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

By his first wife, daughter of Henry Spencer, earl of Sunderland, he had a son William, who succeeded him; and by a second wife, the daughter of William Pierrepoint, second son of Robert earl of Kingston, he had a daughter Gertrude, who was married to Philip Stanhope, third earl of Chesterfield, and was mother to the celebrated earl, who, says Maty, may be perhaps justly compared to his grandfather in extent of capacity, fertility of genius, and brilliancy of wit. They both, adds he, distinguished themselves in parliament by their eloquence; at court, by their knowledge of the world; in company, by their art of pleasing. They were both very useful to their sovereigns, though not much attached either to the prerogative or to the person of any king. They both knew, humoured, and despised the different parties. The Epicurean philosophy was their common study. William, the second marquis of Halitax, died in 1699, when the dignity became extinct in his family, but was revived in 1700 in the person of Charles Montague. The -marquis William left three daughters Anne, married to Charles Bruce, earl of Aylesbury Dorothy, to Richard Boyle, the last earl of Burlington; and Mary, to Sackville Tuftou, earl of Thanet. George,: marquis of Halifax, was the author of some tracts, written with considerable spirit and elegance. Besides his “Character of a Trimmer,” he wrote “Advice to a Daughter;” “The Anatomy of an Equivalent;” “A Letter to a Dissenter, upon his Majesty’s laie Glorious Declaration of Indulgences;” “A rough Draught of a new Model at Sea, in 1694;” “Maxims of State.” Ah which were printed together after his death; and the third edition came out in 1717, 8vo. Since these, /there was alsa published under his name, “The Character of king Charles the Second to which is subjoined, Maxims of State, &c,” 1750, 8vo. “Character of Bishop Burnet,” printed at the end of his “History of his own Times;” “Historical Observations upon the Reigns of Edward I. II. III. and Richard II. with Remarks upon their faithful Counsellors and false Favourites,” 1689. He also left memoirs of his own times* from a journal which he kept every day of all the conversations which he had with Charles II. and the most distinguished men of his time. Of these memoirs two fair copies were made, one of which fell into the hands of Daniel earl, of Nottingham, and was destroyed by him. The other devolved on the marquis’s grand-daughter, lady Burlington, in whose possession it long remained; but Pope, as the late lord Orford informed Mr. Mai one, finding, on a perusal of these memoirs, that the papists of those days were represented in an unfavourable light, prevailed on her to burn them; and thus the public have been deprived of probably a curious and valuable work.

, a most learned man, and a great benefactor to the learning of his country, was the son of Henry Savile of Bradley, in the township of Stainland, in the parish of Halifax, Yorkshire, by Ellen, daughter of Robert Ramsden. He was born at Bradley, Nov. 30, 1549, and first entered of Brasen-nose college, Oxford, whence he was elected to Merton-college in 1561, where he took the degrees in arts, and was chosen fellow. When he proceeded master of arts in 1570, he read for that degree on the Almagest of Ptolemy, which procured him the reputation of a man wonderfully skilled in mathematics and the Greek language; in the former of which, he voluntarily read a public lecture in the university for some time. Having now great interest, he was elected proctor for two years together, 1575 and 1576, an honour not very common, for as the proctors were then chosen out of the whole body of the university, by the doctors and masters, and the election was not, as now, confined to particular colleges, none but men of learning, and such as had considerable interest, durst aspire to that honour. In 1578 he visited the continent, became acquainted with various learned foreigners, and obtained many valuable Mss. or copies of them. He is said to have returned a man of high accomplishment*, and was made tutor in the Greek tongue to queen Elizabeth, or, as it is otherwise expressed, he read Greek and mathematics with her majesty, who had a great esteem for him. In 1585 he was made warden of Mertoncollege, which he governed six and thirty years with great credit, and greatly raised its reputation for learning, by a judicious patronage of students most distinguished for talents and industry. In 1596, he was chosen provost of Eton-college, of which society also he increased the fame by rilling it with the most learned men, among whom was the ever-memorable John Hales. It is said, however, that he incurred some odium among the younger scholars by his severity, and his dislike of those who were thought sprightly wi s. He used to say, “Give me the plodding student. If I would look for wits, I would go to Newgate, there be the wits.” John Earte, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, was the only scholar he ever accepted on the recommendation of being a wit. James 1. upon his accession to the crown of England, expressed a particular regard for him, and would have preferred him either in church or state; but sir Henry declined it, and only accepted the honour of knighthood from his majesty at Windsor on Sept. 21, 1604. His only son dying about that time, he devoted his fortune entirely to the promoting of learning. In 1619 he founded two lectures, or professorships, one in geometry, the other in astronomy, in the university of Oxford; which he endowed each with a salary of 160l. a year, besides a legacy of 600l. for purchasing more lands for the same use. In the preamble of the deed, by which a salary was annexed to these two professorships, it is expressly said that “geometry was almost totally unknown and abandoned in England.” Briggs was his first professor of geometry; but Aubrey says, on the authority of bishop Ward, that he first sent for Gunter for that purpose, who, coming with his sector and quadrant, “fell to resolving of triangles and doing a great many fine things. Said the grave knight, ‘ Do you call this reading of Geometric This is shewing of tricks, man,’ and so dismissed him with scorne, and sent for Brings.” Sir Henry also furnished a library with mathematical hooks near the mathematical school, for the use of his professors; and gave 100l. to the mathematical chest of his own appointing; adding afterwards a legacy of 4C/. a year to the same chest, to the university and to his professors jointly. He likewise gave 120l. towards the new-building of the schools; several rare manuscripts and printed books to the Bodleian library; and a good quantity of matrices and Greek types to the printingpress at Oxford. Part of the endowment of the professorships was the manor of Little Hays in Essex. He died, at Eton -college, Feb. 19, 1621-2, and was buried in the chapel there, on the south side of the communion table, near the body of his son Henry, with an inscription on a black marble stone. The university of Oxford paid him the greatest honours, by having a public speech and verses made in his praise, which were published soon after in 4to, under the title of “Ultima Linea Savilii,” and a sumptuous honorary monument was erected to his memory on the south wall, at the upper end of the choir of Merton- college chapel. Sir Henry Savile, by universal consent, ranks among the most learned men of his time, and the most liberal patrons of learning; and with great justice the highest encomiums are bestowed on him by all the learned of his time: by Isaac Casaubon, Mercerus, Meibomius, Joseph Scaliger, and especially the learned bishop Montagu; who, in his “Diatribes” upon Selden’s “History of Tithes,” styles him “that magazine of learning, whose memory shall be honourable amongst not only the learned, but the righteous for ever.”

We have already mentioned several noble instances of his munificence to the republic of letters: and his works exhibit equal zeal for the promotion of literature. In 1581, he published an English version of, 1. “Four Books of the Histories of Cornelius Tacitus, and the Life of Agricola; with notes upon them,” folio, dedicated to queen Elizabeth. The notes were esteemed so valuable as to be translated into Latin by Isaac Gruter, and published at Amsterdam, 1649, in 12mo, to which Gruter subjoined a treatise of our author, published ia 1598, under the title, 2. “A View of certain Military Matters, or commentaries concerning Roman Warfare;” which, soon after its first appearance, was translated into Latin by Marquardus Freherus, and printed at Heidelberg in 1601, but having become exceeding scarce, was reprinted by Gruter. In 1596, he published a collection of the best ancient writers of our English history, entitled, 3. “Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores post Bedain praecipui, ex vetustissimis codicibus nunc primum in lucem editi:” to which he added chronological tables at the end, from Julius Caesar to the coming in of William the Conqueror. This was reprinted at Francfort in 1601, which edition has a complete index to it. The collection contains William of Malmsbury’s history of the kings of England, and the lives of the English bishops; the histories of Henry of Huntingdon the annals of Roger de Hoveden the chronicle of Ethelvverd, and the history of Ingulphus with a dedication to queen Elizabeth, &c. Wharton, in the preface to his “Anglia Sacra,” objects only to Malmsbury’s history, which he says was printed from an incorrect ms. 4. He undertook and finished an edition, most beautifully printed, of “St. Chrysostom’s Works” in Greek, printed in 1613, 8 vols. folio. In the preface, he says, “that, having himself visited, about twelve years before, all the public and private libraries in Britain, and copied out thence whatever he thought useful to his design, he then sent some learned men into France, Germany, Italy, and the East; to transcribe such parts as he had not already, and to collate the others with the best manuscripts.” At the same time, he makes his acknowledgment to several great men for their assistance; as Thuanus, Velserus, Schottus, Isaac Casaubon, Fronto Duca3us, Janus Gruterus, Hoeschelius, &c. In the eighth volume are inserted sir Henry Savile’s own notes, with those of the learned John Bois, Thomas Allen, Andrew Downes, and other learned men. The whole charge of this edition, including the several sums paid to learned men, at home and abroad, employed in finding out, transcribing, and collating, the best manuscripts, is said to have amounted to no less than 8000l.; but, as soon as it was finished, the bishops and clergy of France employed, somewhat unfairly, as has been said, Fronton Due, or Fronto Ducaeus, who was a learned Jesuit, to reprint it at Paris, in 10 vols. folio, with a Latin translation, which lessened the price of sir Henry’s edition; yet we are told, that the thousand copies which he printed were all sold*. In 1618, he published a Latin work, written by Thomas Bradwarclin, abp. of Canterbury, against Pelagius, entitled, 5. “De Causa Dei contra Pelagium, et de virtute causarum;” to which he prefixed the life of Bradwardin. This book was printed from six Mss. carefully collated. 6. “Nazianzen’s Steliteutics,” 1610. Towards this, says Oldys, he was favoured with the ms epistles of Nazianzen out of the Bod* leian library, “which was a singular courtesy, and done because of his affection to the storing and preserving of the library,” as if any thing could have been refused to such a benefactor. 7. “Xenophon’s Institution of Cyrus,” Gr. 1613, 4to. In 1621, he published a collection of his own mathematical lectures. 8. <: Praelectiones Tredecim in principium Elementorum Euclidis Oxoniae habitae,“4to. 9.” Oratio coram Elizabetha Regina Oxonice hahita, anno 1592,“Oxon. 1658, 4to; published by Dr. Barlow from the original in the Bodleian library, and by Dr. Lamphire, in the second edition of *' Monarchia Britannica,” Oxford, 1681, 8vo. 10. He translated into Latin king James’s 46 Apology for the Oath of Allegiance.“Six letters of his, written to Hugo Blotius, and Sebastian Tenguagelius, keepers of the imperial library, were published in Lambecius’s” Bibliotheca,“vol. III.; four are printed among” Camdeni fcpistolae,“and others are in the Cotton and, Harleian Mss. He was also concerned in the new translation of the Bible, executed by command of James I. being one of the eight persons at Oxford who undertook to translate the four Gospels, Acts, and Revelations. He left behind him several Mss. some of which are now in the Bodleian library, such as 1.” Orations.“2.” Tract of the original of Monasteries.“3.” Tract concerning the Union of England and Scotland, written at the command of king James I.' 1 He wrote notes likewise upon the margin of many books in his library, particularly of Eusebius’s

* This work required such long and before Chrysostom was finished, when

book too, and then you would a little would be a great pity, for he was one

standing by, replied, “.You must then apostles’ times;” with which she was,

change every year“which answer dis- not do it for all the world.” pleased her. The same lady, a little “Ecclesiastical History,” which were afterwards used, and thankfully acknowledged, by Valesius, in his edition of that work in 1659. He is mentioned as a member of the society of Antiquaries, in the introduction to the “Archseologia,” and indeed there was no literary honour at that time of which he was not worthy.

He had a younger brother, Thomas Savile, who was admitted probationer-fellow of Merton college, Oxford, in 1580; afterwards travelled abroad into several countries; upon his return, was chosen fellow of Eton college; and died at London in 1592-3, whence his body was removed to Oxford, and interred with great solemnity in the choir of Merton college chapel. He was a man of great learning, and an intimate friend of Camden; among whose letters there are fifteen of Mr. Savile' s to him.

There was another Henry Savile, related to the above family, and familiarly called Long Harry Savile, who entered a student of Merton college in 1587, during the wardenship of sir Henry, and was soon after made one of the portionists, commonly called postmasters. After taking the degree of B. A. he left Merton college, and removed to St. Alban-hall, where in 1595, he took the degree of M. A. Under the inspection of his learned kinsman, he became an eminent scholar, especially in the mathematics, physic (in which faculty he was admitted by the university to practise), chemistry, painting, heraldry, and antiquities. Afterwards, in order to extend his knowledge, he travelled into Italy, France, and Germany, where he greatly improved, himself He is said to have written several things, but non$ have been published. He gave Camden the ancient copy of ^sser Menevensis, which he published in 1602, and which contains the legendary story of the discord between the new scholars which Grimbald brought with him to Oxford, at the restoration of the university by king Alfred, &c. This Henry Savile lived some years after his return from the continent, in the parish of St. Martin’s in the Fields, London, and dying there April 29, 1617, aged forty-nine, was buried in the chancel belonging to the parish church, where was a monument to his memory. Among the Cotton Mss. is a letter from him to Camden, “concerning antiquities near Otley in Yorkshire.”

There still remains one of this family to be noticed, sir John Savile, elder brother to sir Henry, who was born at Bradley in 1545, and entered a commoner of Brasenose college about 1561, whence, without taking a degree, he went to the Middle Temple for the study of the law. Being called to the bar, he became autumn reader of that house in 1586, steward of the lordship of Waken“eld, serjeant at law in 1594, one of the barons of the exchequer in 1598, and at the same time one of the justices of assize. In July 1603, a little before his coronation, king James conferred the honour of knighthood on him, being one of the judges who were to attend that solemnity. He died at London, Feb. 2, 1606, aged sixty-one, and was buried at St. Dunstan’s church, Fleet-street, but his heart was buried in Methley church, Yorkshire, where is a monument to his memory, erected by his son. Camden acknowledges the assistance he received from sir John Savile in his historical labours. He left at his death several pieces fit for publication, but none have appeared, except” Reports of divers cases in the courts of common pleas and exchequer, from 22 to 3 6Elizabeth," a thin folio, printed first in 1675, and again in 1688.

, a celebrated Italian monk, was born at Ferrara in 1452. In 1466 he became a Dominican at Bologna, and afterwards preached at Florence, but with very little success, and left the place. In 1489 he was invited by Lorenzo de Medici to return to Florence, where he became a very popular preacher. By pretensions to superior sanctity, and by a fervid eloquence, he hurried away the feelings of his hearers, and gained an ascendancy over their minds by his prophecies, which were directed both against church and state. Having by these means acquired a powerful influence, he began to despise the patronage of Lorenzo, and avoided his presence. After the death of Lorenzo, he placed himself at the head of a popular party in Florence, who aimed at the establishment of a free constitution. Savonarola seems to have promised them something between a republic and a theocracy. By such means his party became very formidable; and to flatter them yet more, he denounced terrible judgments to the court of Rome, and to the rest of the Italian states. In 1498 many complaints having been carried to Rome, in which he was accused of having reproached, in his sermons, the conduct of that court and the vices of the clergy, he was publicly excommunicated, which at first he regarded so far as to abstain from preaching, but finding that silence was considered as submission, and would ruin his cause, he resumed his function, and renewed his invectives against the pope and the court of Rome. But when the pope Alexander threatened to interdict the city, the magistrates commanded him to desist from preaching. At length he procured the assistance of a friar of his own convent, named Fra. Domenico da Pescia, who proposed to confirm his master’s doctrines by the ordeal of xvalking through the flames, provided any one of their adversaries would do the same. The challenge was accepted by a Franciscan friar, and a day was appointed for the trial. Savonarola, finding that the adverse party were not to be intimidated, proposed that Domenico should be allowed to carry the host with him into the fire. This was exclaimed against by the whole assembly as an impious and sacrilegious proposal. It was, however, insisted upon by Domenico, who thereby eluded the ordeal. But the result was fatal to the credit of Savonarola, who was deserted by the populace, apprehended and dragged to prison, and condemned to be first strangled and then burnt, which sentence was put into execution on the 23d of May, 1498.

Various opinions have been entertained of this man’s real character. Some of the friends of liberty and protestantism have considered him as a man who had elevated views and good intentions, though perverted by a spirit of fanaticism; and there seems no reason to doubt that he was really a friend to the liberty of Florence, and felt an honest indignation at the profligacy of the court of Rome, and the corruption of the catholic church. For these last reasons, some have even admitted him among the reformers and martyrs. But his title to this honour seems very questionable, and the character of a leader of a party is as discernible in his conduct as that of a reformer. There are a great number of his sermons remaining, and other works in Latin and Italian, most of them on religious subjects. His life, inserted in Bates’ s “Vitse Selectorum,” was written in Latin by John Francis Picus de Mirandola, prince of Concordia. Queti published an edition of it, to which he added notes, with the Latin translation of some of Savonarola’s works, and a list of them.

, an eminent lawyer in the seventeenth century, was a member of Magdalen college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of M.A. in 1655,. and was the same year admitted ad eundem at Oxford. He was afterwards a benefactor to the library of his college. After studying law at the Inner Temple, he was admitted to the bar, and had a large share of practice fit London, and on the Oxford circuit. In 1661 he was knighted, and in Feb. 1680, was appointedattorney-general, As a lawyer he formed himself after the lord chief justice Hale, under whom he practised, and of whom he was a just admirer. Like that excellent person, he was a man of general learning, and, according to Granger, of an integrity that nothing could corrupt; but bishop Burnet represents him as a dull hot man, and forward to serve all the designs of the court. Had this been always the case, however, king James would not have dismissed him from the office of attorney general, which he did in 1687, because he perceived that sir Robert could not have been prevailed upon to njould the laws to such purposes as were never intended by the legislatureOn the other hand, Granger allows that he was justly censured for his harsh treatment of lord Russel on his trial, and it is certain that he supported some of king James’s arbitrary measures, being the manager in depriving the city of London of its charter. At the time of the revolution, he sat as member of parliament for the university of Cambridge, and was expelled the house for being concerned, as attorney-general, in the prosecution of sir Thomas Armstrong, who was executed for being one of the conspirators in the Rye-house plot. In the next sessions he was re-chosen, and appears to have sat quietly for the remainder of his life. He died in 1692, at Highclear in Hampshire, where he had an estate, and rebuilt the parish church. His only daughter married the earl of Pembroke, and died in 1706. Under his name, and those of Heneage Finch, sir George Treby, and Henry Pollexfen, were published in 1690, folio, “Pleadings and arguments with other proceedings in the court of king’s bench upon the Quo Warranto, touching the charter of the city of London, with the judgment entered thereupon.”

, a celebrated commander, was born October 19, 1696, at Dresden, and was the natural son of Frederick Augustus If. king of Poland, and Aurora, countess of Konigsinarc. He gave evident proofs of his taste for military affairs from his childhood; was taught to read and write with the utmost difficulty; nor could he ever be prevailed upon to study a few ho irs in the morning, otherwise than by a promise that he should ride on horseback in the afternoon. He liked to have Frenchmen about him, for which reason their language was the only foreign one which he willingly learnt grammatically. He attended the elector in all his military expeditions; was at the siege of Lisle in 1708, when only twelve years old, and mounted the trenches several times both at the city and at the fortress, in sight of the king, his father, who admired his intrepidity. Nor did he discover less courage at the siege of Tournay, the year following, where he twice narrowly escaped death; and at the buttle of Malplaquet, far from being shocked by the dreadful carnage which attended the engagement, he declared in the evening, “that he was well pleased with the day.” In 1711, he followed the king of Poland to Stralsund, where he swam over the river, in sight of the enemy, with his pistol in his hand, during which time he saw, /vithout any seeming emotion, three officers and above twenty soldiers fall by his side. When he retired to Dresden, the king, who had been witness to his courage and abilities, raised a company of horse for him. Count Saxe spent the whole winter in teaching his regiment some new evolutions, which he had invented, and marched them against the Swedes the year following. This regiment suffered much st the battle of Gadelbusli, where he made them return three times to the attack. This campaign being ended, mad. de Konigsmarc married him to the young countess de Loben, a rich and amiable lady, whose name Avas Victoria, which name, count Saxe afterwards said, contributed as much to fix his choice on the countess, as her beauty and largtr fortune. This lady brought him a son, who died young, and the count having at length a disagreement with her, procured his marriage to be dissolved in 1721, but promised the countess never to marry again, and kept his word. She married a Saxon officer soon after, by whom she had three children, and they lived in harmony together. It was with, great reluctance that the countess had consented to her Carriage being dissolved, for she loved count Saxe; and the latter frequently repented afterwards of having taken such a step. He continued to signalize himself in the war against Sweden, was at the siege of Stralsund in December 1715, when Charles XII. was blocked up, and had the satisfaction of seeing him in the midst of his grenadiers“. The behaviour of this celebrated warrior inspired count Saxe with a high degree of veneration, which he ever retained for his memory. He served against the Turks in Hungary in 1717, and on his return to Poland in 1718, received the order of the white eagle from the king. In 1720, he visited France, and the duke of Orleans, then regent, gave him a brevet of marechal de camp. Count Saxe afterwards obtained leave from his Polish majesty to serve in France, where he purchased a German regiment in 1722, which afterwards bore his name. He changed the ancient exercise of this regiment for one of his own invention; and the chevalier Folard, on seeing this exercise, foretold immediately, in his Commentary on Polybius, torn. III. b. ii. chap. 14, that count Saxe would be a great general. During his residence in France, he learnt mathematics and the art of fortification with astonishing facility, till 1725, when prince Ferdinand, duke of Courland, falling dangerously ill in the month of December, he turned his thoughts to obtaining the sovereignty of Courland. With this view, he set out for Mittau, and arrived there, May 18, 1726. He was received with open arms by the states, and had several private interviews with the duchess dowager of Courland, who had resided there since her husband’s decease. This lady was Anne Iwanaw, second daughter of the czar I wan Alexiowitz, brother of Peter the Great. Count Saxe, having communicated his design to her, soon engaged her in his interests; and she acted with such indefatigable ardour, and conducted affairs so well, that he was unanimously elected duke of Courland, July 5, 1726. Thia choice being; opposed by Poland and Russia, the duchess supported count Saxe with all her interest, and even went to Riga and Petersburg, where she redoubled her solicitations in favour of the late election. There seems indeed to be no doubt, but that, if the count had returned her passion, he would not only have maintained his ground in Courland, but shared the throne of Russia, which this princess afterwards ascended; but, during his stay at Mittau, an affair of gallantry between him and one of her ladies broke off the marriage, and induced the duchess to abandon him. From that moment the count’s affairs took an unhappy turn, and he was forced to go back to Paris in 1729. The following remarkable circumstance occurred during the course of his enterprise: Having written from Ccmrlandto France for a supply of men and money, mademoiselle le Couvreur, a celebrated actress, who was at that time attached to him, pawned her jewels and plate, and sent him 40,000 livres. When count Saxe returned to Paris, he applied himself to obtain a complete knowledge of the mathematics, and acquired a taste for mechanics. He refused the command of the Polish army offered him by the king, his brother, in 1733, and distinguished himself on the Rhine under marechal Berwick, particularly at the lines of Etlingen, and the siege of Philipsburg, after which he was made lieutenant-general August 1, 1734. Hostilities having recommenced on the death of the emperor Charles VI. count Saxc took Prague by assault, Nov. 26, 1741, then Egra and Ellebogen, raised a regiment of Hullans, and brought back marechal de Broglio’s army upon the Rhine, where, he fixed various posts, and seized the trenches of Lanterburg. He was appointed marechal of France, March 26, 1744, and commanded the main bocly of the army in Flanders, where he so exactly observed the motions of the enemies, who were superior in, number, and made use of such excellent manoeuvres, that he reduced them to remain inactive, for they were afraid to undertake any thing. This campaign in Fianders did count Saxe great honour, and was considered as a chefd'ceuvre of the military art. He won the famous battle of Fonterioi, under the king’s command, May 11, 1745, where, though sick and weak, he gave his orders with such presence of mind, vigilance, courage, and judgment, as made him the admiration of the whole army. This victory was followed by the capture of Tournay, which the French be^ sieged; of Ghent, Bruges, Oudenarde, Ostend, Ath, &c. and at the time that the campaign was supposed to be finished, he took Brussels, February 28, 1746. Nor was the next campaign less honourable to count Saxe. He won the battle of Kauconx, Oct. I 1, the same year, 1746; and his majesty, to reward such a constant series of glorious services, dtrlurod him marechal general of his camps and armies, Jan. 12, 1747. Marechal Saxe carried troops into Zealand, gained the battle of Lanfeldt, July 2 following-, approved the siege of Bergen-op-Zoom, of which M. de Loewen made himself master, and took Maestrecht, May 7, 1748. In consequence of these victories a peace was concluded at Aix-la-Chapelle, Oct. 18, the same year. Marechai Saxe went afterwards to Chambord, which the king had given him, ordered his regiment of Hullans thither, and kept a stud of wild horses, more proper for light cavalry than those used by the French. He visited Berlin some time after, and was magnificently entertained by his Prussian majesty. On his return to Paris, he formed a plan for the establishment of a colony in the island of Tobago; but gave it up, when he found that England and Holland opposed it. Count Saxe died, after a nine days 7 illness, at Chambord, Nov. 30, 1750, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. He wrote a book on the art of war, called” Mes Reveries/ 1 of which a very splendid edition, with his life, was published in 1757, 2 vols. 4to. There is also an English translation of it. His “Life” was printed in 1752 > vols. 12mo, reprinted often.

Count Saxe was a man of ordinary stature, of a robust constitution, and extraordinary strength. To an aspect, noble, warlike, and mild, he joined many excellent qualities of disposition. Affable in his manners, and disposed to sympathize with the unfortunate, his generosity sometimes carried him beyond the limits of his fortune. He was remarkably careful of the lives of his men. One day a general officer was pointing out to him a post which would have been of great use “It will only cost you,” said he, “a dozen grenadiers:” “That would do very well,” replied the marshal, “were it only a dozen lieutenant-generals.” He had been educated and died in the Lutheran religion. “It is a pity (said the queen of France, when she heard of his death) that we cannot say a single De-profundis for a man who has made as sing so many Te Dennis” Religion had not much influence on his general conduct, but on his death-bed he is said to have reviewed his errors with remorse, and expressed much penitence.

, or Sassi [Joseph Anthony), an ecclesiastical historian, was born at Milan in 1673. He for some time taught the belles lettres in his native city, and afterwards was employed as a missionary. In 1703 he was admitted a doctor of the Ambrosian college at Milan, and eight years afterwards was appointed director of that college, and keeper fits fine library. He died about 1756. He was author of many theological, historical, and chronological works, among which are, 1. “Epistola ad Card. Quirium de Literatura Mediolanensium,” 4to. 2. “De Studiis Mediolanensium Antiquis et Novis,” Milan, 1729. 3. “Archiepiscoporum Mediolanensium Series critico-chronologica,” ibid. 1756, 4to. 4- “St. Caroli Borromei Homilise, prefatione et notis,” 1747, &c. 5 vols. fol. Some of the works of Saxi have been inserted in the collection “Rerum Italicarum Scriptores” by Muratori.

, a very learned philologer and literary historian, was born at Eppendorff, a village between Chemnitz and Freyberg, in Saxony, where his father was a clergyman, Jan. 13, 1714. His proper name was Christopher Gottlob Sach, which, when he commenced author, he Latinized into Sachsius, and afterwards into Saxius, dropping the Gottlob altogether. His father first gave him some, instructions in the teamed languages, which he afterwards improved at the school of Chemnitz, but more effectually at the electoral school of Misnia, where he also studied classical antiquities, history, and rhetoric, and in 1735 went to Leipsic with the strongest recommendations for industry and proficiency. Here he studied philosophy under the celebrated Wolff, but as he had already perused the writings both of the ancient and modern philosophers with profound attention, he is said to have had the courage to differ from the current opinions. Philosophy, however, as then taught, was less to his taste than the study of antiquities, classical knowledge, and literary history, to which he determined to devote his days; and the instructions of professor Christ, and his living in the house with Menkenius, who had an excellent library, were circumstances which very powerfully confirmed this resolution. He had not been here above a year, when two young noblemen were confided to his care, and this induced him to cultivate the modern languages most in use. His first disputation had for its subject, “Vindiciae secundum libertatem pro Maronis jEneide, cui manum Jo. Harduinus nuper assertor injecerat,” Leipsic, 1737. Among other learned men who highly applauded this dissertation was the second Peter Burmann, in the preface to his Virgil, but who afterwards, in his character as a critic, committed some singular mistakes in condemning Saxius, while he applauded Sachsius, not knowing that they were one and the same. In 1738 Saxius took his master’s degree, and commenced his literary career by writing a number of critical articles in the “Nova acta eruditorum,” and other literary journals, from this year to 1747. Tiiis employment involved him sometimes in controversies with his learned brethren, particularly with Peter Burmann, or with foreign authors with whose works he had taken liberties. In 1745 he visited the most considerable parts of Germany, and was at Franckfort on the Maine during the coronation of the Emperor. In 1752 he was appointed professor of history, antiquities, and rhetoric at Utrecht, and on entering on his office pronounced an oration on the science of antiquity, which was printed in 1753, 4to. After this his life seems to have been devoted entirely to the duties of his professorship, and the composition of a great many works on subjects of philology and criticism, some in German, but principally in Latin. The most considerable of these, the only one much known in this country, is his “Onomasticon Literarium,” or Literary Dictionary, consisting of a series of biographical and critical notices or references respecting the most eminent writers of every age or nation, and in every branch of literature, in chronological order. The first volume of this appeared in 1775, 8vo, and it continued to be published until seven volumes were completed, with a general Index, in 1790. To this, in 1793, he added an eighth or supplementary volume, from which we have extracted some particulars of his life, as given by himself. This is a work almost indispensable to biographers, and as the work of one man, must have been the production of many years* labour and attention. Some names, however, are omitted, which we might have expected to find in it; and the English series, as in every foreign undertaking of the kind, is very imperfect. We have seen no account of his latter days. He lived to a very advanced age, dying at Utrecht. May 3, 1806, in his ninety-second year.

, a Danish historian, is supposed to have been a native of Denmark, but this has been a disputed point. As to his name Sachse, it is evident from many monuments of Danish antiquity, that it is of no obscure or late origin in the history of Denmark. Saxo himself calls the Danes his countrymen, Denmark his country; and speaking of the kings, he terms them our kings. Some attribute his origin to Ambria, others with more reason to Sialandia, a Danish island. The name Scalandicus is also added to that of Saxo, in some editions of his works. He has been called Longus, which has induced some to attribute his descent to the noble family of the Langii. Others have rather chosen to ascribe this name to the height of his stature. Saxo, in his preface, speaks of his ancestors as having been distinguished in war, which indicates that they were of no ignoble race. His name of Grammaticus was titular, and expressive of his attainments in literature. There are different opinions concerning the year of his birth. It is, however, certain that he flourished in the twelfth century. Carpzovius endeavoured, by some acute and subtile reasonings, to ascertain the date. The education of Saxo is equally involved in uncertainty. Pontoppidan supposes that he studied at Paris,and there acquired the eleg.ance of style for which he afterwards was distinguished. It is certain, that in the 12th century the Cimbri and the Danes frequently went to France for education. It may, however, be doubted, whether in the rage for trifle which then prevailed at Paris, Saxo could have procured a master who was capable of instructing him. We must be rather inclined to suppose that he owed his attainments to his own industry and talents. It appears that he applied to theology, for we find him appointed capitular in the bishopric of Lundens, and afterwards a prefect in the cathedral of Roschiid. While he 'filled this office he was sent, in 1161, by Absalon, the bishop of Roschiid, to Paris, with a view of inviting some monks from St. Genevieve, who might correct^the depraved morals of those which belonged to Eskilsco. William Abbas accepted the invitation of Saxo, and three brothers followed him. These monks introduced into Denmark the monastic discipline which had been prescribed by St. Augustine. Various opinions have been offered about the date of Saxo’s death. Pontanus supposes it to have been in the year 1208. Some conjecture the time to have been 1190, others in 1201. But, when we reflect that in his preface he speaks of Waldemar II. who ascended the throne of Denmark in 1203, and that Andrew Suno, to whom the history is dedicated, succeeded Absalon in the bishopric in 1202, we cannot agree with those who have adopted the earlier dates. Though some others have fixed the date in 1204, and others in 1206, the general opinion is, that he died in 1208, aged upwards of seventy. He was buried in the cathedral of Roschild. Three centuries afterwards, an inscription was’ added to his tomb by Lago Urne, bishop of Scalandre. Though more elegant verses might have been invented, says Klotzius, none could have been more true.

Absalon, bishop of Roschild, first instigated Saxo to undertake the history of Denmark, and assisted him with his advice and with books. Saxo employed twenty years in accomplishing his undertaking, and at last rendered it worthy the expectations of Absalon who, however, died be* fore the history was completed, which Saxo inscribed to Andrew Suno, who was the successor to the see. After remaining in ms. for three hundred years, Christianus Petra3us undertook the publication, having received the manuscript accurately written from Bergeius the archbishop of Lundens. It was delivered to be printed to Jodocus Radius Ascensius, and was published at Paris in 1514, and re-published at Basil, in 1534, by Oporinus. A third edition appeared at Francfort on the Maine, in 1576. At last, Stephanus Johannes Stephanius, historian to the king, and professor of eloquence and history in the university of Sora, with the aid of some Danish nobles, and the liberal contribution of the king, was enabled to publish an edition of Saxo, in folio, printed at Sora, 1644. A second part of the volume appeared in the following year, containing the “Prolegomena,” and copious notes. There is a later edition by Christ. Adolphus Klotz, printed at Leipsic in 1771, 4to, and there are several Danish translations. The credibility of Saxo is somewhat doubtful, but his style is good, and much praised by critics of authority.

, a dissenting minister of considerable talents, was born in 1675, and was the second son of the Rev. Giles Say, who had been ejected from the vicarage of St. Michael’s in Southampton by the Bartholomew-act in 1662; and, after king James the second’s liberty of conscience, was chosen pastor of a dissenting congregation at Guestwick in Norfolk, where he continued till his death, April 7, 1692. Some years after, the subject of this article being at Southwark, where he had been at school, and conversing with some of the dissenters of that place, met with a woman of great reputation for piety, who told him, with joy, that a sermon on Ps. cxix. 130, preached by his father thirty years before, was the means of her conversion. Being strongly inclined to the ministry, Mr. Say entered as a pupil in the academy of the Rev. Mr. Thomas Rowe at London about 1G92, where he had for his fellow-students Mr (afterwards Dr.) Isaac Watts, Hughes the poet, and Mr. Josiah Hort, afterwards archbishop of Tuam. When he had finished his studies, he became chaplain to Thomas Scott, esq. of Lyrninge in Kent, in whose family he continued three years. Thence he removed to Andover in Hampshire, then to Yarmouth in Norfolk, and soon after to Lowestoffin Suffolk, where he continued labouring in word and doctrine eighteen years. He was afterwards copastor with the Rev. Mr. Samuel Baxter at Ipswich nine years; and lastly was called, in 1734, to succeed Dr. Edmund Caiamy in Westminster, where he died at his house in James-street, April 12, 1743, of a mortification in his bowels, in the sixty-eighth year of his age.

In the preface to his works, we are told that Mr. Say te was a tender husband, an indulgent father, and of a most benevolent, communicative disposition, ever ready to do good, and to distribute. He was well versed in astronomy and natural philosophy; had a taste for music and poetry, was a good critic, and a master of the classics. Yet so great was his modesty, that he was known only to a few select friends, and never published above two or three sermons, which were in a manner extorted from him.“Among the modern Latin poets Broukhusius was his favourite; among the English, Milton, whose head, etched by Mr. Richardson, is prefixed to his second essay, A letter. from Mr. Say to Mr. Hughes, and two from Mr. Say to Mr. Duncombe, with a Latin translation of the beginning of” Pa* radise Lost,“are printed among the” Letters of Eminent Persons deceased,“vol. J. and vol. II. His characters of Mrs. Bridget Bendysh, grand-daughter of Oliver Cromwell, in the appendix to vol. II. first appeared (without a name) jn Gent. Mag. 1765, p. 357. In the same volume, p. 423,” The Resurrection illustrated by the Changes of the Silkworm“is by the same hand. And some of his poetical pieces are in Nichols’s” Select Collection, vol. VI.

, an Italian, eminent as a statesman and man of letters, when letters were just reviving in Europe, was born about 1424, some say 1430. He was only the son of a miller but, going early to Florence, he fell under the notice of Cosmo de Medici who, observing uncommon parts in him and a turn for letters, took him under his protection, and gave him an education. He studied the law; and, taking a doctor’s degree in that faculty, frequented the bar. After the death of Cosmo in 1464, Peter de Medici shewed the same regard for him; and Scala, through his means, was trusted by the republic in the most important negociations. In 1471, the freedom of the city was conferred on him and his Descendants; and the year after he obtained letters of nobility; he was then secretary or chancellor of the republic. In 1484, the Florentines sent a solemn embassy to Innocent VIII, to congratulate him on his being raised to the pontificate; when Scala, one of the embassy, delivered a speech so very pleasing to the pope, that he was made by him a knight of the golden spur, and senator of Rome. In 1436, he was made holy-standard-bearer to the republic. He died at Florence in 1497; and left, among other children, a daughter, named Alexandra, who afterwards became famous for her learning and skill in the Greek and Latin tongues.

During his life-time were published the above-mentioned speech to pope Innocent; another speech which he made as chancellor of Florence, “Pro Imperatoriis miiitaribus siguis dandis Constantio Sfortise Imperatori,” 1481 and “Apologia contra vituperatores civitatis Florentiae,” 1496, in folio. His posthumous works are four books, “De Historia Floremina,” and “Vita di Vitaliani Borromeo;” both printed at Rome in 1677, 4to. This history of the Florentine republic was written in twenty books, and deposited in the Medicean library; but, as only four of these books and part of a fifth were finished, no more have been thought fit for the press. He was the author also of “Apologues,” and of some Latin and Italian “Poems.” Some few of his letters have been published; and there are eight in the collection of Politian, with whom Scala, as appears from the correspondence, had the misfortune to be at variance. Politian probably despised him for being his superior in every thing but letters, and Scala valued himself too much on his opulence. Erasmus also has not passed a very favourable judgment on him: he represents him as a Ciceronian in his style. Scala' s daughter Alexandra, above mentioned, was no less distinguished by her personal beauty, than her literary acquirements. She gave her hand to the Greek Marullus (See Mahullus); and Politian is numbered among her unsuccessful admirers; a circumstance that may in some degree account for the asperities which marked his controversy with her father. She is said to have been assisted in her studies by. John Lascaris, and Demetrius Chalcondylas. In evidence of her proficiency, we are told that she replied to a Greek epigram, which the gallantry of Politian addressed to her, in the same language and measure; and in a public representation of the “Electra” of Sophocles at Florence, she undertook to perform the principal female character, which, according to Politian, she did with great success. She died in 1506.

, a very learned and eminent critic, was born, according to his son’s account, April 23, 1484, at Ripa, a castle in the territory of Verona, and was the son of Benedict Scaliger, who, for seventeen years, commanded the troops of Matthias, king of Hungary, to whom he was related. His mother was Berenice Lodronia, daughter of count Paris. From the same authority we learn, that Scaliger was a descendant from the ancient princes of Verona; but while other particulars of the birth and family ol Scaliger are called in question, this seems to be refuted by the patent of naturalization which Francis I. granted him in 1528, in which such an honourable descent would unquestionably have been noticed, whereas in this instrument he is called only “Julius Caesar della Scala de Bordons, doctor of physic, a native of Verona.” When therefore, his critical asperities had raised him enemies, they did not fail to strip him of his royal origin, and instead of it, asserted that he was the son of a school-master (some say an illuminator) of Verona, one Benedict Borden, who, removing to Venice, took the name of Scaliger, either because he had a scale for his sign, or lived in a street called from that instrument; and although Thuanus seems inclined to consider this story as the fabrication of Augustine Niphus, out of pique to Scaliger, it is certain that the royal origin of the Scaligers has always appeared doubtful, and we have now no means to remove the uncertainty.

He was taught Latin at home, and, according to his son, had for his preceptor John Jocundus of Verona, whom he himself in various parts of his works mentions as his master; but even this circumstance his opponents are not disposed to credit, and tell us, that as he was the descendant of princes, it was necessary to provide him with a preceptor like Jocundus, who was a man not only of high character, but a gentleman by birth. They also add some circumstances which certainly make it doubtful whether Scaliger really was taught by Jocundus, because it was neither by his knowledge of Latin, nor by philosophy or theology, that Jocundus acquired his reputation, but by his skill in the fine arts. (See Jocundus,) It appears, however, less questionable, that at the age of twelve Scaliger was presented to the emperor Maximilian, who made him one of his pages, and that he served that emperor seventeen years, and gave proofs of his valour and dexterity in several expeditions, in which he attended his master. He was at the battle of Ravenna in 1512, in which he lost his father and brother Titus, whose bodies he conveyed to Ferrara, where his mother resided, who some time after died wkj> grief. His father dying in narrow circumstances, Scaliger found himself almost without a maintenance, and therefore resolved to enter into the Franciscan order, for which purpose he went to Bologna, and applied himself vigorously to study, especially to logic and Scotus’s divinity; but changing his views of the ecclesiastical profession, he agaiiv entered into the army, and served some time in Piedmont. A physician, whom he knew at Turin, persuaded him to study physic and accordingly he prosecuted it at his leisure hours, while he was in the army he likewise learned the Greek language, of which he had been entirely ignorant till then. At length, frequent attacks of the gout determined him, at forty years of age, to abandon a military life, and devote himself entirely to the profession of physic. In this he had already acquired both skill and fame, and the bishop of Agen, being indisposed, and apprehending some need of a physician in his journey to his diocese, requested Scaliger to attend him. Scaliger consented upon condition that he should not stay at Ageu above eight days: there, however, he conceived an attachment for a young lady, said to be not more than thirteen years of age, and remained at Agen waiting for her parents’ consent. That obtained, he married her in 1529, lived with her twenty-nine years, and had fifteen children by her, seven of whom survived him. Whatever his origin, he must have been now a man of some consideration, for this lady was of a noble and opulent family.

After his settlement at Agen, he bega'n to apply himself seriously to those general studies which made him most known in the literary world. He learned the French tongue at his first coming, which he spoke perfectly well in three months; and then made himself master of the Gascon, Italian, Spanish, German, Hungarian, and Sclavonian During these studies, he maintained himself by the practice of physic. It is probable that he had taken a doctor’s degree in this faculty at Padua; for, the letters of naturalization, which were granted him by Francis I. in 1528, give him this title. As he began his studies late, it was proportionably so before he commenced author, none of his works having appeared until he was forty-seven; but he soon gained a name in the republic of letters, which was both great and formidable. From this time, composition and controversy employed him till his death, which happened in 1558, in the seventy-fourth year of his age. His epitaph was, “Julii Gaesaris Scaligeri quod fuit.”

His son Joseph has described him as a man with many excellent qualities both of body and mind; tall, well-made, of a noble and venerable air, and very strong and active even to old age of such sagacity, that he could divine the characters of men from their looks of a prodigious memory; singularly averse to every departure from truth, and so charitable that his house was a kind of hospital to the indigent and distressed. With these good qualities, however, he had an insupportable pride and vanity, and a fastidious and petulant temper, which was excited to fury by every difference from his opinions, and every, the least contradiction, or fancied mark of disrespect. This appeared particularly in his treatment of Erasmus, who, in his “Ciceronianus, sive de optimo dicendi genere,” had ridiculed certain of the learned in Italy, who would allow no expressions to be pure latinity but what were to be found in Cicero; and had even criticised the style of Cicero himself, for whom, nevertheless, he had the profoundest veneration. This provoked Scaliger to publish two orations in his defence; in which he treated his antagonist with the utmost virulence of contempt. The death of Erasmus, however, which happened while the second oration was printing, appears to have softened Scaliger' s heart, and he wrote a poem, in which he expressed great grief at his dying before they were reconciled, and shewed a willingness to acknowledge his great virtues and merit.

Julius Caesar Scaliger was certainly a man of extraordinary capacity, and of great talents both natural and acquired; but those who were his contemporaries, or who lived nearest to his times, have spoken of him in language' too nearly approaching to extravagance. Colerus does not scruple to say, that he was the greatest philosopher since Aristotle, the greatest poet since Virgil, and the greatest physician since Hippocrates. Lipsius goes a little farther, and not only gives us Homer, Hippocrates, Aristotle, and Scaliger, as the four greatest men that ever appeared, but adds, that he prefers Scaliger to the three others. The elder Vossius ascribes to him a sort of human divinity; and Huet thinks he was expressly formed by nature as a consolation for our degeneracy in these latter days. From these, and other encomiums, which might be multiplied by a reference to the works of his contemporaries and im> mediate successors, it is evident that his reputation was great and extensive; and if he began to study and to write so late in life as has been reported, it is easy to believe that his endowments and application must have been of the most extraordinary kind. A list of his principal works, therefore, seems necessary to illustrate his character. 1. “Exotericarum exercitationum liber quintus decimus de subtilitate ad Hieronymum Cardanum,” Paris, 1557, 4to, often reprinted in 8vo. He calls this attack on Cardan the fifteenth book, because he had written fourteen others under the same title of “Exercitationes,” which had no relation to Cardan. These, however, never were published. 2. “In Theophrasti libros sex de causis plantarum commentarii,” Geneva, 1566, folio. 3. “Commentarii in Aristoteli adscriptos libros duos de plantis,” ibid. 1566, folio. 4. “Aristotelis Hist. Animalium liber decimus, ac versione et commentario,” Lyons, 1584, 8vo. This was a prelude to the entire work published by Maussac at Toulouse, in 1619, fol. “Aristotelis Hist. Animalium, Gr. & Lat. ex versione et cum commentaries J. C. Scaligeri.” 5. “Animadversiones in Theophrasti historias plantarum,” Lyons, 1584, 8vo. 6. “Commentarii in Hippocratis librum de Insomniis,” Gr. & Lat. Lyons, 1538, 8vo, reprinted several times after. 7. “De causis lingua? Latinos libri XIII.” Lyons, 1540, 4to, &c. This is esteemed one of his most valuable works. 8. “J. C. Scaligeri adversus Desiderium Erasmum orationes duae eioquentiae Romance vindices, cum ejusdem epistolis opusculis,” Toulouse, 1621, 4to. The first of these orations, which we have already noticed, was printed at Paris in 1531, 8vo, and seems, therefore, to have been the first of our author’s publications, an earnest of what the world might expect both from his genius and temper. 9. “Epistolse,” Leyden, 1600, 8vo. 10. “Epistolce nonnullee ex manuscripto Bibliothecre Z. C. ab Uffenbach,” printed in the sixth and eighth volumes of the “Arncenitates Litterarise,” by Schelhorn. They all relate to his orations against Erasmus. 11. “De Analogia sermonis Latini,” subjoined to Henry Stephen’s “Appendix ad Terentii Varronis assertiones analogies sermonis Latini,” 1591, 8vo. 12. “Poetices Libri Septem,” 1561, fol. and several times reprinted; this is his greatest critical work, in which, however, many mistakes and many untenable opinions have been discovered by more recent critics, 13, “Heroes,” or epigrams on various personages of antiquity, Lyons, 1539, 4to. 14. “Epidorpides, seu carmen de sapientia et beatitudine,” ibid, 1573, 8vo. 15. “Poemata in duas partes divisa,” 1.574 and 1600, 8vo. 16. “De comicis dimensionibus,” prefixed to an edition of Terence printed at Paris, 1552, fol.

, son of the preceding, and heir to his talents and temper, was born at Agen in 1540; and, at eleven years of age, was sent with two of his brothers to the college of Bordeaux, where he was taught Latin. Three years after, on the appearance of the plague, he was obliged to return home to his father, who then superintended his education. He required of him everyday a short exercise or theme upon some historical subject, and made him transcribe some poems, which he himself had composed. This last task is supposed to have inspired him with a taste for poetry, and so eager was he to show his proficiency, that he wrote a tragedy upon the story of Oedipus before he was seventeen. His father dying in 1558, he went to Paris the year following to study Greek, and attended the lectures of Turnebus for two months. But finding the usual course too dilatory, he resolved to study it by himself, and with the assistance of some knowledge of the conjugations, attempted to read Homer with a translation, in which he succeeded very soon, and at the same time formed to himself a kind of grammar, with which he was enabled to proceed to the other Greek poets, and next to the historians and orators, and by persevering in this course, he gained in the space of two years a perfect knowledge of the language. He afterwards turned his thoughts to the Hebrew, which he learned by himself in the same manner. All are agreed indeed, that he had an extraordinary capacity for learning languages, and is said to have been well skilled in no less than thirteen. He made the same progress in the sciences, and in every branch of literature; and he at length obtained the reputation of being the most learned man of his age, and his biographers have handed down to us little else than the progress of his studies and the chronology of his publications. In 1503 he was invited to the university of Leyden, to be honorary professor of Belles Lettres, on which occasion, if we may believe the “Menagiana,” Henry IV, of France treated him with great coldness and neglect. Scaliger had determined to accept the offer; and, waiting upon the king to acquaint him with his journey, and the occasion of it, “Well, Mr. Scaliger,” said his majesty, “the Dutch want to have you with them, and to allow you. a good stipend I am glad of it,” adding some other remarks of a grosser kind. Henry was no patron of learning or learned men: but some have supposed that he wished to mortify Scaliger, who had already shewn too much of his father’s vanity and arrogant spirit. He now went to Leyden, where he spent the remainder of his life; and died there of a dropsy, Jan. 21, 1609, without having ever been married. He was a man of perfect sobriety of manners, and whose whole time was well spent in study. He had as great parts as his father, and far greater learning, having been trained to it from his infancy, which his father had not. He had a profound veneration for his father, and unfortunately extended it to an imitation of his irritable temper, and disrespect for his learned contemporaries. But he was often a discerner and encourager of merit. While at Leyden he was so struck with the early appearance of talent in Grotius, that he undertook to direct his studies. Grotius repaid his care by the utmost respect, and Scaliger' s counsels were commands to him. The elder Scaliger lived and died in the church of Rome: but the son embraced the principles of Luther, and relates that his father also had intentions of doing so.

The works of Joseph Scaliger are very numerous and various: but his “Opus de Emendatione Temporum,” printed at Paris 1583 in folio, is his greatest performance, in which he has collected every thing which might serve to establish the principles of chronology, and was the first who undertook to form a complete system. He has in this work rendered his name memorable to posterity, by the invention of the Julian period, which consists of 7980 years, being the continued product of the three cycles, of the sun 28, the moon 19, and Roman indiction 15. This pe*­riod had its beginning fixed to the 764th year before the creation, and is not yet completed, and comprehends all other cycles, periods, and epochas, with the times of all memorable actions and histories. Scaliger has, therefore, been styled the father of chronology; and his “Thesaurus Temporum, complectens Eusebii Pamphili Chronicon cum Isagogicis Chronologiae Canonibus,” in which he has cor* reeled and reformed many things in his “Opus cle Emerrdatiorte Temporum,” seems to give him a sufficient claim to the title. The best edition of “De Emendatione Temporurn” is that of Geneva, 1609, folio; of the “Thesaurus Temporum” that of Amsterdam, 1658, in 2 vols. folio.

He wrote notes and animadversions upon almost all the Greek and Latin authors: those upon Varro “de Lingua Latlrra” were written by him at twenty years of age; but scarcely any of his editions of the classics are now held in esteem. Gerard Vossius observes, that his conjectures are too'boki, and quotes Peter Victorias, who said, that Scaliger was born to corrupt the ancients rather than to correct ttiehh -It is certain, at least, that he dealt too much in cdhjeettiral criticism, although he ofteif shows a great degree of ingenuity, even in the most fanciful of the freedoms he take’s’ with his author’s meaning, and always leaves the reader impressed with his extensive learning.

He wrote some dissertations upon subjects of antiquity; and gave specimens of his skill in all branches of literature. He made a Latin translation to two centuries of Arabian proverbs, which were published at Leyden, 1623, with the notes of Erpenius, at the request of Isaac Casaubon, who tells us, that he employed less time in translating it than others who understood Arabic would have done in reading it. He was also obliged to write some controversial pieces: and his controversy with Scioppius, concerning the biography of his family in his work, entitled “De vetustate & splendore gentis Scaligeranaj,” is a wretched example of literary rancour and personal obloquy. His “Poemata,” in which there is not much poetical spirit, were published at Leyden, 1615, 8vo; his “Epistolse,” which are learned, and contain many interesting particulars of literary history, were edited by Daniel Heinsius, at the same place, 1637, 8vo. ??? 4

, a celebrated architect, was born at Vicenza in 1550). He was educated under his father, also an able architect, and went to Venice for improvement, where afterwards, on Palladio’s death, he became the first architect, and was employed in various works, particularly the additions to the Library of St. Mark, the Olympic theatre at Vicenza, and the. new theatre at Sabbioneta. In 1615 he published in 2 vois. small folio* a work entitled “L‘ Idea- deli’ Architettura universale,”, in six books, the sixth of which, containing the five orders of architecture, is most esteemed. The French have a translation of his works, and an abridgment by Joubert. Seamozzi also published “Discorsi sopra leantichitadi Roma,”' 1583, fol. with forty plates. He died in 1616.

, the reputed author of a Greek Lexicon, studied first at Lausanne, but has his name recorded in the annals of literature, neither on account of his talents and learning, nor for his virtuous industry, but for a gross act of disingenuity and fraud which he committed against an eminent literary character of the sixteenth century. Being employed by Henry Stephens, the celebrated printer, as a corrector to his press, while he was publishing his “Thesaurus Linguee Groecoe,” Scapula extracted those words and explications which he reckoned most useful, comprised them in one volume, and published them as an original work, with his own name. The compilation and printing of the Thesaurus had cost Stephens immense labour and expence; but it was so much admired by the learned men to whom he had shown it, and seemed to be of such essential importance to the acquisition of the Greek language, that he reasonably hoped his labour would be crowned with honour, and that the money he had expended would be repaid by a rapid and extensive sale. Before, however, his work came abroad, Scapula’s abridgment appeared; which, from its size, price, and obvious utility, was quickly purchased, while the Thesaurus itself lay neglected in the author’s hands. The consequence was a bankruptcy on the part of Stephens, while he who had occasioned it was enjoying the fruits of his treachery. Scapula’s Lexicon was first published in 15SO, in 4to. It was afterward enlarged, and published in folio. It has gone through several editions, the best of which is the Elzevir of 1652, some copies of which have the following imprint, “Londini, impeusis Josuae Kirkton et Samuelis Thompson;” but it is the genuine Elzevir edition, the names of Kirkton and Thompson being appended only to the copies they purchased from the Leyden proprietors. Stephens charges the author with omitting a great many important articles, and with misunderstanding and perverting his meaning, and tracing out absurd and trifling etymologies, which he himself had been careful to avoid. Dr. Busby, so much celebrated for his knowledge of the Greek language, and his success in teaching it, would never permit his scholars in Westminster-school to make use of Scapula.

, an eminent physician and mathematician, was born about 1616. After the usual classical education he was admitted of Caius college, Cambridge, in 1632, and took his first degree in arts in 1636. He was then elected to a fellowship, and commencing A. M. in 1640, he took pupils. In the mean time, intending to pursue medicine as his profession, he applied himself to all the preparatory studies necessary for that art. Mathematics constituted one of these studies: and the prosecution of this science having obtained him the acquaintance of Mr. (afterwards bishop) Seth Ward, then of Emanuel college, they mutually assisted each other in their researches. Having met with some difficulties in Mr. Ougbtred’s “Clavis Mathematical which appeared to them insuperable, they made a joint visit to the author, then at his living of Aldbury, in Surrey. Mr. Oughtred (See Oughtred) treated them with great politeness, being much gratified to see these ingenious young men apply so zealously to these studies, and in a short time fully resolved all their questions. They returned to Cambridge complete masters of that excellent treatise, and were the first that read lectures upon it there. In the ensuing civil wars, Mr. Scarborough became likewise a joint sufferer with his fellow-student for the royal cause, being ejected from his fellowship at Caius. Upon this reverse of fortune he withdrew to Oxford, and entering himself at Merton college, was incorporated A.M. of that university, 23d of June, 1646. The celebrated Dr. Harvey was then warden of that college, and being employed in writing his treatise” De Generatione Animaiium,“gladly accepted the assistance of Mr. Scarborough. The latter also became acquainted with sir Christopher Wren, then a gentleman commoner of Wadham college, and engaged him to translate” Oughtred’s Geometrical Dialling" into Latin, which was printed in 1649.

Upon leaving Oxford, and taking the degree of doctor of physic, Dr. Scarborough settled in the metropolis, where he practised with great reputation. In the College of Physicians, of which he was a fellow, he was particularly respected as a man of uncommon talents; and, in 1658, by the special appointment of the president, he introduced, with an elegant Latin speech, the marquis of Dorchester for his admission into the college that year. In the mean time Dr. Scarborough began to read his highly celebrated anatomical lectures at Surgeons’ Hall, which he continued for sixteen or seventeen years, and was the first who introduced geometrical and mechanical reasonings upon the muscles.

Such extraordinary merit did not escape the notice of king Charles II., who conferred on him the order of knighthood in 1669, and at the same time appointed him his principal physician. He was nominated to the same honourable office by his majesty’s brother, which he held both before and after his accession to the throne; and he also served king William in the same capacity. He was likewise appointed physician to the Tower of London, and held that office till his death, which occurred about 1696. Sir Charles Scarborough was married and left a son, who was created doctor of civil law at Oxford, in August 1702. In 1705, this gentleman printed in folio, from his father’s manuscript, “An English Translation of Euclid’s Elements, with excellent explanatory notes.” Sir Charles also wrote <c A Treatise upon Trigonometry;“”A Compendium of Lily’s Grammar;“and” An Elegy on Mr. Abraham. Cowley."

, an eminent burlesque French writer, was the son of Paul Scarron, a counsellor in parliament, and born at Pari’s in 1610. Although deformed, and of very irregular manners, his lather designed him for an ecclesiastic, and he went to Italy for that purpose, in his twenty-fourth year, whence he returned equally unfit for his intended profession, and continued his irregularities until he lost the use of his limbs, and could only use his hands and tongue. This happened in his twenty-seventh year but, melancholy as his condition was, his burlesque humour never forsook him he was continually talking and writing in this strain and his house became the rendezvous of all the men of wit. Afterwards, a fresh misfortune overtook him: his father, who had hitherto supplied his wants, incurred the displeasure of cardinal Richelieu, and was banished, and although Scarron presented an humble request to Richelieu, which from its humour pleased that minister, no answer appears to have been returned, and both Richelieu and his father died soon after. Scarron at length, helpless, and deformed as he was, conceived thoughts of marriage; and, in 1651, was actually married to mademoiselle d'Aubigne, afterwards the celebrated madam de Maintenon, who lodged near him, and was about sixteen years of age. Unequal as this match was, she, had influence enough to produce some salutary change in his manners and habits, and her wit and beauty served to increase the good company which frequented his house. Scarron died in 1660, and within a few minutes of his death, when his acquaintance were about him all in tears, “Ah! my good friends, 7 ' said he,” you will never cry for me so much as I have made you laugh."

, a learned German, was born at Nuys, in the electorate of Cologne, 1646; his father was a major in the army of the landgrave of Hesse Cassel. He was educated for the church at Dxiisbourg; and, having rnacle the Oriental tongues his particular study, became professor of them in that university in 1677. In 1679 he removed to Leyden, to fill the same post for a larger stipend.; aud there continued till 1729, when, he died of an apoplexy. He published some useful books in the Oriental way as, 1. “Opus Aramseum, complectens Grammaticam Chaldaicam & Syriacam,” 1686, 8vo. 2. “Nq-, vuin Testamenturn Syriacum, cum versione Latina,” 1708,' 4to. The Latin version is that of Tii./melHus retouched. Leusdeu laboured jointly with hini in this work till death, which happened when they were got to Luke xv. 20 and, Scbaaf wrote the remainder by himself. At the end of it is subjoined, “Lexicon Syriacum Concordantiale.” 3. “Epitome Grammaticae Hebraicae,” 1716, 8vo. 4. “A Letter in Syriac of the bishop Mar Thomas, written from, Malabar to the patriarch of Antioch, and a Latin version by himself,” 1714, 4to. 5. “Sermo Academicus de Linguarum Orientalium scientia,” an Inauguration-Speech, In 1711 he drew up, at the request of the curators of the academy at Leyden, a catalogue of all the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, and Samaritan books and manuscripts in the li^ brary there; which was joined to the catalogue of that library t published in 1714.

, an ingenious painter, was born at Dort, in 1643. His father placed him first with Solomon Van Hoogstraten, and afterwards with Gerard Dow, from whom he caught a great delicacy of finishing; but his chief practice was to paint candle-lights. He placed the object and a candle in a dark room; and looking through a small hole, painted by day-light what he saw in the dark chamber. Sometimes he drew portraits, and came with that view to England, but found the business too much engrossed by Kneller, Closterman, and others. Yet he once drew king William; but, as the piece was to be by candle-light, he gave his majesty the candle to hold, till the tallow ran down upon his fingers. As if to justify this ill-breeding, he drew his own picture in the same situation. Delicacy was no part of his character: having drawn a lady who was marked with the small-pox, but had handsome hands, she asked him, when the face was finished, if she must not sit for her hands “No,” replied Schalken, “1 always draw them from my house-maid.” After carrying on his business for some time in England, he settled at the Hague, where he died in 1706. Some additional anecdotes of him may be found in our authority.

, a very learned chemist, was born in 1742, at Stralsund in the capital of Swedish Pomerania, where his father was a tradesman. Having shown an inclination to learn pharmacy, he was bound apprentice to an apothecary at Gottenburg, with whom he lived eight years, and at his leisure hours contrived to make himself master of the science of chemistry, reading the best authors, and making such experiments as his confined means would permit. From Gottenburg, he went to Malmo, and two years after to Stockholm. In 1773 he went to Upsal, and resided for some time in the house of Mr. Loock. Here Bergman first found him, saw his merit and encouraged it, adopted his opinions, defended him with zeal, and took upon him the charge of publishing his treatises. Under this liberal patronage (for Bergman procured him also a salary from the Swedish academy), Scheele produced a series of discoveries which at once astonished and delighted the world. He ascertained the nature of manganese discovered the existence and singular properties of oxymuriatic acid and gave a theory of the composition of muriatic acid, which promises fair to be the true one. He discovered a new earth which was afterwards called barytes; and he determined the constituents of the volatile alkali. All these discoveries are related in one paper published about 1772. He discovered and ascertained the properties of many acids, the nature of plumbago and molybdena; analyzed fluor spar, which had eluded the searches of all preceding chemists; and determined the constituents of tungstate of lime. His two essays on the prussic acid are particularly interesting, and display the resources of his mind, and his patient industry, in a very remarkable point of view. His different papers on animal substances are particularly interesting, and replete with valuable and accurate information. On one occasion, in his treatise on fire, Scheele attempted the very difficult and general subject of combustion; but his attempt was not crowned with success. The acuteness, however, with which he treated it deserves our admiration; and the vast number of new and important facts, which he brought forward in support of his hypothesis, is truly astonishing, and perhaps could not have been brought together by any other man than Scheele. He discovered oxygen gas, and ascertained the composition of the atmosphere, without any knowledge of what had been previously done by Dr. Priestley. His views respecting the nature of atmospheric air were much more correct than those of Priestley; and his experiments on vegetation and respiration, founded on those views, were possessed of considerable value. These and other discoveries which stamp the character of Scheele as a philosopher, are to be found generally in the transactions of the Royal Society of Stockholm. Dr. Beddoes published an English translation of mo t of his dissertations, with useful and ingenious notes. There is also an English translation of his dissertation on air and fire, with notes by Richard Kirwan, esq.

In 1777 he was appointed by the medical college to be apothecary at Koping; and in this situation he remained until his death, although it was often wished that he had obtained a more conspicuous situation. He is said to have been offered an annuity of 300l. if he would settle in England, and that his death only prevented his accepting it. On May 19, 1786, he was confined to his bed; on the 21st he bequeathed his whole* property to the widow of his predecessor at Koping, whom, when his end was approaching, he married out of a principle of gratitude, and on the same day he died, aged only forty-four.

According to the report of his friends, the moral character of this ingenious man was irreproachable, and though his manners were reserved, and he mixed little in company, he was of a very friendly and communicative disposition. He attained high fame under very disadvantageous circumstances. He understood none of the modern languages, except the German and Swedish, so that he had not the benefit of the discoveries made by foreigners, unless by the slow and uncertain medium of translations. The important services, however, which he rendered to natural philosophy, entitled him to universal reputation, and he obtained it.

, a learned German, was born at Strasburg in 1621, and probably educated there. He applied himself principally to the study of Greek and Latin antiquities, and of history; and made himself a tolerable verbal critic upon Latin and Greek authors. He was driven out of his own country by the wars; and, as Christina of Sweden was at that time the general patroness of all men of letters, he withdrew into her kingdom in 1648. He was made, the same year, professor of eloquence and politics at Upsal afterwards, honorary professor, royal of the law of nature -and nations, andassessor of the royal college of antiquities; and, at length, librarian of the university of Upsal. He died in 1679, after havingpublished a great number of works. Many of his pieces relate to Qreek and Roman antiquities, and are to be found in. the collection of Qrseyius and Gronovius. He wrote notes uppn many ancient authors upon Ælian, Phaedrus, “Arrianl Tactica,” of which last he made also a Latin version Petronius, Hyginus, Julius Obsequens, Justin, &c. He was one of those who stoutly defended the authenticity of that fragment of Petronius, pretended to have been fou.nd at Trau which, however, is generally judged to be a forgery, and accordingly rejected by Burman and other critics.

, a considerable mathematician and astronomer, was born at Mundeilheitn in Schwaben, in 1575. He entered into the society of the Jesuits whenhe was twenty; and afterwards taught the Hebrew tongue and the mathematics at Ingolstadt, Friburg, Brisac, and Rome. At length, he became rector of the college of the Jesuits at Neisse in Silesia, and confessor to the archduke Charles. He died in 1650, at the age of seventylive.

Scheiner was chiefly remarkable for being one of the first who observed the spots in the sun with the telescope, though not the very first for his observations of those spots were first made, at Ingolstadt, in the latter part of 1611, whereas Galileo and Harriot both observed them in the latter part of the year before, or 1610. Scheiner continued his observations on the solar phenomena for many years afterwards at Rome, with great assiduity and accuracy, constantly making drawings of them on paper, describing their places, figures, magnitude, revolutions, and periods, so that Riccioli delivered it as his opinion that there was little reason to hope for any better observations of those spots. Des Cartes and Hevelius also say, that in their judgment, nothing can be expected of that kind more satisfactory. These observations were published in 1630, in one volume folio, under the title of “Rosa Ursina,” &c. Almost every page is adorned with an image of the. sun with spots. He wrote also several smaller pieces relating to mathematics and philosophy, the principal of which are, 1. “Ocultis, sive Fundamentnm Opticum,” &c, which was reprinted at London, in 1652, in 4to. 2. 4< Sol Eclipticus, Disquisitiones Mathematicse.“3.” De Controversiis ct NovttacihiM Astronomicis."

, a celebrated German physician and philosopher, was born March 3, 1649, at Jena,.;ui was son of Christopher Schelhamm T, a it an- lessor of anatomy and surgery in that city, and fir where he was also physician to the duke of Holstei“uthier died January 11, 1716, in his sixtyseventieth year leaving” Introductio in artem medicam," Hali. 1726, 4to, and a great number of valuable and learned wor > physu;, of which it is to be wished that a complete co: v'Jtion was published. He published also some botanical dissertations, and first described the peculiar change wliici during germination, takes place in the cotyledon of palms. The Schelhammera, in botany, was so called in honour of him. His life, by Scheffelius, in Latin, Visnr*r, 17 % 8vo, is prefixed to the letters written to him by several of the literati.

, an eminent physician and naturalist, was the son of a very learned physician of the same mimes at Zurich, where he was born, August 2, 1672. His father dying in the prime of life, he appears to have been left to the care of his mother, and his maternal grandfather. He was educated at Zurich under the ablest professors, of whom he has left us a list, but Says that he might with great propriety add his own name to the on cber, as he went through the greater part of his studies with no other guide than his own judgment. In 1692 he commenced his travels, and remained some time at \ltdorf, attending the lectures of Wagenseil, Hoffman^ father and son, Sturm, &c. In 1693 he went to Utrecht, where he took his degree of doctor of physic in Jan. 1694, and Pi 1695 returned to Nuremberg and Altdorf to study mathematics under Sturm and Eimmart. To Sturm he addressed a learned letter on the generation of fossil shells, which iie attempted to explain on mathematical principles; but, discovering the fallacy of this, he adopted the theory of our Dr. Woodward, whose work on the subject of the natural history of the earth he translated into Latin, and published at Zurich in 1704. Returning to Zurich, before this period, he was appoint-, ed first physician of the city, with the reversion of the professorship of mathematics. He now began to write various dissertations on subjects of natural history, particularly that of Swisserland, and wrote a system of natural history in German, which he published in parts in the years 1705, 6, and 7, the whole forming three small 4to volumes. He published afterwards three more in 1716, 1717, and 1718, which complete the natural history of Swisserland, with the exception of the plants, of which he had formed an herbal of eighteen vast volumes in folio. His “Nova litteraria Helvetica” began in 1702, and were continued to 1715. In 1694 he began his tours on the Alps, which he repeated for many years, the result of which was published under the title of “Itinera Alpina,” one volume of which was published at London in 1708, 4to, and four at Leyden in 1713. In the course of these journeys, he improved the geography of his country, by a small map of Toggenbourg, and by his map of Swisserland in four large sheets. Amidst all these pursuits, his official duties, and his extensive literary correspondence, he found leisure to gratify his taste for medallic history, and translated Jobert’s work on that subject, which does not, however, appear to have been printed. In 1712, Leibnitz, being acquainted with his learning and fame, procured him an invitation from the czar, Peter the Great, to become his majesty’s physician, but the council of Zurich induced him to decline the offer, by an additional salary. Some time afterward, he obtained a canonry; but, according to Meister, his colleagues had no very profound respect for him, of which he gives the following ludicrous proof: A favourite crane belonging to Dr. Scheuchzer one day made her escape, and the doctor was obliged to climb the roof of the house to recover her, which he did at no small risk. The canons are said to have declared on this occasion, that they would have given a pension to the crane, if the doctor had broke his neck. It appears that this disrespect was mutual. They considered Scheuchzer as an intruder, and he despised their ignorance in condemning the Copernican system, and the theory of Swammerdam, as profane and pernicious. He appears to have had a considerable hand in the political and ecclesiastical affairs of Zurich, and had at one time a sharp controversy on religion with a Jesuit of Lucerne, whom Meister describes as the Don Quixote of the Romish church. In 1731 appeared his great work, “Physica sacra,” in 4 vols. folio, which was immediately republished in French at Amsterdam, in both instances enriched with a profusion of fine plates illustrative of the natural history of the Bible. This had been preceded by some lesser works on the same subject, which were now incorporated. He did not long survive this learned publication, dying at Zurich about the end of June 1733. He was a member of many learned societies, of our Royal Society, and of those of Berlin, Vienna, &c. and carried on a most extensive correspondence with the principal literati of Europe. He left a well-chosen and numerous library, a rich museum of natural history, and a collection of medals. Besides the works we have incidentally noticed, he published, 1. “Herbarium Diluvianum,” Zurich, 1709, reprinted and enlarged, at Leyden, 1723, folio. 2. “Piscium querelse et vindicise,” Zurich, 1708, 4to. 3. “Oratio cle Matheseos su in Theologia,” ibid. 1711, 4to. 4. “Museum Diluvianum,” ibid. 1716, 8vo.5. “Homo diluvii testis,” ibid. 1726, 4to. G. “De Helvetii aeribus, aquis, locis, specimen,” ibid. 1728, 4to. He also wrote in German, a treatise on the mineral waters of Swisserland, Zurich, 1732, 4to. In 1740, Klein published “.Sciagraphia lithologica curiosa, seu lapidum figuratorum nomenclator, olim a Jo. Jac. Scheuchzero conscriptus, auctus et illustratus,” 4to. Of his “Physica Sacra,” we have noticed the first edition published at Augsburgh, 1731—1735, four vols. folio, or rather eight volumes in four, the text of which is in German; this edition is valued on account of its having the first impressions of the plates. The Amsterdam edition, 1732 38, 8 vols. has, however, the advantage of being in French, a language more generally understood, and has the same plates. Scheuchzer had a brother, professor of natural philosophy at Zurich, who died in 1737, and is known to all botanists by his laborious and learned “Agrostographia,” so valuable for its minute descriptions of grasses. He had a son with whom we seem more interested, John Gaspak Scheuchzer, who was born at Zurich in 1702, and after studying at home came over to England, and received the degree of' M. D. at Cambridge, during the royal visit of George I. in 1728, and died at London April 13, 1729, only twenty-seven years old. He had much of the genius and learning of his family, and was a good antiquary, medallist, and natural historian. He translated into English Koempfec’s history of Japan, 1727, 2 vols. folio, and had begun a translation 1 of Koempfer’s travels in Muscovy, Persia, &c. but did not live to complete it. He wrote also a treatise on inoculation. Some part of the correspondence of this learned family is in the British Museum.

, named Medula, an eminent artist, was born in 1522, at Sebenico, in Dalimtia. His parents, who were poor, placed him with a house-painter at Venice, where, at his leisure hours, he acquired a superior taste, by studying the etchings and compositions of Parmigiano and the works of Giorgione and Titian in the public buildings of the city. At length, Titian, being informed of his unfortunate situation and promising talents, took him under his care, and soon afterwards employed him in the library of St. Marco, where Schiavoni is said to have painted three entire cielings. Feeling. his strength, he ventured to paint, in competition with Tintoretto, a picture for the church of the Santa Croce, representing the visitation of the Virgin to Elizabeth; and though he did not equal his antagonist, yet he received a considerable share of applause. Schiavoni was accounted one of the finest colourists of the Venetian school, and to colouring sacrificed almost every other attribute of the art; yet his compositions are managed with great dexterity, and executed with astonishing freedom. Two of his most admired works are in the church of the Padri Teatini at Rimini, representing the Nativity and the Assumption of the Virgin, and his “Perseus and Andromeda,” and the “Apostles at the Sepulchre,” are in the royal collection at Windsor. He died at Venice in 1582, at the age of sixty.

, a very ingenious artist, was born at Bassano, in the Venetian territory, April 1, 1765. His father was a stationer, who was enabled to give him a useful, but limited education. From his infancy he had a peculiar taste for drawing; and attained such proficiency, that an able painter, Julius Golini, to whom some of his productions were shewn, undertook to instruct him in that art. At the age of thirteen Lewis was put under his care, and the high opinion he had formed of the hoy’s genius was confirmed by the rapid progress he made, while his amiahle disposition endeared him so much, that he loved him as his own son* After three years of useful instruction, he had the misfortune to lose this master, who expired in his arms. Left to pursue his own course, he turned his views to Count Remaudini, whose extensive typographical and chalcographical concern is rendered more famous by the giving employment to Bartolozzi and Volpato; and the works of those artists gave fresh impulse to the youth’s ardour for improvement. About this time he became acquainted with one Lorio, an indifferent engraver, with whom he worked about twelve months, when, finding he bad exhausted his fund of instructions, he resolved to alter his situation. A copy of a holy family in the line manner, from Bartolozzi, after Carlo Maratta, gained him immediate employment from Count Remaudini, and attracted the notice of Mr. Suntach, an engraver and printseller in opposition to Remaudini. About this time came to Bassano a wretched engraver of architecture, but a man of consummate craft ancf address. He became acquainted with Schiavonetti at Mr. Sumach’s, and was ultimately the means of bringing him to England, where he became acquainted with Bartolozzi, and lived in his house until he established himself on his own foundation; after which Schiavonetti cultivated his genius with a success; that answered the expectations which vtere first formed' of it, and conducted all his affairs with an uprightness and integrity that will cause his memory to be equally revered as a gentleman and an artist. He died at Bromptoiv June 7, 1810, in the forty-fourth year of his age; and on the -14-th was buried in Paddington church-yard, with a solemnity worthy of his talents and character.

In his person, Mr. Schiavonetti was rather ' tall, and well made, and his amiable modesty, equability of temper, ancj promptness to oblige, won the good will of all who saw and conversed with him. Many acts of his private life showed the excellence of his character; among others, as soon as he began to derive profit from his profession, he devoted a portion of it to the support of his relatives in Italy; and constantly remitted to his aged parent a stipend sufficient to ensure him comfort. suo

Some of his principal performances are, the “Madre Dolorosa,” after Vandyke the Portrait of that Master in the character of Paris Michael Angelo’s celebrated Cartoon of the Surprize of the Soldiers on the Banks of the Arno a series of Etchings, from designs by Blake, illustrative of Blair’s Grave: the Portrait of Mr. Blake, after Phillips, for the same work: the Landing of the British Troops in Egypt, from Loutherbourg; and the Etching of the Pilgrimage, from Stotbard’s esteemed picture. There is no circumstance which more forcibly shews Mr. Schiavonetti’s power of delineation, than his print from the Cartoon, considering the disadvantages under which he produced it. He had neither the benefit of an original, or an authentic copy, but engraved after a copy painted by H. Howard, II. A. from Sangallo’s copy of his own study of Michael Angelo’s Cartoon. The work of the “Canterbury Pilgrims” being no farther advanced than the etched state, is another and still more striking example of his powers as a draughtsman; every line is expressive of the object it aims to represent. This is the last great work of Mr, Schiavonetti’s hand. From his own avowal in conversation at various times since he undertook it, and even during his last illness, it was a performance on which he meant to concentrate all his powers, and to build his reputation. He had, however, others in view, particularly a portrait of the president of the Royal Society, from a picture by Mr. Phillips, and the splendid representation of the Stag Hunt, by Mr. West, in which Alexander III. king of Scotland was rescued from the fury of a stag by Colin Fitzgerald. Schiavonetti, in the opinion of his biographer, classes with Gerard Audran, with Edelinck, Strange, and Woollett. He not only possessed the powers of delineation, the harmony of lines, the union in tones and in a general effect, which severally distinguish these eminent men; but he added a brilliancy and playful movement to his productions, approaching more nearly to the free pencilling of the painter, than any thing that can be found in the performances of those artists.

, or rather Schedone (Bartolomeo), was born at Modena in 1560. He is said to have acquired the principles of the art of painting in the school of the Caracci, but must have remained there a very short time, as it is difficult to meet with any traces of their style in his works. He afterwards studied, and with the greatest success, the works and manner of Corregio. When his early works came to be admired, Ranuccio, duke of Parma, took him into his service, and for this patron he painted several pictures, which were among the principal ornaments of the collection of the king of Naples, who was heir to the Farnese family. Sir Robert Strange counted in that palace and the city of Naples near fourscore pictures by this artist. There are but few in the other collections. In the cathedral of Modena there is an admirable picture of his, of S. Geminiano restoring a dead child to life; there are also a few at Parma, but in general they are seldom to be met with to purchase. In all he is the imitator of Corregio, and between their works some connoisseurs have found it difficult to distinguish, nor has any artist so successfully imitated him, either in the harmony of his colouring, his knowledge of light and shadow, or the graces he has diffused throughout many of his compositions. Schidoni is said to have been addicted to gaming, which wasted his substance, and disturbed his mind; and at last to have fallen a sacrifice to it, not being able to overcome the mortification of having one night lost more than he was able to pay. He died at the age of fifty-six, in 1616.

, a German writer, principally known in this country as a dramatist, was born Nov. 10, 1759, at Marbach, in the duchy jf Wurtemberg, where his father was lieutenant in the service of the duke. While a boy, he was distinguished by uncommon ardour of imagination, which he never sought to limit or controul. When young, he was placed in the military school at Stuttgard, but disliked the necessary subordination. He was intended for the profession of surgery, and which he studied for some time; but from the freedom of his opinions, he was obliged to withdraw himself through apprehension of the consequences, and it is said that, at this time, he produced his first play, “The Robbers.” This tragedy, though full of faults and pernicious extravagancies, was the admiration of all the youth of enthusiastic sentiments in Germany, and several students at Leipsic deserted their college, with the avowed purpose of forming a troop of banditti in the forests of Bohemia; but their first disorders brought on them a summary punishment, which restored them to their senses, and Schiller’s biographer gravely tells us, that this circumstance added to his reputation. The tragedy certainly was quite adapted to the taste of Germany, was soon translated into several foreign languages, and the author appointed to the office of dramatic composer to the theatre of Mauheim. For this he now wrote his ' Cabal and Love,“the” Conspiracy of Fiesco,“and” Don Carlos,“and published a volume of poems, which procured him a wife of good family and fortune. This lady fell in love with him from reading his works, and is said to have roused him from those habits of dissipation in which he had in* dulged, and to which he was in great danger of falling a victim. He was now patronized by the duke of Saxe- Weimar, who conferred on him the title of aulic counsellor, and nominated him to the professorship of history and philosophy at the university of Jena. He had previously written an account of the” Revolt of the Netherlands from the Spanish government,“and he now set about composing his 4< History of the thirty Years’ War in Germany,” a work which has been much admired in his own country. At length he removed to Weimar, where the pension, as honorary professor from the duke, was continued to him; and produced the “History of the most memorable Conspira cies,” and the “Ghost-Seer,” which displayed the peculiar turn of his mind, and were much read. In the latter part of his life he conducted a monthly work published at Tubingen, and an annual poetical almanac, and composed a tragedy entitled “The Maid of Orleans.” He was the author of other dramatic pieces, some of which are known, though imperfectly, in this country, through the medium of translation. He died at Weimar, May 9, 1805, and he was interred with great funeral solemnity. In his private character Schiller was friendly, candid, and sincere. In his youth he affected eccentricity in his manners and appearance, and a degree of singularity seems always to have adhered to him. In his works, brilliant strokes of genius are unquestionably to be found, but more instances of extravagant representation of passion, and violation of truth and nature. They enjoyed some degree of popularity here, during the rage for translating and adapting German plays for our theatres; and although this be abated, they have contributed to the degeneracy of dramatic taste, and have not produced the happiest effects on our poetry.

, an eminent jurist, was born at Pegaw in Misnia, Aug. 29, 1632, and studied at Leipsic and Naumberg, where in 1651, he removed for two years to Jena, and then completed his course at Leipsic. In 1655 he took the degree of doctor in philosophy, as he did the same in the faculty of law at Strasburgh some years after. He practised for gome time as an advocate at Naumberg, where prince Maurice of Saxe made him keeper of his archives, and intendant or director of the territory of Sul in the county of Henneberg. About 1686 he accepted an invitation to Strasburgh, where he was appointed counsellor and advocate of the state, and honorary professor of the academy. He died there, May 14, 1705, in the seventythird year of his age. He wrote a great many volumes on subjects connected with antiquities and with his profession, the principal of which are, 1. “Codex juris Alemannici feudalis,” 1696, 3 vols. 4to. 2. “Thesaurus antiquitatum Teutonicarum,” 1728, 3 vols. fol. a posthumous publication, eJited by Scherzius at Uhn. 3. “Institutiones Canonici,” 1721, 8vo, in which he endeavours to reconcile the canon law to that in use among the protestant churches. 4. “Institutiones juris publici,” 1696, 2 vols. 8vo, one of his first, and a very learned work.

, a learned German, was born May 11, 1740, at Nordheim, and studied law at Gottingen. In 1762 he visited St. Petersburgh in company, with count Munich, in whose family he had been tutor for some time, but returned to his studies, and took his law degrees at Gottingen, whence he removed to Helmstadt. He was soon after appointed professor in the Caroline college at Brunswick, where he lectured on history, public law, and statistics until 1779, when the prince made him a counsellor and keeper of the archives at Wolfenbuttel. In 1784, the prince added the title of aulic counsellor. He died in 1801. In his visit to Russia he contracted a fondness for that country and its language, and employed much of his time on its history. This produced various works, published in German, “Letters on Russia,” “Materials for a knowledge of the Constitution and Government of Russia,” “An attempt towards a new introduction to the History of Russia,' 1 &c. &c. He published also” A manual of History,“V Historical miscellanies,” and “A History of Germany,” which is spoken of as an eloquent and useful work.

, an excellent Greek scholar, was born at Delitzch in Misnia, 1560, and became eminent for his skill in the Greek tongue and in the mathematics; both which, although they are accomplishments seldom found in the same person, he professed with great reputation for many years at Wittemberg, where he died in 1637. He published an edition of “Pindar” in 1616, 4to, with a Latin version and learned notes. While Heyne finds many defects in this edition, he honours the editor with the title of “Editorum Pindari facile princeps.” He wrote notes also upon Lycophron, Dionysius Periegetes, and Hesiod which last was published at Geneva in Jfi93 an excellent Concordance to the Greek Testament,“fol. the best edition of which is that of 1717 and a” Commentary on the New Testament," much esteemed, Argent. 1650, fol.

, a learned Lutheran divine, was born at Worms, in 1652. In his twenty-seventh year, he hurt his right arm with a fall so much, that he could never recover the use of it: he learned to write, however, so well with the left, as to be able to compose near a hundred publications, without the help of an amanuensis, but they are chiefly theses upon subjects of ecclesiastical history. One of his pieces is entitled “Arcana dominationis in rebus gestis Oliverii Cromwelli;” another is against a book, supposed to be Le Clerc’s, with this title, “Liberii de sancto amore Epistolse Theoiogicse*” He translated Pardie’s “Elements of Geometry” out of French into Latin. He died in 1726; and his funeral oration was made by John Laurence Mosheim, who speaks very highly in his praise.

, was son of a native of Zurich, in Switzerland, lieutenant in the Dutch army at the memorable siege of Bergen-op-Zoom in 1747; when, after a gallant resistance of two months, it was, as generally believed, surprised by the French under marshal Lowendal. Upon quitting the service Mr. Schnebbelie came over to England, and settled in the business of a confectioner, in which capacity he had frequently the honour of attending on king George II. He afterwards opened a shop at Rochester, where one of his sons still resides; and the same profession his son Jacob (who was born Aug. 30, 1760, in Duke’s Court, in the parish of St. Martin in the Fields) followed for some time, first at Canterbury, and afterwards at Hammersmith till, nature pointing out to him the proper road to fame and credit, he quitted his shop and commenced self-taught teacher, at Westminster and other public schools, of the art of drawing, in which he made a proficiency which introduced him to the notice of many among the learned and the great. To the earl of Leicester’s notice he was first introduced by accidentally sketching a view in his park near Hertford, and was employed by him in taking some of the most picturesque landscapes about Tunbridge Wells, with a view to their publication for his benefit. At their noble president’s express recommendation he was appointed draughtsman of the society of antiquaries; and filled that office with equal credit to himself and his patron. The merits of his pencil are too generally known and acknowledged to require any exaggerated eulogium, Happy in a quick eye and a discriminating taste, he caught the most beautiful objects in the happiest points of view; and for fidelity and elegance of delineation, may be ranked high among the list of firstrate artists. The works put forth on his own account are not numerous. In 1781 he intended to publish six views of St. Augustine’s Monastery, to be engraved by Mr. Rogers, &c. five of which. were completed, and one small view of that religious house was etched by himself. In 1787 he etched a plate representing the Serpentine River, part of Hyde Park, with the house of earl Bathurst, a distant view of Westminster Abbey, &c. now the property and in the possession of Mr. Jukes, intended to be aquatinted for publication, Mr. Jukes purchased also from him several views of Canterbury cathedral, St. Augustine’s monastery, &c. In March 1788 he published four views of St. Alban’s town and abbey, drawn and etched by himself; which in the November following were published, aquatinted by F. Jukes. About the same time that he set on foot the “Antiquaries Museum,' he became an associate with the late James Moore, esq. F. S. A. and Mr, Parkyns, in the f< Monastic Remains*;” which, after five numbers had appeared, he relinquished to his coadjutors. The assistance he occasionally gave to “The Gentleman’s Magazine,” the smallest part of his merit, it will be needless to particularize; his masterly hand being visible on whatever it was exerted. It is of more consequence to his fame to point out the beauties of many of the plates in the second and third volumes of the “Vetusta Monumenta” of the Society of Antiquaries and in the second volume of the “Sepulchral Monuments of Great Britain ,” the far greater part of the numerous plates in which are after him; or in the very many drawings he had finished, and the sketches he had designed, for Mr. Nichols’s “History of Leicestershire.” He had completed also some views of King’s college chapel at Cambridge, in a style worthy that most beautiful and most perfect of all our gothic buildings, and in a manner which had so far recommended him to royal notice, that, had his life been spared, there is no doubt but he would have been properly distinguished.

Mr. Schnebbelie was not contented with drawing the remains of antiquity; his close pursuits had made him a proficient in the study of our national antiquities, and a judge of the different styles of Gothic architecture and monuments. His description of the various places and buildings which he had examined were judicious and accurate, and discovered what attention he paid to them. An outline, if we may so call it, of Gothic architecture, had been suggested to him, to have been illustrated by drawings of the various parts; and he had actually begun to compile a work under the title of “Antique Dresses since the reign of William the Conqueror, collected from various works; with their authorities.” It may be safely affirmed, that few artists have produced more specimens of their talents, in their particular departments, than Mr. Schnebbelie in the four last years of his life, which is the short space qt" time since he seriously took up the pursuit.

He died in Poland-rstreet, Feb. 21, 1792, in. the thirtysecond year of his age, after an illness of six weeks, which commenced with a rheumatic fever, occasioned by too intense an application to his professional engagements, and terminated in a total debility of body; leaving an amiable widow and three children. Two sons and a daughter died during the last year of their father’s life; and a son was born five days after his death. He was interred in the burying-ground belonging to a new chanel then building for St. James’s parish, in the road from Tottenham court to Hampstead.

The very small portion of time which elapsed after the talents of Mr. Schnebbelie became universally acknowledged, did not enable him to lay by much store for his surviving family, who received a handsome relief from the Society to which he was draughtsman.

, a learned historian and antiquary, was born September 6, 1694-, at Sulzbourg, a town in the margraviate of Baden Dourlach; his father, holding an honourable office in the margrave’s court, died soon after in Alsace, leaving his son to the care of his mother. After tei: years studying at Dourlach and Basil, he kept a public exercise on some contested points of ancient history with applause, and finished his studies in eight years more at Strasbourg. In 1717, he there spoke a Latin panegyric on Ge^manicus, that favourite hero of Germany, which was printed by order of the city. In return for this favour he spoke a funeral oration on M. Barth, under whom he had studied; and another on Kuhn, the professor of eloquence and history there, whom he was soon after elected to succeed in 1720, at the age of twenty ­ix. The resort of students to him from the Northern nations was very great, and the princes of Germany sent their sons to study law under him. The professorship of history at Francfort on the Oder was offered to him; the czarina invited him to another at St. Petersburg, with the title of historiographer royal; Sweden offered him the same professorship at Upsal, formerly held by Scheffer and Boeder, his countrymen; and the university of Leyden named him successor to the learned Vitriarius. He preferred Strasbourg to all. Amidst the succession of lectures public and private, he found time to publish an innumerable quantity of historical and critical dissertations, too many to be here particularised. In 1725 he pronounced a congratulatory oration before king Stanislaus, in the name of the university, on the marriage of his daughter to the king of France; and, in 1726, another on the birth of the dauphin, besides an anniversary one on the king of France’s birthday, and others on his victories. In 1726 he quitted his professorship, and began his travels at the public expence. From Paris he went to Italy, stayed at Rome six months, re* ceived from the king of the Two Sicilies a copy of the “Antiquities of Herculaneum,” and from the duke of Parma the “Museum Florentinum.” He came to England at the beginning of the late king’s reign, and left it the day that Pere Courayer, driven out of Paris by theological disputes, arrived in London. He was now honoured with a canonry of St. Thomas, one of the most distinguished Lutheran chapters, and visited Paris a third time in 1728. Several dissertations by him are inserted in the “Memoirs of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres;” one, ascribing the invention of moveable types to Guttenberg of Strasbourg, 1440, against Meerman,

In 1733, he narrowly escaped from a dangerous illness, He had long meditated one of those works, which alone, by their importance, extent, and difficulty, might immortalise a society, a “History of Alsace.” To collect materials for this, he travelled into the Low Countries and Germany in 1738, and into Switzerland 1744. At Prague he found that the fragment of St. Mark’s Gospel, so carefully kept there, is a continuation of that at Venice. The chancellor D'Aguesseau sent for him to Paris, 1746, with the same view. His plan was to write the History of Alsace, and to illustrate its geography and policy before and under the Romans, under the Franks, Germans, and its present governors; and, in 1751, he presented it to the king of France, who had before honoured him with the title of “Historiographer Royal and Counsellor,” and then gave him an appointment of 2000 livres, and a copy of the catalogue of the royal library. He availed himself of this opportunity to plead the privileges of the Protestant university of Strasbourg, and obtained a confirmation of them. His second volume appeared in 1761; and he had prepared, as four supplements, a collection of charters and records, an ecclesiastical history, a literary history, and a list of authors who had treated of Alsace: the publication of these he recommended to Mr. Koch, his assistant and successor in his chair. Between these two volumes he published his ^Vindiciae Celticse,“in which he examines the origin, revolution, and language of the Celts. The” History of Baden“was his last considerable work, a duty which he thought he owed his country. He completed this history in seven volumes in four years; the first appeared in 176 3, the last in 1766. Having by this history illustrated his country, he prevailed upon the marquis of Baden to build a room, in which all its ancient monuments were deposited in 1763. He engaged with the elector palatine to found the academy of Manheim. He pronounced the inaugural discourse, and furnished the electoral treasury with antiques. He opened the public meetings of this academy, which are held twice a year, by a discourse as honorary president. He proved in two of these discourses, that no electoral house, no court in Germany, had produced a greater number of learned princes than the electoral house. In 1766, he presented to the elector the first volume of the” Memoirs of a Rising Academy," and promised one every two years.

A friend to humanity, and not in the least jealous ohis literary property, he made his library public. It was the most complete in the article of history that ever belonged to a private person, rich in Mss. medals, inscriptions, figures, vases, and ancient instruments of every kind, collected by him with great judgment in his travels. All these, in his old age, he presented to the city of Strasbourg, without any other condition except that his library should be open both to foreigners and his own countrymen. The city, however, rewarded this disinterested liberality by a pension of a hundred louis. He was admitted to the debates in the senate upon this occasion, and there complimented the senate and the city on the favour they had shewn to literature ever since its revival in Europe. November 22, 1770, closed the fiftieth year of the professorship of Mr. S.; this was celebrated by a public festival: the university assembled, and Mr. Lobstein, their orator, pronounced before them a discourse in praise of this extraordinary man, and the whole solemnity concluded with a grand entertainment. Mr. S. seemed born to outlive himself. Mr. Ring, one of his pupils, printed his life in 1769. In 1771, he was attacked by a slow fever, occasioned by an obstruction in his bowels and an ulcer in his lungs, after an illness of many months. He died August 7, the first day of the eleventh month of his seventy-seventh year, sensible to the last. He was buried in the collegiate church of St. Thomas, the city, in his favour, dispensing with the law which forbids interment within its limits.

, a learned English clergyman, was born July 6, 1756, and educated at Southampton-school, where he laid the foundation of his classical learning, and displayed his taste in some juvenile performances which were much approved. He afterwards cultivated these attainments under Dr. Warton at Winchester-school, whence he removed to Magdalen -college, Oxford, of which he became M. A. in 1781, and fellow and tutor. Although formed to excel in polite literature, his inclination led him into other pursuits, and the whole ceconomy of human life became the subject of his observation. The interests of nations, the relations of arts, the circuitous channels and the secret recesses of commerce, and the wide range of operations in manufactures and agriculture, were open to his intuition. His “Chronological View of the Roman Laws,” published in 1785, was the introduction to a larger work, for which he had furnished himself with ample materials, by his study of juridical an* tiquities. Connected with this, was his <k Treatise on the Maritime Laws of Rhodes,“in which he clearly investigated the origin, and elegantly described the nature, of the maritime codes which bore an analogy to the Rhodian laws. During the intervals of his occupation as tutor of the college, he visited the principal seats of commerce and manufactures in England and on the continent. The result of these researches was given, in 1787, in* his” Historical and Political Remarks on the Tariff of the Commercial Treaty with France/' which proved the very enlightened progress he had made in the science of political ceconomy. From that time he had, with minute attention, observed the effects of that famous treaty upon both nations; and he had made a considerable progress in printing a series of facts and collateral deductions, under the title of “Present State and Manufactures in France,” when he was interrupted by an excruciating disorder, which proved fatal April 6, 1792, at Bath, whither he had gone in hopes of relief from the waters. He was a man of an amiable disposition, and greatly lamented by his friends. He had taken orders, but had no preferment in the church.

, a distinguished general, was descended of a noble family in Germany, and waa the son of count Schomberg, by his first wife, an English lady, daughter of the lord Dudley; which count was killed at the battle of Prague in Bohemia in 1620, together with several of his sons. The duke was born in 1608. He served first in the army of the United Provinces, and afterwards became the particular confident of William II. prince of Orange; in whose last violent actions he had so great a share, and particularly in the attempt upon Amsterdam, that, on the prince’s death in 1650, he retired into France. Here he gained so high a reputation, that, next to the prince of Conde, and Turenne, he was esteemed the best general in that kingdom; though, on account of his firm adherence to the Protestant religion, he was not for a considerable time raised to the dignity of a marshal. In Nov. 1659 he offered his service to Charles II. for his restoration to the throne of England; and, the year following, the court of France being greatly solicitous for the interest of Portugal against the Spaniards, he was sent to Lisbon; and in his way thither passed through England, in order to concert measures with king Charles for the suppoxt of Portugal. Among other discourse which he had with, that prince, he advised his majesty to set up for the head of the Protestant religion; which would give him a vast ascendant among the princes of Germany, make him umpire of all their affairs, procure him great credit with the protestants of France, and keep that crown in perpetual fear of him. He urged him likewise not to part with Dunkirk, the sale of which was then in agitation; since, considering the naval power of England, it could not be taken, and the possession of it would keep both France and Spain in a dependence upon his majesty.

In Portugal he performed such eminent services to that kingdom that he was created a grandee of it, by the title of count Mertola, with a pension of 5000l. to himself and his heirs. In 1673 he came over again into England, to command the army; but, the French interest being then very odious to the English, though he would at any other time of his life have been acceptable to them, he was at that crisis looked on as one sent over from France to bring our army under French discipline. Finding himself, therefore, obnoxious to the nation, and at the same time not loved by the court, as being found not fit for the designs of the latter, he soon returned to France. In June 1676, he was left by the king of France, upon his return to Parisy with the command of his army in Flanders; and soon after obliged the prince of Orange to raise the siege of Maestricht, and was made a marshal of France. But, when the prosecution against those of the reformed religion was begun in that kingdom, he desired leave to return into his own country; which was denied him, aud all the favour he could obtain was to go to Portugal. and, though he had preserved that nation from falling under the yoke of Castile, yet now, when he came thither for refuge, the inquisition represented that matter of giving harbour to an heretic so odiously to the king, that he was forced to send the marshal away. He went thence to England; and, passing through Holland, entered into a particular confidence with the prince of Orange; and, being invited by the elector of Brandenburgh to Berlin, was made governor of Prussia, and placed at the head of all the elector’s armies. He was treated likewise by the young elector with the same regard that his father had shewn him; and, in 1688, was sent by him to Cleves, to command the troops which were raised by the empire for the defence of Cologne.

When the prince of Orange was almost ready for his expedition into England, marshal Schomberg obtained leave of the elector of Brandenbourg to accompany his highness in that attempt; and, after their arrival at London, he is supposed to have been the author of that remarkable stratagem for trying the affections of the people, by raising an universal apprehension over the kingdom of the approach of the Irish with fire and sword. Upon the prince’s advancement to the throne of England, he was appointed master of the ordnance, and general of his majesty’s forces; in April 1689, knight of the garter, and the same month naturalized by act of parliament; and, in May, was created a baron, earl, marquis, and duke of this kingdom, by the name and title of baron Teys, earl of Brentford, marquis of Harwich, and duke of Schomberg. The House of Commons likewise voted to him 100,000l. for the services which he had done; but he received only a small part of that sum, the king after his death paying his son 5000l. a year for the remainder. In Aug. 1689 he sailed for Ireland, with an army, for the reduction of that kingdom; and, having mustered all his forces there, and finding them to be not above 14,000 men, among whom there were but 2000 horse, he marched to Dundalk, where he posted himself; king James being come to Ardee. within five or six miles of him, with above thrice his number. Schomberg, therefore, being disappointed of the supplies from England, which had been promised him, and his army being so greatly inferior to the Irish, resolved to keep himself on the defensive. He lay there six weeks in a rainy season; and his men, for want of due management, contracted such diseases that almost one half of them perished.

He was censured by some for not making a bold attempt; and such complaints were sent of this to king William, that his majesty wrote twice to him, pressing him on the subject. But the duke saw that the enemy was well posted and well provided, and had several good officers among them; and knew that, if he met with a check, his whole army, and consequently all Ireland, had been lost, since he could not have made a regular retreat. The surest method was to preserve hi’s army; which would save Ulster, and although his conduct exposed him to the reproaches of some persons, better judges thought, that his management of this campaign was one of the greatest actions of his life. At the battle of the Boyne, July 1, 1690, he passed the river in his station, and immediately rallied and encouraged the French Protestants, who had been left exposed by the death of their commander, with this short harangue; “Aliens, messieurs, voila vos persecuteurs,” pointing to the French Papists in the enemy’s army. But these words were scarcely uttered, when a few of king James’s guards, who returned full speed to their main body, after the slaughter of their companions, and whom the French refugees suffered to pass, thinking them to 1 be of their own party, fell furiously upon the duke, and gave him two wounds over the head, which, however, were not mortal. Upon this, the French regiment acknowledged their error by committing a greater; for, firing rashly on the enemy, they shot him through the neck, of which wound he instantly died. He was buried in St. Patrick’s cathedral, where the dean and chapter erected a small monument to his honour, at their own expence, with an elegant inscription by Dr. Swift, which is printed in the Dean’s works.

Burnet tells us, that he was “a calm man, of great application and conduct, and thought much better than he spoke; of true judgment, of exact probity, and of an humble and obliging temper.” And another writer observes, that he had a thorough experience of the world; knew men and things better than any man of his profession evet clicl; and was as great in council as at the head of an army. He appeared courteous and affable to every person, and yet had an air of grandeur that commanded respect from all. In king William’s cabinet are the dispatches of the duke of Schomberg in Ireland to king William, which sir John Dalrymple has printed in the second volume of his memoirs “because,” he remarks, " they paint in lively colours the state of the army in that country clear Schoinberg of inactivity, which has been unjustly thrown upon him; and do honour to the talents of a man, who wrote with the elegant simplicity of Caesar, and to whose reputation and conduct, next to those of king William, the English nation owes the revolution.

, one of a family of physicians of some note in their day, was the son of Dr. Meyer Schomberg, a native of Cologne, a Jew, and, as it was said, librarian to some person of distinction abroad, which occupation he left, and came and settled in London, where he professed himself to be a physician; and, by art and address, obtained a lucrative situation amidst the faculty. In 1740 he had outstripped all the city physicians, and was in the annual receipt of four thousand pounds. He died March 4, 1761. This, his son, was born abroad, and at the age of two or three years was brought to England, where he received a liberal education, and afterwards studied at Leyden. After his return to London he set up in practice, but had a dispute with the college of physicians, as, we are told, his father had before him. The particulars of this dispute are not uninteresting in the history of the college.

After Dr. Schomberg had practised some years as a physician in London, he received a notice from the college of their intention to examine him in the usual form, and to admit him a licentiate. This notice he was thought to have treated with contempt; for, instead of submitting tothe examination, he objected to the names of some persons vyho were to be examined at the same time, and behaved, it is said, with some haughtiness to those of the college who, he complained, had used him ill, in ordering him to be examined in such company. The college considering themselves the sole judges of what persons they should upon, refused to attend to the doctor’s objection, but examined the persons against whom he seemed most to except; but this not tending to make up the dispute, they proceeded to interdict the doctor from practice until he had given such satisfaction as his conduct required. In the mean time the doctor submitted to be examined, and in 1750 procured the degree of doctor of physic to be conferred on him by the university of Cambridge; and, thus supported, demanded his admittance a second time, not as a licenciate, but one of the body. This demand was refused to be complied with, and it was objected, that the doctor, though naturalized, could not hold the office of censor of the college, which was an office of trust; and this refusal brought the determination of the business to the decision of the lawyers. A petition was presented to the king, praying him, in the person of the lord chancellor, to exercise his visitatorial power over the college, and restore the licenciates to their rights, which, by their arbitrary proceedings, the president and fellows had for a succession of ages deprived them of. This petition came on to be heard at Lincoln’s Inn hall, before the lord chief justice Willis, baron Smythe, and judge Wilmot, lords commissioners of the great seal; but the allegations therein contained not being established, the same was dismissed. This attack on the college was the most formidable it erer sustained.

In this dispute Dr. Schomberg was supposed to have Employed his pen against his adversaries with considerable effect. It is certain he was well supported by his friends; One of whom, Moses Mendez, esq. exposed his opponents to ridicule, in a performance entitled “The Battiad,” since Reprinted in Billy’s Repository.

From this period Dr. Schomberg took his station in the medical profession, with credit and approbation, though without the success that inferior talents sometimes experienced. On the last illness of David Garrick, he was fcalled in, and hailed, by his dying friend, in the affectionate terms of “though last not least in'our dear love.” He survived Garrick but a short time, dying at his house in Conduit-street, the 4th of March, 1780; and the following character was given of him by one who seems to have known him well:

"His great talents and knowledge in his profession, were universally acknowledged by the gentlemen of the faculty; and his tenderness and humanity recommended him to the friendship and esteem, as well as veneration, of his patients. He was endued with uncommon quickness and sagacity in discovering the sources, and tracing the progress of a disorder; and though in general a friend to prudent regimen, rather than medicine, yet, in emergent cases, he prescribed with a correct and happy boldness equal to the occasiom He was so averse from that sordid avarice generally charged, perhaps often with great injus* tice, on the faculty, that many of his friends in affluent cii> cumstances found it impossible to force on him that reward for his services which he had so fairly earned, and which his attendance so well merited. As a man he was sincere and just in his principles, frank and amiable in his temper, instructive and lively in conversation; his many singulari* ties endearing him still further to his acquaintance, as they proceeded from an honest plainness of manner, and visibly flowed from a benevolent simplicity of heart. He was, for many days, sensible of his approaching end, which he encountered with a calmness and resignation, not easily to be imitated by those who now regret the loss of so good a man, so valuable a friend, and so skilful a physician/'

Dr. Schomberg had a younger brother, Ralph Schomberg, M. D. who first settled at Yarmouth as a physician^ and published some works on professional subjects that indicated ability, and others from which he derived little reputation. Of the former kind are, 1. “Aphorismi practici, sive observationes medicse,” for the use of students, and in alphabetical order, 1750, 8vo. 2. “Prosperi Martiani Annotationes in csecas praenotationes synopsis,” 175 1 * 3. “Van Swieten’s Commentaries” abridged. 4. “A Treatise of the Colica Pictonum, or Dry Belly-ache,” 1764, 8vo. 5. “Duport de signis morborum libri quatuor,” 1766. Of the latter, are some dramatic pieces of very little value, and 6. “An Ode on the present rebellion,” 1746. 7. “An Account of the present rebellion,” 1746. 8. “The Life of Maecenas,” 1767, 12mo, taken without acknowledgment from Meibomius. 9. “A critical Dissertation on the characters and Writings of Pindar and Horace, in a letter to the right hon. the earl of B” also a shame* ful instance of plagiarism from Blondell’s “Comparison de Pindare et D' Horace.” It would have been well if his pilferings had only been from books; but after he had removed to Bath, and practised there some years with considerable success, he tried his skill upon the funds of a public charity, and, detection following, was obliged to make a precipitate retreat from Bath, and from public practice. He appears to have hid himself first at Pangbourn in Berkshire, and afterwards at Heading, where he died June 29, 1792. In the obituary he is called “Ralph Schornberg, Esq.”

, a noted German philosopher and mathematician, was born at Carolostadt in 1477, and died in 1547, aged seventy. From his uncommon acquirements, he was chosen mathematical professor at Nuremberg when he was but a young man. He wrote a great many works, and was particularly famous for his astronomical tables, which he published after the manner of those of Regiomontanus, and to which he gave the title of Resolute, on account of their clearness. But, notwithstanding his great knowledge, he was, after the fashion of the times, much addicted to judicial astrology, which he took great pains to improve. The list of his writings is chiefly as follows: I. “Three Books of Judicial Astrology.” 2. “The astronomical tables named Resolutoj.” 3. “De Usu Globi Stelliferi; De Compositione Giobi Ccelestis De Usu Globi Terrestris, et de Compositione ejusdem.” 4. “Æquatorium Astronomicum.” 5. “Libeilus de Distantiis Locorum per Instrumenturn et Numeros investigandis.” 6. “De Compositione Torqueti.” 7. “In Constructionem et Usum Rectangnli sive Radii Astronomic! Annotationes.” S. “Horarii Cylindri Canones.” 9. “Planisphserium, sen Meteoriscopium.” 10. “Organum Uranicum.” 11.“Instrumentum Impedimentorum Luna3.” All printed at Nuremberg, in 1551, folio. Of these, the large treatise of dialling rendered him more known in the learned world than all his other works besides, in which he discovers a surprising genius and fund of learning of that kind; but some have attributed this to his son.

, a learned Norwegian, was born at Skatnaes, in Nordland, in 1722. He went in 1740 to the school of Drontheim, the rector of which conceived so high an opinion of his talents, as to assist him in carrying on his studies at Copenhagen, where in 1758, he was elected a member of the academy of sciences at Copenhagen. In 1764 he was appointed professor of history and eloquence at Sora, and received literary honuurs from various societies. In 1773, 1774, and 1775, he went on a tour, at the king’s expence, through various parts of Norway, to examine the remains of antiquity, but was recalled to Copenhagen to be keeper of the archives, and in 1776 was appointed a member of the society formed for publishing Icelandic works from the collection of Arnas Magnaeus. He died July 18, 1780. He is said to have passed his time and employed his thoughts entirely on his peculiar studies, having an utter aversion to theological controversy, and being equally partial to men of merit of all persuasions. His works are numerous, but many of them are academical dissertations. Among those of a more permanent form are “An Essay towards the ancient Geography of the Northern Countries, particularly Norway” “Observations on the old Northern Marriages and Weddings” “De Anni Ratione apud veteres Septentrionales” “History of Norway from the foundation of the kingdom till the time of Harold Haarfager,” 1771—1781, 4 vols. 4 to, the last volume edited by Suhm “Travels through Norway,” &c. He was also the contributor of many papers to the Transactions of the Norwegian society, and of the academy of sciences at Copenhagen, on subjects of antiquity, bearing some relation to the northern nations.

, a learned and very laborious writer, was born April 1, 1614, at Utrecht, and was successively professor of languages, rhetoric, history, natural philosophy, logic, and experimental philosophy in that city, at Deventer, Groningen, and lastly, at Francfort upon Oder, where he died in 1665, aged fifty-one. Schoockius delighted in singular subjects, and has left a prodigious number of works. Burman says he never knew a man who published so much and acquired so little fame in the learned world. Some of his works are critical, others on philosophy, divinity, history, and literature, chiefly ia 12 mo or 8vo, &c. The most known are, tracts on turfs, “De Turffis, seu de cespitibus Bituminosis” “On Butter;” “On Antipathy to Cheese” “On Eggs and Chickens;” “On Inundations” “De Harengis, seu Halecibus” “De Signaturis foetus” “De Ciconiis” “De Nihilo” “De Sternutatione” “De figmento legis Regies” “De Bonis Ecclesiasticis et Canouicis,” 4toj “De Statu Reipublicse faederati Belgii,” &c. c. He wrote also against Des Cartes, at the request of the famous Voetius, with whom he was much connected. Some other pieces on singular subjects are in his “Exercitationes variae,” 1663, 4to, reprinted under the title of “Martini Themidis exercitationes,” 1688, 4to, &C.

, professor of mathematics at Leyden about the middle of the seventeenth century, was a very acute proficient in that science. He published, in 1649, an edition of Descartes’s geometry, with learned and elaborate annotations on that work, as also those of Beaume, Hudde, and Van Heauralt. Schooten published also two very useful and learned works of his own composition; “Principia Matheseos universalis,” 1651, 4to; and “Exercitationes Mathematics,” 1657, 4to.

, a very learned German, to whom the republic of letters has been considerably indebted, was born at Antwerp, Sept. 12, 1552; and educated at Louvain. Upon the taking and sacking of Antwerp in 1577, he retired to Douay; and, after some stay there, went to Paris, where Busbequius received him into his house, and made him partner of his studies. Two years after, he went into Spain, and was at first at Madrid; then he removed to Alcala, and then in 1580 to Toledo, where his great reputation procured him a Greek professorship. The cardinal Gaspar Quiroga, abp. of Toledo, conceived at the same time such an esteem for him, that he lodged him in his palace, and entertained him as long as he remained in that place. In 1584, he was invited to Saragossa, to teach rhetoric and the Greek language; and, two years after, entered into the society of Jesuits, and was called by the general of the order into Italy to teach rhetoric at Rome, He continued three years there., and then returned to his own country, where he spent the remainder of a long life in study and writing books. He was not only well skilled in Latin and Greek learning, but had also in him a candour and generosity seldom to be found among the men of his order. He had an earnest desire to oblige all mankind, of what religion or country soever and would freely communicate even with heretics, if the cause of letters could her served: hence protestant writers every where mention him with respect. He died at Antwerp Jan. 23, 1629, after having published a great number of books. Besides works more immediately connected with and relating to his own profession, he gave editions of, and wrote notes upon, several of the classics; among which were Aurelius Victor, Pomponius Mela, Seneca Rhetor, Cornelius Nepos, Vale* rius Flaccus, &c. He wrote the life of Francis di Borgia, and “Hispania illustrata,” 4 vols. folio, hut there are reasons for doubting whether the “Bibliotheca Hispana,” $ vols. in one, 4to, was a publication of his own; it seems rather to have been compiled from his Mss. He published, however, an edition of Basil’s works, and is said to have translated Photius; but this has been thought to be so much below the abilities and learning of Schott, that some have questioned his having been the author of it.

, a learned Jesuit, was born in 1608, in the diocese of Wurtzburg. His favourite studies were philosophy and mathematics, which he taught till his death. He passed several years at Palermo, whence he removed to Rome, where he contracted an intimacy with the celebrated Kircher, who communicated to him several of his observations on the arts and sciences. Schott was author of several works, of which the most remarkable are, 1, “Physica curiosa; sive Mirabilia Naturae et artis,” 1667, 4to. 2. “Magia naturalis et artificialis,” 1657 59, 4 vols. 4to, reprinted in 1677. 3. “Technica curiosa,” Norimberg, 1664, 4to, in which is found the first idea of the airpump. 4. “Anatomia Physico-hydrostatica Fontium et Fluminum.” 5. “Organum Mathematicum.” In the various writings of this Jesuit are to be met with the germs of the greater part of modern experiments in physics. Complete sets of them should consist of 20 vols., but they are not easily procured, as they were almost entirely forgotten, till brought to notice in 1785 by the abbé Mercier, in his “Notice des ouvrages de Caspar Schott.”

, a Dutch commentator, was the son of Theodore Schrevelius, first rector of the school at Haerlem, the history of which city he published, and afterwards rector of that of Leyden. He was born probably at the former place, and removed to Leyden with his father in 1625, who being then advanced in years resigned his office in favour of Cornelius in 1642. Cornelius appears before this to have studied and took his degrees in medicine, but his promotion to the school turned his attention to classical pursuits, in the course of which he pub­]ished editions variorum of Hesiod, Homer, Claudian, Virgil, Lucan, Martial, Juvenal and Persius, Erasmus’s colloquies, &c. none of which have been so fortunate as to obtain the approbation of modern critics. He applied, however, to lexicography with more success, and besides a good edition of the Greek part of Hesychius’s Lexicon, published himself a Greek and Latin Dictionary, which has been found so useful to beginners, that perhaps few works of the kind have gone through so many editions. Those of this country, where it still continues to be printed, have been enlarged and improved by Hill, Bowyer, and others. Schrevelius died in 1667.

, a German divine, was bora at Groningen, where he studied till 1706, and greatly distinguished himself by taste and skill in Arabic learning. He became a minister of Wassenar, and professor of the oriental tongues at Franeker. At length he was invited to Leyden, where he taught Hebrew and the oriental languages with reputation till his death, which happened in 1750. There are many works of Schultens, which shew profound learning and just criticism as, “Commentaries upon Job and the Proverbs” a book, entitled “Vet us et regia via Hebraizandi” “A Treatise of Hebrew Roots,” &c. He had a son John Jacob Schultens, who was professor of divinity and oriental languages at Leyden, in his room. This John Jacob was father to the subject of the following article.

, was born Feb. 15, 1749, at Herborn (where his father was at that time divinityprofessor), and was educated at the university at Leyden, where he applied himself with great diligence to the Arabic, under his father’s instructions, and those of Scheidius, who then lodged in his house. By his father’s advice, he commenced his study of the eastern languages by learning the Arabic, to which he applied during two years, before he began the Hebrew. This, among other reasons, may account for the preference which he always gave to the Arabic literature, and which was so great that he was often heard to wish that the duties of his station would allow him to devote the whole of his time to it. He, however, studied the Greek and Latin classics with the utmost diligence under Hemsterhuis, Rhunkenius, and Valkenaar. He also cultivated an acquaintance with the best modem writers, among whom he in general gave the preference to the English; he was remarkably fond of Pope; and of Shakspeare he was an enthusiastic admirer.

In 1772, when only in his twenty-third year, he published a work entitled “Anthologia Sententiarum Arabicarum,” with a Latin translation and notes, of which sir William Jones testified his approbation. Soon after this Schultens went to England, in order to examine the Arabic Mss. in the Bodleian library, and resided for some time at Oxford, as a gentleman commoner of Wadham college. Here in less than three months during the short winter days, he transcribed Pocock’s “Meidanius” with his translation and notes, a work which took up no less than 646 folio pages. The late professor White, in a letter to the father of Schultens, says of him: “It is impossible for any one to be more generally respected in this place, or indeed to be more deserving of it. His abilities, his amiable disposition, and his polite behaviour, recommend him strongly to all those among us who know him only by reputation, and endear him to all who are personally acquainted with him.” The university testified its sense of his extraordinary merit, by conferring on him (in May 1773) the degree of M. A. by diploma. He also visited Cambridge, where he spent a fortnight; during which time he corrected several errors in the catalogue of Arabic manuscripts, and made several additions to it. In London he published a specimen of Pocock’s “Meidanius.” Dr. Morton offered to make him his assistant at the British Museum, and to secure to him the reversion of his own place but the ambition of Schultens was to be a professor of Eastern languages and as there was no probability of this appointment in England, he determined to return to Holland. Sir William Jones, whose friendship he assiduously cultivated, advised him to study the Persian, which he did with great diligence but he complained that this pursuit was often interrupted by other avocations, and that he was not able to devote so much time to it as he wished.

Soon alter his arrival in the United Provinces, he was chosen professor of oriental languages in the academical school of Amsterdam, where he resided during five years, and enjoyed the esteem and friendship of a numerous acquaintance. Besides Latin Lectures to the students, he delivered some in Dutch, on the Jewish antiquities and oriental history, which were much frequented and greatly admired. On the death of his father, in 1773, he was called to Leyden as his successor. In Nov. 1792, he was attacked by a malignant catarrhal fever that terminated in a consumption, of which he died in August 1793. Some time before his death, his physician found him reading the latter part of St. John’s gospel, of which he expressed the warmest admiration, and added, “It is no small consolation to me, that, in the vigour of health, I never thought less highly of the character and religion of Christ, than I do now, in the debility of sickness. Of the truth and excellence of Christianity I have always been convinced, and have always, as far as human frailty would allow, endeavoured so to express this conviction that, in these my last hours, I might with confidence look forwards to a blessed immortality.” Schultens, in his private character, was in every respect an amiable and worthy man.

As a teacher, professor Schultens had the happy talent of rendering the driest subjects plain and interesting to his pupils. This was particularly the case with the principles of the Hebrew grammar, an intimate and accurate knowledge of which he recommended as indispensably necessary to all who wished to understand the Old Testament in the original language. In translating and explaining the Bible, he preserved a judicious medium between those who^ thought the Hebrew text too sacred to be the subject of criticism; and those who, like Houbigant, without a sufficient acquaintance with the genius of the language, ventured on needless alterations. Hence he was. much displeased with a work by professor Kocherus of Berne, entitled “Vindiciue sacri textus Hebraei Esaiae vatis, adversus 11. Lowthi criticam;” concerning which he said, in a letter to Dr. Findlay, of Glasgow, “It violates the bounds of moderation and decency by the assertion that the text of Isaiah could not gain any thing by Dr. Lowth’s conjectures. I am of a very different opinion. When at Oxford and London, I was intimately acquainted with bishop Lowth, had an opportunity of knowing his excellent disposition, and am therefore much vexed that Kocherus, from his fiery zeal against innovation, should have been induced to treat him with seventy, as if the bishop had been a rash and petulant critic.” Schultens’s sentiments on this subject are more fully expressed in some articles which he wrote for the “Bihliotheca Critica,” published by Wyttenbach, particularly in the review of Kennicoi’s Bible. These judicious sentiments, together with his extensive abilities and knowledge of the subject, his eulogist observes, rendered him admirably qualified to have given a new version of the Old Testament. This at one time he designed, and nearly finished a translation of the book of Job, which was published after his death by Herman Muntinge, 1794, 8vo, but his sentiments of this portion of sacred writ are so much at variance with those of the most able and popular commentators, that we question if it will meet with general approbation.

, a most learned German lady, was the daughter of parents who were both descended from noble Protestant families, and was born at Cologne, in 1607. She discovered from her infancy an uncommon facility in acquiring various accomplishments, as cutting with her scissors upon paper all sorts of figures, without any model, designing flowers, embroidery, music vocal and instrumental, painting-, sculpture, and engraving; and is said to have succeeded equally in all these arts. Mr. Evelyn, in his “History of Chalcography,” has observed, that “the very knowing Anna Maria a Schurman is skilled in this art with innumerable others, even to a prodigy of her sex.” Her hand-xvriting in all languages was inimitable; and some curious persons have preserved specimens of it in their cabinets. M. Joby, in his journey to Minister, relates, that he was an eye-witness to the beauty of her writing, in French, Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, and Arabic; and of her skill in drawing in miniature, and making portraits upon glass with the point of a diamond. She painted her own picture by means of a looking-glass; and made artificial pearls so like natural ones, that they could not be distinguished but by pricking them with a needle.

The powers of. her understanding were not inferior to her skill in those arts: for at eleven, when her brothers were examined in Latin, she often whispered to them what they were to answer, though she was only a casual hearer of their lessons. Her father therefore began to instruct her more perfectly in that knowledge which made her so justly celebrated; and very soon the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages became so familiar to her, that she not only wrote, but spoke them, in a manner which surprised the most learned men. She made a great progress also in the Syriac, Chaldee, Arabic, and Ethiopic; and of the living languages, she understood and spoke readily, the French, English, and Italian. She was competently versed in geography, astronomy, philosophy, and the sciences, so as to be able to judge of them with exactness: but all these accomplishments yielded at last to divinity, and the study of the scriptures.

Her father, who had settled at Utrecht while she was an infant, and afterwards removed to Franeker for the more convenient education of his children, died there in 1623. His widow then returned to Utrecht, where Anna Maria continued her studies very intensely; which probably prevented her from marrying, as she might have done advantageously v.ith Mr. Cats, pensionary of Holland, and a celebrated poet, who wrote verses in her praise when she was only fourteen. Her modesty, which was as great as her knowledge, would have kept her in obscurity, if Rivetus, Spanheim, and Vossius, had not made her merit known. Salmasius also, Beverovicius, and Huygens, maintained a literary correspondence with her; and, by shewing her letters, spread her fame into foreign countries. This procured her a correspondence with Balzac, Gassendi, Mersennus, Bo chart, Conrart, and other eminent men; persons of the first rank paid her visits, and cardinal Richelieu likewise shewed her marks of his esteem. About 1650, a great alteration took place in her religious system. She performed her devotions in private, without frequenting any church, upon which it was reported that she was inclined to popery; but she attached herself to the famous mystic Labadie, and embracing his principles and practice, lived some time with him at Altena, in Holstein, and attended him at his death there in 1674. She afterwards retired to Wiewart, in Friseland, where the famous Penn, the Quaker, visited her in 1677; she died at this place in 1678. She took for her device these words of St. Ignatius: “Amor meus crucifixus est.”

She wrote “De vitae humanae termino,” Ultraj. 1639; “Dissertatio de ingenii muliebris ad doctrinam et meliores literas aptitudine,” L. Bat. 1641, 12 mo. These two pieces, with letters in French, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, to her learned correspondents, were printed in 1648, under the title of “A. M. a Schurman Opuscula Hebrsea, Grseca, Latina, Gallica; prosaica & metrica” enlarged in a 2d edition at Leyden, 1650, 12 mo. She wrote afterwards, “Eukleria, seu rnelioris partis electio.” This is a defence of her attachment to Labadie, and was printed at Altena in 1673, when she was with him.

, a learned German, was born December 1641, at Corback, in the county of Waldeck. Having taken a doctor’s degree in philosophy at Wittemberg, in 1664, he returned to Corbac, where he taught during some time instead of his father, and then returning to Wittemberg, published a learned piece, entitled “Judicium de novissimis prudentise civilis scriptoribus,” &c. under the assumed name of “Eubulus Theodatus Sarckmasius.” Jn this little work, which consists but of a leaf and half, the author passes judgment very freely on fifteen German lawyers, or political writers, which raised him many enemies, and engaged him in a literary war, which produced a great number of pieces collected by Crusius, 8vo, under the title of “Acta Siirckmasiana,” and even occasioned his being struck out from the list of doctors by the university of Wittemberg. He was, however, not only restored to that title two years after, but appointed professor of history, then of poetry, and at length of Greek. In 1700, Schurtztieisch succeeded to the rhetorical chair, and became counsellor and librarian to the duke of Saxe-Weimar, and died July 7, 1708. He left a great number of learned works on history, poetry, criticism, literature, &c. the most celebrated of which are, “Disputationes historic^ civiles,” Leipsic, 1699,3 torn. 4to. Henry Leonard Schurtzfteisch, his brother, was also author of some works, among which is, “Historia Ensiferorum ordinis Teutonic!,” Wittemberg, 1701, 12mo.

, who passes for being the discoverer of that fatal composition so well known by the name of gun-powder, was born at Friburg in Germany in the thirteenth century, and is said to have discovered this dangerous secret in prison, as he was making some chemical experiments. Albertus Magnus speaks of him as a Cordelier, and says that he invented some sorts of firearms. The discovery of this fatal secret has been attributed by some to the Chinese, and by others to our countryman, Roger Bacon: however, the use of artillery was introduced about the time of the battle of Crecy, 1346, and made an absolute change in the whole art of war; whether a beneficial one, has not yet been decided.

, a learned German writer, and one of the most arrogant and contentious critics of his time, was born about 1576; and studied first at Amberg, then at Heidelberg, afterwards at Altdorf, at the charges of the elector palatine. Having made a considerable stay at Ingolstadt, he returned to Altdorff, where he began to publish some of his works. Ottavia Ferrari, a celebrated professor at Padua, says, that he “published books when he was but sixteen, which deserved to be admired by old men;” some, however, of his early productions do not deserve this encomium. He took a journey into Italy; and, after he had been some time at Verona, returned into Germany, whence he went again into Italy, and published at Ferrara a panegyric upon the king of Spain and pope Clement VIII. Iti 1599, he embraced the Roman catholic religion, but had an extraordinary antipathy to the Jesuits; against whom, Baillet tells us, he wrote about thirty treatises under fictitious names. Nor was he more lenient to the Protestants, and solicited the princes to extirpate them by the most bloody means, in a book which he published at Pavia in 1619, under the title of “Gasp. Scioppii Consiliarii Regii Classieum belli sa'cri, sive, Heldus Redivivus.” The following is the title of another, printed at Mentz in 1612, against Philip Mornay du Plessis; and which, as he tells us in the title-page, he sent to James I. of England, by way of new-year’s gift: “Alexipharmacum Regium felli clraconum et veneno aspidum sub Philippi Mornaei de Piessis nuper Papatus historia abdito appositum, et sereniss. Jacobo Magnae Britanniae Regi strenae Januariae loco muneri missum.” He had before attacked the king of England, by publishing in 1611, two books with these titles; “Ec­clesiasticus auctoritati Sereniss. D. Jacob), &c. oppositus,” and “Collyrium Regium Britanniae Regi graviter ex oculis laboranti muneri missum;” that is, “An Eye-salve for the use of his Britannic majesty.” In the first of these pieces he ventured to attack Henry IV. of France in a most violent manner which occasioned his book to be burnt at Paris. He gloried, however, in this disgrace and, according to his own account, had the farther honour of being hanged in effigy in a farce, which was acted before the king of England. He did not, however, always escape with impunity; for, in 1614, the servants of the English ambassador are said to have beaten him with great severity at Madrid. Of the wounds he received in this conflict, he, as usual, made his boasts, as he also did of having been the principal contriver of the Catholic league, which proved so ruinous to the Protestants in Germany. In his way through Venice in 1607, he had a conference with father Paul, whom he endeavoured by promises and threats to bring over to the pope’s party; which, perhaps, with other circumstances, occasioned his being imprisoned there three or four days. After he had spent many years in literary contests, he applied himself to the prophecies of holy scripture, and flattered himself that he had discovered the true key to them. He sent some of these prophetical discoveries to cardinal Mazarine, who paid no attention to them. It has been said that he had thoughts at last of going back to the communion of Protestants; but this, resting upon the single testimony of Hornius, has not been generally believed. He died in 1649.

He was indisputably a very learned man; and, had his moderation and probity been equal to his learning, might justly have been accounted an ornament to the republic of letters: his application to study, his memory, the multitude of his books, and his quickness of parts, are surprising. Ferrarius tells us that he studied day and night; that, during the last fourteen years of his life, he kept himself shut tip in a little room, and that his conversation with those who went to visit him ran only upon learning; that, like another Ezra, he might have restored the holy scripture, if it had been lost, for that he could repeat it almost by heart; and that the number of his books exceeded the number of his years. He left behind him also several manuscripts, which, as Morhoff tells us, “remained in the hands of Picruccius, professor at Padua, and are not yet published, to the no small indignation of the learned world.” He was nevertheless a man of a malignant and contentious spirit, and lived in continual hostility with the learned of his time, nor did he spare the best writers of ancient Rome, even Cicero himself, whose language he censured for improprieties and barbarisms. Niceron enumerates upwards of an hundred different publications by Scioppius, all of which are now fallen into oblivion, or only occasionally consulted. They are mostly polemical, on subjects of criticism, religious opinions, the Jesuits, Protestants, &c. many of them under the fictitious names of Nicodemus Macer, Oporinus Grubinius, Aspasius Crosippus, Holofernes Krigsoederus, and other barbarous assumptions.

, an eminent naturalist, was born in 1725, at Cavalese, in the bishopric of Trent. He studied at Inspruck, and at twenty years old obtained the degree of licentiate in medicine, and afterwards was intrusted with the care of the hospitals of Trent, and of hi* native town Cavalese; but as this stage was too small for his ambition, he requested that his parents would permit him to go to Venice. In that city, under the auspices of Lo taria Lotti, he extended his knowledge of medicine, and added to it a more intimate acquaintance with pharmacy, botany, and natural history. On his return he traversed the mountains of Tirol and Carniola, where he laid the foundation of his “Flora” and “Entomologia Carniolica.” In 1754- he accompanied count de Firmian, prince bishop, and afterwards cardinal, to Gratz, from whence he went to Vienna to obtain a diploma to practice in the Austrian dominions. His examination is said to have been rigorous, and his thesis on a new method of classing plants to have been received with great regard. The friendship of Van Swieten, if in this instance it can be called friendship, procured him the office of first physician to the Austrian miners of Tirol. In this banishment he continued more than ten years; for it was only in 1766, after repeated solicitations, that he obtained the post of counsellor in the mining department, and professor of mineralogy at Schemnitz; but in this interval he produced his “Anni tres Historico-naturales,” 1769 to 1771, 8vo. In this new office he was indefatigable in teaching, exploring new mines, composing different works on fossils, and improving the method of treating minerals; but after ten years’ labour, he was not able to obtain the newly-established chair of natural history at Vienna; yet soon after his attempt, about the end of 1776, he was appointed professor of chemistry and botany at Pavia. In this situation he published some pharmaceutical essays, translated and greatly augmented Macquer’s Dictionary, and explained the contents of the cabinet of natural history belonging to the university, under the title of " Deliciae Florae et Faunae Insubricee,' 7 the last part of which he did not live to complete. The president of the Linnsean society, who dedicated the Scopolia to his memory, informs us that, after some domestic chagrin, and much public persecution, he died at Pavia, May 8, 1788. He had been concerned with all the most eminent men of that university, Volta, Fontana, and others, in detecting the misconduct of their colleague, the celebrated Spallanzani, who had robbed the public museum. But the emperor, loth to dismiss so able a professor, contented himself with a personal rebuke at Vienna to the culprit, and his accusers were silenced, in a manner which was supposed to have caused the death of Scopoli. The survivors told their story, as explicitly as they durst, in a circular letter to the learned of Europe.

, was born near Haddington, in East Lothian, 1675, and brought up to the law in Edinburgh; but never made any figure at the bar. Attached to the royal family of Stewart, he refused to take the oaths to the revolution-settlement, which brought him into many difficulties, and sometimes imprisonment. He had no great knowledge of history; but an opinion of his own abilities induced him to write that of Scotland, which was published in 1727, in one volume folio. Jt is a performance of not much value. He died at Haddington, 1741—2, aged sixty-seven.

, a dissenting minister, was the son of a merchant in London, and was educated with Butler and Seeker, afterwards eminent prelates in the church of England, under the learned Mr. Jones, at Tewkesbury, in Gloucestershire, from whose seminary he removed to Utrecht, in Holland, pursued his studies with indefatigable zeal, and took his degree of doctor of laws. While he was in this city, he changed his opinion concerning the mode of baptism, and became a baptist, but occasionally joined in communion with other denominations. On his return to England, he settled in London or Colchester, and devoted his time to various learned and useful treatises. In 1725 appeared his “Essay towards a Demonstration of the Scripture Trinity,” without his name, which was for some time ascribed to Mr. James Pierce, of Exeter. In 1738, a second edition, with some enlargements, was sent out from the press, and in both editions the author’s friends have laboured to prove that dishonourable methods were taken to prevent the spread of it. A new edition of this Essay, freed from the learned quotations with which it abounded, was printed, some years back, in 4to, and, without any dishonourable means, added very little to the Socinian cause. In 1741, he appeared to more advantage in “A New Version of St. Matthew’s Gospel, with Critical Notes and an Examination of Dr. Mill’s Various Readings” a very learned and accurate performance. At the persuasion of his dignified friends, Seeker and Butler, to whom he dedicated his work, he published, in 1745, in two volumes, folio, an “Appendix to H. Stephen’s Greek Lexicon;” a monument of his amazing diligence, critical skill, and precision. He lost several hundred pounds bj this publication, and, by his close application to it for many years, broke his health and spirits. He was never married, and died suddenly, in a retirement near London, March 29, 1759.

His father, by his first wife, had a son, Thomas Scott, a dissenting minister at Norwich, who published several occasional sermons, and died in 1746, leaving two sons, one Thomas Scott, a dissenting minister at Ipswich, author of a poetical version of the Book of Job, a second edition of which was printed in 1774. This has been thought more valuable as a commentary than as a translation. His other son was Dr. Joseph Nicol Scott, who was first a dissenting minister, and published 2 vols. of sermons “preached in defence of all religion, whether natural or revealed.” He was a strenuous opponent of the doctrine of eternal punishments. He afterwards practised physic in London, and died about 1774.

, a learned member of the royal society, and of the board of longitude, was the eldest son of Mr. Scott, of Bristow, in Scotland, who married Miss Stewart, daughter of sir James Stewart, lord advocate of Scotland in the reigns of William III. and queen Anne. That lady was also his cousin-german, their mothers being sisters, and both daughters of Mr. Robert Trail, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, of the same family as the rev. Dr. William Trail, the learned author of the “Life of Dr. Robert Simson, professor of mathematics at Glasgow.”

Mr. Scott, the father, with his family, lived many years abroad, in a public character; and he had three sons born while residing at the court of Hanover. The eldest of these was our author, George Lewis, named, in both these names, after his god-father, the elector, who was afterwards George I. George Lewis Scott was a gentleman of considerable talents and general learning; he was well-skilled also in the mathematical sciences , for which he manifested at times a critical taste, as may be particularly seen in some letters which, in 1764, passed between him and and Dr. Simson, of Glasgow, and are inserted in Dr. Trail’s account of “The Life and Writings of Dr. Simson.” Mr. Scott was also the author of the “Supplement to Chambers’s Dictionary,” in 2 large folio volumes, which was much esteemed, and for which he received 1,500l. from the booksellers, a considerable price at the time of that publication. Mr. Scott was sub-preceptor, for the Latin language, to his present majesty when prince of Wales. After that he was appointed a commissioner of excise; a situation which his friends considered as not adequate to his past deserts, and interior to what he probably would have had, but for the freedom of his political opinions. From some correspondence with Gibbon, to whom, in particular, he wrote an excellent letter of directions for mathematical studies, we may infer that he did not differ much from that gentleman in matters of religious belief. Mr. Scott died. Dec. 1730. He was elected F. S. A. in 1736, and F. R. 8. in 1737.

Mrs. Scott, his widow, survived him about fifteen years, and died at Catton, near Norwich, in Nov. 1795. She was sister to the late celebrated Mrs. Montagu, of Portmansquare. From the pen of a very intelligent and equally candid writer, we have the following account of this lady “She was an excellent historian, of great acquirements, extraordinary memory, and strong sense; and constantly employed in literary labours; yet careless of fame, and tree from vanity and ostentation. Owing to a disagreement of tempers, she soon separated from her husband; but in every other relation of life she was, with some peculiarities, a woman of exemplary conduct, of sound principles, enlivened by the warmest sense of religion, and of a charity so unbounded, so totally regardless of - herself, as to be almost excessive and indiscriminate. Her talents were not so brilliant, nor her genius so predominant, as those of her sister, Mrs. Montagu: but in some departments of literature she was by no means her inferior. When she left her husband she united her income with that of her intimate friend, lady Bab Montagu, the sister of lord Halifax, and they continued to live together to the death of the latter. From that period Mrs. Scott continually changed her habitation, for restlessness was one of her foibles. Her intercourse with the world was various and extensive; and there were few literary people of her day with whom she had not either an acquaintance or a correspondence. Yet when she died, not one of her contemporaries who knew her literary habits came forward to preserve the slightest memorial of her; and she went to her grave as unnoticed as the most obscure of those who have done nothing worthy of remembrance. Under these circumstances, the writer of this article trusts to a candid reception of this imperfect memoir, while he laments that Mrs. Scott herself shut out some of the best materials, by ordering all her papers and voluminous correspondence, which came into the hands of her executrix, to be burnt; an order much to be lamented, because there is reason to believe, from the fragments which remain in other hands, that her letters abounded with literary anecdote, and acute observations on character and life. Her style was easy, unaffected, and perspicuous; her remarks sound, and her sagacity striking. Though her fancy was not sufficiently powerful to give the highest attraction to a novel, she excelled in ethical remarks, and the annals of the actual scenes of human nature. In dramatic effect, in high-wrought passion, and splendid imagery, perhaps she was deficient.”

, a learned English divine, was son of Mr. Thomas Scott, a substantial grazier, and was born in the parish of Chippingham, in Wiltshire, in 1638. Not being intended for a literary profession, he served an apprenticeship in London, much against his will,- for about three years but, having an inclination as well as talents for learning, he quitted his trade and went to Oxford. “He was admitted a commoner of New Inn in 1657, and made a great progress in logic and philosophy; but left the university without taking a degree, and being ordained., came to London, where he officiated in the perpetual curacy of Trinity in the Minories, and as minister of St. Thomas’s in Southwark. In 1677 he was presented to the rectory of St. Peter Le Poor; and was collated to a prebend in St. Paul’s cathedral in 1684. In 1685 he accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor in divinity, having before taken no degree in any other faculty. In 1691 he succeeded Sharp, afterwards archbishop of York, in the rectory of St. Giles in the Fields; and the same year was made canon of Windsor. Wood says that*; he might soon have been a bishop, had not some scruples hindered him;‘.’ and Hickes lias told us that he refused the bishopric of Chester, because he could not take the oath of homage; and afterwards another bishopric, the deanery of Worcester, and a prebend of the church of Windsor, because they were all places of deprived men. This, however, Dr. Isham attributes entirely to his growing infirmities. He died in 1694, and was buried in St. Giles’s church: his funeral sermon was preached by Dr. Isham, and afterwards printed in 1695. In this sermon we are told that” he had many virtues in him of no ordinary growth piety towards God kindness, friendship, affability, sincerity, towards men zeal and constancy in the discharge of the pastoral office and, in a word, all those graces and virtues which make the good Christian and the good man.“When popery was encroaching under Charles II. and James II. he was one of those champions who opposed it with great warmth and courage, particularly in the dedication of a sermon 'preached at Guildhall chapel, Nov. 5, 1683, to sir William Hooker, lord-mayor of London, where he declares that” Domitian and Dioclesian were but puny persecutors and bunglers in cruelty, compared with the infallible cut-throats of the apostolical chair."

This divine wrote an excellent work, called “The Christian Life,” which has been often printed, and much read. The first part was published 1681, in 8vo, wiih this title, “The Christian Life, from its beginning to its consummation in glory, together with the several means and instruments of Christianity conducing thereunto, with directions for private devotion and forms of prayer, fitted to the several states of Christians;” in 1685, another part, “wherein, the fundamental principles of Christian duty are assigned, explained, and proved;” in 1686, another part, “wherein the doctrine of our Saviour’s mediation is explained and proved.” To these volumes of the “Christian Life” the pious author intended a continuation, had not long infirmity, and afterwards death, prevented him. This work is not now much read, although the ninth edition was published in 1729. Mr. Orton, in his “Letters to young Ministers,” seems to recommend the first volume only. Dr. Scott published two pieces against the papists: I. “Examination of Bellarmine’s eighth note concerning sanctity of doctrine.” 2. “The texts examined, which papists cite out of the Bible concerning prayer in an unknown tongue.” Both these pieces were printed together, Oct. 1688, while king James was upon the throne. He wrote also “Certain Cases of Conscience resolved, concerning the lawfulness of joining with forms of prayer in public worship,” 1683, in two parts; which were both reprinted, and inserted in the second volume of a work entitled “A collection of Cases and other Discourses lately written to recover Dissenters to the Communion of the Church of England,” 1685, 4to. His whole works, including sermons, &c. were published in 2 vols. fol. 1704.

, a poet of considerable genius, and a very amiable man, was the youngest son of Samuel and Martha Scott, and was born January 9, 1730, in the GrangeWalk, in the parish of St. Mary Magdalen, Bermondsey. His father was a draper and citizen of London, a man of plain and irreproachable manners, and one of the society of the people called quakers, in which persuasion our poet was educated, and continued during the whole of his life, although not with the strictest attention to all the peculiarities of that sect. In the seventh year of his age he was put under the tuition of one John Clarke, a native of Scotland, who kept a school in Bermondsey-street, attended young Scott at his father’s house, and instructed him in the rudiments of the Latin tongue. In his tenth year his father retired with his family, consisting of Mrs. Scott and two sons, to the village of Amwell in Hertfordshire, where, for some time, he carried on the malting trade. Here our poet was sent to a private day-school, in which he is said to have had few opportunities of polite literature, and those few were declined by his father from a dread of the smallpox, which neither he nor his son had yet caught* This terror, perpetually recurring as the disorder made its appearance in one quarter or another, occasioned such frequent removals as prevented his son from the advantages of regular education. The youth, however, did not neglect to cultivate his mind by such means as were in his power. About the age of seventeen he discovered an inclination to the study of poetry, with which he combined a delight in viewing the appearances of rural nature. At this time he derived much assistance from the conversation and opinions of one Charles Frogley, a person in the humble station of a bricklayer, but who had improved a natural taste for poetry, and arrived at a considerable degree of critical discernment. This Mr. Scott thankfully acknowledged when he had himself attained a rank among the writers of his age, and could return with interest the praise by which Frogley had cheered his youthful attempts. The only other adviser of his studies, in this sequestered spot, was a Mr. John Turner, afterwards a dissenting preacher. To him he was introduced in 1753 or 1754, and, on the removal of Mr. Turner to London, and afterwards to Colleton in Devonshire, they carried on a friendly correspondence on matters of general taste.

Mr. Scott’s first poetical essays were published in the Gentleman’s Magazine, “.the great receptacle for the ebullitions of youthful genius.” Mr. Hoole, his biographer, has not been able to discover all the pieces inserted by him in that work, but has reprinted three of them, which are added to his works in the late edition of the English poets. With the taste of the public during his retirement at Arnwell he could have little acquaintance. He had lived here about twenty years, at a distance from any literary society or information. His reading was chiefly confined to books of taste and criticism; but the latter at that time were not many nor very valuable. In the ancient or modern languages it does not appear that he made any progress. Mr. Hoole thinks he knew very little of Latin, and had no knowledge of either French or Italian. Those who know of what importance it is to improve genius by study, will regret that such a man was left, in the pliable days of youth, without any acquaintance with the noble models on which English poets have been formed. They will yet more regret, that the cause of this distance from literary society, the source of all generous and useful emulation, was a superstitious dread of the small-pox, already mentioned as obstructing his early studies, and which continued to prevail with his parents to such a der gree, that although at the distance of only twenty miles, their son had been permitted to visit London but once in twenty years. His chief occupation, when not in a humour to study, was in cultivating a garden, for which he had a particular fondness, and at length rendered one of trie most attractive objects to the visitors of Amwell.

In 1761, during the prevalence of the small-pox at Ware, he removed to St. Margaret’s, a small hamlet about two miles distant from Amwell, where, Mr. Hoole informs us, he became first acquainted with him, and saw the first sketch of his poem of Amwell, to which he then gave the title of “A Prospect of Ware and the Country adjacent,” In 1766, he became sensible of the many disadvantages he laboured under by living in continual dread of the smallpox, and had the courage to submit to the operation of inoculation, which was successfully performed by the late baron Dimsdale. He now visited London more frequently, and Mr. Hoole had the satisfaction to introduce him, among 'others, to Dr. Johnson. “Notwithstanding the great difference of their political principles, Scott had too much love for goodness and genius, not to be highly gratified in the opportunity of cultivating a friendship with that great exemplar of human virtues, and that great veteran of human learning; while the doctor, with a mind superior to the distinction of party, delighted with equal complacency in the amiable qualities of Scott, of whom he always spoke with feeling regard.”

In 1767, he married Sarah Frogley, the~daughter of his early friend and adviser Charles Frogley. The bride was, previous to her nuptials, admitted a member of the society of quakers. For her father he ever preserved the highest respect, and seems to have written his Eleventh Ode with a view to relieve the mind of that worthy man from the Apprehension of being neglected by bim. The connection he had formed in his family, however, was not of long duration. His wife died in childbed in 1768, and the same year he lost his father and his infant-child. For some time he was inconsolable, and removed from Amwell, where so many objects excited the bitter remembrance of all he held dear, to the house of a friend at Upton. Here, when time and reflection had mellowed his grief, he honoured the memory of his wife by an elegy in which tenderness and love are expressed in the genuine language of nature. As he did not wish to make a parade of his private feelings, a few copies only of this elegy were given to his friends, nor would he ever suffer it to be published for sale. It procured him the praise of Dr. Hawkesworth, and the friendship of Dr. Langhorne, who, about this time, had been visited by a similar calamity. His mother, it ought to have been mentioned, died in 1766; and, in 1769, he lost his friend and correspondent Mr. Turner.

Although we have hitherto contemplated our author as a student and occasional poet, he rendered himself more conspicuous as one of those reflectors on public affairs who employ much of their time in endeavouring to be useful. Among other subjects, his attention had often been called to that glaring defect in human polity, the state of the poor; and having revolved the subject in his mind, with the assistance of many personal inquiries, he published in 1773 “Observations on the present state of the parochial and vagrant Poor.” It is needless to add, that his advice in this matter was rather approved than followed. Some of his propositions, indeed, were incorporated in Mr. Gilbert’s Bill, in 1782; but the whole was lost for want of parliamentary support.

At, such intervals as our author could spare, he wrote various anonymous pamphlets and essays, on miscellaneous subjects, and is said to have appeared among the enemies of the measures of government who answered Dr. Johnson’s “Patriot,” “False Alarm,” and “Taxation no Tyranny.” On the commencement of the llowleian controversy, he took the part of Chatterton, and was among the first who questioned the authenticity of the poems ascribed to Rowley. This he discussed in some letters inserted in the Gentleman’s Magazine. Of course he was led to admire the wonderful powers ~of the young impostor, and in his XXIst ode pays a poetical tribute to his memory, in which, with others of his brethren at that time, he censures the unfeeling rich for depriving their country of a new Shakspeare or Milton.

These, however, were his amusements; the more valuable part of his time was devoted to such public business as is ever best conducted- by men of his pure and independent character. He gave regular attendance at turnpike-meetings, navigation trusts, and commissions of land tax*, and proposed and carried various schemes of local improvement, particularly the fine road between Ware and Hertford, and some useful alterations in the streets of Ware. Among his neighbours he frequently, by a judicious interference or arbitration, checked that spirit of litigation which destroys the felicity of a country life. During the meritorious employments of his public and political life, it can only be imputed to him that in his zeal for the principles he espoused, he sometimes betrayed too great warmth; and in

* When once asked whether he was that an oath and an affirmative are subin the commission of the peace, he stantially the same, and that the mode

the Society, His own opinion was, Review, yol. VII. N. S. p. 257. answering Dr. Johnson’s pamphlets, it has been allowed that he made use of expressions which would better become those who did not know the worth of that excellent character.

In 1778, he published a work of great labour and utility, entitled “A Digest of the Highway and general Turnpike laws.” In this compilation, Mr. Hoole informs us, all the acts of parliament in force are collected together, and placed in one point of view; their contents are arranged under distinct heads, with the addition of many notes, and an appendix on the construction and preservation of public roads, probably the only scientific treatise on the subject. A part of this work appeared in 1773, under the title of a “Digest of the Highway Laws.” In the spring of 1782, he published what he had lorfg projected, a volume of poetry, including his elegies, Amwell, and a great variety of hitherto^unpublished pieces. On this volume it is evident he had bestowed great pains, and added the decorations of some beautiful engravings. A very favourable account was given of the whole of its contents in the Monthly Review; but the Critical having taken some personal liberties with the author, hinting that the ornaments were not quite suitable to the plainness and simplicity of a quaker, Mr. Scott thought proper to publish a letter addressed to the authors of that journal, in which he expostulated with them on their conduct, and defended his poetry. Every friend, however, must wish he had passed over their strictures in silence. His defence of his poetry betrays him into the error of which he complained, and we see far more of the conceited egotist than could have been supposed to belong to his simple and humble character.

After this contest, he began to prepare a work of the critical kind. He had been dissatisfied with some of Dr. Johnson’s Lives of the Poets, and had amassed in the course of his own reading and reflection, a number of observations on Denham, Milton, Pope, Dyer, Goldsmith, and Thomson, which he sent to the press, under the title of “Critical Essays,” but did not live to publish them. On the 25th of October 1783, he accompanied Mrs. Scott to London for the benefit of medical advice for a complaint under which she laboured at that time; but on the 1st of December, while at his house at Radtliff, he was attacked by a putrid fever, which proved fatal on the 12th of that month, and he was interred on the 18th in the Quaker burying-­ground at Radcliff. He had arrived at his fifty-fourth year, and left behind a widow and a daughter, their only child, then about six years old. His death was the more lamented as he was in the vigour of life, and had the prospect of many years of usefulness. “In his person he was tall and slender, but his limbs were remarkably strong and muscular he was very active, and delighted much in the exercise of walking his countenance was cheerful and animated.” The portrait prefixed to his works is not a very correct likeness, nor was he himself satisfied with it.

His public and private character appears to have been in every respect worthy of imitation, but what his religious opinions were, except that he cherished a general reverence for piety, is somewhat doubtful. Professedly, he was one of the society called Quakers, but the paper which that society, or some of his relations, thought it necessary to publish after his death, seems to intimate that in their opinion, and finally in his own, his practice had riot in all respects been consistent.

His “Critical Essays” were published in 1785 by Mr, Hoole, who prefixed a life written with much affection, yet with impartiality. As a poet, Mr. Scott seems to rank among those who possess genius in a moderate degree, who please by short efforts and limited inspirations, but whose talents are better displayed in moral reflection and pathetic sentiment than flights of fancy. His “Elegies,” as they were the first, are among the best of his performances. Simplicity appears to have been his general aim, and he was of opinion that it was too little studied by modern writers. In the “Mexican prophecy,” however, and in “Serim,” there is a fire and spirit worthy of the highest school. His “Amwell” will ever deserve a distinguished place among descriptive poems, but it is liable to all the objections attached to descriptive poetry. His feeblest effort is the “Essay on Painting,” a hasty sketch, in which he professed himself, and that not in very humble terms, to be the rival of Hayley. Upon the whole, however, the vein of pious and moral reflection, and the benevolence and philanthropy which pervade all his poems, will continue to make them acceptable to those who read to be improved, and are of opinion that pleasure is not the sole end of poetry.

, of Balwirie, a learned Scotch author of the fifteenth century, made the tour of France and Germany, and was received with some distinction at the court of the emperor Frederick II. Having travelled enough to gratify his curiosity, he returned to Scotland, and gave himself up to study and contemplation. He was skilled in languages; and, considering the age in which he lived, was no mean proficient in philosophy, mathematics, and medicine. He translated into Latin from the Arabic, the history of animals by the celebrated physician Avicenna. He published the whole works of Aristotle, with notes, and affected much to reason on the principles of that great philosopher. He wrote a book concerning “The Secrets of Nature,” and a tract on “The nature of the Sun and Moon,” in which he shews his belief in the philosopher’s stone. He likewise published what he called “Mensa Philosophica,” a treatise replete with astrology and chiromancy. He was much admired in his day, and was even suspected of magic, and had Roger Bacon and Cornelius Agrippa for his panegyrists.

, a learned English gentleman, was a younger son of sir John Scot, of Scot’s-hall, near Smeeth in Kent, where he was probably born; and, at about seventeen, sent to Hart-hall, in Oxford. He retired to his native country without taking a degree, and settled at Smeetb; and, marrying soon after, gave himself up solely to reading, to the perusing of obscure authors, which had by the generality of scholars been neglected, and at times of leisure to husbandry and gardening. In 1576, he published a second edition, for we know nothing of the first, of “A perfect platform of a Hop-garden,” &c. in 4to and, in 1584, another work, which shewed the great depth of his researches, and the uncommon extent of his learning, entitled “The Discoverie of Witchcraft,” &c. reprinted in 1651, 4to, with this title: “Scot’s Discovery of Witchcraft; proving the common opinion of witches contracting with devils, spirits, familiars, and their power to kill, torment, and consume, the bodies of men, women, and children, or other creatures, by diseases or otherwise, their flying in the air, &c. to be but imaginary erroneous conceptions and novelties. Wherein also the practices of witch. mongers, conjurors, inchanters, soothsayers, also the delusions of astrology, alchemy, legerdemain, and many other things, are opened, that have long lain hidden, though very necessary to be known for the undeceiving of judges, justices, and juries, and for the preservation of poor people, &c. With a treatise upon the nature of spirits and devils,” &c, In the preface to the reader he declares, that his design in this undertaking, was “first, that the glory of God be not so abridged and abased, as to be thrust into the hand or lip of a lewd old woman, whereby the work of the Creator should be attributed to the power of a creature secondly, that the religion of the gospel may be seen to stand without such peevish trumpery thirdly, that favour and Christian compassion be rather used, towards these poor souls, than rigour and extremity,” &c.

A doctrine of this nature, advanced in an age when the reality of witches was so universally believed, that even the great bishop Jewel, touching upon the subject in a sermon before queen Elizabeth, could “pray God they might never practise farther than upon the subject,” exposed the author to every species of obloquy and persecution; and accordingly Voetius, a foreign divine, informs us in his “Disput. Theolog.” vol. III. p. 564, though Wood says nothing of it, that his book was actually burnt. It was also opposed, and, as it should seem, by great authority too: for, James I. in the preface to his “Demonologie,” printed first at Edinburgh in 1597, and afterwards at London in 1603, observes, that be “wrote that book chiefly against the damnable opinions of Wierus and Scott; the latter of whom is not ashamed,” the king says, “in public print to deny, that there can be such a thing as witchcraft, and so maintains the old error of the Sadducees in the denying of spirits,” an inference which by no means follows from Scot’s premises. Dr. John Raynolds, in his “Praslectiones upon the Apocrypha/' animadverts on several passages in Scot’s” Discovery;“Meric Casaubon treats him as an illiterate person; and Mr. Joseph Glanvil, one of the greatest advocates for witchcraft, affirms, that” Mr. Scot doth little but tell odd tales and silly legends, which he confutes and laughs at, and pretends this to be a confutation of the being of witches and apparitions: in all which his reasonings are trifling and childish; and, when he ventures at philosophy, he is little better than absurd." Scot did not live to see the full effects of his endeavours to abate the prejudices of the times, nor could this indeed be the work of a single hand, contending against the king on the thfone, many very learned men, almost the whole body of the people, and what was the last to yield, the statutelaw of the land. His work, however, was reprinted in 1651, 4to, and in 1665, folio, with additions, and was translated into German.

This sensible, learned, upright, and pious man (for we know that he possessed the two first of these qualities, and he is universally allowed to have had also the two last) died in 1599, and was buried among his ancestors in the church at Smeeth.

, alias Rotheram (Thomas), a munificent benefactor to Lincoln college, Oxford, was born at Rotheram, in Yorkshire, from whence he took his name, but that of his family appears to have been Scot. He rose by his talents and learning to the highest ranks in church and state, having been successively fellow of King’s college, Cambridge, master of Pembroke Hall, chancellor of that university, prebendary of Sarum, chaplain to king Edward IV. provost of Beverley, keeper of the Privy Seal, secretary to four kings, bishop of Rochester and Lincoln, archbishop of York, and lord chancellor. His buildings at Cambridge, Whitehall, Southwell, and Thorp, are eminent proofs of his magnificent taste and spirit.

He was promoted to the see of Lincoln in 1471, and we learn from his preface to his body of statutes, that a visit through his diocese, in which Oxford then was, proved the occasion of his liberality to Lincoln college. On his arrival there, in 1474, John Tristroppe, the third rector of that society, preached the visitation sermon from Psalm Ixxx. 14, 15. “Behold and visit this vine, and the vineyard which thy right hand hath planted, &c.” In this discourse, which, as usual, was delivered in Latin, the preacher addressed his particular requests to the bishop, exhorting him to complete his college, now imperfect and defective both in buildings and government. Rotheram is said to have been so well pleased with the application of the text and subject, that he stood up and declared that he would do what was desired. Accordingly, besides what he contributed to the buildings, he increased the number of fellows from seven to twelve, and gave them the livings of of Twyford in Buckinghamshire, and Long Combe in Oxfordshire. He formed also in 1479, a body of statutes, in which, after noticing with an apparent degree of displeasure, that although Oxford was in the diocese of Lincoln, no college had yet made provision for the natives of that diocese, he enjoined that the rector should be of the diocese of Lincoln or York, and the fellows or scholars should be persons born in the dioceses of Lincoln and York, and one of Wells, with a preference, as to those from the diocese of York, to his native parish of Rotheram. This prelate died in 1500 at Cawoud, and was buried in the Chapel of St. Mary, under a marble tomb which he had built.

, an eminent Scotch divine, and second son of Patrick Scougal, bishop of Aberdeen, was born June 1650, at Salton, in East Lothian, where his father, the immediate predecessor of Bishop Burnet, was rector. His father, designing him for the sacred ministry, watched over his infant mind with peculiar care, and soon had the satisfaction of perceiving the most amiable dispositions unfold themselves, and his understanding rise at once into the vigour of manhood. Relinquishing the amusements of youth, young Scougal applied to his studies with ardour: and, agreeably to his father’s wish, at an early period directed his thoughts to sacred literature. He perused the historical parts of the bible with peculiar pleasure, and then began to examine its contents more minutely. He was struck with the peculiarities of the Jewish dispensation, and felt an anxiety to understand why its rites and ceremonies were abolished. The nature and evidences of the Christian religion also occupied his mind. He perused sermons with much attention, committed to writing those passages which most affected him, and could comprehend and remember their whole scope. Nor was he inattentive to polite literature. He read the Roman classics, and made considerable proficiency in the Greek, Hebrew, and other oriental languages. He was also well versed in history and mathematics. His diversions were of a manly kind. After becoming acquainted with Roman history, he formed, in concert with some of his companions, a little senate, where orations of their own composition were delivered.

At the age of fifteen he entered the university, where he behaved with great modesty, sobriety, and diligence. He disliked the philosophy then taught, and applied himself to the study of natural philosophy: and in consequence of this, when he was only about eighteen years of age, he wrote the reflections and short essays since published: which, though written in his youth, and some of them left unfinished, breathe a devotion, which shows that his mind was early impressed with the most important concerns of human life. In all the public meetings of the students he was unanimously chosen president, and had a singular deference paid to his judgment. No sooner had he finished his courses, than he was promoted to a professorship in the university of Aberdeen, where he conscientiously performed his duty in training up the youth under his care in such principles of religion and learning as might render them ornaments to church and state. When any divisions and animosities happened in the society, he was very instrumental in reconciling and bringing them to a good understanding. He maintained his authority among the students in such a way as to keep them in awe, and at the same time to gain their love and esteem. Sunday evenings were spent with his scholars in discoursing of, and encouraging religion in principle and practice. He allotted a considerable part of his yearly income for the poor; and many indigent families of different persuasions, were relieved in their difficulties by his bounty, although so secretly that they knew not whence their supply came.

Having been a professor of philosophy for four years, he was at the age of twenty-three admitted into holy orders, and settled at Auchterless, a small village about twenty miles from Aberdeen. Here his zeal and ability in his great Master’s service were eminently displayed. He catechised with great plainness and affection, and used the most endearing methods to recommend religion to his hearers. He endeavoured to bring them to a close attendance on public worship, and joined with them himself at the beginning of it. He revived the use of lectures, looking upon it as very edifying to comment upon and expound large portions of scripture. In the twenty-fifth year of his age, he was appointed professor of divinity in the King’s college, Aberdeen, which he at first declined, but when induced to accept it, he applied himself with zeal and diligence to the exercise of this office. After he had guarded his pupils agajnst the common artifices of the Romish missionaries in making proselytes, he proposed two subjects for public exercise the one, of the pastoral care, the other, of casuistical divinity.

The inward dispositions of this excellent man are best seen in his writings, to which his pious and blameless life was wholly conformable. His days, however, were soon numbered: in the twenty-seventh year of his age, he fell into a consumption, which wasted him by slow degrees: but during the whole time of his sickness he behaved with the utmost resignation, nor did he ever shew the least impatience. He died June 20, 1678, in the twenty-eighth year of his age, and was buried in King’s college church, in Old Aberdeen. His principal work is entitled “The Life of God in the Soul of Man,” which has undergone many editions, and has been thought alike valuable for the sublime spirit of piety which it breathes, and for the purity and elegance of its style. He left his books to the library of his college, and five thousand marks to the office of professor of divinity. He composed a form of morning and evening service for the cathedral church of Aberdeen, which may be seen in Orem’s “Description of the Chanonry of Old Aberdeen,” printed in No. 3 of the “Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica.” His treatise on the “Life of God,” &c. was first printed in his life-time by bishop Burnet about 1677, without a name, which the author’s modesty studiously concealed. It went through several -subsequent editions, and was patronised by the society for promoting Christian knowledge, and was reprinted in 1726 with the addition of “Nine discourses on important subjects,” by the same author, and his funeral sermon, by Dr. G. G.

, a Roman physician, lived in the reign of Claudius, and is said to have accompanied this emperor in his campaign in Britain. He wrote a treatise “De Compositione Medicamentorum,” which is very often quoted by Galen, but was pillaged by Marcellus the empiric, according to Dr. Freind. At a time when it was the practice of many physicians to keep their compositions secret, Scribonius published his, and expressed great confidence in their efficacy; but many of them are trifling, and founded in superstition, and his language is so inferior to that of his age, that some have supposed he wrote his work in Greek, and that it was translated into Latin by some later hand: but Freind and others seem of a different opinion. The treatise of Scribonius has been several times reprinted, and stands among the “Medicse Artis Principes” of Henry Stephens, 1567.

, one of the most learned men of the sixteenth century, was born at Dundee in Scotland, in 1506, and after making great progress in the Greek and Latin languages at the grammar school of that place, studied philosophy at St. Andrew’s university with equal success* He afterwards studied civil law at Paris and Bourges. At this latter city he became acquainted with the Greek professor, James Amiot, who recommended him to be tutor to two young gentlemen; and this served also to introduce him to Bernard Bornetel, bishop of Rennes, a celebrated political character, who invited Mr. Scrimzeor to accompany him to Italy. There he became acquainted with the most distinguished scholars of the country. The death of the noted Francis Spira * happened during his visit at Padua, and as the character and conduct of this remarkable person at that time engaged the attention of the world, Mr. Scrimzeor is said to have collected memoirs of him, which, however, does not appear in the catalogue of his works.

After he had stored his mind with the literature of foreign countries, and satisfied his curiosity as a traveller, it was his intention to have revisited Scotland; but, on his journey homeward, through Geneva, the syndics and other magistrates requested him to set up the profession of philosophy in that city; promising a suitable compensation. He accepted the proposal, and established the philosophical

* Francis Spira was a lawyer of great plied. Shortly after he fell into * reputation at Cittadella in the Venetian deep melancholy, lost his health, and State, at the beginning of the sixteenth was removed to Padua for the adcentury. He had imbibed the prin- vice of physicians and divines but ciples of 'he Reformation, and was ac- his disorders augmented. The recused before John de la Casa, arch- cantation, which he said he had made bishop of Benevento, the pope’s nun- from cowardice and interest, filled his cio at Venice. He made some con- mind with continual horror and remorse, cessions, and asked pardon of the pa- and no means being found to restore pal minister for hi* errors. But the either his health or peace of mind, be nuncio insisted upon a public recanta- fell a victim to his miserable situation tion. Spira was exceedingly averse to in 1548. Collier’s Diet. art. Spira. this measure but at the pressing in- There have been many editions of a stances of his wife and his friends, who “Life of Spira” published in England represented to him, that tie must lose and Scotland, as a “warning to aposhis practice and ruin his affairs by tales.” persisting against it, he at last comchair; but after he had taught for some time at Geneva, a fire broke out in his neighbourhood, by. which his house was consumed, and he himself reduced to great distress. At this time flourished at Augsburg that famous mercantile family, the. Fuggers. Ulric Fugger, its then representative, a man possessed of prodigious wealth, and a munificent patron of learned men, having heard of the misfortune which had befallen Mr. Scrimzeor, immediately sent him a pressing invitation to accept an asylum beneath his roof till his affairs could be re-established. Mr. Scrimzeor, gladly availing himself of such a hospitable kindness, lost no time in going to Germany.

Whilst residing at Augsburg with Mr. Fugger, he was much employed in augmenting his patron’s library by vast collections, purchased from every corner of Europe, particularly manuscripts of the Greek and Latin authors. He also composed many works of great learning- and ingenuity, whilst he continued in a situation so peculiarly agreeable to the views and habits of a scholar; and when he was desirous of returning to Geneva to print them, Fugger recommended him, for this purpose, to the very learned Henry Stephens, one of his pensioners.

Immediately on his arrival at Geneva, 1563, he was earnestly solicited by the magistrates to resume the chair of philosophy. With this he complied, and notwithstanding the dedication of much of his time to the study of physics, he, two years afterwards, instituted a course of lectures in the civil law,and had the honour of being its first professor at Geneva. Being now settled here, he intended to have printed his various works, but a suspicion which Henry Stephens entertained, that it was his intention to set up a rival press at Geneva, occasioned great dissentions between them. The result of the dispute was, that almost all Scrimzeor’s publications were posthumous-. Among them are critical and explanatory notes upon Athenaeus’s “Deipnosophists,” published by Isaac Casaubon at Leyden in 1600, but without distinguishing his own notes from those of Scrimzeor; also a commentary and emendations of Strabo, which were published in Casaubon’s edition of that geographer, 1620, but likewise without acknowledging the assistance he derived from Scrimzeor. Scrimzeor collated different manuscripts of all the works of Plutarch, probably with a view to an edition of that author, and also the ten books of Piogenes Laertius on the lives of the philosophers. His corrected text of this author, with notes full of erudition, came into Casaubon’s possession, and is supposed to have contributed much to the value of his edition of Laertius, printed at Paris in 1593. The works of Phornutus and Palsephatus were also among the collations of Mr. Scrimzeor. To the latter of these authors he made such considerable additions that the work became partly his own. Tht: manuscripts of both these were for some time preserved in the library of sir Peter Young, after that of his uncle Scrimzeor, which was brought into Scot-, laud in 1573, had been added to it. What became of this valuable bequest at the death of the former, is not known. Our learned philologer left also behind him, in manuscript, the orations of Demosthenes, Æschines, and Cicero, and the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius, all carefully collated; and among his literary remains was a collection of his Latin epistles. But of the many performances which had exercised his pen, it does not appear that any were published by himself but his translation of “Justinian’s Novels” into Greek. This was printed at Paris in 1558, and again with Holoander’s Latin version at Antwerp in 1575. This work has been highly extolled both for the purity of its language and the accuracy of its execution. He wrote also a Latin translation of “The Basilica,” or Basilics, a collection of Roman Laws, which the Eastern emperors Basil and Leo, who reigned in the fifth century, commanded to be translated into Greek, and which preserved their authority till the dissolution of the Eastern empire.

Almost the whole of his life, although he arrived at old age, was spent in his library. The time of his death is uncertain; but it appears most likely, from a comparison of different accounts, that it happened very near the expiration of 1571, or at the beginning of the succeeding year, about the sixty-sixth year of his age. He died in the city of Geneva.

, a considerable philologer and poet, was born at Harlem in 1576. He was educated at Harlem and at Leyden, where he read law in his early days, but devoted himself afterwards to a private and studious life, which ended April 30, 1660, in the eighty-fourth year of his age. His works are: “ Batavia illustrata.” “Batavise comitumq. omnium Historia.” “Miscellanea Philologica.” “Carmina Latina & Belgica.” “Populare Hollandise Chronicon.” “Collectanea Veterum Tragicorum.” He likewise corrected the copyof “Vegetius,” and enlarged and wrote notes upon Aquilius’s <c Chronicon Geldricum" and was the author or editor of various other works, classical and historical.

, a French writer of eminence in his day, was descended from an ancient and noble family of Apt in Provence, and born at Havre-de-Grace in 1603. He spent part of his youth at Apt, and afterwards came and settled at Paris, where at first he subsisted by the efforts of his pen, particularly in poetry, and dramatic pieces, none of which are now in any estimation, and we may, therefore, be spared the trouble of giving their titles. In 1627 he published observations upon the “Cid” of Corneille, with a view of making his court to cardinal Richelieu, who was absurdly envious of that great poet, and did every thing he could to oppose the vast reputation and success of the “Cid:” and by his influence alone enabled even such a man as Scuderi “to balance,” as Voltaire says, “for some time, the reputation of Corneille.” Scuderi was received a member of the academy in 1650. He had before been made governor of the castle of Notre-Dame de la Garde, in Provence; and although this was a situation of very little profit, Scuderi, who was still more vain than indigent, gave a pompous description of it in a poem, which drew upon him the raillery of Chapelle and Bachaumont. Scuderi died at Paris, May 14, 1667, leaving a name now better known than his works.

, sister of the preceding, and his superior in talents, was born at Havre-de-Grace in 1607, and became very eminent for her wit and her writings. She went earty to Paris, where she gained admission into the assemblies of learning and fashion. Having recourse, like her brother, to the pen, she gratified the taste of the age for romances, by various productions of that kind, which were very eagerly read, and even procured her literary honours. The celebrated academy of the Ricovrati at Padua complimented her with a place in their society; and some great personages showed their regard by presents, and other marks of esteem. The prince of Paderborn, bishop of Munster, sent her his works and a medal; and Christina of Sweden often wrote to her, settled on her a pension, and sent her her picture. Cardinal Mazarin left her an annuity by his will: and Lewis XIV. in 1683, at the solicitation of M. de Maintenon, settled a good pension upon her, which was punctually paid. His majesty also appointed her a special audience to receive her acknowledgments, and paid her some very flattering compliments. She had an extensive correspondence with men of learning and wit: and her house at Paris was the rendezvous of all who would be thought to patronize genius. She died in 1701, aged 94; and two churches contended for the honour of possessing her remains, which was thought a point of so much consequence, that nothing less than the authority of the cardinal de Noailles, to whom the affair was referred, *was sufficient to decide it. She was a very voluminous writer as well as her brother, but of more merit; and it is remarkable of this lady, that she obtained the first prize of eloquence founded by the academy. There is much common-place panegyric upon her in the “Menagiana,” from the personal regard Menage had for her but her merits are better settled by Boileau, in the “Discours” prefixed to his dialogue entitled “Les Hero des Roman.” Her principal works are, “Artamene, ou le Grand Cyrus,” 1650, 10 vols. 8 vo; “Clelie,” 1660, 10 vols. 8vo; “Celanire, ou la Promenade de Versailles,” 1693, 12mo; “Ibrahim, ou l'Illustre Bassa,” 1641, 4 vols. 8vo “Almahide, ou PEsclave Reine,” 1660, 8 vols. 8vo Celine,“1661, 8vo” Mathilde d'Aguiiar,“1667, 8vo;” Conversations et Entretiens," 10 vols. c. These last conversations are thought the best of Mad Scuderi’s wo^ks, but there was a time when English translations of her prolix romances were read. What recommended them to the French public was the traits of living characters which she occasionally introduced.

, an eminent protestant divine, was born at Grumberg in Silesia, Aug. i?4, 1556, and after having studied there till 1582, was sent to BresUw to continue his progress in the sciences He was recalled soon after, his father, who had lost all his fortune in the fire of Grunberg, being no longer able to maintain him at the college, and therefore intending to bring him up to some trade. The young man was not at all pleased with such a proposal; and looked out for the place of a tutor, which he found in the family of a burgomaster of Freistad, and this gave him an opportunity of hearing the sermons of Melancthon and of Abraham Bucholtzer. In 1584 he took a journey into Poland, and went to Gorlitz in Lusatia the year following, and resided there above two years, constantly attending the public lectures, and reading private lectures to others. He employed himself in the same manner in the university of Wittemberg in 1588 and 1589, and afterwards in that of Heidelberg till he was admitted into the church in 1594. He officiated in a village of the palatinate for some months; after which he was sent for by the elector palatine to be one of his preachers. In 1598 he was appointed pastor of the church of St. Francis at Heidelberg, and two years after was made a member of the ecclesiastical senate. He was employed several times in visiting the churches and schools of the palatinate, and among these avocations wrote some works, which required great labour. He attended the prince of Anhalt to the war at Juliers in 1610, and applied himself with great prudence and vigilance to the re-settlement of the affairs of the reformed church in those parts. He attended Frederic V. prince palatine into England in 1612, and contracted an acquaintance with the most learned men of that kingdom, but Wood speaks of his having resided some time at Oxford in 1598. He took a journey to Brandenburg in 1614, the elector John Sigismond, who was about renouncing Lutheranism, being desirous of concerting measures with him with respect to that change; and on his return to Heidelberg he accepted the place of courtpreacher, which he relinquished when appointed professor of divinity in 1618. He was deputed soon after to the synod of Dort, where he endeavoured at first to procure a reconciliation of the contending parties; but finding nothing of that kind was to be expected, he opposed vigorously the doctrines of the Arminians. He preached at Francfort the year following during the electoral diet held there, his master having appointed him preacher to the deputies whom he sent thither. He also attended that prince in his journey into Bohemia; and retiring into Silesia after the fatal battle of Prague, resolved to return to Heidelberg in order to discharge the functions of his professorship there; but the fury of the war having dispersed the students, he went to Bretten, and afterwards to Schorndorf in the country of Wirtemberg, whence he removed to Embden in August 1622. The king of Bohemia his master had consented that the city of Embden should offer Scultetus the place of preacher, but he did not enjoy it very long; for he died October the 24th, 1625.

The principal works of this learned divine, who, as Freher says, was reckoned another Chrysostom, are, 1. “Confutatio disputationis Baronii de baptismo Constantini,” Neost. 1607, 4to. 2. “Annales Evangelii per Europara 15 Seculi renovati, Decad. 1 et 2,” Heidelberg, 1618, 8vo. In these annals of the reformation he has shown himself a very candid and credible historian. 3. “Axiomata concionancii,” Han. 1619, 8vo. 4. “Observationes in Pauli Epistolas ad Timotheum, Titum, et Philernonem.” 5. “Medulla Patrum,” 1634, 4to. So indefatigable was his application, that he wrote the following lines over his study door:

, a distinguished surgeon, was born in 1595, at Ulm, and studied medicine at Padua, where he took his degrees in that faculty in 1621. On his return to his native city, he practised with great reputation for twenty years, until being called to Stutgard to a patient, he was there attacked with a fit of apoplexy, which terminated his life December 1, 1645. He appears to have practised surgery extensively, and with great boldness in the operations of bronchotomy, of the trephine, and forempyema. His principal work is entitled “Armamentarium Chirurgicum, 43 tabulis acre incisis ornatum;” and was published after his death, at Ulm, in 1653. It subsequently passed through many editions, and was translated into most of the European languages.

, an ancient mathematician and geographer, was a native of Caryanda, in Caria, and is noticed by Herodotus, and by Suidas, who, however, has evidently confounded different persons of the same name. There is a Periplus which still remains, bearing the name of Scylax, and which is a brief survey of the countries along the shores of the Mediterranean and Euxine seas, together with part of the western coast of Africa surveyed by Hanno; but it seems doubtful to what Scylax it belongs. This Periplus has come down to us in a corrupted state: it was first published from a palatine ms by Hoeschelius and others in 1600. It was afterwards edited by Isaac Vossius in 1639, by Hudson in 1698, and by Gronovius in 1700.

, called also Cu­Ropalates, from an office he held in the household of the emperor of that name, was a Greek historian, known for his abridgment of history from the death of Nicephorus Logothetes, in 811, to the deposition of Nicephorus Botoniates, in 1081. This history, from 1067, is the same as that of Cedrenus, which has raised a doubt whether Cedre-. nus or Scylitza was the original author. Scylitza is thought to have been a native of Lesser Asia, and a prefect of the guards before he attained the dignity of curopalates. A Latin translation of his history entire, was published at Venice in 1570; and the part concerning which there is no dispute was printed in Greek and Latin conjointly with that author, at Paris, in 1647.

, a very learned German, was descended from ancient and noble families; and born at Aurach, a town of Franconia, Dec. 20, 1626. He made good use of a liberal education, and was not only a master of the French, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, but had also some skill in mathematics and the sciences, The great progress he made in his youth coming to the ears of Ernest the pious, duke of Saxe-Goth'a, this prince sent for him from Cobourg, where he then was, to be educated with his children. After remaining two years at Gotha, he went, in 1642, to Strasbnrg; but returned to Gotha in. 1646, and was made honorary librarian to the duke. In 1651, he was made an lie and ecclesiastical counsellor; and, in 1663, a counsellor of state, first minister, and sovereign director of the consistory. The year after, he went into the service of Maurice, duke of Saxe-Zeist, as counsellor of state and chancellor; and was no less regarded by this new master than he had been by the duke of SaxeGotha. He continued with him till his death, which happened in 1681; and then preferred a life of retirement, during which he composed a great many works; but Frederic III. elector of Brandenburg, again brought him into public life, and made him^. counsellor of state and chancellor of the university of Halle, dignities which he did not enjoy long, for he died at Halle Dec. 18, 1692, in the sixty-sixth year of his age. He was twice married, but had only one son, who survived him. Besides his knowledge of languages, he was learned in law, history, divinity; and is also said to have been a tolerable painter and engraver. Of his numerous writings, that in most estimation for its utility, was published at Francfort, 1692, 2 vols. folio, usually bound up in one, with the title, “Commentarius Historicus & Apologeticus de Lutheranisrno, sive de lleformatione Religionis ductu D. Martini Lutberi in magna Germania, aliisque regionibus, & speciatim in Saxonia, recepta & stabilita,” &c. This work, which is very valuable on many accounts, and particularly curious for several singular pieces and extracts that are to be found in it, still holds its repu^ tation, and is referred to by all writers on the reformation.

, an eminent English prelate, was born in 1693, at asmail village called Sibthorpe, in the vale of Belvoir, Nottinghamshire. His father was a Protestant dissenter, a pious, virtuous, and sensible man, who, having a small paternal fortune, followed no profession. His mother was the daughter of Mr. George Brough, of Shelton, in the county of Nottingham, a substantial gentleman farmer He received his education at several private schools in the country, being obliged by various accidents to change his masters frequently; yet at the age of nineteen he had not only made a considerable progress in Greek and Latin, and read the best and most difficult writers in both languages, but had acquired a knowledge of French, Hebrew, Chaldee, and Syriac, had learned geography, logic, algebra, geometry, conic sections, and gone through a course of lectures on Jewish antiquities, and other points preparatory to the study of the Bible. At the same time, in one or other of theseacademies, he had an opportunity of forming an acquaintance with several persons of great abilities. Among the rest, in the academy of Mr. Jones at Tewkesbury, he laid the foundation of a strict friendship with Mr. Joseph Butler, afterwards bishop of Durham.

Mr, Seeker had been designed by his father for orders among the dissenters. With this view, his studies were directed chiefly, and very assiduously, to divinity, but not being able to decide upon certain doctrines, or determine absolutely what communion he should embrace, he resolved to pursue some profession, which should leave him at liberty to weigh these things more maturely in his thoughts, and therefore, about the end of 1716, he applied himself to the study of physic, both at London and Paris. During his stay at Paris, he kept up a constant correspondence with Mr. Butler, who was now preacher at the Rolls. Mr. Butler took occasion to mention his friend Mr. Seeker, without his knowledge, to Mr. Edward Talbot, who promised, in case he chose to take orders in the church of England, to engage the bishop, his father, to provide for him. This was communicated to Mr. Seeker, in a letter, about the beginning of May 1720. He had not at that time come to any resolution of quitting the study of physic, but he began to foresee many obstacles to his pursuing that profession: and having never discontinued his application to theology, his former difficulties, both with regard to conformity, and some other doubtful points, had gradually lessened, as his judgment became stronger, and his reading and knowledge more extensive. It appears also from two of his letters from Paris, both of them prior to the date of Mr. Butler’s communication above mentioned, that he was greatly dissatisfied with the divisions and disturbances which at that particular period prevailed among the dissenters. In this state of mind Mr. Butler’s unexpected proposal found him, and after deliberating carefully on the subject of such a change for upwards of two month*, he resolved to embrace the offer, and for that purpose quitted France about July 1720.

At Houghton Mr. Seeker applied himself with alacrity to all the duties of a country clergyman, omitting nothing which he thought could be of use to his Bock. He brought clown his conversation and his sermons to the level of their understandings; visited them in private, catechised the young and ignorant, received his country neighbours and tenants kindly and hospitably, and was of great service to the poorer sort by his skill in physic, which was the only use he ever made of it. Though this place was in a very remote part of the world, yet the solitude of it perfectly suited his studious disposition, and the income arising from it bounded his ambition. Here he would have been content to live and die here, as he has often been heard to declare, he spent some of the happiest hours of his life and it was no thought or choice of his own that removed "him to a higher and more public sphere. But Mrs. Seeker’s health, which was thought to have been injured by the dampness of the situation, obliged him to think of exchanging it for a more healthy one. On this account he procured an exchange of Houghton for a prebend of Durham, and the rectory of Ryton, in 1727; and for the two following years he lived chiefly at Durham, going over every week to officiate at Ryton, and spending there two or three months together in the summer. In July 1732, the duke of Grafton, then lord chamberlain, appointed him chaplain to the king. For this favour he was indebted to bishop Sherlock, who having heard him preach at Bath, thought his abilities worthy of being brought forward into public notice. From that time an intimacy commenced betwixt them, and he received from that prelate many solid proofs of esteem and friendship. This preferment produced him also the honour of a conversation with queen Caroline. Mr. Seeker’s character was now so well established, that on the resignation of Dr. Tyrwhit, he was instituted to the rectory of St. James’s, May 18, 1733, and in the beginning of July went to Oxford to take his degree of doctor of laws, not being of sufficient standing for that of divinity. On this occasion he preached his celebrated Act sermon, on the advantages and duties of academical education, which was printed at the desire of the heads of houses, and quickly passed through several editions. The queen, in a subsequent interview, expressed her high opinion of this sermon, which was also thought to have contributed not a little to his promotion to the bishopric of Bristol, to which he was consecrated Jan. 19, 1735.

Dr. Seeker immediately set about the visitation of his dioeese, confirmed in a great many places, preached in several churches, sometimes, twice a day, and from the information received in his progress, laid the foundation of a parochial account of his diocese, for the benefit of his successors. Finding at the same time, the affairs of his parish of St. James’s in great disorder, he took the trouble, in concert with a few others, to put the accounts of the several officers into a regular method. He also drew up for the use of his parishioners that course of “Lectures on the Church Catechism,” which have since been so often reprinted. “The sermons,” says bishop Porteus, “which he set himself to compose were truly excellent and original. His faculties were now in their full vigour, and he had an audience to speak before that rendered the utmost exertion of them necessary. He did not, however, seek to gratify the higher part by amusing them with refined speculations or ingenious essays, unintelligible to the lower part, and unprofitable to both; but he laid before them all, with equal freedom and plainness, the great Christian duties belonging to their respective stations, and reproved the follies and vices of every rank amongst them without distinction or palliation.” He was certainly one of the most popular preachers of his time, and though, as his biographer observes, his sermons, may not now afford the same pleasure, or produce the same effects in the closet, as they did from the pulpit, accompanied as they then were with all the advantages of his delivery, yet it will plainly appear that the applause they met with was founded no less on the matter they contained, than the manner in which they were spoken.

On the translation of Dr. Potter to the archbishopric of Canterbury, Dr. Seeker was translated to the bishopric of Oxford, in May 1737. When the unfortunate breach happened between the late king and the prince of Wales, his highness having removed to Norfolk-house, in the parish of St. James’s, attended divine service constantly at that church. Two stories are told of this matter, which, although without much foundation, served to amuse the public for a while. The one was, that the first time the prince made his appearance at church, the clerk in orders, Mr. Bonney, began the service with the sentence, “I will arise and go to my father,” &c- The other, that Dr. Seeker preached from the text, “Honour thy father and thy mother,” &c. Dr. Seeker had the honour of baptizing all his highness’s children except two, and though he did not attend his court, which was forbidden to those who went to the king’s, yet on every proper occasion he behaved with all the submission and respect due to his illustrious rank. In consequence of this, his influence with the prince being supposed much greater than it really was, he was sent, by the king’s direction, with a message to his royal highness; which not producing the effects expected from it, he had the misfortune to incur his majesty’s displeasure, who had been unhappily persuaded to think that he might have done more with the prince than he did, though indeed he could not For this reason, and because he sometimes acted with those who opposed the court, the king did not speak to him for a great number of years. The whole of Dr, Seeker’s parliamentary conduct appears to have been loyalj manly, and independent. His circular letter to his clergy, and his sermon on the subject of the rebellion in 1745, rank among the best and most efficacious documents of the kind which that melancholy event produced. In the spring of 1748 his wife died, to whom he had now been married upwards of twenty years.

In December 1750, he was promoted to the deanery of St. Paul’s, in exchange for the rectory of St. James’s and the prebend of Durham. Having now more leisure both to prosecute his own studies, and to encourage those of others, he gave Dr. Church considerable assistance in his “first and second Vindication of the Miraculous powers,” against Dr. Middleton, and in his " Analysis of Lord Bolingbroke’s Works,' 7 which appeared a few years afterwards. He likewise assisted archdeacon Sharpe in his controversy with the Hutchinsonians, which was carried on to the end of the year 1755.

During the whole time that he was dean of St. Paul’s, he attended divine service constantly in that cathedral twice every day, whether in residence or not and in concert with the three other residentiaries, established the custom of always- preaching their own turns in the afternoon, or exchanging with each other only, which, excepting the case of illness, or extraordinary accidents, was very punctually observed. He also introduced many salutary regulations in the financial concerns of the church, the keeping of the registers, &c. &c. In the summer months he resided constantly at his episcopal house at Ctiddesden, the vicinity of which to Oxford rendered it very pleasing to a man of his literary turn. His house was the resort of those who were most distinguished for academical merit, and his conversation such as was worthy of his guests, who always left him with a high esteem of his understanding and learning. And though in the warm contest in 1754, for representatives of the county (in which it was scarce possible for any person of eminence to remain neuter), he openly espoused that side 'which was thought most favourable to the principles of the revolution; yet it was without bitterness or vehemence, without ever departing from the decency of his profession, the dignity of his station, or the charity prescribed by his religion.

His conduct as a prelate was in the strictest sense of the word, exemplary. In his charges, he enjoined no duty, &nd imposed no burthen, on those under his jurisdiction, which he had not formerly undergone, or was not still ready, as far as became him, to undergo. He preached constantly in his church at Cuddesden every Sunday morning, and read a lecture on the catechism in the evening; (both which he continued to do in Lambeth chapel after he became archbishop) and in every other respect, within his own proper department, was himself that devout, discreet, disinterested, laborious, conscientious pastor, which he wished and exhorted every clergyman in his diocese to become. At length such distinguished merit prevailed over all the political obstacles to his advancement; and on the death of archbishop Hutton, he was appointed by the king to succeed him in the diocese of Canterbury, and was accordingly confirmed at Bow-church on April 21, 1758. The use he made of this dignity very clearly shewed that rank, and wealth, and power, had in no other light any charms for him, than as they enlarged the sphere of his active and industrious benevolence.

In little more than two years after his grace’s promotion to the see of Canterbury, died the late George II. Of what passed on that occasion, and of the form observed in proclaiming our present sovereign (in which the archbishop of course took the lead), his grace has left an account in writing. He did the same with regard to the subsequent ceremonials of marrying and crowning their present majesties, which in consequence of his station he had the honour to solemnize, and in which he found a great want of proper precedents and directions. He had before, when rector of St. James’s, baptized the new king (who was born in Norfolk-house, in that parish) and he was afterwards called upon to perform the same office for the greatest part of his majesty’s children a remarkable, and perhaps unexampled concurrence of such incidents in the life of one man.

As archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Seeker considered himself as the natural guardian, not only of that church over which he presided, but of learning, virtue, and religion at large; and, from the eminence on which he was placed, looked round with a watchful eye on every thing that concerned them, embracing readily all opportunities to promote their interests, and opposing, as far as he was able, all attempts to injure them. Men of real genius or extensive knowledge, he sought out and encouraged. Even tho^e- of humbler talents, provided their industry was great, and their intentions good, he treated with kindness and condescension. Both sorts he would frequently employ in undertakings suited to their respective abilities, and rewarded them in ways suited to their respective wants. He assisted them with books, promoted subscriptions to their 5 works, contributed largely to them himself, talked with them on their private concerns, entered warmly into their interests, used his credit for them with the great, and gave them preferments of his own. He expended upwards o 300l. in arranging and improving the ms library at Lambeth. Arid having observed with concern, that the library of printed books in that palace had received no accessions since the time of archbishop Tenison, he made it his business to collect books in all languages from most parts of Europe, at a very great expence, with a view of supplying that chasm; which he accordingly did, by leaving them to the library at his death.

All designs and institutions that tended to advance good morals and true religion he patronized with zeal and generosity. He contributed largely to the maintenance of schools for the poor, to rebuilding or repairing parsonagehouses and places of worship, and gave at one time no less than 500l. towards erecting a chapel in the parish of Lambeth, to which he afterwards added near 100l. more. To the society for promoting Christian knowledge he was a liberal benefactor; and to that for propagating the gospel in foreign parts, of which he was the president, he paid much attention, was constant at the meetings of its members, and superintended their deliberations with consummate prudence and temper. He was sincerely desirous to improve to the utmost that excellent institution, and to diffuse the knowledge and belief of Christianity as wide as the revenues of the society, and the extreme difficulty of establishing schools and missions amongst the Indians, and of making any effectual and durable impressions of religion on their uncivilized minds, would admit. But Dr. Mayhew, of Boston in New England, having in an angry pamphlet accused the society of not sufficiently answering these good purposes, and of departing widely from the spirit of their charter, with many injurious reflections interspersed on the church of England, and the design of appointing bishops in America, his grace on all these accounts thought himself called upon to confute his invectives, which he did in a short anonymous piece, entitled “An Answer to Dr. Mayhew’s Observations on the charter and conduct of the Society for propagating the Gospel,” London, 1764, reprinted in America. The strength of argument, as well as fairness and good temper, with which this answer was written, had a considerable effect on all impartial men; and even on the doctor himself, who plainly perceived that he had no common adversary to deal with; and could not help acknowledging him to be “a person of excellent sense, and of a happy talent at writing; apparently free from the sordid illiberal spirit of bigotry; one of a cool temper, who often shewed much candour, was well acquainted with the affairs of the society, and in general a fair reasoner.” He was therefore so far wrought upon by his “worthy answerer,” as to abate much in his reply of his former warmth and acrimony. But as he still would not allow himself to be “wrong in any material point,” nor forbear giving way too much to reproachful language and ludicrous misrepresentations, he was again animadverted upon by the late Mr. Apthorpe, in a sensible tract, entitled, “A Review of Dr. Mayhew’s Remarks,” &c. 1765. This put an end to the dispute. The doctor, on reading it, declared he should not answer it, and the following year he died.

It appeared evidently in the course of this controversy that Dr. Mayhew, and probably many other worthy men amongst the Dissenters, both at home and abroad, had conceived very unreasonable and groundless jealousies of the church of England, and its governors; and had, in particular, greatly misunderstood the proposal for appointing bishops in some of the colonies. The nature of that plan is fully explained in bishop Porteus’s life of our archbishop, to which we refer. The question is now of less importance, for notwithstanding the violent opposition to the measure, when Dr. Seeker espoused it, no sooner did the American provinces become independent states, than application was made to the English bishops by some of those states to consecrate bishops for them according to the rites of the church of England, and three bishops were actually consecrated in London some years ago: one for Pennsylvania, another for New York, and a third for Virginia.

Whenever any publications came to the archbishop’s knowledge that were manifestly calculated to corrupt good morals, or subvert the foundations of Christianity, he did his utmost to stop the circulation of them yet the wretched authors themselves he was so far from wishing to treat withany undue rigour, that he has more than once extended his bounty to them in distress. And when their writing* could not properly be suppressed (as was too often the case) by lawful authority, he engaged men of abilities to answer them, and rewarded them for their trouble. His attention was everywhere. Even the falsehoods and misrepresentations of writers in the newspapers, on religious or ecclesiastical subjects, he generally took care to have contradicted: and when they seemed likely to injure, in any material degree, the cause of virtue and religion, or the reputation of eminent and worthy men, he would sometimes take the trouble of answering them himselfOne instance of this kind, which does him honour, and deserves mention, was his defence of Bishop Butler, who, in a pamphlet, published in 1767, was accused of having died a papist.

The conduct which he observed towards the several ditisions and denominations of Christians in this kingdom, was such as shewed his way of thinking to be truly liberal and catholic. The dangerous spirit of popery, indeed, he thought should always be kept under proper legal resiraints, on account of its natural opposition, not only to the religious, but the civil rights of mankind. He therefore observed its movements with care, and exhorted his clergy to do the same, especially those who were situated in the midst of Roman catholic families: against whose influence they were charged to be upon their guard, and were furnished with proper books or instructions for the purpose. He took all opportunities of combating the errors of the church of Rome, in his own writings; and the best answers that were published to some bold apologiesfor popery were written at his instance, and under his direction.

With the dissenters his grace was sincerely desirous of cultivating a good understanding. He considered them, in general, as a conscientious and valuable class of men. With some of the most eminent of them, Watts, Doddridge *, Leland, Chandler, and Lardner, he maintained an

* The biographers of eminent dis- drulge’s Letters,“in his zeal, has* presenters, with all tlx-ir prejudices against duced two letters from archbishop Seckthe hierarchy, setm never to exult er to that dirine, forgetting; that he was more than when they can produce uot archbishop until several year after the correspondence of a distinguished Duddridge’s death, prelate. But the editor of” Dr. Dod intercourse of friendship or civility. By the most candid and considerate part of them he was highly reverenced and esteemed: and to such among them as needed help he shewed no less kindness and liberality than to those of his own communion.

Nor was his concern for the Protestant cause confined to his own country he was well known as the great patron and protector of it in various parts of Europe from whence he had frequent applications for assistance, which never failed of being favourably received. To several foreign Protestants he ailowed pensions, to others he gave occasional relief, and to some of their universities was an annual benefactor.

In public affairs, his grace acted the part of an honest citizen, and a worthy member of the British legislature. From his entrance into the House of Peers, his parliamentary conduct was uniformly upright and noble. He kept equally clear from the extremes of factious petulance and servile dependence: never wantonly thwarting administration from motives of party zeal or private pique, or personal attachment, or a passion for popularity: nor yet going every length with every minister, from views of interest or ambition. He seldom, however, spoke in parliament, except where the interests of religion and virtue seemed to require it: but whenever he did, he spoke with propriety and strength, and was heard with attention and deference. Though he never attached himself blindly to any set of men, yet his chief political connections were with the late duke of Newcastle, and lord chancellor Hardwicke. To these he owed principally his advancement: and he lived long enough to shew his gratitude to them or their descendants.

During more than ten years that Dr. Seeker enjoyed the see of Canterbury, he resided constantly at his archiepiscopal house at Lambeth. A few months before his death, the dreadful pains he felt had compelled him to think of trying the Bath waters: but that design was stopped by the fatal accident which put an end to his life. His grace had been for many years subject to th gout, which, in the latter part of his life, returned with more frequency and violence, and did not go off in a regular manner, but left the parts affected for a long time very weak, and was succeeded by pains in different parts of the body. About a year and a half before be died, after a fit of the gout, he was attacked with a pain in the arm, near the shoulder, which having continued about twelve months, a similar pain seized the upper and outer part of the opposite thigh, and the arm soon became easier. This was much more grievous than the former, as it quickly disabled him from walking, and kept him in almost continual torment, except when he was in a reclining position. During this time he had two or three fits of the goat: but neither the gout nor the medicines alleviated these pains, which, with the want of exercise, brought him into a general bad habit of body.

On Saturday July 30, 1768, he was seized, as he sat at dinner, with a sickness at his stomach. He recovered before night: but the next evening, while his physicians were attending, his servants raising him on his couch, he suddenly cried out that his thigh-bone was broken. He lay for some time in great agonies, but when the surgeons arrived, and discovered with certainty that the bone was broken, he was perfectly resigned, and never afterwards asked a question about the event. A fever soon ensued: on Tuesday he became lethargic, and continued so till about five o'clock on Wednesday afternoon, when he expired with great calmness, in the seventy- fifth year of his age. On examination, the thigh-bone was found to be carious about four inches in length, and at nearly the same distance from its head. He was buried, pursuant to his own directions, in a covered passage, leading from a private door of the palace to the north door of Lambeth church: and he forbade any monument or epitaph to be placed over him.

In person, Dr. Seeker was tall and comely in the early part of his life slender, and rather consumptive but as he advanced in years, his size increased, yet never to a degree of corpulency that was disproportionate or troublesome. His countenance was open, ingenuous, and expressive.

By his will, he appointed Dr. Daniel Burton, and Mrs. Catherine Talbot (daughter of the Rev. Mr. Edward Talhot), his executors; and left thirteen thousand pounds in the three per cent, annuities to Dr. Porteus and Dr. Stinton his chaplains, in trust, to pay the interest thereof to Mrs. Talbot and her daughter during their joint lives, or the life of the survivor; and, after the decease of both those ladies, eleven thousand to be transferred to the following charitable purposes: To the society for propagation of the gospel in foreign parts, for the general uses of the society, lOOOl.; to the same society, towards the establishment of a bishop or bishops in the king’s dominions in America, 1000; to the society for promoting Christian knowledge, 600l. to the Irish protestant working schools, 500l. to the corporation of the widows and children of the poor clergy, 500L to the society of the stewards of the said charity, 200l. to Bromley college in Kent, 500l. to the hospitals of the archbishop of Canterbury, at Croydon, St. John at Canterbury, and St. Nicholas Harbledown, 500l. each to St, George’s and London hospitals, and the Jying-in-hospital in Brownlow-s-treet, 500l. each; to the Asylum in the parish of Lambeth, 400l. to the Magdalen-hospital, the Lock-hospital, the Small- pox and Inoculation-h ispital, to each of which his grace was a subscriber, '6001. each to the incurables at St. Luke’s hospital, 500l. towards the repairing or rebuilding of houses belonging to ppor livings in the diocese of Canterbury, 2.00Q/.

The life prefixed to his works was written by Dr. Porteus, the late very amiable and much admired bishop of London, and reprinted separately by his lordship in 1797, in consequence of bishop Kurd’s having, in his life of Warburton, “judged it expedient to introduce into his life of bishop Warburton, such observations on the talents, learning, and writings of archbishop Seeker, as appeared, both to Dr. Porteus and to many other of his grace’s friends extremely injurious to his literary character, and the credit of his numerous and useful publications; and therefore highly deserving of some notice from those who loved him in life, and revered him after death.” These observations are indeed fully refuted in this excellent piece of biography, as well as the other slanders which the steady and upright conduct of archbishop Seeker drew upon him from persons notoriously disaffected to religion and the church; and time, which never fails to do ample justice to such characters as his, has almost effaced the remembrance of them. Yet, as some have lately attempted to revive the calumny, and suppress the refutation, we have given some references in the note on this subject, not without confidence that archbishop Seeker’s character will suffer little while he has a Porteus for his defender, and a Hollis, a Walpole, a Blackburn, and a Wakefield for his accusers.

, a French historian, was born January 8, 1691, at Paris. He began to study the law in obedience to his father’s desire, who was an able advocate; but losing both his parents shortly after, he quitted the bar, for which he had not the least taste, and devoted himself wholly to the belles lettres, and French history. His unwearied application to books, which no other passion interrupted, soon made him known among the learned; and he was admitted into the academy of inscriptions in 1723, and chosen by chancellor d'Aguesseau five years after, to continue the great collection of statutes, made by the French kings, which M. de Laurier had begun. As Secousse possessed every talent necessary for such an important undertaking, the voiumes which he published were received with universal approbation. He died at Paris, March 15, 1754, aged sixty-three, leaving a library, the largest and most curious, in French history, that any private person had hitherto possessed. His works are, the continuation of the collection of statutes before mentioned, to the ninth volume inclusively, which was printed under the inspection of M. de Villevault, counsellor to the court of aids, who succeeded M. Secousse, and published a table, forming a tenth volume, and since, an eleventh and twelfth. Secousse also wrote many dissertations in the memoirs of the academy of inscriptions editions of several works, and of several curious pieces “Memoirs for the History of Charles the Bad,” 2 vols. 4to,

, a French dramatic writer, was born at Paris, June 4, 1719. Abandoned by his friends, he was, at the age of thirteen, obliged to quit his studies, in which he was little advanced, and to practise a trade for his subsistence. He was first a journeyman, and then a master mason* and architect; which businesses he conducted with uncommon probity. Natural inclination led him to cultivate literature, and particularly the drama, for which he wrote various small pieces and comic operas, the most popular of which were, “Le Deserteur;” and “Richard Coeur de Lion.”“All of them met with great success, and still continue to be performed, but the French critics think that his poetry is not written in the purest and most correct style, and that his pieces appear to more advantage on the stage than in the closet. He possessed, however, a quality of greater consequence to a dramatic writer the talent of producing stage effect. He was elected into the French academy, in consequence of the success of his” Richard Coeur de Lion," and was intimately connected with all the men of letters, and all the artists of his time. He died in May 1797, aged seventy-eight.

, a nonconformist divine, was born at Marlborough in Wiltshire, in 1600, and educated first at Queen’s college, and then at Magdalen-hall, Oxford. After taking his degrees in arts, he was ordained, and became chaplain to lord Horatio Vere, whom he accompanied into the Netherlands. After his return, he went again to Oxford, and was admitted to the reading of the sentences in 1629. Going then to London he preached at St. Mildred’s, Bread-street, until interrupted by the bishop, and in 1639 became vicar of Coggeshall in Essex, where he continued three or four years. The commencement of the rebellion allowing men of his sentiments unconstrained liberty, he returned to London, and preached frequently before the parliament, inveighing with extreme violence against the church and state: to the overthrow of both, his biographers cannot deny that he contributed his full share, in the various characters of one of the assembly of divines, a chaplain in the army, one of the triers, and pne of the ejectors of those who were called “ignorant and scandalous ministers.” In 1646 he became preacher at St. Paul’s, Covent-garden, where he appears to have continued until the decay of his health, when he retired to Marl borough, and died there in January 1658. As a divine, he was much admired in his day, and his printed works had considerable popularity. The principal of them are, “The Fountain opened,” 1657; “An exposition of Psalm xxiii.” 1658, 4to; “The Anatomy of Secret Sins,” 1660; “The Parable of the Prodigal,” 1660; “Synopsis of Christianity,” &c. &c. He had a brother, John, an ad*, herent to the "parliamentary cause, and a preacher, but of less note; and another brother Joseph, who became batler in Magdalen college in 1634, and B.A. in 1637, and then went to Cambridge, where he took his master’s degree, and, was elected fellow of Christ’s college. After the restora-^ tion he conformed, and was beneficed in the church; in 1675 he was made prebendary of Lincoln, and was also rector of Fisherton, where he died Sept. 22, 1702, in the seventy-fourth year of his age, leaving a son John Sedgwick, who succeeded him in the prebend, and was vicar of Burton Pedvvardine in Lincolnshire, where he died in 1717.

, a dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was the son of sir John Sedley, of Aylesford in Kent, by a daughter of sir Henry Savile, and was born about 1639. At seventeen, he became a fellowcommoner of Wadham college in Oxford; but, taking no degree, retired to his own country, without either traveling, or going to the inns of court. At the restoration he came to London, and commenced wit, courtier, poet, and man of gallantry. As a critic, he was so much admired, tfiat he became a kind of oracle among the poets; and no performance was approved or condemned, till sir Charles Sedley had given judgment. This made king Charles jestingly say to him, that Nature had given him a patent to be Apollo’s viceroy; and lord Rochester placed him in the first rank of poetical critics. With these accomplishments, he impaired his estate by profligate pleasures, and was one of that party of debauchees whom we have already mentioned in our account of Sackville lord Buckhurst, who having insulted public decency, were indicted for a riot, and all severely fined; sir Charles in 500l. The day for payment being appointed, sir Charles desired Mr. Henry Killigrew and another gentleman, both his friends, to apply to the king to get it remitted; which they undertook to do; but at the same time varied the application so far as to beg it for themselves, and they made Sedley pay the full sum.

After this affair, his mind took a more serious turn; and he began to apply himself to politics. He had been chosen to serve for Romney in Kent, in the parliament which begun May 8, 1661, and continued to sit for several parliaments after. He was extremely active for the revolution, which was at first thought extraordinary, as he had received favours from James II. but those were cancelled by that prince’s having taken his daughter into keeping, whom he created countess of Dorchester. This honour by no means satisfied sir Charles, who, libertine as he had been, considered his daughter’s disgrace as being thereby made more conspicuous. Still his wit prevailed over his resentment, at least in speaking on the subject; for, being asked, why he appeared so warm for the revolution, he is said to have answered, “From a principle of gratitude; for, since his majesty has made my daughter a countess, it is fit I should do all I can to make his daughter a queen.” He died Aug. 20, 1701.

His works were printed in 1719, 2 vols. 8vo; and consist of plays, translations, songs, prologues, epilogues, and small occasional pieces. His poems are generally of the licentious kind, and do not afford great marks of genius, and his dramas are quite forgotten. Pope, according to Spence, thought him very insipid, except in some of his little loveverses. Malone thinks he was the Luideius of Dryden’s “Essay on dramatic poetry,” and Dryden certainly shewed his respect for him by dedicating to him his “Assignation.”

, a priest and poet, either Irish or Scotch, of the fifth century, is recorded as the writer of an heroic poem, called “Carmen Paschale,” divided into five books. The first begins with the creation of the world, and comprehends the more remarkable passages of the Old Testament. The next three describe the life of Jesus Christ. This performance has been highly commended by Cassiodorus, Gregorius Turrinensis, and others. Sedulius afterwards wrote a piece on the same subjects in prose. The poem was printed by Aldus in the collection of sacred poets, in 1502. It is also in Maittaire’s “Corp. Poet.” and has since been published by itself, with learned notes, by Arntzenius, 1761, 8vo, and by Arevale at Rome, 1794, 4-to.

, an English divine, who was born at Clifton, near Penrith, in Cumberland, of which place his father was rector, had his school-education at Lowther, and his academical at Queen’s college, in Oxford. Of this society he was chosen fellow in 1732. The greatest part of his life was spent at Twickenham, where he was assistant or curate to Dr. Waterland. In 1741, he was presented by his college to the living of Enham in Hampshire, at which place he died in 1747, without ever having obtained any higher preferment, which he amply deserved. He was exemplary in his morals, orthodox in his opinions, had an able head, and a most amiable heart. A late romantic writer against the Athanasian doctrines, whose testimony we choose to give, as it is truth extorted from an adversary, speaks of him in the following terms: “Notwithstanding this gentleman’s being a contender for the Trinity, yet he was a benevolent man, an upright Christian, and a beautiful writer; exclusive of his zeal for the Trinity, he was in every thing else an excellent clergyman, and an admirable scholar. 1 knew him well, and on account of his amiable qualities very highly honour his memory; though no two ever differed more in religious sentiments.” He published in his life-time, “Discourses on several important Subjects,” 2 vols. 8vo and his “Posthumous Works, consisting of sermons, letters, essays, &c.” in 2 vols. 8vo, were published from his original manuscripts by Jos. Hall, M. A. fellow of Queen’s college, Oxford, 1750. They are all very ingenious, and full of good matter, but abound too much in antithesis and point.

, an eminent painter, was born at Antwerp in 1.589. Under the instructions of Henry van Balen, and Abraham Janssens, he had made considerable progress in the art before he went to Italy. On his arrival at Rome, he became the disciple of Bartolommeo Manfredi; and from him adopted a taste for the vigorous style of Michael Angelo Caravaggio, to which he added somewhat of the tone and colour he had brought with him from his native country; producing the powerful effect of candle-light, though often falsely applied in subjects which appertain to the milder illumination of the day. He at length accepted the invitation of cardinal Zapara, the Spanish ambassador at Rome, to accompany him to Madjrid, where he was presented to the king, and was engaged in his service, with a considerable pension. After some years he returned to Flanders, and his fellow-citizens were impatient to possess some of his productions; but they who had been accustomed to the style of Rubens and Vandyke, were unable to yield him that praise to which he had been accustomed, and he was obliged to change his manner, which he appears to have done with facility and advantage, as many of his latter pictures bear evident testimony. His most esteemed productions are, the principal altar-piece in the church of the Carmelites at Antwerp, the subject of which is the marriage of the virgin; and the adoration of the magi, the altar-piece in the cathedral of Bruges. The former is much after the manner of Rubens. Vandyke painted his portrait among the eminent artists of his country, which is engraved by Pontius. He died in 1651, aged sixty-two. His son Daniel, who was born at Antwerp in 1590, was a painter of fruit and flowers, which he, being a Jesuit, executed at his convent at Rome. He appears, indeed, to have painted more for the benefit of the society to which he had attached himself, than for his private advantage: and when he had produced his most celebrated picture, at the command of the prince of Orange, it was presented to that monarch in the name of the society, which was munificently recompensed in return. He frequently painted garlands of flowers, as borders for pictures, which were filled up with historical subjects by the first painters. He died at Antwerp in 1660, aged seventy.

, an early Italian writer, was born at Florence about the close of the fifteenth century. He was educated at Padua, where he became an accomplished classical scholar, but appears afterwards to have gone into public life, and was employed in various embassies and iiegociations by duke Cosmo, of Florence. He wrote an excellent history of Florence from 1527 to 1555, which, however, remained in ms. until 1723, when it appeared, together with a life of Niccolo Capponi, gonfalonier of Florence, Segni’s uncle. He likewise translated Aristotle’s Ethics. “L‘Etica d’Aristotele, tradotta in volga Fiorentino,” Florence, 1550, 4to, a very elegant book; and “DelP Anima d'Aristotele,” 1583, also the Rhetoric and Poetics of the same author, &c. He died in 1559.

, a French poet, was born at Caen in 1624, and first studied in the college of the Jesuits there. As he grew up, he applied himself to French poetry, and was so successful as to be enabled to rescue himself, four brothers, and two sisters, from the unhappy circumstances in which the extravagance of a father had left them. In his twentieth year he met with a patron who introduced him to Mad. de Montpensier, and this lady appointed him her gentleman in ordinary, in which station he remained many years, until obliged to quit her service, for opposing her marriage with count de Lauzun. He immediately found a new patroness in Mad. de la Fayette, who admitted him into her house, and assigned him apartments. Her he assisted in her two romances, “The princess of Cleves” and “Zaida.” After seven years, he retired to his own country, with a resolution to spend the rest of his days in solitude; and there married his cousin, a rich heiress, about 1679. Mad. de Maintenon invited him to court, as tutor to the duke of Maine: buthedid notchooseto exchange theindependenceof a retired life for the precarious favours of a court, and therefore continued where he was. He was admitted of the French academy in 1662; and was the means of re-establishing that of Caen. He died at this place, of a dropsy, in 1701. He was very deaf in the last years of his life, bufe was much courted for the sake of his conversation, which was replete with such anecdotes as the polite world had furnished him with. A great number of these are to be found in the “Segraisiana;” which was published many years after his death, with a preface by Mr. de la Monnoye; the best edition of it is that of Amsterdam, 1723, 12mo.

The prose writings of Segrais, though for the most part frivolous enough, yet have great merit as to their style, which may be considered as a standard. Of this kind are his “Nouvelles Francoises;” but he was chiefly admired for his poems, which consist of *' Diverses Poesies,“printed at Paris in 1658, 4to;” Athis," a pastoral and a translation of Virgil’s Georgics and Æneid. Of his eclogues, and particularly of his translation of Virgil, Boileau and D'Alembert speak very highly, but his Virgil is no longer read.

, one of the most learned men of the seventeenth century, wasthe son of John Selden, a yeoman, by Margaret his wife, only daughter of Mr. Thomas Baker of Rushington, descended from the family of th Bakers in Kent. He was born Dec, 16, 1584, at a house called the Lacies at Salvinton, near Terring in Sussex, and educated at the free-school at Chichester, where he made a very early progress in learning. In 159$, at fourteen years of age, as some say, but according to Wood, in 1600, he was entered of Hart-hall, Oxford, where under the tuition of Mr. Anthony Barker (brother to his schoolmaster at Chichester) and Mr. John Young, both of that hall, he studied about three years, and then removed to Clifford’s Inn, London, for the study of the law, and about two years afterwards exchanged that situation for the Inner Temple. Here he soon attained a great reputation for learning, and acquired the friendship of sir Robert Cotton, sir Henry Spelman, Camden, and Usher. In 1606, when only twentytwo years of age, he wrote a treatise on the civil government of Britain, before the coming in of the Normans, which was esteemed a very extraordinary performance for his years. It was not printed, however, until 1615, and then very incorrectly, at Francfort, under the title “Analects Anglo-Britannicwv Hbri duo, de civile administratione Britanniae Magnae usque ad Normanni adventum,” 4to. Nicolson is of opinion that these “Analecta” do not so clearly account for the religion, government, and revolutions of state among our Saxon ancestors, as they are reported to do. It was an excellent specimen, however, of what might be expected from a youth of such talents and application.

In 1614 he published a work which has always been praised for utility, his “Titles of Honour,” Lond. 4to, with an encomiastic poem by his friend Ben Jonson. It was reprinted with additions in 1631, fol. and again in 1671, and translated into Latin by Simon John Arnold, Francfort, 1696, Nicolson remarks that a as to what concerns our nobility and gentry, all that come within either of those lists will allow, that Mr. Selden’s Titles of Honour ought first to be perused, for the gaining of a general notion of the distinction of a degree from an emperor down to a country gentleman.“In 1616 appeared his notes on sir John Fortescue’s work sc De laudibus legum Anglise,” and sir Ralph’s Hengham’s “Sums,” Lond. 8vo. In 1617 he drew up a dissertation upon the state of the Jews formerly living in England, for the use of Purchas, who printed it, although, as Selden complained, very defectively, in hi* “Pilgrimage.” In the same year he published his very learned work, “De Diis Syriis syntagmata duo.” This is not only a treatise on the idolatry of the ancient Syrians, but affords a commentary on all the passages in the Old Testament, where mention is made of any of the heathen deities. This first edition (Lond, 8vo.) being out of print, Ludovicus de Dieu printed an edition at Leyden in 1629, which was revised and enlarged by Selden. Andrew Beyer afterwards published two editions at Leipsic, in 1668 and 1672, with some additions, but, according to Le Clerc, of little importance. Le Clerc offers also some objections to the work itself, which, if just, imply that Selden had not always been judicious in his choice of his authorities, nor in the mode of treating the subject. It contributed, however, to enlarge the reputation which he already enjoyed both at home and abroad.

In his next, and one of his most memorable performances, he did not earn th*e fame of it without some danger. This was his “Treatise of Tythes,” the object of which was to prove that tithes were not due by divine right under Christianity, although the clergy are entitled to them by the laws of the land. This book was attacked by sir James Sempill in the Appendix to his treatise entitled “Sacrilege sacredly handled,” London, 1619, and by Dr. Richard Tillesley, archdeacon of Rochester, in his “Animadversions upon Mr. Selden’s History of Tithes,” London, 1621, 4to. Selden wrote an answer to Dr. Tillesley, which being dispersed in manuscript, the doctor published it with remarks in the second edition of his “Animadversions,” London, 1621, 4to, under this title, “Animadversions upon Mr. Selden’s History of Tithes, and his Review thereof. Before which (in lieu of the two first chapters purposely praetermitted) is premised a catalogue of 72 authors before the yeare 1215, maintaining the Jus divinum of Tythes, or more, to be paid to the Priesthood under the Gospell.” Selden’s book was likewise answered by Dr. Richard Montague in his “Diatribe,” London, 1621, 4to; by Stephen Nettles, B. D. in his “Answer to the Jewish Part of Mr. Selden’s History of Tythes,” Oxford, 1625; and by William Sclater in his “Arguments about Tithes,” London, 1623, in 4to. Selden’s work having been reprinted in 1680, 4to, with the old date put to it, Dr. Thomas Comber answered it in a treatise entitled, “An Historical Vindication of the Divine Right of Tithes, &c.” London, 1G&1, in 4to. This work also excited the displeasure of the court, and the author was called before some of the lords of the high commission, Jan. 28, 1618, and obliged to make a publicsubmission, which he did in these words: “My good Lords, I most humbly acknowledge my errour, which 1 have committed in publishing the ‘ History of Tithes,’ and especially in that I have at all, by shewing any interpretation of Holy Scriptures, by meddling with Councils, Fathers, or Canons, or by what else soever occures in it, offered any occasion of argument against any right of maintenance ' Juredivino* of the Ministers of the Gospell; beseeching your Lordships to receive this ingenuous and humble acknowledgment, together with the unfeined protestation of my griefe, for that through it I have so incurred both his Majestie’s and your Lordships’ displeasure conceix-ed against mee in behalfe of the Church of England.” We give this literally, because some of Mr. Selden’s admirers have asserted that he never recanted any thing in his book. The above is at least the language of recantation; yet he says himself in his answer to Dr. Tillesley, “I confesse, that I did most willingly acknowledge, not only before some Lords of the High Commission (not in the High Commission Court) but also to the Lords of his Majesty’s Privy Council, that I was most sorry for the publishing of that History, because it had offended. And his Majesty’s most gracious favour towards me received that satisfaction of the fault in so untimely printing it; and I profess still to all the world, that I am sorry for it. And so should I have been, if I had published a most orthodox Catechism, that had offended. But what is that to the doctrinal consequences of it, which the Doctor talks of? Is there a syllable of it of less truth, because I was sorry for the publishing of it Indeed, perhaps by the Doctor’s logic there is; and just so might he prove, that there is the more truth in his animadversions, because he was so glad of the printing them. And because he hopes, as he says, that my submission hath cleared my judgment touching the right of tithes: what dream made him hope so? There is not a word of tithes in that submission more than in mentioning the title; neither was my judgment at all in question, but my publishing it; and this the Doctor knows too, as I am assured.” Selden, therefore, if this means any thing, was not sorry for what he had written, but because he had published it, and he was sorry he had published it, because it gave offence to the court and to the clergy. In 1621, king James having, in his speech to the parliament, asserted that their privileges were originally grants from the crown^ Selden was consulted by the House of Lords on that question, and gave his opinion in favour of parliament; which being dissolved soon after, he was committed to the custody of the sheriff of London, as a principal promoter of the famous protest of the House of Commons, previous to its dissolution. From this confinement, which lasted only five weeks, he was released by the interest of Dr. Andrews, bishop of Winchester, and returned to his studies, the first fruits of which were> a learned epistle prefixed to Vincent’s “Discovery of errors in two editions of the Catalogue of Nobility by Ralph Brooke,” Lond. 1622, and the year following his “Spicilegium in Eadmeri sex libros Historiarum,” fol.

Although he had already been consulted by parliament on account of his knowledge of constitutional antiquities, he had not yet obtained a seat in that assembly; but in 1623 he was chosen a member for Lancaster, and in the parliament called in 1625, on the accession of Charles L he was chosen for Great Bed win in Wiltshire) and novr took an active p>rt in opposition to the measures of the court*. In 1626 he was chosen of the committee for

* In Trinity term, 1624, he was concerning him were respited until this chosen reader of Lyon’s-lnn, but re- term. Now this day being called agairt fused to perform that office. In the to the table, he doth absolutely refuse register of the Inner Temple is the fol- to read. The masters of the bench, lowing passage “Whereas an order taking into consideration his contempt was made at the Bench-Table this term, add offence, and for that it is without ince the last parliament, and entered precedent, that any man elect-d to into the buttery-book in these words; read in chancery has been discharged Jovtslldie Octobrls 1624. Memoran- in like case, much less has with such dum, that whereas John Selden, esq. wilfulness refused the same, have orone of the utter barristers of this house, dered, that he shall presently pay to *ras in Trinity term last, chosen reader the use of this house the sum of 20J. of Lyon’s-lnn by the gentlemen of the for his fine, and that he stand and be same house, according to the order of disabled ever to be called to the bench, their house, which he then refused to or to be a reader of this house. Now take upon him, and perform the same, at this parliament the said order is coriwithout some sufficient cause or good firmed; and it is further ordered, that reason, notwithstanding many ccwirte- if any of this house, which hereafter ous and fair persuasions and admoni- shall be chosen to read in chancery, tions by the masters of the bench made shall refuse to read, every such offender to him; forwhich cause he having been shall be fined, and be disabled to be twice convented before the masters of called to the bench, or to be a reader the bench, it was then ordered, that of this house.” However, in Michaelthere should be a nt reclpiatur entered mas term 1632, it was ordered, that upon his name, which was done accord- Mr. Seldea “shall stand enabled and ingly and in respect the beneh was be capable of any preferment in the not then full, the farther proceedings House, in such a manner as other drawing up articles of impeachment against the duke of Buckingham, and was afterwards appointed one of the managers for the House of Commons on his trial. In 1627 he opposed the loan which the king endeavoured to raise, and although he seldom made his appearance at the har, pleaded in the court of King’s Bench for Hampden, who had been imprisoned for refusing to pay his quota of that loan. After the third parliament of Charles I. in which he sat for Lancaster, had been prorogued, he retired to Wrest in Bedfordshire, a seat belonging to the earl of Kent, where he finished his edition of the” Marmora Arundelliana," Loud. 1621), 4to, reprinted by Prideaux, with additions at Oxford, in 1676, folio, and by Maittaire, at London, 1732, in folio.

In the next session of parliament he continued his activity against the measures of the court, to which he had made himself so obnoxious, that after that parliament was dissolved, he was committed to the Tower by an order of the Privy-council, where he remained about eight months, and as he then refused to give security for his good behaviour, he was removed to the King’s Bench prison, but was allowed the rules. It was about this time that he wrote his piece “De successionibns in bona defuncti, secundum leges Hebraeorum,” Lond. 1634, 4to; and another, “De successione in pontificatum Hebracorum libri duo,” reprinted at Leyden, 1638, 8vo, and Francfort, by Beckman, 1673, 4to, with some additions by the author. In May 1630 he was removed to the Gate-house at Westminster; and in conseqaence of this removal, he found means to obtain so much indulgence, as to pass the long vacation in Bedfordshire; but when his habeas corpus was brought, as usual, in Michaelmas term ensuing, it was refused by the court, and the judges complaining of the illegality of his removal to the Gate-house, he was remanded to the King’sbench, where he continued till May 1631, when he was admitted to bail, and bailed from term to term, until he. petitioned the king, in July 1634, and was finally released Iby the favour of archbishop Laud and the lord treasurer. During his confinement, having been always much attached totli study of Jewish antiquities, he wrote his treatises, “De Jure naturali et gentium, juxta disciplinam Hebneorum,”

utter barristers of this House are to all standing-; and accordingly he was called intents and purposes, any former act to the beach Michaelmas following.“of parliament to the contrary notwithand his” lixor Hebraica,“on the marriages, divorces, &c. of the ancient Hebrews. In 1633 he was one of the committee appointed for preparing the mask exhibited by the gentlemen of the Inns of Court, before the king and queen on Candlemas night, in order to show their disapprobation, of Prynne’s book against stage-plays, called” Histriomastix:" so various were Selden’s pursuits, that he could even, superintend mummery of this kind, while apparently under the displeasure of the court. His next publication, however, effectually reconciled the court and ministers.

During king James’s reign, Selden had been ordered by his majesty to make such collections as might shew the right of the crown of England to the dominion of the sea, and he had undertaken the work, but, in resentment for being imprisoned by James, declined the publication. An occasion offered now in which it might appear to advantage. In 1634, a dispute having arisen between the English and Dutch concerning the herring -fishery upon the British coast, to which the Dutch laid claim, and had their claims supported by Grotius, who, in his “Mare liberum” contended that fishing on the seas was a matter of common right, Selden now published his celebrated treatise of “Mare Clausum,” Lond. 1635, foL In this he effectually demonstrated, from the law of nature and nations, that a dominion over the sea may be acquired: and from the most authentic histories, that such a dominion has been claimed and enjoyed by several nations, and submitted to by others, for their common benefit; that this in fact was the case of the inhabitants of this island, who, at all times, and under every kind of government, had claimed, exercised, and constantly enjoyed such a dominion, which had been confessed by their neighbours frequently, and in the most solemn manner. This treatise, in the publication of which Selden is said to have been encouraged by archbishop Laud, greatly recommended him to the court, and was considered as so decisive on the question, that a copy of it was placed among the records of the crown, in the exchequer, and in the court of admiralty. This work was reprinted in 1636, 8vo. An edition also appeared in Holland, 12mo, with the title of London, but was prohibited by the king, because of some additions, and a preface by Boxhornius. It was jtranslated into English, by the noted Marchamont Needham, 1652, foL with some additional evidence and discourses, by special command, and a dedication of eighteen pages, addressed to “The supreme authoritie of the nation and parliament of the Commonwealth of England,” which is of course not prefixed to the translation by J. H. Gent published after the restoration in 1663. Nicolson observes, that when Selden wrote this book, he was not such an inveterate enemy to the prerogative doctrine of ship-money, as afterwards: for he professedly asserts, that in the defence of their sovereignty at sea, our kings constantly practised the levying great sums on their subjects without the concurrence of their parliaments. The work having been attacked by Peter Baptista Burgus, Selden published in 1653, 4to, a treatise in its defence, with rather a harsh title, “Vindicise secundum integritatem existimationis suae per eonvitium de scriptione Maris Clausi petulantissimum et mendacissimum Maris Liberi, &c.”

In this same year, 1640, Selden was chosen member for the university of Oxford, and that year and the following continued Jo oppose the measures of the court, but his. coneliiet may to some appear unsteady. In truth, he attempted what in those days was impossible, to steer a middle course. He supported the republican party in the measures preparatory to the sacrifice of the earl of Strafford, but was not one of their Committee for managing the impeachment, and his name was even inserted in a list of members, posted up in Old Palace Yard by some party zealots, and branded with the appellation of " enemies of justice.*' On the subject of church-government, although he seems to have entertained some predilection for the establishment, yet he made no effort to prevent its fall, at all commensurate to his knowledge and credit. In the debates on the question whether bishops sat in parliament as barons and peers of the realm, or as prelates, he gave it as his opinion that they sat as neither, but as representatives of the clergy; and this led to the expulsion of them from parliament. Afterwards we find him concurring with other members of the House of Commons in a protestation that they would maintain the protestant religion according to the doctrine of the church of England, and would defend the person and authority of the king, the privileges of parliament, and the rights of the subject. In the prosecution of archbishop Laud, Selden was among those who were appointed to draw up articles of impeachment against him, an office which must have produced a severe contest between his private feelings and his public duties.

Notwithstanding all this, the royalists were unwilling to believe that a man so learned and so well informed as Selden could be seriously hostile, and there were even some thoughts of taking the great seal from the lord keeper Littleton, and giving it to him. Clarendon tells us, that lord Falkland and himself, to whom his majesty referred the consideration of this measure, “did not doubt of Mr. Selden’s affection to the king; but withal they knew him so well, that they concluded he would absolutely refuse the place, if it were offered to him. He was in years, and of a tender constitution be had for many years enjoyed his ease, which he loved was rich, and would not have made a journey to York, or have lain out of his own bed, for any preferment, which he had never affected.” But in all probability his majesty’s advisers savy that his want of iirmness, and his love of safety, were the real impediments. When the king found him opposing in parliament the commission of array, he desired lord Falkhad to write to Selden on the subject, who vindicated his conduct on that point, but declared his intention to-be equally hostile to the ordinance for the militia, which was moved by the factious party, and which he justly declared to be without any shadow of law, or pretence of precedent, and most destructive to the government of the kingdom. Accordingly he performed his promise, but tins remarkable difference attended his efforts, that his opposition to the commission of array did the king great injury among many of his subjects, while the ordinance which armed the parliamentary leaders against the crown was carried: and, according to Whitelocke, Selden himself was made a deputy -lieutenant under it. There was an equally remarkable difference in the treatment he received for this double opposition. The king and his friends, convinced that he acted honestly, bore no resentment against him; but the popular leaders, most characteristically, inferred from this, that he must be hostile to their cause, and made vain endeavours to induce Waller to implicate him in the plot which he disclosed in 1643. Nor was his exculpation sufficient: for he was obliged, by an oath, to testify his hostility against the traitorous and horrible plot for the subversion of the parliament and state,

In 1643, he was appointed one of the lay-members to. sk in the assembly of divines at Westminster, in which, his admirers tell us, he frequently perplexed those divines with his vast learning; and, as Whitelocke relates, *‘ sometimes when they had cited a text of scripture to prove their assertion, he would tell them, ’ perhaps in your little pocket-bibles with gilt leaves,' which they would often pull out and read, < the translation may be thus’ but the Greel^ and the Hebrew signify thus and thus and so would totally silence them." This anecdote, which has often been repeated to Selden’s praise, may afford a proof of his wit, such as it was; but as a reflection on the divines of that assembly, it can do him no credit, many of them certainly understanding the original languages of the Bible as well as himself. It was in truth, as an able critic has observed, a piece of wanton insolence.

It is now necessary to revert to his publications, which were seldom long interrupted by his political engagements. In 1642, he published “A brief discourse concerning the power of peers and commons in parliament in point of judicature/' 4to, which some have, however, ascribed t sir Simonds D'Ewes. It was followed by” A discourse concerning the rights and privileges of the subjects, in a conference desired by the lords in 1628,“Lond. 1642, 4to” Privileges of the Baronage of England, when they sit in parliament,“ibid. 1642, and 1681, 8vo and an edition of Eutychius’s” Origines,“with a translation and notes, Lond. 4to, under this title,” Eutychii Ægyptii, Patriarchs orthodoxorum Alexandrini, Ecclesia* sine origines ex ejusdem Arabico, nunc primum edidit ac versione et commentario auxit Joannes Seldenus." Pocock (see Pocock, Vol. XXV. p. 91) inserted this work in his edition of the annals of Eutychius, which he translated at the desire of Mr. Selden, at whose expence they were printed at Oxford, in 1656, 4to. Mr. Selden’s book has been animadverted upon by several writers, particularly Abraham Ecchellensis, John Morin, and Eusebius Renaudot.

In 1643, he afforded every proof of his adherence to the republican party, by taking the covenant; and the same year, was by the parliament appointed keeper of the records in the Tower. In 1644, he was elected one of the twelve commissioners of the admiralty and nominated to the mastership of Trinity- college, in Cambridge, which he did not think proper to accept. In this year, he published his treatise “De Anno civili et Calendario Judaico,” 4to. In 1646, the parliament was so sensible of his services that they voted him the sum of 5000l. in consideration of his sufferings. What these were we have already related. In 1647, he published his learned “Dissertation annexed to (a book called) Fleta,” which he discovered in the Cottonian library. A second edition was published in 1685, but in both are said to be many typographical errors. In 1771, R. Kelham Esq. published a translation with notes. This work contains many curious particulars relating to those ancient authors on the laws of England, Bracton, Britton, Fleta, and Thornton, and shews what use was made of the imperial law in England, whilst the Romans governed here, at what time it was introduced into this nation, what use our ancestors made of it, how long it continued, and when the use of it totally ceased in the king’s courts at Westminster.

Selden continued to sit in Parliament after the murder of the king, and was the means of doing some good to learning, by his own reputation and influence in that reipect. He preserved archbishop Usher’s library from being sold, and rendered considerable services to the university of Oxford, taking all occasions, as in the cases of Pocock and Greaves, to moderate the tyranny of the parliamentary visitors, and often affording a generous protection to other eminent men who were about to be ejected for their adherence to the king. He also was instrumental in preserving the books and medals at St. James’s, by persuading his friend Whitelocke to accept the charge of them. Of his conduct while the death of the king was pending, we have no account at that critical period, he retired, it is said, as far as he could and it is certain that he refused to gratify Cromwell by writing an answer to the Eikoti Basilike. In 1650, he published his first book, “De Synedriis et prcefecturis Hebraeorum,” 4to; the second appeared in 1653, and the third after his death, in 1655. Many passages in this work have been animadverted upon by several eminent writers, especially what relates to excommunication. Dr. Hammond, in particular, has examined Selden’s notion concerning the power of binding and loosing, in his treatise concerning “The power of the Keys.” In 1652, he contributed a preface to the “Decem Scriptores Historic Anglicanae,” printed at London that year, in folio.

In the beginning of 1654 his health began to decline, and he began to see the emptiness of all human learning; and owned, that out of the numberless volumes he had read and digested, nothing stuck so close to his heart, or gave him such solid satisfaction as a single passage out of St. Paul’s Epistle to Titus, ii. 11, 12, 13, *14. On Nov. lOof that year, he sent to his friend Bulstrode Whitelocke, in order to make some alterations in his will, but when he came he found Selden’s weakness to be so much increased, that he was not able to perform his intention . He died Nov. 30, in the seventieth year of his age, in White Friars, at the house of Elizabeth, countess of Kent, with whom he had lived some years in such intimacy, that they were reported to be man and wife, and Dr. Wilkins supposes, that the wealth, which he left at his death, was chiefly owing to the generosity of that countess: but there is no good reason for either of these surmises. He was buried in the Temple church, where a monument was erected to him; and abp. Usher preached his funeral sermon. He left a most valuable and curious library to his executors, Matthew Hale, John Vaughan, and Rowland Jewks, esqs. which they generously would have bestowed on the society of the Inner Temple, if a proper place should be provided to receive it: but, this being neglected, they gave it to the university of Oxford. Selden, himself, had originally intended it for Oxford, and had left it so in his will , but was offended because when he applied for a manuscript in the Bodleian library, they asked, according to usual custom, a bond of 1OOO/. for its restitution. This made him declare, with some passion, that they should never have his collection. The executors, however, considered that they were executors of his will and not of his passion, and therefore destined the books, amounting to 8000 volumes, for Oxford, where a noble room was added to the library for their reception, Bumet says, this collection was valued at some thousands of pounds, and was believed to be one of the most curious in Europe. It is supposed that sir Matthew Hale gave some of Selden’s Mss respecting law to Lincoln’s-Inn library, as there is nothing of that kind among what were sent to the Bodleian; and a few Mr. Selden gave to the library of the college of physicians.

Selden was a man of extensive learning, and had as much skill in the Hebrew and Oriental languages as perhaps any man of his time, Pocock excepted. Grotius, over whom he triumphed in his “Mare clausum,” styles him “the glory of the English nation.” He was knowing in all laws, human and divine, yet did not greatly trouble himself with the practice of law: he seldom appeared at the bar, but sometimes gave counsel in his chamber. “His mind also,” says Whitelocke, “was as great as his learning; he was as hospitable and generous as any man, and as good company to those he liked.” Wilkins relates, that he was a man of uncommon gravity and greatness of soul, averse to flattery, liberal to scholars, charitable to the poor; and that, though he had a great latitude in his principles with regard to ecclesiastical power, yet he had a sincere regard for the church of England. Baxter remarks, that “he was a resolved se-> rious Christian, a great adversary, particularly, to Hobbes’s errors;” and that sir Matthew Hale affirmed, “how he had seen Selden openly oppose Hobbes so earnestly, as either to depart from him, or drive him out of the room.” But the noblest testimony in his favour is that of his intimate friend the earl of Clarendon, who thus describes him in all parts of his character: “Mr. Selden was a person,” says he, “whom no character can flatter, or transmit in any expressions equal to his merit and virtue. He was of such stupendous learning in all kinds and in all languages, as may appear from his excellent and transcendant writings, that a man would have thought he had been entirely conversant among books, and had never spent an hour but in reading or writing; yet his humanity, courtesy, and affability, was such, that he would have been thought to have been bred in the best courts, but that his good-nature, charity, and delight in doing good, and in communicating all he knew, exceeded that breeding. His style in all his writings seems harsh, and sometimes obscure; which is not wholly to be imputed to the abstruse subjects of which he commonly treated, out of the paths trod by other men, but to a little undervaluing the beauty of a style , and too much propensity to the language of antiquity: but in his conversation he was the most clear discourser, and had the best faculty in making hard things easy, and present to the understanding, of any man that hath been known.” His lordship also used to say, that *' he valued himself upon nothing more than upon having had Mr. Selden’s acquaintance, from the time he was very young; and held it with great delight as long as they were suffered to continue together in London: and he was very much troubled always when he heard him blamed, censured, and reproached for staving in London, and in the parliament, after they- were in rebellion, and in the worst times, which his age obliged him to do; and how wicked soever the actions were, which were every day done, he was confident he had not given his consent to them, but would have hindered them if he could with his own safety, to which he was always enough indulgent. If he had some infirmities with other men, they were weighed down with wonderful and prodigious abilities and excellences in the other scale.“The political part of Selden’s life, is that which the majority of readers will contemplate with least pleasure; but on this it is unnecessary to dwell. The same flexibility of spirit, which made him. crouch before the reprehension of James I. disfigured the rest of his life, and deprived him of that dignity and importance which would have resulted from his standing erect in any place he might have chosen. Clarendon seems to have hit the true cause of all, in that anxiety for his own safety to which, as he says,” he was always indulgent enough."

Several other works of his were printed after his death, or left in manuscript. I. “God made man, A Tract proving the nativity of our Saviour to be on the 25th of December,” Lond. 1661, 8vo, with his portrait. This was answered in the first postscript to a treatise entitled tc A brief (but true) account of the certain Year, Month, Day, and Minute of the birth of Jesus Christ,“Lond. 1671, 8vo, by John Butler, B. D. chaplain to James duke of Ormonde, and rector of Litchborow, in the diocese of Peterboroup-h. 2.” Discourse of the office of Lord Chancellor of England,“London, 1671, in fol. printed with Dugdale’s catalogue of lord chancellors and lord keepers of England from the Norman conquest. 3, Several treatises, viz.” England’s Epinomis;“already mentioned, published 1683, in fol. by Redman Westcot, alias Littleton, with the English translation of Selden’s” Jani Anglorum Facies altera.“4.” Ta. ble talk: being the discourses or his sense of various maU ters of weight and high consequence, relating especially to Religion and State,“London, 1689, 4to, published by Richard Mil ward, amanuensis to our author. Dr. Wilkins observes, that there are many things in this book inconsistent with Seiden’s great learning, principles, aud character. It has, however, acquired popularity, and still continues to be printed, as an amusing and edifying manual. 5.” Letters to learned men;“among which several to archbishop Usher are printed in the collection of letters at the end of Parr’s life of that prelate; and two letters of his to Mr. Thomas Greaves were first published from the originals by Thomas Birch, M. A. and F. R. 8. in the life prefixed to Birch’s edition of the” Miscellaneous works of Mr. John Greaves,“Lond. 1737, in two volumes, 8vo. 6.” Speeches, Arguments, Debates, &c. in Par! lament.“7. He had a considerable hand in, and gave directions and advice towards, the edition of” Plutarch’s Lives,“printed in 1657, with an addition of the year of the world, and the year of our Lord, together with many chronological notes and explications. His works were collected by Dr. David Wiljvins, and printed at London in three volumes fol. 1726. The two first volumes contain his Latin works, and the third his English. The editor has prefixed a long life of the author, and added several pieces never published before, particularly letters, poems, &c. In 1675 there was printed at London in 4to,” Joannis Seldeni Angli Liber de Nummis, &c. Huic accedit Bibliotheca Nummaria.“But this superficial tract was not written by our author, but by Alexander Sardo of Ferrara, and written before Selden was born, being published at Mentz, 1575, in 4to. The” Bibliotheca Nummaria" subjoined to it was written by father Labbe the Jesuit.

, whose adventures have given rise to the popular romance of Robinson Crusoe, was born at Largo, in Fifeshire, in Scotland, about 1676, and was bred a seaman. He left England in 1703, in the capacity of sailing-master of a small vessel, called the Cinque- PortsGalley, Charles Pickering captain and in the month of September, the same year, he sailed from Cork, in company with another ship of 26 guns and 120 men, called the St. George, commanded by captain William Dampier, intended to cruise against the Spaniards in the South sea. On the coast of Brasil, Pickering died, and was succeeded in the command by lieutenant Stradling. They proceeded round Cape Horn to the island of Juan Fernandez, whence they were driven by the appearance of two French ships of 36 guns each, and left five of Stradling’s men on shore, who were taken off by the French. Hence they sailed to the coast of America, where Dampier and Stradling quar^ relied, and separated by agreement. This was in the month of May 1704; and in the following September, Stradling came to the island of Juan Fernandez, where Selkirk and his captain having a quarrel, he determined to remain there alone. But when the ship was ready to sail, his resolution was shaken, and he desired to be taken on board; but now the captain refused his request, and he was left with hm clothes, bedding, a gun, and a small quantity of powder and ball, some trifling implements, and a few books, with certain mathematical and nautical instruments. Thus left sole monarch of the island, with plenty of the necessaries, of life, he found himself at first in a situation scarcely supportable; and such was his melancholy, that he frequently determined to put an end to his existence. It was full eighteen months, according to his own account, before he could reconcile himself to his lot. At length his mind became calm, and fully reconciled to his situation: he grew happy, employed his time in building and decorating his huts, chasing the goats, whom he soon equalled in speed, and scarcely ever failed of catching them. He also tamed young kids, and other animals, to be his companions. When his garments were worn out, he made others from the skins of the goats, whose flesh served him as food. His only liquor was water. He computed that he had caught, during his abode in the island, about 1000 goats, half of which he had suffered to go at large, having first marked them with a slit in the ear. Commodore Anson, who went there 30 years after, found the first goat which they shot, had been thus marked; and hence they concluded that it had been under the power of Selkirk. Though he constantly performed his devotions at stated hours, and read aloud, yet when he was taken from the island, his language, from disuse of conversation, had become scarcely intelligible. In this solitude he remained four years and four months, during which only two incidents occurred which he thought worthy of record. The first was, that pursuing a goat eagerly, he caught at the edge of a precipice, of which he was not aware, and he fell over to the bottom, where he lay some time senseless; but of the exact space of time in which he was bereaved of his active powers he could not ferm an accurate estimate. When, however, he came to himself, he found the goat lying under him dead. It was with difficulty that he could crawl to his habitation, and it was not till after a considerable time that he entirely recovered from his bruises. The other event was the arrival of a ship, which he at first supposed to be French, but, upon the crew’s landing, he found them to be Spaniards, of whom he had too great a dread to trust himself in their hands. They, however, had seen him, and he found it extremely difficult to make his escape. In this solitude Selkirk remained until the 2d of February, 1709, when he saw two ships come to the bay, and knew them to be English. He immediately lighted a fire as a signal, and he found, upon the landing of the men, that they were two privateers from Bristol, commanded by captains Rogers and Courtney. These, after a fortnight’s stay at Juan Fernandez, embarked, taking Selkirk with them, and returned byway of the East Indies to England, where they arrived on the 1st of October, 1711; Selkirk having been absent eight years. The public curiosity being much excited, he, after his return, drew up some account of what had occurred during his solitary exile, which he put into the hands of Defoe, vvho made it the foundation of his well-known work, entitled “Robinson Crusoe.” The time and place of Selkirk’s death are not on record. It is said, that so late as 1798, the chest and musket, which Selkirk had with him on the island, were in possession of a grand nephew, John Selkirk, a weaver in Largo, North Britain. Such are the particulars of this man’s history as recorded in “The Englishman,” No. 26, and elsewhere, but what credit is due to it, we do not pretend to say.

, a distinguished French physician, wag born in Gascony about the close of the seventeenth century, and is said to have been a doctor of the faculty of physic of Rheims, and a bachelor of that of Paris; which last degree he obtained in 1724 or 1725. He was a man of profound erudition, united with great modesty, and became possessed, by his industry in the practice of his profession, of much sound medical knowledge. His merits obtained for him the favour of the court, and he was appointed consulting physician to Louis XV. and subsequently succeeded Chicoyneau in the office of first physician to that monarch. He was also a member of the royal academy of sciences at Paris, and of the royal society of Nancy. He died in December 1770, at the age of about Seventy-seven years.

This able physician left some works of great reputation, particularly his “Traite de la Structure du Coeur, de son Action, et de ses Maladies,” Paris, 1749, in two volumes, 4to. An essay “De recondita febrium intermittentium et reuiittentium natura,” Amst. 1759, is generally ascribed to Senac. He also published an edition of Heister’s Anatomy, Paris, 1724, and afterwards “Discours sur la Methode de Franco, et sur celle de M. Rau touchant l'Operation de la Taille,” 1727. “Traite des Causes, des Accidens, et de la Cure de la Peste,” 1744. A work under the assumed name of Julien Morison, entitled “Lettres sur la Choix des Saignees,” 1730, was from his pen; but the “Nouveau Cours de Chymie suivant les Principes de Newton et de Stahl,” Paris, 1722 and 1737, has been attributed by mistake to Senac; it was in fact a compilation of notes taken at the lectures of Geoffroy by some students, and is unworthy of his pen.