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

The character of Dr. Owen, apart from the share he had in the troubles of his country, seems entitled to the praise bestowed by his various biographers. In person he was tall, grave in aspect, of a comely and majestic figure, and his deportment was in every respect that of a gentleman. As he was indisputably the most learned, he was at the same time the most moderate and candid of the nonconformists. With great talents, keenness, and spirit for controversy, he confined himself strictly to argument, and abstained from personal reflections and arrogance. As a writer he was perhaps the most voluminous of his brethren. His works amount to seven volumes in folio, twenty in quarto, and about thirty in octavo.

, a controversial writer against the Jesuits, was born in Merionethshire in 1572, and educated at Christ Church, Oxford, which he left without taking a degree, “having,” as Wood says, “some petty employment bestowed on him.” He afterwards went to the continent, and entered into the society of the Jesuits in Spain, but discovering that their conduct savoured more of worldly policy than true religion, he made use of the information he had picked up among them to expose their intrigues. With this view he published, 1. “The Running Register; recording a true relation of the state of the English colleges, seminaries, and cioysters of all forraigne parts. Together with a brief and compendious discourse of the lives, practices, couzenage, impostures and deceits of all our English monks, friars, Jesuits, and seminarie priests in general,” Lond. 1626. This curious book (of which some extracts are given in the “Restituta,” vol. I. p. 141) abounds with anecdotes of those English Roman catholics who had fled for refuge to the foreign seminaries. 2. “The unmasking of all popish monks, friars, and Jesuits; or, a treatise of their genealogy, beginnings, proceedings, and present state,” &c. ibid. 1628, 4to. 3. “Speculum Jesuiticum, or the Jesuit’s Looking-glass; wherein they may behold Ignatius (their patron) his progress, their own pilgrimage,” &c. ibid. 1629, 4to. To this is added a list of all their colleges, the number of their fellows, &c. This was reprinted in sir Edward Sandys’s “Europe Speculum.” Owen was living in 1629, as appears by the date of his work, but we have no information of what became of him afterwards.

, a learned judge, and author of a book of reports, was the son of Richard Owen, esq. of Condover, in Shropshire, and educated in Oxford, but in what college seems doubtful. Having taken a degree in arts, he left the university, and repairing to Lincoln’s Inn, London, studied law, and became an eminent counsellor. In 1583 he was elected Lent-reader of that society. In 1590 he was made serjeant at law, and- queen’s serjeant soon after. He arrived at length at the dignity of judge of the common pleas, which office he is said to have executed during five years with great abilities and integrity. He died in December 1598, and was buried on the south side of the choir in Westminster abbey, where a monument was erected to his memory. He had the reputation of a learned man, and a patron of learning. His “Reports in the King’s Bench and Common Pleas, in the reign of queen Elizabeth, and some few cases in the time of king James,” (which last could not have been his) were printed in folio, in 1656. Though there is a vacancy in the pages of this volume from 77 to 80 inclusive, the book is perfect.

, a learned English divine, was born in Derbyshire in 1625, and in 1641 was admitted of Trinity college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1645, and according to his epitaph, seems to have been fellow of that college, as he was afterwards of Christ’s. In this last he took the degree of M. A. in 1649, and that of D. D. in 1660. His first preferment was in Lincolnshire, and he appears to have succeeded Dr. Josias Shute in the rectory of St. Mary Woolnoth, which he resigned in 1666. On July 30, 1669, he was installed archdeacon of Leicester, to which he was collated by Dr. William Fuller, bishop of Lincoln. In July 1670 he was also installed prebendary of Westminster, and was some time rector or minister of St. Margaret’s, Westminster. He died August 23, 1679, aged fifty-four, and was interred in Westminster abbey, where a monument was erected to his memory, with a Latin inscription. In this he is recorded as “a complete divine in all respects, a nervous and accurate writer, and an excellent and constant preacher.” It is also noticed that intense application to study brought on the stone, which at last proved fatal to him. He was an accomplished scholar in the Oriental languages, as appears by his excellent work “De Sacrifices,” Loud. 1677. This is divided into two books: in the first he treats of the origin of sacrifices; the places for sacrificing, and the tabernacle and temple of the Jews. His object is to defend the doctrine of vicarious punishment, and of piacular or expiatory sacrifices, in opposition to the Socinian notions. In the second book he treats of the priesthood of Christ; proves that Christ is a priest properly so called; that his sacrifice is an expiatory sacrifice, which takes away the sins of mankind; that his death is a vicarious punishment, or, that he suffered for, and in the stead of, sinful men, &c. &c. Some of his sermons having been surreptitiously printed, his relations selected twenty from his Mss. which were published by Dr. James Gardiner, afterwards bishop of Lincoln. Of these a second edition appeared in 1697, 8vo, with a preface by the editor, in which he gives a high character of Dr. Ovvtram. Baxter also speaks highly of him, Peck has published, in his “Desiderata,” a fragment of one of Dr. Owtram’s sermons.

, an eminent French mathematician, was descended from a family of Jewish extraction, but which had long been convertsto the Romish faith and some of whom had held considerable places in the parliaments of Provence. He was born at Boligneux, in Brescia, in 1640; and being a younger son, though his father had a good estate, it was thought proper to breed him to the church, that he might enjoy some small benefices which belonged to the family, to serve as a provision for him. Accordingly he studied divinity four years; but, on the death of his father, devoted himself entirely to the mathematics, to which he had always been strongly attached. Some mathematical books, which fell into his hands, first excited his curiosity; and by his extraordinary genius, without the aid of a master, he made so great a progress, that at the age of fifteen he wrote a treatise of that kind, of which, although it was not published, he inserted the principal parts in some of his subsequent works.

For a maintenance he first went to Lyons to teach the mathematics, in which he had considerable encouragement; and after some time his generous disposition procured him still better success elsewhere. Among his scholars were two foreigners, who expressing their uneasiness to him at being disappointed of some bills of exchange for a journey to Paris, he asked them how much would do, and being told 50 pistoles, he lent them the money immediately, even without their note for it. Upon their arrival at Paris, mentioning this generous action to M. Daguesseau, father of the chancellor, this magistrate was touched with it; and engaged them to invite Ozanam to Paris, with a promise of his favour. The opportunity was eagerly euibraced; and the business of teaching the mathematics here soon brought him in a considerable income: but he wanted prudence for some time to make the best use of it. He was young, handsome, and sprightly; and much aduicted both to gaming and gallantry, which continually drained his purse. Among others, he had a love intrigue with a woman, who lodged in the same house with him, and gave herself out for a person of condition. However, this expence in time led him to think of matrimony, and he soon after married a young woman without afortune, but for this defect she made amends by her modesty, virtue, and sweet temper; so that though the state of his purse was not amended, yet he experienced a long course of domestic happiness. He had twelve children by her, who all died young; and he was lastly rendered quite unhappy by the death of his wife also, which happened in 1701. Neither did this misfortune come single: for the war breaking out about the same time, on account of the Spanish succession, it swept away all his scholars, who, being foreigners, were obliged to leave Paris. Thus he sunk into a very melancholy state; under which, however, he received some relief, and amusement, from the honour of being admitted this same year an eleve of the royal academy of sciences.

We are told that he knew too much of astronomy to give into judicial astrology; and obstinately refused all that was offered him to engage him to calculate nativities. Once indeed he submitted to the importunity of a count of the empire, whom he had sufficiently warned not to believe him. He drew up by astronomy the scheme of his nativity, and then without employing the rules of astrology, foretold him all the instances of good fortune, which ca.ne into his head. The count at the same time procured his horoscope to be taken by a physician, who was greatly infatuated with astrology, and who followed exactly all the rules of that art. Twenty years after the count informed Mr. Ozanam, that all his predictions were come to pass, and that none of the physician’s had their effect. This account gave him a very different satisfaction from what was intended. The count thought to compliment him upon his skill in astrology, but it only served to confirm him in his opinion of the absurdity of that pretended science.

Ozanam was of a mild and calm disposition, a cheerful and pleasant temper, endeared by a generosity almost unparalleled. His manners were irreproachable after marriage; and he was sincerely pious, and zealously devout, though studiously avoiding to meddle in theological questions. He used to say, that it was the business of the Sorbonne to discuss, of the pope to decide, and of a mathematician to go straight to heaven in a perpendicular line. He wrote a great number of useful books; a list of which is as follows 1. “La Geometric-pratique, contenant la Trigonometric theorique & pratique, la Longimetrie, la Planimetrie, & la Stereometric,” Paris, 1684, 12mo., 2. “Tables des Sinus, Tangentes, & Secantes, & des Logarithmes des Sinus & des Tangentes, & des nombres depuis T unite jusqu'a dix mille, avec un traite de Trigonometric, par de nouvelles demonstrations & des pratiques tres faciles,” Paris, 1685, 8vo reprinted, with additions, in 1710. 3. “Traite des 'Lignes du premier genre, de la construction des equations, et des lieux Geometriques, expliquees par une methode nouveile & facile,” Paris, 1687, 4to. 4. “L‘usage du Compas de proportion, explique & demontre d’une maniere courte & facile, & augmente d'un Traite de la division des champs,” Paris, 1688, 8vo, reprinted in 1700. 5. “Usage de l'instrument universel pour resoudre promptement & tres-exactement tous les problemes de la Geometric- pratique sans aucun calcul,” Paris, 1688, 12mo; reprinted in 1700. 6. “Dictionaire Mathematique, ou Idee generale des Mathematiques,” Paris, 1690, 4to. 7. “Methode Generale pour tracer des Cadrans sur toutes sortes de plans,” Paris, 1673, 12mo, reprinted and enlarged in 1685. 8. “Cours de Mathematiques, qui comprend toutes les parties de cette science les plus utiles & les plus necessaires,” Paris, 1693, 5 vols. 8vo. 9. “Traite” 4e la Fortification, contenant les methodes anciennes & modernes pour la construction & defense des Places, & la maniere de les attaquer, expliquees plus au long qu‘elles n’on jusqu' a present,“Paris, 1694, 4to. 10.” Recreations Mathematiques & Physiques, qui contiennent plusieurs problemes utiles & agreables de PArithmetiquej de Geometric, d'Optique, de Gnomonique, de Cosmographie, de Mechanique, de Pyrotecnie, & de Physique, avec un Traite des Horloges elementaires,“Paris, 1694, 2 vols. 8vo. There was a new edition, with additions, at Paris, in 1724, 4 vols. 8vo; and in 1803, Dr. Hutton published a very enlarged edition, in 4 vols. 8vo, with Montucla’s and his own additions and improvements. 11.” Nouvelle Trigonometric, oil Ton trouve la maniere de calculer toutes sortes de Triangles rectilignes, sans les tables des Sinus, & aussi par les Tables des Sinus, avec un application de la Trigonometric a la mesure de Lignes droites accessibles & inaccessibles sur la terre,“Paris, 1699, 12mo. 12.” Methode facile pour arpenter ou mesurer toutes sortes de superficies, & pour toiser exactement la Ma^onnerie, les Vuidanges des terres, & tous les autres corps, avec le toise du bois de charpente, & un traite dela Separation des Terres,“Paris, 1699, 12mo; reprinted, with corrections, in 1725. 13.” Nouveaux Elemens d'Algebre, ou Principes generaux pour resoudre toutes sortes de problemes de Mathematiques,“Amsterdam, 1702, 8vo, Mr. Leibnitz, in the Journal des Savans of 1703, speaks thus of this work of our author:” Monsieur Ozanam’s Algebra seems to me greatly preferable to most of those which have been published a long time, and are only copies from Des Cartes and his commentators. I am well pleased that he has revived part of Vieta’s precepts, which deserve not to be forgotten.“14.” Les Elemens d'Euclide, par le P. Dechales. Nouvelle edition corrigee & augmentee,“Paris, 1709, in 12mo; reprinted in 1720. 15.” GeometriePratique du Pieur Boulanger, augmentee de plusieurs notes & d‘un Traite de l’Arithmetique par Geometric, par M. Ozanam,“Paris, 1691, 12mo. 16.” Traite de la Sphere du Monde, par Boulanger, revu, corrige*, & augmente, par M. Ozanam,“Paris, 12mo. 17.” La Perspective Theorique & Pratique, ou Ton enseigne la maniere de mettre toutes sortes d‘objets en perspective, & d’en representer les ombres causees par le Soleil, ou par une petite Lumiere,“Paris, 1711, 8vo. 18. * e Le Geographic & Cosmographie, qui traite de la Sphere, des Corps celestes, des differens Systmes du Monde, du Globe, & de ses usages,” Paris, 1711, 8vb. 19. In the Journal des Ssavans, our author has the following pieces I. “Demonstration de ce Theoreme que la somme ou la. difference de deux quarre”-quarrez ne peut etre un quarre-quarre,“Journal of May 20, 1680. II.” Response a un probleme propose“par M.'Comiers,” Journal of Nov. 17, 1681. III. “Demonstration d'un problSaie touchant les racines fausses imaginaires,” Journal of the 2d and 9th of April, 1685. IV. “Methode pour trouver en nombres la racine cubique, & la racme sursolide d'un binoine, quand ii y en a une,” Journal of April 9th, 1691. 20. In the “Me mo ires de Trevoux,” he has this piece, “Reponse aux principaux articles, qui sont dans le 23 Journal de Paris de Tan 1703, touchant la premiere partie de son Algebre,” inserted in the Me. noire* of December 1703, p. 2214. And lastly, in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences of 1707, he has Observations on a Problem of Spherical Trigonometry.

, a writer, to whose industry, if not to his genius, the world was at one time thought indebted, received the first rudiments of his education from Mr. Shaw, an excellent grammarian, and master of the free-school at Ashby de la Zouch, in Leicestershire. He afterwards completed his grammatical studies under the rev. Mr. Mountford, of Christ’s Hospital, where, having attained considerable knowledge of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, it was the intention of his friends to have sent him to the university of Cambridge, with a view to his being admitted into holy orders. But Mr. Ozell, averse to the confinement of a college-life, and perhaps disinclined to the clerical profession, and desirous of being sooner settled in the world than the regular course of academical gradations would permit, solicited and obtained an employment in a public office of accounts; with a view to which, he had taken previous care to qualify himself, by a most perfect knowledge of arithmetic in all its branches, and a greater degree of excellence in writing all the necessary hands. Notwithstanding, however, this grave attention to business, he still retained an inclination for, and an attention to, even polite literature, that could scarcely have been expected; and, by entering into much conversation with foreigners abroad, and a close application to reading at home, he made himself master of most of the living languages, especially the French, Italian, and Spanish, from all which, as well as from the Latin and Greek, he has favoured the world with many translations. Among these are Don Quixote, Rabelais, Fenelon on Learning, Vertot’s “Revolutions of Rome,” Nicole’s “Logic,” The Life of Veronica of Milan,“besides some parts of Rapin, Boileau, &c. &c. The only one which seems rather useful is his” Common Prayer, and Common Sense, in several places of the Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, French, Latin, and Greek Translations of the English Liturgy. Being a specimen of the manifold omissions, &c. in all, or most of the said translations, some of which were printed at Oxford, and the rest at Cambridge,“Lond. 1722, 8vo. For this he tells us, in his foolish advertisement hereafter mentioned, the bench of bishops gave him a purse of guineas. Ozell’s plays, though all translations, are very numerous, there being included in them a complete English version of the dramatic pieces of that justly celebrated French writer Moliere besides some others from Corneille, Racine, &c. the titles of which are to be found in the” Biographia Dramatica."

Mr. Ozell had the good fortune to escape all those vicissitudes and anxieties in regard to pecuniary circumstances which too frequently attend on men of literary abilities; for, besides that he was, from his earliest setting out in life, constantly in possession of very good places, having been for some years auditor-general of the city and bridge accounts, and, to the time of his decease, auditor of the accounts of St. Paul’s cathedral and St. Thomas’s Hospital, all of them posts of considerable emolument; a gentleman, who was a native of the same country with him, who had known him from a school-boy, and it is said lay under particular obligations to his family, dying when Mr. Ozell was in the very prime of life, left him such a fortune as would have been a competent support for him if he should at any time have chosen to retire from business entirely, which, however, it does not appear he ever did. He died Oct. 15, 1743, and was buried in the vault of a church belonging to the parish of St. Mary Aldermanbury; but in what year he was born, and consequently his age at the time of his death, are particulars that we do not find on record. Mr. Ozell was a man of application, but of no ta’ste or genius, yet acquired some reputation for his numerous translations, and would have deserved more had he confined his labours to serious works, where a reader may be content with a literal meaning; but it was his misfortune to undertake works of humour and fancy, which were qualities he seemed not to possess himself, and therefore could not do justice to in others. Moliere, particularly, is an author of that superior genius, that it would require abilities almost equal to his own to translate him in such a manner as to give him, in the clothing of our own language, the air and manner of a native.

Mr. Ozell, however, had a more exalted idea of his own abilities than the world was willing to allow them, for, on his being introduced by Mr. Pope into the “Dunciad” (for what cause, however, does not appear), he published a very extraordinary advertisement, signed with his name, in a paper called “The Weekly Medley,” Sept. 1729, in which he expresses his resentment, and at the same time draws a comparison, in his own favour, between Mr. Pope and himself, both with respect to learning and poetical genius. The advertisement at length may be seen in the notes to the “Dunciad.” But, says the author of his life, “though we cannot readily subscribe to this self-assumed preference, yet, as Mr. Coxeter informs us that his conversation was agreeable, and his knowledge of men and things considerable, and as it is probable that, with an understanding somewhat above the common rank, he possessed a considerable share of good-nature, we readily allow, that a person of this character might be much more amiable than one of a greater brilliancy of parts, if deficient in these good qualities.”

, or in Latin Pavius, a physician and anatomist, born at Amsterdam in 1564, was educated in medical studies at Leyden, whence he proceeded to Paris for farther improvement. He afterwards spent some time in Denmark, and at Rostock, where he received the degree of doctor in 1587, and at Padua. On his return to Leyden, he was appointed professor of medicine in 15S9, in which office he acquired the approbation and esteem both of the public and his colleagues, and died universally regretted, in August 1617, at the age of fifty-four. Anatomy and botany were the departments which he most ardently cultivated; and he was the founder of the botanic garden of Leyden. His works are, 1. “Tractatus de Exercitiis, Lacticim'is, et Bellariis.” Rost. 2. “Notse in Galen urn, de cibis boni et mali succi,” ibid. These two pieces appear to. have been his inaugural exercises. 3. “Hortus publi-, cus Academiae Lugduno-Batavae, ejus Ichnographia, descriptio, usus, &c.” Lugd. Bat. 1601. 4. “Primitioe Anatomicae de humani corporis Ossibus,” ibid. 1615. 5. “Succenturiatus Anatomicus, continens Commentaria in Hip-. pocratem de Capitis Vulneribus. Additae sunt Anuotationes in aliquot Capita Librioctavi C. Celsi,” ibid. 1616. 6. “Notae et Commentarii in Epitomen Anatomicum Aridresa Vesalii, ibid, 1616. To these we may add some works which appeared after his death. 7.” De Valvula Intestini Epistolaa du33.“Oppenheim, 1619, together with the first century of the Epistles of Fabric-ills Hildanus. 3.” De Peste Tractatus, cum Henrici Florentii additamentis.“Lug. Bat. 1636. 9.” Anatomicae Observationes selectiores.“Hafniae, 1657, inserted in the third and fourth centuries of the anatomical and medical histories of T. Bartholin. He also left in ms. a” Methodus Anatomica," which was in the library of M. de Vick of Amsterdam.

, a poet and orator, was born in the fourth century, at Drepanum in Aquitania, but, according to others, at Bourdeaux; or, according to Sidonius, at Agen. He discovered a remarkable taste for poetry from his youth; and Ausonius informs us, wrote love verses. Ausonius adds, that he was equal to Catullus, and surpassed all the Latin poets, except Virgil. Ausonius probably thought all this; for he certainly had a very high opinion of him, dedicated some of his own works to him, and paid the greatest deference to his judgment. Pacatus was sent to Rome in the year 388, to congratulate Theodosius the Great on his victory over the tyrant Maximus; and on this occasion he delivered a panegyric on the emperor in the senate house, for which he was rewarded, in the year 390, with theproconsulship of a province in Africa, and, in the year 393, with the office of superintendant of the imperial domain. We have no farther particulars of his life. None of his poems are extant, and the only proof of his talents to which we can appeal is his panegyric on Theodosius, the second part of which is the most interesting, and gives some curious historical facts. In style and manner he is thought to resemble Seneca or Pliny rather than Cicero. The best edition is that by Arntzenius, Amst. 1753, 4to.

, a learned Englishman, was born about 1432, at or near Winchester, as is generally supposed, and was educated at the charge of Thomas Langton, bishop of that diocese, who employed him, while a youth, as his amanuensis. The bishop, pleased with his proficiency, and particularly delighted with his early turn for music, which he thought an earnest of greater attainments, bestowed a pension on him sufficient to defray the expences of his education at Padua, at that time one of the most flourishing universities in Europe. Accordingly he studied there for some time, and met with Cuthbert Tonstall, afterwards bishop of Durham, and William Latimer, whom he called his preceptors. On his return, he studied for some time at Queen’s-college, Oxford, of which his patron Langton had been provost; and was soon after taken into the service of Dr. Christopher Bambridge, who succeeded Langton in the office of provost, and became afterwards a cardinal. He attended him to Rome, about the beginning of the sixteenth' century, and continued there until the cardinal’s death in 1514. He appears, before this, to have entered into holy orders, for in the beginning of this year, and while abroad, he was made prebendary of Bugthorp, in the church of York, in the room of Wolsey, afterwards the celebrated cardinal; and in May of the same year, was promoted to the archdeaconry of Dorset, on the resignation of his friend Langton, at which time, as Willis supposes, he resigned the prebend of Bugthorp.

On his return to. England, he was sent for to court, probably in consequence of the character given of him by his deceased patron, cardinal Bambridge; and became such a favourite with Henry VIII. that he appointed him, as some say, secretary of state, which Mr. Lodge doubts; but it seems certain, that he either held that, or the office of private secretary, or some confidential situation, under Henry, who employed him in affairs of high political importance. In 1515, he was sent to the court of Vienna, where the object of his embassy was to engage the emperor Maximilian to dispossess the French king Francis 1. of the duchy of Milan, his royal master being alarmed at the progress of the French arms in Italy. Pace succeeded in his negociation, so far as to persuade the emperor to undertake this expedition; and he also engaged some of the Swiss cantons to furnish him with troops; but the scheme was ultimately so unsuccessful that Maximilian was obliged to make peace with France. Pace, however, profited so much by his acquaintance with this emperor, as to acquire a/very useful knowledge of his character; and when he afterwards offered to resign his crown in favour of Henry VIII. he was enabled to give his sovereign the best advice, and to assure him, that Maximilian had no other design, by this apparently liberal offer, than to obtain another subsidy, and that, in other respects, very little credit was due to his word. In this opinion cardinal Wolsey, at home, seems to have concurred.

In 1519, Maximilian died, and the kings of France and Spain immediately declared themselves candidates for the Imperial throne. Henry, encouraged by the pope, was also induced to offer himself as a candidate, and Pace was ordered to attend the diet of the empire, sound the opinions of the electors, and endeavour to form a judgment of the likelihood of his success. Pace, however, soon discovered that his royal master had started too late, and that tven the electors of Mentz, Cologn, and Triers, who were disposed to favour his pretensions, pleaded, with a shew of regret, that they were pre-engaged. The election fell on Charles V. In 1516, Pace was instituted treasurer of Lichfield, which he resigned in 1522, on being made dean of Exeter. In 1511), he succeeded Colet as dean of St. Paul’s; and some say, held also the deanery of Sarum, but this is not quite clear, although he is called dean of Salisbury by Herbert, in his “Life and Reign of Henry VIII.” In 1521, he was made prebendary of Combe and Harnham, in the church of Sarum, and we find mention of some other church preferments he held from 1516 to 1522, but they are so dubiously related that it is difficult to give them in due order.

On the death of pope Leo X. when cardinal Wolsey’s ambition aimed at the papal throne, he sent Pace to Rome to promote his interest; but before his arrival there, Adrian, bishop of Tortosa, had been chosen: and on his death, in 1523, Pace was again employed to negotiate for Wolsey, but with no better success, Clement VII. being elected. He obtained, however, from the pope, an enlargement of Wolsey’s powers as legate, which the latter was at this time desirous to obtain. Pace was soon afterwards sent on an embassy to Venice, where he carried with him the. learned Lupset as his secretary. Wood declares that on this occasion “it is hard to say whether he procured more commendation or admiration among the Venetians; both for the dexterity of his wit, and especially for his singular promptness in the Italian tongue; wherein he seemed nothing inferior, neither to P. Vannes here in England, the king’s secretary for the Italian tongue, nor yet to any other, which were the best for that tongue in all Venice.”

It was at this time, however, that Pace fell under cardinal Wolsey’s displeasure; the effects of which are said to have been very serious. The cardinal is thought to have been enraged against him, first, because he had shewn a readiness to assist Charles duke of Bourbon with money, for whom the cardinal had no great affection: and, secondly, because he had not forwarded the cardinal’s design of obtaining the papal chair with so much zeal as Wblsey expected. Such are the reasons assigned by some historians for Wolsey’s displeasure, who is said to have ordered matters in such a manner, that for nearly the space of two years, Pace received no instructions from his court as to his proceedings at Venice; his allowance for expences was also withdrawn, and no answer returned to his letters. On one occasion, when the Venetian ambassador residing in London asked Wolsey whether he had any commands for the English ambassador at Venice, he answered Paceus decipit Begem: and this singular treatment, we are told, so affected Pace that he became insane. As soon as the king was informed of this, Pace was ordered home; and, being carefully attended by physicians at the king’s command, was restored in a short time to his senses, and amused himself by studying the Hebrew language, with the assistance of Robert Wakefield. In the interval, he was introduced to the king at Richmond, who expressed much satisfaction at his recovery; and admitted him to a private audience, in which he remonstrated against the cardinal’s cruelty to him. But the cardinal was too powerful at this time, and when urged by the king to answer the charge against him, he summoned Pace before him, and sat in judgment, with the duke of Norfolk and others, who condemned Pace, and sent him to the Tower of London; where he was confined for two years, till discharged at length by the king’s command. Pace, thus degraded, and depressed in body and mind, resigned his deanries of St. Paul and Exeter, a little before his death; and, retiring to Stepney for his health, died there, in 1532, when not quite fifty years of age.

There is an elegant and just character of him by Leland, written upon his return from Venice; and he certainly was much esteemed by the learned men of his time, especially by sir Thomas More and Erasmus. The latter admired Pace for his candour and sweetness of temper; and was so much afflicted at his misfortunes,that he could never forgive the man that caused them. He styles him utriusque literature calentissimus; and wrote more letters to him than to any one of his learned friends and correspondents. Stow gives him the character of a right worthy man, and one that gave in council faithful advice: learned he was also, says that antiquary, “and endowed with many excellent parts and gifts of nature; courteous, pleasant, and delighting ia music; highly in the king’s favour, and well heard in matters of weight.” There is extant a remarkable letter of his to the king, written in 1527, in which he very honestly gives his opinion concerning the divorce; and Fiddes observes, that he always used a faithful liberty to the cardinal, which brought him at last to confinement and distraction.

He wrote, 1. “De fructu qui ex doctrina percipitur liber.” Basil, 1517, dedicated to Dr. Colet. This was written by our author at Constance, while he was ambassador in Helvetia; but, inveighing much against drunkenness as a great obstacle to the attaining of knowledge, the people there supposing him to reflect upon them, wrote a sharp answer to it, and even Erasmus calls it an indiscreet performance; in which Pace had, between jest and earnest, represented him as a beggar, and a beggar hated by the clergy. He bids sir Thomas More exhort Pace, since he had so little judgment, rather to confine himself to the translation of Greek writers, than to venture upon works of his own, and to publish such mean and contemptible stuff. (Erasm. epist. 275, and Ep. 287). 2. “Oratio nuperrime composita de fcedere percusso inter Henricum Angliae regem, et Francorum reg. Christianiss. in aede Pauli Lond. habita,” 1518. 3. “Epistolse ad Erasmum,” &c. 1520. These Epistles are part of the “Epistolae aliquot eruditorum virorum.” 4. “Exemplum literarum ad regem Hen. VIII. an. 1526,” inserted in a piece entitled, “Syntagma de Hebraeorum codicum interpretatione,” by Robert Wakefield. Pace also wrote a book against the unlawful ness of the king’s marriage with Katharine, in 1527, and made several translations: among others, one from English into Latin, “Bishop Fisher’s Sermon,” preached at London on the day upon which the writings of M. Luther were publicly burnt, Camb. 1521, and a translation from Greek into Latin of Plutarch’s piece, “De commodo ex inimicis capiendo.”

, a Spanish artist, supposed to have been born in 1571, at Seville, is said by Mr. Fuseli, to owe his reputation more to theory, writing, and the celebrity of his scholars Cano and Velazquez, than to the superiority of his works. He was a pupil of Luis Feniandez, but, though partial to the great style, does not appear to have studied it in Italy. With sufficient correctness of outline, judgment in composition, dignity of characters, propriety of costume, observance of chiaroscuro and perspective, Pacheco displeases by want of colour, timidity of execution, and dryness of style. Seville possesses the best of his historic performances; of his numerous portraits, those of his wife and Miguel de Cervantes were the most praised. He possesses considerable erudition, and there is much wit and humour in his epigrams. He died in 1654. Of his works we know only one, entitled “Arte de la Pintura, su antiguedad y grandezas,” Seville, 1649, 4to.

, a celebrated abbot of Tabenna in Egypt, was born about the year 292, of heathen parents. He bore arms at the age of twenty, and was so touched with the charitable works of some Christians, that he returned to Thebais when the war ended, and embraced Christianity. He afterwards placed himself under the direction of a solitary named Palemon, and made so astonishing a progress in religion with this excellent master, that he became founder of the monastery of Tabenna, on the banks of the Nile, peopled Thebais with holy solitaries, and had above 5000 monks under his care. His sister founded a convent of nuns on the other side of the Nile, who lived in a community, and practised great austerities. St. Pachomius died May 3, 348. We have some of his “Epistles” remaining, a “Rule,” and some other pieces in the library of the fathers. M. Arnauld D'Andilly has, translated a life of him into French, which may be found among those of the fathers of the desert.

, an eminent Greek, flourished about 1280, under the reign of Michael Paleologus, and Andronicus his successor. He was a person of high birth r and had acquired no less knowledge in church-affairs in the great posts he had among the clergy of Constantinople, than of state-matters in the high employments he held m the court of the emperor; so that his “History of Michael Paleologus and Andronicus” is the more esteemed, as he was not only an eye-witness of the affairs of which he writes, but had also a great share in them. This history was published by Poussines, a Jesuit, Gr. et Lat. “ex intorpr. et cum not. P. Possini,” Rome, 1666—69, 2 vols. fol. Pachymera composed also some Greek verses; but they were little esteemed, and never printed. Brucker mentions a compendium of the Aristotelian philosophy published from his manuscripts; and Tilman published his paraphrase on the epistles of Dionysius the Areopagite, “Georgii Pachymerae Paraphrasis in decem epistolas bead Dionysii Areopagitæ,” Paris, 1538.

, antiquary and librarian to the duke of Parma, and historiographer of the order of Malta, was born at Turin, Nov. 13, 1710. After studying in the university of Turin, he took the religious habit in the order of the Theatins, at Venice, and then went to Bologna to study mathematics and natural philosophy under the celebrated Beccari. It appears that he began his subsequent literary career with the last-mentioned pursuit; and that as soon as he had attained the higher orders, he was appointed professor of philosophy in the college of Genoa; and was one of those who first dared, to explode, from the schools of Italy, the old rooted prejudices of fantastic systems, and to substitute for them the eternal truths discovered by Newton. He did not, however, long remain in the professorship of philosophy, at Genoa, but quitted philosophy for divinity, and devoted ten years to preaching and the composition of sermons, by neither of which he acquired much reputation; but within this period he published some orations, his “Treatise on the Antiquities of Hipa Transone,” the ancient Cupra; and three years after, his “Explanation of an ancient engraved Stone.”

The precise date of Father Paciaudi’s most meritorious labours may be properly fixed at 1747, the thirty-sixth of kis life; and, from that time to 1760, he was seen almost in a state of continual preregrination at Naples, at Florence, at Venice, and at Rome. In the first of these cities, during the years 1747, 48, and 49, he published a learned “Dissertation on a Statue of Mercury,” in 4to; “ObserTations on some foreign and odd Coins,” likewise in 4to and, “A Series of Medals representing the most remarkable Events of the Government of Malta,” in folio. At Florence appeared in 1750, in 4to, his “Treatise on the ancient Crosses and Holy Monuments which are found at iui” at Venice, in the same year, his unrivalled work, “De sacris Christianorum Balneis” and at Rome, from 1751 to 1756, no less than eight volumes in 4to, containing as many different works, issued from his pen; the best of which was accounted the treatise “De Athletarum Cubistesi.” His position, in this disquisition, was, that the Greeks, though they placed dancing in the same rank as the military march, considered it as an art tending to regulate, adjust, and beautify the movements of the body, and divided it into four genera according to its various application to religious ceremonies, warlike exercises, theatrical performances, and domestic enjoyments; yet the cubistic art, whose object is to teach jumping and uncommon corporeal exertions, although perfectly known, was never held in great estimation in ancient Greece.

The year 1757 is perhaps the most remarkable in Paciaudi’s literary life; that being the period in which he entered into a correspondence with count Cayius, and began to supply him with numberless heads of valuable information for his “Recueii d' Antiquity’s.” Paciaudi may, in fact, be considered if not one of the authors, at least as a contributor to that work. And his letters, which were published in 1802 at Paris, are a proof of the ample share of fame to which he is entitled in this respect. This correspondence was carried on for eight years, from 1757 to 1765. But neither were Paciaudi’s powers confined to it alone, nor was he without further employments during that period It was then (in 1761) that he published his capital work “Monumenta Peloponnesia,” in 2 vols. 4to, containing a complete illustration of those celebrated statues, busts, bas-reliefs, and sepulchral stones, which, from the continent and the islands of Peloponnesus, had been removed to Venice, and which formed a part of the numerous collection of antiquities possessed by the illustrious family of Nani, in that metropolis. Then too it was that he received from the celebrated Parmesan minister Tillot, the invitation to go to Parma to superintend the erection of the library which had been projected by his royal highness the Infant Don Philip.

From a confidential declaration to count Cayius, it appears, that Mr Paciaudi was highly satisfied with his employment. He considered it as an opportunity of rendering useful his extensive erudition, without those inconveniencies which attend the necessary intercourse with the world. He therefore engaged in the business with a zeal bordering on enthusiasm. Besides the acquisition which he made of the excellent library of count Pertusati at Home, in 1762, he went to Paris in search of other books; and such was his exertion, that, in less than six years, he collected more than sixty thousand volumes of the best xvorks of every kind, and thus erected one of the most copious libraries in Italy. He also compiled such an excellent “Catalogue raisonne*e” of its articles as deserves to be adopted as a model by all who are at the head of large bibliographical establishments.

Whilst he was thus active in the organization of the library, he received additional honours and commissions from the royal court of Parma. In 1763 he was appointed antiquary to his royal highness, and director of the excavations which, under the authority of government, had been undertaken in the ancient town of Velleja, situated in the Parmesan dominions; and in 1767, on the expulsion of the Jesuits, he was declared “president of studies,” with the power of new modelling as he thought proper, the whole system of public instruction throughout the state. In this new organization of studies he displayed the same spirit of order by which he had been already distinguished in the formation of the library. He endeavoured to arrange the different subjects in the minds of his pupils as he had formerly classified the books upon the different shelves.

Notwithstanding so many signal services to the court of Parma, Paciaudi fell a victim to mean intrigues, and lost the favour of his sovereign. He had been intimately connected with the minister who then happened to be disgraced, and was in some measure involved in the same misfortune. He forfeited his places. But, conscious of his own integrity, he did not choose to leave Parma, and patiently waited for the transit of the storm. His innocence being soon ascertained, he was restored to his several functions, and to the good opinion of the prince. He made, however, of this favourable event, the best use that a prudent man could do; he endeavoured to secure himself against a similar misfortune in future, by soliciting permission to retire to his native country; and this “voluntary exile,” says M. Dacier, in the eulogy of Paciaudi, “banished the last remains of suspicion against him. Nothing was now remembered but his merit and his zeal: his loss was severely felt; and the most engaging solicitations were made to him to resume his functions. In vain did he plead in excuse his advanced age, and the necessity of repose; his excuses were not admitted, and he was finally obliged to return to Parma.”

The literary establishments which had been formed by him in that place, did not then require so much of his attention and care, as to prevent him from indulging himself in other pursuits. He therefore conceived the plan of a general biography of the grand masters of the order of Malta. In 1749, when he published, at Naples, the series of medals concerning the government of Malta, he had received from the grand master, Pinto, the place of historiographer of the order; but his uninterrupted labours in other pursuits had prevented him, for nearly thirty years, from directing his attention to that great object, the most interesting, perhaps, in the religious and military history of the middle ages. At last he devoted to it some of his latter years, and, in 1780, published from the unrivalled press of Bodoni, of Parma, his “Memorie de Gran Maestri,” &c. or “Memoirs of the Grand Masters of the Holy Military Order of Jerusalem,” in 3 vols. 4to. This publication contains only the history of the first century of the order, and consequently, not more than the lives of its founder and of the first ten grand masters. It would have been continued, if the author had not, soon after its appearance, fallen into that languor, which generally attends long labours and old age, and which accompanied him till his death, which took place on the 2d of February 1785, in the 75th year of his age.

Mr. Paciaudi was an excellent man: religious, disinterested, and cordial; and although not without personal vanity, and often chargeable with severity of criticism on his antagonists, was always kind and polite, beloved by the great, consulted by the learned, and esteemed by people of every description. He was intimately connected with the greatest literary men of his age, among whom, besides Caylus, it is sufficient to mention the illustrious Winkelmann, and the author of the Travels of Anacharsis, to whom he stood indebted for the academical honours which he received at Paris.

, an eminent lawyer and philosopher, called Pacius de Beriga, from the name of a country seat belonging to his father’s family, near Vicenza, was born at the latter city in 1550. His parents bestowed every pains on his education, and he is said to have made such progress in his first studies as to have composed a treatise on arithmetic at the age of thirteen. For farther proficiency he was sent to Padua, with his brother Fabius, who afterwards became a physician of eminence, and is mentioned with great honour by the medical biographers. Julius, after taking his degree of doctor in law, returned to his own country, where, in the course of his extensive reading, he became acquainted with the sentiments of the reformers, and concealed his attachment to them with so little care, that he was menaced by the horrors of the inquisition, from which he escaped to Geneva. This step being attended with the Joss of his property, he gained a livelihood for some lime by teaching youth, until his character becoming known, he was encouraged to give lectures on civil Jaw, which he did for ten years with great success and reputation. At Geneva also he married a lady whose family had fled from Lncca for the cause of religion, and had a family of ten children by her.

In 1585 he accepted the offer of the law professorship at Heidelberg, which he held lor ten years, and then removed to Sedan, where he taught logic for some time; but the war which took place induced him to return again to Geneva, and thence to Nismes, where he was appointed principal of the college. His next settlement, which he hoped would have been final, was at Montpellier, where he was made regius professor of law, and where he certainly acquired a high reputation, and brought together from all parts a numerous concourse of students, among whom was the celebrated Peiresc, who induced him to return to the Roman catholic religion. After various changes of place, however, he fixed at last at Valence in Dauphinl, where he died in 1635, at the age of eightyfive. His principal works were, 1. “Corpus Juris Civilis,” Geneva, 1580, fol. 2. “Consuetudines Feudorum,” ibid. 1580, fol. 3. “Justiniani Imperatoris institutionum Libri quatuor,” &c. ibid. fol. 4. “Aristotelis Organum, hoc est libri omnes ad logicam pertimntes, Gr. et Lat.” Morgiis, 1584, 8vo, reprinted in 1592, and at Francfort in 1598, which is the best edition of what is reckoned a very valuable translation of the Aristotelian logic. 5. “Sapientissimi Curopalatae de officialibus Palatii Constantinopolitani, et officiis magnae ecclesiae libellus, Or et Lat.” Htidelberg, 1588, 8vo. This was published by Codinus. Pacius only supplied the ms. from his library 6. “Aristotelis naturalis auscultationis libri octo.” Gr. and Lat. Francfort, 1596, 8vo. 7. “Aristotelis de anima libri tres, Gr. et Lat.” ibid. 1596, 8vo. 8. “Aristotelis de Ccelo libri quatuor,” &c. Gr. et Lat. ibid. 1601, 8vo. 9. “Doctrina Peripatetica tomi tres,” Aureliae Allobrogum (Geneva) 1606, 4to. Niceron enumerates various other works which he published, some of a temporary kind, and some compiled for the use of students; but the above appear to have contributed most to the reputation he enjoyed.

, an English poetical and miscellaneous writer, the son of John Pack, of Stoke- Ash, in Suffolk, who, in 1697 was high sheriff of that county, was born about 1680. He was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, whence, at the age of sixteen, he removed to St. John’s college, Oxford, and remained there two years, at the end of which his father entered him of the Middle Temple, intending him for the profession of the law. His proficiency, as a law student, must have appeared in a very favourable light to the benchers of this honourable society, as he was at eight terms standing admitted barrister, when he was not much above twenty years of age. But habits of study and application to business not agreeing either with his health or inclination, he went into the army, and his first command, which he obtained in March 1705, was that of a company of foot. He served afterwards abroad under general Stanhope, and the duke of Argyle, who for his distinguished bravery promoted him to the rank of major, and ever after honoured him with his patronage and friendship. Some of the best of major Pack’s effusions were in celebration of his grace’s character, at a time when there was a jealousy between him and the du.ke of Marlborough. The major died at Aberdeen in Sept. 1728, where his regiment happened then to be quartered. He published first a miscellany of poems in 1718, dedicated to colonel Stanhope, which sold rapidly, and when it came to a second edition was enlarged by some prose pieces. In 1719 he published the “Life of Pomponius Atticus,” with remarks addressed to the duke of Aygyle; in 1720, “Religion and Philosophy, a Tale;” and in 1725, a “New Collection” of poetical miscellanies, to which he prefixed the “Lives of Miltiades and Cymon,” from Cornelius Nepos. His “Whole Works” were afterwards collected and published in one vol. 8vo, 1729. In all he discovers considerable taste, vivacity, and learning. His connections, as well as his principles, appear to have been of the superior cast.

, a Latin tragic poet, was a native of Brindisi, the ancient Brundusium, and nephew to Ennius. He flourished at Rome about 154 B. C. According to his last biographer, he was held in high esteem by C. Lelius, and particularly by Cicero, who affirmed him to be superior to Sophocles in his tragedy of “Niptra,” and classed“him in the first rank of tragic poets. They are said likewise to have looked upon every one as an enemy to Roman literature who had temerity enough to despise his tragedies, particularly his” Antiope.“We have nothing, however, of his works left except some fragments in Maittaire’s” Corpus Poetarum." Pacuvius was a painter also, as well as a poet; and Pliny speaks of one of his pictures which was placed in the temple of Hercules, and was admired by the connoisseurs of those times. He died at Tarentum, when beyond his ninetieth year. He wrote his own epitaph, which is preserved in Aulus Gellius. Annibale di Leo, who was also born at Brindisi, published in 1764 a dissertation on his life and writings, in order to do honour to his native place, which certainly would not have been less honoured if he had omitted to tell us that among the eminent men of Brindisi, was M. Lenius Strabo, the first inventor of bird-cages.

, an eminent French mathematician, was born at Avignon, in Provence, March 3, 1604, and entered the army at fourteen, for which he had been educated with extraordinary care. Ir> 1620 he was engaged at the siege of Caen, in the battle of the bridge of Ce, and other exploits, in which he signalized himself, and acquired a reputation above his years. He was present, in 1G21, at the siege of St. John d'Angeli, as also at that of Clerac and Montauban, where he lost his left eye by a musket-shot. At this siege he had another loss, which he felt with no less sensibility, viz. that of the constable of Luynes, who died there of a scarlet fever. The constable was a near relation to him, and had been his patron at court. He did not, however, sink under his misfortune, but on the contrary seemed to acquire fresh energy from the reflection that he must now trust solely to himself. Accordingly, there was after this time, no siege, battle, or any other occasion, in which he did not signalize himself by some effort of courage and conduct. At the passage of the Alps, and the barricade of Suza, he put himself at the head of the forlorn hope, consisting of the bravest youths among the guards; and undertook to arrive the first at the attack by a private way which was extremely dangerous; but, having gained the top of a very steep mountain, he cried out to his followers, “See the way to glory!” and sliding down the mountain, his companions followed him, and coming first to the attack, as they wished to do, immediately began a furious assault; and when the army came up to their support, forced the barricades. He had afterwards the pleasure of standing on the left hand of the king when his majesty related this heroic action to the duke of Savoy, with extraordinary commendations, in the presence of a very full court. When the king laid siege to Nancy in 1633, our hero had the honour to attend his sovereign in drawing the lines and forts of circumvallation. In 1642 his majesty sent him to the service in Portugal, in the post of field-marshal; but that year he had the misfortune to lose his eye-sight.

Disabled now from public service, he re-assumed, with greater vigour than ever, the study of the mathematics and fortification; and, in 1645, gave to the public his “Treatise of Fortification.” It was allowed by all who understood the science, that nothing superior had then appeared on that subject; and, whatever improvements have been made since, they have been derived in a manner from this treatise, as conclusions from their principles. In 1651 he published his “Geometrical. Theorems,” which shew a perfect knowledge of all parts of the mathematics. In 1655 he printed a paraphrase, in French, of the “Account,” in Spanish, “of the River of the Amazons,” by father de Rennes, a Jesuit; and we are assured, that blind as he was, yet he drew the chart of that river, and the parts adjacent, which is seen in this work. Of this work an English translation was published by W. Hamilton in 1661, 3vo.

In 1657 he published “The Theory of the Planets; cleared from that multiplicity of eccentric circles and epicycles, which the astronomers had invented to explain their motions.” This distinguished him among the astronomers, as much as his work on fortification did among the engineers; and he printed, in 1658, his “Astronomical Tables,” which are very succinct and plain. But, as few great men are without their foible, that of Pagan was a prejudice in favour of judicial astrology; and, though he is more reserved than most others, yet what he wrote upon that subject must not be classed among those productions which do honour to his understanding. He was beloved and visited by all persons illustrious for rank, as well as science; and his house was the rendezvous of all the polite and worthy both in city and court. He died at Paris, Nov. 18, 1665, having never been married. The king ordered his first physician to attend him in his illness, and gave several marks of the extraordinary esteem which he had for his merit.

His character is that of an universal genius; and, having turned himself entirely to the art of war, and particularly to the branch of fortification, he made extraordinary progress in it. He understood mathematics, not only better than is usual for a gentleman whose view is to rise in the army, but even to a degree of perfection above that of the ordinary masters who teach that science. He had so particular a genius for this kind of learning, that he obtained it more readily by meditation than by reading, and accordingly spent less time on mathematical books than he did in those of history and geography. He had also made morality and politics his particular study; so that he may be said to have drawn his own character in his “Homme Hero'ique,” and to have been one of the completes! gentlemen of his time. Louis XIII. was heard to say several times, that the count de Pagan was one of the most worthy, most adroit, and most valiant men in his kingdom. That branch of his family which removed from Naples to France in 1552, became extinct in his person.

, an English divine, was born in 1590, at Harrow on the Hill, Middlesex, and entered of Baliol College, Oxford, in 1606. Here he took his degrees in arts, and in 1619 was chosen fellow of All Souls. In 1629, by the interest of Laud, he succeeded Dr. Denison, as master of the free school of Reading. In 1634 he was admitted D. D. but ten years after was deprived of his school by the parliamentary commissioners for Berkshire. He held, however, the rectory of East Locking in that county, to which he had been presented by his college, until his death, which happened Feb. 14, 1663, at the rectory -house. He was buried in the chancel of his own church. At the restoration he had obtained a writ of restitution to the school, which was publicly read, he being present, as appears by the diary of the corporation; but, after some debate it was carried that Mr. Singleton, the then master, should have notice before an answer was resolved upon; and it appears that Mr. Singleton was confirmed in the place, being the sixth person who held it after Page.

Dr. Page was thought well versed in the Greek fathers, an able disputant, and a good preacher. He wrote “A Treatise of justification of Bowing at the name of Jesus, by way of answer to an appendix against it,” Oxford, 1631, 4to; and an “Examination of such considerable reasons as are made by Mr. Prynne in a reply to Mr. Widdowes concerning the same argument,” printed with the former. The fate of this publication was somewhat singular. The point in dispute was at this time eagerly contested. Archbishop Abbot did not think it of sufficient importance to be allowed to disturb the peace of the church, and, by his secretary, advised Dr. Page to withdraw his work from the press, if already in it. Laud, on the contrary, who was then bishop of London, ordered it to be printed, viewing the question as,a matter of importance, it being a defence of a canon of the church; and it accordingly appeared. Dr. Page was also the author of “Certain animadversions upon some passages in a Tract concerning Schism and Schismatics,” by Mr. Hales of Eton, Oxon. 1642, 4to; “The Peace Maker, or a brief motive to unity and charity in Religion,' 1 Loud. 1652, I6mo; a single sermon, and a translation of Thomas a Kempis, 1639, 12mo, with a large epistle to the reader. Wood mentions” Jus Fratrum, or the Law of Brethren," but is doubtful whether this belongs to our Dr. Page, or to Dr. Samuel Page, vicar of Deptford, who died in 1630, and was the author of some pious tracts. It belongs, however, to neither, but to a John Page, probably a lawyer, as the subject is the power 6f parents in disposing of their estates to their children.

, a famous Cordelier, and one of the ablest critics of his time, was born at Rognes, a small town in Provence, March 31, 1624. He took the monk’s habit in the convent of the Cordeliers at Aries, and professed himself there in 1641. After he had finished the usual course of studies in philosophy and divinity, he preached some time, and was at length made four times provincial of his order. These occupations did not hinder him from applying to chronology and ecclesiastical history, in which he excelled. He printed in the Journal des Savans, Nov. 11, 1686, a learned “Dissertation upon the Consular Office,” in which he pretends to have discovered the rules, according to which the Roman emperors took the dignity of consul at some certain times more than others, but in this he is not thought to have been successful. His most considerable work is “A Critique upon the Annals of Baronius;” in which he has rectified an infinite number of mistakes, both in chronology and in facts. He published the first volume of this work, containing the first four centuries, at Paris, in 1689; with a dedication to the clergy of France, who allowed him a pension. The whole work was printed after his death, in four volumes, folio, at Geneva, in 1705, by the care of his nephew, father Francis Pagi, of the same order. It is carried to the year 1198, where Baronius ends. Pagi was greatly assisted in it by the abbe* Longuerue, who also wrote the eloge of our author, which is prefixed to the Geneva edition. Another edition was published at Geneva in 1727. It is a work of great utility, but the author’s chronology of the popes of the first three centuries is not approved by the learned. He has also prefixed a piece concerning a new chronological period, which he calls “Graeco-Romana,” and uses for adjusting all the different epochas, which is not without its inconveniences. Our author wrote some other works of inferior note before his death, at Aix, in Provence, June 7, 1699. His character is that of 'a very able historian, and a learned and candid critic. His style has all the simplicity and plainness which suits a chronological narration. He held a correspondence with several learned men, as Stillingfleet, Spanheim, Cuper, Dodwell, the cardinal Noris, &c.

, nephew of the preceding, was born at Lambesc in Provence Sept. 7, 1654. The extraordinary inclination that appeared in his infancy for polite learning induced his parents to send him to study, among the priests of the oratory, at Toulon; where he soon made so great a proficiency, that his uncle, Anthony Pagi, sent for him to Aix, where he then resided. The conversation of hip uncle inspired him with a desire of devoting himself to the church, and accordingly he entered into the order of the Cordeliers, and made his profession. After having taught philosophy in several convents, he desired to return to his uncle at Aix; and, having obtained leave, remained studying under his directions for several years and assisted him in his “Critique upon Baronius’s Annals” of which, as we have mentioned in the preceding article, he became the editor. Father Francis afterwards laid the plan of another work, which he published under the title “Breviarium Historicochronologico-criticum, illustriofa pontificum Romanorum gesta, conciliorum generalium acta, nee non complura turn sacrorum rituum, turn antiquae ecclesiae discipline, capita complectens,” 4 vols. 4to, 1717, &c. In this he discovers the most bigoted zeal for the Ultramontane theology, and every thing which exalts the authority of the pope. A long illness, brought on by a fall, prevented his finishing the last volume, which was not published until 1727, six years after his death, which took place Jan. 21, 1721.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Mr. Paine, your opinions, by a large portion of the community, have been treated with deference you have never been in the habit of mixing in your conversation words of course: you have never indulged in the practice of profane swearing: you must be sensible that we are acquainted with your religious opinions as they are given to the world. What must we think of your present conduct? Why do you call upon Jesus Christ to help you? Do you believe that he can help you? Do you believe in the divinity of Jesns Christ? Come now, answer me honestly; I want an answer as from the lips of a dying man, for I verily believe that you will not live twenty-four hours/ I waited some time at the end of every question; he did not answer, but ceased to exclaim in the above manner. Again I addressed him c Mr. Paine, you have not answered my questions; will you answer them Allow me to ask again, do you believe or let me qualify the question, do you wish to believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God‘ After a pause of some minutes, he answered, ’ I have no wish to believe on that subject.' I then left him, and know not whether he afterwards spoke to any person, on any subject, though he lived, as I before observed, till the morning of the 8th.

“Such conduct, under usual circumstances, I conceive absolutely unaccountable, though with diffidence I would remark, riot so much so in the present instance; for though the first necessary and general result of conviction be a sincere wish to atone for evil committed, yet it may be a question worthy of able consideration whether excessive pride of opinion, consummate vanity, and inordinate self-love, might not prevent or retard that otherwise natural consequence?”

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

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

What he calls “the principles of society, acting upon the nature and convluct of man,” are sufficient of themselves, according to his simple theory, to produce and perpetuate all the happiness and order of civilized life. Government is only imposition disguising oppression, and protecting wrongful accumulation. The dignity of human nature, in its lowest forms, is thus flattered by the discovery that the beggar and the felon have justice on their side while the one petitions for, aqd the other enforces, the restitution of his original rights. What hungry reprobate does not relish the proposition, that it is government which debauches the purity of our morals, and brings in passion over reason, by a sort of usurpation, to perplex the simplicity of God’s appointments? Philosophy must not be insulted by opposing her polished weapons to this? beggarly sophistry. There is one short and simple aphorism of common sense by which the whole of his theory is abundantly answered; and it is this, “Government is not made for men as they ought to be, but for men as they are; not for their possible perfection, but for their practical indigence.” This answer is co-extensive with the whole work of Mr. Paine upon the rights of man. It demolishes the whole fabric of his treacherous system. It dispels at once the clumsy fiction of his barbarous Utopia.

In perusing a man’s writings, a picture of the author himself is sometimes insensibly drawn in the imagination of the reader. By the perusal of the works of Thomas Paine, a most disgusting idea is presented to our thoughts both of the man and his manners. This idea is completely verified by the account which Mr. Cheetham has given us of his person and deportment. The paintings of Zeuxis attained a sort of ideal perfection by combining the scattered excellencies of the human countenance to conceive the countenance, or the mind, of Mr. Thomas Paine, now that death has withdrawn the living model, we must condense into an imaginary focus all the offensiveness and malignity that are dispersed throughout actual existence. Mr. Cheetham seems to have no hostility towards the man, and to be disposed to draw no inferences against him but what fairly arise from the facts. We may add too, that his facts appear to be collected from very credible sources of intelligence; from persons with whom Paine passed great part of his existence; and who, though not appearing to have much intercourse together, agree in the substance of their communications on this subject.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The rest of his masses appeared in the following order; Lib. iii. Romas per Valerium Doricum, 1570, in folio, Ven. 1599; Lib. iv. Venet. per Ang. Gardanum, 1582, quarto; Lib. v. Romae, 1590; Lib. vi. Ven. 1596; Lib. vii. 1594; Lib. viii. and ix. Ven. 1599; Lib. x. and xi. Ven, 1600; and lib. xii. without date, or name of the printer. Besides this regular order of publication, these masses were reprinted in different forms and collections, during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, in most of the principal cities of Italy. The next division of Palestrina’s works consists of Motets for five, six, seven, and eight voices, five books, at Rome and Venice, 1569, 1588, 1589, 1596, and 1601. Motets for four voices, lib. i. Romae, 1590; Lib. ii. Venet. 1604; Two books of Offertorij, a 5 and a 6 voc. Romge, 1593; Lamentationi, a 4 voc. Romae, 1588; Hymns for five voices, Ven. 1598; Litanie, a 4, Ven. 1600; Magnificat, 8 tomum. Romae, 191; Madrigali Spirituali, two books, Rome and Venice, 1594.

To the above ample list of the works of this great and fertile composer, are to be added “La Cantica di Salomone,” a 5; two other books of “Magnificats,” a 4, 5, and 6 voc. One of “Lamentationi,” a 5; and another of secular Madrigals. These have been printed in miscellaneous publications after the author’s death and there still remain in the papal chapel, inedited, another mass, with his “Missa Defunctorum,” and upwards of twenty motets, chiefly for eight voices, a due cori. Nothing more interesting remains to be related of Palestrina, than that most of his admirable productions still subsist. Few of his admirers are indeed possessed of the first editions, or of all his works complete, in printer manuscript; yet curious and diligent collectors in Italy can still, with little difficulty, furnish themselves with a considerable number of these models of counterpoint and ecclesiastical gravity. The best church compositions since his time have been proverbially called alia Palestrina.

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

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

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

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

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

comes a public teacher; and the of Morals,“1800, ahd” , Annotations

thought liable to objection. In 1789, Principles of Moral and Political PhiMr. Gisborne published strictures on it, losophy," 1801. All these deserve

under the title of “The Principles of the attention of the readers of Paley. Moral Philosophy investigated.” His Sunday afternoons. There is no part of his character more justly entitled to respect than the active and zealous discharge of his professional duties, and his even enlarging them, as in this instance, when he thought it would be for the benefit of his flock. While officiating as examining chaplain to the bishop of Carlisle, he caused a new edition to be published of Collyer’s “Sacred Interpreter,” a work which he recommended to candidates for deacon’s orders. In 1788, he joined to his other meritorious labours, an effort in favour of the abolition of the slave trade, and corresponded with Mr. Clarkson and the committee whose endeavours have been since crowned with success.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Being at length summoned by his father to return to Berlin, he quitted London with regret in the latter end of April 1762, and repaired to Harwich in order to embark for Holland. Being there fortunately detained some days by contrary winds, he embraced that opportunity of examining the sea-coast, and collecting a variety of marine productions. On the 13th of May he landed in Holland, and passing through the Hague, Leyden, and Amsterdam, he continued his route through the Circle of Westphalia, and arrived at Berlin on the 12th of June.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

He published, besides some occasional sermons, 1. “Prayers for the use of families and persons in private; with a preface, containing a brief view of the argument for prayer,” 1773, 12mo. There has been a second edition of these prayers, which are much admired by those who call themselves rational dissenters. 2. “Free thoughts on the inconsistency of conforming to any religious test, as a condition of Toleration, with the true principle of Protestant Dissent,” 1779. 3. “Observations in defence of the Liberty of Man, as a moral agent; in answer to Dr. Priestley’s Illustrations of Philosophical Necessity,” 1779, 8vo. As the doctor replied to it, “In defence of the Illustrations of Philosophical Necessity,” Mr. Palmer published, 4. “An Appendix to the Observations in defence of the Liberty of Man, as a moral agent, &c.” 1780, 8vo. The controversy terminated with “A second Letter to the rev. John Palmer,” by Dr. Priestley. 5. “A summary view of the grounds of Christian Baptism; with a more particular reference to the baptism of infants; containing remarks, argumentative and critical, in explanation and defence of the rite. To which is added, a form of service made use of on such occasions,” 8vo.

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

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

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

Palomino may be considered as the Vasari of Spain; as copious, as credulous, as negligent of dates; too garrulous for energy, and too indefinite for the delineation of character, but eminently useful with the emendations of modern and more accurate biographers. His work is divided into three parts, theoretic, practic, and biographic. The two first bear one title, “El Museo pictorico y escala optica,” 1715, 2 vols. folio. The third part, distinguished by that of “El Parnaso Espannol Pintoresco laureado, &c. Tomo Tercero, Madrid,” 1724, though, perhaps, only intended as an appendix to the two former, is by far the most important and interesting. Palomino died in 1726.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

, a very eminent Greek of Alexandria, flourished, according to Suidas, under the emperor Theodosius the Great, from the year 379 to* 395, and acquired deserved fame as a consummate mathematician. Many of his works are lost, or at least have not yet been discovered. Suidas and Vossius mention as the principal of them, his “Mathematical Collections,” in 8 books, of which the first and part of the second are lost; a “Commentary upon Ptolomy’s Almagest;” an “Universal Chorography;” “A Description of the Rivers of Libya;” a treatise or' “Military Engines;” “Commentaries upon Aristarchus of Samos, concerning the Magnitude and Distance of the Sun and Moon,” &c. Of these, there have been published, “The Mathematical Collections,” in a Latin translation, with a large commentary, by Commandine, in 1588, folio; reprinted in 1660. In 1644, Mersenne exhibited an abridgment of them in his <c Synopsis JVIathematica,“in 4to, containing only such propositions as could be understood without figure*. In 1655, Meibomius gave some of the Lemmata of the seventh book, in his” Dialogue upon Proportions.“In 1688, Dr. Wallis printed the last twelve propositions of the second book, at the end of his” Aristarchus Samius.“In 1703, Dr. David Gregory gave part of the preface of the seventh book, in the Prolegomena to his Euclid. And in 1706, Dr. Halley exhibited that preface entire, in the beginning of his” Apollonius." Dr. Ilutton, in his Dictionary, has given an excellent analysis of the “Mathematical Collections.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pardies wrote with great neatness and elegance. His principal works are as follow 1. “Horologmm Thaumaticum duplex,” 1662, 4to. 2. “Dissertatio de Motu et Natura Cometarum,” 1665, 8vo. 3. “Discours du Mouvement Local,” 1670, 12mo. 4. “Eiemens de Geometric,” 1670, 12mo. This has been translated into several languages in English by Dr. Harris, in 1711. 5. “Discours de la Connoissance des Betes,” 1672, 12mo. 6. “Lettre d'un Philosophe a un Cartesien de ses amis,” 1672, 12mo. 7. “La Statique ou la Science des Forces Mouvantes,” 1673, 12mo. 8. “Description et Explication de deux Machines propres a faire des Cadrans avec une grande faciliteY' 1673, 12mo. 9.” Remarques du Mouvement de la Lumiere.“10.” Globi Ccelestis in tabula plana redacti Descriptio," 1675, folio. Part of his works were printed together, at the Hague, 1691, 12mo; and again at Lyons, 1725. Pardies had a dispute also with sir Isaac Newton, about his new theory of light and colours, in 1672. His letters are inserted in the Philosophical Transactions for that year.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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