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

, another English poet, of a more estimable character, was born at Cambridge in the beginning of 1715. His father was a baker in St. Botolph’s parish, and at one time must have been a man of some property or some interest, as he bestowed a liberal education on his eldest son, John, wtio after entering into the church, held the living of Pershore in the diocese of Worcester. He would probably have been enabled to extend the same care to William, his second son, had he not died when the boy was at school, and left his widow involved in debts contracted by extravagance or folly. A few acres of land, near Grantchester, on which he expended considerable sums of money, without, it would appear, expecting much return, is yet known by the name of White head’s Folly* William received the first rudiments of education at some common school at Cambridge, and at the age of fourteen was removed to Winchester, having obtained a nomination into that college by the interest of Mr. Bromley, afterwards lord MonttorC. Of his behaviour while at school his biographer, Mr. Mason, received the following account from Dr. Balguy. " He was always of a delicate turn, and though obliged to go to the hills with the other boys, spent his time there in reading either plays or poetry; and was also particularly fond of the Atalantis, and all other books of private history or character. He very early exhibited his taste for poetry; for while other boys were contented with shewing up twelve or fourteen lines, he would till half a sheet, but always with English verse. This Dr. Burton, the master, at first discouraged; but, after some time, he was so much charmed, that he spoke of them with rapture. When he was sixteen he wrote a whole comedy. In the winter of the year 1732, he is said to have acted a female part in the Andria, under Dr. Burton’s direction. Of this there are some doubts; but it is certain that he acted Marcia, in the tragedy of Cato, with much applause. In the year 1733, the earl of Peterborough, having Mr. Pope at his house near Southampton, carried him to Winchester to shew him the college, school, &c. The earl gave ten guineas to be disposed of in prizes amongst the boys, and Mr. Pope set them a subject to write upon, viz. Peterborough. Prizes of a guinea each were given to six of the boys, of whom Whitehead was one. The remaining sum was laid out for other boys in subscriptions to Pine’s Horace, then about to be published. He never excelled in writing epigrams, nor did he make any considerable figure in Latin verse, though he understood the classics very well, and had a good memory. He was, however, employed to translate into Latin the first epistle of the Essay on Man; and the translation is still extant in his own hand. Dobson’s success in translating Prior’s Solomon had put this project into Mr. Pope’s head, and he set various persons to work upon it.

In all this there is nothing extraordinary; nor can the partiality of his biographer conceal that, among the early efforts of his muse, there is not one which seems to indicate the future poet, although he, is anxious to attribute this to his having followed the example of Pope, rather than of Spenser, Fairfax, arvd Milton. The “Vision of Solomon,” however, which he copied from Whitehead’s juvenile manuscripts, is entitled to considerable praise. Even when a schoolboy he had attentively studied the various manners of the best authors; and in the course of his poetical life, attained no small felicity in exhibiting specimens of almost every kind of stanza.

He brought some little reputation with him to college, and his poetical attempts when at school, with the notice Mr. Pope had taken of him, would probably secure him from the neglect attached to inferiority of rank. But it is more to his honour that by his amiable manners and intelligent conversation, he recommended himself to the special notice of some very distinguished contemporaries, of Drsi Powell, Balguy, Ogden, Stebbing, and Hurd, who not only admitted him to an occasional intercourse, but to an intimacy and respect which continued through the various scenes of their lives; In sueh society his morals and industry had every encouragement which the best example could give, and be soon surmounted the prejudices which vulgar minds might have indulged on the recollection of his birth and poverty.

The production with which, in Mr. Mason’s opinion, he commenced a poet, was his epistle “On the Danger of Writing in Verse.” This, we are told, obtained general admiration, and was highly approved by Pope. But that it is “one of the most happy imitations extant of Pope’s preceptive manner,” is a praise which seems to come from Mr. Mason’s friendship, rather than his judgment. The subject is but slightly touched, and the sentiments are often obscure. The finest passage, and happiest imitation of Pope, is that in which he condemns the licentiousness of certain poets. The tale of “Atys and Adrastus,” his next publication, is altogether superior to the former. It is elegant, pathetic, and enriched with some beautiful imagery. “The Epistle of Anne Boleyn to Henry VIII.” which followed, will not be thought to rank very high among productions of this kind. “The truth is,” says Mr. Mason, “Mr. Pope’s Eloisa to Abelard is such a chef (TceuvrC) that nothing of the kind can be relished after it.” Our critic has, however, done no credit to Whitehead by this insinuation of rivalship, and yet less to himself by following it with a petulant attack on Dr. Johnson. In his eagerness to injure the reputation of a man so much his superior, and with whom, it is said, he never exchanged an angry word, he would exclude sympathy from the charms which attract in the Eloisa, and, at the expence of taste and feeling, passes a clumsy sarcasm on papistical machinery.

The “Essay on Ridicule” was published in 1743. It is by far the best, of his didactic pieces, and one upon which, his biographer thinks, he bestowed great pains. “His own natural candour led him to admit the use of this excellent (though frequently misdirected) weapon of the mind with more restrictions than, perhaps, any person will submit to, who has the power of employing it successfully.” The justice of this observation is proved by almost universal experience. Pope and Swift at this time were striking instances of the abuse of a talent which, moderated by candour, and respect for what ought to be above all ridicule and all levity, might contribute more powerfully to sink vice into contempt than any other means that can be employed!.

Soon after this, as he was recovering from a severe fit of sickness, happened the remarkable visitation of his university by cardinal Pole, in order to discover and expel the heretics, or those inclined to the doctrines of the reformation. To avoid the storm, Whitgift thought of going Abroad, and joining the other English exiles; but Dr. Perne, master of his college, although at that time a professed papist, had such an esteem for him, that he undertook to screen him from the commissioners, and thus he was induced to remain; nor was he deceived in his confidence in Dr. Perne’s friendship, who being then vicechancellor, effectually protected him from all inquiry, not withstanding the very strict severity of the visitation. In 1560 Mr. Whitgift entered into holy orders, and preached his first sermon at St. Mary’s with great and general approbation. The same year he was appointed chaplain to Cox, bishop of Ely, who gave him the rectory of Teversham in Cambridgeshire. In 1563 he proceeded bachelor of divinity, and Matthew Button, then fellow of Trinity-college, being appointed regius professor of divinity, the same year Whitgift succeeded him as lady Margaret’s professor of divinity. The subject of his lectures was the book of Revelations and the whole Epistle to the Hebrews, which he expounded throughout. These lectures were prepared by him for the press; and sir George Paule intimates, that they were likely in his time to be published; but whatever was the reason, they have never appeared. Strype tells us, that he saw this manuscript of Dr. Whitgift' s own hand -writing, in the possession of Dr. William Payne, minister of Whitechapel London; and that after his death it was intended to be purchased by Dr. John More, lord bishop of Ely. This manuscript contained likewise his thesis, when he afterwards kept his act for doctor of divinity, on this subject, that “the Pope is Antichrist.”

With these acquisitions, he did not hastily obtrude the novel opinions to which they had given rise. He was thirty-six years of age before his talents appeared to the world, and even then they were called forth rather by necessity than choice. In 1360 he became the advocate for the university against the incroachments made by the mendicant friars, who had been very troublesome from their first establishment in Oxford in 1230, and had occasioned great inquietude to the chancellor and scholars, by infringing their statutes and privileges, and setting up an exempt jurisdiction. Their misconduct had decreased the number of students from thirty thousand to six thousand, parents being afraid to send their children to the university, where they were in danger of being enticed by these friars from the colleges into convents; and no regard was paid to the determination of parliament in 1366, that the friars should receive no scholar under the age of eighteen. But Wickliffe now distinguished himself against these usurpations, and, with Thoresby, Bolton, Hereford, and other colleagues, openly opposed the justification which the friars had advanced in favour of their begging trade from the example of Christ and his apostles. Wickliffe also wrote several tracts against them, particularly “Of Clerks Possessioners,” “Of the Poverty of Christ, against able Beggary,” and “Of Idleness in Beggary.” These were written, with an elegance uncommon in that age, in the English language, of which he may be considered as one of the first refiners, while his writings afford many curious specimens of old English orthography. His controversies gave him such reputation in the university, that, in 1361 he was advanced to be master of Baliol college; and four years after he was made warden of Canterbury-hall, founded by Simon de Islip, archbishop of Canterbury, in 1361, and now included in Christ-church. The letters of institution, by which the archbishop appointed him to this wardenship, were dated 14 Dec. 1365, and in them he is styled, “a person in whose fidelity, circumspection, and industry, his grace very much confided; and one on whom he had fixed his eyes for that place, on account of the honesty of his life, his laudable conversation, and knowledge of letters.” Wickliffe amply fulfilled these expectations, till the death of the archbishop in 1366, who was succeeded in che archiepiscopal dignity by Simon Langham. This prelate had been a monk, and being inclined to favour the religious against the seculars, was easily persuaded by the morrks of Canterbury to eject Wickliffe in 1367 from his wardenship, and the other seculars from their fellowships. He also issued out his mandate, requiring WicklifFe and all the scholars to yield obedience to Wodehall as their warden. This Wodehall had actually been appointed warden by the founder, but he was at such variance with the secular scholars, that the archbishop was compelled to turn him and three other monks out of his new-founded hall, at which time he appointed Wickliffe to be warden, and three other seculars to be scholars. The scholars now, however, refused to yield obedience to Wodehall, as being contrary to the oath they had taken to the founder, and Langham, irritated at their obstinacy, sequestered the revenue, and took away the books, &c. belonging to the balL Wickliffe, and his expelled fellows, appealed to the pope, who issued a bull, dated at Viterbo 28 May, 1370, restoring Wodehall and the monks, and imposing perpetual silence on Wickliffe and his associates. As this bull was illegal, and interfered with the form of the licence of mortmain, the monks in 1372 screened themselves by procuring the royal pardon, and a confirmation of the papal sentence, for which they paid 200 marks, nearly 800l. of our money.

About this time the pope (Urban) sent notice to king Edward, that he intended to cite him to his court at Avignon, to answer for his default in not performing the homage which king John acknowledged to the see of Rome; and for refusing to pay the tribute of 700 marks a-year, which that prince granted to the pope. The king laid this before the parliament, and was encouraged to resist the claim. One of the monks having endeavoured to vindicate it, Wickliffe replied; and proved that the resignation of the crown, and promise of a tribute made by king John, ought not to prejudice the kingdom, or oblige the present king, as it was done without consent of parliament. This introduced him to the court, and particularly to the duke of Lancaster, who took him under his patronage. At this time he styled himself peculiaris regis clericus, or the king’s own clerk or chaplain, but continued to profess himself an obedient son of the Roman church. Shortly after he was presented, by the favour of the duke of Lancaster, to the living of Lutterworth in Leicestershire, but in the diocese of Lincoln, and it was here that he advanced in his writings and sermons, those opinions which entitle him to the rank of reformer. But as he did not in the most open manner avow these seaiiments until he lost this living, his enemies then and since have taken occasion to impute them to a motive of revenge against the court of Rome which deprived him. This, however, is not strictly the truth, as he seems to have uttered and maintained some of his reforming opinions before he was turned out of the rectorship. This is evident from a tract entitled “Of the last age of the Church,” published in 1356, fourteen years before, in which he censures the popish exactions and usurpations.

It must be allowed, however, that his boldness increased with his sufferings. In 1372 he took his degree as doctor of divinity, and read lectures with great applause, in which he more strongly opposed the follies and superstitions of the friars, exposed their corruptions, and detected their practices without fear or reserve. The conduct of the court of Rome in disposing of ecclesiastical benefices and dignities to Italians, Frenchmen, and other aliens, became so notorious and oppressive, that in 1374, the king issued out a commission for taking an exact survey of all the dignities and benefices throughout his dominions, which were in the hands of aliens. The number and value of them appeared enormous, and he determined to send seven ambassadors to require of the pope that he would not interfere with the reservation of benefices. He had tried a similar embassy the yea before, which procured only an evasive concession. On the present occasion Wickliffe was the second person nominated, and, with the other ambassadors, was met at Bruges by the pope’s nuncio, two bishops and a provost. This treaty continued two years, when it was concluded that the pope should desist from making use of reservations of benefices. But the very next year, the treaty was broken, and a long bill-was brought into parliament against the papal usurpations, as the cause of all the plagues, injuries, famine, and poverty of the realm. They remonstrated that the tax paid to the pope amounted to five times as much as the tax paid to the king; and that God had given his sheep to the pope to be pastured, not fleeced. Such language encouraged Wickliffe, who boldly exposed the pride, avarice, ambition, and tyranny of the pope, in his public lectures and private conversation; and the monks complained to the pope that Wickliffe opposed the papal powers, and defended the royal supremacy; on which account, in 1376 they drew up nineteen articles against him, extracted from his public lectures ard sermons, of which some notice will be taken hereafter. It may be sufficient to add in this place, that they tended to oppose the rights which the popes had assumed, and to justify the regal,' in opposition to the papal pretensions of an ecclesiastical liberty, or an exemption of the persons of the clergy, and the goods of the church from the civil power, in advancing such opinions, he had the people on his side, and another powerful protector appeared for him in Henry Percy, earl-marshal. This alarmed the court of Rome, and Gregory XL issued several bulls against Wickliffe, all dated May 22, 1377. One was directed to the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of London, whom he delegated to examine into the matter of the complaint; another was dispatched to the king himself, and a third to the university of Oxford. In the first, addressed to the two prelates, he tells them, “he was informed that Wickliffe had rashly proceeded to that detestable degree of madness, as not to be afraid to assert, and publicly preach, such propositions, as were erroneous and false, contrary to the faith, and threatening to subvert and weaken the estate of the whole church.” He therefore required them to cause Wickliffe to be apprehended and imprisoned by his authority; and to get his confession concerning his propositions and conclusions, which they were to transmit to Rome; as also whatever he should say or write, by way of introduction or proof. But, if Wickliffe could not be apprehended, they were directed to publish a citation for his personal appearance before the pope within three months. The pope requested the king to grant his patronage and assistance to the bishops in the prosecution of Wickliffe. In the bull to the university, he says, the heretical pravity of Wickliffe tended “to subvert the state of the whole church, and even the civil government.” And he orders them to deliver him up in safe custody to the delegates.

King Edward III. died before these bulls arrived in England, and the university seemed inclined to pay very little respect to the one addressed to them. The duke of Lancaster and the earl-marshal openly declared they would not suffer, him to be imprisoned, and as yet, indeed, the bishops were not authorized by law to imprison heretics without the royal consent. The archbishop of Canterbury and the bishop of London, however, on the 19th Feb. 1378, issued out their mandate to the chancellor of the university of Oxford, commanding them to cite Wickliffe to appear before them in the church of St. Paul, London, within thirty days. But in such reputation was Wickliffe held at this time, that when, in the interval before his appearance, the first parliament of king Richard II. met, and debated “whether they might lawfully refuse to send the treasure out of the kingdom, after the pope required it on pain of censures, by virtue of the obedience due to him?” the resolution of this doubt was referred by the king and parliament to doctor Wickliffe, who undertook to prove the, legality of their refusal.

Sueh confidence reposed in him by the higher powers augured ill for the success of the prelates who had summoned him to appear before them. On the day appointed, a vast concourse assembled, and Wickliffe entered, accompanied by the duke of Lancaster and the earl-marshal Percy, who administered every encouragement, to him. But before the proceedings began, an altercation was occasioned by the bishop oi London’s opposing a motion of the earl-marshal, that Wickliffe should be allowed a seat. The duke of Lancaster replied to the bishop in warm terms, and said, although rather softly, that “rather than -take such language from the bishop, he would drag him out of the church by the hair of his head.” But this being over-s heard, the citizens present took part with their bishop, and such a commotion ensued that the court broke up without entering on the examination, while Wickliffe was carried off by his friends in safety. The Londoners, in revenge, plundered the duke of Lancaster’s palace in the Savoy, and the duke turned the mayor and aldermen out of the magistracy for not restraining their violence. From these circumstances it would appear that at this time WicklihVs principles had not been espoused by many of the lower classes, as is generally the case with innovations in religious matters; yet it was not long before he had a strong party of adherents even among them, for when he was a second time cited by the prelates to appear before them at Lambeth, the Londoners forced themselves into the chapel to encourage him, and intimidate his judges and accusers, On this occasion Wickliffe delivered a paper to the court, in which he explained the charges against him, but the proceedings were again stopped by the king’s mother, who sent sir Lewis Clifford to forbid their proceeding to any definitive sentence against Wickliffe. This completely disconcerted them, and according to the evidence of their own historian, Walsyngham, changed their courage into pusillanimity. “Qui quam iodevote,” says he, “ quamsegniter commissa sibi mandata compleverint, inelius est silere quam loqui.” All they could do was to enjoin him silence, to which he paid no regard; his followers increased; the death of pope Gregory XI. put an end to the commission of the delegates; and when a schism ensued by the double election of two popes, Wickliffe wrote a tract, “Of the Schism of the Roman Pontiffs,” and soon after published his book “Of the Truth of the Scripture,'” in which he contended for the necessity of translating the scriptures into the English language, and affirmed that the will of God was evidently revealed in two Testaments; that the law of Christ was sufficient to rule the church; and that any disputation, not originally produced from thence, must be accounted profane.

In 1381 we find Wickliffe attacking the doctrine of transubstantiation, which was first asserted by Radbertus about the year 820, and had been always propagated by the Romish church. Wickliffe offered to support his opinion in a public disputation, but as that was prohibited, he published it in a tract entitled “De Blasphemia,” which was condemned by William de Barton, chancellor of the university, and eleven doctors, of whom eight were of the religious. Wickliffe maintained that they had not refuted his assertions, and appealed from their condemnation, to the king. In the mean time William Courtney, bishop of London, succeeded archbishop Sudbury in the see of Canterbury, and was entirely devoted to the interest of his patron the pope. This prelate had before shewn himself a violent opposer of Wickliffe, and now proceeded against him and his followers. But as soon as the parliament met in 1382, Wickliffe presented his appeal to the king and both houses. Walsingham represents this as done with a design to draw the nobility into erroneous opinions, and that it was disapproved by the Duke of Lancaster, who ordered Wickliffe to speak no more of that matter. Others say that the duke advised Wickliffe not to appeal to the king, but submit to the judgment of his ordinary upon which, the monks assert, he retracted his doctrine at Oxford in the presence of the archbishop of Canterbury, six bishops, and many doctors, surrounded with a great concourse of people. But the confession which he read, in Latin, was rather a vindication of his opinion of the sacrament, as it declares his resolution to defend it with his blood, and maintains the contrary to be heresy.

The persecution which followed plainly proves this to be the case. After the death of the queen, Anne of Luxemburg, in 1394, who was a favourer of the Wickiffites, the archbishop, Courtney, assembled a court of bishops, in the monastery of the preaching friars, London, who declared fourteen conclusions of Wickliffe and others, heretical and erroneous. It is said that Wickliffe was prevented from appearing at this court by his friends, who thought that a plot was laid to seize him on the road. His cause, however, was undertaken by the chancellor of Oxford, the two proctors, and the greatest part of the senate, who, in a letter, sealed with the university seal, and sent to the court, highly commended his learning, piety, and orthodox faith. His particular friends and followers, Dr. Nicholas Hereford, Dr. Philip Rapingdon, and John Ayshton, M. A. defended his doctrines both in this court and in the convocation. The archbishop still persisted in his endeavours to punish the Wickliffites, but their doctrines increased, while Wickliffe himself, although obliged to quit his professorship at Oxford, lived peaceably at Lutterworth, still divulging his principles, and increasing the number of his followers. In 1382, soon after he left Oxford, he was seized with the palsy; and about the same time the pope cited him to appear at Rome, to which he sent an excuse, pleading, that “Christ had taught him to obey God rather than man.” He was seized with a second stroke of palsy on Innocent’s day 1384, as he was in his church of Lutterworth, and soon after expired, in the sixtieth year of his age.

On the 5th of May, 1415, the council of Constance condemned forty-five articles maintained by Wickliffe, as heretical, false, and erroneous. His bones were ordered to be dug up and cast on a dunghill; but this part of his sentence was not executed till 1428, when orders were sent by the pope to the bishop of Lincoln to have it strictly performed. His remains, which had now lain in the grave forty-four years, were dug out and burnt, and the ashes cast into an adjoining brook, called the Swift. It is said that the gown which Wickliffe wore now covers the communion-table of the church of Lutterworth.

The principles which this eminent reformer endeavoured to introduce may be gathered from the nineteen articles before-mentioned, which were extracted from his public lectures and sermons, by the monks, and sent to the pope. It appears that he held the doctrine of predestination in as strong a sense as any who have since supported it, and, in the opinion of a late writer, carries it much farther than any modern or ancient writers have attempted. He was, indeed, an absolute necessitarian, and among certain articles extracted from his works by Thomas Netter (commonly called Thomas of Walden, who flourished about 1409) we find the following, “That all things come to pass by fatal necessity; that God could not make the world otherwise than it is made; and that God cannot do any thing which he doth not do.” Other less unguarded expressions have been laid to his charge, of which Fuller observes, that were all his works extant, “we might read the occasion, intention, and connection of what he spake, together with the limitations, restrictions, distinctions, and qualifications, of what he maintained. There we might see what was the overplus of his passion, and what the just measure of his judgment.” He maintained, with the church in after-times, the doctrine of pardon and justification by the alone death and righteousness of Christ. The several points in which he differed from the then established popery were these; the reading of the bible in the vulgar tongue, and making them the sole rule of a Christian’s faith and practice, without faith in tradition, or any human authority; his opposing the pope’s supremacy and infallibility; his rejecting and condemning transubstantiation, indulgences, confession, and absolution, extreme unction; the celibacy of the clergy; forced vows of chastity; prayers to, and worship of saints, shrines and pilgrimages. But the opinions which rendered him most obnoxious in his day, were those which struck at the temporal dominion of the pope, and which occasioned many of his followers to be persecuted in the subsequent reigns of Richard II. Henry IV. and Henry V.

, an ingenious and learned English bishop, was the son of Mr. Walter Wilkins, citizen and goldsmith of Oxford, and was born in 1614, at Fawsley, near Daventry, in Northanvptonshire, in the house of his mother’s father, the celebrated dissenter Mr. John Dod. He was taught Latin and Greek by Edward Sylvester, a teacher of much reputation, who kept a private school in the parish of All-Saints in Oxford and his proficiency was such, that at thirteen he entered a student of New-innhall, in 1627. He made no long stay there, but was removed to Magdalen-hall, under the tuition of Mr. John Tombes, and there took the degrees in arts. He afterwards entered into orders; and was first chaplain to William lord Say, and then to Charles count Palatine of the Khine, and prince elector of the empire, with whom he continued some time. To this last patron, his skill in the mathematics was a very great recommendation. Upon the breaking out of the civil war, he joined with the parliament, and took the solemn league and covenant. He was afterwards made warden of Wadham-college by the committee of parliament, appointed for reforming the university; and, being created bachelor of divinity the 12th of April, 1648, was the day following put into possession of his wardenship. Next year he was created D. D. and about that time took the engagement then enjoined by the powers in being. In 1656, he married Robina, the widow of Peter French, formerly canon of Christ-church, and sister to Oliver Cromwell, then lord-protector of England: which marriage being contrary to the statutes of Wadham-college, because they prohibit the warden from marrying, he procured a dispensation from Oliver, to retain the wardenship notwithstanding. In 1659, he was by Richard Cromwell made master of Trinity-college in Cambridge; but ejected thence the year following upon the restoration. Then he became preacher to the honourable society of Gray’s-inn, and rector of St. Lawrence-Jewry, London, upon the promotion Dr. Seth Ward to the bishopric of Exeter. About this time, he became a member of the Royal Society, was chosen of their council, and proved one of their most eminent members. Soon after this, he was made dean of Rippon; and, in 1668, bishop of Chester, Dr. Tillotson, who had married his daughter-in-law, preaching his consecration sermon. Wood and Burnet both inform us, that he obtained this bishopric by the interest of Villiers duke of Buckingham; and the latter adds, that it was no stnall prejudice against him to be raised by so bad a man. Dr. Walter Pope observes, that Wilkins, for some time after the restoration, was out of favour both at Whitehall and Lambeth, on account of his marriage with Oliver Cromwell’s sister; and that archbishop Sheldon, who then disposed of almost all ecclesiastical preferments, opposed his promotion; that, however, when bishop Ward introduced him afterwards to the archbishop, he was very obligingly received, and treated kindly by him ever after. He did not enjoy his preferment long; for he died of a suppression of urine, which was mistaken for the stone, at Dr. Tiilotson’s house, in Chancery-lane, London, Nov. 19, 1672. He was buried in the chancel of the church of St. Lawrence Jewry; and his funeral sermon was preached by Dr. William Lloyd, then dean of Bangor, who, although Wilkins had been abused and vilified perhaps beyond any man of his time, thought it no shame to say every thing that was good of him. Wood also, different as his complexion and principles were from those of Wilkins, has been candid enough to give him the following character “He was,” says he, “a person endowed with rare gifts he was a noted theologist and preacher, a curious critic in several matters, an excellent mathematician and experimentist, and one as well seen in mechanisms and new philosophy, of which he was 3 great promoter, as any man of his time. He also highly advanced the study and perfecting, of astronomy, both at Oxford while he was warden of Wadham-college, and at London while he was fellow of the Royal Society; and I cannot say that there was any thing deficient in him, but a constant mind and settled principles.”

Bishop Williams’ s other works were, 1. “Seven golden Candlesticks, holding the seven greatest lights of Christian Religion,” Lond. 1627, 4to. 2. “The True Church shewed to all men that desire to be members of the same in six books, containing the whole body of divinity,” ibid. 1629, fol. 3. “The right way to the best Religion; wherein is largely explainecUne sum and principal heads of the Gospel, in certain sermons and treatises,” ibid. 1636, fol. 4. “The great Antichrist revealed,” ibid. 1660, fol. In this he attempted to prove that Antichrist was neither pope, nor Turk, nor any one person, but the party which overthrew the church and state. He published also some other treatises arising from the circumstances of the timers, and many sermons afterwards published collectively, in 1662, fol. and 1666, 4to. His most curious production, and from which the preceding circumstances of his life are taken, is entitled “The persecution and oppression of John Bale, and Griffith Williams, bishops of Ossory,” Lond. 1664, 4to. In this he institutes a parallel between bishop Bale and himself, as promoted to the same see at the mere motion of kings, without any interest or application; both violently expelled from the same house; both their persecutions occasioned by their pulpit performances; the one by popish, the other by puritan adversaries; both their dangers by sea were great; both persecuted by false accusers; to which Mr. Harris adds, “the same licentious spirit of railing appears in their writings, which no apology can excuse.”

In one of his letters, dated 1754, he gives an account of his change of religion, which too plainly appears to have been guided by motives of interest, in order to make his way to Rome, and gain a better livelihood. At Dresden he published, 1755, “Reflections on the Imitation of the Works of the Greeks,” 4to, translated into French the same year, and republished 1756, 4to. At Rome he made an acquaintance with Mengs, first painter to the king of Poland, afterwards, in 1761, appointed first painter to the house of Spain, with an appointment of 80,000 crowns, a house, and a coach; and he soon got access to the library of cardinal Passionei, who is represented as a most catholic and respectable character, who only wanted ambition to be pope. His catalogue was making by an Italian, and the work was intended for Winkelman. Giacomelli, canon of St. Peter, &c. had published two tragedies of Æschylus and Sophocles, with an Italian translation and notes, and was about a new edition of “Chrysostom de Sacerdotio;” and Winkelman had joined with him in an edition of an unprinted Greek oration of Libanius, from two Mss. in the Vatican and Barberini libraries. In 1757 he laments the calamities of his native country, Saxony, which was then involved in the war between the emperor and the king of Prussia. In 1758 he meditated a journey over the kingdom of Naples, which he says could only be done on foot, and in the habit of a pilgrim, on account of the many difficulties and dangers, and the total want of horses and carriages from Viterbo to Pisciota, the ancient Velia. Jn 1768 we find him in raptured with the idea of a voyage to Sicily, where he wished to make drawings of the many beautiful earthen vases collected by the Benedictines at Catana. At the end of the first volume of his letters, 1781, were first published his remarks on the ancient architecture of the temple of Girgenti. He was going to Naples, with 100 crowns, part of a pension from the king of Poland, for his travelling charges, and thence to Florence, at the invitation of baron Sto&ch. Cardinal Archinto, secretary of state, employed him to take care of his library. His “Remarks on Ancient Architecture' 7 were ready for a second edition. He was preparing a work in Italian, to clear up some obscure points in mythology and antiquities, with above fifty plates; another in Latin, explanatory of the Greek medals that are least known; and he intended to send to be printed in England” An Essay on the Style of Sculpture before Phidias.“A work in 4to appeared at Zurich, addressed to Mr. Wrnkelman, by Mr. Mengs, but without his name, x entitled,” Thoughts on Beauty and Taste in Painting,“and was published by J. C. Fuesli. When Cardinal Albam succeeded to the place of librarian of the Vatican, he endeavoured to get a place for the Hebrew language for Winkelman, who refused a canonry because be would not take the tonsure. The elector of Saxony gave him, 1761, unsolicited, the place of counsellor Richter, the direction of the royal cabinet of medals, and antiquities at Dresden. Upon the death of the abbe Venuti, 1762, he was appointed president of the antiquities of the apostolic chamber, with power over all discoveries and exportations of antiquities and pictures. This is a post of honour, with an income of 160 scudi per annum. He had a prospect of the place of president of antiquities in the Vatican, going to be created at 16 scudi per month, and was named corresponding member of the academy of inscriptions. He had thoughts of publishing an” Essay on the Depravation of Taste in the Arts and Sciences.“The king of Prussia offered him by Col. Quintus Icilius the place of librarian and director of his cabinet of medals and antiquities, void by the death of M. Gautier de la Croze, with a handsome appointment. He made no scruple of accepting the offer; but, when it came to the pope’s ears, he added an appointment out of his own purse, and kept him at Rome. In April 1768 he left Rome to go with M. Cavaceppi over Germany and Switzerland. When he came to Vienna he was so pleased with the reception he met with that he made a longer stay there than he had intended. But, being suddenly seized with a secret uneasiness, and extraordinary desire to return to Rome, he set out for Italy, putting off his visits to his friends in Germany to a future opportunity. It was the will of Providence, however, that this opportunity should never come, he being assassinated in June of that year, by one Arcangeli, of whom, and of his crime, the following narrative was published: ” Francis Arcangeli was born of mean parents, near the city of Pistoia, and bred a cook, in which capacity he served in a respectable family at Vienna, where, having been guilty of a considerable robbery, he was condemned to work in fetters for four years, and then to be banished from all the Austrian dominions, after being sworn never to return. When three years of his slavery were expired, he found friends to intercede in his favour, and he was released from serving the fourth, but strictly enjoined to observe the order of banishment; in consequence of which he left Vienna, and retired to Venice with his pretended wife, Eva Rachel. In August 1767, notwithstanding his oath, he came to Trieste with a view to settle; but afterwards changed his mind, and returned to Venice, where, being disappointed of the encouragement he probably expected, he came again to Trieste in May 1768. Being almost destitute of money, and but shabbily dressed, he took up his lodging at a noted inn (probably with a view of robbing some traveller). In a few days the abbe Winkelman arrived at the same inn in his way from Vienna to Home, and was lodged in the next apartment to that of Arcangeli. This circumstance, and their dining together at the ordinary, first brought them acquainted. The abbe expressed a desire of prosecuting his journey with all possible expedition, and Arcangeli was seemingly very assiduous in procuring him a passage, which the abbé took very kindly, and very liberally rewarded him for his services. His departure, however, being delayed by the master of the vessel which was to carry turn, Arcangeli was more than ordinarily diligent in improving every opportunity of making himself acceptable to the abbe, and their frequent walks, long and fainiliar conversations, and the excessive civility and attention of Arcangeli upon all occasions that offered, so improved the regard which the abbe had begun to conceive for him, that he not only acquainted him in the general run of their discourse with the motives and the event of his journey to Vienna, the graces he had there received, and the offers of that ministry; but informed him also of the letters of credit he had with him, the medals of gold and silver which he had received from their imperial majesties, and, in short, with all the things of value of which he was possessed.

The first edition of Mr. Wodhull’s translation of “Euripides” appeared in 1782, 4 vols. 8vo, since reprinted in 3 vols. 8vo. Whoever considers the number of dramas composed by the Greek tragedian, the variety of allusions which they contain to ancient manners, and to the tenets of philosophers; and the peculiar force of the language in which they were written, will acknowledge that the attempt to render them into English verse must have failed altogether without a rare unibn of perseverance, knowledge, and ability. Original composition is the surest test of genius, but the poetical images, and ideas of one man cannot adequately be represented or expressed by another who does not himself possess the imagination and fancy of a poet. In his translation of Euripides, Mr. Wodhull has selected blank verse as the best adapted for the dialogue, and has rendered the chorusses for the most part in a Pindaric ode. The difference therefore both of the subject and versification is such that no comparison can fairly be instituted with the poetical versions of the Æneid and the Iliad. But as Dryden and Pope have secured to themselves a high rank in the list of British Classics by their translations, an honourable post will also be assigned to Mr. Wodhull, who has contributed no mean addition to the stock of British Literature, and naturalized among us him, whom he entitles “The Philosophic Bard.”

Of the ingenuity of this work as a composition no doubts have been entertained, but its tendency was soon thought liable to suspicion. Some objected that he had injured Christianity by laying too much stress upon the obligations of truth, reason, and virtue; and by making no mention of revealed religion, nor even so much as dropping the least and most distant hints in its favour. This made him pass for an unbeliever with some; and the late lord Bolingbroke supposes Dr. Clarke to have had him in his eye when he described his fourth sort of theists. Wollaston held and has asserted the being and attributes of God, natural and moral a providence, general and particular; the obligations to morality the immateriality and immortality of the soul a future state and Clarke’s fourth sort of theists held and asserted the same. But whether Wollaston, like those theists, rejected all above this in the system of revelation, cannot with any certainty be concluded, though at the same time the contrary perhaps may not appear; because, whatever might have been thought necessary to prevent offence from being taken, it was not essential to Wollaston’s design to meddle with revealed religion. In the mean time, lord Bolingbroke has treated “The Religion of Nature delineated,” as a system of theism; which it certainly is, whether Wollaston was a believer or not. His lordship calls it “strange theism, as dogmatical and absurd as artificial theology,” and has spent several pages to prove it so; yet allows the author of it to have been “a man of parts, of learning, a philosopher, and a geometrician.” The seventh edition of this work was printed in 1750 in 8vo, to which are added an account of the author, and also a translation of the notes into English. There is prefixed an advertisement by Dr. John Clarke, late dean of Salisbury, which informs us, that this work was in great esteem with her late majesty queen Caroline, who commanded him to translate the notes into English for her own use. Pope, who has taken some thoughts from it into his “Essay on Man,” informs Mr. Bethel in one of his letters how much this work was a favourite with the ladies, but accompanies his information with a sneer at the sex, which we dare not transcribe.

, a celebrated cardinal and statesman, but to be remembered with more respect as a benefactor to learning, was so obscure in his origin that scarcely any historian mentions the names of his father and mother. Their names, however, are preserved by Rymer (Feed. vol. XIV. p. 355), in the pope’s bull of favours to those who came to Cardinal college in Oxford, and prayed for the safety of the said cardinal, and after his decease for the souls of him, his father Robert, and his mother Joan. This partly confirms the discovery of his zealous biographer, Dr. Fiddes, that he was the son of one Robert Wolsey, a butcher of Ipswich, where he was born in March 1471. Fiddes says that this Robert had a son whose early history corresponds with that of the cardinal, and that he was a man of considerable landed property. We may from other evidence conclude that his parents were either not poor, or not friendless, since they were able to give him the best education his native, town afforded, and afterwards to send him to Magdalen college. But in whatever way he was introduced here, it is certain that his progress in academical studies was so rapid that he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts at the age of fifteen, and from this extraordinary instance of precocity, was usually named the boy bachelor.

On his quitting Lymington, though without resigning the living, Henry Dean, archbishop of Canterbury, made him one of his domestic chaplains, and in 1503, the pope, Alexander, gave him a dispensation to hold two benefices. On the death of the archbishop, in the same year, he was appointed chaplain to sir John Nan fan of Worcestershire, treasurer of Calais, which was then in the possession of the English, and by him recommended to Renry VII. who made him one of his chaplains. About the end of 1504, he obtained from pope Julius II. a dispensation to hold a third living, the rectory of Redgrave in Norfolk. In the mean time he was improving his interest at court by an affable and plausible address, and by a display of political talent, and quick and judicious dispatch in business, which rendered him very useful and acceptable to his sovereign. In February 1508, the king gave him the deanery of Lincoln, and two prebends in the same church, and would probably have added to these preferments had he not been prevented by his death in the following year.

In the mean time, there was no intermission in his preferments. His influence was courted by the pope, who had made him a cardinal, and, in 1516, his legate in England, with powers not inferior to his own; and by the king of Spain, who granted him a pension of three thousand livres, while the duchy of Milan bestowed on him a yearly grant often thousand ducats. On the resignation of archbishop Warham, he was appointed lord high chancellor. “If this new accumulation of dignity,” says Hume, “increased his enemies, it also served to exalt his personal character and prove the extent of his capacity. A strict administration of justice took place during his enjoyment of this high office; and no chancellor ever discovered greater impartiality in his decisions, deeper penetration of judgment, or more enlarged knowledge of law or equity.”

In the same year the pope granted him the administration of the bishopric of Bath and Wells, and the king bestowed on him its temporalities. This see, with those of Worcester and Hereford, which the cardinal likewise farmed, were filled by foreigners who were allowed nonresidence, and compounded for this indulgence by yielding a share of the revenues. The cardinal’s aid, about this time, in establishing the College of Physicians of London, is to be recorded among the many instances of the very liberal views he entertained of every improvement connected with literature. In 1521, he evinced his zeal against the reformation' which Luther had begun, by procuring his doctrines to be condemned in an assembly of divines held at his own house, published pope Leo’s bull against him, and endeavoured to suppress his writings in this kingdom; but there is no favourable part of his character so fully established as his moderation towards the English Lutherans, for one article of his impeachment was his being remiss in punishing heretics, and showing a disposition rather to screen them.

In the same year he received the rich abbey of St. Alban’s to hold in commendam, and soon after went abroad on an embassy. About this time also, he became a candidate for the papal chair, on the demise of Leo X. but was not successful. This disappointment, however, was compensated in some degree by the emperor, who settled a pension on him of nine thousand crowns of gold, and by the bishopric of Durham, to which he was appointed in 1523. On this he resigned the administration of Bath and Wells. The same year he issued a mandate to remove the convocation of the province of Canterbury from St. Paul’s to Westminster, one of his most unpopular acts, but which appears to have been speedily reversed. On the death of pope Adrian he made a second unsuccessful attempt to be elected pope; but while he failed in this, he received from his rival a confirmation of the whole papal authority in England.

On the first day of term, Oct. 9, 1529, while he was opening the Court of Chancery at Westminster, the attorney-general indicted him in the Court of King’s Bench, on the statute of provisors, 16 Richard II. for procuring a bull from Rome appointing him legate, contrary to the statute, by which he had incurred a prtemunire^ and forfeited all his goods to the king, and might be imprisoned. Before he could give in any reply to this indictment, the king sent to demand the great seal from him, which was given to sir Thomas More. He was then ordered to leave York-place, a palace which had for some centuries been the residence of the archbishops of York, and which he had adorned with furniture of great value and magnificence: it now became a royal residence under the name of Whitehall. Before leaving this place to go to Esher, near Hampton Court, a seat belonging to the bishopric of Winchester, he made an inventory of the furniture, plate, &c. of York-place, which is said to have amounted to the incredible sum of five hundred thousand crowns, or pounds of our money. He then went to Putney by water, and set out on the rest of his journey on his mule, but he had not gone far before he was met by a messenger from the king, with a gracious message, assuring him that he stood as high as ever in the royal favour, and this accompanied by a ring, which the king had been accustomed to send, as a token to give credit to the bearer. Wolsey received these testimonials with the humblest expression of gratitude, but proceeded on his way to Esher, which he found quite unfurnished. The king’s design by this solemn mockery is not easily conjectured. It is most probable that it was a trick to inspire the cardinal with hopes of being restored to favour, and consequently to prevent his defending himself in the prosecution upon the statute of provisors, which Henry knew he could do by producing his letters patent authorising him to accept the pope’s bulls. And this certainly was the consequence, for the Cardinal merely instructed his attorney to protest in his name that he was quite ignorant of the above statute; but that he acknowledged other particulars with which he was charged to be true, and submitted himself to the king’s mercy. The sentence of the court was, that “he was out of the protection, and his lands, goods, and chattels forfeit, and his person might be seized.”

The cardinal’s biographers, in treating of the founda.­tion of his college, begin with a very laboured defence of his seizing the property and revenues of many priories and nunneries, which were to serve as a fund for building and endowment; and the zeal they display on this subject, if it cannot now enforce conviction, at least proves the historical fact that the rights of property even at that time were not to be violated with impunity, and that the cardinal’s conduct was highly unpopular. At first it was objected to even by the king himself, although he soon afterwards converted it into a precedent for a more general dissolution of religious houses. Wolsey, however; ought not to be deprived of such defence as has been set up. It has been urged, that h.e procured bulls from the pope empowering him to seize on these priories; and that the pope, according to the notions then entertained of his supremacy, could grant a power by which religious houses might be converted into societies for secular priests, and for the advancement of learning. It has been also pleaded, that the cardinal did not alienate the revenues from religious service, but only made a change in the application of them; that the appropriation of the alien priories by Chichele and Waynriete was in some respects a precedentj and that the suppression of the Templers in the fourteenth century, might also be quoted. Bishop Tanner likewise, in one of his letters to Dr. Charlett, quotes as precedents., bishops Fisher, Alcock, and Beckington. But perhaps the best excuse is that hinted by lord Cherbury, namely, that Wolsey persuaded the king to abolish unnecessary monasteries that necessary colleges might be erected, and the progress of the reformation impeded by the learning of the clergy and scholars educated in them. Tbe same writer suggests, that as Wolsey pleaded for the dissolution of only the small and superfluous houses, the king might not dislike this as a fair experiment how far the project of a general dissolution would be relished. On the other hand, by two letters still extant, written by the king, it appears that he was fully aware of the unpopularity of the measure, although we cannot infer from them that he had any remedy to prescribe.

By two bulls, the one dated 1524, the other 1525, Wolsoy obtained of pope Clement VII. leave to enrich his college by suppressing twenty-two priories and nunneries, the revenues of which were estimated at nearly 2000l.; but on his disgrace some of these were given by the king for other purposes. The king’s patent, after a preface paying high compliments to the cardinal’s administration, enables him to build his college principally on the site of the priory of St. Frideswide and the name, originally intended to be “The College of Secular Priests,” was now changed to Cardinal College. The secular clergy in it were to be denominated the “dean and canons secular of the cardinal of York,” and to be incorporated into one body, and subsist by perpetual succession. He was also authorised to settle upon it 2000l. a year clear revenue. By other patents and grants to the dean and canons, various church livings were bestowed upon them, and the college was to be dedicated to the praise, glory, and honour of the Holy Trinity, the Virgin Mary, St. Frideswide, and All Saints.

In the midst of those researches into antiquity, Dr. Woodward did not neglect his medical profession, although it cannot be said that he was eminently successful. In 1718 we find him involved in a controversy with two of the greatest physicians of his time, Dr. Freind and Dr. Mead. In a learned work which Dr. Freind published, about this time, he had advanced several arguments in favour of purging upon the access of the second fever, in some dangerous cases of the confluent small-pox. This practice was warmly Opposed by Dr. Woodward, who, on the contrary, strenuously recommended the use of emetics in such cases; and in the following year printed his “State of Physic and of Diseases, with an Inquiry into the Causes of the late increase of them; but more particularly of the Small-pox. With some considerations upon the new practice of purging in that disease” &c. in 8vo. This laid the foundation of a bitter controversy and Dr. Mead retained a sense of the injury, as he thought it, for many years after, as appears from the preface to his treatise on the small-pox; where he gives a short history of the affair, and also throws some personal reflections on Dr. Woodward, which would have been inexcusable in the heat of the controversy, and were certainly much more so near thirty years after. Pope, Arbuthnot, and other wits, attempted also to turn Dr. Woodward into ridicule, and there appears to have been something of irascibility in his temper, which afforded his enemies considerable advantage io this way.

, one of the most eminent of modern engravers in England, was born at Maidstone, in Kent, Aug. 27, 1735. Of his early history few particulars have been preserved, and those mostly traditionary. His father was a thread-maker, and long time a foreman to Mr. Robert Pope. The family is said to have come originally from Holland; and there is a tradition that Woollett’s great grandfather escaped from the battle fought by the parliamentary forces against the royalists near Maidstone. Our artist was educated at Maidstone under Mr. Simon Goodwin, who used to notice his graphic talents. Once having taken on a slate the likeness of a schoolfellow named Burtenshaw, who had a prominent nose, his master desired him to finish it on paper, and preserved the drawing. He was also in the habit of drawing the likenesses of his father’s acquaintances. His earliest production on copper was a portrait of a Mr. Scott, of Maidstone, with a pipe in his mouth. These are perhaps trifles, but they compose all that is now remembered of Woollett’s younger days. His first attempts having been seen by Mr. Tinney, an engraver, he took him as an apprentice at the same time with Mr. Anthony Walker and Mr. Brown. His rise in his profession was rapid, and much distinguished, for he brought the art of landscape engraving to great perfection. With respect to the grand and sublime, says Strutt, “if 1 may be allowed the term in landscapes, the whole world cannot produce his equal.” Woollett, however, did not confine himself to landscapes, he engraved historical subjects and portraits with the greatest success. The world has done ample justice to his memory, and the highest prices still continue to be given for good impressions of all his prints, but particularly of his “Niobe” and its companion “Phaeton,? ' his” Celadon and Amelia,“and” Ceyx and Alcyone;“and” The Fishery,“all from Wilson, whose peculiar happiness it was that his best pictures were put into the hands of Woollett, who so perfectly well understood and expressed the very spirit of his ideas upon thecopper. To these we may add the portrait of Rubens, from Vandyke, and, what are in every collection of taste, his justly celebrated prints from the venerable president of the academy,” The Death of General Wolfe,“and The Battle of the Boyne.”

But his wit was not evanescent. We are told that he brought about the reformation by a bon mot, and precipitated the fall of Wolsey by a seasonable story. When the king was perplexed respecting his divorce from queen Catherine, which he affected to feel as a matter of conscience, sir Thomas exclaimed, Lord! that a man cannot repent him of his sin without the pope’s leave!“A truth thus wittily hinted was afterwards confirmed by the opinion of Cranrner and of the universities, and became a maxim of church and state. The story by which he promoted the fall of Wolsey has not descended to our time*; Lloyd merely says that when the king happened to be displeased with Wolsey,” sir Thomas ups with the story of the curs baiting the butcher’s dog, which contained the whole method of that great man’s ruin," alluding to the common report of Wolsey’s being the son of a butcher at Ipswich.

Besides the plays abovementioned, he published a volume of poems in 1704, folio, of very inferior merit; and in 1728, his “Posthumous Works in prose and verse” were published by Theobald, in octavo. His curious correspondence with Pope may be seen in that poet’s works, with many anecdotes of Wycherley, who appears to have been a libertine through the whole course of his life; nor are his works free from the licentiousness, so much encouraged when he was the favourite of Charles and James II.

With a sovereign of Edward III.'s magnificent taste, it was but natural that Wykeham should now become a favourite, and accordingly we find that his majesty wished to distinguish him by many marks of royal favour. In order to facilitate this, it was necessary he should take orders, as ecclesiastical promotion was more particularly within his majesty’s pjwer, where the pope did not think proper to interfere; but this part of Wykeham’s* history is not so clearly detailed as could be wished. There is, on the contrary, some reason to think that he was in the church before he had given proof of his talents at Windsor and Queenborough. In all the patents for the offices he held, he is styled Clericus, but, as his biographer supposes, he had as yet only the clerical tonsure, or some of the lower orders, while the historian of Winchester thinks he was ordained priest by bishop Edyngdon. The first preferment bestowed on him was the rectory of Pulham in Norfolk, in 1357, and as the court of Rome threw some obstacles in the way which kept him for a time out of that living, the king, in 1359, granted him two hundred' pounds a year over and above all his former appointments, until he should get quiet possession of Pulham, or some other benefice, to the value of one hundred marks. But the disproportion between the worth of the living, and the compensation for delay, is so very striking as to incline us to think, either that Dr. Lowth has by mistake inserted 200l. for 20l. or that the king took this opportunity to shew a special mark of his favour, for which the loss of the living should be the ostensible motive. In the mean time he was presented to the prebend of Flixton in the church of Lichfieid, which he afterwards exchanged for some other benefice, and in 1359 he was constituted chief warden and surveyor of the king’s castles of Windsor, Leedes, Dover, and Hadlam; and of the manors of old and new Windsor, Wichenier, and several other castles, manors, and houses, and of the parks belonging to them. In 1360, the king granted him the deanery of the royal free chapel, or collegiate church of St. Martin le Grand, London, which he held about three years; during which he rebuilt, at his own expense, the cloister of the Chapter-house, and the body of the church. This is the first instance on record in which he is noticed as a public benefactor. In 1361 he was quietly settled in the rectory of Pulham, and in less than two years received many other ecclesiastical preferments, specified by Dr. Lowth. The annual value of his livings, for some years before he became bishop of Winchester, amounted to 842l. but “he only received the revenues of the church with one hand, to expend them in her service with the other.”

On the death of his old friend and patron William de Edyngdon, bishop of Winchester, in 1366, Wykeham was immediately and unanimously elected by the prior and convent to succeed him. Some delay having taken place before he c'ould be admitted into possession, it has been supposed that he was objected to by the king on account of his want of learning. But this is utterly destitute of foundation, as it was by the king’s express desire that he was chosen, and what is yet more in point, the pope’s bull, contrary to the official language used at that time, and in which there was frequently no mention of learning, declares that Wykeham was recommended to his holiness, “by the testimony of many persons worthy of credit, for his knowledge of letters, his probity of life and manners, and his prudence and circumspection in affairs both spiritual and temporal.” The real cause of the delay is stated at great length by Dr. Lowth, and depended on circumstances belonging to the history of that age, connected with the general state of ecclesiastical patronage.

In 1379, having completed the several purchases of land necessary for the scite of the college, he obtained the king’s patent or licenceto found, dated June 3.0, of that year; and likewise the pope’s bull to the same effect. In his charter of foundation which he published on November 26 following, his college is entitled Seinte Marie College of Wynchestre in Oxenford. But it is raxher remarkable that the name of New college, which was then given in common speech without much impropriety, should be by-some means continued until the present day, when it is in reality the oldest as to its principal buildings, and the seventh in the order of foundation. The foundation-stone was laid March 5, 1380, and the whole completed in six years; and on April 14, 1386, the society took possession by a public entrance accompanied with much solemnity.

After he had regained his liberty he continued his opposition to the several administrations under which he lived, though he is believed to have altered his opinion with respect to government itself, from the Jacobite notions which he might formerly have espoused, to a more large and popular system; and that upon this ground he afterwards formed his whole Apolitical conduct. Jt was universally allowed that he possessed all the qualifications requisite to form an able senator; sagacity, to discern the strength or weakness of every question, and eloquence, to enforce the one and expose the other; skill and address, to seize every advantage in the course of a debate, without affording any; and a proper degree of warmth and vivacity in speaking, necessary to secure the attention of the audience, without such an excess of it as might embarrass himself, and expose him to the cooler observation of his antagonists. And if we descend to the consideration of him in the more familiar light of his private conversation, we shall find it equally distinguished by an unaffected civility and politeness, enlivened by an easy flow of elegant wit, and supported by a various and extensive fund of useful knowledge. To so imperfect a character of him, it will be but justice to subjoin that which has been given by Pope, with whom he lived in great intimacy.

, an eminent statesman and patron of literature, was born in 1437, at Torrelaguna, in Old Castille, and was the son of Alphonso de Cimeros de Ximenes, procurator of that city. He was educated for the church, at Alcala and Salamanca, and then went to Rome, but having been robbed on his journey home, brought nothing back with him, except a bull for the first prebend which should be vacant. This the archbishop of Toledo refused to grant, and confined him in the tower of Uceda, where it is said a priest, who had long been prisoner there, foretold to him that he should, one day, be archbishop of Toledo. Having recovered his liberty, he obtained a benefice in the diocese of Siguenza, and cardinal Gonsalez de Mendoza, who was bishop there, made him his grand vicar. Ximenes entered soon after among the Franciscans of Toledo, and took the vows; but finding himself embarrassed by visits, he retired to a solitude called Castauel, where he studied the Oriental languages and divinity. On his return to Toledo, queen Isabella of Castille appointed him her confessor, and nominated him to the archbishopric of Toledo, 14.95, without his knowledge. When Ximenes received the bulls from the hand of this princess, he only kissed them, returned them to her, unopened, saying, “Madam, these letters are not addressed to me,” and went immediately back to his convent at Castanel, being determined not to accept the archbishopric. The queen was much pleased with this refusal; but when Ximenes still persisted in his refusal, an express command from the pope became necessary to overcome his resolution. Nor would he even then yield but upon the following conditions: “That he should never quit his church of Toledo; that no pension should be charged on his archbishopric (one of the richest in the world); and that no infringement of the privileges and immunities of his church should ever be attempted.” He took possession of it in 1498, being received with unusual magnificence at Toledo. This prelate’s first care was to provide for the poor, visit the churches and hospitals, and clear his diocese from usurers and licentious houses. Those judges who neglected their duty, he degraded, supplying their places with persons whose probity and disinterestedness were known to him. He held a synod afterwards at Alcala, and another at Talavera, where he made very prudent regulations for the clergy of his diocese, and laboured at the same time to reform the Franciscans throughout Castille and Arragon, in which he happily succeeded, notwithstanding the obstacles he had to encounter. Ximenes established a celebrated university at Alcala, and founded there in 1499, the famous college of St. Ildephonsus, built by Peter Gumiel, one of the best architects of that time. Three years after he undertook the great plan of a Polyglot Bible, for the execution of which he invited many learned men from Alcala to Toledo, who were skilled in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and other languages necessary for the perfect understanding the holy scriptures. This Bible, though began in 1502, was not printed till 1517, 6 vols. folio, at Alcala. It contains the Hebrew text of the Bible, the version of the LXX. with a literal translation, that of St. Jerome, and the Chaldee paraphrases of Onkelos on the Pentateuch only. In the original preface, addressed to pope Leo X. the learned archbishop says, “It is doing great service to the church to publish the scriptures in their original language, both because no translation cati give a perfect idea of the original, and because, according to the opinion of the holy fathers, we should refer to the Hebrew text for the Old Testament, and to the Greek for the New Testament.” The work was above fifteen years in finishing. Ximenes himself assisted in it with great assiduity, and paid the whole expence, which amounted to an immense sum. He purchased seven Hebrew copies, that cost four thousand crowns, and gave vast prices for ancient Mss. To the above-mentioned Bible, which is called the Polyglot of Ximenes, he added a dictionary of the Hebrew and Chaldee words in the Bible. In 1507 pope Julius II. gave him a cardinal’s hat; and Ferdinand the catholic entrusted him with the administration of state affairs, from which moment cardinal Ximenes became the soul of all that was done in Spain. He began his ministry by delivering the people from an oppressive tax, which had been continued on account of the war of Grenada; and he laboured so zealously and successfully in the conversion of the Mahometans, that he made near three thousand proselytes, among whom was the prince of the blood royal of Grenada. This great multitude he baptized in a spacious square, awd ordering all the copies of the Koran to be brought thither, set them on fire; which memorable day was afterwarda kept as a festival in Spain. Cardinal Ximenes extended Ferdinand’s dominion over the Moors, 1509, by the conquest of Oran, a city in the kingdom of Algiers. He undertook this conquest at his own expence, and marched himself at the head of the Spanish army in his pontifical habit, accompanied by a great number of ecclesiastics and monks, and at his return was met within four leagues of Seville by Ferdinand, who alighted to embrace him. Foreseeing afterwards an uncommon dearth, he ordered public granaries to be built at Toledo, Alcala, and Torrelaguna, and stored them with corn at his own cost; which made him so generally beloved, that his eulogy was engraved in the senate-house at Toledo, and in the public square, to perpetuate the memory of this noble action. King Ferdinand dying in 1516, appointed him regent of his dominions, and the archduke Charles (afterwards the emperor Charles V.) confirmed this appointment. No sooner was cardinal Ximenes established in the regency, than he became intent on exerting his authority. He introduced a reformation among the officers of the supreme council, and those of the court, ordered the judges to repress all extortions of the rich and of the nobility, and dismissed prince Ferdinand’s two favourites. These changes excited murmurs among the grandees, and some officer’s asked the cardinal, by what authority he thus acted? Ximenes immediately showed them the soldiers who composed his common guard, and replied, that his power consisted in their strength; then shaking his cord of St. Francis, said, “This suffices me to quell my rebellious subjects.” At the same time he ordered the cannon, which he kept behind his palace, to be fired, and concluded with these words: “Haec est ratio ultima regis;” i. e. This is the decisive argument of kings. He opposed the reformation of the inquisition; devoted himself, with indefatigable ardour, to the affairs of the church and state; and omitted nothing that he thought could contribute to the glory of religion, and the advantage of his sovereigns. At length, after having governed Spain twenty -two years, in the reigns of Ferdinand, Isabella, Jane, Philip, and Charles of Austria, he died November 8, 1517, as some think, by poison, in the eighty-first year of his age. His remains were interred in the college of Ildephonsus, at Alcala, where his tomb may be seen. This cardinal had settled several excellent foundations; among others, two magnificent female convents; one for the religious education of a great many young ladies of high rank, but destitute of fortune the other to be an asylum; for such poor maidens as should be found to have a real call to the monastic life. He also founded a chapel in his cathedral for the performance of divine service according to the Mozarabic rites. If we add the fountain of springwater, which he conveyed to the town of Torrelaguna, for public use, to the other sums he expended there, it will appear that he laid out nearly a million in that one place.

From a paper in “The Englishman” it would appear that Young began his theatrical career so early as 1713, but his tirst play, “Busiris,” was not brought upon the stage till 1719, and was dedicated to the duke of Newcastle, “.because,” he says, “the late instances he had received ­of his grace’s undeserved and uncommon favour, in an affair of some consequence, foreign to the theatre, had taken from him the privilege of chusing a patron.” This dedication also he afterwards suppressed. In 1721 his most popular tragedy, “The Revenge,” made its appearance, and being left at liberty now to chuse his patron, he dedicated it to the duke of Wharton. That he ever had such a patron, Young took all the pains in his power to conceal from the world, by excluding this dedication from his works. He probably indeed was very soon ashamed of it, for while he was representing that wretched nobleman as an amiable character, Pope was perhaps beginning to describe him as “the scorn and wonder of his days,” and it is certain that even at this time Wharton’s real character was well known. His obligations to the duke of Wharton appear to have consisted both of promises and money. Young, about 1719, had been taken into the Exeter family as tutor to the young lord Burleigh. This circumstance transpired on a singular occasion. After Wharton’s death, whose affairs were much involved, among other legal questions, the court of chancery had to determine whether two annuities granted by Wharton to Young, were far legal considerations. One was dated March 24, 1719, and the preamble stated that it was granted in consideration of advancing the public good by the encouragement of learning, and of the love he bore to Dr. Young, &c. This, as his biographer remarks, was commendable, if not legal. The other was dated July 10, 1722; and Young, on his examination, swore that he quitted the Kxeter family, and refused an annuity of 100l. which had be^n offered him for his lite if he would continue tutor to lord BnrJeigh, upon the pressing solicitations of the duke of Wharton, and his grace’s assurances of providing for him in a much more ample manner It also appeared that the duke had given him a bond for 600l. dated March 15, 1721, in consideration of his taking several journeys, and being at great essences in order to be chosen member of parliament at the duke’s desire, and in consideration of his not taking two livings of 200l. and 400l. in the gift of All Souls’ college, on his grace’s promises of serving and advancing him in the world It was for Cirencester that Young stood the unsuccessful contest. Such were the obligations he owed to Wharton; how becoming Young’s character, may be left to the reader.

In 1719, Dr. Young published ^A paraphrase on part of the book of Job,“prefixed by a dedication to the lord chancellor Parker, which he omitted afterwards, and of whom, says his biographer, he clearly appears to have had no kind of knowledge. Of his” Satires“it is not easy to fix the dates. They probably came out between 1725 and 1728, and were afterwards published collectively under the title of” The Universal Passion.“In his preface he says that he prefers laughing at vice and folly, a different temper than that in which he wrote his melancholy” Night Thoughts.“These satires were followed by” The Installment,“addressed to sir Robert Walpote, but afterwards suppressed: and by” Ocean, an Ode,“accompanied by an” Ode to the King, pater patria“an” Essay on Lyric Poetry,“both afterwards omittedby him. Perhaps no writer ever rejected so many of his own performances, nor were the>e juvenile effusions, for he was now forty-six or forty-seven years old; and at this age, he entered into orders, April 1728, and was soon after appointed chaplain to king George II. It is said by one of the biographers of Pope, but the story is scarcely credible, that when he determined on the church, he did not address himself to any eminent divine for instructions in theology, but to Pope, who jocularly advised the diligent perusal of Thomas Aquinas, and this, Ruffhead says, had almost brought on an irretrievable derangement. But as we have seen that Young had once refused two livings in the gift of All Souls, it is surely not improbable that he had then studied in the theological faculty, although at the duke of Wharton’s persuasion, he had been induced to think of political life. One thing, after taking orders, he thought becoming his new character. He withdrew his tragedy of” The Brothers," which was already in rehearsal, and when at last it was performed in 1753, he made up the profits to the sum of iOOO/. and gave the money to the society for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts. We know not that that society has been so honoured since, and it certainly never was so before.

In 1730 he resumed his poetical publications, but one of them, his “Impfcrium Pelasgi, a naval lyric,” he afterwards disclaimed. This was followed by two epistles to Pope “concerning the authors of the age.” In July of the same year he was presented by his college to the rectory of Welwyn in Hertfordshire, and in May 1731 married lady Elizabeth Lee, daughter of the earl of Lichfield, and widow of colonel Lee. This lady died in 1741, and her death is said to have contributed to the mournful tenour of his much celebrated f Night Thoughts,“which formed his next great publication, and that which will in all probability preserve his name the longest. The” Nights“were begun immediately after his wife’s death, and were published from 174? to 1744, It has long been a popular notion that his own son was the Lorenzo of this poem, but this is totally inconsistent with the unquestionable fact that in 1741 this son was only eight years old. Other persons have been conjectured with as little probability. Why might he not have Wharton in his eye? Of this work, we know of no more eloquent eulogium than that by Dr. Johnson.” In his Night Thoughts,“says the critic,” he has exhibited a very wide display of original poetry, variegated with deep reflections and striking allusions, a wilderness of thought, in which the fertility of fancy scatters flowers of every hue and of every odour. This is one of the few poems in which blank verse could not be changed for rhime but with disadvantage. The wild diffusion of the sentiments, and the digressive sallies of the imagination, would have been compressed and restrained by confinement to rhyme. The excellence of this work is not exactness, but copiousness: particular lines are not to be regarded; the power is in the whole, and in the whole there is a magnificence like that ascribed to Chinese plantation, the magnificence of vast extent and endless diversity.“By this extraordinary poem, written after he was sixty, it was the desire of Young to be principally known. He entitled the four volumes which he published himself,” The works of the Author of the Night Thoughts."

, an eminent cardinal, was born in 1339, at Padua. He taught common law in his native place and at Florence, where he acquired so much esteem, that when the archbishopric became vacant, he was chosen to fill it, but the pope had anticipated the election by giving it to another. Zabarella was afterwards invited to Rome by Boniface IX. and by John XXIII, who made him archbishop of Florence, and created him cardinal in 1411, from which time he had the title of the cardinal of Florence. The pope sent him on an embassy to the emperor Sigisrnund, who demanded a council, both on account of the Bohemian heresies, and the schism between the various candidates for the popedom; and the city of Constance having been fixed upon for this general council, Zabarella very much distinguished himself in its debates. He advised the deposition of John XXIII. and there is every reason to believe he would have been elected pope, had he not died, September 26, 1417, aged seventy-eight, six weeks before the election of Martin V. The emperor and the whole council attended his obsequies, and Poggio spoke his funeral oration, exerting the full powers of his eloquence and learning. Zabarella' s works are, “Commentaries on the Decretals and the Clementines,” 6 vols. folio. “Councils,” 1 vol. “Speeches and Letters,” 1 vol. A treatise “De Horis Canonicis” “De Felicitate, libri tres” “Varise Legum repethiones;” “Opuscula de Artibus liberalibus et de natura rerun* diversarum” * c Commentarii in naturalem et moralem Philosophiam“” Historia sui temporis“” Acta in Conciliis Pisano et Constanttensi“lastly,” Notes“on the Old and New Testament, and a treatise” On Schism,“Basil, 1565, folio, in which he ascribes all the misfortunes of the church, during his time, to the cessation of councils. This treatise” On Schism" has been frequently reprinted by the protestants, because Zabarella speaks very freely in it of the popes and the court of Rome; and for the same reason the book has been put into the index. Cardinal Zabarella had a nephew, Bartholomew Zabarella, who gave lectures in canon law at Padua, with reputation, and was afterwards archbishop of Florence, and referendary of the church under pope Eugenius IV. He died August 12, 1442, aged forty-six.

In 1768, he repaired to Rome, and was soon appointed librarian to the college of Jesus, and historiographer of the society for the literary department. Here a new field was open to his exertions. He became the champion of the holy see against the prevailing philosophy of the age, and against the encroachment of the secular powers on the church, for which he was rewarded with a pension by the then reigning and unfortunate pontiff Clement Alii. He did not long enjoy either this gift of fortune or his own tranquillity, as in 1773, by the dissolution of his order, after repeated risks of being confined in the castle of St. Angelo, he received a perpetual injunction not to go out of the gates of Rome without a licence from the magistrates. Pope Ganganelli esteemed and lamented him, though he could not restrain these violent measures. He had better days under the new pontificate, when Pius VI. not only restored liberty to Mr. Zaccaria, but increased the pension which had been formerly granted to him. He also appointed him governor to the newly established academy of noble clergymen, with a liberal salary; and as he had been, before that period, professor of ecclesiastical history in the Roman university, better known by the name of Sapienza, the pope gave him for the remainder of his life the dignity of ex-professor in that school, with the enjoyment of the same salaries as if he had retained the official post. In this situation he remained till his death, which took place October 10, 1795, in the eighty-second year of his age.

The mere list of the various works either written or edited by Zaccaria is sufficient to give him the character. of an extraordinary man. Comprehensiveness of mincf^ depth of erudition, JaboriousnesS of research, and celerity of execution, were happily combined in all his performances. In the earlier part of his life, he had entered the lists with the immortal Muratori and the illustrious Lamb Afterwards he had a great polemic dispute, on the pope’s supremacy, with the celebrated German bishop, John Nicholas Hontheim, better known under the name of Justin us Febronius. In the latter part of his life, he corresponded with many sovereigns and princes, with many Italian academies, and many literary characters, on this side the Alps, among whom were the celebrated Stilting, a Bollandist; Mr. de Courcelles, editor of the Foreign Journal in Paris; the proprietors of the Literary Journal of Italy, published in Amsterdam; and that of the Eneyelopedian Journal of Liege.

, physician to pope Innocent X. was born in 1584, at Rome, and cultivated the belles lettres, poetry, music, painting, and all the sciences; which, however, did not prevent his being one of the best physicians of his time. He died 1659, at Rome, aged seventy-five. His works are, “Queestiones Medico-legales;” of which there are several editions; among others, Lyons, 1726, i torn, folio. This is an excellent work; it contains great learning and judgment, with solid reasoning, and is very Necessary for divines and canonists, in cases where medicine and surgery are connected with the civil and ecclesiastical laws. He wrote also a treatise in Italian, entitled “La Vita quadragesimale,” for avoiding the dispensations of Lent, Rome, 1673, 8vo; and three books, in the same language, “On Hypochondriacal Diseases,” Venice, 1665, 4to, &c.

, one of the most learned men of the sixteenth century, was a native of Bergamo. His real name was Peter, which he exchanged for Basil, when he became a canon regular. He was born in 1501. He appears to have studied at Rome and various other places, but resided for the greater part of his life at Rome, where he was highly honoured for his literary talents, and, as some say (but this is disputed), was made keeper of the Vatican library. He died there, however, in 1560. Paul Manutius, in a letter to Gambara, the intimate friend of Zanchius, says that he was oppressed and persecuted in a very cruel manner, and ended his days miserably, in consequence of a decree of the pope against those who did not reside in their convents, but some have conjectured that he might have probably become a convert to the reformed religion, like his cousin Jerome, of whom we are nxt to speak. It seems certain, however, that he died in prison, and that he was worthy of a better fate, being one of the most learned men, and best Latin poets of his age. His beautiful verses on the death of Sannazarius were translated into Italian by the great Torquato Tasso. His Latin poems were first printed at Rome in 1540, 4to, and were often reprinted. Serassi gave a new edition of them at Bergamo m 1747, with a life of the author. He wrote also observations on all the books of scripture, printed at Rome 1553, and twice reprinted. He is ranked among lexicographers, from having contributed to Nizolius’s observations on Cicero, and from having added a great collection of words to Calepin, from the best and purest authors. He published also “Epithetorum commentarii,” Rome, 1542, 4to, a work better known by the title of the second edition, “Dictionarium poedcum et epitheta veterum poetarum,” &c. 1612, 8vo.

, an eminent painter, and brother of the preceding, was born in 1543, and carried to the Jubilee at Rome in 1550; when he was placed under his brother Taddeo, then in high reputation. He afterwards set up for a master -painter* and finished many of his brother’s pieces. Pope Gregory XIII. employed him; when Zncchero, having a difference with some of his officers, drew a picture of Slander, afterwards engraved by Corneliu^ Cort, in which he represented those who had offended him with ass’s ears. He exposed it publicly over the door of St. Luke’s chnrch; but was obliged to leave Rome, in order to avoid the Pope’s indignation. He worked in France for the cardinal of Lorrain, and in the Escurial for Philip II. without giving content to either the one or the other. He was more fortunate in England, where he drew the picture of queen Elizabeth, and of some other great personages, which gave great satisfaction. At last, returning to Italy, and having worked some time in Venice, Pope Gregory recalled and pardoned him. Soon after, he set up the academy of painting, by virtue of a brief obtained from this pope; of which being chosen the first president himself, he built a noble apartment for their 4 meeting. Hewent afterwards to Venice, to print some books he had written on painting thence passed on to Savoy and, in a journey to Loretto, died at Ancona in 1616. He differed but little from his brother in his style and manner of painting; though in sculpture and architecture he was far more excellent.

In 1519 a Franciscan of Milan, being sent from Leo X. as general visitor of his order, came to publish indulgences at Zurich, and preached according to the usual manner; namely, “That the pope had granted an absolute pardon of sins to those who. purchased such indulgences with money, and that men might by this means deliver souls infallibly from purgatory.” Zuinglius declaimed powerfully not only against the preacher, but even against the indulgences, or at least the use that was made of them. Hugh, bishop of Constance, supposing that he was displeased only with th.e abuse of them, exhorted him to go on, aad promised him his patronage; but Zuinglius went farther, and solicited the bishop, and the pope’s legate in Switzerland, to favour the doctrine he was about to establish, and which he called evangelical truth. The bishop and the legate refusing to hearken to his proposals, he told them, that he would oppose the errors of the court of Rome, and propagate his own doctrines, in defiance of them; and thus continued to preach, from 1519 to 1523, not only against indulgences, but other articles of the catholic church.

Zuinglius made no less progress with the reformation in Switzerland than Luther did in Saxony, yet, though by four years preaching he had prepared the magistrates and people, and knew that they were disposed to cast off the doctrine and discipline of the church of Rome, and to receive his new opinions, he would not attempt to make any alterations in the external worship without the concurrence of the civil powers, and to that end caused an assembly to be called of the senate of Zurich in 1523, that the differences among- preachers in matters of religion might be composed. The senate, by their edict, invited all ecclesiastics of their canton, and gave the bishop of Constance notice of it, that he might either be present by himself or his deputies; and the assembly met at the day appointed. Here Zuinglius declared, “that the light of the gospel having been much obscured, and almost extiuguished by human traditions, several persons of late had endeavoured to restore it by preaching the word of God in its purity; that he himself was one of that number; and, though he had for five years past taught nothing but what was contained in holy scripture, yet he had been treated as a heretic and seducer; that it was for this reason he had desired to give an account of his doctrines before the senate of Zurich, and the bishop of Constance, or his deputies; and, that they might the more easily understand them, he had drawn them out into sixty-seven propositions.” The doctrine contained in these propositions may be reduced to the following articles: 1. “That the gospel is the only rule of faith.” 2. “That the church is the communion of saints.” 3. “That we ought to acknowledge no head of the church but Jesus Christ.” 4. “That all traditions are to be rejected.” 5. “That there is no other sacrifice but that of Jesus Christ.” 6. “That we have need of no other intercessor with God but Jesus Christ.” 7; “That all sorts of meat may be eaten at all times.” 8. 66 That the habits of monks partake of hypocrisy.“9.” That marriage is allowed to all the world, and no man obliged to make a vow of chastity and that priests are not at all debarred from the privilege of being married.“10.” That excommunication ought not to be inflicted by the bishop alone, but by the whole church and that only notorious offenders ought to be excommunicated.“11.” That the power which the pope and bishops assume to themselves, is errant pride, and hath no foundation in scripture.“12.” That none can forgive sins but God; and that confession of sins to a priest is only to beg his ghostly advice,“13,” That the scripture teaches no such place as purgatory.“14.” That the character which the sacraments are said to impress, is a modern invention.“15.” That the scripture acknowledges none for priests and bishops but such as preach the word of God."