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

He then proceeds to assure those who may think proper to assist him, that their contributions shall appear with or without their names, as they shall direct; and that he will gladly pay those whose situation in life will not admit of their making presents of their labours, in such proportion as Mr. Tonson (his bookseller) shall think to be adequate to their merits. What follows is the language of a man who knew not himself, or who concealed his real character and intent, and who was at no very distant period to prove himself, unquestionably a most acute, yet at the same time a most arrogant, supercilious, and malignant critic on his fellow-labourers.

“The characters of living or dead commentators,” says Mr. Steevens in his present real or assumed humility, “shall not be wantonly traduced, and no greater freedom of language be made use of, than is necessary to convince, without any attempts to render those ridiculous, whose assertions may seem to demand a confutation. An error in a quotation, or accidental misrepresentation of a fact, shall not be treated with the severity due to a moral crime, nor as the breach of any other laws than those of literature, lest the reputation of the critic should be obtained at the expence of humanity, justice, and good manners; and by multiplying notes on notes we should be reduced at last, * to fight for a spot whereon the numbers cannot try the cause.' The ostentation of bringing in the commentaries of others, merely to declare their futility, shall be avoided; and none be introduced here, but such as tend to the illustration of the author.” He concludes with signing his name, and requesting that letters may be addressed to him at Mr. Tonson’s. About the same time he opened a kind of correspondence in the St. James’s Chronicle, then the principal literary newspaper, the object of which was to obtain hints and remarks on any passages of Shakspeare which individuals might think themselves able to illustrate. What returns were made to these applications, we know not, but it appears that he became acquainted about this time with Dr. Johnson, and in 1770 they were both employed in that edition of the whole of Shakspeare’s plays which was first called “Johnson and Steevens’s edition,” and which was published in 1773, 10 vols. 8vo. In 1778 it was again reprinted, with the same names, but entirely under the care and with the improvements of Mr. Steevens; and again in 1785, when he availed himself of the assistance of Mr. Isaac Reed, although merely as superintendant of the press. It was a work of which Mr. Steevens would never surrender the entire care to any one, and his jealousy, as an editor of Shakspeare, was the cause of those many splenetic effusions for which he has been so justly blamed, and his character disgraced. This kind of hostility, in which Mr. Steevens unfortunately delighted, was not confined to the commentators on Shakspeare. He had from the earliest period that can be remembered a disposition to display his talents for ridicule at the expence of those who were, or whom he thought, inferior to himself. He was never more gratified than when he could irritate their feelings by anonymous attacks in the public journals, which he would, in their presence, affect to lament with all the ardour of friendship. Nor was he content to amuse himself with the sufferings of those who were candidates for literary fame, a species of inhumanity in which he had some contemporaries, and has had many successors, but would even intrude into the privacies of domestic life, and has been often, we fear too justly, accused of disturbing the happiness of families, by secret written insinuations, the consequences of which he could not always know, and must therefore have enjoyed only in imagination. But as such artifices long practised could not escape detection, his character for mischievous duplicity became known, and not long after the publication of the second edition of his Shakspeare, in conjunction with Dr. Johnson, he lived, in the language of that great man, “the life of an outlaw.” He was scarcely respected even by those who tasted his bounty (for he could at times be bountiful), and was dreaded as a man of great talents and great powers both of pen and tongue, with whom nevertheless it was more dangerous to live in friendship than in hostility.

Previous to the publication of the edition of 1773, he had become acquainted with Mr. Malone, a gentleman who had either formed for himself, or had adopted from Mr. Steevens that system of criticism and illustration by which alone the text of Shakspeare could be improved, and Mr. Steevens very soon discovered that Mr. Malone might be a very useful coadjutor. A friendship too-k place which appeared so sincere on the part, of Mr. Steevens, that having formed a design of quitting the office of editor, he most liberally made a present to Mr. Malone of his valuable collection of old plays; and probably this friendly intercourse might have continued, if Mr. Malone conld have been content to be the future editor of “Johnson and Steevens’s Shakspeare,” and to have contributed his aid as the junior partner in the firm. But unfortunately for their friendship, Mr. Malone thought himself qualified to become ostensible editor, and his first offence seems to have been the publication, in 1780, of two supplementary volumes to the edition of 1778; and having entered on the same course of reading our ancient English authors, which Mr. Steevens had pursued with so much benefit in the illustration of Shakspeare, he determined to appear before the public as an editor in form. To this design Steevens alludes with characteristic humour, in a letter to Mr. Warton, dated April 16, 1783: “Whatever the vegetable spring may produce, the critical one will be prolific enough. No less than six editions of Shakspeare (including CapelTs notes, with Collins’s prolegomena) are now in the mash-tub. I have thrown up my licence. Reed is to occupy the old red lattice, and Malone intends to froth and lime at a little snug booth of his own construction. Ritson will advertise sour ale against his mild.” In this notice of Mr. Malone there is nothing very offensive but the final breach between them was occasioned by a request on the part of Mr. Steevens which cannot easily be justified. To the edition of Shakspeare, published in 1785, Mr. Malone had contributed some notes in which Mr. Steevens’s opinions were occasionally controverted. These Mr. Steevens now desired he would retain in his new edition, exactly as they stood before, that he iniirht answer them and Mr. Malone refusing what was so unreasonable (see Malone), the other declared that all communication on the subject of Shakspeare was at an end between them. Malone’s edition appeared in 1790, and Mr. Steevens’s being reprinted in 1793, 15 vols. 8vo, he at once availed himself of Mr. Malone’s labours, and took every opportunity to treat his opinions with most sarcastic contempt. This edition of 1793, however, has always been reckoned the most complete extant, and although it has been twice reprinted, with some additions which Mr. Steevens bequeathed to Mr. Reed, the demand for the 1793 is still eager with the collectors, partly, we presume, on account of its being the last which Mr. Steevens superintended; partly on account of the accuracy of the printing, in which he had the assistance of Mr. Reed and Mr. Harris, librarian of the Royal Institution; and partly because the additions to the subsequent one are not thought of sufficient value to induce the possessors to part with a monument to Mr. Steevens’s merit erected by his own hands.

“At the chambers of Mr. Reed, where he was allowed to admit himself, with a sheet of the Shakspeare letter-press ready for correction, and found a room prepared to receive him, there was every book which he might wish to consult: and on Mr. Reed’s pillow he could apply, on any doubt or sudden suggestion, to a knowledge of English literature, perhaps equal to his own. This nocturnal toil greatly accelerated the printing of the work, as, while the printers slept, the editor was awake; and thus, in less than twenty months, he completed his edition.”

The latter years of his life he passed chiefly at his house at Hampstead, neither visited nor visiting. That cynic temper which he had so much indulged all his life at the expence of others, became his own tormentor in his last days; and he died without the consolations of religion or the comforts of friendship, Jan. 22, 1800. He was buried in the chapel at Poplar, where, in the north aile there is a monument to his memory by Flaxtnan, and some encomiastic verses by Mr. Hayley, the truth of which may be questioned. Let us hear, however, what has been advanced in his favour:

“Though Mr. Steevens,” says an eulogist, " is known rather as a commentator, than as an original writer, yet, when the works which he illustrated, the learning, sagacity, taste, and general knowledge which he brought to the task, and the success which crowned his labours, are considered, it would be an act of injustice to refuse him a place among the first literary characters of the age. Mr. Steevens possessed that knowledge which qualified him, in a superior degree, for the illustration of Shakspeare; and without which the utmost critical acumen would have proved abortive. He had, in short, studied the age of Shakspeare, and had employed his persevering industry in becoming acquainted with the writings, manners, and laws of that period, as well as the provincial peculiarities, whether of language or custom, which prevailed in different parts of the kingdom, but more particularly in those where Shakspeare passed the early years of his life. This store of knowledge he was continually encreasing, by the acquisition of the rare and obsolete publications of a former age, which he spared no expence to obtain; while his critical sagacity and acute observation were employed incessantly in calling forth the hidden meanings of the great dramatic bard, from their covert; and consequently enlarging the display of his beauti

“Mr. Steevens was a classical scholar of the first order. He was equally acquainted with the belles lettres of Europe. He had studied history, ancient and modern, but particularly that of his own country. He possessed a strong original genius, and an abundant wit; his imagination was of every colour, and his sentiments were enlivened with the most brilliant expressions. His colloquial powers surpassed those of other men. In argument he was uncommonly eloquent; and his eloquence was equally logical and animated. liis descriptions were so true to nature, his figures were so finely sketched, of such curious selection and so happily grouped, that he might be considered as a speaking Hogarth. He would frequently, in his sportive and almost boyish humoursj condescend to a degree of ribaldry but little above O'Keefe with him, however, it lost all its coarseness, and assumed the air of classical vivacity. He was indeed too apt to catch the ridiculous, both in characters and things, and indulge an indiscreet animation wherever he found it. He scattered his wit and his humour, hisgibes and his jeers, too freely around him, and they were not lost for want of gathering. Mr. Steevens possessed a very handsome fortune, which he managed with discretion, and was enabled by it to gratify his wishes, which he did without any regard to expence, in forming his distinguished collections of classical learning, literary antiquity, and the arts connected with it. His generosity also was equal to his fortune; and though he was not seen to give eleemosynary sixpences to sturdy beggars or sweepers of the crossings, few persons distributed bank-notes with more liberality; and some of his acts of pecuniary kindness might be named, which could only proceed from a mind adorned with the noblest sentiments of humanity. He possessed all the grace of exterior accomplishment, acquired at a period when civility and politeness were characteristics of a gentleman.”

, an eminent musical composer, was born in 1655, as the German authorities say, at Leipsic, but Handel and the Italians make him a native of Castello Franco, in the Venetian state. In his youth he was a chorister of St. Mark’s, where his voice was so much admired by a German nobleman, that, obtaining his dismission, he took him to Munich in Bavaria, and had him educated, not only in music under the celebrated Bernabei, but in literature and theology sufficient, as was there thought, for priest’s orders; in consequence of which, after ordination, he was distinguished by the title of abate, or abbot, which he retained until late in life, when he was elected bishop of Spiga. In 1671, at the age of nineteen, he published his “Psalms,” in ei^ht parts. He likewise published “Sonate a quattroStromenti,” but his chamber duets are the most celebrated of his works, and indeed, of that species of writing. In his little tract, “Delia certezza Dei principii della Musica,” he has treated the subject of musical imitation and expression, according to Martini, like a philosopher, and agreeable to mathematical principles. This work was so admired in Germany, that it was translated into the language of that country, and reprinted eight times. He composed several operas likewise between the years 1695 and 1699, for the court of Hanover, where he resided many years as maestro di capella, and these were afterwards translated into German, and performed to his music at Hamburgh. About 1724, after he had quitted the court of Hanover, where he is s;dd to have resigned his office in favour of Handel, he was elected president of the academy of ancient music at London. In 1729, he went into Italy to see his native country and relations, but returned next year to Hanover; and soon after having occasion to go to Francfort, he was seized with an indisposition, of which he died there in a few days, aged near eighty. There are, perhaps, no compositions more correct, or fugues in which the subjects are more pleasing, or answers and imitations more artful, than are to be found in the duets of StefFani, which, in a collection made for queen Caroline, and now in the possession of his majesty, amount to near one hundred.

, an eminent painter, the son of Francis Stella, a Fleming, was born in 1596 at Lyons, where his father had settled on his return from Italy. Although he was but nine years old at his father’s death, the latter had successfully initiated him in the principles of the art, which he afterwards improved in Italy. At the age of twenty, being at Florence, the great duke Cosmo de Medicis, perceiving him to be a man of genius, assigned him lodgings and a pension equal to that of Callot, who was there at the same time; and here, during a residence of seven years, he exhibited many proofs of his skill in painting, designing, and engraving. Thence he went to Rome, where he spent eleven years, chiefly in studying the antique sculptures, and Raphael’s paintings. Having acquired a good taste, as well as a great reputation, in Rome, he resolved to return to his own country; intending, however, to pass thence into the service of the king of Spain, who had invited him more than once. He took Milan in his way to France; and cardinal Albornos offered him the direction of the academy of painting in that city, which he refused. When he arrived in Paris, and was preparing for Spain, cardinal Richelieu detained him, and presented him to the king, who assigned him a good pension and lodgings in the Louvre. He gave such satisfaction here, that he was honoured with the order of St. Michael, and painted several large pictures for the king, by whose command the greatest part of them were sent to Madrid. Being very laborious, he spent the winter-evenings in designing the histories of the Holy Scriptures, country sports, and children’s plays, which were engraved, and make a large volume. He also drew the designs of the frontispieces to several books of the Louvre impression; and various antique ornaments, together with a frieze of Julio Romano, which he brought out of Italy. He died of a consumption in 1647. This painter had a fine genius, and all his productions were wonderfully easy. His talent was rather gay than terrible: his invention, however, noble, and his design in a good style. His models were evidently Raphael and Poussin. He was upon the whole an excellent painter, although somewhat of a mannerist. Sir Robert Strange has a fine engraving from a “Holy Family” by this artist.

, a Danish anatomist, was born at Copenhagen, Jan. 10, 1C38. His father was a Lutheran, and goldsmith to Christian IV. He himself studied under Bartholin, who considered him as one of the best of his pupils. To complete his knowledge he travelled in Germany, Holland, France, and Italy, and in the latter place obtained a pension from Ferdinand II. grand duke of Tuscany. In 1669 he abjured the protestant persuasion, having been nearly converted before by Bossuet at Paris. Christian V. who wished to fix him at Copenhagen, made him professor of anatomy, and gave him permission to exercise the religion he had adopted. But his change produced disagreeable effects in his own conntry, and he returned to Italy: where, after a time, he became an ecclesiastic, and was named by the pope his apostolical vicar for the North, with the title of bishop of Titiopolis in Greece. He became now a missionary in Germany, and died at Swerin in 1686. He made several discoveries in anatomy, and his works that are extant are chiefly on medical subjects, as 1. “EJementorum Myologist; Specimen,” Leyden, 1667, 12mo. 2. “A Treatise on the Anatomy of the Brain,” in Latin, Paris, 1669; and Leyden, 1671. He also wrote a part of the Anatomical Exposition of Winslow, to whom he was great uncle.

, called The Old, was born at Steenwyck, in 1550, and was the disciple of John de Vries, who excelled in painting architecture and perspective. In imitation of the style of his master, Stenwyck chose the same subjects; but surpassed him and all his contemporaries, in the truth, neatness, transparence, and delicacy, of his pictures. His subjects were the insides of superb churches and convents, of Gothic architecture, and generally views of them by night, when they were illuminated by flambeaux, tapers, or a number of candles fixed in magnificent lustres, or sconces. He was a thorough master of the true principles of the chiaroscuro, and distributed his lights and shadows with such judgment, as to produce the most astonishing effects; but as he was not expert at designing figures, those that appear in any of his compositions were inserted by Brueghel, Van Tulden, and other eminent artists. The genuine pictures of this master, who died in 1603, aged fifty -three, are extremely scarce, and very highly prized in ev ry part of Europe.

, the Young, son of the preceding, was born about 1589, and, by studying the works of his father from his infancy, and also receiving excellent directions from him, he adopted the same manner and style; and, by some very competent judges, was thought to have often equalled, if not surpassed, his father. Vaudyck, who admired his works, introduced him. to the court of ki'ig Charle^ I. where he met with such a degree of encouragement as was due to his extraordinary talents, and found employment in England for several years. His usual subjects were the insides of churches and grand edifices; but at last he quitted the dark manner, which he had originally acquired by imitating the manner of his father. He sometimes painted the back grounds of Vandyck’s portraits, as often as they required ornamental architecture; and it is the portrait of the younger Stenwyck which was painted by Vandyck, and perpetuated by his hand among the distinguished artists of his time. He died at London, but when is not known; and his widow, who practised perspective painting during the life of her husband, retired after his death to Amsterdam, where she followed that profession, and painted in the style of her husband and his father with great credit; and as her works were generally esteemed, she was enabled to live in affluence and honour.

Hermolaus’s Abridgment was first printed at the Aldine press in 1502, folio; and other editions followed of the Greek only. Pinedo, a Portuguese Jew, was the first who published a Greek and Latin edition, Amst. 1678, folio; but some copies have a new title-page with the date 1725. In the mean time, Berkelius had begun his labours on this author, and had published at Leyden in 1674, 8vo, the fragment above mentioned, which Ternulius had printed in 1669, 4tu; and to this Berkelius added a Latin translation and commentary, the Periplus of Hanno, and the monument of Adulis. In 1681 James Gronovius published a new edition of this fragment, with a triple Latin version and notes, reprinted, and somewhat more correctly, by Montfaucon in his “Bibliotheca Cosliniana.” Ryckius also published the posthumous remarks of Lucas Holsteniuson Stephanusof Byzantium, at Leyden, 1684, folio. At length Berkelius closed his labours by sending to the press at Leyden his Greek and Latin edition in 1688, folio. In this he gave a new translation, an amended text, and a very learned commentary; but dying before the work was printed, Gronovius undertook the task, and made some valuable additions. It was reprinted in 1694.

, or familiarly in this country Stephens, and in France Estienne, the first of an illustrious family of printers, was born at Paris in 1470; and began the business of printing about 1503, in which year appeared the abridgment of the Arithmetic of Boethius, which is the first work known to have issued from his press. His printing-house was in the rue de Tecole de Droit, and his mark the old arms of the university, with the device, plus olei quam vini. His great object was correctness, and besides reading the proofs himself with the greatest care, he submitted them to the learned men who visited him. If, notwithstanding these pains, any mistakes occurred, he informed the reader, by an “errata,” an attention which he is said to have been the first who paid. He died at Paris, according to his biographers, July 24, 1520; but this has been doubted, as not agreeing with the date of the last work he printed. He left three sons, all printers, Francis, Robert, and Charles. His widow married Simon de Colines, or Colinseus, his partner. Among the works he executed^ which are in greatest request, are the “Psalterium quintuplex,” 1509 and 1513 the “Itinerarium” of Antoninus, 1512, and Mara “De Tribus fugiendis,” &c.

, the eldest son of the preceding, was employed in printing with his step-father de Colines. The “Vinetum” of Charles Stephens, 1537, is the first work to which we see his name and the last is the “Andria” of Terence, in 1547. He sometimes used his father’s mark, but occasionally one of his own, a golden vase placed on a book, and surmounted by a vine-branch with fruit. He never was married, and Maittaire is mistaken in saying he had a son of the same names, who was a printer in 1570. That Francis was the son of Robert, and nephew to the subject of this short article.

, the most celebrated printer of this family, was the second son of Henry, and born at Paris in 1503. He had a liberal education, and made very great progress in learning, particularly in the classical languages, and in the Hebrew. After his father’s death he worked for some years in partnership with De Colines, who entrusted him with the care of the business. It was during these years (in 1522) that he published an edition of the New Testament, more correct, and in a more convenient size, than any which had preceded it. It had a very quick sale, which alarmed the doctors of the Sorbonne, who could not be reconciled to the circulation of a work from which the reformers drew their most powerful arguments; but still they could not find even a plausible pretext for requiring that it should be suppressed, and there-fore concealed their indignation until a more favourable opportunity .

Robert Stephens married Petronilla, the daughter of the celebrated printer Jodocus Badius, a lady of learned accomplishments. She herself taught Latin to her children and servants, and with such success that there was not a person in Robert’s house who did not understand and speak that language. In 1526, Robert dissolved partnership with de Colines, and set up a printing- establishment of his own in the same part of the city where his father had lived. The first work which issued from his press was Cicero “De Partitionibus Oratoriis,” in 1527; and from that year to his death, there seldom passed a year in which he did not produce some new editions of the classics, superior to all that had preceded, and for the most part enriched with notes and valuable prefaces. So attentive was he to the business of correction, that he used to fix up his proof sheets in some conspicuous place, with offers of reward to those who could detect a blunder. For some time he used the same types with his father and his late partner, but in 1532 he had a new and elegant fount cast, which he first used for his edition of the Latin Bible, dated that year. He, indeed, neglected nothing that could make this a chef-d'oeuvre of the art; and not only collated the text most carefully with two manuscripts, one at St. Germain-des-Pres, and the other at St. Denis, but consulted the ablest divines, sought their advice, and obtained their approbation. But this edition gave his old enemies, the doctors of the Sorbonne, an opportunity to renew their bigoted opposition to the circulation of the Scriptures; and if the king, Francis I. who had a great value for Robert, had not protected him against their violence, he would probably at this time have been obliged to quit his native country. Still the love of peace, and of a quiet life, to execute his undertakings, induced him to submit so far to these gentlemen, that he promised to print no work in future without the consent of the Sorbonne. He soon after published the first edition of his “Thesaurus Linguae Latinae,” on which he had been employed many years, aided by various learned men; but although he had great success, he never ceased to improve each edition until he made it the first and most correct work of the kind. In 1539 he was appointed king’s printer of Latin and Hebrew; and it was at his suggestion that Francis I. caused those beautiful types to be cast by Garamond, which are still in the royal printing-office of Paris.

These favours, however honourable to the king’s taste and discernment, were ultimately of disadvantage to Robert, by exciting the jealousy of the Sorbonnists, who could not endure that his majesty should bestow his confidence on a man whom they suspected of being unsound in the faith, and therefore sought occasion to convict him of heresy. Grounds for this they thought were to be found in the new edition of the Bible which Robert published in 1545, and which had a double Latin version, and the notes of Vatablus. Leo Juda, well known to be a Zuinglian, was the translator of one of these versions; and they farther alleged that Robert had corrupted the notes of Vatablus. This was, in those days, a serious accusation, and the king had again to interpose between him and his enemies. His majesty died about this time, and Robert, as a mark of gratitude, printed with particular care, Duchatel’s funeral oration on Francis L in which that orator happened to say that the king was “translated from the present life to eternal glory.” This expression, although common in every eulogium of the kind, was now made the subject of an accusation by the Sorbonnists, who asserted that it was contrary to the doctrine of the church respecting purgatory. Robert, therefore, soon perceived that he could no longer depend on the protection he had hitherto received, and after some years struggling against the machinations of his enemies, determined to remove to Geneva with his family. He accordingly took his leave of Paris, and arrived at Geneva in the beginning of 1552. There he printed the same year, in partnership with his brother-in-law Conrad Radius, the New Testament in French. He afterwards set up a printing-house of his own, from which some valuable works issued. He was chosen a burgher of Geneva in 1556, and died there Sept. 7, 1559. Robert is said to have been a man of a firm and decided character; but it has been objected by his popish biographers, that he did not allow that liberty to other* which he had taken himself, and that he disinherited one of his children for not embracing the reformed religion. Beza, Dorat, and St. Marthe, have given him the highest character. Thuanus places him above Aldus Manutius, and Froben, and asserts that the Christian world was more indebted to him than to all the great conquerors it had produced, and that he contributed more to immortalize the reign of Francis I. than all the renowned actions of that prince. His mark was an olive with branches, and the device, Noli altum sapere, to which sometimes were added the words sed time. The works he executed as King’s printer, are marked with a lance, round which a serpent is entwined, and a branch of olive, and underneath a verse of Homer, “B<nXi raya&ia xgaltfjca r‘ai%/*>iV’” to the good king and the valiant soldier.“All the printers who afterwards were permitted to use the royal Greek types adopted the same emblems. The works which he printed at Geneva are marked only with the olive, and these words, Oliva Roberti Stephani. It was not Robert, however, as has been commonly said, who first divided the Bible into verses, which he is said to have done inter equitandum, while riding from Paris to Lyons. That mode of division had been used in the Latin Bible of Pagninus in 1527, 4to, in the” Psalterium quintuples," 1509, and in other works. Another report concerning him is untrue, namely, that when he left Paris, he carried with him the Greek types belonging to the royal printing-house. The fact seems to have been that the matrices employed in casting those types were already at Geneva, and were the property of the family of Robert, and probably given to him by Francis I.; for when the French clergy in 1619 were about to reprint the Greek fathers, they requested that the king would demand of the state of Geneva the matrices used in casting the Greek types for Francis I. The answer was, that they might be bought for the sum of 3000 livres, to be paid either to the state of Geneva, or to the heirs of Robert Stephens.

Among the finest editions from the press of Robert are, 1. His Hebrew Bibles, 4 vols. 4to, and 8 vols. 16mo. 2. The Latin Bible, 1538 — 40, fol. of which the large paper copies are principally valued. 3. The Greek New Testament, 1530, fol. one of the most beautiful books ever printed; to which may be added the small editions of 1546 and 1549, usually called the O mirifcam, the first two words of the preface. That of 1549 is the most correct. 4. “Historiae ecclesiastics scriptores, Eusebii preparatio et demonstratio evangelica,” Gr. 1544, 2 vols. fol: this is the first work published with Garamond’s new Greek types. 5. The works of Cicero, Terence, Plautus, &c. &,c. Besides the prefaces and notes with which Robert introduced or illustrated various works, he is deemed the author of the following: 1. “Thesaurus Linguae Latinae,” before mentioned, which has been often reprinted. One of the best of the modern editions is that of London, 1734 5, 4 vols. fol. and the last is Gessner’s, Leipsic, 1749, 4 vols, fol. 2. “Dictionarium Latino-Gallicum,” Paris, 1543, 2 vols. fol. He published an abridgment of this for young people. 3. “Ad censuras Theologorum Parisiensium quibus Biblia a Roberto Stephano excusa calumniose notarunr, responsio,” Geneva, 1552, 8vo. The same year a French edition of this was published; it forms a very able answer to the calumnies of his enemies the Sorbonnists. 4. “Gallicae grammatices libellus,” ibid. 1558, 8vo, and a “Grammaire Frangaise,” 1558, 8vo. He intended to have published a commentary on the Bible, and had engaged the assistance of the celebrated divine Marlorat; he also had projected a Greek Thesaurus, but the honour of that work was reserved for his son Henry, to whom he gave what materials he had collected. Robert had several sons, of whom Henry, Robert, and Francis, will be noticed hereafter, and a daughter, Catherine, who was married to Jacquelin, a royal notary of Paris.

, brother to the preceding, and third son of Henry, the founder of the family, received also a liberal education, and afterwards studied medicine, and was received as a doctor of the faculty of Paris. Lazarus Baif engaged him to be tutor to his son. >nrJ likewise to accompany him in his embassies to Germany and Italy, that he might continue to instruct his pupil. During his being at Venice, he formed a friendship wit a Pnul Manutius, who speaks of him in some of his letters, in very honourable terms. It was not until 1551 that he began the business of printing, and his rirst w>rk was an edidition of “Appian” from manuscripts in the royal iib r ary, and executed with Garamond’s types. He appears also to have been honoured with the 'itle of king’s printer John Maumont, in a letter to Scaliger, represents Charles Stephens as an avaricious man, jealous of his brethren and even of his nephews, whom he endeavoured to injure on every occasion. He was, however, unsuccessful in business, and was imprisoned for debt in the Chatelet in 1561, and died there in 1564. Maittaire says that the fine editions of Charlt-s Stephens have never been surpassed, that in point of erudition he was not inferior to the most learned printers, and that in his short space few of them printed more books. Among the most valuable are, 1. “De re vesiiaria, de vasculis ex Bayfio excerpt.” Paris, 1535, 8vo. 2. “Abrege de l'Histoire des vicomtes et dues de Milan,” 1552, 4to, with portraits. 3. “Paradoxes ou propos contre la commune opinion, debattus en forme de declamations forenses, pour exciter les jeunes esprits en causes difficiles,” Paris, 155 4-, 8vo, a very rare work and an imitation of the “Paradossi” of Ortensio Lando. 4. “Dictionarium Latino-Graecum,” ibid. 1554, 4to, compiled, as the author allows, for the most part, from the notes of G. Buddseus. 5. “Dictionarium Latino-Galhcum,” ibid. 1570, fol. the best and most complete edition, but not a work in much demand. 6. “Preedium rusticum, &c.” ibid. 1554, 8vo. Of this he published a French translation under the title of “Agriculture et Maison rusti^ue, de M. Charles Estienne,” and it has been since translated into Italian, German, English, &c. 7. “Thesaurus Ciceronis,” ibid. 1556, fol. This work, whatever its merit, was a most unfortunate speculation, as the expences attending it obliged him to borrow large sums, for which he was at last arrested. 8. “Dictionarium Historico-geographico-poeticum,” Geneva, 1566, 4to. This did not appear until after his death. It was much improved by subsequent editors to a large folio, whence it was translated into English by Lloyd, and twice published at Oxford in 1670, and at London in 1686.

Charles Stephens was the author also of some professional treatises, and had the credit of making some discoveries in anatomy. He had a learned daughter, who was married to John Liebaut, who published an improved edition of the “Pnedium Rusticum.” She spoke and wrote well in several languages, and was celebrated for her poetical talents, but none of her productions have been published.

, the second of the name, and the eldest son of Robert, was born at Paris in 1528, and froiii his inf-mcy gave every promise of perpetuating the honours of the family. His tatuer, uoi having it in his power to superintend his education as he wished, entrusted that care to an able tutor, who was to instruct him in the elements of grammar. At this time his tutor, in his ordinary course, was teaching his other pupils the Medea of Euripides, and Henry was bo captivated with the sweetness and harmony of the Greek language, that he resolved immediately to learn it. His tutor, however, objected to this, as he thought that the Latin should always precede the Greek, in a course of education; but Henry’s father being of a different opinion, he was allowed to foilow his inclination, and his progress corresponded to the enthusiasm with which he entire < on this language. A few days were sufficient for the Greek grammar, and Euripides being then put into his hands, he read it with avidity, and could repeat most of the plays, even before he had become a thorough master of the language. He afterwards perfected himself in Greek under Turnebus and other eminent scholars, and at the same time did not neglect to make himself acquainted with the Latin, as may appear by the notes he published on Horace, when he was only twenty years of age. He also studied arithmetic, geometry, and even judicial astrology, then very fashionable, but he is said to have very soon discovered its absurdity.

In 1547 he went to Italy for the purpose of visiting the libraries and collating the ms copies of ancient authors, whose works he intended to publish. He probably passed several years in this pursuit, as he himself informs us that he remained three years at Florence, Rome, Naples, and Venice. Among the treasures he thus amassed, were the “Hypotyposes” of Sextus Empiricus, some parts ofAppian’s history, the odes of Anacreon, &c. Before his return home he visited England and the Netherlands. He learnt Spanish in Flanders, as he had before learnt Italian at Florence, and arrived at Paris in 1551, which he found his father ready to quit for Geneva, in order to avoid the persecution of the doctors of the Sorbonne. It appears that Henry accompanied his father in his exile, but was on his return to Paris in 1554. He presented a petition to the Sorbonne that he might be allowed to establish a printing-office, and added to his request the privilege which Francis I. had granted to his father, and soon after published his edition of Anacreon; at least this bears his name, but some suppose it was printed in the house of Charles Stephens, and that Henry had not an establishment of his own before 1557. Towards the end of 1554 he was at Rome, and went thence to Naples to endeavour to obtain those passports which the French ambassador, Odet de Selves, demanded of him, and it is said that he escaped an ignominious death by his facility in speaking Italian. He then went to Venice, to collate some valuable Mss. of Xenophon and Diogenes Laertius. It was therefore about the beginning of 1557 that he published some of those works which he had obtained with so much pains and risk. The great expences he had incurred, would at this time have ruined him, if Ulrick Fugger, an opulent patron of literature, had not advanced him the money necessary to carry on the business. Henry, out of gratitude, took the title of printer to this benefactor, “Illustris viri Huldnci Fuggeri typographic,” which he continued as long as the latter lived.

In our account of Robert Stephens, we mentioned his intention of publishing a Greek Thesaurus: this was now accomplished by his son, after twelve years incessant labour, and is alone a sufficient monument of his erudition. The learned bestowed the highest commendation, but the great price which he was obliged to fix upon it to indemnify himself is said to have retarded the sale, and he was still a more serious sufferer by the plagiarism of Scapula (See Scapula), which indeed completed his ruin. He was not, however, without friends or resources. He went after this affair into Germany, and although he had been neglected by his countrymen, did not cease by his writings to do honour to France in foreign countries. This conduct recommended him to the favour of Henry III. who gave him a present of 3000 livres for his work on the excellence of the French language, and a pension of 300 livres to assist him in collating manuscripts. He also invited him to reside at his court, often admitted him into his councils, and gave him grants for considerable sums; but these sums were either ill-paid, or not sufficient to extricate our author from his difficulties, and he resolved therefore to leave the court. He now commenced a kind of wandering life, residing for short spaces of time at Orleans, Paris, Francfort, Geneva, and Lyons, and exhausting his poor finances. During the last journey he made to Lyons, he was seized with sickness, and carried to the hospital, where he died in the month of March, 1598, after having been for some time in a state of derangement.

Such was the melancholy end of one of the most learned men of his time, and one of the greatest benefactors to literature. The unfortunate circumstances of his life prevented him from bestowing the same attention which his father had to the typographical beauty of the works which issued from his press; but he published a great many which do not yield to Robert’s in point of correctness. To all his editions he prefixed learned prefaces, illustrated them by short and judicious notes, and they have generally formed the basis of all future reprints. Some modern critics, of Germany chiefly, have attacked his fidelity as an editor, and accused him of having introduced readings not justified by the authority of manuscripts; but he has been very ably defended against this charge by Wyttembach, in the preface to his edition of Plutarch’s morals. Henry had great facility in writing Latin poetry, which he often composed almost extempore, while walking, riding, or conversing with his friends. He had a correspondence with all the learned of Europe; but had seme little alloy in his character. He was rather impatient of contradiction, and too frequently indulged his epigrammatic turn at the expence of those who could not accede to his opinions. Among the ancient authors which he published, with notes, we may mention the “Poet. Gracci, principes heroici carminis,” 1566, fol. a magnificent collection, which is every day rising in price; “Pindari et casterorum octo Grfficorum carmina,” 1560, 1566, 1586, 24mo: to these we may add Maximus Tyrius, Diodorus, Xenophon, Thucydides, Hefodotus, Sophocles, ^schylus, Diogenes Laertius, Plutarch, Apollonius Rhotlius, Callimachus, Plato, Herodian, and Appian; Horace, Virgil, the younger Pliny, Aulus Gellius, Macrobius, and a collection of the Latin historians; but his taste most inclined to Greek literature, and from that language he has furnished us with Latin translations of Anacreon, Theocritus, Bion and Moschus, Pindar, Sextus Empiricus; Æschylus, Sophocles, &c. &e. and all his translations, extensive as they are, are allowed to be excellent.

The most valued of his own works, original or compiled, are, 1. “Ciceronianum Lexicon Graeco-Latinum,” Paris, 1557, 8vo. 2. “In Ciceronis quamplurimos locos castigationes,” ibid. 1557, 8vo; this is usually printed with th former. 3. “Admonitio de abusu linguae Graecae in quibusdam vocibus quas Latina usurpat,” 1563, 8vo; of this there was a new edition by Koloff and Kromayer, Berlin, 1736, 8vo. 4. “Fragmenta poetarum veterum Latinorum, quorum opera non extant,” 1564, 8vo. 5. “Dictionarium medicum,” 1564, 8vo. 6. “Introduction au traite de la conformite des merveilles anciennes avec les modernes, ou Traite preparatif a l'apologie pour Herodote,” 1566, 8vo, of great rarity and value, and the only edition in which the text was not altered, as was the case in the subsequent ones, of which there were about twelve before 1607. Duchet published a new edition at the Hague in 1733, 3 vols. 8vo. We have mentioned the author’s fears respecting his being known to have written it, but in fact he never was discovered, nor is there any truth in the story of his having been obliged to fly from the city, and take refuge in the mountains of Auvergne. 7. “Traite de la conformite du langage Francois avec le Grec,” 8vo, without date. The second edition, of Paris, 1569, was cancelled in some places, which makes the other the more valuable. 8. “Artis typographicae querimonia de illiteratis quibusdam typographis,” 1569, 4to. This little poem, for such it is, has been added to those published by Almeloveen and Maittaire, and there is a recent edition by Lottin, printed at Paris in 1785, 4to, with a French translation, and the genealogy of the Stephani, from 1500. 9. “Epistola qua ad multas multorum amicorum respondet de suas typographic statu, nominatimque de suo Thesauro linguae Graecoe,” 1569, 8vo, reprinted also by Almeloveen and Maittaire. 10. “Comicoruin Graecorum sententiae,” 1569, 12mo. 11. “Epigrammata Graeca selectaex Anthologia interpretata ad verbum et carmina,” 1570, 8vo. 12. “Thesaurus Grsecae linguae,” 1572, 4 vols. fol. with which is connected the “Glossariaduo,” &C.1573, fol. Of this celebrated work it is unnecessary to say much, as it is so well known to the learned in Europe, and to others information vvoxild be unnecessary. Maittaire was of opinion that Henry published a second edition, but has not discovered the date. Niceron thinks he only printed a new title for the unsold copies, with an epigram on Scapula. But Brunet, after examining a great many copies, both with the first and second titles, inclines to the existence of a second edition. Of late a spirited invitation has been held out to public taste and liberality by Messrs. Valpy, who have undertaken a nevr edition, with improvements and every lover of literature, every scholar anxious for the honour of his country must wish them success. 13. “Virtutum encomia, sive gnomas de virtutibus,” 1575, 12mo. 14. “Francofordiense emporium, sive Francofordienses nundinse,” 1574, 8vo. This collection of prose and verse pieces, which he calls “merchandize,” is but little known. 15. “Discours merveilleux de la vie et deportments de la reine Catherine de Medecis,” 1575, 8vo. This satire, translated in 1575, by a protestant writer, into Latin, with the title of “Legenda sanctae Catharinae JMediceas,” is attributed to Henry Stephens, and has been often reprinted. 16. “De Latinitate falso suspecta expostulatio, necnon de Plauti Latinitate dissertatio,” 1576, 8vo. This is a hit at the Ciceronians, or those who undervalue all Latin that is not borrowed from Cicero. 17. “Pseudo-Cicero, dialogus in quo de multis ad Ciceronis sermonem pertinentibus, de delectu editionum ejus, et cautione in eo legendo,” 1577, 8vo. 18. “Schediasmatum variorum, id est, observationum, &c. libri tres,” 1578, 8vo. These three books of critical remarks bear the names of the first three months of the year, and three others were added in 1589, but this second part is very rare. Gruter, however, has inserted it in the supplement to vol. V. of his “Thesaurus criticus.” 19. “ Nizolio-Didascalus, sive monitor Ciceronianorum-Nizoliandrum dialogus,” 1578, 8vo. (See Nizolius). 20. “Deux dialogues du nouveau Frangois Italianize” et autrement deguise entre les courtesans de ce temps,“3vo, no date, but printed, as Brunet thinks, in 1579, by Patisson, and reprinted at Antwerp the same year in 12mo. 21.” Projet de livre intitule de la precellence du langage Frangois,“1579, 8vo, a curious and very rare work, for which, as we have noticed, the king rewarded him. 22.” Paralipojnena grammaticarum GrEecae linguae institutionum,“1581, 8vo. 23.” Hypomneses de Gallica lingua,“1582, 8vo, and inserted also in his father’s French grammar. 24.” De criticis veteribus Grsecis et Latinis, eorumque variis apud poetas potissimurn reprehensionibus dissertatio,“1587, 4to. 25.” Les premices, ou le premier livre des proverbes epigrammatises, ou des epigrammes proverbiales rangees ea lieux communs,“1593, 8vo. 26.” De Lipsii Latinitate palestra," Francfort, 1595, 8vo.

Henry Stephens was twice married, and had three children by his first wife, a son, Paul, a printer, at Geneva, and two daughters, one of whom, Florentia, was married to Isaac Casaubon.

, the second of that name, and brother to the preceding, was born at Paris in 1530. Remaining attached to the Roman catholic religion, he refused to accompany his father when he went to Geneva, on which account his father disinherited him; but by his talents and labours he was soon enabled to provide for himself. From 1556 he had a printing-office with many founts of beautiful types, as we may see from his edition of Despauter’s “Rudimenta,” the first book he printed. William Morel was his partner in the publication of some works, and among the rest an Anacreon, prepared for the press by his brother Henry. It is thought that he obtained the brevet of king’s printer after the death of his father, but we do not find that he assumed the title before 1561. He died in Feb. 1571, and in the month of March following, his nephew, Frederic Morel, was made king’s printer. He married Denisa Barbe, and had three sons, Robert, Francis, who died young, and Henry. His widow married Mauiert Patisson.

, Francis Stephens, the third son of Robert, and younger brother to the two preceding, renounced popery with his father, and accompanied him to Geneva, where he carried on the printing business in partnership with Francis Perrin, from 1561 to 1582. He was married and had children, but we find no mention of them. The following works have been attributed to him: 1. “Traite des Danses, auquel il est demontre qu'elles sont accessoires et dependances de paillardise,” 1564, 8 vo. “2.” De la puissance legitime dti prince sur le peupie, et du people sur le prince,“written in Latin by Stephanus Junius Brutus (Hubert Languet) and translated into French, Geneva, 1581, 8vo. This translation is so much esteemed as to bear a higher value than the original. 3.” Remonstrance charitable aux dames et demoiselles de France sur leurs ornamens dissolus," Paris, 1577, 12tno. and a rare book, although twice reprinted in 1581 and 15S5, 8vo.

, the third of that name, was the son of the preceding Robert the second, and was educated by the celebrated Desportes, who inspired him with a taste for poetry. He began printing in 1572, and in 1574 was honoured with the title of king’s printer. He translated from Greek into French the first two books of Aristotle’s Rhetoric, and printed them himself in 1629, 8vo. In the title-page he calls himself poet and interpreter to the king for the Greek and Latin languages. He was a man of spirit and wit, and was much celebrated for his choice of devices and mottoes for eminent personages. He died in 1629, but left no family. Besides his translation of Aristotle and some Greek poets, he was the author of, 1. “Vers Chretiens au comte du Bouchage,” 1587, 4to. 2. “Discours en vers au connetable de Montmorency,” 1595, 4to. 3, “Epitre de Gregoire de Nysse touchant ceux qui vont a Jerusalem,” with a preface on the superstitious abuse of pilgrimages, which gave rise to the opinion that he was not far from embracing the protestant religion.

, son of the second Henry, was born in 1566, and educated with great care. After he had finished 1m studies, his father, who wished him to succeed to his own business, sent him on his travels that he might form connections with men of learning. He accordingly visited the principal cities of Germany, Holland, Leyden, where he lived some time with Lipsius, and came also into England, where he is said to have formed an intimacy with John Castohus, a young man well versed in the ancient languages, but of whom we find no other mention. In 1599 he established a printing-office at Geneva, and produced some very correct editions of the Greek and Latin classics with notes, but not such beautiful specimens of typography as those of his father and grandfather. He died at Geneva in 1627, leaving two sons, Anthony and Joseph; the latter was king’s printer at Rochelle, and died in 1629. Of Anthony we shall take some notice presently. Paul published, 1. “Epigrammata Graecse anthoiogiae, Latinis versibus reddita,” Geneva, 1575, 8vo. 2. “Juvenilia,” ibid. 1595, 8vo, consisting of some small pieces he wrote in his youth. Among the editions of the classics which came from his press, there are few, if any, that used to be more valued than his “Euripides,” 1602, 4to. It occurs very rarely.

We shall now briefly mention the remaining branches of this justly celebrated family. Henry Stephens, the third of that name, and son to Robert, the second, was treasurer of the royal palaces. Prosper March and thinks he was a printer in 1615, but no work is known to have issued from his press. He had two sons, Henry and Robert, and a daughter married to Fougerole, a notary. His son Henry, sieur des Fossés, was the author of “L' Art de faire les devices, avec un Traité des rencontres ou mots plaisants,” Paris, 1645, 8vo. His “Art of making devices” was translated into English by our countryman Thomas Blount (See vol. V. p. 430) and published in 1646, 4to. Henry assumed the title of interpreter of the Greek and Latin languages, and was reckoned a good poet. We also are indebted to him for a character of Louis XIII. and eloges of the princes and generals who served under that monarch, which he published in a work entitled “Les Triomphes de Louis-le-Juste,” Paris, 1649, fol. Robert, his brother, was an advocate of parliament, and completed the translation of Aristotle’s Rhetoric begun by his uncle, Robert the third of the name, and published at Paris in 1630, 8vo. He left off printing about 1640, and was bailli of St. Marcel.

, the son of Paul, was born at Geneva in 1594, studied at Lyons, and came to Paris at the age of eighteen. He abjured the protestant religion, and in 1614 obtained the title of printer to the king and to the clergy. The cardinal Duperron became his patron, and gave him a pension of 500 livres, which he enjoyed as long as that prelate lived. He reprinted for the booksellers of Paris, the Greek fathers, and published other important works, as Merin’s Bible, Duval’s Aristotle, Strabo, Xenophon, Plutarch, &c. He had by his wife Jean Leclerc several children, and a son Henry, who would have succeeded him, but he died in 1661. Anthony himself became unfortunate, and when infirm and blind, was obliged to solicit a place in the Hotel-Dieu, where he died in 1674, in the eightieth year of his age.

, a learned English divine, the son of Walter Stephens, vector of Bishops Castle in Shropshire, was born therein 1592, and was entered of Brasenose college, Oxford, in 1609. Having completed his degrees in arts in 161 i, he was ordained deacon, and was appointed chaplain of All Souls college. In May 1616, he was admitted to priest’s orders, and in 1621 was presented to the rectory of Quinton in Northamptonshire, and in 1626 to that of Wotton adjoining, both by Charles I. In 1641 he was made prebendary of Biggleswade in the church of Lincoln, by the interest of archbishop Laud, as a reward for the assi>tance he gave sir Henry Spelman in the first volume of his edition of the “Councils;” but in 1644 he was deprived of all his preferments, and imprisoned by the usurping powers. At the restoration he was replaced in his former livings, and had also a prebend in the church of Salisbury. He died Jan. 9, 1665, at Wotton, and was buried in the chancel of that church.

He published, 1. “Notae in D. Cyprian, de imitate Ecclesiae,” London, 1632, 8vo. 2. “Notre in D. Cyprian, de bono patiemise,” ibid. 1633, 8vo, both, as Wood says, collated with ancient manuscripts by some of the Oxford divines. 3. “Apology fur the ancient right and power of the Bishops to sit and vote in parliaments,” ibid. 1660. 4. “B. Gregorii magni, episcopi Romani, de cura pastovali liber vere aureus, accurate emendatus et restitutus e vet. Mss cum Romana editione collatis,” ibid. 1621', 8vo. He was also the editor of Spelman’s work on “Tithes,” and his apology lor the treatise “De non temerandis ecclesiis;” and had prepared some small pieces on the controversies arising from the usurpation, the publication of which was rendered unnecessary by the return of Charles II.

, an eminent antiquary, was the fourth sou of Richard Stephens, esq. of the elder house of that name atEastington in Gloucestershire, by Anne the eldest daughter of sir Hugh Cholmeley, of Whitby, in Yorkshire, baronet. His first education was at Wotton school, whence he removed to Lincoln-college, Oxford, May 19, 681. He was entered very young in the Middle Temple, applied himself to the study of the common law, and was called to the bar. As he was master of a sufficient fortune, it may be presumed that the temper of his mind, which was naturally modest, detained him from the public exercise of his profession, and led him to the politer studies, and an acquaintance with the best authors, ancient and modern: yet he was thought by all who knew him to have made a great proficience in the law, though history and antiquities seem to have been his favourite study. When he was about twenty years old, being at a relation’s house, he accidentally met with some original letters of the lord chancellor Bacon; and finding that they would greatly contribute to our knowledge of matters relating to king James’s reign, he immediately set himself to search for whatever might elucidate the obscure passages, and published a complete edition of them in 1702, with useful notes, and an excellent historical introduction. He intended to have presented his work to king William but that monarch dying before it was published, the dedication was omitted. In the preface, he requested the communication of unpublished pieces of his noble author, to make his collection more complete; and obtained in consequence as many letters as formed the second collection, published in 1734, two years after his death. Being a relation of Robert Harley earl of Oxford (whose mother Abigail, was daughter of Nathaniel Stephens of Eastington), he was preferred by him to be chief solicitor of the customs, in which employment he continued with unblemished reputation till 172C, when he declined that troublesome office, and was appointed to succeed Mr. Madox in the place of historiographer royal. He then formed a design of writing a history of king James the first, a reign which he thought to be more misrepresented than almost any other since the conquest: and, if we may judge by the good impression which he seems to have had of these times, his exactness and care never to advance any thing but from unquestionable authorities, besides his great candour and integrity, it could not but have proved a judicious and valuable performance. He married Mary the daughter of sir Hugh Cholmeley, a lady of great worth, and died at Gravesend, near Thornbury, in Gloucestershire, Nov. 12, 1732; and was buried at Eastington, the seat of his ancestors, where is an inscription to his memory.

, an English poet and statesman, was descended from a family at Pendigrast in Pembrokeshire, but born at London in 1663. It has been conjectured that he was either son or grandson of Charles third son of sir John Stepney, the first baronet of that family: Mr. Cole says his father was a grocer. He received his education at Westminster-school, and was removed thence to Trinity-college, Cambridge, in 1682; where he took his degree of A.B. in 1685, and that of M.A. in 1689. Being of the same standing with Charles Montague, esq. afterwards earl of Halifax, a strict friendship grew up between them, and they came to London together, and are said to have been introduced into public life by the duke of Dorset. To this fortunate incident was owing all the preferment Stepney afterwards enjoyed, who is supposed not to have had parts sufficient to have risen to any distinction, without such patronage. When Stepney first set out in life, he seems to have been attached to the tory interest; for one of the first poems he wrote was an address to James II. upon his accession to the throne. Soon after, when Monmouth’s rebellion broke out, the Cambridge men, to shew their zeal for the king, thought proper to burn the picture of that prince, who had formerly been chancellor of the university, and on this occasion Stepney wrote some good verses in his praise. Upon the Revolution, he embraced another interest, and procured himself to be nominated to several foreign embassies. In 1692 he went to the elector of Brandenburg’s court, in quality of envoy; in 1693, to the Imperial court, in the same character; in 1694, to the elector of Saxony; and, two years after, to the electors of Mentz, Cologn, and the congress at Francfort; in 1698, a second time to Brandenburg; in 1699, to the king of Poland; in 1701, again to the emperor; and in 1706, to the States General; and in all his negotiations, is said to have been successful. In 1697 he was made one of the commissioners of trade. He died at Chelsea in 1707, and was buried in Westminster-abbey; where a fine monument was erected over him, with a pompous inscription. At his leisure hours he composed poetical pieces, which are republished in the general collection of English poets. He likewise wrote some political pieces in prose, particularly, “An Essay on the present interest of England, in 1701: to which are added, the proceedings of the House of Commons in 1677, upon the French king’s progress in Flanders.” This is reprinted in the collection of tracts, called “Lord Somers’s collection.”

, a learned physician of Ireland, was born at Ardbraccan in the county of Meath. in 1622, in tfie house of his uncle, the celebrated archbishop Usher, but then bishop of Meath. He was educated in the college of Dublin, of which he became a fellow, but was ejected by the usurping powers for his loyalty. At the restoration he was reinstated, and advanced to the place of senior fellow by nomination, together with Joshua Cowley, Richard Lingard, William Vincent, and Patrick Sheridan, masters of arts, in order to give a legal form to the college, all the senior fellows being dead, and it being requisite by the statutes, that all elections should be made by the provost and four senior fellows at least. He was M. D. and LL. D. and public professor of the university. He was a very learned man, but more fond of the study of divinity, than that of his own profession, in which, however, he had great knowledge. He died in 1669, aged forty-six, and was buried in the college chapel, where a monument was erected to his memory. His writings are, J. “Aphorismi de frclicitate,” Dublin, 1654, 8vo, twice reprinted. 2. “De morte dissertatio,” ibid. 1656 and 1659, 8vo. 3. “Animi medela, seu de bearitudine et miseria,” ibid. 1658, 4to. 4. “Adriani Heerboordii disputation um de concwrsu examen,” ibid. 1658, 4to. 5. “De electione et reprobatione,” ibid. 1662, 4to. To this is added, “Manuductio ad vitam probam.” 6. “De Obstinatione, opus posthumum, pietatem Christiano-Stoicam Scholastico more suadens.” This was published in 1672 by the celebrated Mr. Dodwell, as we have noticed in his life. Dodwell had been pupil to Dr. Sterne.

Dr. Sterne’s son, John, was educated by him in Trinitycollege, Dublin, and became successively vicar of Trim, chancellor and dean of St. Patrick’s, bishop of Dromore in 1713, and of Clogher in 1717, and vice-chancellor of the university of Dublin. Being a single man, he laid out immense sums on his episcopal palaces, and on the college of Dublin, where he built the printing-house, and founded exhibitions. Most of these were gifts in his life-time, and at his death (June 1745) he bequeathed the bulk of his fortune, about 30,000l. to public institutions, principally of the charitable kind. His only publications were, a “Concio ad clerum,” and “Tractates de visitatione infirmorum,” for the use of the junior clergy, printed at Dublin in 1697, 12mo. Dean Swift appears to have corresponded with bishop Sterne for many years on the most intimate and friendly terms, but at length, in 1733, the dean sent him a letter full of bitter sarcasm and reproach, to which the bishop returned an answer that marks a superior command of temper; but it appears from the life of the rev. Philip Skelton, that his lordship deserved much of what Swift had imputed to him.

, archbishop of York, the son of Simon Sterne, was descended from a family in Suffolk, but was born at Mansfield in Nottinghamshire in 1596. He was admitted of Trinity-college, Cambridge, in 1611, whence, having taken his degrees of A. B. in 1614, and A. M. in 1618, he removed to Bene't-college in 1620, and was elected fellow July 10, 1623. He then took pupils with great credit to himself and to the college, and proceeded B. D. the following year, and was incorporated in the same degree at Oxford in 1627. He had been appointed one of the university preachers the year before, and was in such high reputation, that he was made choice of for one of Dr. Love’s opponents in the philosophical act, kept for the entertainment of the Spanish and Austrian ambassadors, and fully answered their expectations. In 1632 he was made president of the college; and upon Dr. Beale’s translation from the mastership of Jesus to that of St. John’s college soon alter, was put in his room in March 1633. His promotion is thus noticed in a private letter “One Stearne, a solid scholar (who first summed up the 3600 faults that were in our printed Bibles of London) is by his majesty’s direction to the bishop of Ely (who elects there) made master of Jesus.” This occasioned him to take the degree of D.D. in 1635, and he then assumed the government of the college, to which he proved a liberal benefactor, and it was by his means that the north side of the outer court was built. In 1641 he was nominated by a majority of the fellows to the rectory of Harletpn in Cambridgeshire; but some contest arising, he did not get possession of it till the summer following. He had, however, from March 1634 enjoyed that of Yeovilton in the county of Somerset, through the favour of archbishop Laud, one of whose chaplains he was, and so highly esteemed, that he chose him to do the last good offices for him on the scaffold. On the breaking out of the rebellion, he incurred the fiercest anger of the usurper for having conveyed to the king both the college plate and money, for which he was seized by Cromweii y and carried up to London. Here, after suffering the severest hardships in various prisons, he was ejected from all his preferments. Few men indeed suffered more cruel treatment; and it was some years before he was finally released, and permitted to retire to Stevenage in Hertfordshire, where he kept a private school for the support of his family till the restoration. Soon after that event, while he was carrying on the repairs of the college, he was appointed bishop of Carlisle, and was concerned in the Savoy conference, and in the revisal of the hook of Common-prayer. On the decease of Dr. Frevveii, he was translated to the archiepiscopal see of York, over which he presided with becoming dignity, till the time of his death, Jan. 18, 1683, in the eightyseventh year of his age. He was buried in the chapel of St. Stephen in his own cathedral, where an elegant monument uas afterwards erected to his memory by his grandson Richard Sterne, of Eivington, esq.

His character has been variously represented, as we have repeatedly had occasion to notice in the case of persons of eminence who lived in his disastrous period. Bishop Kennet informs us, “He was promoted to the bishopric of Carlisle, on account of his piety, great learning, and prudence, as being indeed not less exemplary in his notions and conversations, than if he himself had expected martyrdom, from the hour of his attendance upon his patron archbishop Laud.” Baxter says, “Among all the bishops there was none who had so promising a face. He looked so honestly, and gravely and soberly, that he thought such a face could not have deceived him;” but then he adds, “that he found he had not half the charity which became so grave a bishop, nor so mortified an aspect.” Notwithstanding this charge, he was one of those bishops who shewed great lenity, charity, and respect, in their treatment of the nonconformist clergy. The only substantial charge against him is that advanced by bishop Burnet, who censures him for being too eager to enrich his family. For this there seems some foundation, and Browne Willis allows that he ivould have deserved a larger encomium than most of his predecessors, if he had not demised the park of Hexgrave from the see to his son and t‘amiK His m.my benefactions to Bene’t and Jesus colleges, to the rebuildin of St. Paul’s, and other public and charitable purposes, show that if he was rich, fee was also liberal. As an author, besides some Latin verses, in the “Genethliacon Caroli et Marioe, 1631,” at the end o‘ Winterton’s translation of the Aphorisms of Hippocrates in lb’33, on the birth of a prince in 1640, anil others in “Iivnodia Cantab, ob paciferum Catoli e Scotia remtum, 164.1,” he ivas one of the assistants in the publication of the Polyglot; published a “Comment on Psalms ciii.” Lond. 1641*. 8vo; and wrote an accurate treatise on logic, which was published after his death, in 16St5, 8vo, under the title of “Summa Logicæ, &c.”

, said to be great-grandson of the preceding, was the son of Roger Sterne, "lieutenant of the army. He was born at Clonmel in the South of Ireland, Nov. 24, 1713. It has been thought that his affecting story of Le Fevre was founded on the circumstances of his father’s family, which had long to struggle with poverty and hardships on the slender pay of a lieutenant. As soon as Lawrence was able to travel, his father and family left Ireland and went to Elvington near York, where his father’s mother resided, but in less than a year, they returned to Ireland, and afterwards moved from place to place with the regiment, until Lawrence was placed at a school near Halifax in Yorkshire. In 1731 his father died.

Lawrence remained at Halifax till about the latter end of the above year, and in the following, was admitted of Jesus-college, Cambridge, where he took his bachelor’s degree, January 1736, and that of master in 1740. During this time he was ordained, and his uncle Jaques Sierne, LL. D. prebendary of Durham, &c. procure.; him the living of Sutton, and afterwards a prebend of York, and by his wife’s means (whom he married in 1741), he got the living of Stillington. He 'resided, houever, principally, and for above twenty years, at Sutton, where, as he informs us, his chief amusements were painting, fiddling, and shooting. Here, however, he must have employed a considerable part of his time in reading, as some of the works which he afterwards published plainly evince the study of many voluminous and neglected authors. He had also before he quitted Sutton, published in 1747, a charity sermon for the support of the charity-school at York, and in 1756 an assize sermon, preached at the cathedral, York. in 1759 he published at York the first two volumes of his “Tristram Shandy,” anci in 1760 took a house at York. Tin: same year he went up to London to republish the above volumes, and to print two volumes of' his “Sermons;” and this year also lord Falconbridge presented him to the ciftacy of Coxwold. In 1762 he went to France, and two years after to Italy. In 1767 he left York, and came to London to publish the “Sentimental Journey;” but his health was now fast declining, and, aftt-r a short but severe struggle with his disorder, he died at his lodgings in Bond-street, March 18, 1768, and was buried in the new burying-ground belonging to the parish of St. George Hanover-square.

His principal works consist of the “Tristram Shandy,” the “Sentimental Journey,” and some volumes of “Sermons.” Several letters have been published since i:is death, which partake much of the style and manner of his other works. Were a judgment to be formed of his character from these, it would appear that, with more laxity of morals than becomes the clerical character, he was a man abounding in the tenderness and delicacy of humanity; but there were many well-known circumstances in his life which proved, that he was more an adept in the language than the practice of these virtues.

The works of few men, however, attracted more notice than those of Sterne during their publication from 1759 to the time of his death. He appeared an humourist of great originality, and became the founder of a school of sentimental writers which may be said still to rlouiish. Certainly no man ever delineated the feelings of a tender heart, the sweetness of compassion, and the duties of humanity, in more elegant or striking colours, although he was grossly deficient in that practice which is above all language and all expression.

As an original writer, Sterne’s merit has been lately disputed in an article which originally appeared in the Manchester memoirs, and has since b^en published in a separate form by Dr. Ferriar. This ingenious writer has incontestabiy traced many very striking sentiments and passages from our author’s works, to Burton’s “/in atomy qf Melancholy,” bishop Hall’s works, and other books not generally read. Yet with these exceptions, for exceptions they certainly are, enough will remain the exclusive property of Sterne, to prove that both in the language of sentiment and the delineation of character, he was in a very high degree original, and altogether so in those indecencies which displace his most popular writings.

, an English poet and psalmodist, was born, according to Wood’s conjecture, in Hampshire, and, as Hoi imbed says, at Southampton; but Atkins, in his History of Gloucestershire, expressly affirms, that he was born at Awre, a parish about twelve miles from Gloucester; and adds, that his posterity turned papists, and left the place. He studied for some time at Oxford, but not long enough to take any degree. By some interest that he had at court, he was preferred to the office of groom of the robes to Henry VIII. which he discharged so well that he became a personal favourite of the king, who by his will left him a legacy of an hundred marks. Upon the decease of king Henry, he was continued in the same employment by Edward VI. and having leisure to pursue his studies, he acquired some degree of esteem about the court for his poetical talents. He wa> a man of great piety, in his morals consequently irreproachable, and was a stedfast adherent to the principles of the Reformation. Being offended with the immodest Soul'S, which were then the usual entertainment of persons about the court, he undertook to translate the Psalms into English metre, hoping the courtiers might find in them a proper antidote and substitute for their licentious songs: but he died in 1549, without completing the work. His will was proved Sept. 12th of that year, and in it he is styled groom of his majesty’s robes; and it appears that he died seized of lands to a considerable value in Hampshire and Cornwall.

He lived to versify only fifty-one of the Psalms, which were first printed by Edward Whitechurch in 1549, with the title “All such Psalms of David as Thomas Sterneholde late grome of the kinges majestyes robes, did in his lyfe-­tyme drawe into Englyshe metre.” This book is dedicated to Edward VI. by the author, and seems therefore to have been prepared by him for the press; but Wood, and his followers, are mistaken, in saying, that Sternhold caused musical notes to be set to his Psalms, for they were published, both in 1549 and 1552, without notes; the first edition with notes did not appear until 1562 . Sir John Hawkins thinks it worthy of remark, that both in France and England the Psalms were first translated into vulgar metre by laymen; and, which is very singular, by coiuv tiers. Marot was of the bedchamber to Francis I. and Sternhold groom of the robes to Henry VIII. and Edward VI. Their respective translations were not completed by themselves, and yet they translated nearly an equal number of Psalms, Marot fifty, and Sternhold fifty-one.

Sternhold’s principal successor in carrying on the translation of the Psalms was John Hopkins, who was admitted A. B. at Oxford in 1544, and is supposed to have been afterwards a clergyman of Suffolk. He was living in 1556. Warton pronounces him a raiher better poet than Sternhold. He versified fifty-eight of the Psaims, which are distinguished by his initials. Bishop Tanner styles him “poeta, ut ea ferebant tempora, eximius” ajid Bale, “Britanuicorum poetarum sui temporis non infimus;” and, at the end of the Latin commendatory verses prefixed ix’s “Acts and Monuments,” are some stanzas of his h seem to justify this character. Five other Psalms were translated by William Whitting-ham, the puritan dean of Durham, and he also versified the decalogue, the prayer immediately after it, and very probably the Lord’s prayer, the creed, and the hymn “Veni Creator;” all which follow the singing-psalms in our version. Thomas Norton (See Norton) translated twenty-seven more of the psalms; Robert Wisdome the twenty-fifth, and also wrote that once very popular prayer at the end of the version, “Preserve us, Lord, by thy dear word,” &.c. which is a literal translation of Luther’s hymn upon the same occasion. Eight psalms, which complete the whole series, have the initials W. K. and T. C. but we have no account of either of these authors.

The complete version was first printed in 1562, by John Day, entitled “The whole book of Psalms, Collected into English metre by T. Sternhold, J. Hopkins, and others, conferred with the Ebrue; with apt notes to sing them withall:” Heylin, who seems to have a singular aversion to psalmody, says that “this was a device first taken up in France by one Clement Marot,” but this is a mistake. Luther, and before his time, John Huss, ajid the Bohemian brethren, had metrical psalms and hymns in the German language, which they sung to what Dr. Burncy calls unisonous and syllabic tunes, that were either adopted or imitated by all posterior reformers. In ibe edition of 1562 the tunes are chiefly German, and still used on the continent by Lutherans and Calvinists, as appears by c-iiaiion, particularly the melodies set to the Uth, 14th, 113th, 121-th, U7th, and l.vuii Psalms.

The original motive to the undertaking of Sternhold and his coadjutors was not solely the introduction of Psai insinging into the English protestant churches; it had also for its object the correction of public morals, as appears from the declaration contained in the title-page of our common version, and which has been continued in all the printed copies from the time of its first publication to this day, “Set forth and allowed to be sung in churches of the people together, before and after evening prayer, as also before and after sermon; and, moreover, in private houses, for their godly solace and comfort, laying apart all ungodly songs and ballads,which tend only to the nourishment of vice, and the corrupting of youth.” About the beginning of the reign of queen Elizabeth these Psalms were printed along with the book of Common Prayer, so that Heylm’s nice distinctions between an allowance, which he calls a connivance, and an -approbation, seem to be unnecessary, and certainly are inconclusive. Sternhold and Hopkins’s version, be its merit what it may, had all the sanction it co-aid have, that of undisturbed use, in all churches and chapels, for above a century and a half, and it has not yet entirely;.o that of Tate and Brady. On its poetical merits it would be unnecessary to enter. It is valuable chiefly as a monument of literary antiquity, and as fixing the sera of an important addition to public worship, a subject which we regret to observe, both Mr. War ton and Dr. Burney have treated with unbecoming levity.

, an ancient Greek poet, was born at Himera, a city of Sicily, in the seventh century B. C. His name was originally Tysias, but changed to Stesichorus, on account of his being the first who taught the chorus to dance to the lyre. He appears to have been a man of first rank for wisdom and authority among his fellow citizens and to have had a great hand in the transact; between that state and the tyrant Phalaris. He died at Catana in Sicily at above eighty, in the year 556 B. C. the people were so sensible of the honour his relics did the city, that they resolved to keep them against the claims of the Himerians. Much of this poet’s history depends upoit the authority of Phalaris’s epistles; and if the genuineness of these should be given up, which is now the general opinion, yet we may perhaps collect from them the esteem and character Stesichorus bore with antiquity. We have no character of ins works on record: Suidas only tells us, in general, that he composed a book of lyrics in the Dorian dialect; of which a few scraps, not amounting to threescore lines, are inserted in the collection of Fnlvius Ursinus, at Antwerp, 1568, 8vo. Majesty and greatness make the common character of his style: and Horace speaks of his “Graves Camoenae.” Hence Alexander, in Dion Chrysostom, reckons him among the poets whom a prince ought to read: and Synesius puts him and Homer together, as the noble celebrators of the heroic race. Quintilian’s judgment on his works will justify all this: “the force of Stesichorus’s wit appears,” says he, “from the subjects he has treated of; while he sings the greatest wars and the greatest commanders, and sustains with his lyre all the weight and grandeur of an epic poem. For he makes his heroes speak and act agreeably to their characters: and had he but observed moderation, he would have appeared the fairest rival of Homer. But he is too exuberant, and does not know how to contain himself: which, though really a fault;, yet is one of those faults which arises from an abundance and excess of genius.”

, a very worthy, benevolent, and learned citizen of London, was born in the parish of St. Saviour’s, Southwark, March 2, 1732. His father was a tradesman, residing in that parish, and his mother was sister of the rev. Samuel Home, rector of Otham, near Maidstone, in Kent, and aunt of the late excellent Dr. Home, bishop of Norwich. His father died when he was in his infancy, and being educated with his cousin, George Home, an attachment, from similarity of disposition, commenced between them, which led to the same studies in their future lives, although their destinations were so different. When little more than fifteen, Mr. Home was sent to Oxford, and Mr. Stevens, at the same period, being only fourteen, in August 1746, was placed as an apprentice with Mr. Hookham, No. 68, Old Broad-street, au eminent wholesale hosier, and in this house he lived and died. The cousins now communicated by correspondence, in which Mr. Home informed his friend of the studies in which he was engaged, wi.ile Mr. Stevens spent all his leisure time in acquiring, by his own labour and industry, that knowledge which the young academician was amassing under belter auspices. By such means Mr. Stevens acquired, not only an intimate acquaintance with the French language, but also a considerable knowledge of Latin, Greek,

and Hebrew literature, and became also an excellent theologian. All this was performed amidst the strictest attention to the duties of his apprenticeship, and when that term expired in 1753, his master employed him for a year as his assistant, and then rewarded his fidelity and upright conduct, by taking him into partnership. Mr. Stevens, after this, continued to pursue his business with his usual activity for many years with little alteration as to the circumstances of it. When Mr. Hookham died, his nephew Mr. Paterson succeeded, with whom, and Mr. Watlington, Mr. Stevens conducted the business, as chief partner, until 1801, when he relinquished a great part of the profits, in order to be relieved from the drudgery of business, and to dedicate more of his time to the society of the friends that he loved, and to those studies in which he delighted. About two years before his death, he gave up the whole concern to Mr. Paterson, with whom, however, he continued to board till his death.

His leisure time, during the whole of his life, he dedicated to study, to intercourse with learned men, and to the duties of benevolence and devotion. His reading was extensive, and his taste may be understood from the plan of his studies. He was well versed in the writings of the fathers of the church of the first three centuries, generally called the Apostolic fathers; he had twice read through Dr. Thomas Jackson’s Body of Divinity, in three large folios; a divine for whose writings bishop Home always expressed the highest respect. The works of bishops Andrews, Jeremy Taylor, and dean Hickes, were quite familiar to Mr. Stevens; and there was hardiy a writer of modern days, at all celebrated for orthodox opinions, who was unknown to him. Such was the esteem in which he was held, as a theologian, that Dr. Douglas, bishop of Salisbury, once said of him, “Here is a man, who, though not a bishop, yet would have been thought worthy of that character in the first and purest ages of the Christian church;” and the late bishop Horsley, who was not given to flattery, when on one occasion Mr. Stevens paid him a compliment on account of his sermon, said, “Mr. Stevens, a compliment from you upon such a subject is of no inconsiderable value.” Mr. Stevens was also, like bishop Home, a great admirer of the works of Mr. John Hutchinson.

In 1773 Mr. Stevens first appeared as an author, if we may say so of one who never put his name to his writings, by publishing “An Essay on the nature and constitution of the Christian church, wherein are set forth the form of its government, the extent of its powers, and the limits of our obedience, by a layman.” This was published at a time (the preface says) “when the press teemed with the most scurrilous invectives against the fundamental doctrines of our religion: and even the newspapers were converted into trumpets of sedition by the enemies of the church.” Thirty years after the appearance of this tract the society for promoting Christian knowledge placed it on the catalogue of their publications with the name of the author, one of whose primary motives for writing it was the effort making in 1773 to get rid of subscription to the Thirty-nine articles. With the same view, and about the same time, Mr. Woliaston, rector of Chislehurstin Kent, having published “An address to the Clergy of the church of England in particular, and to all Christians in general,” Mr. Stevens printed “Cursory Observations” on this pamphlet, with a mixture of playfulness and argument, censuring him for being friendly to the scheme then in view. In 1776 he published “A discourse on the English Constitution, extracted from a late eminent writer, and applicable to the present times,” which were, it may be remembered, times of great political turbulence. In the following year he published two distinct works: the one, “Strictures on a sermon entitled, The Principles of the Revolution vindicated — preached before the university of Cambridge, on Wednesday, May 29, 1776, by Richard Watson, D.I). F II. S. Regius professor of divinity in that university” an<1, the other, “The Revolution vindicated, and constitutional liberty asserted in answer to the Rev. Dr. Watson’s Accession Sermon, preached before the university of Cambridge on Oct. 25, 1776.” In both these works, he contends that the preacher and his friends deavouf to support doctrines which, if followed, would destroy, and not preserve the constitution, grounding all authority in the power of the people: that the revolution (in 1688) intended to preserve, and did preserve, the constitution, in its pristine state and vigour: and that this is manifest from the convention, founding the revolution entirely on the abdication and vacancy of the throne.

Whether these letters were translated from the French, as the title-page imports, or were the xvork of Mr. Stevens himself, “it is not,” says his learned biographer, “material to inquire. The object of this publication was to offer some observations on the doctor’s proposals, and to point out the supposed evil tendency of the plan.” In this, as we have noticed in our account of Dr. Kennicott, Mr. Stevens was not singular, and if he erred, he did not err alone in his judgment upon the points at issue. Although Mr. Stevens would never announce himself as the author of any of the preceding works, he collected them at the earnest solicitation of his friends, into a volume, which, with his characteristic humility, he entitled “OvSevo; efya,” “The Works of Nobody,” and gave copies in presents to his friends.

In 1800, he was again induced to enter the fields of controversy, in defence of the opinions partly of his relation bishop Home, and partly of his friend Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones, in his life of bishop Home, had adverted to that prelate’s acquaintance with the writings of Htitchinson; but before a second edition was wanted, some writers had attacked the character of Dr. Home, as an Hutthinsonian and Mr. Jones therefore, in the new edition of the life, published in 1799, introduced a long preface^ vindicating the bishop, and shewing that the Hutchinsonian plan was consistent with the Holy Scriptures. This preface being reviewed in the British Critic in a manner by no means satisfactory to the supporters of Hutchinsonian opinions, or the friends of Mr. Jones (who died about this time), Mr. Stevens, with all the ardour of friendship, and with all the ability and spirit which had distinguished him in his earlier years, published under the name of Ain, the Hebrew word for Nobody, “A Review of the Review of a new Preface to the second edition of Mr. Jones’s Life of bishop Home.”

The last literary work in which Mr. Stevens was engaged, was an uniform edition of the works of Mr. Jones, in 12 vols 8vo, to which he prefixed a life of that excellent man, composed in a style of artless and pathetic religious eloquence, which his biographer has very aptly compared to that of Isaac Walton, between whom and Mr. Stevens he states otner similarities. “Both were tradesmen; they were both men of reading, and personally acquired learning; of considerable theological knowledge well versed in that book which is the only legitimate source of all theology, the Bible. Both were companions and friends of the most eminent prelates and divines that adorned the church of England; both were profound masters in the art of k(>ly living, and of the same cheerfulness of disposition, &c. &c.” But though Mr. Stevens never published any other work that can be called his own, yet he was always considering how the world might be benefited by the labours of others, and therefore he was a great encourager of his learned friend Mr. Jones, in the publication of his various works; and alter the death of bishop Home, the most severe loss he ever met with, he superintended the publication of some of the volumes of his sermons. It was he also who suggested to the bishop the “Letters on Infidelity,” in answer to Ur. Adam Smith’s exaggerated character of Hume; and to him the bishop addressed them under the initials of W. S. esq.

Mr. Stevens died Feb. 6, 1807, at his house in Broadstreet,;nd was interred in Oiharn church-yard in the county of Kent. Otham wa* not the place of his nativity, yet, from being the parish of his maternal relations, he had always regarded it as his home; and in that church-yard he expressed his desire to be buried. Indeed to the church of Otham he had, during his life-time, been a great benefactor, having laid out about 600l. in repairing and adorning it. An epitaph has since been placed on a marble tablet, containing a just summary of his excellent character. For a more minute detail of it, and particularly of his extensive -charities, both as ari individual, and as treasurer of queen Anne’s bounty, which office he held many years, and it afforded to him a wide scope for benevolent exertion for many admirable traits of temper and proofs of talent, and for an example of integrity, private virtues, and public usefulness, rarely to be met with, we must refer to the “Memoirs of William Stevens, esq.” printed for private distribution in 1812, 8vo, and in 1815 for sale. 7'his very interesting and instructive work is the well-known, although not avowed, production of a learned judge, who bus ably proved “how much every man has it in his power, even under very discouraging circumstances, by diligence, fidelity, and attention, to advance himself, not only in worldly prosperity, but in learning and wisdom, in purity of life, and in moral and religious knowledge,” and that “a life of the strictest piety and devotion to God, and of the warmest and most extensive benevolence to our fellow men, is strictly compatible with the utmost cheerfulness of disposition, with all rational pleasures, and with all the gaiety, which young persons naturally feel.”

, a Flemish mathematician of Bruges, who died in 1633, was master of mathematics to prince Maurice of Nassau, and inspector of the dykes in Holland. It is said he was the inventor of the sailing chariots, sometimes made use of in Holland. He was a good practical mathematician and mechanist, and was author of several useful works: as, treatises on arithmetic, algebra, geometry, statics, optics, trigonometry, geography, astronomy, fortification, and many others, in the Dutch language, which were translated into Latin, by Snellius, and printed in two volumes folio. There are also two editions in the French language, in folio, both printed at Leyden, the one in 1608, and the other in 1634, with curious notes and additions, by Albert Girard. In Dr. Hutton’s Dictionary, art. Algebra, there is a particular account of Stevin’s inventions and improvements, which were many and ingenious.

, an eminent political writer, was born at Edinburgh, Oct. 10, 1713. His father was sir James Stewart of Goostrees, bart. solicitorgeneral for Scotland, and his mother was Anne, daughter of sir Hugh Dalrymple of North Berwick, bart. president of the college of justice in Scotland. After some classical education at the school of North Berwick, in East Lothian, he was removed to the university of Edinburgh, where, in addition to the other sciences usually taught there, he made himself well acquainted with the Roman law and history, and the municipal law of Scotland. He then went to the bar as an advocate, and published an acute and ingenious thesis on that occasion, having before submitted himself, as is usual, to a public examination by the fac'ilty of advocates.

A few months after this introduction to the practice of his profession, he set out upon his travels, and made the tour of Holland, Germany, France, Spain, and Italy, which employed him for nearly five years after which, in 1740, he returned to Scotland, and two years after married lady Frances Wemyss, eldest daughter of the earl of Wemyss. One of his biographers observes, that his return to the bar was anxiously expected by his friends and countrymen, and his absence from it was imputed to the influence of certain connections of a political nature, which he had formed abroad, and particularly at Rome.

A few months after his marriage a vacancy took place in the representation in parliament fur the county of Edinburgh, when sir James took an active part in opposition to the interest of Robert Dunclas, esq. of Arniston, one of the senators of the college of justice, who happened to preside at the meeting of the electors for the county of Edinburgh, and omitted to call over sir James’s name, on the roll of the electors, on account of an alleged insufficiency of right to vote on that occasion. On ibis account Mr. Dunclas became the object of a legal prosecution by sir James, as having disobeyed the act of parliament relating to the rolls of electors of members of parliament for counties in Scotland. When, in the course of litigation, tliis cause came to be heard before the college of justice, sir J. mes pleaded his own cause with so much eloquence, and in so masterly a manner, that Mr. Dunclas (commonly called lord Arniston), though a judge, came down from the bench and defended himself at the bar; an appearance very uncommon, and demonstrative of the high sense he had of the abilities of his opponent. This extraordinary appearance of our author gave the greatest hopes of his professional abilities, and inspired all his friends with fresh zeal for his continuance at the bar; but the sentiments and engagements formerly mentioned in all probability prevented sir James from availing himself of so brilliant an introduction. After this struggle he passed near two years at his seat in the country, surrounded at all times by the most learned and accomplished of his countrymen, and rendering himself continually the delight of all his guests and companions, by the charms and variety of his conversation, and the polite animation of his manners and address. Amoncr those were many of the illustrious persons who afterwards engaged in the attempt to piace the Pretender on the throne in 1745. As he was by far the ablest man of that party, the Jacobites engaged him to write prince CharlesEdward’s manifesto, and to assist in his councils. Information having been given of his share in these affairs, he thought it prudent, on the failure of the attempt, to leave Britain, and was excepted afterwards from the bill of indemnity, and thus rendered an exile from his country. He chose France for his residence during the first ten years of his banishment, and was chiefly at Angoule^me, where he applied himself to the study of those subjects which are treated in his works, particularly finance, and collected that vast magazine of facts relating to the revenue which laid the foundation for some of the most curious and interesting chapters of his “Principles of Political CEconomy.” From the information on these subjects which he obtained in France, he was enabled to compare the state of the two nations, as well as to give that very clear and succinct account of the then state of the French finances which composes the sixth chapter of the fourth part of the fourth book of his great work. In 1757, sir James published at Frankfort on the Maine, his “Apologiedu sentiment de Monsieur de chevalier Newton, sur Pancienne chronologie des Grecs, contenant des reponses a toutes les objections qui y ont ete faites jusqu'a present.” This apology was written in the beginning of 1755; but the printing of it was at that time prevented by his other engagements. It is said to be a work of great merit.

While sir James resided abroad, during the war between France and Great Britain, which terminated in 1763, he had the misfortune to have some letters addressed to him proceeding on the mistake of his person and character, by which he became innocently the object of suspicion, as furnishing intelligence to the enemy, which occasioned the imprisonment of his person until the mistake was discovered. Some time after the peace of Paris, he was permitted to come incognito to London, where a noli proseqm aucl pardon was solicited for him, through different channels, and particularly through that of lord Chatham, by the interposition of sir James’s nephew, the present earl of Buchan, then lord Cardross; and although this was not then successful, yet in 1767 sir James was fully restored to his native country, and to his citizenship, with the gracious approbation of his discerning sovereign. He then retired to his paternal inheritance, and continued to exert his faculties for the benefit of his country. He repaired the mansion of his ancestors, improved his neglected acres, set forward the improvements of the province in which he resided, by promoting high-roads, bridges, agriculture, and manufactures; publishing at this time, for the use of the public, an anonymous plan for the construction of an act of parliament to regulate the application of the statute labour of the peasants and others upon the public roads; the greatest part of which treatise has been since adopted in the framing of acts for the different counties in Scotland.

In 1771, he was employed, on the generous offer of his gratuitous services, by the East India Company of Great Britain, to consider the most likely methods of regulating the coin in their settlements; and in the year 1772, at their request, he published the results of his labours on that subject; in a treatise entitled “The principles of money applied to the present state of the coin of Bengal.” In a letter to lord Buchan, he conveyed a plan for a general uniformity of weights and measures, a work of great ingenuity and learning, which was intended to have been laid before the congress, previous to the peace of 1763. It was written at Tubingen in Suabia, and finally corrected and enlarged at Coltness, his seat in Clydesdale in Scotland, in March 1778, and published at London in 1790. In the summer of 1779, he set himself to inquire minutely into the state of the distillery and brewery, and the revenue arising from it, which was suggested by the complaint which. had proceeded from an act of parliament, enlarging the lawful size of vessels for the distillation of malt spirits, and the imposition of a tax in Scotland, equal to that in England, on malt spirits; the general result of this inquiry he anonymously published in the Edinburgh Evening Courant of October 2, 1779; and the particular discussion, with the materials he had used, he transmitted to a friend in parliament. This publication had the effect to prevent the counties in Scotland from entering into crude resolutions on a subject of so much importance. In 1780, in the beginning of October, sir James was attacked by an inflammation in his toe, in consequence of the too near cutting of a nail, which, from the ill habit of his body at that time, terminated, towards the beginning of November, in a mortification. The progress of this disorder was arrested by the copious use of the Jesuits bark; but on the 19th of that month, he was seized with a fever, which put an end to his useful and valuable life on the 26th. His biographer adds, “It is with uncommon satisfaction that we find it in our power to adorn the account of this celebrated author, by adding the just encomium of his domestic virtues, an accompaniment too often wanting, at least with truth, in the biography of illustrious characters. As a husband, father, master, companion, and friend, sir James’s life was distinguished; and to all these excellent qualities, that rare one of public spirit, and unwearied attention to the interest of the state, were eminently conjoined.”

His “Inquiry into the principles of Political Œconorny” was published in 1767, 2 vols. 4to. On this work there have been considerable differences of opinion, and the author certainly has never attracted so much attention as his great rival on the same subject, Dr. Adam Smith, who has been heard to observe that he understood sir James’s system better from his conversation than from his volumes. The work was republished in 1805, along with other pieces from his pen, in 6 vols. 8vo.

, an eminent mathematician, and professor of mathematics in the university of Edinburgh, was the son of the reverend Mr. Dugald Stewart, minister of Rothsay in the Isle of Bute, and was born at that place in 1717. After having finished his course at the grammar school, being intended by his father for the church, he was sent to the university of Glasgow, and was entered there as a student in 1734. His academical studies were prosecuted with diligence and success; and he uas particularly distinguished by the friendship of Dr. Hutcheson, and Dr. Simson the celebrated geometrician, under whom he made great progress in that science.

Mr. Stewart’s views made it necessary for him to attend the lectures in the university of Edinburgh in 1741; and that his mathematical studies might suffer no interruption, he was introduced by Dr. Simson to Mr. Maclaurin, who was then teaching with so much success both the geometry and the philosophy of Newton, and under whom Mr. Stewart made that proficiency which was to be expected from the abilities of such a pupil, directed by those of so great a master. Eut the modern analysis, even when thus powerfully recommended, was not able to withdraw his attention, from the relish of the ancient geometry, which he had imbibed under Dr. Simson. He still kept up a regular correspondence with this gentleman, giving him an account of his progress, and of his discoveries in geometry, which were now both numerous and important, and receiving in return many curious communications with respect to the Loci Plani, and the Porisms of Euclid. Mr. Stewart pursued this latter subject in a different, and new direction, and was led to the discovery of those curious and interesting propositions, which were published, under the title of “General Theorems,” in 1746, which, although given without the demonstrations, placed their discoverer at once among the geometricians of the first rank. They are, for the most part, Porisms, though Mr. Stewart, careful not to anticipate the discoveries of his friend, gave them only the name of Theorems. While engaged in them, Mr. Stewart had entered into the church, and become minister of Roseneath. It was in that retired and romantic situation, that he discovered the greater part of those theorems. In the summer of 1746, the mathematical chair in the university of Edinburgh became vacant, by the death of Mr. Maclaurin. The “General Theorems” had not yet appeared; Mr. Stewart was known only to his friends; and the eyes of the public were naturally turned on Mr. Stirling, who then resided at Leadhills, and who was well known in the mathematical world. He however declined appearing as a candidate for the vacant chair; and several others were named, among whom was Mr. Stewart. Upon this occasion he printed his “Theorems,” which gave him a decided superiority above all the other candidates. He was accordingly elected professor of mathematics in the university of Edinburgh, in September 1747. The duties of this office gave a turn somewhat different to his mathematical pursuits, and led him to think of the most simple and elegant means of explaining those difficult propositions, which were bit erto only accessible to men deeply versed in the modern analysis. In doing this, he was pursuing the object which, of all others, he most ardently wished to obtain, viz. the application of geometry to such problems as the algebraic calculus alone had been thought able to resolve. His solution of Kepler’s problem was the first specimen of this kind which he gave to the world, and which, unlike all former attempts, was at once direct in its method and simple in its principles. This appeared in vol. II. of the “Essays of the Philosophical Society of Edinburgh,” for 1756; and in the first volume of the same collection are some other propositions by him, which are an extension of a curious theorem in the fourth book of Pappus.

In the course of prosecuting his plan of introducing into the higher parts of mixed mathematics, the strict and simple form of ancient demonstration, he produced the “Tracts Physical and Mathematical,” which were published in 1761. In the first of these, Mr. Stewart lays down the doctrine of centripetal forces in a series of propositions demonstrated, the quadrature of curves beingadmitted, with the utmost rigour, and requiring no previous knowledge of mathematics, except the elements of plane geometry and of conic sections. The good order of these propositions, added to the clearness and simplicity of the demonstrations, renders this tract the best elementary treatise of physical astronomy that is any where to he found. In the three following tracts, his object was to determine, by the same method, the effect of those forces which disturb the motions of a secondary planet: and from these he proposed to deduce, not only the theory of the rnoon, but a determination of the sun’s distance from the earth. The former, it is well known, is the most difficult subject to which mathematics have been applied. It must be regretted, therefore, that the decline of Dr. Stewart’s health, which began soon after the publication of the “Tracts” did not permit him to pursue this investigation. In regard to the distance of the sun, the transit of Venus, which was to happen in 1761, had turned the attention of mathematicians to the solution of this curious problem; but when it was considered of how delicate a nature the observations were from which that solution was to be deduced, and to how many accidents they were exposed, it was natural that some attempts should be made to ascertain the dimensions of our system by some method less subject to disappointment. Such accordingly was the design of Dr. Stewart, and his inquiries into the lunar irregularities had furnished him with the means of accomplishing it.

The transit of Venus took place; the astronomers returned, who had viewed the curious phenomenon, from the most distant stations: and no very satisfactory result was obtained from a comparison of their observations. Dr. Stewart then resolved to apply the principles he had already laid down and in 1763 pnblisned his essay on the “Sun’s Distance,” where the computation being actually made, the parallax of the sun was found to be no more than 6“9, and consequently his distance almost 29,875 semidiameters of the earth, or nearly 119 millions of miles. A determination of the sun’s distance, that so far exceeded all former estimations of it, was received with surprise, and the reasoning on which it was founded was likely to undergo a severe examination. But, even among astronomers, it was not every one who could judge in a matter of such difficult discussion. Accordingly, it was not till about five years after the publication of the sun’s distance, that there appeared a pamphlet, under the title of” Four Propositions," intended to point out certain errors in Dr. Stewart’s investigation, which had given a result much greater than the truth. From his desire of simplifying, and of employing only the geometrical method of reasoning, he was reduced to the necessity of rejecting quantities, which were considerable enough to have a great effect on the last result. An error was thus introduced, which, had it not been for certain compensations, would have become immediately obvious, by giving the sun’s distance near three times as great as that which has been mentioned.

The author of the pamphlet, referred to above, was the first who remarked the dangerous nature of these simplifications, and who attempted to estimate the error to which they had given rise. This author remarked what produced the compensation above mentioned, viz. the immense variation of the sun’s distance, which corresponds to a very small variation of the motion of the moon’s apogee. And it is but justice to acknowledge that, besides being just in. the points already mentioned, they are very ingenious, and written with much modesty and good temper. The author, who at first concealed his name, but afterwards consented to its being made public, was Mr. Dawson, a surgeon at Suclbury in Yorkshire, and one of the most ingenious mathematicians and philosophers which this country at that time possessed.

A second attack was soon after this made on the sun’s distance, by Mr. Landen; but by no means with the same good temper which has been remarked in the former. He fancied to himself errors in Dr. Stewart’s investigation, which have no existence; he exaggerated those that were real, and seemed to triumph in the discovery of them with unbecoming exultation. The error into which Dr. Stewart had fallen, though first taken notice of by Mr. Dawson, whose pamphlet was sent by Dr. Hutton to Mr. Landen as soon as it was printed (for Dr. Hutton had the care of the edition of it) yet this gentleman extended his remarks upon it to greater exactness. But Mr. Landen, in the zeal of correction, brings many other charges against Dr. Stewart, the greater part of which seem to have no good foundation. Such are his objections to the second part of the investigation, where Dr. Stewart finds the relation between the disturbing force of the sun, and the motion of the apses of the lunar orbit. For tiiis part, instead of being liable to objection, is deserving of the greatest praise, since it resolves, by geometry alone, a problem which had eluded the efforts of some of the ablest mathematicians, even when they availed themselves of the utmost resources of the integral calculus. Sir Isaac Newton, though he assumed the disturbing force very near the truth, computec the motion of the apses from thence only at one half of what it really amounts to; so that, had he been required, like Dr. Stewart, to invert the problem, he would have committed an error, not merely of a few thousandth parts, as the latter is alleged to have done, but would have brought out a result double of the truth. (Princip. Math. lib. 3, prop. 3.) Machin and Callendrini, when commenting on this part of the “Principia,” found a like inconsistency between their theory and observation. Three other celebrated mathematicians, Clairaut, D'Alembert, and Euler, severally experienced the same difficulties, and were led into an error of the same magnitude. It is true, that, on resuming their computations, they found that they had not carried their approximations to a sufficient length, which when they had at last accomplished, their results agreed exactly with observation. Mr. Walmsley and Dr. Stewart were the first mathematicians who, employing in the solution of this difficult problem, the one the algebraic calculus, and the other the geometrical method, were led immediately to the truth; a circumstance so much for the honour of both, that it ought not to be forgotten. It was the business of an impartial critic, while he examined our author’s reasonings, to have remarked and to have weighed these considerations.

The “Sun’s Distance” was the last work which Dr. Stewart published; and though he lived to see the animadversions made on it, just mentioned, he declined entering into any controversy. His disposition was far from polemical; and he knew the value of that quiet, which a literary man should rarely suffer his antagonists to interrupt. He used to say, that the decision of the point in question was now before the public; that if his investigation was right, it would never be overturned, and that if it was wrong, it ought not to be defended.

Soon after the publication of the “Sun’s Distance,” Dr. Stewart’s health began to decline, and the duties of his office became burdensome to him. In 1772 he retired to the country, where he afterwards spent the greater part of his life, and never resumed his labours in the university. He was, however, so fortunate as to have a son to whom, though very young, he could commit the care of them with the greatest confidence. Mr. Dugald Stewart, having begun to give lectures for his father from the period above mentioned, was elected joint professor with him in 1775, and gave an early specimen of those abilities which are now so universally known.

After mathematical studies (on account of the bad state of health into which Dr. Stewart was falling) had ceased to be his business, they continued to be his amusement. The analogy between the circle and hyperbola had been an early object of his admiration. The extensive views which that analogy is continually opening; the alternate appearance and disappearance of resemblance in the midst of so much dissimilitude, make it an object that astonishes the experienced, as well as the young geometrician. To the consideration of this analogy therefore the mind of Dr. Stewart very naturally returned, when disengaged from other speculations. His usual success still attended his investigations; and he has left among his papers some curious approximations to the areas, both of the circle and hyperbola. For some years toward the end of his life, his health scarcely allowed him to prosecute study even as an amusement. He died the 23d of January 1735, at the age of sixty-eight.

The habits of study, in a man of original genius, are objects of curiosity, and deserve to he remembered. Concerning those of Dr. Stewart, his writings have made it unnecessary to remark, that from his youth he had been accustomed to the most intense and continued application. In consequence of this application, added to the natural Vigour of his mind, he retained the memory of his discoveries in a manner that will hardly be believed. He seldom wrote down any of his investigations, till it became necessary to do so for the purpose of publication. When he discovered any proposition, he would set down the enunciation with great accuracy, and on the same piece of paper would construct very neatly the figure to which it referred. To these he trusted for recalling to his mind, at any future period, the demonstration, or the analysis, however complicated it might be. Experience had taught him that he might place this confidence in himself without any danger of disappointment; and for this singular power he was probably more indebted to the activity of his invention, than to the mere tenaciousness of his memory. Though Dr. Stewart was extremely studious, he read but few hooks, and thus verified the observation of D'Alembert, that, of all the men of letters, mathematicians read least of the writings of one another. Our author’s own investigations occupied him sufficiently; and indeed the world would have had reason to regret the misapplication of his talents, had he employed, in the mere acquisition of knowledge, that time which he could dedicate to works of invention.

It was Dr. Stewart’s custom to spend the summer at a delightful retreat in Ayrshire, where, after the academical labours of the winter were ended, he found the leisure necrssary for the prosecution of his researches. In his way thither he often made a visit to Dr. Simson of Glasgow, with whom he had lived from his youth in the most cordial and uninterrupted friendship. Jt was pleasing to observe, in these two excellent mathematicians, the most perfect esteem and affection for each other, and the most entire absence of jealousy, though no two men ever trod more nearly in the same path. The similitude of their pursuits served only to endear them to e^ch other, as it will ever do with men superior to envy. Their sentiments and views of the science they cultivated, were nearly the same; they were both profound geometricians; they equally admired the ancient mathematicians, and were equally versed in their methods of investigation; and they were both apprehensive that the beauty of their favourite science would be forgotten, for the less elegant methods of algebraic computation. This innovation they endeavoured to oppose; the one, by reviving those books of the ancient geometry which were lost; the other, by extending that geometry to the most difficult inquiries of the moderns. Dr. Stewart, in particular, had remarked the intricacies, in which many of the greatest of the modern mathematicians had involved themselves in the application of the calculus, which a little attention to the ancient geometry would certainly have enabled thfim to avoid. He had observed too the elegant synthetical demonstrations that, on many occasions, may be given of the most difficult propositions, investigated by the inverse method of fluxions. These circumstances had perhaps made a stronger impression than they ought, on a mind already filled with admiration of the ancient geometry, and produced too unfavourable an opinion of the modern analysis. But if it be confessed that Dr. Stewart rated in any respect too high, the merit of the former of these sciences, this may well be excused in the ir.an whom it had conducted to the discovery of the General Theorems, to the solution of Kepler’s Problem, and to an accurate determination of the Sun’s disturbing force. His great modesty made him ascribe to the nut hod he used that success which he owed to his own abilities.

, a protestant minister, and very skilful mathematician, was born at Eslingen, a town in Germany; and died at Jena in Thuringia, in I 567, at fifty-eight years of age, according to Vossius, but some others say eighty. Stitels was one of the best mathematicians ol his time. He published, in the German language, a treatise on algebra, and another on the Calendar or ecclesiastical computation. But his chief work is the “Arithmetica Integra,” a complete and exct llent treatise, in Latin, on Arithmetic and Algebra, printed in 4to, at Norimberg, 1544. In this work there are a number of ingenious inventions, both in common arithmetic, and in algebra, and many curious things, some of which have been ascribed to a much later date, such as the triangular table for constructing progressional and figurate numbers, logarithms, &c. Stifels was a zealous, but weak uisciple of Luther, and took it into his head to become a prophet. He predicted that the end of the world would happen on a certain day in 1553, by which he terrified many people, but lived to see its fallacy, and to experience the resentment of those whom he had deluded.

, bishop of Bath and Wells, was born in 1543, and was the son of William Still, of Grantham in Lincolnshire. He was admitted at Christ’s college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of M. A. In 1570 he was Margaret professor at Cambridge; in 1571 became rector of Hadleigh, in the county of Suffolk, and archdeacon of Sudbury, and in 1573 was collated to the vicarage of Eastmarham, in Yorkshire. He was also elected master of St. John’s in 1574, and of Trinity college in 1577. In 1588 he was chosen prolocutor of the convocation, by the recommendation of dean Nowell, and preached the Latin sermon. Two years after the death of bishop Godwin, he was appointed to the vacant see of Bath and Wells, in which he continued till his decease, which happened Feb. 26, 1607. Sir John Harrington describes him as a man “to whom he never came, but he grew more religious from whom he never went, but he parted better instructed.” Archbishop Parker had a high opinion of him, and not only gave him a prebend of Westminster, but recommended him very strongly to be appointed dean of Norwich, in which, however, he did not succeed. He had been one of his grace’s chaplains. The bishopric of Bath and Wells having been in his time enriched by some lead mines in Mendip hills, he is said to have left a considerable fortune to his family, and endowed an alms-house in the city of Wells.

The historians of the drama are of opinion, that in his younger days he was the author of an old play called “Gammer Gurtun’s Needle,” 1575, 4to. From the books of the stationers’ company, it mi^ht seem as though it had been composed some years before publication. It was republished among Dodsley’s Old Plays, and is frequently referred to by the commentators on Shakspeare.

, one of the most learned prelates of the seventeenth century, was the seventh son of Samuel Stillingfleet, gent, descended from the ancient family of the StillingBeets of Stillingfleet, about four miles from York. His mother was Susanna, the daughter of Edward Norris, of Petworth, in Sussex,gent. He was born at Cranbourne in Dorsetshire, April 17, 1635, and educated at the grammar-school of that place by Mr. Thomas Garden, a man of eminence in his profession. He continued at this school until, being intended for the university, he was removed to Ringwood in Hampshire, that he might have a chance for one of Lynne’s exhibitions, who was the founder of that school.

Having succeeded in this, he was entered in Michaelmas 1648, of St. John’s college, Cambridge, and in the beginning of November was admitted a scholar of the house, on the nomination of the earl of Salisbury. It may readily be believed that his application and progress in his studies were of no common kind, as he was so soon to give public proofs of both. He took his bachelor’s degree in 1652, and was now so much esteemed by his society, that at the very next election he was chosen into a fellowship, and admitted March 31, lf-53. While bachelor, he was appointed tripos, and was much applauded for his speech on that occasion, which was “witty and inoffensive,” a character not often given to those compositions.

About 1654 he left the university to accept the invitation of sir Roger Burgoyne, who wished him to reside with him at his seat at Wroxhall, in Warwickshire He had been recommended by Dr. Hainan, one of the fellows 01 his college, but in what capacity, whether as chaplain or companion, does not appear. Sir Roger was a man of piety and learning, and became afterwards a very kind friend and patron to Mr. Stillingfleet, yet parted with him very readily next year, when he was invited to Nottingham to be tutor to the hon. Francis Pierrepoint, esq. brother to the marquis of Dorchester. In 1656 he completed his master’s degree, and the following year left Nottingham, and went again to Wroxfoail, where his patron, sir Roger Burgoyne, presented him to the living of Sutton, in Bedfordshire. Before institution he received orders at the hands of Dr. Brownrig, the ejected bishop of Exeter.

While at Nottingham, as tutor to Mr. Pierrepoint, he composed his first publication, and printed it in 1659, under the title of “Irenicum, a weapon-salve for the church’s wounds, or the divine right of particular forms of churchgovernment discussed and examined according to the principles of the law of nature; the positive laws of God; the practice of the apostles; and the primitive church; and the judgment of reformed divines, whereby a foundation is laid for the church’s peace, and the accommodation of our present differences.” As this was an attempt to promote the return of the non-conformists to the church, and consequently implied some concessions which were irreconcilable with the divine right of episcopacy, for which the adherents of the church contended, and yet not enough to please either presbyterians or independents, the author had not the satisfaction of meeting with full credit even for his intentions; and upon more mature consideration, he himself thought his labour in vain, and did not scruple afterwards to say of his work, that “there are many things in it, which, if he were to write again, he would not say; some, which shew his youth, and want of due consideration; others, which he yielded too far, in hopes of gaining the dissenting parties to the church of England.” In 1662 he reprinted this work; with the addition of a discourse “concerning the power of Excommunication in a Christian Church” in which he attempts to prove, that “the church is a distinct society from the state, and has divers rights and privileges of its own, particularly that it has a power of censuring offenders, resulting from its constitution as a Christian society; and that these rights of the church cannot be alienated to the state, after their being united, in a Christian country.”

Whatever difference of opinion there was respecting some of the positions laid down in this work, there was one point in which all agreed, that it exhibited a fund of learning, and an extent of reading and research far beyond what could have been expected in a young man of twenty-­four years of age, and was, as we shall soon find, mistaken for the production of a man of full years and established fame.

At Sutton, while he performed all the duties of a diligent and faithful pastor, he adhered closely to his studies, and in 1662, produced his “Origines Sacræ; or a rational account of the Christian Faith, as to the truth and divine authority of the Scriptures, and the matters therein contained,” 4to. The highest compliment paid him in consequence of this very learned work, was at a visitation, when bishop Sanderson, his diocesan, hearing his name called over, asked him if he was any relation to the great Stillingfleet, author of the Origines Sacræ? When modestly informed that he was the very man, the bishop welcomed him with great cordiality, and said, that “he expected rather to have seen one as considerable for his years as he had already shewn himself for his learning.” This work has indeed been always justly esteemed one of the ablest defences of revealed religion that had then appeared in any language. It was republished by Dr. Bentley in 1709, with “Part of another book upon the same subject, written in 1697, from the author’s own manuscript,” folio. Bishop Sanderson, as a special mark of his respect, granted the author a licence to preach throughout his diocese; and Henchman, bishop of London, conceived so high an opinion of his talents, that he employed him to write a vindication of archbishop Laud’s conference with Fisher, the Jesuit. Laud’s conference had been attacked in a publication entitled “Labyrinthus Cantuariensis, or, Dr. Laud’s Labyrinth, by T. C.” said to have been printed at Paris, in 1658, but which did not appear till 1663. Stillingfleet’s answer was entitled “A rational account of the grounds of the Protestant Religion; being a vindication of the lord archbishop of Canterbury’s relation of a conference,” &c. Lond. 1664, fol. Such was his readiness in composition, that he is reported to have sent to the press six or seven sheets a week of this volume, which Dr. Tillotson said he “found in every part answerable to its title, a rational account.”

The country was now no longer thought a proper field for the exertions of one who had already shown himself so able a champion for his church and nation. His first advance to London was in consequence of his being appointed preacher to the Rolls chapel, by sir Harbottle Grimston; and in Jan. 1665 he was presented by Thomas, earl of Southampton, to the living of St. Andrew’s, Holborn. With this he kept his preachership at the Rolls, and was at the same time afternoon lecturer at the Temple church, which procured him the esteem and friendship of many eminent men in the law, particularly sir Matthew Hale, and lord chief justice Vaughan. Nor were his discourses less adapted to the common understanding. The eminent non-conformist, Matthew Henry, was often his auditor and admirer.

In February 1667, he was collated by bishop Henchman to the prebend of Islington, in the church of St. Paul’s. Having in 1663 taken his degree of B. D. he commenced D. D. in 1668, at which time he kept the public act with great applause. He was also king’s chaplain, and in 1670 his majesty bestowed on him the place of canon residentiary of St. Paul’s. In Oct. 1672 he exchanged his prebend of Islington for that of Newington, in the same church. These preferments were succeeded, in 1677, by the archdeaconry of London, and in Jan. 1678, by the deanry of St. Paul’s.

To all these he had recommended himself by the ability with which he carried on controversies with various enemies to the established religion. In 1669 he had published some sermons, one of which, “on the reason of Christ’s suffering for us,” involved him in a controversy with the Socinians, and he was engaged soon after in other controversies with the popish writers, with the deists, and with the separatists. It would be unnecessary to give the titles of the pamphlets he wrote against all these parties, as they are now to be found in the edition of his collected works. Successful as he was against these opponents, and few writers in his time were more so, he was not a lover of controversy, and seldom could be prevailed upon to engage in it, but in consequence of such provocation as he thought it would have been a desertion of his post, if he had neglected to notice.

About 1679 Dr. Stillingfleet turned his thoughts to a subject apparently foreign to his usual pursuits, but in which he displayed equal ability. This was the question as to the right of bishops to vote in capital cases, and was occasioned by the prosecution of Thomas Osborne, earl of Danby. Among others who contested that right, was Denzil lord Holies, who published “A Letter shewing that bishops are not to be judges in parliament in cases capital,” 1679, 4to. In answer to this, Dr. Stillingfleet published “The grand question concerning the bishop’s right to vote in parliament in cases capital, stated and argued from the parliament rolls and the history of former times, with an inquiry into their peerage, and the three estates in parliament.” Bishop Burnet observes that in this Stillingfleet gave a proof of his being able to make himself master of any argument which he undertook, and discovered more skill and exactness in judging this matter than all who had gone before him. Burnet adds that in the opinion of all impartial men he put an end to the controversy.

In 1685, he published his “Origines Britannicæ,” or the antiquities of British Churches, a work of great learning, and in which he displayed a knowledge of antiquities, both civil and ecclesiastical, which would almost induce the reader to think they had been the study of his whole life. Just before the revolution, he was summoned to appear before king James’s ecclesiastical commission, but had the courage, in that critical time, to draw up a discourse on the illegality of that commission, which was published in 1689.

Besides his other preferments, Dr. Stillingfleet was canon of the twelfth stall in the church of Canterbury, and prolocutor of the lower house of convocation for many years, in the reigns of Charles II. and James 11. At the revolution he was advanced to the bishopric of Worcester, and consecrated Oct. 13, 1689, and in this station conducted himself in a very exemplary manner, and delivered some excellent charges to his clergy, which were afterwards published among his “Ecclesiastical Cases.” In the House of Lords he is said to have appeared to much advantage; but two only of his speeches are upon record, one on the case of visitation of colleges, occasioned by a dispute between Dr. Trelawney, bishop of Exeter, as visitor of Exeter college, and Dr. Bury, the rector of that college; and the other on the case of commendams.

Soon after his promotion to the see of Worcester, he was appointed one of the commissioners for reviewing the liturgy, and his opinion was highly valued by his brethren. The last controversy in which he had any concern, was with the celebrated Locke, who, having laid down some principles in his “Essay on Human Understanding,” which seemed to the bishop to strike at the mysteries of revealed religion, fell on that account under his lordship’s cognizance. Although Dr. Stillingfleet had always had the reputation of coming off with triumph in all his controversies, in this he was supposed to be not successful; and some have gone so far as to conjecture, that being pressed with clearer and closer reasoning by Locke, than he had been accustomed to from his other adversaries, it created in him a chagrin which shortened his life. There is, however, no occasion for a supposition so extravagant. He had been subject to the gout near twenty years, and it having fixed in his stomach, proved fatal to him. He died at his house in Park-street, Westminster, March 27, 1699. His biographer describes his person as tall, graceful, and well-proportioned; his countenance comely, fresh, and awful. “His apprehension was quick and sagacious, his judgment exact and profound, and his memory very tenacious so that, considering how intensely he studied, and how he read every thing, it is easy to imagine him, what he really was, one of the most universal scholars that ever lived.” His body was carried for interment to Worcester cathedral, after which an elegant monument was erected over him, with an inscription written by Dr. Bentley, who had been his chaplain. This gives a noble and yet just idea of the man, and affords good authority for many particulars recorded of his life.

“When I was a young man,” says the present venerable bishop of Llandaff, “I had formed a mean opinion of the reasoniog faculties of bishop Stillingfleet, from reading Mr. Locke’s Letter and two replies to him but a better acquaintance with the bishop’s works has convinced me that my opinion was ill-founded. Though no match for Mr. Locke in strength and acuteness of argument, yet his `Origines Sacræ,' and other works, show him to have been not merely a searcher into ecclesiastical antiquities, but a sound divine and a good reasoner.” This confession from one, perhaps a little more latitudinarian than our author in some important points, has probably contributed to revive an attention to Stillingfleet’s works, which have accordingly risen very highly in value. Indeed if we consider the variety of subjects on which he wrote, and wrote with acknowledged skill and with elegance of style, and the early fame he acquired and uniformly preserved, it will not be thought too much to rank him in the first class of learned men of the seventeenth century. While he was rector of Sutton, he married a daughter of William Dobyns, a Gloucestershire gentleman, who lived not long with him; yet had two daughters who died in their infancy, and one son, Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, afterwards rector of Wood-Norton in Norfolk. Then he married a daughter of sir Nicholas Pedley of Huntingdon, Serjeant at law, who lived with him almost all his life, and brought him seven children, of whom two only survived him; James rector of Hartlebury and canon of Windsor, and Anne, married afterwards to Humphrey Tyshe, of Gray’s-Inn, esq. His grandson is the subject of the next article.

, grandson to the preceding, and an eminent naturalist and poet, was the son of Edward Stillingfleet, who was first a physician, but afterwards entered into holy orders. He died in 1708. Hia only son, Benjamin, was born in 1702, and educated at Norwich school, where he made a considerable proficiency in classical literature. In 1720 he entered as a subsizar at Trinity-college, Cambridge, where, while he improved his classical knowledge, he attached himself with success to mathematical studies. On May 3, 1723, he was admitted a scholar, and the same year took the degree of B. A. Soon after this he left the university, and in 1724 lived in the family of Ashe Windham, esq. of Felbrig, as preceptor to William, his only son, then about seven years old. In the beginning of 1726, he returned to Cambridge, in hopes of succeeding to a fellowship, there being then four vacancies. But in this he was disappointed, “by the influence, it is said, of Dr. Bentley, who has been accused of repaying with this instance of ingratitude the obligations he had received from the father of the unprotected candidate.” Although we are unwilling to credit so serious a charge, it appears that Mr. Stillingfleet considered it as just, and “seldom afterwards omitted an opportunity of testifying his resentment against Bentley,” a circumstance which we are sorry to hear, even if the charge had been proved.

After this failure, he attached himself wholly to his patron Mr. Wind ham, and at the mansion of Felbrig passed the next fourteen years of his life, “beloved and respected by all who visited or were connected with the family.” While he was “employed in the grateful task of instructing a youth of superior talents and amiable disposition,” he was insensibly Jed into a tender attachment, in which he was not successful. The lady was a Miss Anne B; nes who, with the inexperience of youth, and the thoughtless gaiety of a volatile temper, encouraged his addresses; and he passed several years in her society, in the ardent hope that a favourable change in his circumstances at no distant period would unite him with the object of his first and lasting passion. But after ten years, the prudence or the lady outweighed her affection. As she was herself without fortune, and Mr. Stillingfleet without any means of establishing himself in life, she listened to an advantageous offer, and soon afterwards espoused a richer and more fortunate rival.

Soon after this disappointment, in 1737, he accompanied his pupil, Mr. Windham, to the Continent. The events of this tour, and the connexions to which it gave rise, fixed the future course, and formed the happiness of his life. Mr. Coxe’s account of it is highly amusing, and introduces us to the acquaintance of many persons, now, or lately, distinguished in the political or literary world. One of the results of this tour was, “A Letter from an English Gentleman to Mr. Arlaud, a celebrated painter at Geneva, giving an account of the Glacieres, or Ice Alps of Savoy, written in the year 1741.” This was written chiefly by Mr. Windham and Mr. Price (of Foxley in Herefordshire), with the assistance of Mr. Siillingfieet, and illustrated with the drawings of Mr. Price. They are said to have been the first travellers who penetrated into these Alpine recesses. In 1743 Mr. Stillingfleet returned with his pupil to England. His pupil’s father gave Mr. Stillingfleet an annuity of 100l. which for some time was his principal support. He now resided partly in London and partly with some friends in the country; and his leisure hours were dedicated to literary pursuits, some of which Mr. Coxe has specified, particularly an edition of Milton, illustrated by notes, in which he had made considerable progress when the appearance of Dr. Newton’s proposals induced him to relinquish his design. His M8S. however, which were in the possession of the late bishop Dampier, were obligingly lent to Mr. Todd, for his excellent edition of our great epic poet. About this time Mr. Stillingfleet composed some of his poems, particularly those on “Conversation,” and “Earthquakes.”

In 1746 Mr. Stillingfleet took up his residence at Foxley, the seat of the above-mentioned Mr. Price, or rather in a neighbouring cottage, where he was master of his time and pursuits; and passed his leisure hours with the family. An indifferent state of health first led him to the pursuit of Natural History, which forms his principal distinction as an author; and he soon became one of the first defenders and earliest propagators of the Linnsean system in England. This zeal produced, in 1759, his “Miscellaneous Tracts in Natural History,” with a Preface, which contains a spirited eulogium of the study of nature, and a just tribute of applause to the talents and discoveries of the great Swede. The publication of this miscellany may be considered as the sera of the establishment of Linnaean Botany in England. His biographer has also published the Journal of Mr. Stillirigfleet’s excursion into part of North Wales, which is illustrative of his character and observations, and is curious as one of the first of those local tours which are since become so fashionable. In 1760, Mr. Stillingfleet received an addition to his income by obtaining the place of barrack -master at Kensington, through the interest of his friend Mr. Price, brotherin-law to lord Harrington, then secretary at war. But in 1761 he had the misfortune to lose, by death, his friend Mr. Price, and also his pupil Mr. Windham. The latter left him guardian to his only son, the late much lamented statesman William Windham, esq. His feelings were not u little tried also, about this time, by the death of his sisters and their husbands, whose history, as well as that of Messrs. Price, Windham, and Williamson, form a very interesting part of Mr. Coxe’s memoirs. That of his nephew, capt. Locker, is particularly so, as he was one of those who contributed to form the wonderful mind of our gallant hero, lord Nelson.

After the publication of the second edition of his “Miscellaneous Tracts,” in 1762, Mr. Stillingfleet embarked on a scheme which was likely to employ the remainder of his life. This was a “General History of Husbandry,” from the earliest ages of the world to his own times. Of this work he left six volumes of ms collections, of which Mr. Coxe has given such an analysis as displays the author’s plan, and excites regret that a man of so much research and powers of thinking did not complete his intended work.

This was the last of Mr. Stillingfleet' s publications; for he died, at his lodgings in Piccadilly opposite Burlingtonhouse, Dec. 15, 1771 (the year this last-me.itioned work was published), aged sixty-nine. He was interred in St. James’s church, where his great nephew Edward Hawke Locker, esq. third son of captain Locker, has recently erected a monument to his memory. The merit most generally attributed to Mr. Stillingfleet is the service which he has rendered to our Natural History and Agriculture. In the present age it may not be deemed a merit in a gentleman, who is at the same time a man of letters, to encourage such pursuits by precept and example; as we have numerous instances of men of the first rank and abilities, who have dedicated their time and labours to the promotion of this branch of useful knowledge. But, in the time of Mr. Stillingfleet, the case was far different; for few men of respectable rank in society were farmers; and still fewer, if any, gave the result of their experience and observations to the public. On the contrary, there seems to have existed among the higher classes a strong prejudice against agricultural pursuits; which Mr. Stillingfleet took some pains to combat, and which, indeed, his example, as well as his precepts, greatly contributed to overcome. As a poet, Mr. Stillingfleet is less known, because few of his compositions were ever given to the public, and those were short, and confined to local or temporary subjects. The “Essay on Conversation” the “Poem on Earthquakes” the dramas and sonnets; will certainly entitle him to a place on the British Parnassus but, when we consider his refined and classical taste, his command of language, his rich and varied knowledge, and the flights of imagination which frequently escape from his rapid pen, we can have no hesitation in asserting, that if, instead of the haste in which he apparently prided himself, he had employed more patience and more assiduous correction, he would have attained no inconsiderable rank among our native poets. Independently of his merits as a naturalist and a poet, he possessed great versatility of genius and multifarious knowledge. His intimate acquaintance with the higher branches of the mathematics, and his skill in applying them to practice, are evident from his treatise on the principles and powers of harmony: and all his works, both printed and manuscript, display various and undoubted proofs of an extensive knowledge of modern languages, both ancient and modern, and a just and refined taste, formed on the best models of classic literature.

, a celebrated Greek philosopher of Megara, who flourished about 306 B. C. was so eloquent, and insinuated himself so easily into the favour of his auditors, that all the young philosophers quitted their masters to hear him. It is said, that Stilpo, having reproached the courtezan Glycera with corrupting youth, she replied, “What does it signify whether they are corrupted by a courtezan or by a sophist!” which answer induced Stilpo to reform the school of Megara, banishing from it all sophisms, useless subtilties, general propositions, captious arguments, and that parade of senseless words, which had so long debased the schools. When Demetrius, son of Antigonus, took Megara, he forbade any one to touch our philosopher’s house, and if any thing was taken from him in the hurry of plunder, to restore it. When Demetrius asked him if he lost any thing by the capture of the city, “No,” replied Stilpo, “for war can neither rob us of virtue, learning, nor eloqaence.” He at the same time gave that prince some instructions in writing, calculated to inspire him with humanity, and a noble zeal for doing good to mankind, with which Demetrius was so affected that he ever after followed his advice. Stilpo is said to have entertained very equivocal notions respecting the deity; but he was nevertheless considered as one of the chiefs of the Stoic sect. Several Grecian republics had recourse to his wisdom, and submitted to his decisions. Cicero observes, that this philosopher was naturally inclined to drunkenness and debauchery, but had so entirely conquered those propensities by reason and philosophy, that no one ever saw him intoxicated, nor perceived in him the least vestige of intemperance.

, an ancient Greek writer, lived in the fifth century, as is generally supposed. What remains of him is a collection of extracts from ancient poets and philosophers, which has not come down to us entire; and even what we have of it appears to be intermixed with the additions of those who lived after him. These extracts, though they give us no greater idea of Stobaeus than that of a common-place transcriber, present us with many things which are to be found no where else; and therefore have always been highly valued by the learned. It appears beyond dispute, in Fabricius’s opinion, that Stobaeus was not a Christian, because he never meddled with Christian writers, nor made the least use of them in any of his collections. The “Excerpta of Stobseus,” were first published in Greek at Venice in 1536, 4to, and dedicated to Bembus, who was the curator of St. Mark’s library there, and furnished the manuscript. They were republished since by Canter, 1609, folio, under the title of “Sententiae,” under that of “Eclogae,” by Heern, 1792, 4 vols. 8vo. Grotius published an excellent edition of the “Dicta Poetarum,” at Paris in 1623, 4to.

, a celebrated scholar and Orientalist, was born at Camburg, in 1672, became a professor at Jena in 1717, and died in 1733, with a rery high reputation, particularly for Oriental literature. The chief of his works are, 1. “Disputationes de poenis Hebrosorum capitalibus.” 2. “Clavis Linguae Sanctae Veteris Testamentis.” 3. “Clavis Linguce Sanctee Novi Testament!.” These two last, which are a Hebrew and a Greek lexicon, for the words contained in the sacred writings, have been much approved, have gone through several editions, and received improvements and additions.

, an eminent puritan divine, was born in the city of York, and educated in St. John’s- college, Cambridge, where, on account of his great progress in learning, he acquired the friendship of the celebrated Dr. Whitaker. He took his degrees in arts here, and in 1595 was incorporated M. A. at Oxford. Leaving the university, he became domestic chaplain first to sir Anthony Cope of Ashby in Northamptonshire, and then to lady Lane of Bourton-on-the-water in Gloucestershire. Soon after he came to London, he officiated as assistant to the vicar of All-hallows, Breadstreet, for sixteen years, and in 1610 succeeded him in that living. His preaching was much admired, and his conduct answering to his profession procured him an extraordinary degree of esteem and reverence. He died April 20, 1626, and was buried in Allhallows-church, where a monument was erected to his memory, but was destroyed at the great fire in 1666. His works are, 1. “Doctrine and use of Repentance,” Lond. 1610, 8vo. 2. “Sermon at the funeral of John lord Harrington,” &c. 1614, 8vo. 3. “Stock of Divine Knowledge,” ibid. 1641, 4to. 4. “Truth’s Champion,” &c. 5. “Commentary on the prophecy of Malachi,” edited by Torshell, folio, 1641.

, a miscellaneous writer of some learning, was born Oct. 26, 1736, in the village of Branxton, of which parish his father, the Rev. Thomas Stockdale, was vicar, and also perpetual curate of Cornhill near the Tweed. He was educated for six years at the grammar-school of Alnwick, and afterwards at that of Berwick, where he studied the Greek and Latin classics, and acquired some taste, which it was his misfortune afterwards to consider as equivalent to a great genius for poetry. The world and he however were never agreed as to the merit of his poetical efforts; and this proved a constant subject for chagrin. He left school in his eighteenth year, and resided for some time with his father at Cornhill. He was then sent to the university of St. Andrews, but the year after, 1755, was recalled home, in consequence of the death of his father. Returning to St. Andrews, he pursued his studies for some time, until a friend procured him a second-lieutenancy in the army, in which he served at Gibraltar, and in the memorable expedition commanded by admirals Byng and West, for the relief of the besieged garrison of St. Philip, in the island of Minorca. In 1756, he returned to England, and about a year after quitted the army altogether, which produced what he calls “many rude interruptions, many wide and unideal intervals” in his literary pursuits.

In his way to Berwick, where he meant to pay his duty to his mother, and determine on some future plan of life, he visited Dr. Thomas Sharp, archdeacon of Northumberland, then at Durham, who invited him to a residence in his house, and encouraged him to enter into holy orders. Accordingly he was ordained deacon, at Michaelmas 1759, by Dr. Trevor, bishop of Durham, and went immediately to London, where he was to be one of Dr. Sharp’s assistants in the curacy of Duke’s-place, Aldgate. After this, he seems to have fallen into a rambling life, and in 1767, being without any church-employment, went to Italy, and resided for two years in the town of Villa Franca, where he says he read and wrote assiduously. In 1769, after his return to London, he published a translation of Tasso’s Aminta; had afterwards some concern in the “Critical Review,” and wrote a life of Waller the poet, which was prefixed to a new edition of his works. He also translated Bos’s “Antiquities of Greece” in 1771 was editor of the “Universal Magazine” and in 1775 published three sermons, two against luxury and dissipation, and one on universal benevolence. In the same year, appeared his poem entitled “The Poet,” which had some temporary reputation; and soon after the publication of it, he obtained the office of chaplain to his majesty’s ship the Resolution of 74 guns. This he retained for three years, and published “Six Sermons to Seamen;” translated Sabbatier’s “Institutions of the Ancient Nations,” and wrote an “Essay on the writings and genius of Pope,” in answer to Dr. Warton’s work on the same subject.

In the summer of 1779, he wrote several political letters, with the signature of Agricola, in the “Public Advertiser.” At this period, when the principal booksellers of London determined to publish a new edition of the English Poets, with a previous account of the life of each poet, we are told that “Mr. Stockdale’s Life of Waller had given them so high an idea of his ability to execute their plan, that they resolved, in this meeting, to apply to him to be its biographer and editor. The agreement was accordingly made; but, by some strange misunderstanding, Mr. Stockdale was deprived of this employment, and Dr. Johnson wrote the Lives of the Poets! Owing to this circumstance, a feud arose between our injured author and some of these booksellers^ which has never subsided, and from which he may date not a few of the misfortunes and vexations of his life.” We copy this story merely to contradict it, for no such agreement was ever entered into, and whatever resentment “our injured author” might have entertained against the booksellers, they could not have hesitated a moment had their choice been between Mr. Stockdale and Dr. Johnson. He now left his ship; and, being without any regular employment, was advised by his friends to accept a situation which now presented itself, that of tutor to the late lord Craven’s eldest son, but this, it is said, he found a state of vassalage, “totally incompatible with his independent sentiments,” and therefore quitted it the following spring.

In the summer of 1780, sir Adam Gordon, who had the living of Hincworth in Hertfordshire, offered Mr. Stockdale the curacy of that place. He accepted it with gratitude, and there wrote fifteen sermons. At this period at the distance of twenty-three years from his first ordination, he took priest’s orders. In 1782, he wrote his “Treatise on Education;” and in the autumn of the succeeding year, lord Thurlow (the then lord Chancellor), in consequence, as we are gravely told, “of having read a volume of Mr. Stockdale’s sermons, and without any other recommendation,” presented him with the living of Lesbury, in Northumberland. To this the duke of Northumberland added that of Long-Houghton, in the same county. Here he wrote a tragedy called “Ximenes,” which was never acted or printed; but still, in a restless pursuit of some imaginary happu.ess, he fancied that the bleakness of the climate injured his health; and accepted an invitation in 1787, from his friend Mr. Matra, British Consul at Tangier, to pass some time with him, under its more genial sky.

In 1790, he returned from the Mediterranean; and, from the researches he had made in Spain, and on the coast of Barbary, wrote a large account of Gibraltar, comprehending its natural and political history. It was composed we are informed with great attention and diligence, but, “when he had arrived within a day’s work of its completion, in consequence of some recent and mortifying events, his literary adversity, and all his other misfortunes, took fast hold of his mind, oppressed it extremely, and reduced it to a stage of the deepest despondency.” In this state, “he made a sudden resolution never more to prosecute the profession of an author! to retire from the world; and read only for consolation and amusement. That he might have the less temptation to break his vow, in a desperate moment, he threw his History of Gibraltar into the flames!” He did not adhere much longer, however, to this, than to any former resolution; and after his chagrin had a little abated, resolved to write a course of 11 Lectures“upon the respective merits of the most eminent English poets, and about the same time composed two poems:” The Banks of the Wear,“and” The Invincible Island.“His” Lectures on the Poets“were completed, and published in the year 1807, and present a strange combination of good and bad sense, just and petulant criticism. His next publication was his own” Memoirs,“and in 1808, when he paid his last visit to London, he published a selection of his” Poems,“in one volume 8vo. From this period his health rapidly declined: and in the autumn of 1810, he returned to his vicarage in Northumberland, where he died Sept. 11, 1811. Mr. Stockdale was a man of very considerable talents, but his” Memoirs," in which he is uniformly his own panegyrist, are unfortunately calculated to give us a very unfavourable opinion of his temper and disposition. Having early accustomed himself to a very exalted idea of his own merit and importance, he was perpetually encountering disappointment for want of steadiness even in his most laudable pursuits. Although mixing much with the world, he never seems to have understood the terms on which it dispenses its favours, nor profited by the experience which the constant failure of his crude, romantic notions of his own genius and fame, might have contributed. His narrative affords a melancholy picture of a mind perpetually irritated by disappointed vanity, and never seeking solace where his profession might have pointed.

, a German mathematician, was born at Justingen in Suabia, in 1452, and died in 1531. He taught mathematics at Tubingen, wnere he acquired a great reputation, which however he lost again in a great measure, by intermeddling with the prediction of future events. He announced a great deluge, which he said would happen in the year 1524, a prediction with which he terrified all Germany, where many persons prepared vessels proper to escape with from the floods. But the prediction failing, served to convince him of the absurdity of his prognostications. He was author of several works in mathematics and astrology, full of foolish and chimerical ideas; such as, 1. “Elucidatio Fabric. Ususque Astrolabii,” 1513, fol. 2. “Procli sphaeram comment.” 1541, fol. 3. “Cosmographies aliquot Descriptiones,” 1537, 4to.

, an eminent, though self-taught mathematician, was a native of Scotland, and son of a gardener in the service of the duke of Argyle. Neither the time nor place of his birth is exactly known, but from a ms memorandum in our possession it appears that he died in March or April 1768. The chief account of him that is extant is contained in a letter written by the celebrated chevalier Ramsay to father Castel, a Jesuit at Paris, and published in the Journal de Trevoux, p. 109. From this it appears, that when he was about eighteen years of age, his singular talents were discovered accidentally by the duke of Argyle, who found that he had been reading Newton’s Principia. The duke was surprised, entered into conversation with him, and was astonished at the force, accuracy, and candour of his answers. The instructions he had received amounted to no more than having been taught to read by a servant of the duke’s, about ten years before. “I first learned to read,” said Stone; “the masons were then at work upon your house: I went near them one day, and I saw that the architect used a rule and compasses, and that he made calculations. I inquired what might be the use of these things; and I was informed, that there was a science called arithmetic: I purchased a book of arithmetic, and I learned it. I was told there was another science called geometry: I bought the books, and I learned geometry. By reading I found that there were good books in these two sciences in Latin: I bought a dictionary, and 1 learnt Latin. I understood that there were good books of the same kind in French: I bought a dictionary, and I learned French. And this, my lord, is what I have done. It seems to me that we may learn every thing, when we know the twenty-four letters of the aipiuibet.” Delighted with this account, the duke drew him from obscurity, and placed him in a situation which enabled him to pursue his favourite objects. Stone was author and translator of several useful works 1 “A new Mathematical Dictionary, 1726, 8vo. 2.” Fluxions,“1730, 8vo. The direct method is a translation of L' Hospital’s Analyse des infiniment petits, from the French; and the inverse method was supplied by Stone himself. 3.” The Elements of Euclid," 1731, 2 vols. 8vo. This is a neat and useful edition of the Elements of Euclid, with an account of the life and writings of that mathematician, and a defence of his elements against modern objectors. 4. ' A paper in the Philosophical Transactions, vol. xli. p. 218, containing an account of two species of lines of the third order, not mentioned by sir Isaac Newton, or Mr. Sterling; and some other small productions.

He is described by Ramsay as a man of the utmost modesty and simplicity, animated by a pure and disinterested love of science. He discovered sometimes, by methodhis own, truths which others had discovered before him. On these occasions he was charmed to find that he was not the first inventor, but -that others had made a reater progress than he supposed.

To this account, as given in the last edition of this work, we may add that when Stone had obtained the duke of Argyle’s patronage, he probably was enabled to come to London, as we find he was chosen a fellow of the Royal Society in 1725, a year before the publication of his “Mathematical Dictionary,” and his subsequent works were all published in London: but in what capacity he lived or how supported, we know not. Io 1742 or 1743 his name was withdrawn from the list of the Royal Society. In 1758 he published “The Construction and Principal Uses of Mathematical Instruments, translated from the French of M. Bion, chief instrument -maker to the French king. To which are added, the construction and uses of such instruments as are omitted by M. Bion, particularly of those invented or improved by the English. By Edmund Stone,” folio. Here he omits the title of F. R S. which appeared to his former publications. From the introductory part of an account of this work in the Critical Review, it would appear that he was known to the writer of that article, and that he was now old and neglected. “Since the commencement of our periodical labours,” says the critic, “none of Mr. Stone’s works have passed through our hands. It is with pleasure we now behold this ingenious gentleman breaking a silence, for the service of the publick, which we were ready to attribute to his sense of its ingratitude. There is hardly a person the least tinctured with letters in the British dominions, who is unacquainted with the extraordinary merit of our author. Untutored, and self-taught, he ascended from the grossest ignorance, by mere dint of genius, to the sublimest paths of geometry. His abilities are universally acknowledged, his reputation unblemished, his services to the public uncontested, and yet he lives to an advanced age unrewarded, except by a mean employment that reflects dishonour on the donors.” What this employment was, we know not, but the work itself is said to be a second edition, and that the first had a rapid sale. In 1767, was published a pamphlet entitled “Some reflections on the the uncertainty of many astronomical and geographical positions, with regard to the figure and magnitude of the earth, &c. &c. By Edmund Stone,” 8vo. We have not seen this production, but from the account given of it in the Monthly Review, it must have been written either by a Mr. Edmund Stone of far inferior abilities and good sense to our author, or by our author in his dotage.

, a pious and worthy baronet, originally a physician and afterwards a divine, was the son of Richard and Caroline Stonhouse, of Tubney, near Abingdon, in Berkshire, and was born July 20, 1716. His father, who died when his son was ten years old, was, as sir James informs us, “a country squire, kept a pack of hounds, and was a violent Jacobite.” Our author succeeded to the title of baronet late in life, by the death of his collateral relation sir James Stonhouse cf Radley.

He was educated at Winchester-school, and was afterwards of St. John’s college, Oxford, where he took his master’s degree in 1739, and his degrees in medicine, M. B. in 1742, and M. D. in 1745. He had his medical education under Dr. Frank Nichols (See F. Nichols), whom he represents as a professed deist, and fond of instilling pernicious principles into the minds of his pupils. Mr. Stonhouse resided with him in his house in Lincoln’s. innfields for two years, and dissected with him, which, he says, was a great and an expensive privilege. He also attended St. Thomas’s hospital for two years under those eminent physicians sir Edward Wilmot, Dr. Hall, and Dr. Letherland. Two years more he devoted to medical study and observation at Paris, Lyons, Montpellier, and Marseilles. On his return, he settled one year at Coventry, where he married Miss Anne Neale, the eldest of the two daughters of John Neaie, esq. of Allesley, near Coventry, and member of parliament for that city. This lady, who died in 1747, soon after their marriage, in the twenty-fifth year of her age, is introduced as one of the examples of frail mortality in Hervey’s “Meditations,” and is farther commemorated there in a note.

From Coventry, Dr. Stonhouse removed, in 1743, to Northampton, where and through the neighbourhood for many miles, his practice became most extensive; and his benevolence keeping pace with his profits, he was acknowledged in all respects a great benefactor to the poor. Among other schemes for their relief, he founded the county-infirmary at Northampton, but amidst much opposition. During his residence here the celebrated Dr. Akenside endeavoured to obtain a settlement as a practitioner, but found it in vain to interfere with Dr. Stonhouse, who then, as Dr. Johnson observes in his life of Akenside, “practised with such reputation and success, that a stranger was not likely to gain ground upon him.” After practising at Northampton for twenty years, he quitted his profession, assigning for a reason that his practice was become too extensive for his time and health, and that all hi- attempts to bring it into narrower limits, without giving offence, and occasioning very painful reflections, had failed. But neither the natural activity of his mind, nor his unceasing wish to be doing good, would permit him to remain unemployed, and as his turn of mind was peculiarly bent on subirets of divinity, he determined to go into the church, and was accordingly ordained deacon by the special favour of the bishop of Hereford, in Hereford cathedral, and priest next week by letters dimissory to the bishop of Bristol, in Bristol cathedral, no one, he informs us, being ordained at either of those times but himself. In May 1764 lord Radnor found him very ill at Bristol-wells, and gave him the living of Little-Cheverel; and in December 1779 his lordship’s successor gave him that of Great Cheverel.

About ten years before this, he married his second wife Sarah, an heiress, the only child of Thomas Ekins, esq. of Cb,<ester-on-the-water, in Northamptonshire. She was left by her father under the guardianship of Dr. Doddridge, who died before she came of age, at which last period Dr. Stonhouse married her. Dr. Stonhouse’s piety, for which he was most admired, had not always been uniform. He tells us, that he imbibed erroneous notions from Dr. Nichols, and that he was for seven years a confirmed infidel, and did all he could to subvert Christianity. He went so far as to write a keen pamphlet against it; the third edition of which he burnt. He adds, “for writing and spreading of which, I humbly hope, as I have deeply repented of it, God has forgiven me: though I never can forgive myself.” His conversion to Christianity, which he attribute.-, to some of Dr. Doddridge’s writings, and the various circumstances attending it, were such, that he was advised to write the history of his life, which he accordingly did, and intended it to have been published after his death: but in consequence of the suggestion of a friend, and his own suspicions lest a bad use might have been made of it, he was induced to destroy the manuscript.

After being settled at Cheverel, he applied himself to the duties of his station with fervour and assiduity, and became very popular as a preacher. Much of his general character and conduct, his sentiments and the vicissitudes of his professional employment, may be learned from his correspondence lately published. He died at Bristol- Wells Dec. 8, 1795, in the eightieth year of his age, and was buried in the Wells chapel, in the same grave with his second wife, who died seven years before, over which, on an elegant monument, is an epitaph, in verse, by Miss Hannah More.

Among other ways of doing good, sir James Stonhouse was convinced that the dispersion of plain and familiar tracts on important subjects, was one of the most important, and accordingly wrote several of these, the greater part of which have been adopted by the Society for promoting Christian knowledge. The others are, 1. “Considerations on some particular sins, and on the means of doing good bodily and spiritually.” 2. “St. Paul’s Exhortation and motive to support the weak or sick poor, a sermon.” 3. “A short explanation of the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, &c.” 4. “Hints to a curate fo i- tue management of a parish.” 5. “A serious address to the parishioners of Great Cheverel,” &c.

, a poet of the Elizabethan period, was the son of John Storer, a native of London, and was elected student of Christ-clmrcn, Oxford, about 1587. He took his degree of master of aits, and had the fame of excellent poetical talents, which were exhibited, not only in verses before the books of many members of the university, but in his poem entitled “The Life and De^th of Thomas Wolsey, cardinal: divided into three pans: his aspiring; triumph; and death,” Lond. 1599, 4to. He obtained also great credit for some pastoral airs and madrigals, which were published in the collection called “England’s Helicon.” He died in the parish of St. Michael Bassishaw, London, in Nov. 1604, and had his memory celebrated by many copies of verses. His poem on Wolsey is far from despicable, and contains many curious historical particulars. It is of the greatest rarity; but there is a copy in the Bodleian, and another in the British Museum.

, a Dutch painter of sea-pieces, and sea-ports, died in 1708, but the time of his birth, and the master under whom he studied, have not been recorded. He was a native of Amsterdam, where he might naturally imbibe a taste for that kind of scenery which he usually represented; consisting of boats, barges, and ships, with many persons engaged in different employments, lading or unlading the vessels. He studied assiduously after nature, and usually sketched from the real objects, so that a strong character of truth is the great recommendation of his seas, rocks, and harbours. His figures are small, but usually designed with great exactness, and so numerous in most of his pieces, as to afford a great fund of entertainment. He had a brother who was a painter of landscapes, and chiefly represented views of the Rhine, but was not equal to him. A capital picture of Abraham Stork is, the reception of the duke of Marlborougb, in the river Amstel.

, a valuable historian and antiquary, was born in London, and as is usually supposed, in St. Michael’s Cornhill, where his father and grandfather lived, and were reputed men of good credit. The time of his birth was about 1525, but we know little of the circumstances of his youth, unless that he was bred up to his father’s business, that of a taylor. It has been often remarked as a singular, but after all a trifling circumstance, that two of the most celebrated antiquaries of the sixteenth century, Stow and Speed, were both bred to that occupation.

At what time, or on what occasion he removed from Cornhill, is uncertain, but in 1549, we find him dwelling within Aldgate, where the pump now stands, between Leadenhall-street and Fenchurch-street. While he lived here, he was the spectator of an execution which affected him not a little. The bailiff of Rumford, coming up to town during an insurrection which prevailed in Norfolk and Suffolk, and spread to some parts of Essex, happened to fall in company with the curate of Cree church, who asking him what news, the bailiff said that many were up in Essex, but that, “thanks be to God, things were in good quiet about them.” The curate, from some misconception of these words, immediately informed against the poor bailiff, as one of the rebels, or a favourer of their cause. On this he was next morning brought before a court-martial, and sentenced to be hanged in the parish where he uttered the aforesaid words, upon a gibbet erected before Mr. Stow’s door. Stow was of course a witness, and heard the poor man’s dying declaration, respecting the above words which he made use of, and which were the only pretence for this unjust execution. Some time after, Stow removed into Lime-street ward, in the parish of St. Andrew Unclershaft, where he continued until his death*.

He began early to apply himself to the study of the history and antiquities of England with so much enthusiasm, that he bestowed little attention on business, or the concerns of domestic life; and this improvidence greatly impaired his circumstances, and at length reduced him to considerable difficulties. His first appearance, as an antiquary, was in the service of the ward of which he was now become an inhabitant. That of Bishopsgate had encroached on the bounds of it, and had taken in three houses, and a piece of land near London-wall, which belonged to it. These Mr. Stow plainly proved to be the property of his ward, by certain old leases and grants, and other authentic registers; an 1 they were accordingly at that time yielded to it; though, afterwards, when sir Richard Pype, al-'erman of Bishopsgate ward, became lord mayor of London, and reclaimed them, it receded from its un.l >ubted right, and tamely surrendered them to his jurisdiction.

Mr. Stow’s success, however, in the Affair probably ani­* This curate, called Sir Stephen, one c<>mii>- n I e/\p bumr them. Mr. became so contemptible by his furious Slow heat <J 'his sermon, an I saw the zeal, that he was forced to leave the effec’s of it. Another rmrk of the city, and retire tosome unknown place curate’s imprudent zeal w.< his takin the country. “Mr. Stow has re- ing; /ccasion from that church’s name corded some things of him, which Un ^rshaft., as superstitions^ ^iv>n it, though not attended with such fata! to i!<-r are his judgment that thr titles consequences as that already men- of cnurches should be altered, and that tioned, were evidences of his exclusive even the names of the days of the week big‘ try. In a sermon, which he ought to be changed from those ht;apreached before a areat auditory at St. then ones which had been given them; Paul’s Cross, he inveighed bitterly nud that Fridays and Saturdays should against a long may-pole, called -haft, be no more fish-days, but others subin the next parish to his own, which stituted for such in thei>- place from thence was named *r. Andrew that Lent should he kept ai>nv Undershaft. This he insisted upon time than between Shrove-ti e and being an idol; and so warmly did he Raster. Another t.’id ).ia<-tice of this declare against it, that the zeal of many cut ate was, to go out of the pulpi> into of his hearers being excited thereby, the church- yard, and II.Oum' nu h gh they wt-nt in the afternoon of the same elm that grew there and p ea; h from day, and pulled the may-pole do MI tbttnce to his audience, and then return from the place where it hung upon to the church, and say or-ire the hooks, and then sawed it ii to divers English service, not at th,- a^tar. as pieces, each housekeeper taking as w. is usual, but upon a tomb, whit much of it as hung over his door or placed northward of it.” Strype’s Life stall, and then casting the pieces into of Stow. mated him in his antiquarian researches, as he had now demonstrated the practical benefit arising from them. It was about 1560, that he turned his thoughts to the compiling an English chronicle, and he spent the greater part of his future life in collecting such materials relating to the kingdom at large, as he esteemed worthy to be handed down to posterity. But after he had been eagerly employed for a while in these studies, perceiving how little profit he was likely to reap from them, he was on the point of diverting his industry into the channel of the occupation he had been bred to; and the expensiveness of purchasing manuscripts was an additional motive to this resolution. Archbishop Parker, however, himself an excellent antiquary, and a bountiful patron of all who had the same turn, persuaded him to goon, and liberally contributed to lessen his expences, while his grace lived.

The first work which he published, was his “Summary of the Chronicles of England, from the coming in of Brute unto his own time,” which he undertook at the instance of lord Robert Dudley. The reason of his proposing it to him was this: In 1562, Mr. Stow having in his search after curious and uncommon tracts, met with an ingenious one of Edmund Dudley, his lordship’s grandfather’s writing, during his imprisonment in the Tower, entitled “The Tree of the Commonwealth;” (which he dedicated to Henry VIII. but it never came to his hand) he kept the original himself, hut transcribed a fair copy of it, and took an opportunity of presenting it to this nobleman, who earnestly requested our author to attempt something of the same nature. To gratify so illustrious a suitor, he collected his “Summary,” and dedicated it to him when it was finished. The acquisition of such a patron was undoubtedly important to him at this period, but more in point of fame tiian emolument.

Not long after, in 1573, the “Summary” was reprinted with large additions, in a thick octavo in the black letter. It begins with a general description of the kingdom, and then treats of the several kings and queens that governed this island naming the mayors and sheriffs every year; and under each reign it gives the several remarkable occurrences that happened, especially those concerning the city of London.

In 1600, he published his “Flores Historiarum,” or Annals of this kingdom from the time of the ancient Britons to his own.“This work was nothing else but his” Summary" greatly enlarged, which he dedicated to archbishop Whitgift. It was reprinted five years after with additions; but even in this improved state it was no more than an abridgment of a much larger history of this nation, which he had been above forty years collecting out of a multitude of ancient authors, registers, chronicles, lives, and records of cities and towns; and which he intended now to have published, if the printer, probably fearing the success of it, after the late appearance of so large a chronicle as that of Holinshed, had not chosen rather to undertake this lesser abstract of it.

In 1598 appeared the first edition in 4to, of that valuable work which he entitled “A Survey of London.” What induced him hrst to compile this work, was a passage he met with in William Lambard’s “Perambulation,” in which he calls upon all who had ability and opportunity, to do the like service for the shires and counties wherein they were born or dwelt, as he had done for that of Kent. Such an invitation was not lost upon a writer of Stow’s zeal and disposition, and he immediately resolved upon the description of the metropolis, the place both of his habitation and birth. It was dedicated by him to the lord mayor, commonalty, and citizens; and at the end of it were the names of the mayors and sheriffs, as far as 1598. He was sensible something ought to have been added concerning the political government of the city; but he declined touching upon it, as he at first intended, because he was informed that Mr. James Dalton, a learned gentleman and citizen, purposed to treat of it.

In 1603, five years after the first, a second edition of this useful work was published, with considerable improvements made by the author, out of his old stores of “many rare notes of antiquity” as he styles them. Part of these related to the city government, which he now had no scruple to introduce, as Mr. Dalton’s death had put an end to all expectation from that gentleman’s pen. Stow therefore endeavoured to supply the defect, and would have done it more copiously, had he not been interrupted by a fit of sickness. The notes which he added related to the aldermen and sheriffs of London; the names of the officers belonging to the mayor’s house, and to the sheriffs: of the liveries of the mayors and sheriffs, and various other particulars which are very curious when contrasted with the manners and modes of our times*. He must have verylittle curiosity who is not amused by comparisons of this kind, and must have very little reflection, if he does not draw useful conclusions from observing the pertinacity with which every age supports its own fashions. These additions, Stow confessed, were far short of what he desired or purposed to do: but as they were all he could accomplish at present, he promised hereafter to augment them, a promise which his increasing weakness and death prevented him from fulfilling.

must be indulged to his education so of his endeavours." Fuller’s Worthies. hard is it for a citizen to write an hisIn 1618, after his decease, a third edition, still in quarto, was published by A. M. or Anthony Muuday (See Munday), a citizen also, and a man of some fame. He had been the pope’s scholar in the seminary at Rome; afterward, returning home, and renouncing the pope and popery, he wrote two books relative to the English priests and papists abroad. This editor made several additions, as he pretended, to the Survey; much of which, he hinted, he had formerly from Stow himself, who, in his lite-time, delivered into his han.ls some of his best collections, and importunately persuaded him to correct what he found amiss, and to proceed in perfecting so worthy a design. He talks of being employed about twelve years revising and enlarging it; and that he had the encouragement of the court of aldermen in the council-chamber, being brought before them by sir Henry Montague, the recorder, afterward lord chief justice of the King’s-bench. But after all, the additions he made were chiefly some inscriptions and epitaphs from the monuments in the parish churches; a continuation of the names of the mayors and sheriffs; and little more, except some transcripts out of Stow’s Summary and Annals, and here and there venturing to correct some errors, as he calls them, in the original, in place of which he has rather substituted his own; for Mr. Stow was too exact and precise to be corrected by one so much inferior to him in literature, and in antiquities, as Munday appears to be.

In 1633, there appeared an edition of it in folio, by the same A. M. together with H. D. C. J. and some others. It was dedicated, as all the preceding editions had been, to the lord-mayor, aldermen, and recorder for the time being, with the citizens. In this was a continuation of the names of the mayors and sheriffs to that year, with the coats of arms of all the mayors, the companies of London, merchants and others; and a brief imperfect account of the incorporation of the said companies’, and the dates of their several charters; with some other articles. But by this time the book began to abound with verbal errors and deviations from the author’s edition and sense, which called for "some abler and more judicious hand than had been hitherto employed to correct and rectify.

This was happily effected in 1720, when it arrived at a fifth impression, under the care and management of John Strype, M. A. a citizen by birth (as all the former editors were) and the son of a freeman of London. This edition is enlarged into two volumes folio; great numbers of errors are corrected, and Stow restored to himself; the remains are inserted every where in their proper places; the history of the city brought down to the period of publication, and the customs, laws, and acts of common-council, which are of such importance for understanding the civil polity of it, very fully explained. In 1754, the sixth and last edition was published, with continuations of all the useful lists, and considerable additions of various matters, and particularly of many plates from very accurate designs.

Having thus gone through the history of the work, from its first appearance in a small quarto, to its enlargement into two folio volumes of near 800 pages each, we shall resume our memoirs of the author. \ seen, \>y the fruits of it, his strong propensity to the study of history and antiquities; and have observed that so much or his time was consumed by employments of this kind, as was inconsistent with his attention to his trade. Accordingly, what by this neglect, and the expence of purchasing books and manuscripts, he greatly impaired and diminished his fortune; and instead of enjoying that affluence and ease, which his labours for the honour of his country, and the service of posterity, justly merited: he was not even refunded what he expended in the advancement of them, but left in the decline of life to encounter with poverty and distress.

After twenty-five years labour in this way, and publishing his large “Summary,” as a specimen of his capacity, he addressed the lord-mayor and aldermen to grant him two freedoms, which perhaps he received, although we find no record of the fact. Some years after, he again petitioned the lord-mayor and aldermen, stating, “That he was of the age of threescore and four, and that he had for the space of almost thirty years last past, besides his Chronicles dedicated to the earl of Leicester, set forth divers” Summaries“dedicated to them, &c. He therefore prayeth them to bestow on him some yearly pension, or otherwise, whereby he might reap somewhat toward his great charges.” Whether this application had any success, is not known. There is no instance of his reaping any reward from the city, adequate to the extraordinary pains he underwent in the establishment of the reputation of it, unless his being promoted to the office of its Fee'd Chronicler; a post of no great consequence, and to which probably a very small salary was annexed. Whatever it might he, it was so far from retrieving his ruined circumstances, that it did not even afford him the means of subsistence; so that he was forced to beg a brief from king James I. to collect the charitable benevolence of well-disposed people. To the liberal feelings of the present age, it must appear very strange that such a man should have been reduced to such a situation; that neither the opulent city of London, whose service and credit he had so greatly advanced, by writing such an elaborate and accurate survey of it; nor the wealthy company of Merchant Taylors, of which he was a member; nor the state itself; should have thought it their duty to save a person from want, to whom they were all so highly indebted. The licence or brief which his majesty granted him to beg, was a libel upon his own bounty; and the produce of it, so far as we know, fixes an indelible reproach on the charity of the Londoners of that day. We may judge of the sum total collected on this occasion by what was gathered from the parishioners of St. Mary Wolnoth, which amounted to no more than seven shillings and sixpence.

In this state of poverty, he died April 5, 1605, in his eightieth year, and was buried towards the upper end of the north-isle of the church of St. Andrew Undershaft, in Leadenhall-street, where a monument was erected by his widow, of a composition resembling alabaster, and altogether a very animated work. How she could afford this, when her husband died in such poor circumstances, does not appear. Probably she was assisted by some persons who were ashamed of their neglect of our author in his life-time. We are sorry to add a very disgraceful circumstance to this account, which was not known to the editors of the edition of 17 54, and which we have upon the authority of Maitland. After noticing this monument, and paying a just compliment to the deceased’s character, Maitland adds, “that neither that, nor any other consideration was sufficient to protect his repository from being spoiled of his injured remains by certain men in the year 1732, who removed his corpse to make way for another.”

For the character of Stow, we must necessarily be indebted to his contemporaries, and it would be injustice not to give it in their simple style. His person and temper are thus described by Edmund Hows, who well knew him “He was tall of stature, lean of body and face his eyes small and chrystalline; of a pleasant and cheerful countenance y his sight and memory very good, and Ijg recained the use of all his senses unto the day of his Ueath. He had an excellent memory was very sober, mild, and courteous to any that required his instructions. He always protected never to have written any thing either for envy, fear, or favour, nor to seek his own private gain or vain glory, and that his only pains and care was, to write truth.”

But in order to form a judgment of him, it is necessary to consider the disposition of his mind, as well as lus visible works and actions. The first thing that naturally occurs to our view is, that he was an earnest student and lover of the antiquities of his own country, and this to such a degree as to sacrifice the trade to which he was brought up. He was an unwearied reader of all English history, whether printed or in manuscript; and a searcher into records, registers, journals, charters, &c. Nor was he content with barely perusing these things, but desirous also of possessing himself of them, as of a great treasure. By the time he was forty years of age, he h?id furnished a considerable library of such, as appears from the report of Mr. Watts, archdeacon of London, who was sent to search it, viz. ‘That he had a great collection of old books anJ Mss. of all sorts, but especially relating to chronicles and history, both in parchment and paper, &c.’ And his library contained not only ancient authors, but original charters, registers’, and chronicles of particular places, which he had the greater opportunity of procuring, as he lived shortlyafter the dissolution of the monasteries, when such things were dispersed and scattered abroad among various hands.

It was his custom to transcribe all such old and useful books, as he could not obtain or buy, and were of service to his purpose. Thus, as we are assured by Ralph Brooksmouth, he copied Le'and’s six volumes of collections for his own use, which he sold afterward to the celebrated Camden, who gave him for them an annuity of H/. during his life. As he was thus well provided with books, he acquired a critical and nice taste in judging of them, and was enabled to detect many frauds and vulgar errors in our history, which had long passed unquestioned. One whimsical instance we shall mention from Strype. Grafion relates in his chronicle, that in 1502, one Bartholomew Read, a goldsmith and mayor, entertained in Goldsmiths’­hall more than a hundred persons of great estate; messes and dishes served in a vast number; nay, that there was a park paled in the same hall, furnished with fruitful trees and beasts of venery (hunting) and other like circumstances. Stow had litltle difficulty in refuting this story, by measuring the hail, and it would appear to require very little ability to refute it, yet in these days of credulity it ion '4 passed current.

By his skill, also, in antiquity, he was enabled to settle the true bounds and limits of many contested properties, and to throw gceat light upon some obsolete authors, toward the useful editions of which he contributed largely. We are likewise indebted to him for some of the additions and enlargements of our most ancient poet, Chaucer; whose works were first collected and published by Caxton; and again published with additions by William Thinne, esq. in the reign of Henry VIII. after which they were “corrected and twice increased (to use his own words) through Mr. Stow’s painful labours in the reign of queen Elizabeth, to wit, in the year 1561; and again beautified with notes by him collected out of divers records and monuments: which he delivered to his loving friend Thomas Speight.”

He was a true antiquary, one who was not satisfied with reports, nor yet with the credit of what he found in print, but always had recourse to originals. He made use of his own Lgs (for he could never ride), travelling on foot to many cathedral churches, and other places, where ancient records and charters were, to read them, and made large transcripts into his collections. There is a volume of these notes, which first came into the possession of sir Simonds D'Ewes, and was afterward procured by the first earl of Oxford. Ii is now part of the Harleian collection.

Much has been said of his religion. He was first, in all probability, a favourer of popery: this appears from the jealousy the state had of him in 1568, which occasioned an order of council to Grindal, bishop of London, to have his library searched f;>r superstitious books’; of which sort several were found there. And it is very likely that his notorious bias this way, might be the ground of the troubles he underwent either in the ecclesiastical commission court, or star-chamber; for it is certain that about 1570, he was accused before the ecclesiastical commissioners of no less than a hundred and forty articles, preferred against him by one that had been his servant. This miscreant had before defrauded him of his goods, and now sought to deprive him of his life also. A far less number would hate been sufficient to despatch a man out of the world in those mistrustful times, hut the witnesses against him weie of such exceptionable characters, that his judges were too upright to condemn him upon their testimony. Some of them had been detected of perjury, and others burnt in the hand for felony. The perfidious servant, who was at the head of them as the informer, was no other than his younger brother Thomas, a man of great profligacy, as was evident both by this unprincipled prosecution of his nearest relation, and by his subsequent behaviour to him. For instead of manifesting any shame or repentance for his crime, he swore that he never committed it, and persisted in defaming his reputation, and threatening his life.

Whether Mr. Stow was a hearty protestant is rather dubious; there is one expression of his somewhere in the reign of queen Elizabeth, which is an indication of the affirmative, viz. “That doctrine is more pure now than it was in the monkish world.” But it is not certain whether he wrote this in earnest or ironically, nor is it matter of much consequence. Although he was not able to surmount the religious prejudices of his time, his moral practice was unblamable. He hated vice in all orders, and exposed it no less in the elergy than in laymen. He abhorred injustice, and spared not to rebuke all who were guilty of it. He was a lover of hospitality, and a great friend to public benefactions, while he had any thing to bestow. He was of an honest and generous disposition, and unspotted in his life.

, a celebrated Greek geographer, philosopher, and historian, was born at Amasia, and was descended from a family settled at Gnossus in Crete. He was the disciple of Xenarchus, a Peripatetic philosopher, was well read in the history and tenets of the Grecian sects, but at length attached himself to the Stoics, and followed their dogmas. He contracted a strict friendship with Cornelius Gallus, governor of Egypt; and travelled into several countries, to observe the situation of places, and the customs of nations.

Strabo’s work was published with a Latin version by Xylander, and notes by Isaac Casaubon, at Paris, 1620, in folio; and again at Amsterdam in 1707, in two volumes folio, by the learned Theodore Janson of Almelooveen, with the entire notes of Xylander, Casaubon, Meursius, Cluver, Holsten, Salmasius, Bochart, Ez. Spanheim, Cellar, and others. To this edition is subjoined the “Chrestomathise;” or Epitome of Strabo; which, according to Mr. Dodwell, who has written a very elaborate and learned dissertation about it, was made by some unknown person, between the years of Christ 676 and 996. It has been found of some use, not only in helping to correct the original, but in supplying in some measure the defect in the seventh book. Mr. Dodwell’s dissertation is prefixed to this edition. The last and most valuable edition of Strabo, is that by Falconer, (See Falconer.) splendidly printed at Oxford in two volumes folio.

, a very skilful German physician and writer, was born at Mentz, Feb. 14, 1722, and educated in his native city. He then having chosen physic as a profession, came to Paris, and after employing six years in medical studies, took his degree of doctor at Erfurth, in September 1747. Returning to Mentz, he practised with great reputation, and in 1754 was appointed professor of surgery, in 1763 professor of physiology and pathology, and in 1782 professor of chemistry. About this time, when the university of Mentz had sufficient funds for the purpose, Strack was appointed to renovate the medical department, in performing which he acquitted himself with such credit as to be honoured with the title of counsellor of the electorate court. His writings likewise were so much admired by the faculty throughout Europe, that he was chosen a member of the learned societies of Paris, Madrid, Erfurth, and Giessen, and carried off several prizes, the rewards of the treatises he communicated. He died Oct. 18, 1806, in the eighty-fourth year of his age. His principal writings are, 1. “De dysenteria tentamen medicum,” 1760. 2. “De coiica pictonum,” 1772. 3. “De tussi convuUiva infantum,” 1777. 4. “De crusta lactea infantum,” and other treatises on the diseases of children and lying-in women, to both which he appears to have devoted much of his attention. 5. “Observationes rnedicinales de febribus intermittentibus,” 1785. 6. “Nova theoria pleuritidis,” 1786. 7. “De diversa. febris continuce remittentis causa,” 1789. 8. “De ratione novandi, et pururn reddendi aerem intra nosocornia carceresque,” 1770. 9. “De custodia aegrorum,” 1779. 10. “De fraudibus conductorum nutricum,” 1779. 11. “Oratio qua matres hortatur ut proles suas ipsa? lactent,” 1801.

, an ingenious and learned Jesuit, was born at Rome in 1572, and entered the society of Jesuits in 1591. His ordinary residence was in the Roman college, where he taught rhetoric, and it was while thus employed that he drew up for the use of his scholars his “Prolusiones Academical,” on different subjects of classical literature, a work elegantly written, and containing many ingenious remarks and just precepts. That prolusion in which he imitates the manner of some of the most eminent Latin poets, has been celebrated by Addison in Nos. 115, 119, and 122 of the “Guardian,” as “one of the most entertaining, as well as the most just pieces of criticism” that he ever read. The “Prolusiones” were published at Cologne, 1617, 8vo, and reprinted at Oxford in 1631, but there are other editions. Strada died in the Roman college in 1649, in the seventieth year of his age.

Although his “Prolusiones” is by far his best work, he is yet perhaps better known as a historian. His “Historia de Bello Belgico” was published at Rome in two parts or decades, 1640—1647, 2 vols. fol. It is written in what some have termed elegant Latin, and which character, “in a certain degree, it deserves; but the style is florid and fuse, and too obviously an affected imitation of that of Livy. His partiality to the Spanish cause is another objection, of which his readers must be warned. This history appeared at the same time wit!) that o(' Beniivoglio, who says that Strada’s work is fitter for a college than a court, and that he did not understand war and politics. It was also attacked by Scioppius in a very rude manner, in a book entitled” Infamia Faimani." Strada, or Stradanus (John), a Flemish painter, born at Bruges in 1536, was famous in several branches of his art. He painted history, battles, chaces, and animals, all with great success. His family was illustrious, but his inclinations led him to the study of painting; and to complete his knowledge of the art he went to Italy. The exquisite remains of antiquity, with the works of Raphael, and other great painters, were the models which enabled him to attain considerable eminence in his profession. Florence was the place where he chose to fix his residence, though invited to several others; and there the best of his works remain. He died there in 1604, at the age of sixtyeight. His taste is esteemed good, though not entirely divested of the Flemish style, after all his diligent study in Italy. The tone of his colouring, however, is pleasing, and his works maintain an honourable place with those of Salviati, Volterra, and others.

, an eminent printer, and many years printer to his majesty, was born at Edinburgh in 1715. His father, who had a small appointment in the customs, gave his son the education which every boy of decent rank then received in a country where the avenues to learning were easy, and open to men of the most moderate circumstances. After having passed through the tuition of a grammar-school, he was put apprentice to a printer; and, when a very young man, went to follow his trade in London. Sober, diligent, and attentive, while his emoluments were for some time very scanty, he contrived to live rather within than beyond his income; and though he married early, and without such a provision as prudence might have looked for in the establishment of a family, he continued to thrive, and to better his circumstances. His abilities in his profession, accompanied with perfect integrity, and unabating diligence, enabled him, after the first difficulties were overcome, to proceed with rapid success. He was one of the most flourishing men in the trade, when, in 1770, he purchased a share of the patent for king’s printer, of Mr. Eyre, with whom he maintained the most cordial intimacy during all the rest of his life. Besides the emoluments arising from this appointment, as well as from a very extensive private business, he was eminently successful in the purchase of the copy-rights of some of the most celebrated authors of the time. In this his liberality kept equal pace with his prudence, and in some cases went perhaps rather beyond it. Never had such rewards been given to the labours of literary men, as were now received from him and his associates (See Cadell) in those purchases of copy-rights from authors.

Having now attained the first great object of business, wealth, Mr. Strahan looked with a very allowable ambition en the stations of political rank and eminence. Politics had long occupied his active mind, which he had for many years pursued as his favourite amusement, by corresponding on that subject with some of the first characters of the age. His queries to Dr. Franklin in the year 1769, respecting the discontents of the Americans, published in the London Chronicle of July 28, 1778, shew the just conception he entertained of the important consequences of that dispute, and his anxiety as a good subject to investigate, at that early period, the proper means by which their grievances might be removed, and a permanent harmony restored between the two countries. In 1775 he was elected a member of parliament for the borough of Ma'msbury, in Wiltshire, with a very illustrious colleague, the hon. Charles James Fox; and in the succeeding parliament, for Wotton Bassett, in the same county. In this station, applying himself with that industry which was natural to him, he attended the House with a scrupulous punctuality, and was a useful member. His talents for business acquired the consideration to which they were entitled, and were not unnoticed by the minister. In his political connexions he was constant to the friends to whom he had been first attached. He was a steady supporter of that party who were turned out of administration in the spring of 1781, and lost his seat in the House of Commons by the dissolution of parliament with which that change was followed: a situation which he did not shew any desire to resume on the return of the new parliament. One motive for his not wishing a seat in the next parliament, was a sense of some decline in his health, which had rather suffered from the long sittings and late hours with which the political warfare in the last had been attended. Though without any fixed disease, his strength was visibly declining; and though his spirits survived his strength, yet the vigour and activity of his mind were considerably impaired. Both continued gradually to decline till his death, which happened on July yth, 1785, in the seventy-first year of his age.

Endued with much natural sagacity, and an attentive observation of life, he owed his rise to that station of opulence, and respect which he attained, rather to his own talents and exertion, than to any concurrence of favourable circumstances. His mind, though not deeply tinctured with learning, was not uninformed by letters. From a habit of attention to style, he had acquired a considerable portion of critical acuteness in the discernment of its beauties and defects. In the epistolary branch of writing, he not only shewed a precision and clearness of business, but possessed a neatness, as well as fluency of expression, which fe'.v letter-writers have surpassed. Letter-writing was one of his favourite amusements; and among his correspondents were men of such eminence and talents as well repaid his endeavours to entertain them. To Dr. Franklin, already mentioned, may be added the names of most of the great authors who had adorned the republic of letters for almost forty years before Mr. Strahan’s death; and many specimens of his letters have been given in their posthumous works, or lives. We may add, among his anonymous essays, a paper in “The Mirror,” No. 94.

, an able lawyer, was born in London in 1696, according to the English inscription in Leyton church, where he was buried; but the Latin one says that he was only forty-nine years old at his death in 1754, and consequently must have been born in 1705. We are rather inclined to think the first date the correct one. Having chosen the law as a profession, he arrived, by great natural abilities, and unwearied application, at such eminence, that, in 1735, he was appointed one of his majesty’s counsel learned in the law; and in the following year, solicitor-general. While in this office, he was so highly esteemed by the citizens of London, that, in 1739, they chose him their recorder. In 1742 he resigned these offices, and his majesty, as a peculiar mark of his regard, honoured him with a patent, to take place for life next to the attorney-general; and on Jan. 11, 1749, advanced him to the office of master of the Rolls; the revenue of which, soon after his promotion, received from parliament, unsought by him, a very considerable and honourable augmentation. He die:i May Is, 17'54, leaving behind him the character of an able and upright lawyer, and a man of great personal virtues in private life.

Sir John Strange married Susan, eldest daughter, and coheir of Edward Sis oreemvich, in the county of Kent, esq. She died in 1747, and was buried in the same vault with her husband in Leyton church-yard. Two sons survived him, of whom Matthew, the eldest, died in 1759, and John, who died March 19, 1799, aged sixty-seven. He was educated at Clare hall, Cambridge, and was British resident at Venice for some years, and in his own country LL. D. F. R. S. and F. S. A. He was also a member of the academies of Bologna, Florence, and Montpelier, and the Leopolcline academy of the Curiosorum Naturae. He was a very able antiquary and naturalist, and contributed various papers both to the Archacologia, and to the Philosophical Transactions. He accumulated an xcellent library, a very extensive museum, and a fine collection of pictures, all which were sold after his death, as directed by his will.

, an English engraver of the first eminence, was born in the Island of Pomona in Orkney, July 14, 1721. He was lineally descended from sir David Strange, or Strang, a younger son of the family of Stranges, or Strangs, of Balcasky in the county of Fife, who settled in Orkney at the time of the Reformation. He received his classical education at Kirkwall in Orkney, under the care of a learned, worthy, and much-respected gentleman, Mr. Murdoch M'Kenzie, who rendered great service to his country by the accurate surveys and charts he gave of the island of Orkney, and of the British and Irish coasts.

Mr. Strange was originally intended for the law; but that profession ill according with his peculiar turn of mind, he quitted it in a short time, and while yet uncertain whither his genius really pointed, went aboard a man of war bound for the Mediterranean. From this voyage he returned so much disgusted with a sea-life, that he again betook himself to pursuits of law, and might have continued to prosecute them through life, and his talents as an artist been for ever lost to the world, if his brother had not accidentally discovered in his bureau a variety of drawings and unfinished sketches, with which he appears to have amused those hours that his friends supposed devoted to severer labours. These first essays of genius struggling to display its peculiar powers, were shewn to the late Mr. llichard Cooper, at Edinburgh, the only person there who, at that time, had taste in such performances; they were by him very highly approved, and he immediately proposed that the young man should be regularly placed under his tuition. This measure, coinciding perfectly with his own inclinations, was accordingly adopted. The rapid progress which he made under this master’s instructions soon satisfied his friends that in making the arts his study and profession, he had yielded at last to the bent of nature, and was following the course which genius prompted him to pursue.

While he was thus assiduously engaged in laying the foundation of his future fame, a fatal interruption to the arts of peace took place in Scotland, by the arrival of the young chevalier; and Strange, urged by many motives, and particularly by the desire of gaining a hand which was already become necessary to his happiness, joined the rebel army. He continued to act with it as one of the troops styled the Life-Guards, a post of danger as well as honour, till the total defeat of the Pretender’s few remaining troops on the field of Culloden, obliged him and all those who escaped the issue of the day, to fly for shelter to the Highland hills. There young Strange, among the rest, continued concealed for many months, enduring hardships, the detail of which would seem to make dear the purchase even of life itself. Before the period of this overthrow, and soon after the battle of Falkirk, he so narrowly escaped the severest fate of war, that the accident deserves to be recorded. Having received command to execute some military order, in the absence of an aid-de-camp, he was riding for that purpose along the shore, when the svrord which he carried was bent in his hand by a ball from one of the king’s vessels stationed off the coast.

When the vigilance of pursuit was somewhat abated, Strange left the Highlands, and returned to Edinburgh, where, for the first time, he began to turn his talents to account, and contrived to maintain himself, in concealment, by the sale of small drawings of the rival leaders in the rebellion, many of which must still be extant. They were purchased, at the time, in great numbers, at a guinea each. A fan also, the primary destination of which gave it in his eyes an additional value, and where he had, on that account, bestowed more than usual pains, was sold at this period, with a sad heart, “non hos quacsitum munus in usus,” to the earl of Wemyss; who was too sensible of its value to suffer it to be re-purchased, when that was proposed a short time afterwards. Tired of a life of alarm and privacy,lr. Strange, at length, after much difficulty, procured a safe conduct to London, intending to embark for France; but not till he had received the reward peculiarly due to the brave; and made that hand his own, for the sake of which he had risked his life in the field. The name of the lady to whom he was thus united in 1747, and in whose steady affection, through the whole of a long life, all those dangers were forgotten, was Isabella Lumisden, the daughter of an ancient and respectable family, and sister to a gentleman well known in the literary world for his instructive work on the antiquities of Rome.

Having safely reached London, Mr. Strange completed his intention of visiting France; and after remaining a considerable time at Rouen, respected and beloved by all the companions in exile whom he found there, and obtaining an honorary prize given by the academy of that place, where his competitors were very numerous, proceeded to Paris, and prosecuted his studies with infinite assiduity, chiefly under the direction of the celebrated Le Bas. It was from this master that he had the first hint of the use of the instrument commonly called the dry needle, which he afterwards greatly improved by his own genius, and by which he added such superior beauties to his engravings.

In the year 1751, he finally removed his family to London; and at this period, when historical engraving had made but little progress in Britain, he began to devote himself to this higher and more difficult species of his art; of which, therefore, in this country, he is justly entitled to be considered as the father. It was about this time that by refusing to engrave a portrait of his present majesty, he incurred the strong displeasure of lord Bute; whose conduct towards him is detailed, with many other interesting circumstances, in a letter to that nobleman, which Mr. Strange published in 1775. It is not easy, or perhaps possible, in this country, for power to depress merit; and so it proved in the case of this artist, who rose in spite of all opposition. With respect to the painting which he thus refused to engrave, it is said that a personage, apparently more concerned in the question than lord Bute, has since commended the spirit of the artist, who scorned to perpetuate so wretched a performance. In 1760 Mr. Strange set out for Italy, which, as the seat of the fine arts, he had long been anxious to visit. The drawings made by him in the course of this tour, several of which he afterwards engraved, are now in the possession of lord Dundas. Every where throughout Italy singular marks of attention and respect accompanied him, not only from illustrious personages, but from the principal academies of the fine arts which he visited in his route. He was made a member of the academies of Rome, Florence, and Bologna, and professor of the royal academy at Parma. Nothing indeed shews more strongly the high estimation in which his talents were held at Rome, than the compliment which was paid him by signer Roifanelli, in painting the ceiling of that room in the Vatican library, where the collection of engravings is preserved. The painting represents the progress of the art of engraving, and, among the portraits of those who were most eminent in it, that of Strange is introduced. He is represented holding under his arm a volume on which his name is inscribed; an honour paid to no British artist but himself. Similar marks of high respect were also bestowed on his talents in France. In particular, he was made a member of the royal academy of painting at Paris, the highest honour ever conferred on any foreigner.

Among these engravings, it will be observed, there is only one from the painting of any native artist of this country; and that is from Mr. West’s apotheosis of the king’s children. This painting he solicited his majesty’s permission to engrave, which was granted with the utmost readiness; and every accommodation which the palace could give was liberally furnished to him, while engaged in the undertaking; in the progress of which he was often visited both by the king and the royal family. Before the work could be completed his avocations called him to Paris, and he expected to have been forced to leave the engraving unfinished till his return; but his majesty, in a manner peculiarly flattering, consented to let him take it with him. In return for so much condescension, when a few copies of this engraving had been struck off, the plate itself was destroyed, by cutting out the principal figure, which, after being gilt, was presented to his majesty.

On the 5th of Jan. 1787, Mr. Strange received the honour of knighthood, a distinction which flattered him the more, as it appeared to mark a peculiar eminence in his profession; and proved that his royal patron was fully sensible of the merit which his minister had once vainly attempted to crush.

Sir Robert enjoyed his honours but for a short period. On the 5th of July, 1792, he fell a victim to a complaint of an asthmatic nature, with which he had been long severely afflicted. It is for those who were best acquainted with his character while living, to conceive with what sentiments of regret this melancholy event, though neither untimely nor unexpected, was felt by his family and friends. Of aM Uk-;-! whom the writer of this narrative ever knew, sir Hubert ossessed the mildest and most ingenuous manne! s, i.uned to dispositions of mind the most liberal and benign. There was in his temper an endearing gentleness which invited affection; and in his heart a warm sincerity, immediately perceptible, which infallibly secured it. To know him and be his enemy was impossible. Unassuming even to a fault, and with a diffidence which anxiously shunned pretension, his opinions both of thinking and of expressing himself, even on the most unimportant occasions, laid an irresistible, though unconscious claim, to taste, to sentiment, and to genius. These, indeed, a skilful physiognomist, if such a person exists, might have read distinctly in the features of his countenance; though Lavater, to support a theory, or misled by an imperfect likeness, has asserted the contrary. The head engraved from Greuse, and prefixed to sir Robert’s posthumous volume, bears a strong, though scarcely a striking resemblance, to the original, and will probably be thought to justify what is here advanced. It may certainly with equal truth be added, that in the whole of his deportment and general demeanour, there was a remarkable degree of grace and modest dignity.

To these qualities, for which engaging is a phrase too tame, sir Robert added a liberality of sentiment upon all subjects, which bespoke such a strength and soundness of understanding as would probably have secured him considerable eminence, even if his peculiar talents had been mistaken, and law had continued the object of his professional pursuit. Though engaged, from the motives which have been suggested, in the support of a cause more allied to prejudice than connected with sound reason, reflection made him early sensible of his error (the romantic occasion of which points out, in some degree, the generous ardour of his genius), and his riper years paid the tribute of sincere attachment to that establishment of the state, which his arm had once been raised to overthrow. With a just and enlarged sense of political relations, religious principles the most zealous were conjoined; but his religion, though warm, was tolerant; and his devotion, like his other virtues, altogether devoid of ostentation.

He left behind him, besides his lady, a daughter and three sons all of whom his honourable exertions would have sufficed to place in a state of independence, even though honest ambition had not impelled the whole of them to increase, by their own efforts, the inheritance descending from their father. The extreme assiduity with which he laboured for this purpose is the only circumstance in sir Robert’s history which yet remains unnoticed. In the coldest seasons, when health permitted him, he went to work with the dawn, and the longest day was too short to fatigue his hand. Even the most mechanical parts of his labours he would generally perform himself; choosing rather to undergo a drudgery so unsuitable to his talents than trust to others, or be the means of engaging them in a profession, which, notwithstanding his own deserved success, he never thought deserving of recommendation. In this conviction, he was always extremely solicitous to keep the pencil out of his children’s hands, lest taste should have influenced any of them to prosecute the same pursuits, to which he had devoted a life of unwearied diligence and application.

His remains were interred, in compliance with what had long been known to be his own modest desire, in the most private manner, in Covent-garden churchyard; his ashes being placed immediately adjoining to those of a daughter once tenderly beloved. A simple tablet, with his name inscribed, is all that distinguishes the spot. The works indeed of such an artist form his truest and most appropriate monument. These no time has power to destroy, and, as long as the labours of taste shall be objects of admiration among mankind, these assuredly will perpetuate his reputation; and with it a name not more to be remembered for the genius which gave it lustre, than the virtues by which it was adorned.

, a pious and learned bishop of Chester, was born at Hemel-Hempstead in Hertfordshire, in 1633, and admitted scholar of Trinity college, Oxford, in June 1652, where in 1656 he became fellow and master of arts. After taking orders, he married a relation of Dr. Dolben, bishop of Rochester, and by his interest was made warden of Manchester college in Lancashire. He was aiso in 1670 made prebendary of Leicester St. Margaret in the church of Lincoln; in 1673, dean of St. Asaph, at which time he took his degree of D. D. and was appointed chaplain in ordinary to his majesty. In 1683 y ­he was presented to the rectory of St. Mary Aldermanbury, London, and the following year resigned the wardenship of Manchester college. In 1689, he was consecrated bishop of Chester, over which he presided, in constant residence, and with the most anxious cave for its interests, both spiritual and temporal, for eighteen years. He died Feb. 12, 1707, and was interred in his cathedral, where a long Latin inscription records his character, without exaggeration. Besides some occasional sermons, and a charge to his clergy, his works were chiefly levelled at the doctrines of popery, in which controversy, he published, 1. “Discourse concerning the necessity of Reformation, \ respect to the errors and corruptions of the church of Rome,” Lond. 1685, parti. 4to; a second part followed. 2. “Discourse on the Pope’s Supremacy,” in answer to Dr. Godden, ibid. 1.688, 4to. 3. “The people’s right to read the Holy Scriptures asserted,” ibid. 1688, 4to. 4. “The lay-Christian’s obligation to read the Holy Scriptures,” ibid. 1688, 1689, 4to. 5. “Examination” of Bellarmin’s fourteenth note concerning the unhappy end of the church’s enemies," &c. &c.

Bishop Stratford was one of the first and most zealous promoters of the Societies, established in the beginning of the last century for the “Reformation of manners.” In the “Memoirs of Matthew Henry,” we read that “this good work was first set on foot in that city by those of the established church: they were happy in a bishop and dean, that had the interests of practical religion very much at heart, Dr. Stratford and Dr. Fog, men of great learning and true piety, both excellent preachers, and greatly grieved at the open and scandalous wickedness that abounded in that city, and every where throughout the nation.” It appears that a monthly lecture was established at the cathedral for this purpose, and the bishop preached the first sermon.

, a German Luthe-an divine and mathematician, but in this country known only as a chronologist, was born in 1632, at Wittemberg. He studied at Leipsic, and was afterwards professor of theology at Wittemberg, and at Dantzick. He was frequently involved in theological disputes, both with the Roman catholics and the Calvinists, from his intemperate zeal in favour of Lutheranism. He died at Wittemberg in 1682. He published some mathematical works; but was chiefly distinguished for his chronological and historical disquisitions, of which he published a considerable number from 1652 to 1680. One of the best and most useful, his “Breviarium Chronologicum,” was long known in this country by three editions (with improvements in each) of an English translation, by Richard Sault, called in the title F. R. S. but his name does not occur in Dr. Thomson’s list of the members of the Royal Society. Locke’s high commendation of this work probably introduced it as a useful manual of chronology. The edition of 1745, which, we believe, was the last, received many improvements and corrections, but it has since given way to lesser chronological systems.

, an English painter, was born in 1624, and, being a person of great industry as well as capacity, arrived to an eminent degree of perfection in his art. He excelled particularly in history, architecture, and perspective; and shewed himself a great master by the truth of his outlines, and skill in foreshortening his figures.

He was also excellent in landscape and still-life; and there is some fruit of his painting yet to be seen, which is of the highest Italian style, for penciling, judgment, and composition. Upon the restoration of Charles II. he was made his majesty’s serjeant-painter. He became violently afflicted with the stone, and resolved to be cut; which the king hearing, and having a great kindness for him, sent on purpose to France for a surgeon, who came and performed the operation; which, however, Streater did not survive. He died in 1680, having spent his life in great esteem and reputation. His principal works were, the theatre at Oxford the chapel at Ah Souls college; some ceilings at Whitehall, now burnt the battle of the giants with the gods, at sir Robert Clayton’s; the pictures of Moses and Aaron, at St. Michael’s church in Cornhill, &c. &c.

, baron de Schwarrenaw, a native of Austria, and learned Protestant writer, counsellor to the emperor, superintendant of finances, and his librarian, was born in 1538. He was much esteemed by the literati of his time, and died in 1601, leaving a treatise “De Gentibus et Familiis Romanorum,” Paris, 1559, fol. in which he has thrown considerable light on the Roman antiquities. He wrote also some pieces against Bellarmin, and some discourses in favour of the freedom of the Netherlands, which he published anonymously lest they should offend the house of Austria, whose subject he was.

, a learned divine and promoter of the reformation, was born at Kaufbeir, Dec. 26th 1524. He lost his father in the year 1527, and was sent to Fribourg in Brisgaw in 1538; where he went through a course of philosophy under John Zinckius, and removed from thence in 1542 to the university of Wittemberg, and attended the lectures of Luther and Melancthon. Having taken the degree of master of philosophy in 1544, he applied himself to the reading of private lectures, which gained him great reputation, and he continued them until the war obliged him to leave Witteuoberg, and go to Magdeburg, and afterwards to Erfurt. The war being concluded, he went to Jena in 1548. In 1556, he was present at the conference of Eisenach, and disputed amicably with Menius upon a question relating to the necessity of good works. He reduced this controversy to seven propositions, on which the whole dispute turned, and which Menius owned to be agreeable to the word of God. Strigelius afterwards drew up, by order of the elector of Saxony, a form of confession, to which all the divines subscribed. The year following he was attacked by Flacciuslllyricus, and disputed with him viva voce at Weimar. The acts of that conference were published, but not faithfully, and he complained that something was retrenched. In 1559, he was imprisoned with two others, owing to certain theological disputes with the divines of Weimar, but by the influence of the emperor Maximilian recovered his liberty at the end of three years, and resumed the usual course of his lectures. As, however, he found that he was not in a safe situation, he retired from Jena, and paid no regard to the remonstrances that university wrote to him to engage him to return. Removing to Leipsic, he published there notes on the psalter. He obtained of the elector the liberty of teaching, either in the university of Wittemberg, or in that of Leipsic, which last he preferred, and beginning his lectures there in March 1563, explained not only divinity, but likewise logic and ethics. He had carried his commonplaces as far as the article of the eucharist, and was to enter upon that in February 1567; but a fresh opposition being raised against him, in which the elector would not interfere, he retired into the Palatinate, and soon after was invited to Heidelberg to be professor of ethics, which office he discharged with great reputation till his death, June 26th, 1569. He had the reputation of an able philosopher and divine, and had an incomparable talent in instructing youth. His principal works are, 1 “Epitome doctrinse de primo motu,” Wittem. 1565, 8vo. 2. “Argumenta et scholia in Nov. Test.” 3 “Tres partes locorum communium.” 4. “Enchiridion locorum Theologicorum.” 5. Scholiæ Historicæ, a condito mundo ad natum Christum, &c."

, father and son, were two poets of Ferrara, who both wrote in Latin. Their poems were printed together at Venice, 1513, 8vo, and consist of elegies and other compositions, in a pure and pleasing style. Titus died about 1502, at the age of eighty. Hercules, his son, was killed by a rival in 1508. Strozzi was also an illustrious name at Florence, which migrated with the Medici’s into France, and there rose to the highest military honours, as they had in their own country attained the greatest commercial rank. There have been several other writers of the name, of whom we shall notice only one, as most remarkable, Cyriac Strozzi, who was a profound student in the works of Aristotle, and therefore considered as a peripatetic philosopher. He was born at Florence in 1504. He travelled over a great part of the world, and pursued his studies wherever he went. He was a professor of Greek and of philosophy at Florence, Bologna, and Pisa, in all which places he was highly esteemed. He died in 1565, at the age of sixty-one. He added a ninth and a tenth book to the eight books of Aristotle’s politics, and wrote them both in Greek and Latin. He had so completely made himself master of the style and sentiments of his great model, that he has been thought, in some instances, to rival him. He had a sister, Laurentia, who wrote Latin poems. Considerable information may be found respecting the Strozzi in our authorities.

, an ingenious artist, and the author of some valuable works on subjects of antiquity, was bora at Springfield, in Essex, Oct. 27, 1749, where his father, a man of some property, was a miller, but died when this son was only a year and a half old. His mother, however, took a tender care of his education, and placed him at Chelmsford school. At the age of fourteen he was apprenticed to the unfortunate William Wynne Ryland (See Ryland), and in 1770 became a student at the royal academy, where he had the gold and silver medals adjudged to him, the former for a painting in oil, his first effort, and the latter for the best academy-figure. The subject of his oil-painting was from the Æneid and it was no small triumph that his competitor was the celebrated Hamilton. After his apprenticeship had expired, he took up his residence in the family of his friend Mr. Thane; and in 1771 was first introduced to the British Museum, where he was employed to make some drawings. The rich stores of science and of art in that valuable repository, gave a new bias to his pursuits, and he now conceived some of those literary labours connected with his profession, which he afterwards executed; and such was his industry, that two years afterwards (1773) he published his first work, “The regal and ecclesiastical Antiquities of England,” 4to, and in June 1774, the first volume of what he then called “Jjopba TCngel-Cynnan -” or, complete views of the manners, customs, arms, habits, &.c. of the inhabitants of England, from the arrival of the Saxons to the time of Henry VIII.“A second volume appeared in 1775, and both were reprinted in 1797. This was a work of great research and labour, both in the preparation of the letter- press, and of the engravings, and he justly derived considerable reputation, on the score of accuracy and judgment. In 1777 and 1778 he published his” Chronicle of England,“in 2 vols. 4to, which he meant to have extended to six, but want of encouragement compelled him to relinquish his design. The work, however, is complete as far as it goes, and contains much valuable information, but is rather heavy, and not what is called a very readable book. In 1785 Mr. Strutt published the first volume of his” Dictionary of Engravers," and the second in 1786. In this he received considerable assistance from the late eminent sculptor, John Bacon, esq. As the first work of the kind executed in this country, it is deserving of high praise, and although far from being free of defects, still remains the only work of the kind on which reliance can be placed. The introductory history of engraving is particularly creditable to his judgment and industry.

In 1790, a severe asthmatic complaint rendered a country residence necessary, and he therefore settled for five years at Bacon’s-farm in Hertfordshire, where he employed some part of his time in engraving a series of plates for the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” which are said to be as fair a specimen of his talents as an artist, as any that can be produced but it is not mentioned for what edition they were engraved, or whether sold separately. Here likewise his benevolent regard for the welfare of the young induced him, at his own expence, to establish a Sunday school at Tewin, not far from his residence, which he superintended with great care, and had the satisfaction to find it attended with the most beneficial consequences to the morals of the villagers. In 1795, he returned to London, and began to collect materials for his work entitled “A complete view of the Dresses and Habits of the People of England, from the establishment of the Saxons in Britain to the present time.” The first volume of this appeared in 1796, and the second in 1799, 4to, illustrated by 143 plates. It was about the same time published in French. In 1801, he published the last work he lived to complete, namely, EligEamena XnjelTpeob; or, The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England,“a performance which, from the novelty of the subject, attracted the notice and admiration of readers of almost every class. In the beginning of October 1802, Mr. Strutt, then residing in Charles-street, Hatton-garden, was confined to his chamber with his last illness, of which he died on the 16th of that month, in the fifty-third year of his age. His biographer sums up his character in these words:” The calamities incident to man were indeed his portion on this earth; and these greatly augmented by unkindnesses where he least deserved to have met with them. He was charitable without ostentation a sincere friend, without intentional guile; a dutiful son a faithful and affectionate husband a good father: a worthy man and, above all, it is humbly hoped, a sincere Christian. His natural talents were great, but little cultivated by early education. The numerous works which he gave to the world as an author, and as an artist, prove that he employed his time to the best advantage.“Mr. Strutt engraved many plates, in dots, in imitation of chalk, a manner which he learned from his master Ryland, and in which softness and harmony are blended. He also left some Mss. in the possession of his son, from which have since been published, 1.” Queen Hoo Hall, a Romance and Ancient Times, a Drama,“4 vols. 12mo. both which have many characteristics of a lively and well-regulated imagination; and, 2.” The Test of Guilt; or Traits of Ancient Superstition, a dramatic tale, &c." in poetry, but not much calculated to raise our ideas of his merit in that branch.

, a German scholar, was born at Magdebourg, Sept. 27, 1619. He became professor of jurisprudence at Jena, and was called to the council of the dukes of Saxony. He gave to the public some strong proofs of his learning at Helmstadt, before the year 1653; but in that year he published a greater work, entitled “Syntagma Juris Feudulis;' 1 and, ten years after, a similar compilation of civil law, under the title of” Syntagma Juris Civilis.“He was twice married, and had in all twenty-six children. He lived to the age of seventythree, and died on the 15th of December, 1692. He had a frankness of manners that gained universal attachment. His form was robust, and his diligence so indefatigable, that he applied to every magistrate the expression of a Roman emperor,” Oportet stantem mori;" and so completely acted up to his own principle, that he made the report of a lawsuit a very short time before his death.

, one of the many sons of the preceding, was born at Weimar, May 26, 1671. His father, who soon perceived his turn for study, sent him to Zeitz, to profit by the instructions of the learned Cellarius, who then lived in that place, and he afterwards pursued his studies under the ablest masters at Jena, Helmstadt, Francfort, and Halle. In the latter city he went to the bar, but did not follow that profession long, devoting his attention chiefly to history and public law, which were his favourite pursuits. He paid some visits to Holland and Sweden, whence he returned to Wetzlar, accompanied by his brother, who had dissipated his fortune in search of the philosopher’s stone. This misfortune affected our author, who, after the death of his brother, spent almost his whole property in paying his debts, and he fell into a melancholy state, which lasted for two years; but having then recovered his health and spirits, he was appointed librarian at Jena in 1697, and took his degree of doctor of philosophy and law at Halle. In 1704, he was made professor of history in that university, and in 1712 professor extraordinary of law, counsellor and historiographer to the dukes of Saxony; and at length in 1730, counsellor of the court, and ordinary professor of public and feudal law. He died at Jena, March 25, 1738, leaving many distinguished proofs of learned research, particularly in law and literary history. One of his first publications was his “Bibliotheca numismatum antiquiorum,” 12mo, which appeared at Jena in 1693. 2. “Epistolaad Cellarium, de Bibliothecis,” Jena, 1696, 12mo. 3. “Atuiquitatum Romanorum Syntagma,” Jena, 1701, 4to, This is the first part of a larger work, and chiefly respects the religion of the Romans, but is valuable. 4. “Tractatus Juridicus de Balneis et Balneatoribus” 4to, the same year, at Jena; all his works indeed appear to have been published there. 5. “Acta Literaria,” vol.1. 1703, 8vo; vol.11. 1720. 6. “Bibliotheca Philosophica,” 1704, 8vo, and again, 1728. 7. “Bibliotheca Historica,” 1705, 8vo. This, like several other works of this author, has undergone several editions, and been much augmented b) other editors. The title to the latest edition of this book is “Bibliotheca Historica, instructa a Burcardo Gotthelf Siruvio, aucta a Christi. Gottlieb Budero, nunc vero a Joanne Georgio Meuselio ita digesta, amplificata, et emendata, ut pcene novum opus videri possit.” This account of it is literally true, for, from a single volume, it is now extended to twenty-two vols. 8vo, usually bound in eleven, 1782 1804. It forms a complete index to the histories of all nations. 8. “Bibliotheca Librorum rariorum,” 1719, 4to. 9. “Introductio ad Notitiam Rei Literariee, et usum Bibliothecarum.” The fifth edition of this work, a very thick volume, small 8vo, with the supplements of Christopher Coler, and the notes of Michael Lilienthal, was printed at Leipsic in 1729; but the best is that of 1754 by John Christian Fischer, 2 vols. 8vo. 10. A life of his father, entitled, “De Vita et Scriptis Geo. Adam Struvii,” 1705, 8vo. He published also several works in German, and some others in Latin, all of which are mentioned in H- insius’s Biicher Lexicon, published at Leipsic in 1793, which is indeed a very excellent index to the works of German authors in particular.

, the most valuable contributor to ecclesiastical history and biography that ever appeared in this country, is said to have been of German extraction. His father John Strype, or Van Stryp, was a native of Brabant, and fled to England for the sake of religion. He was a merchant and silk-throwster. His son is said to have been born at Stepney, Nov. 1, 1643, but he calls himself a native of London, and his baptism does not occur in the register of Stepney, though the names of some of his brothers and sisters are there entered, and his father lies buried in the church-yard. The reason why he calls himself a Londoner probably was, that he was born in Strype’s yard, formerly in Stepney, but afterwards in the parish of Christ-church, Spitalfields. After being educated in St. Paul’s school for six years, he was matriculated of Jesuscollege, Cambridge, July 5, 1662, whence he removed to Catherine-hall, where he took his degree of A. B. in 1665, and that of M. A. in 1669, His first preferment was the donative, or perpetual curacy of Theydon-Boys in the county of Essex, conferred upon him July 14, 1669; but he quitted it a few months after, on being appointed minister of Low-Leyton in the same county, which he retained all his life. The circumstances attending this preferment were rather singular, Although he enjoyed it above sixtyeight years, and administered the sacrament on Christmasday, for sixty-six years successively, yet he was never instituted nor inducted. The reason assigned for this irregularity is, that the living being small, the patrons allowed the parish to choose a minister. Accordingly Mr. Strype having, on the vacancy which occurred in 1669, preached before them, he was duly elected to be their curate and lecturer, and they entered into a subscription-bond for his maintenance, promising to pay the sums annexed to their names, “provided he continues the usual custom of his predecessor in preaching twice every Sunday.” The subscriptions in all amounted to 69l. Many years after this, viz in 1674, he was licensed by Dr. Henchman, then bishop of London, to preach and expound the word of God in the parish church of Low-Leyton, and to perform the full office of priest and curate there, during the vacancy of the vicarage, which license, and no other instrument, he used to exhibit at the visitations, as late as 1720. In 1677, as he seemed secure of his possession, he rebuilt the vicarage, with 140l. of his own money, aided by contributions from his parishioners, and expended considerable sums also in the repairs of the chancel. After his death, his executors derived some advantage from the manner in which he held this living; for, being sued by his successor for dilapidations, only 40l. could be recovered, as the plea was, that he had never been instituted nor inducted, and that the parsonage- house was built and ought to be repaired by the parish. It is probable that the quiet possession he so long enjoyed was owing to the high esteem in which he was held by the heads of the church, for his eminent services as a historian. Soon after he came to reside at Low-Leyton, he got access to the valuable manuscripts of sir Michael Hickes, knt. once of Ruckholt’s in this parish, and secretary to William lord Burleigh, and began from them some of those collections which he afterwards published. It appears, however, that he extended his inquiries much farther, and procured access to every repository where records of any kind were kept; made numerous and indeed voluminous transcripts, and employed many years in comparing, collating, and verifying facts, before he published any thing. At the same time he carried on an extensive correspondence with archbishop Wake, and the bishops Atterbury, Burnet, Nicolson, and other eminent clergymen or laymen, who had a taste for the same researches as himself. Towards his latter days, he had the sinecure of Terring, in Sussex, given him by archbishop Tenison, and was lecturer of Hackney till 1724, when he resigned that lecture. When he became old and infirm, he resided at Hackney with Mr. Harris an apothecary, who had married his granddaughter, and there he died Dec. 11, 1737, at the very advanced age of ninety-four , one instance at least, that the most indefatigable literary labour is not inconsistent with health.

His publications were, 1. “The second volume of Dr. John Lightfoot’s works,” 1684, fol. 2. “Life of Archbishop Cranmer,” 1694, fol. 5. “The Life of Sir Thomas Smith,” 1698, 8vo. 4. “Lessons for Youth and Old Age,” 1699, 12mo. 5. “The Life of Dr. John Elmer, bishop of London,” 1701, 8vo. 6. “The Life of Sir John Cheke,” 1705, 8vo. 7. “Annals of the Reformation,” 4 vols vol. I. 1709, (reprinted 1725); vol.11. 1725; vol.111. 1728; vol. IV. 1731. 8. “Life of Archbishop Grindal,” 17 10, fol. 9. “Life and Letters of Archbishop Parker,” 1711, fol. 10. “Life of Archbishop Whitgift,” 1718, folio. 11. “An accurate edition of Stow’s Survey of London,” 1720, 2 vols. folio, for which he was eighteen years collecting materials. 12. “Ecclesiastical Memorials,” 1721, 3 vols. fol. He also published a sermon at the assizes at Hertford, July 8, 1689; and some other single sermons, in 1695, 1699, 1707, 1711, 1724. He kept an exact diary of his own life, which was once in the possession of Mr. Harris; and six volumes of his literary correspondence were lately in the possession of the rev. Mr. Knight, of Milton, in Cambridgeshire. The materials for many of his works, part of the Lansdowne library, are now ID the British Museum. Dr. Birch observes, that “his fidelity and industry will always give a value to his numerous writings, however destitute of the graces, and even uniformity of style, and the art of connecting facts.” We should be sorry, however, to see the simple and artless style of honest Strype exchanged for any modernizing improvements. There is a charm in his manner which seems to bring us close to the periods of which he is writing, and renders his irregular and sometimes digressive anecdotes extremely interesting. We can remember the time when Strype’s works were much neglected, and sold for little more than waste-paper; but it is much to the credit of the present age, that they have now risen vt ry high in value, and are yet purchased with eagerness. A new edition of his life of Cranmer, with some important additions, has lately issued from the Clarendon press, and is to be followed by the lives of the other archbishops, and his “Annals.”

, a Scottish historian, was born at Edinburgh, in 1742. His father, Mr. George Stuart, who died in 17>3, was professor of humanity in that university, and a man of considerable eminence for classical taste and literature. Gilbert Stuart, having made the usual prepa' rations in the grammar-school and the university, applied himself to the study of jurisprudence. For thr-.t profession, however, he is said to have been disqualified by indolence: and he early began to indulge his passion for general literature, and boundless dissipation. Yt t his youth was not wasted altogether in idleness, for before he had completed his twenty-second year, he published “An Historical Dissertation concerning the Antiquity of the British Constitution,” which had so much merit as to obtain for him the degree of doctor of laws, from the university of Edinburgh. After an interval of some years, in which he could not have neglected his studies, he produced, 2. “A View of Society in Europe, in its progress from rudeness to refinement; or inquiries concerning the history of laws, government, and manners.” This is a valuable work, and proves that he had meditated with much attention on the most important monuments of the middle ages. About the time when the first edition of this book appeared, Dr. Stuart applied for the professorship of public law in the university of Edinburgh; but being disappointed, removed soon after to London. He there became from 1768 to 1773, one of the writers of the Monthly Review. He then returned to Edinburgh, where he began a magazine and review, called from the name of that city, the first number of which appeared in October 1773. In this he was assisted by William Smellie (See Smellie); but owing to the virulent spirit displayed by the writers, it was obliged to be discontinued in 1776. In 1778 his View of Society' was republished. In 1782 he again visited London, and engaged in the Political Herald, and the English Review; but being attacked by two formidable disorders, the jaundice and the dropsy, he returned by sea to his native country, where he died, in his father’s house, August 13, 1786.

The other works of Dr. Gilbert Stuart were, 3. An anonymous pamphlet against Dr. Adam, who had published a Latin grammar, 1772. 4. “Observations concerning the public Law and Constitutional History of Scotland,” Edinburgh, 1779, 8vo. In this work he critically examined the preliminary book to Dr. Robertson’s History of Scotland. 5. “The History of the Establishment of the Reformation of Religion in Scotland,” London, 1780, 4to, a work commended for the easy dignity of the narrative, and for the more extraordinary virtue of strict impartiality. 6. “The History of Scotland,” from the establishment of the reformation to the death of queen Mary, London, 1782, 2 vols. His chief purpose in this book was to vindicate the character of that queen; but the whole is well written, and has been very generally read and admired. 7. He also revised and published “Sullivan’s Lectures on the Constitution of England,” This was about 1774. Dr. Stuart was about the iRnicldle size and justly proportioned. His countenance was modest and expressive, sometimes announcing sentiments of glowing friendship, of which he is said to have been truly susceptible; at others, displaying strong indignation, against folly and vice, which he had also shewn in his writings. With all his ardour for study, he yielded to the love of intemperance, to which, notwithstanding a strong constitution, he fell an early sacrifice. His talents were great, and his writings useful; yet in his character altogether there appears to have been little that is worthy of imitation. He is painted in the most unfavourable colours by Mr. Chalmers, in his Life of Ruddiman, who says, “Such was Gilbert Stuart’s laxity of principle as a man, that he considered ingratitude as one of the most venial of sins. Such was his conceit as a writer, that he regarded no one’s merits but his own. Such were his disappointments, both as a writer and a man, that he allowed his peevishness to sour into malice; and indulged his malevolence till it settled in corruption.” If this character be not too harshly drawn, it is impossible that much should be alleged in its defence.

, a celebrated architect and lover of classical antiquity, was born in London, in 1713. His parents resided in Creed-lane, Ludgate-street. His father, who was a mariner, was a native of Scotland, and his mother of Wales. Their circumstances were very narrow; but they were honest and worthy people, and gave their son the best education in their power. Mr. Stuart, who was the eldest of four children, was left utterly unprovided for when his father died. He exhibited, however, at a very early period of life, the dawnings of a strong imagination, splendid talents, and an ardent thirst for knowledge. By whom he was educated we have no account; but drawing and painting were his earliest occupations; and these he pursued with such industry and perseverance, that, while yet a boy, he contributed very essentially to the support of his widowed mother and her little family, by designing and painting fans for a person in the Strand. He placed one of his sisters under the care of this person as his shop-woman; and he continued, for many years, to pursue the same mode of maintaining the rest of his family. Notwithstanding the great pressure of such a charge, and the many temptations to dissipation, which are too apt to attract a young man of lively genius and extensive talents, Mr. Stuart employed the greatest part of his time in such studies as tended to perfect himself in the art he loved. He acquired a very accurate knowledge of anatomy; he became a correct draughtsman, and rendered himself master of geometry, and all the branches of the mathematics, so necessary to form the mind of a good painter: and it is no less extraordinary than true, that necessity and application were his only instructors. He has often confessed, that he was first led into the obligation of studying the Latin language, by a desire to understand what was written under prints, published after pictures of the ancient masters.

As his years increased, knowledge attended their progress: he acquired a great proficiency in the Greek language; and his unparalleled strength of mind carried him into a familiar association with most of the sciences, and principally that of architecture. His stature was of the middle size, but athletic. He possessed a robust constitution, invincible courage, and inflexible perseverance. Of this the following fact is a proof: a wen, in his forehead, had grown to an inconvenient size; and, one day, being in conversation with a surgeon, he asked him how it could be removed. The surgeon acquainted him with the length of the process; to which Mr. Stuart objected, on account of the interruption of his pursuits, and asked whether he could not cut it out, and then it would be only necessary to heal the part. The surgeon replied in the affirmative, but mentioned the very excruciating pain and danger of such an operation. Mr. Stuart, after a minute’s reflection, threw himself back in his chair, and said, “I will sit stil! do it now.” The operation was performed with success. With such qualifications, although yet almost in penury, he conceived the design of visiting Rome and Athens; but the ties of filial and fraternal affection induced him to postpone his journey, till he could insure a certain provision for his mother, and his brother and second sister. His mother died: he was soon after enabled to place his brother and sister in a situation that was likely to produce them a comfortable support; and then, with a very scanty pittance in his pocket, he set out on foot for Rome; and thus he performed the greatest part of his journey travelling through Holland, France, &c. and stopping through necessity at Paris, and several other places in his way, where, by his ingenuity as an artist, he procured some moderate supplies, towards prosecuting the rest of his journey. When arrived at Rome, he soon formed an intimate acquaintance with Mr. Nicholas Revett, an eminent painter and architect. From this gentleman Mr. Stuart first caught his ideas of that science, in which (quitting the profession of a painter) he afterward made such a conspicuous figure. During his residence at Rome, he studied architecture and fortification; and in 1748 they jointly circulated “Proposals for publishing an authentic description of Athens, &c.” For that purpose, they quitted Rome in March 1750, but did not reach Athens till March 1751, where, in about two months, they were met by Mr. Wood and Mr. Dawkins, whose admiration of his great qualities and wonderful perseverance secured to him their patronage. Dawkins was glad to encourage a brother in scientific investigation, who possessed equal ardour with himself, but very unequal resources for prosecuting those inquiries in which they were both engaged; having at the same time so much similarity of disposition, and ardour of pursuit. During his residence at Athens Mr. Stuart became a master of architecture and fortification; and having no limits to which his mind would be restricted, he engaged in the army of the queen of Hungary, where he served a campaign voluntarily, as chief engineer. On his return to Athens, he applied himself more closely to make drawings, and take the exact measurements of the Athenian architecture. He left Athens in 1755, still accompanied by his friend Revett; and after visiting Thessalonica, Smyrna, and the islands of the Archipelago, arrived in England in the beginning of 1755. The result of their classical labours was the appearance, in 1762, of the first volume in folio of “The Antiquities of Athens measured and delineated, by James Stuart, F. R. S. and S.A. and Nicholas Revett, painters and architects.” This work is a very valuable acquisition to the lovers of antiquities and the fine arts, and is a proper companion to the noble descriptions of Palmyra and Balhec, by Mr. Dawkins and Mr. Wood, by whom the two artists were early encouraged in the prosecution of a design so worthy of the most distinguished patronage. To this work, and the long walk which the author performed to compose it, he has been indebted for the name of the Athenian Stuart, universally decreed to him by the learned of this country.

Upon his return to England, Mr. Stuart was received into the late Mr. Davvkins’s family; and, among the many patrons which the report of his extraordinary qualifications acquired him, the first lord Anson led him forward to the reward most judiciously calculated to suit his talents and pursuits. It was by his lordship’s appointment that Mr. Stuart became surveyor to Greenwich hospital, which he held till the day of his death with universal approbation. He likewise constantly received the notice and esteem of the marquis of Rockingham, and of the principal nobility and gentry of taste and power. Besides his appointment at Greenwich hospital, all the additions and rebuilding of that part which was destroyed by the fire there, were conducted under his direction. He likewise built several houses in London; Mr. Anson’s in St. James’s-square, Mrs. Montague’s in Portman-square, &c.

In whatever new project he engaged, he pursued it with such avidity, that he seldom quitted it while there was any thing further to be learned or understood from it. Thus he rendered himself skilful in the art of engraving, and of sculpture; and his enthusiastic love for antique elegance made him also an adept in all the remote researches of an antiquary. But in this display of his talents, a just tribute to his memory as a man must not be forgotten. Those who knew him intimately, and had opportunities of remarking the nobleness of his soul, will join in claiming for him the title of Citizen of the World; and, if he could be charged with possessing any partiality, it was to merit, in, whomsoever he found it.

Mr. Stuart was twice married; first in 1760, to his housekeeper, a very worthy woman, by whom he had a son, who died an infant; his second wife, who survived him, was the daughter of Mr. Blackstone, a farmer in Kent; and to this lady, who was very young, he was united at the age of sixty-seven. By her he had four children; one of whom— a boy—was the very image and transcript of himself, both in body and mind. He exhibited an astonishing genius for drawing, even before he was three years old, and would imitate with pen, or pencil, any thing that he saw lying on his father’s table. This child (the darling of his father) died of the small-pox toward the end of 1787. Mr. Stuart’s health was observed to decline very rapidly from that time. He expired, at his house, in Leicester-square, on the 2d of February, 1788, in the seventy-sixth year of his age, and and was buried in a vault of the church of St. Martin’s in the Fields. Two volumes of his great work, “The Antiquities of Athens,” have been published since his death; the 2d in 1790, the 3d in 1794: the former by Mr. Newton, the latter by Mr. Revely. A fourth volume, containing a great many plates, has just been published under the superintendance of Mr. Taylor, of the architectural library, Holborn.

, an English writer of uncommon parts and learning, and very celebrated in his day, was born at Partney, near Spilsbye in Lincolnshire, Feb. 28, 1631. His father was a minister, and lived at Spilsbye; but being inclined to be an anabaptist, and forced to leave that place, he went with his wife and children into Ireland. Upon the breaking out of the rebellion there in 1641, the mother fled with her son Henry into England; and, landing at Liverpool, went on foot from thence to London, where she gained a comfortable subsistence by her needle, and sent her son Henry, being then ten years of age, to Westminster- school. There Dr. Busby, the master, was so struck with the surprising parts of the boy, that he shewed him more than ordinary favour; and recommended him to the notice of sir Henry Vane, junior, who one day came accidentally into the school. Sir Henry took a fancy to him, and frequently relieved him with money, and gave him the liberty of resorting to his house, “to fill that belly,” says Stubbe, “which otherwise had no sustenance but what one penny could purchase for his dinner, and which had no breakfast except he got it by making somebody’s exercise.” He says this in the preface to his “Epistolary Discourse concerning Phlebotomy;” where many other particulars of his life, mentioned by Mr. Wood, and here recorded, are also to be found. Soon after he was admitted on the foundation, and his master, in consideration of his great progress in learning, gave him additional assistance in books and other necessaries.

In 1649, he was elected student of Christ-church in Oxford; where, shewing himself too forward, saucy, and conceited, he was, as Mr. Wood relates, often kicked and beaten. However, through the interest of his patron, he was certainly of no small consequence; for the oath, called the Engagement, being framed by the parliament that same year, was some time after sent down to the university by him; and he procured some to be turned out, and others to be spared, according as he was influenced by affection or dislike. While he continued an under-graduate, it was usual with him to discourse in the public schools very fluently in Greek, which conveys no small idea of his learning. After he had taken a bachelor of arts degree, he went into Scotland, and served in the parliament army there from 1653 to 1655: then he returned to Oxford, and took a master’s degree in 1656; and, at the motion of Dr. Owen, was in 1657 made second-keeper of the Bodleian library, under Dr. Barlow. He made great use and advantage of this post for the assistance of his studies, and held it till 1659; when he was removed from it, as well as from his place of student of Christ church; for he published the same year, “A Vindication” of his patron sir Henry Vane; “An Essay on the good Old Cause;” and a piece, entitled “Light shining out of Darkness, with an Apology for the Quakers,” in which he reflected upon the clergy and the universities.

After his ejection, he retired to Stratford upon Avon in Warwickshire, in order to practise physic, which he had studied some years; and upon the Restoration applied to Dr. Morley, soon after bishop of Winchester, for protection in his retirement. He assured him of an inviolable passive obedience, which was all he could or would pay, till the covenant was renounced; and, upon the re-establishment of episcopacy, received confirmation from the hands of his diocesan. In 1661, he went to Jamaica, being honoured with the title of his majesty’s physician for that island; but the climate not agreeing with him, he returned and settled at Stratford. Afterwards he removed to Warwick, where he gained very considerable practice, as likewise at Bath, which he frequented in the summer season. He did not, however, apply so closely to the business of his profession, as to neglect every thing else: on the contrary, he was ever attentive to the transactions of the literary world, and was often a principal party concerned. Before the Restoration, he had joined Mr. Hobbes, with whom he was intimately acquainted, against Dr. Wallis, and other mathematicians; and had published a very smart tract or two in that controversy, in which he was regarded as second to Hobbes. After the. Restoration, he was engaged in a controversy with some members of the Royal Society, or rather with the Royal Society itself; in which, far from being a second, he was now a principal, and indeed alone.

The Royal Society had from its first institution alarmed the zealous admirers of the ok! philosophy, who affected to represent the views of many of its members to be the destruction, not only of true learning, but even of religion itself. This gave occasion to Dr. Sprat’s “History of the Royal Society” in 1667, and to a discourse by Mr. Glanvill in 1668, under the title of “Plus ultra, or, the progress and advancement of Knowledge since the days of Aristotle, in an account of some of the most remarkable late improvements of practical useful learning, to encourage philosophical endeavours.” Mr. Stubbe attacked both these works with great warmth and severity, yet with prodigious acuteness and learning, in a 4tu volume, entitled, “Legends no history, or a specimen of some animadversions upon the History of the Royal Society; together with the Plus ultra of Mr. Glanvill, reduced to a Non plus, 1670.” In this book he charges the members of the Royal Society with intentions to bring contempt upon ancient and solid learning, especially the Aristotelian philosophy, to undermine the universities, to destroy the established religion, and even to introduce popery. This laid the foundation of a controversy, which was carried on with asperity for some time; and Stubbe wrote several pieces to support his allegations. He w;is encouraged in this affair by Dr. Fell, who was no admirer of the Royal Society; and he made himself so obnoxious to that body, that, as he himself informs us, “they threatened to write his life.”

The writings of Mr. Stubbe, though his life was no long one, were extremely numerous, and upon various subjects. Those which he published before the Restoration were against monarchy, ministers, universities, churches, and every thing which was dear to the royalists; yet he did this more to please and serve his friend and patron sir Henry Vane, than out of principle, or attachment to a. party: and when his antagonists insulted him for changing his tone afterwards, he made no scruple at all to confess it: “My youth,” says he, “and other circumstances, incapacitated me from rendering him any great services but all that I did, and all that I wrote, had no other aim nor do I care how much any man can inodiate my former writings, so long- as they were suhservient to him.” “The truth is, and all,” says Wood, “who knew him in Oxford, knew this of him for certain, that he was no frequenter of conventicles, no taker of the covenant or engagement, no contractor of acquaintance with notorious sectaries; that he neither enriched nor otherwise advanced himself during the late troubles, nor shared the common odium, and dangers, or prosperity of his benefactor.” On this account he easily made his peace with the royalists, after the Restoration: yet not, as it should seem, without some overt acts on his part, for, besides conforming entirely to the church of England, he wrote a small piece against Harrington’s “Oceana,” in 1660 which, in the preface to “The good old Cause,” printed in 1659, he had extolled, “as if,” says Wood, “it were the pattern in the mount.” By these means he made amends for all the offence he had given: “I have at length,” says he, “removed all the umbrages I ever lay under; I have joined myself to the church of England, not only on account of its being publicly imposed (which in things indifferent is no small consideration, as I learned from the Scottish transactions at Perth;) but because it is the least defining, and consequently the most comprehensive and fitting to be national.”

After a life of almost perpetual war and conflict in various ways, this extraordinary man came to an untimely end: yet not from any contrivance or designs of his enemies, although his impetuous and furious zeal hurried him to say that they often put him in fear of his life. Being at Bath in the summer season, he had a call from thence to a patient at Bristol; and whether because it was desired, or from the excessive heat of the weather, he set out in the evening, and went a by-way. Mr. Wood says that “his head was then intoxicated with bibbing, but more with talking and snuffing of powder:” be that as it may, he was drowned in passing a river about two miles from Bath, on the 12th of July, 1676. His body was taken up the next morning, and the day after buried in the great church at Bath; when his old antagonist Glanvill, who was the rector, preached his funeral sermon; but, as it is natural to imagine, without saying much in his favour. Soon after, a physician of that place made the following epitaph, which, though never put over him, deserves to be recorded: “Memorise sacrum. Post varies casus, et magna rerum discrimina, tandem hie quiescunt mortalitatis exuviae Henrici Stubbe, medici Wanvicensis, quondam ex cede Christi Oxoniensis, rei medicae, historicse, ac mathematics peritissimi, judkii vivi, & librorum heliuonis qui, quum multa scripserat, & plures sanaverat, aliorum saluti sedulo prospiciens, propriam neglexit. Obiit aquis frigidissuffocatus, 12 die Julii, A.D. 1679.”

Wood was contemporary with Stubbe at Oxford, and has given him this character: that, “he was a person of most admirable parts, and had a most prodigious memory; was the most noted Latinist and Grecian of his age; was a singular mathematician, and thoroughly read in all political matters, councils, ecclesiastical and profane histories; had a voluble tongue, and seldom hesitated either in public disputes or common discourse; had a voice big and magisterial, and a mind equal to it; was of an high generous nature, scorned money and riches, and the adorers of them; was accounted a very good physician, and excellent in the things belonging to that profession, as botany, anatomy, and chemistry. Yet, with all these noble accomplishments, he was extremely rash and imprudent, and even wanted common discretion. He was a very bold man, uttered any thing that came into his mind, not only among his companions, but in public coffee-houses, of which he was a great frequenter: and would often speak freely of persons then present, for which he used to be threatened with kicking and beating. He had a hot and restless head, his hair being carrot-coloured, and was ever ready to undergo any enterprise, which was the chief reason that macerated his body almost to a skeleton. He was also a person of no fixed principles; and whether he believed those things which every good Christian doth, is not for me to resolve. Had he been endowed with common sobriety and discretion, and not have made himself and his learning: mercenary and cheap to every ordinary and ignorant fellow, he would have been admired by all, and might have picked and chused his preferment; but all these things being wanting, he became a ridicule, and undervalued by sober and knowing scholars, and others too.”

, a celebrated anatomist and painter of animals, was born at Liverpool in 1724-, and at the age of thirty went to Rome for improvement in his studies, but why is not easily accounted for; London was the best theatre to exercise his talents for the dissection and the portraiture of animals, of horses (which he chiefly excelled in) especially, and in London he fixed his residence. That his skill in comparative anatomy never suggested to him the propriety of style in forms, if it were not eminently proved by his Phaeton with the Horses of the Sun, would be evident from all his other figures, which, when human, are seldom more than the attendants of some animal, whilst the style of the animals themselves depended entirely on the individual before him: his tiger for grandeur has never been equalled; his lions are to those of Rubens what jackals are to lions; but none ever did greater justice to the peculiar structure of that artificial animal, the race courser, and to all the mysteries of turf- tactics, though, unfortunately for the artist, they depend more on the fac-similist’s precision than the painter’s spirit. Stubbs was perhaps the first who painted in enamel on a large scale. He was an associate of the Royal Academy, and died in 1806. He published a work, completed in 1766, under the title of “The Anatomy of the Horse including a particular description of the bones, cartilages, muscles, fascias, ligaments, nerves, arteries, veins, and glands; in eighteen tables from nature:” and before his death three numbers of another work, which was to have consisted of six, entitled “A Comparative Anatomical Exposition of the structure of the Human Body with that of a Tiger and a common Fowl, in thirty tables.”!

, a learned lawyer in queen Elizabeth’s reign, was born about 1541, and is said by Mr. Strype to have been a member of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge. He removed thence to Lincoln’s-inn for the study of the law, and contracted an acquaintance with the most learned and ingenious men of that society. He became a puritan in consequence, as some suppose, of his connection with the celebrated Thomas Cartu right, who had married his sister. About 1579, when the report of the queen’s intended marriage with the duke of Anjou, brother to the king of France, had created an extraordinary alarm, lest such a match should eventually be injurious to the Protestant establishment, Mr. Stubbs published a satirical work against it, entitled “The Discovery of a gaping gulph wherein England is like to be swallowed up by another French marriage,” &c. This highly incensed the queen, whose passions ha -I always much -way over her actions, and too much over htr ministers, and she immediately issued out a proclamation against it; and the autuor and printer, or bookseller, being discovered, they were soon apprehended, and sentence given against them, that their right hands should be cut off, according to an act of Philip and Mary, “against the authors and publishers of seditious writings.” When Stubbs came to receive his punishment, which was inflicted with great barbarity, with a butcher’s knife and mallet, he immediately took off his hat with his left hand, and cried “God save the queen!”

In this suffering Stubbs had the sympathy of the people, and did not lose the regard of thuse who had previously known his learning and talents, and who probably thought little of an offence that proceeded from his zeal for the reformation, and evidently from no principle of disloyalty. A very few years afterwards he was employed by the lord treasurer, to answer cardinal Allan’s “Defence of the English Catholics;” a task which he executed with acknowledged ability. Several letters of Stubbs, addressed to the lord treasurer and his secretary Hickes, are preserved in the Burghley -papers, now in the British Museum; and most of them having been written with his left-hand, he usually, in allusion to the loss of his right, signed himself Scæva. Whether his answer to Allen was ever published is uncertain; but he translated Beza’s meditations on the first Psalm, and the seven penitential Psalrns, from the French, which he dedicated to lady Anne Bacon, wife of sir Nicholas Bacon. The dedication is dated from v Thelveton in Norfolk, where he appears to have taken up his residence, May 31, 1582, and it is signed “John Stubbe, Sceva.” It is said that Stubbs was afterwards a commander in the army in Ireland, but we have no farther accouu- of him, or any notice of his death. Wood is of opinion, that he was either father or brother to Philip Stubbs, author of “The Anatomy of Abuses,” and other works against the vices and abuses of his time. This man, who was not m orders, although all his publications are such as might have been expected from a divine, lived about the same time with John Stubbs; but Wood’s account of him is imperfect.

, a celebrated writer towards the end of the sixteenth century, was born at Zurich. He acquired great honour by his works, particularly by his treatise “On the Feasts of the Ancients,” which is very curious, and may be found with his works on antiquity, Leyden, 1695, 2 vols, folio. He died in 1607. Stuckius also wrote some good Commentaries on Arrian and a parallel between Charlemagne and Henry IV. entitled “Carol us Magnus redivivus,” 4to.

, an antiquary of much celebrity, descended from an antient family in Lincolnshire, was born at Holbech in that county, November 7, 1687. After having had the first part of his education at the free-school of that place, under the care of Mr. Edward Kelsal, he was admitted into Bene't-college in Cambridge, Nov. 7, 1703, under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Favvcett, and chosen a scholar there in April following. While an under-graduate, he often indulged a strong propensity for drawing and designing; and began to form a collection of antiquarian books. He made physic, however, his principal study, and with that view took frequent perambulations through the neighbouring country, with the famous Dr. Hales, Dr. John Gray of Canterbury, and others, in search of plants; and made great additions to Ray’s “Catalogus Plantarum circa Cantabrigiam;” which, with a map of the county, he was solicited to print; but his father’s death, and various domestic avocations, prevented it. He studied anatomy under Mr. Rolfe the surgeon attended the chemical lectures of signor Vigani and taking the degree of M. B. in 1709, made himself acquainted with the practical part of medicine under the great Dr. Mead at St. Thomas’s hospital. He first began to practise at Boston in his native county, where he strongly recommended the chalybeate waters of Stanfield near Folkingham. In 1717 he removed to London, where, on the recommendation of his friend Dr. Mead, he was soon after elected F. R. S. and was one of the first who revived that of the Antiquaries in 1718, to which last he was secretary for many years during his residence in town. He was also one of the earliest members of the Spalding society. He took the degree of M. D. at Cambridge in 1719, and was admitted a fellow of the College of Physicians in the year following, about which time (1720) he published an account of “Arthur’s Oon” in Scotland, and of “Graham’s dyke,” with plates, 4to. In the year 1722, he was appointed to read the Gulstonian Lecture, in which he gave a description and history of the spleen, and printed it in folio, 1723, together with some anatomical observations on the dissection of an elephant, and many plates coloured in imitation of nature. Conceiving that there were some remains of the Eleusinian mysteries in free-masonry, he gratified his curiosity, and was constituted master of a lodge (1723), to which he presented an account of a Roman amphitheatre at Dorchester, in 4to. After having been one of the censors of the College of Physicians, of the council of the Royal Society, and of the committee to examine into the condition of the astronomical instruments of the Royal Observatory of Greenwich, he left London in 1726, and retired to Grantham in Lincolnshire, where he soon came into great request. The dukes of Ancaster and Rutland, the families of Tyrconnel, Gust, &c. &c. and most of the principal families in the country, were glad to take his advice. During his residence here, he declined an invitation from Algernon earl of Hertford, to settle as a physician at Marlborough, and another to succeed Dr. Hunter at Newark. In 1728 he married Frances daughter of Robert Williamson, esq. of Allington, near Grantham, a lady of good family and fortune. He was greatly afflicted with the gout, which used generally to confine him during the winter months. On this account, for the recovery of his health, it was customary with him to take several journeys in the spring, in which he indulged his innate love of antiquities, by tracing out the footsteps of Caesar’s expedition in this island, his camps, stations, &c. The fruit of his more distant travels was his “Itinerarium Curiosum; or, an Account of the Antiquities and Curiosities in his Travels through Great Britain, Centuria I.” adorned with one hundred copper-plates, and published in folio, London, 1724. This was reprinted after his death, in 1776, with two additional plates; as was also published the second volume, (consisting of his description of the Brill, or Caesar’s camp at Pancras,“IterBoreale,” 1725, and his edition of Richard of Cirencester , with his own notes, and those of Mr. Bertram of Copenhagen, with whom he corresponded, illustrated with 103 copper-plates engraved in the doctor’s lifetime. Overpowered with the fatigue of his profession, and repeated attacks of the gout, he turned his thoughts to the church; and, being encouraged in that pursuit hy archbishop Wake, was ordained at Croydon, July 20, 1720; and in October following was presented by lord-chancellor King to the living of All-Saints in Stamford . At the time of his entering on his parochial cure (1730), Dr. Rogers of that place had just invented his Oleum Artbriticum; which Dr. Stukeley seeing oihers use with admirable success, he was induced to do the like, and with equal advantage for it not only saved his joints, but, with the addition of a proper regimen, and leaving off the use of fermented liquors, he recovered his health and limbs to a surprising degree, ind ever after enjoyed a firm and active state of body, beyond any example in the like circumstances, to a good old age. This occasioned him to publish an account of the success of the external application of this oil in innumerable instances, in a letter to sir Hans Sloane, 1733; and the year after he published also, “A Treatise on the Cause and Cure of the Gout, from a new Rationale;” which, with an abstract of it, has passed through several editions. He collected some remarkable particulars at Stamford in relation to his predecessor bishop Cumberland; and, in 1736, printed an explanation, with an engraving, of a curious silver plate of Roman workmanship in basso relievo, found underground at Risley Park in Derbyshire; wherein he traces its journey thither, from the church of Bourges, to which it had been given by Exsuperius, called St. Swithin, bishop of Toulouse, about the year 205. He published also the same yea.- his “Palæographia Sacra, No. I. or, Discourses on the Monuments of Antiquity that relate to Sacred History,” in 4to, which he dedicated to sir Richard Kllys, bart. “from whom he had received many favours.” In this work (uhich was to have been continued in succeeding numbers) he undertakes to shew, how Heathen Mythology is derived from Sacred History, and that the Bacchus in the Poets is no other than the Jehovah in the Scripture, the conductor of the Israelites through the wilderness. In his country retirement he disposed his collection of Greek and Roman coins according to the order of the Scripture History; and cut out a machine in wood (on the plan of an Orrery), which shews the motion of the heavenly bodies, the course of the tide, &c. In 1737 he lost his wife and in 1738, married Elizabeth, the only daughter of Dr. Gale, dean of York, and sister to his intimate friends Roger and Samuel Gale, esquires; and from this time he often spent his winters in London. In 1740, he published an account of Stonehenge, dedicated to the duke of Ancaster, who had made him one of his chaplains, and given him the living of Somerby near Grantham the year before. In 1741, he preached the Thirtieth of January Sermon before the House of Commons; and in that year became one of the founders of the Egyptian society, composed of gentlemen who had visited Egypt. In 1743 he printed an account of lady Roisia’s sepulchral cell, lately discovered at Royston, in a tract, entitled “Palseographia Britannica, No. I.” to which an answer was published by Mr. Charles Parkin, in 1744. The doctor replied in “Palasographia Britannica, No. II.” 1746, giving an account of the origin of the universities of Cambridge and Stamford, both from Croylandabbey; of the Roman city Granta, on the north-side of the river, of the beginning of Cardike near Waterbeach, &c. To this Mr. Parkin again replied in 1748; but it does not appear that the doctor took any further notice of him. In 1747, the benevolent duke of Montagu (with whom he had become acquainted at the Egyptian society) prevailed on him to vacate his preferments in the country, by giving him the rectory of St. George, Queen-square, whence he frequently retired to Kentish-town, where the following inscription was placed over his door:

He had the misfortune to lose his patron in 1749 on whose death he published some verses, with others on his entertainment at Boughton, and a “Philosophic Hymn on Christmas-day.” Two papers by the doctor, upon the earthquakes in 1750, read at the Royal Society, and a sermon preached at his own parish-church on that alarming occasion, were published in 1750, 8vo, under the title of “The Philosophy of Earthquakes, natural and religious;” of which a second part was printed with a second edition of his sermon on “the Healing of Diseases as a Character of the Messiah, preached before the College of Physicians Sept. 20, 1750.” In 1751 (in “Palaeographia Britannica, No. III.”) he gave an account of Oriuna the wife of Carausius; in Phil. Trans, vol. XLVIII. art. 33, an account of the Eclipse predicted by Thales; and in the Gentleman’s Magazine, 1754, p. 407, is the substance of a paper read at the Royal Society in 1752, to prove that the coral-tree is a sea-vegetable. On Wednesday the 27th of February, 1765, Dr. Stukeley was seized with a stroke of the palsy, which was brought on by attending a full vestry, at which he was accompanied by serjeant Eyre, on a contested election for a lecturer. The room being hot, on their return through Dr. Stukeley’s garden, they both caught their deaths; for the serjeant never was abroad again, and the doctor’s illness came on that night. Soon after this accident his faculties failed him; but he continued quiet and composed until Sunday following, March 3, 1765, when he departed in his seventy eighth year, which he attained by remarkable temperance and regularity. By his own particular directions, his corpse was conveyed in a private manner to East- Ham in Essex, and was buried in the church-yard, just beyond the east end of the church, the turf being laid smoothly over it, without any monument. This spot he particularly fixed on, in a visit he paid some time before to the vicar of that parish, when walking with him one day in the church-yard. Thus ended a valuable life, daily spent in throwing light on the dark remains of antiquity. His great learning and profound skill in those researches enabled him to publish many elaborate and curious works, and to leave many ready for the press. In his medical capacity, his “Dissertation on the Spleen” was well received. His “Itinerariutn Curiosum,” the first-fruits of his juvenile excursions, presaged what might be expected from his riper age, when he had acquired more experience. The curious in these studies were not disappointed; for, with a sagacity peculiar to his great genius, with unwearied pains and industry, and some years spent in actual surveys, he investigated and published an account of those stupendous works of the remotest antiquity, Stonehenge and Abury, in 1743, and has given the most probable and rational account of their origin and use, ascertaining also their dimensions with the greatest accuracy. So great was his proficiency in Druidical history, that his familiar friends used to call him “the arch-druid of this age.” His works abound with particulars that shew his knowledge of this celebrated British priesthood; and in his Itinerary he announced a “History of the Ancient Celts, particularly the first inhabitants of Great Britain,” for the most part finished, to have consisted of four vplumes, folio, with above 300 copper-plates, many of which were engraved. Great part of this work was incorporated into his Stonehenge and Abury. In his “History of Carausius,” 1757, 1751), in two vols. 4to, he has shewn much learning and ingenuity in settling the principal events of that emperor’s government in Britain. To his interest and application we are indebted for recovering from obscurity Richard of Cirencester’s Itinerary of Roman Britain, which has been mentioned before. His discourses, or sermons, under the title of “Palaeographia Sacra, 1763, on the vegetable creation,” bespeak him a botanist, philosopher, and divine, replete with antient learning, and excellent observations; but a little too much transported by a lively fancy and invention. He closed the last scenes of his life with completing a long and laborious work on ancient British coins, in particular of Cunobelin; and felicitated himself on having from them discovered many remarkable, curious, and new anecdotes, relating to the reigns of that and other British kings. The twenty-three plates of this work were published after his decease; but the ms. (left ready for publishing) remained in the hands of his daughter Mrs. Fleming, relict of Richard Fleming, esq. an eminent solicitor, who was the doctor’s executor, and died in 1774. By his fii^t wife Dr. Stukeley had three daughters; of whom one died young; the other two survived him; the one, Mrs. Fleming already mentioned; the other, wife to the Rev. Thomas Fairchild, rector of Pitsey, in Essex. They both died in 1782. By his second wife, Dr. Stukeley had no child. To the great names already mentioned among his friends and patrons, may be added those of Mr. Folkes, Dr. Berkeley, bishop of Cloyne (with whom he corresponded on the subject of Tar* water), Dr. Pocock bishop of Meath, and many others of the first rank of literature at home: and amou. the eminent foreigners with whom he corresponded wete Dr. Heigertahl, Mr. Keysler, and the learned father Montfaucon, who inserted some of his designs (sent him by archbishop Wake) in his “Antiquity explained.” A good account of Dr. Stukeley was, with his own permission, printed in 1725, by Mr. Masters, in the second part of his History of Corpus Christi college; and very soon after his death a short but just character of him was given in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1765, by his friend Peter Collinson. Of both these, Mr. Nichols availed himself; and was favoured with several additional particulars from Dr. Ducarel and Mr. Gough. After his decease, a medal of him was cast and repaired by Gaub; on one side, the head adorned with oak leaves, inscribed Rev. Gvl. Stvkeley, M.D.S. R. & A. s. Exergue, act. 54. Reverse, a view of Stonehenge, Ob. Mar. 4, 1765, Æt. 84; [but this is a mistake, for he was in fact but 78]. There is a portrait of him, after Kneller, in mezzotino, by;J". Smith in 172 i, before he took orders, with his arms, viz. Argent, a spread-eagle double-headed Sable. Mrs. Fleming had another portrait of him in his robes, by Wills; and Mrs. Parsons (relict of Dr. James Parsons) had a fine miniature, which was esteemed a good likeness.