peripatetic philosophy with virulent invective. Three learned Greeks of the age, Gennadius, George of Trebisond, and Theodore Gaza, had taken up their pens in vindication of Aristotle. Bessarion endeavoured to reconcile the parties by shewing that Plato and Aristotle were not so far removed from each other in opinion as was usually thought and having a great respect for these two sages, he rebuked, in strong terms, the inconsiderate zeal of young Apostoiius, who, without understanding the question, had written a violent and unreasonable declamation against Aristotle. George, however, far from following the example of this moderation, published, in Latin, under the title of “Comparatio Platonis et Aristotelis,” a long dissertation, in which he endeavoured to demonstrate the vast superiority of Aristotle, and inveighed, with great violence, against Plato and his followers. Bessarion then wrote the treatise above-mentioned against this calumniator of Plato, in which he endeavours to prove that the doctrine of Plato is conformable to that of the Scriptures, and that his morals were as pure and irreproachable as his doctrine. Having thus defended Plato, he attacks George of Trebisond, proving that he had mistaken the sense of a great many passages, and that he had no right to give his opinion of a philosopher whose works he did not understand. Of this book there have been three editions, all of which are scarce the first was printed at Rome in 1469, and the others at Venice by Aldus, 1503 and 1516.

med for the mutual assistance and illustration of each other’s genius! How Shakspeare wrote, all men who have a taste for nature may read and know; but with what higher

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

, they were unable to keep up their run of success, above two or three seasons. Vanbrugh and Gibber, who wrote for the other house, were expeditious in their productions

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

attended the ceremony, and two days after published a paper in the Tatler to his memory. Mr. Booth, who knew him only in his decline, used to say, that he never saw

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

rmany to Italy, bringing with him two young princes, the sons or nephews of the prince of Hohenlohe, who had intrusted him with their education. The following year he

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

iew of the revival of arts and sciences after the tenth century, and as interfering with Tiraboschi, who was then employed on the same subject, but to those who may

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

At an hundred and twenty (or, more probably, an hundred and two), he married Catherine Milton, who had a child by him and after that sera of his life he was employed

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

pers of Barrow, as the minister and churchwardens should agree, regard being had especially to those who had been most constantly at prayers, and at the sacrament of

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

n the warmth of my imprudent youth I detest my loose style and my libertine sentiments. I thank God, who has removed from my eyes the veil which blinded my sight in

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

shop of Canterbury, and was justly esteemed one of the best scholars of his time. Alfred of Beverly, who wrote his life, pretends that he studied at Oxford, and took

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

nded with many illustrious personages of his time, and among others with Christina, queen of Sweden, who often requested of him copies of his sermons and poems. The

, a learned Italian of the seventeenth century, was born at Lucca, May 5, 1629. In classical learning he made such progress, that, when only fifteen, he wrote notes and comments on the principal poets of the Augustan age, which drew the notice and approbation of the learned. In his sixteenth year, he went to Rome and entered the congregation of the regular clerks, called the congregation of the “Mother of God.” After completing his theological studies, he taught divinity for four years, at the end of which he was invited to Lucca to be professor of rhetoric. From the salary of this place he was enabled to maintain his aged father and family, and would not afterwards accept of any promotion from his congregation, that his studies might not be interrupted by affairs of business. He corresponded with many illustrious personages of his time, and among others with Christina, queen of Sweden, who often requested of him copies of his sermons and poems. The facility with which he wrote appears by his translation of the Eneid, which he says, in the preface, he completed in thirteen months. He died of a malignant fever, Oct. 24, 1686. He left a great many works, of which his biographer, Fabroni, has given a minute catalogue. The principal are 1. “Saeculum niveum Roma virginea et Dies niveus,” three small Latin collections on the same subject, “De nivibus Exquilinis, sive de sacris nivibus,” Rome, 1650, 1651, and

een so long left in that state it is entitled “Annalium ah origine Lucensis urbis Lib. XV.” Fabroni, who highly praises these annals, seems at a loss to account for

1653, 12mo, Venice, 1682. 4. “Carminum Lib. VII.” ibid. 1674, 12mo. 5. “Eneide di Virgilio, trasportata in ottavo rima,” ibid, 1680, 12mo. This much esteemed translation has been often reprinted. The last edition is that of Rome, 1700, 4to. 6. “Prediche, discorsi, e lezioni,” a posthumous work, Vienna, 1692, 4to. 7. “Syntagma de pondaribus et mensuris,” another posthumous work, Lucca, 1711, 8vo, a very learned performance, often reprinted, and added to all collections on the subject. Among his unpublished works is a historical account of Lucca, which it is rather surprizing, should have been so long left in that state it is entitled “Annalium ah origine Lucensis urbis Lib. XV.” Fabroni, who highly praises these annals, seems at a loss to account for their not having been published, but informs us that Beverini had his enemies as well as his admirers.

nicated the result of many years study and experience in a treatise which is highly commended by all who have taken occasion to speak of it. This book was published

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

, whose name often occurs in works of Bibliography, but who has not laid bibliographers under many obligations, was a bookseller

, whose name often occurs in works of Bibliography, but who has not laid bibliographers under many obligations, was a bookseller at Emmerich, about the end of the seventeenth century. His design in his compilations was evidently to serve the cause of literature, but although all his plans were good, they were imperfectly executed, and have proved perplexing and useless. His principal publications in this department were: 1. “Bibliographia Juridica et Politica,” Amsterdam, 1680, 12mo. 2. “Bibliotheca medica et physica,1691, igmo, enlarged in 1696. 3. “Gallia critica et experimentalis ab anno 1665 usque ad 1681,” Amst. 1683, 12mo. This is a useful index to the articles in the “Journal des Savans.” 4. “Bibliographia mathematica et artificiosa,1685, improved and enlarged, 1688, 12mo. 5. “Bibliographia historica, chronologica, et geographica,1685, 12mo, and continued in four parts until 1710. 6. “Bibliographia crudilorum critico-curiosa, seu apparatus ad historian! literariam,” Amst. 1689—1701, 5 vols. 12mo, a sort of general index to all the literary journals, but containing too many alphabets to be easily consulted. It extends from 1665 to 1700. 7. “Incunabula typographic, sive Catalogus librorum proximis ab iwentione typographic annis ad annum 1500, editorum,” Amst. 1688, 12mo, jejune, says our English bibliographer, and erroneous. Indeed each of these undertakings, to be completely useful, would have required more years than Beughem bestowed upon the whole.

, a divine and historian in the seventh century, was a Briton by birth, who taught the celebrated Nennius, afterwards abbot of the monastery

, a divine and historian in the seventh century, was a Briton by birth, who taught the celebrated Nennius, afterwards abbot of the monastery of Bangor; and applied himself from his earliest youth to the study of learning, which he joined to the greatest purity of morals. Bale tells us. that he was master of a very extensive knowledge of things, and a great fluency of style, and was actuated by a warm zeal for the propagation of truth. He had a son, the subject of the following article; which is a proof, as the historian above-mentioned observes, that the priests in Britain were not at that time prohibited to marry; though Pits is of opinion that our author was not ordained when his son was born. He was extremely industrious in examining into the antiquities of nations, and tracing out the families of the English Saxons after they had entered Britain and from these collections he is said to have written a work “De Geneaiogiis Gentium.” He flourished in the year 600. Bishop Nicolson. in his “English Historical Library” calls him Benlanius, and confounds him with his son.

, and a lawyer, was born at Leipsic in 1665, and died in 1714. He was the first, according to Camus, who gave a course of lectures on legal bibliography, at Wittemberg,

, another bibliographer, and a lawyer, was born at Leipsic in 1665, and died in 1714. He was the first, according to Camus, who gave a course of lectures on legal bibliography, at Wittemberg, in 1698. This produced, 1. “Notitiae auctorum juridicorum et juris arti inservientium, tria specimina,” Leipsic, 1698 1705, 8vo, Of this a new and enlarged edition was published in 1726, 8vo, and Jenichen added a continuation in 1738. Four other improved editions, one by Hommelius, in 1749, two in 1750, and a fourth by Frank, in 1758, all in 8vo, shew the value in which this work was held. 2. “Declinatio juris divini naturalis et positivi universalis,” Wittemberg, 1712, 4to; Leipsic, 1716, 1726, 4to.

appointed a counsellor at the court of Friesland. He died in 1598, leaving a daughter, and two sons, who were both educated in their father’s profession. He wrote several

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

, a celebrated printer of the sixteenth century, who was the first after those who printed the works of Ramus, that

, a celebrated printer of the sixteenth century, who was the first after those who printed the works of Ramus, that made a distinction in his printing between the consonants j and v, and the vowels i and u. Ramus was the inventor of this distinction, and employed it in his Latin grammar of 1557, but we do not find it in any of his works printed after that time. Beys adopted it first in Claude Mignaut’s Latin commentary on Horace. He died at Paris April 19, 1593. He married a daughter of the celebrated Plantin of Antwerp, by whom he had a son, who was probably the poet above-mentioned, as the following burlesque epitaph was written on him

Bourdelot. He passed his first years at Paris, with his uncle Nicholas, a counsellor of parliament, who sent him to Orleans, at the age of six, for education. His master,

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

to Paris he was presented to the priory of Longjumeau, and another benefice; and one of his uncles, who possessed a rich abbey, had an intention to resign in his favour.

On his return to Paris he was presented to the priory of Longjumeau, and another benefice; and one of his uncles, who possessed a rich abbey, had an intention to resign in his favour. Beza thus enjoying an ample revenue, with the prospect of an easy increase, joined too freely in the amusements and dissipations of youth, notwithstanding the remonstrances of his parents and friends: and although in the actual possession of benefices, had not yet taken orders, nor for some years did he associate with persons of the reformed religion, although he could not forget the progress that it had made in his mind when under the tuition of Wolmar. Here he contracted an attachment to a young woman, who, some say, was of a noble family, others, of inferior birth, to whom he secretly promised marriage, but was prevented from accomplishing this, through fear of losing his promotions. At leng:h, however, in 1548, when recovering from a severe illness, he resigned his priory, and went to Geneva, and married the lady to whom he had now been engaged about four years. At the same time he abjured popery, and alter a short stay at Geneva, went to Tubingen, to his old master, Wolmar, for whom he always had the sincerest esteem.

for heresy, in answer to a work apparently on the other side of the question by Sebastian Castalio, who took the liberty to doubt whether it was just or useful to put

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

e some of the German princes to intercede with the king of France for toleration of the Protestants, who were then very cruelly persecuted in that kingdom. Next year

In 1558, Beza endeavoured to induce some of the German princes to intercede with the king of France for toleration of the Protestants, who were then very cruelly persecuted in that kingdom. Next year he left Lausanne to settle at Geneva, where he was admitted a citizen, at the request of Calvin. In Geneva at this time, much pains were taken to promote learning, and diffuse a taste for the sciences, and an academy being about to be formed, Calvin refused the title of rector, offered to himself, and recommended it to be given to Beza, who was also to teach divinity. About the same time, the persons of rank in Fiance who had embraced the reformed religion, perceiving that they would need the support of a crowned head, cast their eyes on Beza, as the proper person to convert the king of Navarre, and confer with him on other matters of consequence respecting the reformation. In this Beza had complete success, and the reformed religion was publicly preached at Nerac, the residence of the king and queen of Navarre. A church was built, and in the course of the following year, 1560, such was the zeal of the queen of Navarre, that she ordered all the churches monasteries of Nerac to be destroyed. Beza remained at Nerac until the beginning of 1561, when the king signified his pleasure that he should attend at the conference of Poissi, to which the senate readily consented. At this conference, appointed for reconciling the disputes between the Popish and Protestant divines, the princes, cardinals, and many of the nobility attended, and the king presided. It was opened Sept. 9, 1561, by the chancellor De l'Hospital, who declared that the king’s intention in assembling them was to discover, from their sentiments, a remedy for the disorders which religious disputes had occasioned in his kingdom that -they should therefore endeavour to correct such things as required it, and not separate until they had put an end to all differences by a sincere reconciliation. In his speech he also honoured this conference with the name of the National Council, and compared it to the provincial synods of Orleans, Aries, and Aix, which the emperor Charlemagne had caused to be held. The conference lasted two months, and many points were eagerly debated. The Protestant clergy, and particularly Beza, spoke with great freedom. Beza, to much learning, added a facility of expression which gave him much advantage he had also from his earliest years a ready wit, which in those years he had employed on subjects perhaps not unsuitable to it, and could not afterwards restrain in controversy on more serious points, nor could he repress the zeal and fervour of his mind when he had to contend for the reformed religion. In this conference some strong expressions he used respecting the eucharist, and against transubstantiation, occasioned an unusual clamour, and a cry of blasphemy! from the adherents to that opinion. It is, perhaps, unnecessary to add, that the purposes of all these debates were not accomplished.

ontroversy. He wrote incessantly against the Roman catholics, against the Lutherans, and against all who were unfriendly to the character or opinions of his friend Calvin,

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

subject by father Cæsar Calino, a Jesuit. When he had completed this work, the elder of his pupils, who by the death of his father bad succeeded to the estate, and

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

young man, although it is probable from the merit and character of his poems, that he found patrons who procured him leisure and competence.

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

der his academic name, Lauriso Tragiense, he defends the opinion of Maffei against that of Concilia, who had published a dissertation “De spectaculis theatralibus,”

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

to the degree of doctor. His master in mathematics and natural philosophy was the learned Montanari, who became much attached to him, and bequeathed to him his collection

, a very learned Italian astronomer and philosopher, was born at Verona, Dec. 13, 1662. After being instructed in the elements of education in his own country, he removed to Bologna, where he went through a course of rhetoric and three years of philosophy, in the Jesuits’ college. He afterwards studied mathematics and design, and made a great progress in both. In 1680 he removed to Padua, where he studied divinity, and was admitted to the degree of doctor. His master in mathematics and natural philosophy was the learned Montanari, who became much attached to him, and bequeathed to him his collection of mathematical instruments. At Padua Bianchini learned also anatomy, and, with rather more pleasure, botany. His inclination being for the church, he went next to Rome, where he was kindly received by cardinal Peter Ottoboni, who knew his family, and appointed him his librarian. Here, as was usual for persons with his views, he went through a course of law, but without losing sight of his favourite studies, experimental philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy. He was admitted a member of the physico-mathematical academy, established by Ciampini, and read many learned papers at their sittings.

ry on him in the cfiurch of St. Lawrence in Damaso, invited him to reside in his palace. Clement XI. who was elected pope in 1700, bestowed on him, the year following,

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

easury was at this time very low, the scheme was abandoned. The pope, however, to console Bianchini, who had it very much at heart, gave him a canonry in the church

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

Previous Page

Next Page