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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. Parkhurst’s first wife died in 1759, leaving him a daughter, now the widow of the rev. James Altham, and two sons, both since dead. In 1761 he married again Milicent Northey, daughter of Thomas Northey, esq. by whom he had the daughter, Mrs. Thomas, whom we have already mentioned. This lady having received, under the immediate inspection of her learned and pious father, an education of the first order, acquired a degree of classical knowledge rarely to be met with in the female world. She wrote a very affectionate memorial of her father’s worth, which is engraven over his remains in Epsom church. Her mother, the second Mrs. Parkhurst, died in 1800.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Philosophy is two-fold, that which follows the report of the senses, and that which is according to reason and truth. The former treaty of the appearances of sensible objects, the latter considers the abstract nature of things, and inquires into the constitution of the universe. Abstract philosophy teaches that from nothing nothing can proceed. The universe is one, immoveable, immutable, eternal, and of a spherical form. Whatever is not comprehended in the universe, has no real existence. Nothing in nature is either produced or destroyed, but merely appears to be so to the senses. Physical philosophy teaches that the principles of things are heat and cold, or fire and earth, of which the former is the efficient, the latter the material cause; that the earth is spherical, and placed in the center, being exactly balanced by its distance from the heavens, so that there is no cause why it should move one way rather than another; that the first men were produced from mud, by the action of heat upon cold; that the frame of the world is liable to decay, but the universe itself remains the same; and that the chief seat of the soul is the heart. Brucker adds, that there is a near resemblance between the metaphysical doctrine of Parmenides and Xenophanes, but that Parmenides adhered more strictly to the Pythagorean doctrine. Telesius revived the doctrine of Parmenides in the sixteenth century.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thus, for instance, as Mr. Gee remarks in his introduction to the Jesuit’s memorial, Parsons treated with the duke of Guise to erect a seminary for such a purpose in Normandy; and he now prevailed with Philip II. to extend these foundations in Spain: so that in a short time they could boast not only of their seminaries at Rome and Rheims, but of those at Valladolid, Seville, and St. Lucar in Spain, at Lisbon in Portugal, and at Douay and St. Omers in Flanders. In all these, their youth were educated with the strongest prejudices against their country, and their minds formed to all the purposes that Parsons had in his head. Among other favourite objects, he obliged them to subscribe to the right of the Infanta of Spain to the crown of England, and defended this position in his “Conference about the next succession to that crown,” which went so far as to assert the lawfulness of deposing queen Elizabeth. The secular priests likewise inform us, that, after the defeat of his designs to dethrone that queen, while he stayed in England, he consulted with the duke of Guise in France upon the same subject; and endeavoured to make a list of catholics, who, under the conduct of the duke, were to change the state of England, upon pretence of supporting the title of Mary queen of Scots.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The celebrated Menage, in that collection called “Menagiana,” selects the two following passages in the writings of M. Pascal, for the acute observations they contain: “Those minds which are capable of invention are very scarce. Those to whom this power is denied, being much the greater number, are of course the prevailing party; insomuch, that when works of invention come forward, to claim the praise due to their authors, the public opinion treats them as visionaries.” And again, “It seems rather a fortunate circumstance, that some common error should fix the wanderings of the human mind. For instance, the moon is supposed to influence the disorders of the human body, and to cause a change in human affairs, &c. which notion, though it be false, is not without its advantage; as men are thereby restrained from an inquiry into things to which the human understanding is incompetent, and from a kind of curiosity which is a malady of the mind.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

His family consisted of three sons, Crispin, William, and Simon, and a daughter Magdalen, all of whom, except perhaps the first, attained considerable fame in their father’s art. William and Simon resided some time in England, and executed many portraits in the English series, but particulars of their lives are unknown.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In one of them, dated Sept. y, 1665, he says, “I suppose you think I intend to stay here still: though I understand by your question, you would not have me. But, my friend, what am I better than another? Somebody must be here; and is it fit I should set such a value upon myself as my going away, and leaving another, will sigm'fy? For it will, in effect, be to say, that I am too good to be lost; but it is no matter if another be. Truly, I do not think myself so considerable to the world: and though my friends set a great price upon me, yet that temptation hath not yet made me of their mind: and I know their love makes me passe for more with them than I am worth. When I mention that word, love, I confess, it moves me much, and I have a great passion for them, and wish I might live to embrace them once again; but i must not take any undue courses to satisfy tins passion, which is but too strong in me. I must let reason prevaile, and stay with my charge, which I take hitherto to be my duty, whatever come. I cannot tell what good we do their souls: though I preach to those who are well, and write to those who are ill (I mean, print little papers for them, which yet are too big to send you by the post): but I am sure, while I stay here, I shall do good to their bodies; and, perhaps, save some from perishing; which I look upon as a considerable end of my continuing. My dear friend, do not take it ill, that I cannot comply with your desires in this thing: you see what sways me, and I know you will yeild to it, and say, it ought to be stronger than the love of you. If you can convince me, that I may, with a good conscience, go, you may think it will be acceptable; but I know not upon what grounds you will make it good. Try, if you have a mind.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ægineta’s principal works are, 1. “Salubria de sanitate tuenda priecepta,” Argent. 1511, 8vo. 2. “De re medica libri septem,” Greek, Venice, 1528, fol. and often reprinted both in Greek, Latin, and other languages, with commentaries. 3. “De crisi et diebus criticis, eorumqufc ignis,” Basil. 1529, 8vo. He appears to have been particularly skilful in the disorders of the female sex, and is the first in antiquity who deserves the title of accoucheur.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The work by which Peacham is best known is his “Complete Gentleman,” a 4to volume, printed in 1622, and reprinted in 1627, 1634, 1654, and 1661. This last edition received some improvements in the heraldic part from Thomas Blount, author of the “Jocular Tenures.” It treats of “nobilitie in gencrall; of dignitie and necessitie of learning in princes and nobilitie; the time of learning; the dutie of parents in their children’s education; of a gentleman’s carriage in the universitie; of style in speaking, writing, and reading history; of cosmography; of memorable observation in the survey of the earth; of geometry; of poetry; of musicke; of statues and medalls; of drawing and painting in oyle; of sundry blazonnes both ancient and modern; of armory or blazing armes; of exercise of body of reputation and carriage; of travaile; of warre; of fishing”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

teney arose in 1124, at an interview very nearly forty years, and till the

S‘. Martin’s church, and gradually in the heuie of lords as carl of Ba’.h, ld, I shall come to his estate, being his eldest son, which will enable me to resign my vicarage; and the profits of the deanry alone, with my father’s estate, will make me quite contented.' The archbishop smiled, and said, " Well, if you will not help yourself, your friends must do it for you.' Accordingly he spoke to the earl of Bath, and they two agreed to try what they could do to make the dean of Winchester a bishop.

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

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

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

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

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

Being now disengaged from his deanry, bishop Pearce seemed to consider himself as freed from half his burthen, and with such vigour as time had left him, and such alacrity as hope continued to supply, he prosecuted his episcopal functions and private studies. It redounds greatly to his honour, that in the disposal of ecclesiastical preferments, he never gave occasion to censure, except in the single instance of a young man*, on whom he bestowed the valuable rectory of Stone, in consideration of his being great grandson of his first patron, the earl of Macclesfield, whose favours, conferred forty years before, his gratitude did not suffer him to forget.

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

Bishop Pearce married, in Feb. 22, the daughter of Mr. Adams, an eminent distiller in Holborn, with a considerable fortune, and lived with her upwards of fifty-one years in the highest degree of connubial happiness. Their children all dying young, he made his brother William Pearce, esq. his heir and executor. He bequeathed his library to the dean and chapter of Westminster, except such books as they already had. His manuscripts, with the books not left to Westminster, and the copy-right of all his works, except the Longinus sold to Mr. Tonson, he gave to his chaplain, the rev. John Derby. Besides some legacies to individuals, and some to various public charities, he left a noble bequest of five thousand pounds Old South Sea Annuities, towards the better support of the twenty widows of clergymen, who are maintained in the college of Bromley, the funds of which had become too seamy for that kind of genteel provision intended by the founder, bishop Warner. Bishop Pearce’s benefaction raised the widow’s pensions to 30l. per ann. and the chaplain’s salary to 60l. His heir, William Pearce, esq. who died in 1782, left a reversionary legacy of 12,Ooo/. for the purpose of building ten houses for clergymen’s widows, in addition to bishop Warner’s college, and endowing them. This legacy falling in a few years ago, the houses were completed in 1802.

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

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

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

Dr. Pearce published in his life-time nine occasional sermons, a discourse against self-murder, which is now in the list of tracts distributed by the Society for promoting Christian knowledge; and soon after the publication of his “Commentary,” his editor gave the public a collee-r tion of the bishop’s “Sermons on various subjects,” 4 vols, 8vo. Besides what 'have been already specified, our author published in 1720, a pamphlet entitled “An Account of Trinity college, Cambridge;” and in 1722, “A Letter to the Clergy of the Church of England,” on occasion of the bishop of Rochester’s commitment to the Tower. He had also a short controversy with Dr. Middleton, against whom he published “Two Letters,” and fully convicted that writer of disingenuousness in quotation. His editor, Mr. Derby, who had married his neice, did not long suryive his benefactor, dying Oct. 8, 1778, only five days after the date of his dedication of the bishop’s “Sermons.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the way of his profession, Dr. Pegge published, in 1739, a pamphlet on a controversy excited by Dr. Sykes, entitled “The Inquiry into the meaning of Demoniacs in the New Testament; in a Letter to the author,” 8vo. He afterwards published two occasional sermons, and three small tracts for the use of his flock, which he distributed among them gratis, on the subjects of confirmation, the church catechism, and the Lord’s Prayer. The late Dr. Farmer attributed to Dr. Pegge, a pamphlet printed in 1731, and entitled “Remarks on the Miscellaneous Observations upon Authors ancient and modern. In several letters to a Friend.” A short address to the reader says, that “These letters are now made public, in order to stop the career, and to curb the insolence, of those Goths and Vandals the minor critics of the age, the Marklands, the Wades, and the Observators.” From this we should suppose the work to be ironical.

Dr. Pegge left many Mss. a considerable part of which are in the possession of his grandson. While vicar of Godmersham, he collected a good deal relative to the college at Wye, in that neighbourhood, which he thought of publishing, and engraved the seal, before engraved in Lewis’s seals. He had “Extracts from the rental of the royal manor of Wye, made about 1430, in the hands of Daniel earl of Winchelsea;” and “Copy of a survey and rental of the college, in the possession of sir Windham Knatchbull, 1739.” He possessed also a ms “Lexicon Xenophonticum” by himself; a Greek Lexicon in ms.; an “English Historical Dictionary,” in 6 vols. foi. a French and Italian, a Latin, a British and Saxon one, in one volume each all corrected by his notes a “Glossarium Generate” two volumes of collections in English history; collections for the city and church of Lincoln, now in Mr. Gough’s library at Oxford; a “Monasticon Cantianuin,” 2 vols. folio; and various other ms collections, which afford striking proofs of unwearied industry, zeal, and judgment.

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

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

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

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

Having now spent almost three years in Italy, he returned to France in the end of 1602, and arrived at Montpellier in July, where he heard the law lectures of Julius P.K in", until he returned to Aix, about the end of J 603, at the earnest request of his uncle, who having resigned to him his senatorial dignity, had, ever since the beginning of the year, laboured to get the king’s patent. The degree of doctor of law being a necessary qualification for that dignity, Peiresc kept the usual exercise, and took that degree Jan, 18, 1604; on which occasion he made a most learned speech, upon the origin and antiquity of the doctoral ornaments.

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

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

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

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

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

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

These letters were answered by Innocent in the year 417, who coincided in sentiment with his correspondents, and anathematized all who said that the grace of God is. not necessary to good works; and judged them unworthy qf the communion of the church. In answer to the five African bishops, who had written to him on his being suspected of favouring Pelagianisui, he says, “He can neither affirm nor deny, that there are Pelagians in Rome; because, if there are any, they take care to conceal themselves, and are not discovered in so great a multitude of people.” He adds, speaking of Pelagius, “We cannot believe he has been justified, notwithstanding that some laymen have brought to us acts by which he pretends to have been absolved. But we doubt the authenticity of these acts, because they have not been sent us by the council, and we have not received any letters from those who assisted at it. For if Pelagius could have relied on his justification, he could not have failed to have obliged his judges to acquaint us with it; and even in these acts he has not justified himself clearly, but has only sought to evade and perplex matters. We can neither approve, nor blame this decision. If Pelagius pretends he has nothing to fear, it is not our business to send for him, but rather his to make haste to come and get himself absolved. For if he still continues to entertain the same sentiments, whatever letters he may receive, he will never venture to expose himself to our sentence. If he is to be summoned, that ought rather to be done by those who are nearest to him. We have perused the book said to be written by him, which you sent us. We have found in it many propositions against the grace of God, many blasphemies, nothing that pleased us, and hardly any thing but what displeased us, and ought to be rejected by all the world.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dr. Pell invented the method of ranging the several steps of an algebraical calculus, in a proper order, in so many distinct lines, with the number affixed to each step, and a short description of the operation or process in the line. He also invented some mathematical characters.

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

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

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

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

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