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

Tbirlby then studied the civil law, in which he lectured while the late sir Edward Walpole was his pupil; but he was a careless tutor, scarcely ever reading lectures. The late learned Dr. Jortin, who was one of his pupils, was very early in life recommended by him to translate some of Eustathius’s notes for the use of “Pope’s Homer,” and complained “that Pope having accepted and approved his. performance, never testitied any curiosity or desire to see him.” The civil law displeasing him, he applied to common law, and had chambers taken for him in the Temple by his friend Andrew Reid, with a view of being entered of that society, and being called to the bar; but of this scheme he likewise grew weary. He came, however, to London, to the bouse of his friend sir Edward Walpole, who procured for him the office of a king’s waiter in the port of London, in May 1741, a sinecure place worth about \00l. per annum. While he was in sir Edward’s house he kept a miscellaneous book of memorables, containing whatever was said or done amiss by sir Edward or any part of his family. The remainder of his days were passed in private lodgings, where he lived in a very retired manner, seeing only a few friends, and indulging occasionally in excessive drinking, being sometimes in a state of intoxication for five or six weeks together; and, as is uual with such men, appeared to be so even when sober; and in his cups he was jealous and quarrelsome* An acquaintance who found him one day in the streets haranguing the crowd, and took him home by gentle violence, was afterwards highly esteemed by Thirlby for not relating the story. He contributed some notes to Theobald’s Shakspeare; and afterwards talked of an edition of his own. Dr. Jortin undertook. to read over that poet, with a view to mark the passages where he had either imitated Greek and Latin writers, or at least had fallen into the same thoughts and expressions. Thirlby, however, dropped his design; but left a Shakspeare, with some abusive remarks on Warburton in the margin of the first volume, and a very few attempts at emendations, and those perhaps all in the first volume. In the other volumes he had only, with great diligence, counted the lines in every page. When this was told to Dr. Jortin, “I have known him,” said he, “amuse himself with still slighter employment: he would write down all the proper names that he could call into his memory.” His mind seems to have been tumultuous and desultory, and he was glad to catch any employment that might produce attention without aqxiety. The copy, such as it was, became the property of sir Edward Walpole, to whom he bequeathed all his books and papers, and who lent it to Dr. Johnson when he was preparing his valuable edition of “Shakspeare” for the press; accordingly the name of Thin by appears in it as a commentator. He died Dec. 19, 1753. One of Dr. Thirlby’s colloquial topics may be quoted, as in it he seems to have drawn his own character, with one of those excuses for which self-conceit is never at a loss. “Sometimes,” said he, “Nature sends into the world a man of powers superior to the rest, of quicker intuition, and wider comprehension; this man has all other men for his enemies, and would not be suffered to live his natural time, but that his excellencies are balanced by his failings. He that, by intellectual exaltation, thus towers above his contemporaries, is drunken, or lazy, or capricious; or, by some defect or other, is hindered from exerting his sovereignty of mind; he is thus kept upon the level, and thus preserved from the destruction which would be the natural consequence of universal hatred.”

As the edition of “Justin Martyr” was the magnum opus of Dr. Thirlby, and he is a writer of whom little has ever hitherto been said, this article may be enlarged with, the opinions of some eminent scholars on that performance.

“The learned Mr. Thiriby,” says Mr. Bowyer, “fellow of Jesus college, is publishing a new edition of ‘Justin Martyr’s two Apologies,’ and his ‘ Dialogue with Trypno the Jew.’ The Greek text will be printed exactly according to R, Stephens’s edition. The version is Langius’s, corrected in innumerable places. On the same page wi$h the text and version are printed the notes and emendations of the editor, with select notes of all the former editors, and of Sraliger, Casaubon, Salma^us, Capellus, Valesius,­and other learned men. The most selected places have been collated with the ms. from which R. Stephens’s edition was taken, and the variations are inserted in their proper places. At the end are bishop Pearson’s notes from the margin of his book, and Dr. Davids notes upon the first Apology;' both now first printed.”

In a letter from Mr. Clarke to Mr. Bowyer, dated March 10, 1768, he says, “I think somebody has told me, that * Justin Martyr’s Apology‘ has been lately published from Dr. Ashton’s papers; by whom I know not. His ’ Hierpcles’ shews that Needham was not equal to that work: has this the same view with regard to Thirlby? That man was lost to the republic of letters very surprisingly; he went off, and returned no more.” 1

, a member of the French academy, was born in 1732, at Clermont in Auvergne, the country of the celebrated Pascal. He received from his mother a severe, and almost a Spartan education. The three children of that estimable woman were brought up chiefly under her own eyes. His two elder brothers died, the one in 1748, the other in 1755, both young men, and both having signalized themselves in literature. Joseph, the eldest, had produced a comedy; and John, the second, excelled in Latin poetry. The death of his second brother, impressed Antony very early with a strong sense of the vanity of worldly cares; and with a profound piety ^ which enhanced the value of his character. He had a decided taste for poetry, but was designed for the bar. In obedience to the wish of his mother, he went to Clermont, to follow a study repugnant to his taste; but going with her to Paris, when John was at the point of death, his friends offered him a professorship in the qoliege of Beauvais. This, therefore, he accepted, as more congenial to his feelings, though less splendid in appearance, than the profession for which he had been designed. He was soon in high estimation for his talents as a poet and an orator; and M. Watelet, a rich man, and a man of letters, offered him a pension as a tribute to his merit; but he chose, with becoming pride, to owe his subsistence to hi own talents, rather than to the generosity of any one: He was afterwards secretary to the duke de Praslin, minister for foreign affairs; secretary to the Swiss cantons (an independent place in the government); and finally secretary to the duke of Orleans. He was also a member of the academy, tho-ugh it is said that he once refused to be chosen, when he found that he was proposed chiefly out of pique to another candidate, M. Marmontel. Without any fortune but his pension from the court, and the trifling reward he received for his assiduous attendance at the academy, he continued to reside at Paris; and latterly, with a sister* who superintended his domestic concerns. But, his health being impaired by excessive application, he was obliged to seek the more favourable climate of Nice, where for a time he recovered the use of all his powers. But his lungs had always been weak, and being seized also with a fever, he died September 17, 1785, in the ho,use of the archbishop of Lyons, and was buried at the neighbouring village of Qulins. At the time of his death he was employed in writing a poem on the czar Peter the Great, styled the “Pe*treade,” which has never been published.

The personal character of M. Thomas, was held still higher than even the merit of his works could claim. He bad that amiable simplicity of manners which prevents a man of genius from offending others by his superiority. He was just, moderate, gentle, an enemy to noise and ostentation, a good friend, and an affectionate son. He was not indifferent to commendation or censure, but received the one without vanity, and the other without anger. It was in 1756, that he first appeared as an author, hy publishing, 1. “Reflexions historiques et liteVaires sur le Poeme de la Religion naturelle cle Voltaire,” 12mo. In this able tract he defended revelation without bigotry; and, allowing the great talents of his antagonist, lamented his errors, and treated him with politeness. 2. In 1759 he wrote and pronounced his “Eloge du Mareschal de Saxe,” a performance which gained hini the crown from the academy, and the credit of uniting the precision of Tacitus with the elevation of Bossuet. He produced afterwards similar orations in praise of d'Aguesseau, du Guai Trouin, Sully, and Descartes, which were equally admired; and with an additional eulogium on Marcus Aurelius, published together by himself, with very valuable notes. 3. In 1772 be produced his “Essai sur le caractere, les mceurs, et Tesprit des Femmes,” 8vo. This is not esteemed equally judicious. 4. “Essai sur les Eloges,” 1773, 2 vols. 8vo. This is a work of great genius and eloquence and contains many able portraits of illustrious persons. He produced also, 5. Several poems; as, “Epitre au Penple,” “Ode sur les temps,” and “Jumonville,” with some others. 6. A ballet in three acts, called “Amphion;” but this is not reckoned one of the best flowers in his crown. It was played in 1767. His prose works were published collectively in 1773; and form 4 vols. 12mo; but a more complete edition appeared in 1802, 7 vols. 8vo.

, a modern philosopher, was born at Leipsic, in 1655, and was well educated, first under his father, and afterwards in the Leipsic university. At first, he acquiesced in the established doctrines of the schools; but, upon reading PuffendorPs “Apology for rejecting the Scholastic Principles of Morals and Law,” he determined to renounce all implicit deference to ancient dogmas. He read lectures upon the subject of natural law, first from the text of Grotius, and afterwards from that of Puffendorf, freely exercising his own judgment, and boldly advancing new opinions. Whilst his father was living, paternal prudence and moderation restrained the natural vehemence and acrimony of the young man’s temper, which was too apt to break out, even in his public lectures. But when he was left to himself, the boldness with which he advanced unpopular tenets, and the severity with which he dealt out his satirical censures, soon brought upon him the violent resentment of theologians and professors.

An “Introduction to Puffendorf,” which Thomas published in 1687, in which he deduced the obligation of morality from natural principles, occasioned great offence, which he increased in the following year, by commencing a monthly journal which he called “Free Thoughts: or Monthly Dialogues on various books, chiefly new;” iti which he attacked many of his contemporaries with such severity, and probably with such injustice, that he -narrowly escaped punishment from the ecclesiastical court of Dresden. A charge also of contempt of religion was brought against him, but was not prosecuted. A satirical review, which he wrote, of a treatise “On the Divine right of Kings,” published by a Danish divine; “A Defence of the Sect of the Pietists,” and other satirical publications, at last excited the resentment of the clergy against Thomas, and he found it necessary to leave Leipsic, and by the permission of the elector of Brandenburgh, read private lectures in the city of Hall. After a short interval, he was appointed public professor of jurisprudence, first in Berlin, and afterwards at Hall. In these situations, he thought himself at full liberty to indulge his satirical humour, and to engage in the controversies of the times; and, as long as he lived, he continued to make use of this liberty in a manner which subjected him to much odium. He died at Hall in 1728.

, known to the world by the name of Corinna, with which Dryden flattered her, was born in 1675; and, after a life of ill health and various disappointments, died Feb. 3, 17 3O, in her fifty-sixth year, and was buried in the church of St. Bride. Among her other misfortunes, she laboured under the displeasure of Pope, whom she had offended, and who took care to place her in his “Dunciad.” He once paid her a visit, in company with Henry Cromwell, esq. whose letters, by some' accident, fell into her hands, with some of Pope’s answers. As soon as that gentleman died, Curl I found means to wheedle them from her, and immediately committed them to the press; which so enraged Pope, that he never forgave her. Corinna, considered as an author, has very few; claims to notice: she had not so much wit as Mrs. Behn or J Mrs. Manley, nor so happy a gift at intellectual painting; but her poetry was once thought soft and delicate, and her letters sprightly and entertaining. Her poems were published after her death, by Curll; and two volumes of letters (under the title of “Pylades and Corinua,”) which passed between her and a Mr. Gwynnet, who was to have been her husband, but died before matters could be accomplished. In this last publication she gives an account of her own life, which has been abridged in Gibber’s “Lives,” and other collections but which Mr. Malone has proved such a tissue of improbabilities and falsehoods, that a mere reference to it may be thought sufficient

, bishop of Rochester, the eldest of three sons of the rev. John Tnomas, many years vicar of Brampton in Cumberland, was born at Carlisle Oct. 14, 1712. Many of his ancestors, both on the paternal and maternal side, were remarkable for their longevity; so that he might be considered as “born with somewhat like an hereditary claim to length of days.” Being designed for the church, at a proper age he was placed in the grammar-school at Carlisle, whence he was sent to Oxford, in 1730, and, on the 23d of November, was admitted a commoner of Queen’s-college. Soon after his admission he had a clerkship given him by Dr. Smith, then provost. Having discharged this office, and completed his terms, he put on a civilian’s gown, and, leaving Oxford, became an assistant at the classical academy in Soho-square. In this situation he acquitted himself so well, as to be recommended to be private tutor to the younger son of sir William Clayton, bart. a charge which led to his future elevation. How long he remained in it, is not precisely known, but probably till he had completed his pupil’s education. His conduct, however, was so well approved, that shortly after, with the consent of sir William Clayton, the sister of his pupil, on the death of her first husband, sir Charles Blackwell, of Sprowston-hall, Norfolk, became his wife. Mr. Thomas lived in habits of the closest friendship with his brother-in-law, until about 1784, when that gentleman met a premature death, occasioned by a fall from his horse.

On the 27th of March, 1737, Mr. Thomas was ordained a deacon, by sir George Fleming, bishop of Carlisle, at a special ordination holden in the chapel of John the Baptist, within the precincts of the Savoy, in the Strand; and, on the 25th of September, in the same year, he was ordained priest, by Dr. Joseph Wilcocks, bishop of Rochester, at a general ordination holden in the parish church of Bromley, in the county of Kent. The promotion of Dr Herring (afterwards archbishop of Canterbury) in this same year to the see of Bangor, occasioned a vacancy in the rectory of Blechingley, to which Mr. Thomas was presented by his majesty, George II. through the interest of sir W. Clayton, and was instituted, on the 27th of January, by Dr. Benjamin Hoadly, bishop of Winchester. During his incumbency on this preferment, which was thirty-six years, Mr. Thomas chiefly resided in the rectorial-house, which he enlarged, improved, and embellished, at a very considerable ex pence. In the discharge of his parochial duties, in which he never omitted any thing which he conceived inight conduce to the temporal or spiritual interests of his parishioners, he was for some time assisted by his brother; and, after his promotion to a vicarage in Norfolk, by the rev. William Thompson, the poet.

On the 25th of May, 1742, Mr. Thomas took the degree of D. C. L.; in the year following his marriage took place; on the 18th of January, 1748, he was appointed chaplain in ordinary to his late majesty, George II.; on the 23d of April, 1754, he was made prebendary of Westminster; on the 12th of December, 1760, he was appointed chaplain to his present majesty, by the king’s order, and without any application. ID 1762, he was appointed sub-almoner to the archbishop of York, an office rather honorary than lucrative; and in 1766, was instituted to the vicarage of St. Bride’s, in London, on the presentation of the dean and chapter of Westminster. In 1768, he succeeded Dr. Pearce as dean of Westminster, and soon after was chosen the archbishop of Canterbury’s prolocutor to the lower house of convocation. In 1772, he met with a severe shock in the death of his wife; and, in 1774, lost his valuable fr.tt,d Dr. Pearce. In November following he succeeded him, “according to his (Dr. Pearce’s) most earnest wish,” in the bishopric of Rochester. On the ancient palace at Bromley, which he found in a ruinous and dilapidated condition, he expended upwards of three thousand pounds; displayed great munificence in repairing and rebuilding it, and in disposing and embellishing the episcopal demesnes; and, from his regard for social worship, a little before his death he gave 5OO/. towards enlarging the parish church at Bromley.

The bishop added one to the many instances of men who have been peculiarly fortunate in their first marriage, and, deeply concerned at its dissolution, seeking consolation in a second. Such consolation did his lordship seek in a second marriage with lady Elizabeth Yates, relict of sir Joseph Yates, late one of the judges of the court of King’sbench, to whom he was married, by special licence, on the 12th of January, 1775, at Westminster-abbey. In this union, he was as happy as the great disparity of age" would permit. Though twice married, he had no issue; but each of his ladies brought him a son and a daughter by their former husbands, and to these he shewed a parental affection.

Age, and its natural concomitants, for some few years before his death, almost incapacitated the bishop from any laborious duty; but, so zealous was he in the discharge of his function, that he held a general confirmation not long before his last lingering and fatal illness, and continued to preach both at court and at Bromley, till near his eightieth year. He expired, in great composure, about eleven o'clock on the morning of Thursday, August 22d, 1793, having completed his eightieth year on the preceding 14th of October, 1792. The manner of his death was perfectly agreeable to his wish, expressed in a letter written to his brother on the death of his first lady, “without a sigh or a groan.” The bjlk of his fortune was bequeathed to his relations, in such proportions as corresponded with the proximity of kindred, and the expectations which he had encouraged; bonds and notes, from different friends and acquaintances, to the amount of 5000l. were cancelled legacies, mourning, &c. were presented to his servants and several sums were appropriated to charitable purposes. In his last will and testament, the bishop had made no provision for the manner or place of his interment: but, in a cancelled will, made as far back as 1774, he had directed his remains to be deposited by those of his first lady, and this direction was consequently carried into effect.

In 1803 a valuable collection, in 2 vols. 8vo, of his “Sermons and Charges,” was published by the rev. G. A. Thomas, his lordship’s chaplain and executor, with a Memoir of his Life, to which we are indebted for the preceding particulars, as well as for the following sketch of his character.

"His lordship was in stature above the middle height, standing about five feet eleven inches. In the early part of his life he was slender, and of Bo delicate a constitution, that his father used to say, he was propped up by art and medicine. But, as he advanced to maturity, his constitution acquired strength: yet he never increased to any degree of corpulence. His figure was elegant and manly, and its dignity comported with the natural elevation of his mind: at all times inspiring respect and veneration, but particularly when he was engaged in any of the sacred offices of religion, which he always performed with such a devotional ardour and fervency, as seemed to add a peculiar sanctity and spirit to the native gracefulness of his appearance. His countenance was the faithful index of his soul, open, placid, and benevolent. His features were regular, and generally softened with the most gracious smile of complacency and benignity.

“His intellectual abilities were above mediocrity; and the endowments of nature were improved by the application of art and study. He had a lively and chaste imagination, a quick apprehension, a sound and penetrating judgment, and a retentive memory. He excelled equally in learning, science, and the polite arts. He was an adept in music, and a connoisseur in painting. He was, in his earlier days, perfectly acquainted with the practice as well as the theory of music; having been a performer on two difficult instruments. For this agreeable art he entertained a passion to his latest days. He was a great lover of antiquity, and well skilled in the knowledge of coins and medals, and of these, as also of prints and paintings, he left valuable collections. There was no feature more prominent in this good bishop’s character, than a zealous and uniform attachment to our unrivalled constitution. It was the warmest wish of his heart, to see our excellent and happy form of government, both in church and state, preserved free from the contagious influence of superstitious tyranny on the one hand, and licentious anarchy on the other.”

, a learned writer of the sixteenth century, was born in Wales, and was at least of Welsh extraction, and educated at Oxford. Wood says that one of both his names was, in 1529, admitted bachelor of canon law, but does not say that it was this person. In 1544, being obliged to quit the kingdom on account of some misfortune, he went to Italy, and in 1546 was at Bologne, and afterwards ai Padua. In 151-9, he was again in London, and on account of his knowledge of modern languages, was made clerk of the council to king Edward VI. who soon after gave him a prebend of St. Paul’s, and the living of Presthend in South Wales. According to Strype, he acted very unfairly in procuring the prebend, not being a spiritual person; and the same objection undoubtedly rests against his other promotion. On the accession of queen Mary, he was deprived of his employment at court, and is said to have meditated the death of the queen; but Bale says it was Gardiner whom he formed a design of murderiug. Others think that he was concerned in Wyat’s rebellion. It is certain that for some of these charges, he was committed to the Tower in 1553, together with William Winter and sir Nicholas Throgmorton. Wood says, “He was a man of a hot fiery spirit, had sucked in damnable principles by his frequent conversations with Christopher Goodman, that violent enemy to the rule of women.” It appears that he had no rule over himself, for about a week after his commitment, he attempted suicide, but the wound not proving mortal, he was arraigned at Guildhall, May 9, 1553, and hanged at Tyburn, on the 18th.

His works are, 1. “The History of Italy,” Lond. 1549, 1561, 4to. 2. “The principal rules of the Italian Grammar, with a dictionary for the better understanding of Boccacce, Petrarch, and Dante,” ibid, 1550, 1561, 1567, 4to. 3. “Le Peregrynne, or a defence of king Henry VIII. to Aretine the Italian poet,” ms. Cott. Vesp. D. 18, and in Bodl. Library. This, Wood says, was about to be published in the third volume of Brown’s “Fasciculus.” 4. “Common Places of State,” written for the use of Edward VI. ms. Cott. 5. “Of the vanity of the World,” Lond. 1549, 8vo. 5. “Translation of Cato’s speech, and Valerius’s answer, from the 4th decade of Li vy,” ibid, 1551, 12mo. He also made some translations from the Italian, which are still in manuscript.

, bishop of Worcester, was son of Mr. John Thomas, a linen-draper in the city of Bristol, who lived in a house of his own on the bridge in that town, where the bishop was born on Thursday, February 2, 1613, and baptized there in St. Nicholas’s church, on the Friday following. He was of a very ancient and noble family, as appears by a pedigree taken out of the Heralds’ -office by William Thomas lord bishop of Worcester in 1688, to prove his right to the Herbert arms. His mother was Elizabeth Blount, descended from the Blounts of Eldersfield, in the county of Worcester. His grandfather, William Thomas, was recorder of Carmarthen, where he and his family had for a long time lived in great credit; and the earl of Northampton, then lord president of Wales, gave him this character, “that he was the wisest and most prudent person he ever knew member of a corporation:” this gentleman, after the death of their son, undertook the care of his grandson; which trust he executed with the greatest care and attention, placing him under the tuition of Mr. Morgan Owen, master of the public school at Caermarthen, afterwards bishop of Landaff: here he continued till he went to St. John’s college, Oxford, in the sixteenth year of his age, in Michaelmas term, 1629; from hence he removed to Jesus college, where he tqok his degree of B, A. 1632, and soon after was chosen fellow of the college, and appointed tutor by the principal. Here, according to the fashion of the times, he studied much school philosophy and divinity, epitomizing with his own hand all the works of Aristotle: he took his degree of M.A. Feb. 12, 1634, was ordained deacon by John Bancroft, bishop of Oxford, at Christ Church, June 4, 1637, and priest in the year following at the same place, and by the same bishop. Soon, after he was appointed vicar of Penbryn, in Cardiganshire, and chaplain to the earl of Northumberland, who presen ed him to the vicarage of Laugharn, with the rectory of Lansedurnen annexed. This presentation being disputed, he determined to give it up; but the earl encouraged him to persevere, assuring him that he would be at all the expence and trouble: in consequence of which, the dispute was soon ended, and Mr. Thomas instituted: here he determined to reside, having no other thought but how best to perform his duty; and that he might be more fixed, and avoid the inconveniences of a solitary single life, he resolved to marry. The person he chose was Blanch Samyne, daughter of Mr. Peter Samyne, a Dutch merchant in Lime-street, London, of an ancient and good family, by whom he had eight children; William, who died young, Peter, John, Blanch, Bridget, William, Sarah, and Elizabeth. Here he religiously performed every duty of a parish priest, esteeming his employment not a trade, but a trust, till about 1644, a party of the parliament horse came to Langharn, and inquired whether that popish priest Mr. Thomas was still there, and whether he continued reading the liturgy, and praying for the queen; and one of them adding, that he should go to church next Sunday, and it' Mr. Thomas persevered in praying for that drab or the whore of Babylon, he would certainly pistol him. Upon this, Mr. Thomas’s friends earnestly pressed him to absent himself; but he refused, thinking it would be a neglect of duty. He no sooner began the service, than the soldiers came and placed themselves in the next pew to him, and when he prayed for the queen, one of them snatched the book out of his hand, and threw it at his head, saying, “What do you mean by praying for a whore and a rogue?” The preacher bore it with patience and composure; but the soldier who had committed the affront was instantly seized with such anxiety and compunction, that his companions were forced to carry him away. Mr. Thomas continued the service, and delivered the sermon with his usual emphasis and 'propriety; and when he returned to his house, he there found the soldiers ready to beg his pardon, and desiring his prayers to God for them. When this happened, he was about thirty-three years old. Soon after, the parliament committee deprived him of the living of Laugharn; and though a principal member of that body had been his pupil and particular friend, yet he refused to shew him any favour, saying, “If he was his father, he would do him no service unless he would take the covenant.” From this time till the restoration, Mr. Thomas endured great hardships, being a sufferer to the amount of above fifteen hundred pounds, and, for the support of his family, obliged to teach a private school in the country; and though his friends often made him liberal presents, yet his wiie and numerous family were frequently in want of common necessaries.

At the restoration Mr. Thomas was re-instated in his living, and by the king’s letters patent made chanter of St, David’s. In this year he took his doctor’s degree in divinity, carrying with him a letter from the chancellor, who said thus of him: “I have heard of his great worth and deserts, as well in respect of his learning and orthodox, judgment, as of his most exemplary life and conversation.” In 1661, he was presented to the rectory of Llaqbeder in the Vajley, in the county of Pembroke, by lord chancellor Hyde, and made chaplain to the duke of York, whom he attended in his voyage to Dunkirk, in whose family he continued some time, and with whom he was in one of the sea engagements against the Dutch. By the interest of the duke and the chancellor he was promoted to the deanery of Worcester, Nov. 25, 1665, in the room of Dr. Thomas Warrnestry, deceased. Here, though a stranger, he behaved himself in such a manner as to gain the affections of all the gentlemen of the county, particularly the duke of Beaufort, lord Windsor, afterwards created earl of Plymouth, and sir John Pakington: the last, that he might enjoy more of his company, presented him to the rectory of Hampton Lovet in the beginning of 1670. Upon this he quitted his living at Laugharn, and removed his family to Hampton. Here he enjoyed an easy and pleasant retirement, and he was often heard to say that this was the pleasantest part of his life; and that here he had more quiet and satisfaction within himself than when he was afterwards in the highest order of the church. Here also he found time to search into antiquity, to enlarge his mind, and to enrich it with fruitful knowledge: but his pleasures were not without alloy, for, during his residence here in 1677, his beloved wife died, and was buried in one of the side ailes of the cathedral church of Worcester. In this year also he was promoted to the see of St. David’s, and held the deanery of Worcester in commendam. He was very acceptable to the gentry and clergy of that diocese: he had been bred up among them, spoke their language, and had been a fellow-sufferer with many of them in the late troublesome times. His behaviour confirmed their expectations, his generous temper agreed with theirs, but his chief concern was not so much to please their humours, as to correct their morals, and save their souls; to promote true piety and goodness, and to sow the seeds of holiness among them. He began to repair the palaces at Brecknock and Aberguilly; he preached frequently in several parts of his diocese in the language of the country, and was very instrumental in promoting the translation of the Bible into Welsh. He endeavoured all he could to remove the cathedral service from St. David’s to Caermarthen; the former being a place of no trade, little frequented, situated ; in a corner of the kingdom, twelve long miles from any market town, the cathedral ruinous, the bishop’s palace quite demolished, no residence kept, the canons never attending, except to receive their revenues, and not one shilling laid out in repairing the cathedral after the restoration. On the contrary, Caermarthen he knew to he a rich and populous town; the great church capable of heing made decent and handsome, and the episcopal house of Aberguilly very near, where the bishop constantly resided. On those motives he set about the work very heartily, but met with the same success as bishop Barlow had done before.

Having been bishop of St. David’s six years, he was translated to the see of Worcester, in the place of bishop Fleetwood. As soon as he knew of this appointment, his lordship, who never was a lover of money, desisted from any further treaty with several tenants of the bishopric of St. David’s, and refused very considerable fines, afterwards received by bishop Womack. He went to Worcester in August 1683, and was conducted to his palace by the gentry and clergy of his diocese, where they were entertained very handsomely, and ever after found a plentiful table and hearty welcome; he being always of opinion that, in order to amend the morals of the people, the first step was to gain their acquaintance and affection. Upon this principle, he was a great lover of hospitality and charity; the poor of the neighbourhood were daily fed at his door, and he sent provisions twice a week to the common prison, besides very large sums given where he saw occasion. Some may think that he carried this matter to excess for though he frequently was heard to say, “he dreaded debt as a sin,” through his extensive charity, and the necessary calls of a numerous family, he sometimes brought himself to the verge of it, he laid not up for himself or his children; and, when charged by several for not providing for his own household, his answer always was, “that no bishop or priest was to enrich himself with, or raise his family out of the revenues of the church that the sacred canons forbade it and that for his part he was resolved that none of his should be the richer for them, as he was only God’s steward, and bound to dispense them to his glory in works of charity and piety.” He was extremely careful what persons he ordained; his censures were also expressed in the softest words, and with an humble air of such tenderness and brotherly compassion as always gained the more ingenuous, and left the incorrigible without excuse. He constantly attended six o'clock prayers in the cathedral, so long as Ins health would permit and upon complaint from archbishop Sheldon, dated June 4, 1670, that the duties of reading the church service and administering 1 the sacraments were too much neglected by dignified persons, “the cleans and canons, as if it were an office below them, and left for the most part to be performed by their vicars or petty canons, to the offence of the church’s friends, and the advantage of sectaries, and their own just reproach;” he, together with the prebendaries, so ordered the residence, that one or two of them generally officiated at the communion. The bishop, at his first visitation of the dean and chapter, by his own authority, and their concurrence, procured a chapter act to be made, to oblige the prebendaries to be resident two at a time in every month; this being done with the concurrence of Dr. Hickes, then dean, and Dr. Hopkins, a worthy prebendary of the church, passed without the least appearance of uneasiness in any one member of the society. The money, which at former visitations was usually expended in entertaining, v the bishops, he ordered to be laid out in books for the library, and entertained the church at his own charge; he was besides a considerable benefactor to the library, the books about this time being brought from an inconvenient room on the south side of the church, and placed in the chapter-house, a very elegant room, capable of containing a noble collection of books. The bishop was often present in the Consistory court, whereby he much prevented the frivolous suits, and expedited the dilatory proceedings, which at that time were much complained of. Jn 1683, archbishop Bancroft wrote a letter to the bishop, complaining of a custom which then and for many years after continued, of preaching the sermon in the body of the cathedral, the prayers being read in. the choir: the origin of this custom was, that as there was no sermon in the parish churches, the several parishioners might, after their own prayers, attend the sermon of some eminent preacher in the cathedral. He was a great patron of the French protestants, and contributed largely to their support. In 1687, when the king made his progress through part of England, the bishop sent his servant to Bath, to invite his majesty to his palace at Worcester, where he had the honour of entertaining him on the 23d day of August, the eve of St. Bartholomew. He met him at the gate of his palace, attended by his clergy, and in a sfyort Latin speech welcomed him to the city. His majesty walked upon a large piece of white broad cloth of the manufacture or the city, all strewed with flowers, which reached from the palace gute to the stairs leading up to the great hall: as he went along, he said, “My lord, this looks like Whitehall.” Having refreshed himself after his journey, he went to see the cathedral, the dean attending his majesty to the college gate, from whence he went to see the curiosities of the town, and, among the rest, was shewn where the battle was fought between Oliver and his royal brother *.

The next morning being the feast of St. Bartholomew, the king went to hear mass at the popish chapel, built at his accession to the crown, on the east side of Foregatestreet, attended by the mayor and aldermen, whom, when they came to the gate of the chapel, his majesty asked if they would not go in with him; to which the mayor with a becoming spirit replied, “I think we have attended your majesty too far already.” This worthy magistrate, who preferred his religion, and duty to his country, to every other consideration, should have his name recorded in letters of gold: Dr. Nash took pains to find out who it was, and believed it to be either Thomas Bearcroft or Thomas Sherwin; the former was elected by the new charter, the Jatter by the old charter restored. Upon this answer made by the mayor, the king went into the popish chapel, and the mayor, with all the protestants who attended him, went to the college church, where, when divine service was ended, the bishop waited on his majesty till dinner came in, and the meat being set on the table he offered to say grace; but the king was pleased to say that he would spare him that trouble, for he had a chaplain of his own, upon which the good old man withdrew, not without tears in his eyes. As soon as the dinner was over, his majesty proceeded in his progress to Ludlow, having expressed himself well pleased with the attendance of the gentlemen of the county, and his entertainment by the bishop, which, his lordship says in a private letter to a friend, though very chargeable to him, yet he did not grudge it, as he hoped he had done the church some credit by it. The white broad

* The king’s escape after the de- out his own horse ready saddled, upon feat in this battle is thus related his which his majesty fled through St. Matmajesty being forced to alight from tin’s gate, and so to Boscobrl. Dr. his horse to get into Sidbury-gate, and Thomas, when dean ef Worcester, a cry being made for a horse to re- married his eldest son to a daughter mount thfcking, a Mr. William Bag- of this Mr. Bngi.il. u* I, who then li\cd in Skibury, turned cloth on which his majesty walked from the palace gate to the stairs leading to the great hall, cost his lordship 27/: it was rolled up after his majesty, and taken away by his attendants as belonging to his wardrobe.

While the king was at Worcester, the neighbouring dissenters of all denominations sent their addresses to hira^ which the earl of Plymouth, being lord-lieutenant, was to receive, and to deliver to the king. When he brought the two first the king asked him what religion the men who brought them were of. “Indeed, sir,” replied the lordlieutenant, “I did not ask them; but I know by their looks they are neither of your religion, nor mine.” But now the good bishop’s troubles drew on apace: the penal laws against nonconformists were suspended; and May 4, 1688, the king ordered the bishops to take care that his declaration should be read in the neighbourhood of London, on the 20th and 27th of the said month, and in all other churches and chapels the 3d and 10th of June. The archbishop and six bishops presented a petition against it; the consequence of which was, that they were sent to the Tower; this was a great grief to the bishop, not that he was concerned for any fault or misbehaviour of his brethren, or for the calamity that had befallen them, for he often wished that he had been with them, to bear his testimony in so good a cause, and to have a share with them in their honourable sufferings, but he was troubled to think on that impending storm which he foresaw might fall on the church: however, both he and the dean (Dr. Hickes) resolved not to disperse the declaration, and signified to all the clergy his utter dislike of it. Soon after he received a letter from court, containing a reprimand for not obeying the king’s orders; the answer to which was, as he himself says, without any tincture of collusion, but declaratory of his firm resolution not to comply. Upon king William’s accession, his ill health would not allow him to attend the convention; and indeed he never approved of the prince of Orange’s being declared king, and much less of that act which obliged all persons to take oaths of allegiance to king William and queen Mary, or to forfeit their offices, their livings, and their temporal subsistence. For his own part, he was resolved to forsake all, rather than act con* trary to his former oaths, and homage, which he had paid to king James; and although he writes to Kettlewell, and says, “If my heart do not deceive me, and God’s grace do not fail me, I think I could suffer at a stake rather than take this oath,” yet it does not appear that he used any persuasions to prevent others from taking it, only freely gave his opinion, and advised them sincerely to consult their own consciences. This was what he said to the clergy; and when a grandson of his, Dr. William Thomas, of whom we shall speak hereafter, then a student in Trinity college, Camhridge, consulted him on this critical point, he left him to his own liberty, and the feelings of his own conscience. In one of his sermons he says, “An humble man submits, suspects his own judgment, hath a venerable esteem for his superiors; if startled by any constitutions in church and state, he frequently prays, seriously discourses, modestly counsels with others; if after all expedients he remains dissatisfied, if he cannot swim with the stream, he will not trouble the waters.”

The limited time for taking the oaths drawing near, he prepared himself for leaving the palace, and vacating the see. He had agreed with Mr. Martin, then vicar of Wolverly, to come and live with him; and he wrote to Dr. StillinghYet, telling him that he would use all his interest that he might succeed him. While he was thus preparing all things for his retirement, God was pleased to prepare better for him, for, about the 20th of June, after a very severe fit of the gout, he grew continually weaker and weaker, though his friends did not think him in any immediate danger. The bishop, however, perceiving himself decaying, on Sunday the2-3d, received the sacrament in his own chapel; on Monday all his servants were called in, and he gave every one of them his blessing; that night he endeavoured to sleep, but in vain; his daughter-in-law, Mrs. Anne Thomas, sat up with him, and was much edified by him, for the most part of that restless night he spent in ejaculations, and prayer to God, that he would be pleased to re* lease him from his miseries, and the troubles of this vain worl 1: there was no weight or clog on his conscience; death did not appear at all troublesome to him, the sting was gone, his earnest desire was to depart, and be with Christ. Thus he passed the few remaining hours of his life, being sensible to the last; but, growing still weaker and weaker, about three o'clock the next day, being the 25th, he patiently submitted to the stroke of death, and resigned his spirit into the hands of God that gave it.

He died in the seventy-sixth year of his age, and according to his own appointment lies buried at the north-east corner of the cloisters of Worcester cathedral, at the bottom of the steps near the south door; being used to say that the church was for the living, and not for the dead. His funeral was ordered by himself, as many old men going before his corpse clothed in black as corresponded with the years of his age when he died. The inscription ordered by himself, was agreeable to his extraordinary humility: “Depositum Gulielmi Thomas, S. T. P. olim Decani Wigorniensis incligni, postea Episcopi Minevensis indignioris, tandem Episcopi Wigorniensis indignissimi, meritis tamen Christi resurrectionis ad vitam seternam candidati.” Something further was added afterwards by dean Hickes, and a marble monument was placed within the church by his youngest son, Mr. William Thomas of Hackney.

His whole estate amounted to but 800l. He left behind him two sons, John and William; and five grand-children, four by his daughter Elizabeth, who married Mr. Jonathan Andrews, of Barnes-hall near Worcester, and one by his son John, who was the Worcestershire antiquary, of whom we shall presently speak.

He published in his life-time, “An Apology for the Church of England, 1678-9,” 8vo. “A Sermon preached at Caermarthen Assizes,” printed in 1657. “The Mammon of Unrighteousness,”, a sermon preached at the cathedral church of Worcester when he was in a very languishing state of health. His “Letter to the Clergy,” and an imperfect work, entitled “Roman Oracles silenced,” were published after his death. All these shew him to have been a good bishop and industrious divine, but not a writer of parts or genius; his style is harder and more antiquated than that of most writers of his time; but his matter shews the simplicity and humility of his heart; for meekness and unaffected humility were his chief ornaments. These rendered him peaceable and quiet, patient of contradiction, and contented in all conditions, the same easy man when sequestered as when bishop and with the same easy- tranquillity and cheerfulness of mind he prepared to lay down his bishopric, as in his younger years he had done his vicarage. He was never known to have been in a passion. When he was dean of Worcester, one of the prebendaries in chapter fell into a sudden and violent emotion upon no great provocation, which made the dean say to him. “Brother, brother, God give you more patience.” To which the angry gentleman replied, “Mr. Dean, Mr. Dean, God give you more passion.” The good man made no reply, but by a smile. His memory was very good, for though he penned his sermons with great' accuracy, yet he always delivered them memoriter. He was of a stature somewhat tall anci slender, of a long visage, his forehead large, his countenance graceful, and his aspect venerable. The constitution of his body in his younger years was strong and healthful, though afterwards much broken by frequent infirmities, particularly the gout; to frequent and violent fits of which he was subject for upwards of four and twenty years: and that disorder would much sooner have brought him to an end, if it had not been checked by his great temperance and repeated abstinence.

, born in 1670, was grandson to the bishop, and only son of John Thomas and Mary Bagnail, daughter 'to Mr. Bagnall, mentioned in the preceding article. William inherited but little from his grandfather. He was educated at Westminster-school, from whence he was elected to Trinity-college, Cambridge, June 25, 1688, being then seventeen years old, as appears by the accounts of admissions in that college. Here he took his master’s degree, and soon after went into orders: he had the living ef Exal in Warwickshire, given him by the interest of lord Somers, to whom he was distantly related: at Atherston in the same county, he had a considerable estate, as he had likewise at the Grange near Toddington in Gloucestershire; the former came to him by his wife, the latter by his uncle William Thomas.

Queen Anne was well disposed to him, and made many inquiries after him, his grandfather the bishop having been formerly her preceptor; but he declined preferment or attendance at court. He married Elizabeth Carter, only daughter of George Carter, esq. of Brill, in the county of Bucks, with whom he had a considerable fortune. By her he had a numerous family, nine daughters and five sons; of the latter one only survived him about eight years, and died unmarried. For the education of this numerous family, Dr. Thomas wished to go to Worcester, which he accordingly did in 1721, and in 1723 was presented to the rectory of St. Nicholas in that city by bishop Hough, to whom he dedicated “Antiquitates Prioratus majoris Malverne,” printed in 1725; his edition of “Dugdale’s Warwickshire in 1730;” and likewise his “Survey of the Cathedral Church of Worcester,” printed in 1736: to Dugdale he made many large and valuable additions, and it is now deservedly a book of great price.

In his younger years, namely in 1700, he travelled to France and Italy, where he contracted a particular intimacy with sir John Pakington; he was well skilled in the Greek and Latin languages, to which he added the French and Italian. He likewise made himself master of the Saxon, a task at that time not so easy as at present, when we have a good dictionary, and 'a good grammar; the former would have saved him great labour, as Dr. Nash saw one he made himself for his own use, which cost him great pains: his industry, indeed, was amazing; as he hardly allowed himself time for sleep, meats, or amusement. He fully intended, if Providence had spared his life, to have published the History of Worcestershire, and with this view had carefully examined and transcribed many of the registers of the bishops, and the church of Worcester. To these labours Dr. Nash owns himself indebted, and says, he should be highly ungrateful if he did not take every opportunity of acknowledging his obligations. He visited likewise every church in the county about fifty years ago, which, together with the church gatherings of old Habingdon, were of great service to Dr. Nash, by explaining defaced arms and obliterated inscriptions: indeed the account of the painted glass is chiefly taken from their Mss. as it is now, by time and other accidents, almost all broken, or rendered unintelligible, by the glaziers. He died July 26, 1788, aged sixty-eight, and is buried in the cloisters of Worcester cathedral, near his grandfather.

, a learned French divine, was born Aug. 28, 1619, at Aix in Provence, of a good and ancient family, and admitted at the age of fourteen into the congregation of the oratory, where he had been educated. After teaching ethics in his congregation, and philosophy, he was appointed professor of divinity at Saumur, and introduced in his school the method of treating theological subjects according to the scriptures, the fatheri, and councils. Being invited to Paris in 1654, he began to bold conferences of positive theology in the seminary of St. Magloire, according to the method he had adopted it Saumur, and continued them till 166S, at which time his superiors and several eminent prelates persuaded him to give the fruits of his labours to the public. He complied, and afterwards became so celebrated by his works, that pope Innocent XI. endeavoured to draw him to Koine, with an intention of giving him a cardinal’s hat, and making use of his talents; but the king of France replied that so learned a man was necessary in his dominions. The French clergy gave him a pension of Jooo livres, which the poor always shared with him. He was mild, modest, active, agreeable in his manners, and very assiduous in all his pursuits. He died December 25, 1695, aged seventyseven. His principal works are: 1. A large treatise on “Ecclesiastical Discipline,” reprinted 1725, 3 vols. fol. in French; of which he, made a Latin translation, reprinted also in 1706, 3 vols. fol. This work is highly praised by persons in the catholic community. 2. “Theological Dogmas,” 1680, 3 torn. fol. in Latin. 3. “Tracts on the Divine office, 8 vo; on the Feasts, 8vo; on the Fasts, 8 vo; on Truth and Falsehood, 8vo; on Alms, 8vo on Trade and on Usury, 8vo; 4.” Tr. dogmatique des Moyens dont on s’est servi dans tous les terns pour maintenir Tunite de i'Eglise,“1703, 3 vols. 4to. To these may be added,” Directions for studying and teaching philosophy in a Christian manner,“8vo the same” for the profane historians,“8vo; apian of the same kind for grammar or the languages with relation to the Holy Scriptures, 2 vols. 8vo;” A Universal Hebrew Glossary,“printed at the Louvre, 1697, fol.” Dissertations on the Councils,“in Latin, 1667, 1 vol. 4to;” Memoires sur la Grace," 1682, 4to, &c. His Life, written by father Bordes, is prefixed to his Hebrew Glossary.

, Count Rumford, an ingenious philosopher, was born in 1753, in North America. His family, of English origin, had long been settled in New Hampshire, at the place formerly called Rumford, and now Concord; and possessed there some land previous to the war of the revolution. From his infancy his attention appears to have been directed towards objects of science. The father of one of his early companions, a clergyman, of the name of Bernard, took a liking to him, and taught him algebra, geometry, astronomy, and even the transcendental part of mathematics. Before the age of fourteen, he had made sufficient progress in this branch of study to be able, without assistance, to calculate and to trace graphically the phases of an eclipse of the sun. He had been destined to business; but from the period of this little event his passion for learning became irresistible, and he could apply himself to nothing but to his favourite objects of study. He attended the lessons of Dr. Williams; afterwards those of Dr. Winthorp, at the college of Havard; and under that able master he made considerable progress.

He appears, however, to have been early acquainted with misfortune. Soon after the death of his father, his mother contracted a second marriage, with a man who turned him away from her while yet a child; and an uncle, who survived his father only a few months, scarcely left him whereon to live. He was thus, at a very early period, launched into a world which was almost unknown to him, and it became necessary for him to acquire the habit of thinking and acting for himself, and of living on his own acquirements. “My ideas,” said he to a friend, “were not yet fixed; one scheme succeeded another, and perhaps I should have acquired a habit of indecision and inconstancy, perhaps I should have lived poor and miserable to the end of my days, if a woman had not loved me, if she had not given me existence, a habitation, and an independent fortune. 1 took a wife, or rather she took me, at nineteen years of age. I married the widow of colonel Rolfe, the daughter of the reverend Mr. Walker, a most respectable clergyman, and one of the first inhabitants of Rumford. He had made three voyages to England, intrusted with public business; he was well informed, and a most liberal-minded man. He heartily approved of the choice of his daughter, and himself united our hands and our destinies. That excellent man was sincerely attached to me; he directed my studies, he formed my taste; and my situation was, in every respect, the happiest which it is possible to conceive.”

Unforeseen circumstances withdrew him from his peaceful retreat, and from the favourite studies which probably would have formed the chief occupation of his life, to make him act on the theatre of the great world, a part for which apparently he was not prepared. At the commencement of the troubles of America, which preceded and brought an the war of the independence, Thompson, then twenty years of age, was united by friendship with the governor of the province, and attached to the government. The civil and military employments, with which, though still young, he was invested, naturally drew him to the royalist party; and when the opposite party acquired the ascendant in his province, he was forced to abandon his home, and to seek an asylum at Boston, then occupied by the English troops. It was toward the end of the month of November 1773, that he secretly quitted his habitation, where he left his wife, with a daughter, of whom she had but lately been delivered. He never again saw the former; and the beloved child whom she had given him he found not till twenty years after, when she came to rejoin her father in Europe.

Thompson was received with distinction by the commander in chief of the British army, and called to raise a regiment for the service of the king. But the events of the war having occasioned the evacuation of Boston, in the spring of 1776, he then repaired to England, and was the bearer of important dispatches to government. Here he soon acquired the confidence of the secretary of state for the colonies, and some days after his arrival in London he was appointed secretary of the province of Georgia, an office which he never exercised. He remained in London connected with the office of the colonies.

During the autumn of the year 1777, his health becoming disordered, he went to Bath to take the waters. He there resumed his favourite pursuits, and performed an interesting set of experiments on the cohesion of different bodies. On his return to London he communicated the results of them to sir Joseph Banks, and from that epoch used to date the intimate friendship which long subsisted between him and the illustrious president of the Royal Society of London. In 1778, he was admitted a member of the society, and he made, in the same year, his first experiments on gun-powder. The results which he obtained greatly excited his curiosity, and raised the desire of repeating the same experiments with great guns, and. of choosing that occasion to study at sea the principles of naval architecture. With this view, in the spring of 1779, he went on board the Victory, a vessel of 110 guns, commanded by admiral sir Charles Hardy, who was his friend. He passed that whole campaign with the grand fleet of England, employing his time as he had purposed to do, by multiplying his experiments, and repeating them on different ships belonging to the fleet; and on his return to London he composed an essay on naval architecture, which is to be found, as a separate chapter, in the treatise of Staikart on the same subject, published the following year. He joined to it a code of signals for the use of the navy, which has never been published. Being appointed under-secretary of state in the beginning of the year 1780, he was for thirteen months constantly employed in the office of the business of the American war. The regiment of cavalry called the King’s American dragoons was raised at that period in his native country by his friends and agents, and he was at first appointed its lieutenant-colonel commandant. This circumstance determined him to return to America to serve with his regiment; and when at Charlestown he was appointed to the command of the remains of the cavalry in the royal army, then under the orders of lieutenant-general Leslie. This corps, which was greatly reduced, he restored speedily; and gained its confidence and attachment. He led it on several times against the enemy, and was often fortunate in his enterprises. Honoured with the esteem of the army, and furnished with the most flattering recommendations from general Leslie to the commander in chief, Thompson set out in the spring of 1782 for New York, where he assumed the command of his regiment. Prince William-Henry- (the duke of Clarence), the king’s third son, who reviewed his corps, delivered to him the colours with his own hand. General Clinton was, towards autumn, replaced by sir Guy Carlton, who equally imparted to Thompson his friendship and confidence. The feeble remainder of the two regiments which had served from the beginning of the war, was joined to his corps, and he was sent to Huntingdon, outpost of the army in Long-Island, where he passed the winter.

At the beginning of 1783, Jamaica being threatened, Thompson was chosen to command a body of troops destined to defend it; but the news of the peace having soon after arrived in America, that expedition was prevented, and he returned to England. There one of the first objects of his solicitude was to make a return to the confidence fvhich had been reposed in him by the American officers; and he was fortunate enough to obtain for these victims of their attachment to the metropolitan country, the compensations which their sacrifices had Reserved. By a solemn act of the legislature an honourable provision was secured to some hundreds of brave officers, notwithstanding a pretty strong opposition, which rendered the issue of the negotiation very doubtful; and general Carltun having mentioned Thompson in his dispatches as an officer of extraordinary merit, the king, upon this recommendation, made him colonel, though it was but two years since he had been made lieutenant-colonel.

Wben the American war terminated, Thompson solicited to be employed wih his regiment in the East Indies; but the peace having occasioned the reduction of that corps, together with that of several others, he obtained from the king permission to travel on the continent, where, stimulated as he then still was by the military passion, he hoped to find an opportunity of serving as a volunteer in the Austrian army against the Turks. “I owe it to a beneficent Divinity,” said he to his biographer, “that I was cured in time of that martial folly. 1 met, at the prince de Kaunitz’s, with a lady seventy years of age, and endowed with great sense and knowledge. She was the wife of general de Burghausen; and the emperor Joseph II. often came to spend the evening with her. That excellent person formed an attachment to me; she gave me wise advices; and imparted a new turn to my ideas, by presenting to me in perspective other species of glory than that of conquering in battles.”

On quitting England in the month of September 1783, he landed at Boulogne, along wiih the celebrated Gibbon, who describes him by three epithets which shew how quickly he had been able to appreciate him. He calls him “the soldier, philosopher, statesman, Thompson.” He afterwards arrived at Strasburg, where the prince Maximilian de Deux- Fonts, now elector of Bavaria, then mareschal du camp in the service of France, was in garrison. That prince, commanding the parade, discovered among the spectators an officer in a foreign uniform, mounted on a fine English horse, and accosted him; Thompson informed him that he had just been employed in the American war; the prince, pointing out to him several officers who surrounded him, ' These gentlemen,“said he,” served in the same war, but against you. They belonged to the royal regiment Deux-ponts, sent to America under the command of the count de Rochambeau."

The conversation became close and animated. Colonel Thompson, invited, in consequence, to dine with the prince, found there a number of French officers against whom he had fought in America. The conversation turned on the events of that war. The colonel sent for his portfolio, which contained exact plans of all the principal actions, of the strong places, of the sieges, and an excellent collection of maps; every one recognized the places where events interesting to himself had happened. The conversation lasted a great while, and they parted, promising to see one another again. The prince was an enthusiast in his profession, and passionately fond of instruction. He invited the colonel next day. They resumed the conversation of the evening with the same ardour; and when the traveller at last took his leave, the prince engaged him to pass through Munich, and gave him a letter of recommendation to his uncle the elector of Bavaria. The season was far advanced, and he was in haste to arrive in Vienna. He intended to stop at Munich two or three days at most. He remained fifteen, and quitted, not without regret, that city, where the testimonies of the favour of the sovereign, and the partialities of the different classes of society, had been lavished upon him with that cordial frankness, which so eminently distinguishes the Bavarian character. At Vienna, in the same manner he met with the most flattering reception, and was presented at court, and in the first companies, He spent there a part of the winter; and, learning that the war against the Turks would not take place, he yielded to the attraction of the recollections of Munich, and passing through Venice, where he stopped some weeks, and through the Tyrol, he returned to that residence toward the end of the winter of 1784. He now received from the elector a positive invitation to enter into his service; and instead of returning to Vienna, he set out for London with the intention of soliciting permission from the king to accept the offers of the elector palatine. Not only was -that favour granted him, but the king joined to it ah honourable distinction, by creating him a knight. He accordingly returned to Bavaria sir Benjamin Thompson; and was on his arrival appointed colonel of the horse, and general aid-de-camp to the sovereign who wanted to secure his services. Sir Benjamin employed the four first years of his abode at Munich in acquiring the political and statistical knowledge necessary for realizing the plans which his philanthropy suggested to him for improving the condition of the lower orders, he did not neglect in the mean time his favourite studies; and it was in 1786, in a journey to Manheim, that he made his first experiments on heat. Political and literary honours poured in upon him during that interval. In 1785 he was made chamberlain of the elector, and admitted a member of the academies of science of Munich and Manheim. In 178C he received from the kin<4 of Poland the order of St. Stanislaus; in 1787 he made a journey in Prussia, during which he was elected a member of the academy of Berlin. In 1788 he was appointed Major-general of cavalry and privy counsellor of state. He was placed at the head of the war department, and particularly charged with the execution of the plans which he had proposed for improving the state of the Bavarian army.

At last, the following year (1789) witnessed the accomplishment of the numerous projects meditated during those which preceded. The house of industry of Manheim was established; the islands of Mulhau near Manheim, which till that time had been nothing but a pestilential morass, useless for culture, and pernicious to the health of the inhabitants of the city, were joined together, surrounded by a mound and ditch, and transformed into a fertile garden, consecrated to the industry of the garrison. The tine establishment of the military academy of Munich was founded; a scheme of military police was formed to deliver the country from the numerous gangs of vagabonds, robbers, and beggars, who infested it; schools of industry, belonging to every regiment, were established, to employ the wives and children of the soldiers; a veterinary school was instituted, and a stud of horses provided for improving the breed of the country. At the beginning of 1790 the house of industry at Munich, that fine establishment, which the count himself has described at length in his essays, was formed, for bettering the condition of the poor; and mendicity was completely abolished: nor has it again made its appearance in Bavaria, since that memorable epoch. The beautiful English garden of Munich was begun, and military gardens established in all the garrisons. The sovereign expressed his obligation for these numerous services, by conferring on sir Benjamin the rank of lieutenant-general of his armies, and giving him a regiment of artillery. In 1791 he was created a count of the holy Roman empire, and honoured with the order of the white eagle. He employed that year and the following in completing his projects, and in removing the obstacles by which attempts were made to interrupt their progress. This species of labour, and the anxiety of mind inseparable from it, impaired his health to such a degree, that his physicians declared that his life was in danger, unless he retired, for some time, from business, and had recourse to a change of climate. He obtained permission from the elector to take a journey into Italy; and before leaving him, communicated, in a detailed account, the principal results of his four years administration, compared with the four years which had preceded his entrance into office. After having travelled over all Italy, and a part of Switzerland, he returned to Bavaria in the month of August 1794. He had been attacked with a dangerous illness in Naples, and his slow recovery did not permit him to resume, on his return, the transaction of the business of his department, over which he contented himself with exercising a general superintendance. He laboured in his closet; and it was at this time that he prepared the first five of the essays which he published.

In the month of September 1795 he returned to England, after an absence of more than eleven years. The principal object of his journey was to publish his essays, and to direct the attention of the English nation toward the plans of public and domestic ceconomy which he had conceived and realized in Germany. Lord Pelham was then secretary of state in Ireland. The count complied with his invitation in the spring of 1796, and took that occasion of visiting that interesting country. He introduced, at Dublin, several important improvements into the hospitals and houses of industry, and left there models of a number of useful mechanical inventions. Every testimony of honour and gratitude was lavished upon him in that country. The royal academy of Ireland, the society for the encouragement of arts and manufactures, both elected him an hono^ rary member; and after having left the country, he received a letter of thanks from the grand jury of the county of Dublin, an official letter from the lord mayor of the city, and one from the lord lieutenant of Ireland; all filled with the most flattering expressions of esteem and of gratitude.

On his return to London he directed the alterations, which had been adopted, on his recommendation, in the Foundling-hospital; and he presented to the Board of agriculture several machines, as models for imitation. The philanthropic activity which distinguished this epoch of his life manifested itself in every form It was at this time he placed in the English and American funds, two sums of 1000l. sterling each, to establish a premium to he given every two years to the author of the most useful discovery, made respectively in Europe or America, on light, or heat. The premium is a gold medal worth 1500 francs, to he adjudged in Europe by the royal society of London, and in America by the academy of sciences of America.

Nothing seemed sufficient to withdraw him from these tranquil and important oc-cupations, when the events of war called upon him to display his military talents fur the service of his adopted country. General Moreau, having crossed the Rhine, and defeated several bodies of soldiers who disputed with him its passage, advanced by quick marches to Bavaria. Count Rumford, on receiving this intelligence, immediately set out to join the elector. His arrival at Munich was eight days previous to the epoch when the sovereign was called upon to quit his residence, and to take refuge in Saxony. Rumford remained in Munich with instructions from the elector to wait events, and to act according to the exigency of circumstances: they were not long in requiring his interference. After the battle of Freidberg, the Austrians, repulsed by the French, fell back upon Munich: the gates of the city were shut against them. They marched round it, passed the Inn by the bridge, and posted themselves on the other side of die river on a height which commanded the bridge and the town. There they erected batteries, and firmly waited for the French. In this situation, some inconsiderate transactions which happened in Munich, were interpreted by the Austrian general as an insult pointed against himself, and he demanded an explanation of them from the council of regency, threatening to order the towq to be fired upon if a single Frenchman entered the city. At this critical moment the count made use of the eventual orders of the elector, to take the command in chief of the Bavarian forces. His firmness and presence of mind awed both parties; neither the French nor the Austrians entered Munich; and that city escaped all the dangers with which it had been threatened.

On the return of the elector, the count was placed at the head of the department of the general police in Bavaria, The services which he rendered in that capacity, though. Jess brilliant than military exploits, were not less valuable, or less conspicuous. But the excessive labour to which his zeal and activity betrayed him, the opposition which he often experienced in the exercise of his office, again affected his health to such a degree as threatened his life. The elector, impressed with esteem and gratitude towards him, wished not to allow him to sink under a labour too severe for him, and desired to find the means of procuring him the repose which he required, without altogether depriving himself of his services: he appointed him his envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary at the court of London. But the rules of England not permitting a subject of the king to be accredited as a foreign minister, the count did not exercise that office, and continued to live in England after his return in 1798 as a private individual.

It being reported in America that he had quitted Bavaria forever, the government of the United States addressed to him, through the medium of the American ambassador at London, a formal and official invitation to return to his naiive country, where an honourable establishment was destined for him. The offer was accompanied with the most flattering assurances of consideration and confidence. He replied, declaring at the same time his profound gra* titude for such a mark of esteem, “That engagements, rendered sacred and inviolable by great obligations, did not permit him to dispose of himself in sach a manner as to be able to accept of the offer which was made to himij”

The historical society of Massachusets, on electing count Rumford a member, communicated to him, by their president, about the same time, their unanimous desire of seeing him return to his own country, and take up his residence among them. His answer, which is to be found in the American papers of that time, was very much admired.

Toward the autumn of 1800, count Rumford went to Scotland. The magistrates of Edinburgh paid him a visit of ceremony; gave a public dinner on his account, and to these marks of distinction added the freedom of the city, conceived in terms the most flattering. They consulted him on the means of improving the existing charitable institutions, and on the measures proper for abolishing mendicity. The work was undertaken without loss of time, and that great enterprize was finished in a few months with complete success. The royal society of Edinburgh, and the college of physicians, elected him at the same time, respectively, an honorary member; and the university bestowed upon him the degree of doctor of laws. During his stay in that city he employed himself in superintending the execution, in the great establishment of Heriot’s hospital, of improvements which he invented with regard to the employment of fuel in the preparation of food; and the managers, to shew their gratitude, sent him a silver box, with a very flattering inscription, having on one of its sides a representation, in relief of gold, of the principal front of the building to the improvement of which he had so eminently contributed.

Count Rumford quitted England for the last time in the month of May 1802, for Paris. He went that summer to Munich, and returned to Paris in the winter. In the summer of 1803, he made a tour of part of Switzerland and Bararia with the widow of the celebrated Lavoisier, a woman of highly cultivated mind and capacious understanding; whom shortly after their return to Paris he married; but their union proved unhappy, and they at length separated, the count retiring to a house at Auteuil, about four miles from Paris, where he passed the rest of his days in philosophical pursuits and experiments, almost secluded from the world; for after the death of his worthy friend, the illustrious Lagrange, he saw only his next-door neighbour, the senator Lecoutejux Caneleux, Mr. Underwood, the member of the royal institution, who assisted him in the experiments, and an old friend, Mr. Parker, a learned American. He ceased to attend the sittings of the National Institute; but for the perpetual secretary Cuvier, he always preserved the highest admiration and esteem. One object of his latter occupations was a work not finished, “On the Nature and Effects of Order;” which would probably have been a valuable present to domestic society. No man in all his habits had more the spirit of order: every thing was classed; no object was ever allowed to remain an instant out of its place the moment he had done with it; and he was never beyond his time in an appointment a single instant. He was also latterly employed on a series of experiments on the propagation of heat in solids. He had by him several unpublished works, particularly one of considerable interest on Meteorolites, in which he demonstrated that they came from regions beyond the atmosphere of the earth. This very ingenious philosopher died August 21, 1814, when on the eve of retiring to England. The literary productions of count Kumford have obtained a wide circulation, having been translated into various languages. His papers in the “Philosophical Transactions,” chiefly on matters connected with the object of his beneficent investigations, were rather distinguished for the useful application of which they were susceptible, than for their number. Among them are, 1. “Experiments on Gun-powder, with. a method of determining the velocity of projectiles, and the force of gun-powder.” 2. “Experiments on Heat; by which it is proved to pass more slowly through the Torricellian vacuum, than through the air.” 3. “Experiments on the production of dephlogisticated air (oxygen gas) by different substances, exposed under water to the action of light.” 4. “Experiments on the relative and absolute quantities of moisture absorbed by different substances employed as garments.” 5. “Experiments on the communication of heat in air.” This memoir procured to the author the gold medal of the royal society. 6. “The description of a photometer, and experiments on the relative quantity of light furnished by different combustible substances, and their relative prices.” 7. “Experiments on coloured shades, and the optical illusions produced by the contrast of colours actually present.” 8. “Experiments on the force of Gunpowder, by which it is proved that this force is at least 50,000 times greater than the mean weight of the atmosphere, and that it is probable that the force of gun-powder depends chiefly on the elasticity of the vapour of water.” 9. “A letter to sir Joseph Banks, president of the Royal Society, offering a capital of 1000l. sterling destined for a fund to furnish a premium every two years to the author of the most useful discovery made in Europe with regard to light or heat.” 10. “Inquiries into the cause of heat excited by friction, &c. &c.”

His only distinct publication was a series of detached “Essays, experimental, political, economical, and philosophical,” which appeared at different times since 1"796, and now amount to eighteen, forming four octavo volumes. The contents are, Essay 1. Account of an Establishment for the Poor at Munich, together with a detail of various public measures connected with that institution, which have been adopted and carried into effect, for putting an end to mendicity, and introducing order and useful industry among the more indigent of the inhabitants of Bavaria. 2. Of the funJamental principles on which general establishments for the relief of the poor may be formed in all countries. 3. Of Food, and particularly of feeding the poor. 4. Of Chimney Fire-places, with proposals for improving them to save fuel; to render dwelling-houses more comfortable and salubrious; and effectually to prevent chimneys from smoking. 5. A short account of several Public Institutions lately formed in Bavaria. 6. On the Management of Fire, and the Economy of Fuel. 7. Of the Propagation of Heat in Fluids. 8. Of the Propagation of Heat in various substances, being an account of a number of new experiments made with a view to the investigation of the causes of the warmth of natural and artificial clothing. (First published in the Phil. Transactions.) 9. An experimental inquiry concerning the Source of the Heat which is excited by friction. 10. On the construction of Kitchen Fire-places, and Kitchen Utensils, together with remarks and observations relating to the various processes of cookery, and proposals for improving that most useful art. 11. Supplementary observations concerning Chimney Fireplaces. 12. Observations concerning the Salubrity of Warm Rooms in Cold Weather. 13. Observations concerning the Salubrity of Warm Bathing, and the principles on which Warm Baths should be constructed. 14. Supplementary observations relating to the management of fires in closed Fire places. 15. Of the use of Steam as a vehicle for transporting heat from one place to another. 16. Of the management of Light, in illuminations; together with an account of a new portable lamp. 17. An inquiry concerning the source of the Light which is manifested in the combustion of inflammable bodies. 18. Of the excellent qualities of Coffee, and the art of making- it in perfection.

, a miscellaneous writer of no great fame, was the son of a merchant at Hull, where he was born about 1738. He was educated at Beverley, under the Rev. Mr. Clarke, and thence removed to Hampstead, unHer the care of Dr. Cox. He early embraced a maritime life, and in 1750 sailed on a voyage to Greenland. In 1754 he was engaged on board an Indiaman, and became what is called “a guinea pig,” though other accounts say that he went to the East Indies with sir Peter Dennis, on board the Dorsetshire, and was in the memorable action off Quiheron Bay. By his “Sailor’s Letters,” it appears that he was at Madras, Ceylon, and Bengal. In 1759 he was engaged in Hawke’s celebrated battle with Gentians. His other naval movements seem to have been of little importance, and on the peace in 1762 he became unemployed He now wrote a licentious poem, celebrating the most remarkable women of the town, which he published under the title of the “Meretriciad.” This seems to have been the means of introducing him to the acquaintance of Churchill, with whom he boasts on many occasions to have lived on terms of intimacy, and with whose principles, political and moral, he appears to have been at perfect agreement. Of this, his subsequent poems, “The Soldier,” “The Courtezan,” and the “Demirep,” afford sufficient proof. In 1765, he was more laudably employed in soliciting parliament for an increase of half-pay for the lieutenants of the navy, an application which was attended with success.

In 1767 he published his “Sailor’s Letters,” 2 vols. 12mo, in which there are many particulars of his life, from 1754 to 1759, told in a rambling and desultory manner. He afterwards edited the works of Oldham in 3 vols. and in 1777, those of Paul Whitehead, in one vol. 4to, and of Andrew Marvell, in 3 vols, 4to, none of which added much to his reputation, either for judgment or correctness. When the war with France commenced, he was, in 1778, appointed to the command of the Hyaena, and was in Rodney’s famous action off Cape St. Vincent, of which he is said to have brought home the intelligence; but this, and other accounts of his progress, as related by his biographer, are certainly erroneous. There was a capt. Thompson, of the America, who brought home the news of Rodney’s having captured a valuable Spanish convoy, but this was capt. Samuel Thompson, a much older officer; and as to Rodney’s action off Cape St. Vincent, a reference to the Gazette will show that it was capt. Uvedale of the Ajax; who brought home that intelligence. We are told, which may be correct, that he was soon afterwards appointed commodore of an expedition against Demerara, and afterwards conveyed home a fleet of merchantmen from St. Eustathius. In 1785 he was appointed commander of the Grampus, and sent to the coast of Africa, where he died on board of his ship, Jan. 17, 1786. He was considered as a brave and skilful commander, and had that infallible test of merit, the affection of his crew. It must also be noticed to his honour that when he acquired some degree of opulence, he with great alacrity and liberality repaid his obligations to many persons who had before assisted him. The most impartial of his biographers concludes with observing that “the merits by which capt. Thompson will be best known to posterity, are his sea songs, which are still on every one’s lips: more especially those three beautiful and affecting compositions, beginning” Loose every sail to the breeze,“” The topsail shivers in the wind,“and” Behold upon the gallant wave."

, a scholar and poet of considerable merit, is said to have been the second son of the rev. Francis Thompson, B. D. of Queen’s college, Oxford, and vicar of Brough in Westmoreland, who died August 31, 1735, aged seventy. His mother, who died two years after, in the sixty-fifth year of her age, was the widow of the rev. Joseph Fisher, M. A. fellow of Queen’s college, Ox* ford, vicar of Brough, and archdeacon of Carlisle, by whom she had no children. Our author was born probably in the early part of the last century, but the year cannot be ascertained. He was young, when in 1734 and 1736, he wrote “Stella, Sive Amores, Tres Libri,” and “Six Pastorals,” none of which he thought it proper to include in his published works. In his poem, entitled “Sickness,” he laments the want of a mother’s tenderness, and a father’s care; but, as they died in advanced age, he could not have lost them before he had attained at least his twentieth year.

It was on the banks of the Eden, which runs near Brough, that “his prattling muse was first provoked to numbers,” and where, we may suppose, he wrote most of those smaller pieces which he thought worthy of preservation. In these he frequently addresses an lanthe, who was probably a real mistress. At the usual age he went to Queen’s college, Oxford, and on February 26, 1738, took the degree of master of arts. He afterwards became a fellow of his college, and succeeded to the livings of South Weston and Hampton Poyle, in Oxfordshire. It was probably during his residence on his living that he published “Sickness,” in 1746. The origin of this poem may be found in a note subjoined to the fifth book, but much of it must have been written just before publication, as he pays tribute to the memory of Pope and Swift, who died about that time.

In 1751, he is said to have been an unsuccessful candidate for the poetry professorship, against Hawkins. In 1756 he published “Gratitude,” a poem, on an occasion which certainly required it from every true son of Oxford. In the preceding year Henrietta Louisa, countess dowager of Pomfret, daughter of John, baron Jeffrys of Wemm, and relict of Thomas, first earl of Pomfret, presented to the university more than one hundred and thirty statues, &c. which the earl’s father, William, baron of Lempster, had purchased from the Arundel collection, and preserved at his seat at Eston Neston in Northamptonshire. On the 25th February, 1756, this lady received the thanks of the university; and the year following, the university celebrated a public enccenia, on which occasion, in an oration by Mr. Thomas Warton, professor of poetry, she was again complimented in the most public manner for her noble and generous benefaction. Besides Thompson, an anonymous Oxonian offered a poetical tribute to her liberality; and in. 1760, Mr. Vivian, afterwards king’s professor of modern history, published “A Poem on the Pomfret Statues.” Thompson’s poem is added to the late collection, without, it will perhaps be thought, adding much to his poetical reputation.

It has already been mentioned, in the life of 'bishop Hall, that in 1753 Thompson superintended the publication of an edition of the “Virgidemiarum.” To his own volumes of poems was added, “Gondibert and Bertha,” a tragedy, the subject taken from Davenant’s poem of “Gondibert.” This tragedy was written, he informs us, when “he was an undergraduate in the university, as an innocent relaxation from those severer and more useful studies for which the college, where he had the henefit of his education, is so deservedly distinguished.” He reprintfd it with all its juvenile imperfections, but, although it is not without individual passages of poetical beauty, it has not dramatic form and consistency to entitle it to higher praise.

Of Thompson’s personal character, a very high opinion may be deduced from the general tenour of his acknowledged works. He appears to have been a man of warm affections in the relative duties of life, an ardent admirer of merit, with an humble consciousness of his own defects; a man of real piety, and of various learning. His studies lay much among the ancient English poets, in whose history and writings he was critically skilled. As a poet, although he has not been popular, he may be allowed to rank above some whose writings have been more anxiously preserved. Having been in early life an admirer of Spenser, he became a studied imitator of that father of English poetry; but like most of his imitators, while he adopted his measure, he thought his imitation incomplete without borrowing a greater number of antiquated words and phrases than can be either ornamental or useful. But if he be censurable on this account, it must be allowed, that in his “Nativity” he has not only imitated, but rivalled Spenser in the sweetness and solemnity which belong to his canto. His imagery is in general striking, and appropriate to the elevated subject, nor is he less happy in his personifications. His “Hymn to May” has received more praise than any of his other pieces. It is certainly more finished, but there are many luxuriancies which sober judgment would have removed, and many glittering epithets, and verbal conceits, which proceeded from a memory stored with the ancient poets, and not yet chastened into simplicity by the example and encouragement of the moderns. The poem on “Sickness” is the longest, and altogether, perhaps the most successful effort of his muse. He chose a new subject, and discovers considerable powers of invention.

, a very eminent poet, was the son of a minister in Scotland, and born at Ednam in the shire of Roxburgh, Sept. the llth, 1700. His mothers name was Beatrix Trotter, and not Hume, as Dr. Johnson says, Hume being the name of his grandmother. His father was minister of Ednam, with a family of nine children. A neighbouring clergyman, Mr. Riccarton, discovering in James uncommon promises of future excellence, undertook to give him instructions, and provide him with books; and, after the usual course of school education at Jedburgh, he was sent to the university of Edinburgh. In the second year of his admission, his studies were for some time interrupted by the death of his lather; but his mother soon after repaired with her family, which was very numerous, to Edinburgh, where she lived in a decent and frugal manner, till her favourite son had not only finished his academical course, but was even distinguished and patronized as a man of genius. Though the study of poetry was about this time become general in Scotland, the best English authors being universally read, and imitations of them attempted, yet taste had made little progress; the major part criticized according to rules and forms, and thus were very able to discern the inaccuracies of a poet, while all his fire and enthusiasm escaped their notice. Thomson believed that he deserved better judges than these, and therefore began to turn his views towards London, to which an accident soon after entirely determined him.

The divinity-chair at Edinburgh was then filled by Mr. Hamilton, whose lectures Thomson attended for about a year, when there was prescribed to him, for the subject of an exercise, a psalm, in which the power and majesty of God are celebrated. Of this psalm he gave a paraphrase and illustration, as the nature of the exercise required, but in a style *o highly poetical, that it surprized the whole audience. Mr. Hamilton complimented him upon the performance; but at the same time told him, smiling, that if he thought of being useful in the ministry, he must keep a stricter rein upon his imagination, and express himself in language more intelligible to an ordinary congregation. Thomson concluded from this, that' his expectations from the study of theology mi^ht be very precarious, even though the church had been more his free choice than it probably was: so that, having soon after received some encouragement from a lady of quality, a friend of his mother, then in London, he quickly prepared himself for his journey, in 1725; and although this encauragement ended in nothing beneficial, it served then for a good pretext, to cover the imprudence of committing himself to the wide world, unfriended and unpatronized, and with the slender stock of money he possessed.

But his merit did not lie long concealed. Mr. Forbes, afterwards lord-president of the session, received him very kindly, and recommended him to some of his friends, particularly to Mr. Aikinan, whose premature death he has with great affection commemorated, in a copy of verses written on that occasion. The good reception he experienced wherever he was introduced, emboldened him to risque the publication of his “Winter,” in March 1726, which was no sooner read than universally admired; and from that time his acquaintance was courted by all men of taste. Dr. Ilundle, afterwards bishop of Derry, received him into his intimate confidence and friendship; promoted his reputation every where; introduced him to his great friend the lord chancellor Talbot; and some years after, when the eldest son of that nobleman was to make his tour of travelling, recommended Mr. Thomson as a proper companion for him. His affection and gratitude to Dr. Rundle are finely expressed in his poem to the memory of lord Talbot. In the mean time, the poet’s chief care had been, in return for the public favour, to finish the plan which their wishes laid out for him; and the expectations which his “Winter” had raised were fully satisfied by the successive publication of the other seasons; of “Summer,” in 1727; of “Spring,” in 1728; and of “Autumn,” in a 4to edition of his works, in 1730. Some very interesting remarks on the variations introduced into these, in subsequent editions, may be seen in the Ceusura Literaria, vols. II. III. and IV.

Besides these, and his tragedy of “Sophonisba,” written and acted with applause in 1729, Thomson had, in 1727, published his “Poem to the Memory of Sir Isaac Newton,” then lately deceased. The same year, the resentment of our merchants, for the interruption of their trade by the Spaniards in America, running very high, Thomson zealously took part in it, and wrote his poem named “Britannia, to rouzethe nation to revenge. His poetical pursuits were now interrupted by his attendance on the honourable Mr. Charles Talbot in his travels, with whom he visited most of the courts and capital cities of Europe. How particular and judicious his observations abroad were, appears from his poem on” Liberty,“in five parts, thus entitled,” Ancient and modern Italy compared“” Greece'“”Rome;“” Britain;“” The Prospect.“While he was writing the first part of” Liberty,“he received a severe shock, by the death of his noble friend and fellow-traveller; and this was soon followed by another still more severe, and of more general concern, the death of lord Talbot himself; which Thomson so pathetically laments, in the poem dedicated to his memory. At the same time, he found himself from an easy competency reduced to a state of precarious dependence, in which he passed the remainder of his life, excepting only the two last years of it; during which he enjoyed the place of surveyor-general of the Leeward islands, procured for him by the generous friendship of lord Lyttelton. Immediately upon his return to England with Mr. Talbot, the chancellor had made him his secretary of briefs, a place of little attendance, suiting his retired indolent way of life, and equal to all his wants. This place fell with his patron; yet could not his genius be depressed, or his temper x hurt, by this reverse of fortune. He resumed, in time, his usual cheerfulness, and never abated one article in his way of living, which, though, simple, was genial and elegant The profits arising from his works were not inconsiderable; his” Tragedy of Agamemnon," acted in 1738, yielded a good sum.

But his chief dependence, during this long interval, was on the protection and bounty of his royal highness Frederic prince of Wales, who, upon the recommendation of lord Lyttelton, then his chief favourite, settled on him an handsome allowance, and always received him very graciously. It happened, however, that the favour of his royal highness was, in one instance, of some disadvantage to Mr. Thomson, in the refusal of a licence for his tragedy of “Edward and Eleonora,” which he had prepared for the stage in 1739. This proceeded from the misunderstandings, which then subsisted between the court of the prince of Wales and that of the king his father. His next dramatic performance was the masque of “Alfred,”' written, jointly with Mr. Mallet, who was his good friend on many occasions, by command of the prince of Wales, for the entertainment of his royal highness’s court at his summer residence. In 1745, his “Tancred and Sigismunda,” taken from the novel in Gil Bias, was performed with applause. He had, in the mean time, been finishing his “Castle of Indolence,” an allegorical poem, in two cantos the stanza which he uses in this work is that of Spenser, borrowed from the Italian poets. This was the last piece Thomson himself published, his tragedy of “Coriolanus” heing only prepared for the theatre, when a fever seized him, and deprived the world of a very good man, as well as of an admirable poet. His death happened Aug. the 27th, 1748. His executors were lord Lyttelton and Mr. Mitchel; and by their interest, the orphan play, “Coriolanus,” was brought on the sta e to the best advantage: from the profits of which, and from the sale of his manuscripts and other effects, all demands were duly satisfied, and a handsome sum remitted to his sisters. His remains were deposited in the church of Richmond in Surrey, under a plain stone, without any inscription; but in 1762 a monument was erected to his memory in Westminster-abbey.

Thomson himself hints, somewhere in his works, that his exterior was not the most promising, his make being rather robust than graceful. His worst appearance was, when he was seen walking alone, in a thoughtful mood; but when a friend accosted him, and entered into conversation, he would instantly brighten ^ito a most amiable aspect, his features no longer the same, and his eye darting a peculiarly animated fire. He had improved his taste upon the best originals, ancient and modern, but could not bear to write what was not strictly his own. What he borrows from the ancients, he gives us in an avowed and faithful paraphrase, or translation, as we see in a few passages taken from Virgil; and in that beautiful picture from the el<!er Pliny, where the course and gradual increase of the Nile, are figured by the stages of a man’s life. 1 he autumn was his favourite season for poetical composition, and the deep silence of the night the time he commonly chose for such studies: so that he would often be heard walking in his study till near morning, humming over, in his way, what he was to correct and write out the next day. The amusements of his leisure hours were civil and natural history, voyages, and the best relations of travellers; and, had his situation favoured it, he would certainly have excelled in gardening, agricultuie, and every rural improvement and exercise. Although he did not perform on any instrument, he was passionately fond of music, and would sometimes listen a full hour at his window to the nightingales in Richmond-gardens. Nor was his taste less exquisite in the arts of painting, sculpture, and architecture. In his tr.vels, he had seen all the most celebrated monuments of antiquity, a.id the best productions of modern art, and had studied them so minutely, and with so true a judgment, that, in some of his descriptions in the poem of “Liberty,” we have the masterpieces, there mentioned, placed in a stronger light than many visitors can see them witii their own eyes. A* for the more distinguishing qualities of his mind and heart, they are better represented in his writings, than they can be by the pen of any biographer. There his love of mankind, of his country, and friends; his devotion to the Supreme Being, founded- on the most elevated and just conceptions of his operations and providence, shine out in every page. So unbounded was his tenderness of heart, that it took in even the brute creation: he was extremely tender towards his own species. He is not indeed known, through his whole life, to have given any person one moment’s pain by his writings, or otherwise. He touk no part in the poetical- squabbles of his time, and so was respected and left undisturbed by both sides. These virtues did not fail to receive their due reward. The best and greatest men of his time honoured him with their friendship and protection; the app'ause of the. public attended all his productions; his friends loved him with an enthusiastic ardour, and sincerely lamented his untimely death.

As a writer, says Dr. Johnson, he is entitled to one praise of the highest kind: his mode of thinking, and of expressing his thoughts, is original His blank verse is no more the blank verse of Milton, or of any other poet, than the rhymes of Prior are the rhymes of Cowley. His numbers, his pauses, his diction, are of his own growth, without transcription, without imitation. He thinks in a peculiar train, and he thinks always as a man of genius; he looks round on Nature and on Life with the eye which Nature bestows only on a poet; the eye that distinguishes, in every thing represented to its view, whatever there is on which imagination can delight to be detained, and with a,rrind that at once comprehends the vast, and attends to the minute The reader of the “Seasons” wonders that he never saw before what Thomson shews him, and that he never yet has felt what Thomson impresses. His is one of the works in which blank verse seems properly used; Thomson’s wide expansion of general views, and his enumeration of circumstantial varieties, would have been obstructed and embarrassed by the frequent interruptions of the sense, which are the necessary effects of rhyme. His descriptions of extended scenes and general effects bring before us the whole magnificence of Nature, whether pleasing or dreadful. The gaiety of Spring, the splendour of Summer, the tranquillity of Autumn, aad the horror of Winter, take in their turns possession of the mind. The poet leads us through the appearances of things as they are successively Taried by the vicissitudes of the year, and imparts to us so much of his own enthusiasm, that our thoughts expand with his imagery, and kindle with his sentiments. Nor is the naturalist without his part in the entertainment; for he is assisted to recollect and to combine, to arrange his discoveries, and to amplify the sphere of his contemplation. The great defect of the “Seasons” is want of method; but for this, perhaps, there was not any remedy. Of many appearances subsisting all at once, no rule can be given why one should be mentioned before another; yet the memory wants the help of order, and the curiosity is not excited by suspense or expectation. His diction is in the highest degree florid and luxuriant, such as may be said to be to his images and thoughts both their lustre and their shade; such as invests them with splendour, through which, perhaps, they are not always easily discerned. It is too exuberant, and sometimes may be charged with filling the ear more than the mind. The highest praise, adds Dr. Johnson, which he has received, ought not to be suppressed: it is said by lord Lyttelton, in the prologue to his posthumous play, that his works contained “No line which, dying, he could wish to blot.”

, an eminent antiquary, descended from a very ancient family, was born at Leeds in Yorkshire, Aug. 16, 1658, and was the son of a reputable merchant, and after some education at the grammar-school of that place, was sent, in 1677, for further improvement, to London. The father possessed a good share of learning, and had a peculiar turn for the knowledge of antiquities; which being inherited by the son, he employed his leisure hours in visiting remarkable places, copying monumfntal inscriptions, studying their history, and particularly collecting accounts of protestant benefactions. His father, designing him for his own -business, sent him in 1678 to Rotterdam, in order to learn the Dutch and French languages, and to be perfected in mercantile accomplishments: but he was obliged to return the year following, on account of his health. On the death of his father, in 1680, he entered on his business: and, though merchandize was his profession, yet learning and antiquities took so firm a possession of his heart, that, contenting himself with a moderate patrimony, he made those researches the great employment of his life. There is a circumstance relating to him, in the unhappy times under James II. which we cannot pass over. He had been bred among the presbyterians; but, never imbibing any of their rigid principles, had always occasionally conformed to the established church: and now, when popery began to threaten the nation, he more frequently attended its worship, with a view of promoting an union among the protestaots for their mutual preservation. His presbyterian pastor was highly displeased with his compliance, and treated him with a very indiscreet zeal. This prompted Thoresby to examine more closely the arguments on both sides, and apply to his diocesan and friend archbishop Sharp (who, by the way, had a good taste for coins and medals, and collected a curious cabinet of them), who treated him very affectionately, and by letters and personal conversation settled him in full communion with the established church.

Thoresby was well respected by the clergy and gentry of his town and neighbourhood, and by all the eminent antiquaries and men of learning of his time. It would be almost endless to enumerate the assistances which he gave in one way or other to the works of the learned. When Gibson published his new edition of Camden’s Britannia, Mr. Thoresby wrote notes and additional observations on the West-riding of Yorkshire, for the use of it; and transmitted above a hundred of his coins to Mr. Obadiah Walker, who undertook that province which related to the Roman, British, and Saxon monies. Hearne often acknowledged in print the favour of his correspondence. He communicated to Strype some original letters in his collection. He imparted to Calamy memoirs of several northern divines for his abridgment of “Baxter’s Life and Times” as he did also of the worthy royalists to Walker, for his “Sufferings of the Clergy,” which was published as an antidote to Calamy’s book; esteeming good men of all parties worthy to have their names and characters transmitted to posterity. His skill in heraldry and genealogy rendered him a very serviceable correspondent to Collins in his “Peerage of England.” By these kindnesses, sweetened with the easiness of access to his own cabinet, he always found the like easy admission to those of others; which gave him frequent opportunities of enlarging his collection, far beyond what could have been expected from a private person, not wealthy. He commenced an early friendship with the celebrated naturalist Dr. Martin Lister. To this friend he sent an account of some Roman antiquities he had discovered in Yorkshire, which being communicated by him and Dr. Gale, dean of York, to the Royal Society, obtained him a fellowship of that learned body in 1697: and the great number of his papers, in their Transactions, relating to ancient Roman and Saxon monuments in the North of England, with notes upon them, and the inscriptions of coins, &c. shew how deserving he was of that honour.

He died in 1725, in his sixty-eighth year, and was interred among his ancestors in St. Peter’s church at Leeds. His character for learning is best seen in the books he published, which shew him to have been a great master of the history and antiquities of his own country; to attain which, it became necessary for him to be skilled, as he was, in genealogy and heraldry. He appears from these books to have been also an industrious biographer: but that. which sets his reputation the highest as a scholar, was his uncommon knowledge of coins and medals. He had long formed a design of doing honour to his native town and its environs, by writing the history of them; and had accumulated a vast quantity of materials for the work, which was published in 1715, under the title of “Ducatus Leodiensis; or, The Topography of Leeds and the parts adjacent,” fol. To which is subjoined, “Museum Thoresbeianum; or, a Catalogue of the Antiquities, &c. in the Repository of Ralph Thoresby, gent. &c.” In the former piece, he frequently refers to the historical part, intended for giving a view of the state of the northern parts of the kingdom during the dark ages of the Britons and the Romans and of the alterations afterwards made by the Saxons, Danes, and Normans: and he proceeded so far, as to bring his narration in a fair copy nearly to the end of the sixth century, illustrating and confirming his history byhis coins. This curious unfinished manuscript is inserted in the Biographia Britannica, in order to excite some able writer to carry it on, and complete the noble design of the author. His advancement in years hindering him from completing this work, he contented himself with committing to the press his “Viearia Leodiensis: or, The History of the Church of Leeds, &c.”, which was published in 1724, 8vo. The subject of this work being narrow and confined, he has enriched it with observations on the original of parochial churches, and the ancient manner of building them; as also on the' old way of passing estates by delivery of pledges, subscription of golden crosses, pendent seals, &c. and, besides the memoirs of many worthy divines successively vicars of Leeds, he has added the lives of the doc-, tors, Matthew Hutton, Edwyn Sandys, Tobie Matthews, John Thoresby, archbishops of York, and of Henry earl of Huntingdon. His character is thus given by his biographer: “However diligent he was in cultivating the laudable accomplishments of the gentleman and the scholar, yet he never suffered his beloved studies to interfere with his religion, but managed all his affairs in subserviency to it. He often lamented the great consumption of time, occasioned by the numerous visitants to see his museum, but took care that they should not hinder his private or public worship. In his principles, after his conversion, he was orthodox; in his affections, catholic, comprehending therein all denominations of Christians. He was modest and pure, temperate, and abstemious to an uncommon degree; though, being one of the lords of the manor, and a governing member 'of the corporation, he could not always avoid public meetings and festivities, yet he was a sparing partaker, even of innocent diversions. He was constant and regular at his private devotions, which were invigorated with an unusual degree of fervency. Ex emplary in the government of his family, he called them together morning and evening to prayer, and reading the Scriptures. Extremely careful of the religious instruction of his children, he was not unmindful of the moral behaviour of his servants. He was a kind relation, compromising the distressed affairs of some that were very near to him, by expensive journeys, irksome applications, and money almost beyond his abilities. He was very charitable to the utmost of his power, not seldom solicited others, and was always a faithful dispenser of whatever was entrusted to his care.”

Mr. Thoresby’s widow survived him near fifteen years. By her he had ten children, of whom three only, a daughter and two sons survived him. The eldest son, Ralph, was of Queen’s college, Cambridge, vicar of Rickmansworth in Hertfordshire, and rector of Stoke Newington in Middlesex, where he died in 1763. The younger, Richard, was of Catherine-hall, and rector of St. Catherine Colman, London, and died about 1774.

, one of a family of that name, of foreign extraction, but settled in England, is said by Wood to have been the son of John Thorius, a physician, who called himself “Balliolenus Flandrus,” a native of Bailleul in Flanders. It is more probable, however, that his father’s name was Francis, whom Foppen calls “Balliolenus, Flander,” who published, in 1562, “Joannis Straselii Comment, in aurea Carmina Pythagorx,” 8vo. He published also, according to the same biographer, a poem on peace, translated into Latin from the French, and wrote some epigrams and satires. According to Wood, John Thorius was born at London in 1568, and in 1586 became a member of Christ church, Oxford, but whether he took a degree, Wood says, “appears not, though in one of his books he writes himself ‘ a graduate of Oxenford.’” When he died is uncertain. He published “A Spanish Dictionary,” Lond. 1590, 4to, along with a translation of Anthony de Corro’s “Spanish Grammar.” He translated from the Spanish “The Councellor; a Treatise of Councils and Councellors of Princes,” Lond. 1589, 4to, written by Barth. Phillip. It is in this he calls himself, not “a graduate of Oxenford,” but “graduate in Oxford.” It is dedicated to the right hon. John Fortescue, master of her majesty’s wardrobe. He also translated from the Spanish of Valdes, “The Serjeant Major: or, a Dialogue of the office of a Serjeant major,” Lond. 1500, 4to.

, whether of the same family with the preceding we know not, for Wood says he was a Frenchman born, and called Thoris, became a physician and Latin poet, and admired in both characters in the reign of James I. He appears to have studied medicine at Oxford, but took no degree in that faculty. He afterwards settled in London, and was very successful in practice. In the first year of the reign of Charles I. when the plague raged in London, his humanity led him to expose himself too much to the infection, and he died of that dreadful disorder in July or August 1625, and was probably buried in St. Bennet Fink church, as his residence was in that parish. It is related of this physician that he was immoderately addicted to wine, and seldom satisfied unless he made his friends keep pace with him in drinking. Gassendi informs us, that Thorius being in company with Peiresc, whom he strongly pressed to drink a large glass of wine, the latter at length consented, upon condition that he would promise to pledge him in return. When it came to the turn of Peiresc he filled a large glass of water, and drinking it off, insisted that Thorius should do the same. This, with much hesitation, and after pouring out execrations against the vile liquor, and citing a multitude of classical invectives against it, he at length performed. The story reached king James I. and much amused him.

His works, all Latin poems, were mostly published after his decease: 1. “Hymnus Tabaci,” which, Wood says, was first published at London in 1627, 8vo; but Eloy mentions two editions at Leyden in 1622 and 1623, 4io. It was afterwards reprinted at the same place in 1628, 4to and at Utrecht in 1644, 12mo, in a collection mentioned by Haller, under the title of “Collectio opusculorum de Tabaco.” 2. “Cheimonopegnion, a Winter Sung,” published with the London edition of the “Tobacco,” 1627, and both were translated into English by Peter Hausted, M. A. and afterwards D. D. of Cambridge, 1651, 8vo. He wrote also “Epistolae duae de Isaaci Casauboni morbi mortisque causa,” inserted in Gronovius’s edition of J. Casaubon’s epistles. Tborius’s death was lamented in a poem printed in 1626, a single sheet, 4to, entitled “Lessus in funere Raphaelis Thorii medici et poeti prastantissimi, qui Londini peste extinctus bonis et doctis omnibus triste sui desiderium reliquit, anno 1625.” He left a son John, who studied at Magdalen -college, Oxford, and became a physician in Dublin. He was incorporated M. D. at Oxford in 1627, but we find no further mention of him.

, a learned divine in the seventeenth century, was educated in Trinity-college, in the university of Cambridge, of which he was fellow. In 1638 he was proctor of that university. In July 1642 he was admitted to the rectory of Barley in Hertfordshire and, upon the death of Dr. Samuel Ward, in September 1643, he was elected master of Sidney-college in Cambridge, from which, Dr. Walker says, he was kept out “by the oppressions of the times;” but there was also somewhat of court-intrigue in this affair, as related in Walter Pope’s life of bishop Ward. He tells us, that upon the death of the latter, the fellows of the college assembled to choose a new master. “Mr. Seth Ward, with nine of them, gave their suffrages for Mr. Thorndike of Trinity-college; for Mr. Minshull there were eight votes including his own. But while they were at the election, a band of soldiers rushed in upon them, and forcibly carried away Mr. Parsons, one of those fellows who voted for Mr. Thorndike, so that the number of suffrages for Mr. Minshull, his own being accounted for one, was equal to those Mr. Thorndike had. Upon which Mr. Minshull was admitted master, the other eight only protesting against it, being ill-advised, for they should have adhered to their votes. Two of them, whereof Mr. Ward was one, went to Oxford, and brought thence a mandamus from the king, commanding Mr. Minshull, and the fellows of Sidney-college, to repair thither, and give an account of their proceedings as to that election. This mandamus, or peremptory summons, was fixed upon the chapel-door by Mr. Linnet, who was afterwards a fellow of Trinity-college, but at that time attended on Mr. Thorndike. On the other side, one Mr. Bertie, a kinsman of the earl of Lindsey, being one of those who voted for Mr. Minshull, was also sent to Oxford on his behalf. This gentleman, by the assistance and mediation of my lord of Lindsey, procured an order from the king to confirm Mr. Minshull’s election; but he, not thinking this title sufficient, did corroborate it with the broad seal, to which Mr. Thorndike consented, Mr. Minshull paying him and the rest of the fellows the charges they had been at in the management of that affair,amounting to about an hundred pounds.” This was therefore evidently a matter in which “the oppressions of the times” (which are usually understood to mean those which arose from the usurpation) were not concerned. He was, however, afterwards, to experience the latter also, and was ejected from his living of Barley, which was given to the rev. Nath. Ball of King’s college, Cambridge, who, Calamy informs us, punctually paid a fifth part of the income to Mr. Thorndike. At the restoration he was replaced in this living, but resigned it on being made a prebendary of Westminster. He very much assisted Dr. Walton in the edition of the Polyglot Bible, particularly in marking the variations in the Syriac version of the Old Testament; and wrote several treatises: “A Discourse concerning the primitive Forme of the Government of Churches,” Cambridge, 1641, 8vo; “A Discourse of Religious Assemblies and the Publike Service of God,” Cambridge, 1642, 8vo; “A Discourse of the Right of the Church in a Christian State, with a Review by way of Appendix,” London, 1649, 8vo; “Just Weights and Measures; that is, the present State of Religion weighed in the Balance, and measured by the Standard of the Sanctuary,” London, 1662, 4to; “A Discourse of the Forbearance of the Penalties, which a due Reformation requires,” London, 1670, 8vo; “Origines Ecclesiae, seu de ratione ac jure finiendi Controversias Ecclesise,” Lond. 1670. To these we may add, what is called his famous book, published in 1659, under the title of “An Epilogue to the Tragedy of the Church of England, in three books, viz. 1. Of the Principles of Christian Truth. 2. Of the Covenant of Grace. 3. Of the Laws of the Church.” By a letter from chancellor Hyde, in the appendix to Dr. Barwick’s Life, it would appear that this work had given offence, as being unseasonable and injudicious. Hyde says, “Pray tell me, what melancholy hath possessed poor Mr. Thorndike? And what do our friends think of his book? And is it possible that he would publish it, without ever imparting it, or communicating with them? His name and reputation in learning is too much made use of, to the discountenance of the poor church; and though it might not be in his power to be without some doubts and scruples, I do not know what impulsion of conscience there could be to publish those doubts to the world, in a time when he might reasonably believe the worst use would be made, and the greatest scandal proceed from them.” This seems to allude to some opinions he held that were unfavourable to the measures of the court: and we find that there was some difficulty in admitting him into the convocation in 1661, “on account of his speaking much of the Bohemian churches, called Unitas Fratrum.” He was a member of the Savoy conference, and in the little he said completely undeceived the non-conformists, who, from his early publications, had supposed he was of their side. There was also a suspicion that he had a little too much leaning to the church of Rome, so that his character has not descended to us with all the evidences of consistency; but that he was a man of great learning, and an able oriental scholar, seems indisputable.

He died July 1672, and was interred in Westminsterabbey. There were some remarkable passages in his last w 11, dated July 3d that year; particularly these words: "My will is, that if my nieces, or either of them, shall return to New-England, after my decease, or shall marry with any that goes to mass, or any of the new licensed conventicles, then whatsoever is given them by this my will, exceeding the four hundred pounds, which I have absolutely given them by deed, shall be void and not due; so that when either or both of them shall be married here to such as sincerely cleave to the church of England, then the payment to be made. As for my body, 1 charge my executor to write these words upon my grave-stone: ‘ Hie jacet corpus Herbert! Thorndike, prebendarii hujusecclesiae, qui vivus veram reformandae ecclesiae rationem ac niodum precibusque studiisque prosequebatur. Tu, lector, requiem ei et beatam in Christo resurrexionem precare.’ It is evident, from this last clause, that he believed in the efficacy of prayer for the dead.

, an eminent English painter, was born in 1676. He was the son of a gentleman of an ancient family ‘and estate in Dorsetshire but the father’s imprudent conduct having reduced him to sell his estate, the son was uno’er the necessity of seeking for a profession which might support him. He came to London, where the famous physician, Sydenham, who was his uncle, supplied him with the necessary assistances for studying under a middling painter. Such a master, however, doing but little for him, he was driven to trust to his own judgment and application; and having naturally genius and taste, he made, by the strength of these, a surprising progress in the art of painting. He travelled through Holland and Flanders, whence he went into France, and there bought several good pictures; among others, a Virgin, of Annibal Carrache, and the history of Tancred, by Poussin. If he had seen Italy, his works would have had more delicacy and correctness. His only view in travelling seemed to be acquiring a knowledge of the tastes of different nations, and buying up good pictures, in which he was very curious. Thornhill’s merit soon spread his character, and raised his reputation to the greatest height. Queen Anne appointed him to paint, in the dome of St. Paul’s church, the history of that saint, which he executed in a grand and beautiful manner, on eight pannels, in two colours, relieved with told her majesty also nominated him her first historypainter. He afterwards executed several public works, particularly at Hampton-court, where he painted an apartment, in which the queen and prince George of Denmark her husband are represented allegorically; as also another piece painted entirely on the wall, where the same subject is treated in a different manner. The other parts of the paintings there are done by Antonio Verrio, a Neapolitan. He painted also in the chapel at All Souls, Oxford, the portrait of the founder over the altar, and the cieling and figures between the windows; an altar-piece for Weyuriouth church, which was engraved by a young man, his scnolar, whom he set up in business: the hall at Blenheim, tke chapel at lord Oxford’s, at Wimple, in Cambridgeshire, the saloon and other things for Mr. Styles, the then owner of More-park, in Hertfordshire.

High as sir James’s reputation was, and laborious as his works, he wa& far from being generously rewarded for some of them, and for others he found it difficult to obtain the stipulated prices. His demands were contested at Greenwich; and though La Fosse received 2000l. for his work at Montague-house, and was allowed 500l. for his diet besides, sir James could obtain but 40s. a square yard for the cupola of S.t. Paul’s, and, as lord Orford thinks, no more for Greenwich. He was obliged to sue Mr. Styles also for the work at More-park, but the issue was in his favour, and he not only recovered 3,500l. which Mr. Styles had agreed to pay him, but 500l. more for decorations about the house.

Notwithstanding these difficulties, sir James had acquired a considerable fortune, and he laid out part of it profitably, in buying back the estate his father had sold, and in rebuilding a beautiful house, where he used to live in summer-time. He was knighted by king George the Second; but, with great injustice, was turned out of his public employment, in company with the great sir Christopher Wren, to make room for persons of far inferior abilities: after which, to amuse himself, he continued to paint easel pictures. The ill treatment he met with was thought to have impaired his health and at last, after a year’s sickness, he died, May 4, 1734, aged fifty- eight, in the same place where he was born. By his marriage he left a son, James, whom he had procured to be appointed serjeant-painter, and painter to the navy; and a daughter, married to the celebrated Hogarth. Lady Thornhill died at Chiswick in 1757.

This painter was well made, and of an agreeable humour. He was several years in parliament, and was also chosen fellow of the royal society. He designed a great deal from, practice, with much facility of pencil. His genius, so well turned for history and allegory, was no less so for portrait, landscape, and architecture; he even practised the last science as a man of business, having built several houses. He had a fine collection of designs of great masters, which he had got together with diligence, and which did honour to his taste; these he shewed very readily to strangers, and they were sold after his death. There is a set of prints engraved after the paintings on the cupola of St. Paul’s.

By the favour of the earl of Halifax, who had procured him the work at Hampton-court, he was allowed to copy the cartoons there, on which he employed three years. He executed also a smaller set, of one-fourth part of the dimensions. Having been very accurate in noticing the defects, and the additions by Cooke who repaired them, and in examining the parts turned in to fit them to the places: and having made copious studies of the heads, hands, and feet, he intended to publish an exact account of the whole, for the use of students, but this work never appeared. At his sale the smaller set was sold for seventy-five guineas, the larger for only 200l. a price we ought in justice to suppose was owing to the few bidders who had spaces in their houses large enough to receive them. They were purchased by the duke of Bedford, and placed in the gallery at Bedford- house, Bloomsbury-square and when that house was pulled down a few years ago, the late duke, Francis, presented them to the royal academy.

, a miscellaneous writer of genuine humour, and the colleague of Mr. Colman in many of his literary labours, was the son of an apothecary, and born in Maiden-lane, London, in 1724. After the usual course of education at Westminster school, he was elected to Christ Church, Oxford, in 1743. The first publication in which he was concerned, was “The Student, or the Oxford Monthly Misrellany;” afterwards altered to “The Student, or Oxford and Cambridge Monthly Miscellany.” This entertaining medley appeared in monthly numbers, printed at Oxford, for Mr. Newbery, in St. Paul’s churchyard. Smart was the principal conductor, but Thornton and other >wits of both universities occasionally assisted. Thornton’s first attempt appeared in the first number, “The Comforts of a Retired Life,” an elegy in imitation of Tibullus. Mr. Thomas Warton was also a writer in the poetical department; and Dr. Johnson, probably at Mr. Newbery’s request, wrote his “Life of Cheynel,” in one of the latter numbers. The whole were afterwards collected and published in 1748, 2 vols. 8vo. In 1752 he began a periodical work entitled “Have at ye all, or the Drury Lane Journal,” in opposition to Fielding’s “Coventgarden Journal.” It contains some humorous remarks on reigning follies, but with too frequent mixture of personal ridicule. How long it lasted is uncertain. The copy before us contains only twelve numbers.

Our author took his degree of M. A. on April 7, 1750, and as his father wished him to make physic his profession, he took the degree of bachelor in that faculty, May 18, 1754 but his bent, like that of Colman, was not to the severer studies, and they about this time “clubbed their wits” to establish the periodical paper entitled “The Connoisseur.” As they did not distinguish their respective papers by any mark, Thornton’s share cannot now be ascertained, but it is believed to be less than that of his partner. His habits were early relaxed, and although not naturally indolent, he was easily led from regular pursuits, and was consequently not remarkable for punctuality in his periodical supplies. Of this we have the following instance: when the Connoisseur, No. 101, came to town for publication, Colman, who happened to be in London, saw it at the publisher’s, and found it contained the production of a correspondent of very inferior merit, which Thornton had sent to press to save himself the trouble of writing one. But as the day for the appearance of this paper was the first of January, Colman was enraged at this carelessness and inattention to so remarkable an opportunity for a good essay, and came to Mr. Say’s printing-office late at night to inquire if it was possible to have a paper printed in time for next day’s publication. Being told that it was barely possible, he immediately sat down in his publisher (Mr. R. Baldwin’s) parlour, and wrote the paper which now stands as the 101st, cancelling the other.

As an occasional writer, however, unfettered by times and seasons, Mr. Thornton was profuse in his contributions to magazines and newspapers. Scarce any popular topic offered of whatever kind, which did not afford him a subject for a pamphlet, an essay, a piece of poetry, or some whimsical paragraphs for the newspapers. His contributions to the Public Advertiser were very considerable, and when the St. James’s Chronicle was projected (and the first thought of it was imparted to him) he became a proprietor, and a valuable contributor. A collection of the best pieces of the first year of that paper was published at the close of it, under the title of “The Yearly Chronicle for 1761; or a collection of the most interesting and striking essays, &c. with a diary of events,” &c. This was handsomely printed in an octavo volume, but notwithstanding the convenience of the plan, and the popularity of the contents, it did not succeed so well as to encourage a continuation. About this time our author had it in contemplation to treat with Mr. Rich for the patent of Covent-gardeii theatre, but the negociation proved abortive. Ho had now given up all thoughts of the employment to which he was bred, and became an author by profession, and a general satirist, oor was it with his pen only that he exercised his humour. He projected an exhibition of sign paintings, a scheme which at first appeared preposterous, beyond all hopes of encouragement, but which actually took place at his house in Bow-street, Covent-garden. The object was to convey satire on temporary events, objects, and persons, and for some time it had considerable success. It was, however, one of those odd schemes which could not be expected to last, or to be repeated, and which the public, at a less good-humoured period, might in all probability be disposed to consider as an insult.

The “Ode for St. Cecilia’s Day,” above mentioned, was another effort of the burlesque kind, from Mr. Thornton’s sportive muse, and afforded much entertainment. The sternest muscles must relax where it is read. It was professedly adapted to “the ancient British music,” viz. the salt-box, the Jew’s harp, the marrow-bones and cleavers, the hum-strum or hurdy-gurdy, &c. Dr. Johnson praised its humour, and seemed much diverted with it; nor could it be less diverting to hear him repeat the following passage, which he frequently did:

In such compositions Mr. Thornton’s imagination was particularly original and fertile, and so various that no writer has ever excelled in so many species of wit, both of the superior and inferior kinds, although his inclination and sometimes his subjects led him more frequently to the latter. What reputation this might have conferred, however, has been in a great measure lost, from his writing anonymously, and upon subjects that had no permanent interest with the public, and from no collection having been made of his pieces when they could be ascertained, and attributed to the proper author. Mr. Colman once announced to his friends, a design to collect all his partner’s works, but neglected it until his other engagements rendered it impracticable. In 1766 Thornton published two volumes, afterwards completed in five, of a translation of “Plautus,” in blank verse, assisted by Warner and Colman; a work, which, although not very successful, was generally approved, and Warburton said “he never read so just a translation in so pure and elegant a style.” In 1767 he published “The battle of the Wigs,” as an additional canto to Garth’s “Dispensary,” the subject of which was the dispute then subsisting between the fellows and licentiates of the college of physicians. This was followed by his “City Latin^” in ridicule of the inscription on Blackfriars Bridge. Besides these publications, he is said to have written the papers in the “Adventurer,” marked A.

In 1764, Mr. Thornton married Miss Sylvia Brathwaite, youngest daughter of colonel Brathwaite, who was governor of Cape Coast Castle in Africa, and who, when the ship in which he was returning to England, was taken by a Spanish privateer, fell under a treacherous blow by one of the sailors, who had observed a valuable brilliant on his finger. With this lady, Mr. Thornton appears to have enjoyed the highest domestic felicity, for which he^ was eminently qualified by a most affectionate heart, until his prospects were closed by bad health, which hurried him to his grave in the forty-fourth year of his age, May 9, 1768. He left a widow, a daughter and two sons, of whom Dr. Thornton, physician, is the only survivor.

His character may be taken from the epitaph written in Latin by his friend Dr. Joseph Warton, and placed on his monument in the cloisters of Westminster-abbey. “His genius, cultivated most happily by every kind of polite literature, was accompanied and recommended by manners open, sincere, and candid. In his writings and conversation he had a wonderful liveliness, with a vein of pleasantry peculiarly his own. In ridiculing the failings of men, without bitterness, and with much humour, he was singularly happy as a companion he was delightful.”

, a physician and antiquary, descended from an ancient Kentish family, was the eldest son of John Thorpe, esq. and born at Newhouse, in the parish of Penshurst, March 12, 1682. After school-education at Westerham in Kent, he was, in April 1698, matriculated as a commoner of University-college, Oxford, where he was under the tuition principally of Dr. Cockman, afterwards master of that college. In 1701 he took his degree of B. A. and in 1704-, that of M. A. Having given a preference to the medical profession, he was admitted B. M. in 1707, and took his doctor’s degree in 1710. In 1705 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, to the transactions of which he had in 1704 contributed a letter “concerning, worms in the heads of sheep,” &c. and afterwards “An. account of a great quantity of Hydatides found in the abdomen.” He was also assistant to Dr. (afterwards sir) Hans Sloane, in the publication of the “Philosophical Transactions.” He then resided in Ormond-street, London, near his friend Dr. Mead, and contracted an intimate acquaintance with the most eminent physicians, naturalists, and antiquaries of that time; but at the earnest solicitations of many of his relations and friends, be quitted London in 1715, and settled at Rochester, where he practised thirty-­five years, with great success, and with equal humanity in all cases where the poor were concerned. He died Nov. 1750 at Rochester, and was buried in a chapel on the north-side of the church of Stockbury in Kent.

, son of the preceding, and also an antiquary, was born in 1714, and educated at Ludsdown in Kent, whence he removed to University-college, Oxford, where he took his masters degree iii 1738, and had an intention to have studied physic, but was diverted from the pursuit, and seems to have devoted his Life to the study of antiquities. He was elected F. S. A. in 1755, and published from his father’s Mss. and indeed what his father had in a great measure prepared, the “Registrum Roffense, or a collection of ancient records, &c. necessary for illustrating the ecclesiastical history and antiquities of the diocese and cathedral church of Rochester, &c. by John Thorpe, late of Rochester, M. D, F. R. S. and published by his son John Thorpe, esq. A. M. F. S. A.” Lond. 1769, fol. Pursuing the same plan, he published in 1788, in another sumptaous folio, the “Custumale Koffense, from the original Mss. in the archives of the dean and chapter of Rochester.”

Mr. Thorpe married the daughter of Lawrence Holker, M. D. a physician at Milton near Gravesend; and after her death, 1789, to whom he had been united forty-two years, be married in 1790 Mrs. Holland, a lady who lived with him as housekeeper, and was the widow of an old college acquaintance. Soon after his first marriage, he purchased High-street-house, in Bexley, which after his first wife’s death he quitted fora house on Richmond-green, Surrey, and at last removed to Chippenham in Wiltshire, where he died Aug. 2, 1792, in the seventy-eighth year of his age. He was buried, according to his own desire, in the churchyard of Harden Huish, Wiltshire. Mr. Thorpe, by the report of one who knew him well, “was happy in a retentive memory, and could quote whole pages of hi*; favourite Pope, with the utmost facility. He was courteous,” but not courtly, in his manners hospitable, but not extravagant at his table skilful and curious in his garden intelligent and communicative in his library; social, elegant, and informing in his general conversation, and on antiquarian topics almost an enthusiast."

, an illustrious historian of France, was son of a first president of the parliament of Paris, and born there the 9th of October, 1553. He was so exceedingly weak and infirm in his infancy, that there was no hope of rearing him for the first five years of his life; and to this it is owing, that abundantly more care was taken to preserve his body, than to cultivate his mind, although he then appeared to be a boy of uncommon talents; for he was not addicted to the amusements of childhood, but aimed at something higher, and would divert himself with drawing and painting, for which he had always a very good taste. When he was ten years old, he was put to books, and placed in the college of Bourgogne; but in less than a year he was attacked with a violent fever, and taken home. The physicians gave him over for many months; but he recovered, and applied again to books, though with great moderation; for hie constitution was not able to* undergo the least fatigue. He was afterwards placed under the care of private tutors \ and regard seems to have been had, in the choice of them, to the weakness of his nature, as well as to the improvement of his understanding; for they were physicians, and successively four of them. Then he studied under the famous Dionysius Lambinus, and Joannes Pellerinus, who was professor of the Greek language in the College-royal.

In 1570 he went to Orleans, to pursue the law; and there the writings of Cujaci us inspired him with such an esteem for that celebrated professor, that he quitted Orleans, and repaired to him into Dauphiny. He stopped upon the road at Bourges six months, for the sake of, hearing the famous civilian Hotomannus; and then proceeded to Valence, where Cujacius was reading lectures. Here he met with Joseph Scaliger, who was upon a visit to Cujacius; and commenced a friendship with him, which he cultivated ever after with the greatest care. His father, unwilling to have him long at a distance from him, recalled him in about a year; and he returned to Paris some time before that terrible massacre of the Protestants, which was perpetrated on St. Bartholomew’s day in 1572. As he was designed for the church, he went to live with his uncle Nicholas de Thou, who, being just made bishop of Chartres, resigned to him a canonry of Notre Dame. He began now to collect that library, which afterwards became so famous. In 1573 he accompanied Paul de Foix into Italy, and visited the principal towns, cultivating acquaintance with the learned as he passed. On his return to Paris, he applied himself to reading for four years; yet this, he used to say, was not of so much use to him as conversing with learned men, which he did daily. About the end of 1576, when civil tumults threatened the state, M. de Thou was employed in certain negotiations, which he executed so well, as to establish the reputation of a man fit for business. He afterwards went into the LowCountries, and in 1578 was made counsellor-clerk to the parliament; an honourable post, bur accepted by him with reluctance, on account of his great love for retirement and study. In 1579 he accompanied his eldest brother to the baths of Plombieres in Lorrain; and this gentleman dying, he soon after quitted the ecclesiastical state.

The plague beginning at Paris in 1580, he retired to Touraine, and took an opportunity of seeing Normandy and Britany; and on his return to Paris, after the plague Stopped, was sent, with other counsellors in parliament, to administer justice in Guyenne. He came again to Paris in 1582, and had the misfortune not to arrive till the day after his father was buried. To make amends*, however, for not being able to pay his last duties to him, he erected a most noble monument to his memory, and adorned it with eulogiums written by the first wits of the age. la 1584 he was made master of the requests; and at that time, late as it may seem, entered upon a new course of study. He took into hix house Bressieu, the professor royal of mathematics; and under his d-rection applied, this year and the following, to read the Greek Euc-lu) with the notes of Proclus. The anvction which the cardinal de Vendome had conceived for him induced him to spend some time at court; but this affection abating, he withdrew from a place he did not at all like, and devoted -himself entirely to the composing his History, which he had begun two years before. In 1587 he took a wife, having first by the official of Paris been thoroughly absolved from all ecclesiastical engagements; for he had taken the four lesser orders. He lost his mother in 158S; and other troubles of a more public kind exercised him this year. The spirit of the league had seized Paris, and obfigef Henry II. to quit the city. Thuanus followed this prince^ and went by his order into Normandy, to sound the governors and magistrates; to acquaint them with what had happened at Paris; to confirm them m their duty; and to make known his intentions of assembling the states. Uponi his return, he was made a counsellor of state.

During the holding of the states at Blois, he returned to Paris, where he was in danger of losing his life; fur the news of the duke of Guise’s death arriving, all who were of known attachment to the king were obliged to hide themselves. Thuanus was among them, hut happily escaped under the disguise of a soldier. He repaired to the king, who, being removed to Tours, resolved to establish a parliament there, to oppose that of the league; and De Thou would have been made the first president of it, if he had not been fixed against accepting that office; He afterwards accompanied Mr. de Schomberg into Germany, to assist in raising forces for the king, and drawing succours from the German princes he passed by Italy, and was at Venice, when the news of Henry Illd’s death made him immediately return to France. Henry IV. received him very kindly, to whom he gave an exact account of all that had been done, and continued very faithfully in his service; while the king placed the greatest confidence in him, and employed him in many important negotiations. After the battle of Yvry, which Henry IV. gained in 159O, De Thou obtained leave to visit his wife at Senlis, whom he had not seen above a year; and arrived there, after having been detained some time upon the road by a fever. His purpose was to settle at Tours and he was one evening upon the road thither, when a party of the enemy carried off his wife and equipage, while he escaped by the swiftness of his horse, and found ipeaus soon after to recover his lady. In 1592, he had the plague, and despaired of life, but was happily cured by the infusion of bezoarstone into strong waters. The year after, the king made him his first librarian, which place became vacant by the death of the learned James Amyot, famous for his translation of Plutarch and other ancient Greek authors. In 1592, the duke of Guise having made his peace with the king, Thuanus was one of the persons appointed to regulate the conditions of the treaty he became the same year president à mortier by the death of his uucle Augustin de Thou, which honour had long been promised him. He was afterwards concerned in many negotiations with the Protestant party, and was greatly instrumental in bringing forward the edict of Nantes, which was signed in April 1598, and afterwards revoked, as is well known, by Louig XIV. in 1685. In 1601, he lost his wife, whom he immortalized by elegies; but soon after recovered so far from his grief, great as it was, as to take another. During the regency of queen Mary of Medicis, Thuanus was one of the general directors of the finances; and was, to the end of his life, engaged more or less in the service of the state. He died the 17th of May, 1617, and was interred with his fami-ly in the chapel of St. Andrew of the Arches,

Part of this History was first printed at Paris in 1604, with a dedication to Henry IV. which is thought to be as masterly a composition in its kind, as the dedication of Casaubon’s Polybius to the same monarch, and that of the “Instittitiones Christianae” of Calvin to Francis I. The publication of the history, in separate parts, was alterwards continued by the author, who, however, does not seem to have published it all in his life-time; or any part of it, except the volume just mentioned, in a manner conformable to his original copy, which, therefore, he deposited in the hands of a friend, that it might be printed after his death, just as he wrote it. It was long, however, before this could be effected. Thuanus was an honest historian, and with respect to things and persons boldly delivered the truth. There would of course be many exceptionable passages in his work, many that would highly offend individuals both in church and state; and this was the reason why, though printed frequently and in different countries, it never came out free from castrations, and agreeable to the author’s original copy, till 1733. It was then handsomely printed at London, and published under the direction, and chiefly at the expence, of the excellent Dr. Mead, in seven volumes folio; to which are prefixed four Latin letters, inscribed to that celebrated patron of letters, and giving an account of the various changes and chances this History has undergone; of the different editions; what each of them contain, and how they vary; and by what materials and assistances the editors have at length been enabled to give a very complete and perfect copy of it.

Thuanus had no children by his first wife; but three sons by the second, the eldest of whom, Francis Augustus Thuanus, a very excellent man, was beheaded at Lyons in 1642, for not revraling a conspiracy, which had been entrusted to him, against cardinal Richelieu. The cardinal was supposed not to be sorry for the opportunity that offered of revenging, upon the son, what the father had said of his great uncle Antony Duplessis de Richelieu, in the following passage of his history: “Antonius Plessianus Richelius, vulgo dictus Monachus, quod earn vitam prafessus fuisset; dein, voto ejurato, omni se licentiae ac libidinis generc contaminasset.” This unfortunate gentleman was thirty-five years of age.

, a natural historian, was born May 31, 1676, at Keiberg, in the parish of Kirkoswald in Cumberland. In 1698 he commenced master of arts in the university of Glasgow, and soon after settled at Low Huddlesceugh, near the place of his birth, in the character of a dissenting minister. In this situation he made a considerable progress in the study of physic, and contracted a love for plants; insomuch, that in 1712, he took a doctor’s degree in medicine at Edinburgh and the next spring, having- a narrow income, and a large family, he removed to Dublin and settled there in both characters, as a divine and a physician. His family, consisting of a wife and three sons, and as many daughters, did not follow till more than a year had elapsed; when, finding himself likely to succeed, he sent for them over. His practice <in medicine soon increased, so far as to enable him to drop his other character entirely, and devote himself wholly to physic; but he died after a short sickness of a violent fever, at hia house in Mark Valley, Frances-street, April 28, 1728, and was buried in the new burial ground belonging to St. Patrick’s, near Cavan Street, to which place his obsequies were attended by a set of children educated by a society t)f gentlemen. He was much regretted by the poor, to whom he had been both as a man, and as a physician, a kind benefactor.

, a topographical writer, whose writ* ings, where they occur, may probably excite some curi-r osity alter his name, was born in 1740. Of his early history we have no account. He was for many years parish clerk of St. Martin’s Leicester, and a man of fine natural parts, and much laudable curiosity. During the vicissi* tudes of a life remarkably checquered, he rendered himself conspicuous as a draughtsman and topographer. He attempted many expedients for the maintenance of a numerous family, few of which answered his purpose; and his last days would have been shaded with penury and disappointment, hut for the assistance of those friends who knew his worth, and justly appreciated him as a man of honesty, integrity, and merit. He died Feb. 3, 1803, ai>ed sixtythree, and is recorded, on a tablet over the vestiy door at Sl Ma tin’s, to have been “of a peaceable disposition; who lived respected, and died an humble member of the church of Christ.” His publications were, 1. “The Me* moirs of the Town and County of Leicester,” 1777, 6 vols. 12mo. 2. “Select Views in Leicestershire, from original Drawings,” 1789, 4to, 3. “A Supplementary volume to the Leicestershire Views, containing a series of Excursions, in 1790, to the villages and places of note in the county,” J 790, 4to. 4. “The History and Antiquities of the ancient town of Leicester,” 1791, 4to. 5. “Letters on the Roman Cloaca at Leicester,” 1793. It is almost needless to add, that all these works on Leicestershire have been since superseded by Mr. Nichols’s elaborate history of that county. 6. “Thoughts on the Provincial Corps raised, and now raising, in support of the British constitution at this awful period,” 1795, 8vo. 7. “Thoroton’s History of Nottinghamshire, re-published with large additions, and embellished with picturesque and select views of seats of the nobility and gentry, towns, villages, churches, and ruins,” 1797, 3 vols. 4to.

, an ancient Greek historian, was a citizen of Athens, and born in the second year of the 77th olympiad, or before Christ 469. He was of royal extraction; for all writers relate, that his father Olorus, or Orolus, was descended from Olorus, king of Thrace. He was educated in philosophy by Anaxagoras, and in eloquence by Antiphon. Suidas and Photius relate a circumstance, which shews, that he had from his youth a noble emulation, for when Herodotus recited his History in public, a practice in use then and many ages after, it drew tears from him; which Herodotus himself noticing, congratulated his father on having a son who shewed so wonderful an affection to the muses. Herodotus was then twenty-nine years of age; Thucydides about sixteen.

When the Peloponnesian war began to break out, Thucydides conjectured truly, that it would prove an argument worthy of his labour; and it no sooner commenced than he began his history, noting down events and circumstances, as they happened under his eye, or came to his knowledge. Of his own life we know nothing with certainty, but what he himself has delivered in his history. He was a lover of contemplation and retirement, yet he did not decline the service of the state, and accepted accordingly a command in the army. This, however, proved unfortunate to him; for while he resided in the Isle of Thasus, it happened that Brasidas, the Lacedemonian, besieged Amphipolis, a city belonging to the Athenians, about half a day’s sail from Thasus. Thucydides being one of the strategi, or of those who had authority to raise forces in those parts for the service of the commonwealth, the Athenian captain sent to him to levy a power, and hasten to his relief: as he did not arrive till too late, and when the city was already yielded up, he was afterwards punished, as if he had done this either through negligence or fear of the enemy. For this suspicion, however, there was no just reason, for he put himself into the city of Eion, and preserved it to the Athenians, with the repulse of Brasidas, who came down the next morning from Amphipolis, and besieged it.

After his banishment, which happened in his forty-eighth year, he lived in Scapte-Hyle, a city of Thrace, where he had married a very opulent wife; and large possessions and rich mines of gold, as he himself professes in his fourth book. He was not however so affected with his disgrace, as to shut himself -up from the world, but was present at the actions of the rest of the war, as appears from the fifth book of his History. In compiling his History, which occupied a great share of his time while in exile, he is said to have employed considerable sums of money in procuring authentic memorials, not only from the Athenians, but the Lacedemonians. It comprehends the Peloponnesian war, which lasted one and twenty years; for though some writers make it continue six years longer, yet others more rightly judge what followed to be rather the consequences of the v\ar, than a part of it. Some critics have imagined, from the difference of style and manner, that the eighth book, according to the ordinary division, was not written by Thucydides, but added afterwards by another hand; but this is not the general opinion, and, as Hobbes says, it is very probable, that it is left the same as it was when he first wrote it, that is, in the way of commentary, neither beautified with orations, nor so well cemented in the transitions as the former seven books are. Xenophon’s “Hellenica” are a supplement to Thucydides 1 s History.

It does not appear, that after his exile Thucydides ever again enjoyed his country; nor is it clear from any author, where, or when, or in what year of his age, he died. Most agree, that he died in banishment; yet some have related, that,“after the defeat in Sicily, the Athenians decreed a general revocation of all banished persons, and that he then returned, and was afterwards put to death at Athens. This is not likely; and many other circumstances are related which have no more probability. Hobbcs thinks, that in this variety or' conjectures there is nothing more probable than that which we have from Pausanias, who, in describing the monuments of the Athenian city, says,” The worthy act of Oenobius, in the behalf of Thucydides, is not without honour, for Oenobius obtained to have a decree passed for his return: who returning was slain by treachery, and his sepulchre is near the gate called Melirides." He is reckoned to have been sixty-eight years of age when he died. He left a son, whose name is hardly known, but supposed to have been Timotheus.

He excelled in the two great points which form a just historian, truth and eloquence. The faith of his History has never been called into question. He wanted no opportunities of knowing the truth, and he does not appear to have misrepresented it; and though some have fancied him a little malevolent towards his country, because the usage hy had received would have made most people so, yet he has not written any thing that discovers such a passion. His manner of writing is coherent, perspicuous, and persuasive, yet close, strong, and pithy. The ancients have spoken <of him in the highest terms and if Herodotus, as his senior, obtained the title “father of history,” yet the greater part have allowed that Thucydides is the better historian. Plutarch says, in his treatise De Gloria Atheniensinm, that Thucydides “aims always at this, to make his auditor a spectator, and to excite in his reader the same passions witii those who were beholders.” Then enumerating some examples, “these things,” he says, “are so described, and so evidently set before our eyes, that the mind of the reader is no less affected, than if he had been present in the actions.” And it was probably for his skill in painting, certainly not for his eloquence (for, as Cicero says, “what great rhetorician ever borrowed any thing of Thucydides?”) that the famous orator Demosthenes wrote over his History, according to Lucian, eight times with his own hand. The same Lucian, in his book “How a history ought to be written,” continually exemplifies the virtues required in an historiographer by Thucydides; and it seems as if the image of Thucydides’s History, preconceived in Lucian’s mind, suggested to him all the precepts he there delivers. As to his style, Cicero speaks of it thus: “Thucydides in the art of speaking, in my opinion, has far exceeded them all. ^For he is so full of matter, that the number of his sentences almost equals the number of his words; and in his words he is so apt, and so close, that it is hard to say, whether his words more illustrate his sentences, or his sentences his words,” The Romans thought highly of Thucydides’s work; and Sallust evidently took him for his model.

It is remarkable, that Dionysius Halicarnassensis entertained unreasonable prejudices against this historian, in favour of his countryman Herodotus, whom he was desirous to have considered as superior to him, and had raised accordingly many objections to his work. “The principal and most necessary office of any man that intendeth to write an history,” he says, “is to chuse a noble argument, and grateful to such as shall read it; and this Herodotus has done, in my opinion, better than Thucydides. For Herodotus hath written the joint history both of the Greeks and Barbarians; but Thucydides writeth only one war.” To this, as well as to Dionysius’ s other objections, Hobbes replies: “Let any man consider, whether it be not more reasonable to say, that the principal and most necessary office of him that will write an history is to take such an argument as is both within his power well to handle, and profitable to posterity that shall read it; which Thucydides, in the opinion of all men, has done better than Herodotus. For Herodotus undertook to write of those things, of which it was impossible for him to know the truth, and which deJight more the ear with fabulous narrations, than satisfy the mind with truth; but Thucydides writes one war, which, how it was carried on from the beginning to the end, he was able certainly to inform himself.” The single circumstance here urged in favour of Thucydides, gives lord Clarendon’s History of our Civil Wars, perhaps, the preference to any history that is extant in any language. Some modern critics have, however, formed an opinion of Thucydides more according with that of Dionysius than of Hobbes. The emperor Charles V. is said to have been so fond of this historian, that he always carried him with him into the camp, and used to talk of him with wonderful pleasure to those about him.

Thucydides was first printed by Aldus, in 1502, folio, since which the best editions are, 1. That printed by Henry Stephens, with a Latin version of “Laureutius Valla, Paris, 1538,” folio. 2. That of Oxford, “Greek and Latin, curn notis variorum & Joh. Hudsoni, 1696,” folio. 3. “Graces & Latin e, cum notis variorum & Jos. Wasse. Accedunt emendationes Car. And. Dukeri, Amst. 1732,” 2 vols. folio. 4. The Glasgow edit. 175y, 8 vols. 12mo. 5. A elegant and correct edition in 8vo, 1783, at Deux-ponts, from the edition of Duker, 6 vois.; and lastly, that of Ediu. 1803 6, 6 vols. edited by the rev. Peter Elmsley.

We have a good English translation of this author by Hobbes, whose account of Thucydides has been of service to us in the course of this memoir. But a translation now more in use and estimation is that of Dr. Smith, dean of Chester, which was published in 1753, 4to, and 1781, 8vo.

, a Benedictine of the congregation de St.Maur, was born in 1685 at Coucy in the diocese of Laon, and taught philosophy and theology in the abbey of St. Germain-des-Pres at Paris. He afterwards became sub-prior of that abbey, and died there, Jan. 12, 1736. His best performance is an excellent French translation of Polybius, with a commentary by the chevalier Follard, 6 vols. 4to. He also acquired fame as a theologian by two “Letters,” on the revocation of his appeal from the bull Unigenitus; and some other pieces, chiefly in favour of the constitution Unigenitus, after he had revoked his appeal which made a great noise in his congregation.

, secretary of state to the two protectors Oliver and Richard Cromwell, was son of Thomas Thurloe, rector of Abbots- Roding, Essex, where he was born in 1616. He was educated to the law, and afterwards recommended to the patronage of Oliver St. John, esq. a person of great eminence in that profession, and successively solicitor-general to Charles I. and lord chief justice of the common pleas; by whose interest, Jan. 1645, he was appointed one of the secretaries to the parliament commissioners at the treaty of Uxbridge. In 1647, he was admitted of LincolnVinn; and, March 1648, made receiver or clerk of the cursitor fines, under the earl of Kent, lord Grey of Werke, sir Thomas Widdrington, and Bulstrode Whitelocke, esq. commissioners of the great seal. Though his attachments were entirely on the side of the parliament, yet, with regard to the death of king Charles, he declares himself, that he was altogether a stranger to the fact, and to all the counsels about it; having 1 not had the least communication with any person whatsoever on that affair. Yet, after that extraordinary event, and the establishment of the new commonwealth, he was diverted from his employments in the law, and engaged in public business. In March 1651, he attended the lord chief justice St. John, and Walter Strickland, esq. ambassadors to the states of the United Provinces, as their secretary, with whom he returned to England in 1651, and, April 1652, was preferred to the office of secretary to the council of state; and, upon Cromwell’s assuming the protectorship in 1653, became secretary of state. In Feb. 1654, he was chosen one of the masters of the upper bench of the society of Lincoln’s-inn; and, in Aug. 1655, had the care and charge of the postage, both foreign and inland, committed to him by the protector. In 1656, he was chosen member of parliament for the Isle of Ely; and in April 1657 received the thanks of the parliament, for his vigilance in detecting the plot of Harrison and other fifth-monarchymen, and for many great services to the public. On July 13 of the same year, he was sworn one of the privy council to the protector, according to the "humble petition and advice 7> and in November was elected one of the governors of the Charter-house. Burnet relates a story, which probably happened about this time, of his having nearly forfeited Cromwell’s good opinion, by not being vigilant enough in listening to accounts of plots against his (Cromwell’s) life, but he soon effected a reconciliation, and appears to have induced Cromwell to think as he did, that too much curiosity after such matters argued an undignified fear.

In Feb. 1658 he was made chancellor of the university of Glasgow; and, in June following, concurred with Whitelocke in advising the protector to leave the persons who had been detected in a plot, to be proceeded against in the ordinary course of trials at the common law, and not by an high court of justice; it being always his opinion, that the forms and rules of the old constitution should, on every occasion, be inviolably preserved, especially in the administration of justice. Upon the death of Oliver, he was continued in the post of secretary and privy counsellor to his successor Richard; though he was very obnoxious to the principal persons of the army, to whose interests, whenever they interfered with those of the civil government, he was a declared enemy: and their resentment against him on that account was carried to so great a height, that they accused him as an evil counsellor, and one who was justly formidable by the ascendant he had gained over the new protector. For this reason, in Nov. 1658, he desired leave to retire from public business; in hopes that this might tend to quiet things, and facilitate the protector’s affairs with the army: but he was induced still to continue in his employment; and, in December, was chosen member of parliament for the university of Cambridge. He was returned likewise for the tpwn and borough of Wisbech, and for the borough of Huntingdon; but made his election for Cambridge, where he had a greater number of votes than had ever been known on a similar occasion. In April 1659, he used his utmost efforts to dissuade the protector from dissolving the parliament; a step which proved fatal to his authority, though, upon his quitting it, Thurloe still continued in his office of secretary till Jan. 14, 1660. It was then conferred on Thomas Scott, esq.; but on Feb. 27, upon a report of the council of state, the parliament resolved, that Thurloe should be again one of the secretaries of state, and John Thomson, esq. the other. In April 1660, he made an offer of his service for the restoration of Charles II. as appears from a letter of chancellor Hyde to sir John Grenville, in which his lordship observes, that Mr. Thurloe' s offers were very frank, and accompanied with many great professions of resolving to serve his majesty, not only in his own endeavours, but likewise by the services of his friends; but that these offers were mixed with somewhat of curiosity in Mr. Thurloe, who was very inquisitive to know whether his majesty had any confidence in general Monk, or had approached him in the right way: which he desired to know, only to finish what was left undone, or be able the better to advise his majesty. The king returned such answers as were proper, and desired to see some effects of his good affection; and that then he would find his services more acceptable. However, on May 15 following, he was committed by the House of Commons to the custody of their serjeant at arms, upon a charge of high treason; but was soon released, and retired to Great Milton in Oxfordshire, where he generally resided, except in term-time, when he came to his c;, bers at Lincoln’s-inn. He was of great use occasionally to the chancellor Clarendon, by the instructions he gave him with respect to the state of foreign affairs; of which there is a very remarkable instance among his state-papers, in the recapitulation he drew up of all the nei>ociations between England, France, and Spain, from the lime of Cromwell’s taking upon him the protectorship till the restoration. He was likewise often solicited by Charles II. to engage in the administration of public business, but thought proper to decline those offers. He died suddenly, at his chambers in Lincoln’s-inn, Feb. 21, 1668, aged fifty-one; and was interred under the chapel there with an inscription over his grave. He was twice married, first to a lady of the name of Peyton, by whom he had two sons who died before him; and secondly to Anne, third daughter of sir John Lytcote of East Moulsey in Surrey, by whom he had four sons and two daughters.

He was a man of a very amiable character in private life; and in the height of his power exercised all possible moderation towards persons of every party. In his manner of writing he is remarkable above most of his contemporaries for conciseness, perspicuity, and strength. But the most Authentic testimony of his abilities is that vast collection of his “State Papers,” in 7 vols. folio, published by Dr. Birch in 1742, which places the history of Europe in general, as well as that of Great Britain and its dominions, during that remarkable period, in the clearest light; and shews at the same time his astonishing industry and application in the management of so great a variety of important affairs, which passed entirely through his hands, with secrecy and success not to be paralleled under any other government.

, Lord Thurlow, a distinguished statesman and lawyer, was the second son of the rev. Thomas Thurlow, rector of Ashfield in Suffolk, and was born about 1732. He was entered of, and continued for some time at Caiut college, Cambridge, whery vulgar report has made him idle and dissipated. Of this we have no proof, nor of his having been equally careless of his studies after he entered the society of the Middle Temple. Lord Thurlow may have been indebted to what are called lucky coincidences for some of his promotions, but as he was always found amply qualified for the high stations he held, he could not have much neglected the cultivation of his natural abilities, or been remiss in accumulating that knowledge by which alone he could rival his contemporaries. He appears to have been called to the bar in 1758, and must have rapidly attained distinction in his profession, for, in three years after, chiefly owing to the talent he displayed in the Douglas cause, he was advanced to the rank of king’s counsel. His voice, person, and manner, were not ill calculated to give his efforts an air of consequence at the bar, and his practice became extensive. In March 1770 he was appointed solicitor-general, and in. June 1771 attorney-general. He now sat in parliament for the borough of Tamworth, where he had many opportunities of justifying the choice of his patrons, and of creating that species of character and interest which generally leads to the highest legal appointments. As a politician, he uniformly, and with commanding vigour, suppotted the measures adopted with respect to America, Sec. during lord North’s administration. In June 1778, he was appointed to succeed lord Apsley, as lord high chancellor of Great Britain, and the same day was raised to the peerage by the title of Lord Thurlow of Ashfield in Suffolk. This office he resigned in April 1783, when the seals were put into commission, but was re-appointed when Mr. Pitt was nominated prime minister in December following. He again resigned them in June 1792, and on the 12th of that month was created Lord Thurlow of Thurlow in Suffolk, with a collateral remainder of this honour to the issue male of his late two brothers, the bishop of Durham, and John Thurlow of Norwich. After this retirement, till a short period before his death, he took an active part, and had great weight, in the House of Lords.; and having retained complete possession of his faculties, with accumulated wisdom and experience, his latter speeches were often more the subject of admiration, than any that had been remembered in his earlier days. He died in the seventy-fourth year of his age, Sept. 12, 1806, without male issue.

Lord Thurlow, says the candid author of the Biographical Peerage, “was a man of whose talents opinions have been various. His faculties were strong and direct; and, the results of his mind decisive. His nervous manner, and imperious temper, gave an artificial strength to what he delivered. Whatever he conceived right, he had rrcr timidity or hesitation in enforcing. A manly tone of sentiment, and a boldness which was admired while it was dreaded, gave him almost irresistible weight when clothed with authority. These qualities, added to a powerful natural sagacity, fitted him to preside over a court of equity with many advantages. He never felt himself fettered by forms and technicalities; but laid the case bare at once, and got at its essence. His head was not formed to be diverted by little difficulties or sophistries. On the other hand he was frequently too impatient, too dogmatical, and too little open to persuasion, and to all the complicated bearings of an entangled cause. His temper was severe, his feelings morose, and his disregard of the world, and even its innocent passions and foibles, too general and untparing. He made little allowance for a difference of habits or pursuits. On the whole, however, he was a man f a superior mind; and in many respects rilled his high station with great and deserved reputation.” To this we may add, that as a patron he was munificent; and often, what he could not perform in his official capacity, he expended from his own fortune. His behaviour, in this respect, to Dr. Johnson, must ever be remembered to his honour. In bestowing church preferment he was singularly honest and disinterested, and of all the anecdotes in current report (and they were at one time very many) relating to this subject, we never heard one that did not place his good sense and humanity in a very favourable light. But while, like many other men of high station encumbered with business, he needed to be reminded of those who had claims upon him, it was peculiar to himself that in his character of patron, he was seldom accessible to the common forms of application. If a tale of depressed merit and consequent distress was gently insinuated, he seldom heard it without extending relief, but all manner of solicitation from those who thought they had influence over him, he repelled with contempt; and such were the vicissitudes of his temper, that even when he came to confer his highest favours, it was frequently in a manner that seemed to lessen the obligation.

As a scholar lord Thurlow possessed more knowledge than the world gave him credit for, and his profound acquaintance with the Greek language is testified in a dedication to him by his friend Dr. Horsley. In early life, he lived much with men of gaiety and wit, and always preserved a high respect for literary merit. In his latter years, he would not probably have defended the laxity in which much of his time had been spent. He never was married, but left three daughters by a lady with whom he had long lived. He was, agreeably to the terms of his second peerage, succeeded by his nephew Edward, eldest son of Thomas Thurlow, late bishop of Durham, who died in 179 1.

, a learned Saxonist, and the descendant of some learned Oxonians, was born in 1667, but where, or where educated, has not been discovered. That he was well grounded in classical learning is evident. He was admitted battler of Queen’s college, Oxford, on Sept. 14, 1689, took his degree of B. A. jn Jan. 1694, and that of M.A. in 1697, and either then or in the following year, was admitted fellow of the college. Queen’s was at this time remarkable for the number of its Saxon scholars, one of the principal of whom was Mr. Thwaites, who so early as 1698 became a preceptor in the Saxon tongue there. The industry of his pupils was great, but they had few helps. In a letter to Wanley, dated March 24, 1698-9, he says, “We want Saxon Lexicons. I have fifteen young students in that language, and but one Somner for them all.” This was undoubtedly a sufficient reason for the patronage he bestowed on Mr. Thomas Benson’s Vocabulary, an epitome of Somner, begun to be printed in small quarto, but which was afterwards printed in 8vo, under the title of“Vocabularium Anglo-Saxonicum Lexico Gul. Somneri magna parte auctius,” Oxon. 1701. Mr. Thwaites, according to a memorandum in Hearne’s ms diary, had a considerable hand in this. In 1697, he edited “Dionysii Orbis Descriptio, cum veterum scholiis et Eustathii commentariis. Accedit Periegesis Prisciani, cum notis Andrea Papii,” Oxon. 8vo. This was followed in 1698, by “Heptateuchus, Liber Job, et Evangelium Nicodemi, Anglo-Saxonice. Historic Judith fragmentum, Dano-Saxonice*. Edidit nunc primum ex Mss. codicibus Edwardus Thwaites, e collegio Reginse,” Oxon. which being dedicated to Dr. Hickes, the celebrated non-juror, gave some offence in those days of party-spirit. The same year Mr. Thwaites had some concern in the edition of king Alfred’s Saxon version of “Boethius cle Consolatione Philosophize,” the professed editor of which was Mr. Christopher Rawlinson. Mr. Thvvaites also rendered much assistance to Dr. Hickes in his “Thesaurus,” which is amply acknowledged in the epistolary preface. In 17 Os, he was elected by the university, reader in moral philosophy, and the next year appointed regius professor of Greek. His last work, “Grammatica Anglo-Saxonica ex Hickesiano linguarum Septentrionalium Thesauro excerpta,” appeared at Oxford in 1711, on the 12th of December, 8vo, in which year he died, and was buried at Iffley church near Oxford. He was only forty-four years of age, and his death is supposed to have been hastened by the amputation of his leg. Of this affair, the accounts in our authorities differ; the one imputing the necessity for amputation to his having broke his leg by a fall from his horse, the other to a growing on one of his knees, perhaps what is called a white swelling, which is a very frequent cause for amputation. Both, however, agree in the extraordinary calmness with which he bore the operation, and in his having stopped the bleeding in the night when it broke out afresh, without help, It is said that when his surgeon, Mr. Charles Bernard, related his behaviour to queen Anne, she ordered him a pension, and to be made Greek professor; but in these circumstances likewise our accounts differ. A consumption ensued, and deprived the university of “the best Septentrionalist,” next to Dr. Hickes, a man, too, “beautiful in his personage, pleasant in conversation, of great vivacity, and of a most agreeable natural behaviour. 7 '” Besides these excellencies, he wrote,“says Mr. Browne,” the finest hand I ever saw."

, an antiquary, and herald, of the sixteenth century, descended from an ancient branch of the noble family now having the title of marquis of Bath, was the son of William Thynne, chief clerk of the kitchen, and afterwards marquis of the household to Henry VIII. He was born at Stretton, in Shropshire, and educated at Tunbridge school, under Mr. Proctor, the learned master, who is gratefully remembered by him as one of the English historians. From thence he was sent to Magdalen college, Oxford, where he was entered a commoner; and, as himself informs us, was afterwards a member of Lincoln’s Inn f Camden, in the preface to his Britannia, gives him the ample character of having prosecuted the study of antiquities with great honour. In that of heraldic and genealogical pursuits, he was particularly an enthusiast, and presented a petition to lord Burleigh, then presiding at the head of the commission for executing the office of earl marshal, requesting to be admitted into the college of heralds, and offering himself to the strictest examination. This was accordingly instituted, and his merit being acknowledged, he was preferred to be blanche lyon poursuivant, after which, when he was fifty- seven years of age, he was, on April 22, 1602, with great ceremony, created Lancaster herald at arms, having previously obtained a patent for that office, dated Oct. 23, 44 Eliz. Wood, in. his “Athenae,” and Hearne, after him, place the death of Mr. Thynne in 1611, but it must have happened sooner, since he never surrendered his patent, and that granted to his successor in office bears date Nov. 1608, which was more probably the year of his death.

, a celebrated Dutch philologer, born about 1603, at Harderwyck, was professor of poetry and eloquence at Leyden, and librarian to that university. He died in 1670. Besides being an excellent commentator on ancient authors, he published several other productions, as 1. “Historia Navalis;” a history of the naval wars between the Dutch and the Spaniards, 1657, 4to. 2. “Compendium Historiae Batavicae,” 1645. 3. “Exercitationes Miscellanea;,” these are dissertations on sacred history, and on mythology, 1639, 12mo. 4. Two tracts on the government and on the laws of Athens, subjoined to “Postellus de Republica, seu Magistratibus Atheniensium;” and published also in Gronovius’s collection. 5. Editions of many classic authors, "as Paterculus, 1668; Sallust, 1665; Valerius Maximus, 1670, which is the best variorum edition; Seneca’s tragediei, 1651, and Lactantius, 1652; Aulus Gellius, 1661, all at Leyden. 6. An edition of Polydore Vergil’s History of England.

, otherwise Pellegrino, an eminent artist, was of Milanese extraction, but probably a native of Bo. logna, and from the date of his earliest picture known to us, the Nativity in the palace Borghese at Rome, painted 1549, in his twenty-second year, must have been born in 1527. He entered the school of Bagnacavallo, and endeavoured to improve himself, according to Vasari, by designing from the pictures of that master in the refectory of S. Michele in Bosco; but departed for Rome in 1547, chiefly to study the works of Michael Angelo. There he was patronized by Monsig. afterwards cardinal Poggi, who sent him back to Bologna to complete the fabric of his palace, at present the Academical Institute, decorated by his pictures, and the principal monument of his art in Italy though the Carracci seemed to prefer, as objects of imitation for themselves and their scholars, the painting^ with which he had filled the sides and compartments of that noble chapel constructed by him in S. Giacopo of the Augustine friars.

From Bologna he went to Loretto, and in the church there built and ornamented a‘ chapel with stuccos and paintings; from thence he was called to Ancona to operate in the churches of S. Agostino and Ciriaco, in the last of which he painted a Christ highly relieved and larger than life; the Merchants 7 hall received its stuccos and paintings from his band. He superintended the fortifications of tha place as military architect, about 1560; and two years afterwards came to Pavia, where, by the order of cardinal Borromeo, he constructed the palace of the Sapienza; he then visited Milan, built the temple of S. Fidele, and before 1570 was elected architect of the cathedral. After disencumbering the dome of numerous empty gothic monuments, sepulchral urns, and trophies, and embellishing it in their stead with various elegant chapels and ’a majestic choir; Pellegrino was commissioned by Berardino Martirano, a Spaniard in the confidence of Philip II. to prepare designs and plans for the Escurial. He followed them himself to Spain in 1586, and superintended that enormous fabric as architect and painter, during nine years , when, satiated with glory, riches, and honours, he returned to Milan, where he died at an advanced age, and was buried in a tomb which he had selected for himself and his descendants in the dome. The precise year of his death is disputed, but his demise may safely be placed under the pontificate of Clement VIII. and some think about 1592.

Pellegrino had a brother, Domenico Tibaldi, who was his scholar, and acquired celebrity as an architect and an engraver at Bologna that he was a painter of merit we are told by his epitaph in the church dell' Annunciata, but epitaphs are doubtful authorities, and of Domenico there is not even a portrait remaining. In engraving he was the master of Agostino Caracci.

It was, however, less for the powers exerted by Peflegrino in the decorations of the Institute, than for the eclec-. tic principle which they discovered in his subsequent works, that the Carracci gave him the epithet of “Michel* angiolo riformato,” and commended

, a Latin poet, is supposed to have been born at Rome, in the year of Rome 690, six years after the birth of Virgil, and one after that of Horace. His father was of the equestrian order; and he himself set out into the world with all the advantages of fortune, and the greatest accomplishments of mind and person. Among the great men of his age, he singled out Messala Corvinus for his patron; who was a brave and accomplished Roman, admired by Cicero, mentioned with great respect by Horace, and ranked by Quintilian among the masters of oratory. He was to Tibullus, what Maecenas was to Horace. This poet had a country seat at Pedum, a town in Latium not far from Rome. He was a great sufferer in the civil wars, yet does not seem to have been concerned in any party. He was, like Ovid, a man devoted to ease and pleasure; and his time was divided between the Muses and his mistresses. He seems indeed to have abandoned himself entirely to the passion of love, as some think, even to the neglect of his affairs. His regard for Messala, however, made him forget his love of ease and pleasure, and followthat nobleman into Gaul, who was there victorious,' and had a triumph decreed him upon his return to Rome. He was attending Messala on a second expedition to Syria, when he fell sick by the way, and was forced to stay in the island of Phaeacia or Corcyra. On this occasion he composed the third elegy of the fourth book, and desired that if he should die of his illness, he might have this epitaph engraven on his monument:

As to his character, Horace, with whom he was intimately acquainted, as well as with the other wits of the Augustan age, gives him that of a fine writer and good critic:

This author has usually been printed in the same volume with Catullus and Propertius; and one of the best editions of him in conjunction with them is that by Graevius, “cum notia variorum,” Leyden, 1589, in 2 vols. 8vo. But he was afterwards, in 1*708, published separately at Amsterdam, in 1 vol. 4to, by Janus Brouckhusius, a very polite and elegant critic, who corrected many places from the best manuscripts, and added his own to the notes variorum. This edition is very neat, and adorned with copper-plates. An excellent edition in quarto was published by Vulpius, a professor at Padua (who also published Catullus and Propertius), in 1749. This was long esteemed the best, and is so still if we take splendour into the account; but two editions in 8vo, have since been published by the celebrated professor Heyne, of which the second of 1777 is, for use, one of the best editions of a classic author that has ever appeared. Tibullus has been translated into English with most success by Grainger, but some have thought it easy to suppose a better transfusion of his spirit into our language.

, son of the rev. Richard Tickell, was born in 1686 at Bridekirk in Cumberland; and in April 1701 became a member of Queen’s college, in Oxford; in 1708 he was made M. A. and two years afterwards was chosen fellow; for which, as he did not comply with the statutes by taking orders, he obtained a dispensation from, the crown. He held his fellowship till 1726, and then vacated it by marrying in that year, at Dublin. Tickell was not one of those scholars who wear away their lives in closets; he entered early into the world, and was long busy in public affairs, in which he was initiated under the patronage of Addison, whose notice he is said to have gained by his verses in praise of “Rosamond.” He produced another piece of the same kind at the appearance of “Cato,” with equal skill, but not equal happiness. When the ministers of queen Anne were negociating with France, Tickell published “The Prospect of Peace,” a poem, of which the tendency was to reclaim the nation from the pride of conquest to the pleasures of tranquillity. Mr. Addison, however he hated the men then in power, suffered his friendship to prevail over the public spirit, and gave in the “Spectator” such praises of Tickell’s poem, that when, after having long wished to peruse it, Dr. Johnson laid hold on it at last, he thought it unequal to the honours which it had received, and found it a piece to be approved rather than admired. But the hope excited by a work of genius, being general and indefinite, is rarely gratified. It was read at that time with so much favour that six editions were sold. At the arrival of king George he sung “The Royal Progress;” which, being inserted in the *' Spectator,“is well known. The poetical incident of most importance in Tickell’s life was his publication of the first book of the” Iliad,“as translated by himself, in apparent opposition to Pope’s” Homer,“of which the first part made its entrance into the world at the same time. Addison declared that the rival versions were both good; but that Tickell’s was the best that ever was made; and with Addison those wits who were his adherents and followers, were certain to concur. Pope does not appear to have been much dismayed;” for,“says he,” I have the town, that is, the mob, on my side.“But he remarks, that it is common for the smaller party to make up in diligence what they want in numbers;” he “appeals to the people as his proper judges; and if they are not inclined to condemn him, he is in little care about the high-flyers at Button’s.” Pope did not long think Addison an impartial judge; for he considered him as the writer of TickelPs version. The reasons for his suspicion we shall literally transcribe from Mr. Spence’s collection. “There had been a coldness between Mr. Addison and me for some time; and we had not been in company together for a good while, any where but at Button’s coffee-house, where I used to see him almost every day. On his meeting me there, one day in particular, he took me aside, and said he should be glad to dine with me at such a tavern, if 1 stayed till those people were gone (Budgell and Philips). We went accordingly; and after dinner Mr. Addison said * that he had wanted for some time to talk with me; that his friend Tickell had formerly, whilst at Oxford, translated the first book of the Iliad; that he designed to print it, and had desired him to look it over; that he must therefore beg that I would not desire him to look over my first book, because, if he did, it would have the air of doubledealing.‘ I assured him that < I did not at all take it ill of Mr. Tickell that he was going to publish his translation; that he certainly had as much right to translate any author as myself; and that publishing both was entering on a fair stage. I then added, that I would not desire him to look over my first book of the ’ Iliad,' because he had looked over Mr. Tickeli’s; but could wish to have the benefit of his observations on my second, which I had then finished, and which Mr. Tickell had not touched upon.‘ Accordingly I sent him the second book the next morning; and Mr. Addison a few days after returned it, with very high commendations. Soon after it was generally known that Mr. Tickell was publishing the first book of the ’ Iliad,‘ I met Dr. Young in the street; and, upon our falling into that subject, the doctor expressed a great deal of surprise at Tickell’ s having had such a translation so long by him. He said, that c it was inconceivable to him, and that there must be some mistake in the matter; that each used to communicate to the other whatever verses they wrote, even to the least things; that Tickell could not have been busied in so long a work there without his knowing something of the matter; and that he had never heard a single word of it till on this occasion.' This surprise of Dr. Young, together with what Steele had said against Tickell in relation to this affair, makes it highly probable that there was some underhand dealing in that business; and indeed Tickelt himself, who is a very fair worthy man, has since in a manner as good as owned it to me. [When it was introduced into a conversation between Mr. Tickell and Mr. Pope by a third person, Tickell did not deny it; which, considering his honour and zeal for his departed friend, was the same as owning it.]” Upon these suspicions, with which Dr. Warburton hints that other circumstances concurred, Pope always, in his “Art of Sinking,” quotes this book as the work of Addison. (See Pope, vol. XXV. p. 168.) When the Hanover succession was disputed, Tickeli gave what assistance his pen would supply. His “Letter to Avignon” stands high among party-poems; it expresses contempt without coarseness, and superiority without insolence. It had the success which it deserved, being five times printed. He was now intimately united to Mr. Addison, who, when he went into Ireland as secretary to the lord Sunderland, took him thither, and employed him in public business; and, when (1717) afterwards he rose to be secretary of state, made him under-secretary. ' Their friendship seems to have continued without abatement; for when Addison died, he left him the charge of publishing his works, with a solemn recommendation to the patronage of Craggs. To these works he prefixed an elegy on the author, which could owe none of its beauties to the assistance which might be suspected to have strengthened or embellished his earlier compositions; but neither he not Addison ever produced nobler lines than are contained in the third and fourth paragraphs, nor is a more sublime or more elegant funeral poem to be found in the whole compass of English literature. He was afterwards (in June 1724) made secretary to the lords justices of Ireland, a place of great honour; in which he continued till 1740, when he died April 23, at Bath. To Tickell cannot be refused a high place among the minor poets; nor should it be forgotten that he was one of the contributors to the “Spectator.” With respect to his personal character, he is said to have been a man of gay conversation, at least a temperate lover of wine and company, and in his domestic relations without censure.

, an ingenious writer, who first appeared as an author about 1778, in a poem entitled, “The Project,” is supposed to have been a descendant of the preceding, or rather of his brother Richard Tickel), esq. who was appointed secretary at war in 1724, and held that post till his death in 1740. Another account states that our author was the son of Richard Tickell, esq. who died in 1793, who was the son of Addison’s friend. Soon, after the appearance of Mr. Tickell’s “Project,” his “Wreath of Fashion” was published, and was allowed to have considerable merit. But that which raised him to immediate celebrity was his admirable political pamphlet, called “Anticipation;” in which, with the most successful humour, he imitated the manner of the principal speakers then in parliament, and defeated the force of the argument of the opposition, by preoccupying them. This appeared in 1778. Two other political pamphlets are attributed to him; namely, “The English Green-box,” 1779, and “Common-place Arguments,” in 1780. He produced also for the theatre, an alteration of Allan Ramsay’s “Gentle Shepherd,” which was acted at Drury-lane, in 1781; and “The Carnival of Venice,” a comic opera, written by himself, and acted the same year; but of these two pieces only the songs were printed.

Mr. Tickell was twice married, first in 1780 to mis* Mary Linley, sister to Mrs. Sheridan, by whom he had three children. After her death he married a daughter of captain Leigh, of the Berrington East-Indiaman, who survived him. His death, which happened Nov. 4, 1793, was occasioned by a fall from the window of his apartments at Hampton-court; in consequence of which he expired, even before Mrs. Tickell could reach the spot, though she had left him only for a moment. He had been for some lime one of the commissioners of the stamp-office.

, a modern German philosopher of considerable eminence, was born Aprils, 1748, at Bremervorde, in the duchy of Bremen, of which place his father was a burgomaster. His father intended him for the study of divinity, but he devoted the principal part of his early years to the study of the classics, and soon made great progress in the learned languages. As he became more acquainted with French and German literature and philosophy, he gave up all thoughts of studying divinity with a view to the church, imbibing by degrees the fashionable infidelity of his contemporaries. In 1772 he published at Riga his “Essay on the Origin of Languages,” and in 1776, his “System of the Stoic Philosophy,” a work that has been much praised abroad, and in which he was encouraged by the celebrated Heyne, who about the same time procured for him the professorship of the Greek and Latin languages in the Collegium Carolinum at Cassel. He was now, we are told, inclined to materialism, but cured by the essays and conversation of the learned Tetens. In 1778 he published his “Investigation of Man, 3 vols.; in 1780,” The first Philosophers of Greece,“and commenced his” Spirit of Speculative Philosophy."

In 1786, he, together with the other teachers of the college, was removed to Marburg, and appointed professor of philosophy. Here he taught with applause logic, metaphysics, empirical psychology, the law of nature, moral philosophy, the history of philosophy and of man, and explained the Greek classics. Of these he is said to have excelled principally in the history of philosophy, and empirical psychology. His religion, we are told, consisted in moral purity and rectitude of conduct: he attached no importance to external worship, though he did not deny its advantages to the great body of the people. He yvas an enemy to every kind of fanaticism, a word which we doubt not was in his creed comprehensive enough to embrace the doctrines of revealed religion. It is more to his honour, however, that he was a man of most extensive learning, particularly in the Greek language. His last performance was a translation of Denon’s Travels in Egypt, illustrated with notes. He died May 24, 1803, in the fifty -fifth year of his age. A prolix account of his studies and his philosophy appeared soon after in the foreign journals, from which we have abridged the present article. His works have never been much known in this country, and were not all very favourably received in his own.

, a learned protestant divine of the French church, was born at Goldberg in Silesia, Feb*4, 1563. He came into France about 1590, and was naturalized by Henry IV. He at first distinguished himself as an opponent of the tenetsof Arminius, but afterwards changed his opinion, and enlisted on the side of the remonstrants. His principal controversy was with Peter Du Moulin, which was carried on with so much warmth, that those who were friends to the peace of the church, and admired both writers for their respective excellencies, interposed to reconcile them, or put a stop to the dispute. James I. of England, among others, wrote a letter in 1614 to the synod of Tonneins on this subject, which with the answer and proceedings of that assembly, may be seen in Quick’s “Synodicon,” vol. I. Tilenus had, before this, been appointed by the mareschal de Bouillon, to be professor at the college of Sedan, which de Bouillon had founded, but about 1619, or 1620, Tilenus was obliged to resign in consequence of persisting in his peculiar sentiments, and came to Paris, where he lived on his property. He afterwards had a personal controversy at a country house near Orleans, with John Cameron, divinity professor at Saumur, concerning the subject of grace and free will. This lasted five days, and an account of it was published, under the title of “Collatio inter Tilenum & Cameronem, &c.” (See Cameron). Some time after, Tilenus addressed a letter to the Scotch nation, disapproving of the presbyterian, and commending the episcopal form of the reformed church, as established in England. This pleased king James so much, who hated presbyterianism, that he invited the author to England, where he received him very graciously, and offered him a pension. Tilenus accepted the offer, and only begged leave to return to France to settle his affairs; but his character becoming by some means obnoxious in this country, he was discouraged from returning, and died at Paris, Aug. 1, 163S. His latter days were spent in defending the Arminian tenets against the reformed church of France, and he wrote several books, the titles of which may now be dispensed with, but may be found in our authorities.

, a landscape-painter, who has left works that sustain their character even in capital collections, was born at Antwerp about 1684, and made himself a painter^ though he studied under very indifferent masters. In 1708, he was brought to England, with his brother-in-law, Casteels, by one Turner, a dealer in pictures, and was employed by him in copying Bourgognon and other masters, in which he succeeded admirably, particularly Teniers, of whom he preserved all the freedom and spirit. He generally painted landscapes with small figures, sea-ports and views, but when he came to be known, he was patronized by several men of quality, and drew views of their seats, huntings, races, and horses in perfection. In this way he was much employed, both in the west and north of England, and in Wales, and drew many prospects for Bridges’s History of Northamptonshire. The duke of Devonshire, in whose collection is a fine view of Chatsworth by Tillemans, and lord Byron, were his chief patrons. He also instructed the latter in his art, who did great credit to his master. After labouring many years under an asthma, for which he chiefly resided at Richmond, he died at Norton in Suffolk, Dec. 5, 1734, and was buried in the church of Stow-Langtoft.

, whom L‘Avocat prqnounces one of the most judicious and accurate critics and historians that France has produced, was born at Paris Nov. 30, 1637. His father, John L,e Nain, was master of the requests. About the age of ten, he was sent to the famous seminary of the Port Royal, where his attention to instruction, and his proficiency, were very extraordinary, and where he very early became fond of ’the study of history. This partiality seems to have been first excited by a perusal of Baronius, and while thus employed he was perpetually putting questions to his master Nicole, who at first gave him such answers as came in his head at the moment, hut soon found that his pupil was not so easily satisfied; and Nicole, although by no means ignorHiit of history, used to dread his approach, lest he might ask questions for which he was not fully prepared. At the age of e ghteen Tillemont began to read the fathers, the lives of the apostles, and their successors in the primitive church, and drew up for himself an account of early ecclesia^tical history, in the manner of Usher’s Annals, a hook he much admired, and formed his pwn somewhat on the same plan. In the mean time he was successfully instructed in other branches but it was a considerable time before he made choice of a profession. In this he was at last influenced by M. Choart de Buzanval, bishop of Brauvais, who determined him in favour of the church, and gave him the tonsure. About 1663, he went to reside with M. Hermant, a canon of the cathedral of Beauvais, and remained there five or six years. He then returned to Paris, and lodged with M. Thomas de Fosse, an old school-fellow, for about two years; but although in all these situations he was constantly employed in study, and had the quiet enjoyment of his time, he removed to the country, and, after receiving the other orders of his church, and being ordained priest in 1676, he settled at Tillemont, whence he took his name, about a league from Paris. About this time he was employed, along with his friend M. de Sacy, on a life of St. Louis, and two years after he travelled in Flanders and Holland. After his return, he continued his studies, and, in 1690, began to publish his <k History of the Emperors,“which was very favourabl\ received, and made the public more anxious to see his history of the church, on which it was well known he had been for some time employed. His” History of the Emperors“was, in fact, a part of his ecclesiastical history; hut when he printed a volume, as a specimen, it fell into the hands of a licenser of the press, who made so many petty objections, that M. Tillemont determined to suppress the work rather than submit to the proposed alterations and omissions, as none of the objections were in any way contrary to the received doctrines of the church. He then, by the advice of his friends, published the history of the emperors separately; and there being no occasion in this case for a theological licenser, he published vol. I. in 1690, 4to; and completed the work in five vols, in 1701, which had abundant success; was reprinted at Brussels, and translated into English. This was followed by his ecclesiastical history,” Memoires pour servir a l'Histoire ecclesiastique des six premiers siecles," &c. 1693, &c. completed in sixteen volumes, quarto. Extreme accuracy of facts and dates constitute the great merit of this work, and the want of a more methodical arrangement, and of a better style, its chief objections. Dupin wishes he had reduced his work to the form of annals, in imitation of Baronius; and this opinion having been conveyed to M. Tillemont, he said he could not think of going over the materials anew, but was very willing to give his manuscripts to any person who would take the trouble to put them in the form of annals. No such person offering his services, M. Tillemont proceeded in his own way, in which he met afterwards with very little opposition, except a short controversy, of no great importance, with father Lamy.

Tillemont was intimate with M. Hermant, doctor of the Sorbonne, Baillet, Nicole, and many other learned men, who frequently consulted him. To a complete knowledge of ecclesiastical history, he joined an exemplary humility, and regularity of conduct. His humility, indeed, was so great, that Bossuet, seeing one of his letters to father Lamy, besought him, *' not to be always upon his knees before his adversary, but raise himself now and then up." He was solicited to push himself in the church, and his friend the bishop of Beauvais wished to have him for his successor: but Tillemont, regardless of dignities, wished for nothing but retirement, and there his perpetual watchings and austerities brought him into a state of languor, which terminated in a disease, of which he died, January 10, 1698, aged sixty-one. He was interred at Port-royal agreeably to his desire, but when that abbey was destroyed in 1711, his remains were removed to St, Andre des Arcs, his parish church.

M. Tronchai, canon of Laval, published Tillemont' s life in 1711, 12mo. At the end of this, are “pious reflections, and instructive Letters,” by M. de Tillemont, from which we learn that he was a zealous devotee of the church of Rome. The “Life of St. Louis,” by M. de la Chaise, was compiled from his “Memoirs;” and many writers of the lives of the fathers found their best materials in that same work. He left in ms. a Memoir concerning William de Saint- Amour, and the disputes between the Dominicans and the university; a, life of Isabella, sister of St. Louis; remarks on the breviaries of Mans and Paris; a legend for the breviary of Evreux, and the history of the Sicilian kings of the house of Anjou.

His brother Peter Le Nain de Tillemont was born March 25. 1640, at Paris. Having chosen the ecclesiastical profession, he entered at St. Victor at Paris, but returned to la Trappe in 1663, being enamoured of the austerities of thai, order, and was a long time sub-prior. He died there in 1713, aged seventy-three. His works are, “Ks^ui de 1* Histoire de l'ordre de Citeaux,” 9 vols. 12mo; “Home.ios sur Jeremie,” 2 vols. 8vo a French translation of St Dorothens, a father of the Gn-ek church, 8vo “The Life of M. de Ranee, abbot and reformer of la Trappe,” 3 vols. 12mo. This life was revised by the celebrated M. Bossuet, but not published as le Nain wrote it; some satirical strokes being inserted, of which the author was incapable. “Relation fie la vie et de la mort de plusieurs Religieux de la I rappe,” 6 vols. 12mo; “Elevations a Dieu pour se ureparer a la Mort” two small tracts, one entitled, “De I‘e’tat du monde apre*s le Jugement dernier; 11 the other,” Sur le Scandale qui put arriver m&me dans le Monast. le mieux regies/‘ &c. These works, says L’Avocat, contain a spirit of true piety, but little criticism, and their style is too diffuse. The author’s life has been written by M. Darnaudin, in 12mo.

, archbishop of Canterbury, wag descended of a family anciently of the name of Tilston, of Tilston in Cheshire, and born at Sowerby in Yorkshire, in Oct. 1630. His father, Mr. Robert Tillotson, wasaconsiderable clothier there, a man of good understanding, and uncommon knowledge of the Scriptures; but so zealously attached to the system of Calvin, as not to be moderated by the reasonings of his son, whom he lived to see dean of Canterbury. He gave his son, however, a liberal education, vv, o,;fu-r passing through a school, was sent in 1647 to Onn. bridge, being then seventeen; and admitted a penftiooer oi C'are-hall. He took his bachelor of arts degree in 1650, and his master’s in 1654, having been chosen fellow of his college in 1651.

His first education and impressions were among Puritans; from whose principles he gradually seceded, and is said to have felt a great repugnance to read the works usually put into the hands of youth. Mr. Chillingworth’s works are said to have first given his mind a new bias, and dire. -ted Dim to a new method of study, and about the same time he entered into friendship with some great men, which contributed not a little to give him new views of theological matters. Cambridge then could boast of the celebrated names of Dr Cudworth, master of Christ’s-colle^e; Dr. More, and Dr. Rust, afterwards bishop of Dromore in Ireland, fellows of the same Dr. Whichcot, provost of King’s; Dr. Worthington, master of Jesus and Mr. John Smith, author of the “Select Discourses,” fellow of Queen’s. Tillotson enjoyed also a close and intimate friendship with Dr. Wilkins, afterwards bishop of Chester; he adopted all the best studies of this great man, but so as to perfect every one of them; for, though Wilkins had more general knowledge, yet Tillotson was the greater divine.

In 1656, Tillotson left his college, and went upon invitation to Edmund Prideaux, esq. of Ford-abbey in Devonshire, to be tutor to his son. Prideaux had been commissioner of the great seal under the long parliament, and was then attorney-general to the protector Cromwell. How long he continued in this Station does not appear;, but he was in London at the time of Cromwell’s death, Sept. 3, 1658; and was present about a week after at a very remarkable scene in Whitehall palace, which we have already related from Burnet in our account of Dr. Owen. The time of his going into orders, and by whom he was ordained, are particulars not known. Some have supposed, that he was curate to Dr. Wilkins at St. Lawrence Jewry, before the restoration; but Wilkins was not admitted to that vicarage till 1662. The first sermon of his that appeared in print was in Sept. 1661: it was preached at the morning exercise at Cripplegate, on “Matth. vii. 12.” and published among a collection with that title, but not admitted among his works till the edition of 1752. At the time of preaching this sermon he was still among the Presbyterians, whose commissioners he attended, thou. h as an auditor only, at the conference held at the Savoy for the review of the Liturgy, in July 1661 but he immediately submitted to the act of uniformity, which commenced on St. Bartholomew’s-day the year following. Upon thus becoming a preacher in the church, he was very little disposed to follow the patterns then set him, or indeed of former times; and therefore formed one to himself, which was long esteemed as a model. He certainly began his course of divinity with the true foundation of it, an exact study of the Scriptures, on which he spent four or five years. He then applied himself to the reading ol all the ancient philosophers and writers upon ethics, and among the fathers chiefly St. Basil and St. Chry*.ostom, with Episcopius among the moderns, whom he made the pattern both of his principles and eloquence. With these preparations, he set himself to compose the greatest variety of sermons that any divine had yet undertaken.

His first office in the church was the curacy of Cheshunt in Hertfordshire, in 16S1 and 1662; where he is said, by his mild and gentle behaviour, which was natural to him, and persuasive eloquence, to have prevailed with an old Oliverian soldier, who preached among the Anabaptists there in a red coat, and was much followed, to desist from that, and betake himself to some other employment. The short distance of Cheshunt from London allowing him often to visit his friends there, he was frequently invited into their pulpits. Accordingly we find that his sermon on Eccles. xii. 1. “Upon the advantages of an early piety,” was preached at St. Lawrence Jewry in 1662; Dec. the 16th of which year, he was elected minister oi the adjoining parish of St. Mary Aldermanbury, upon the deprivation of Mr. Edmund Calamy. He declined this, but did not continue long without the offer of another benefice, which he accepted, being presented, in June 1663, to the rectory of Keddington in Suffolk. His residence there, however, was but short, being called to London by the society of Lincoln’s-Inn, who chose him their preacher the 26th following: his election was owing to his being accidentally heard at St. Lawrence Jewry, by Mr. Atkyns, one of the benchers of that Inn, and afterwards lord chief baron of the Exchequer. He determined to live among them, and therefore immediately resigned his living in Suffolk; but his preaching was so little relished there at first, that he for some time entertained thoughts of leaving them. They maintained, that “since Mr. Tillotson came, Jesus Christ had not been preached among them.” To this accusation, he seems to allude in his sermon against evil-speaking, preached near thirty years after; towards the close of which he says: “I foresee what will be said, because I have heard it so often said in the like case, that there is not one word of Jesus Christ in all this; no more is there in the text: and yet I hope that Jesus Christ is truly preached, when his will and laws, and the duties enjoined by the Christian religion, are inculcated upon us.”

The year after, 1664, he was chosen Tuesday lecturer at St. Lawrence Jewry: and being now settled in town, and having established the character of an excellent preacher, he contributed his share to oppose the two growing evils of Charles the Second’s reign, atheism and popery. He preached a sermonbefore the lord mayor and court of aldermen at St. Paul’s, in 1663, “On the wisdom of being religious;” which was published in 1664, much enlarged, and has been allowed to be one of the most elegant, perspicuous, and convincing defences of religion, in our own or any other language. In 1664, John Sargrant (see Sargeant), who had deserted from the church of England to that of Rome, published a book, called Sure footing in Christianity; or, Rational Discourses on the rule of Faith.“This being highly praised by the abettors of popery, Tillotson answered it, in a piece entitled” The rule of Faith,“which was printed in 1666, and inscribed to Dr. Stillingfleet, with whom he was intimately acquainted. Sargeant replied to this, and also in another piece attacked a passage in Tillotson’s sermon” On the Wisdom of being religious;“which sermon, as well as his” Rule of Faith," Tillotson defended in the preface to the first volume of his sermons, printed in 1671, 8vo.

The same year, 1666, he took a doctor of divinity’s degree; and in 1668 preached the sermon at the consecration of Wilkins to the bishopric of Chester. He was related to Wiikins, by having, Feb. 23, 1664, married his daughterin-law, Elizabeth French, who was niece to Oliver Cromwell; for she was the daughter of Dr. Peter French, canon of Christ church in Oxford, by Robina, sister to Cromwell, which Robina was re- married, about 1656, to Dr. Wilkins, then warden of Wad bam college. In 1670, he was made a prebendary of Canterbury; and, in 1672, advanced to the deanery of that church: he had some ti ue before been preferred to a prebend in the church of St. Paul. He had now been some years chaplain to the king, who is yet supposed, by Burnet and others, to have had no kindness for him; his zeal against popery was too great for him to be much of a favourite at court. When a declaration for liberty of conscience was published in 1672, with a view to indulge the papists, the bishops were alarmed, and directed Uieir clergy to preach against popery; the king complained to archbishop Sheldon of this, as done on purpose to inflame the people, and alienate them from himstU and hit government; on which that prelate called together some of the clergy, to consider what he should say to his majesty, if he pressed him any farther on that head. Dr. Tillotson suggested this answer, that, “since his majesty professed the protestant religion, it would be a thing without precedent, that he should forbid his clergy to preach in clefence of it.' 1 In the mean time, he observed great moderation towards the protestant dissenters, and, early in 1668, had joined in a treaty for a comprehension of such as could be brought into the communion of the church; but this attempt proved abortive, as did another made in 1674. In 1675, he published” The Principles of Natural Religion, by bishop Wilkins,“who had died at his house in 1672, and committed all his papers to him, to dispose of as he pleased. The first twelve chapters only having been transcribed by Wilkins for the press, he finished the remainder out of the bishop’s papers, and wrote a preface. In 1630, he published” The Treatise of the Pope’s Supremacy, by Dr. Barrow," who dying in 1677, left all his manuscripts to the care of Dr. Tillotson. He had the year before converted Charles earl of Shrewsbury, afterwards created a duke by king William, to whom he was secretary of state, from popery to the protestant religion.

On the 2d of April, 1680, he preached before the king at Whitehall, a sermon on Josh. xxiv. 15, which was soon after published by his majesty’s special command, under the title of “The Protestant Religion vindicated from the charge of singularity and novelty.” But this discourse happened to contain some incidental assertions, which offended all parties, particularly the following passage: “I cannot think, till I be better informed, which I arn always ready to be, that any pretence of conscience warrants any man, that is not extraordinarily commissioned, as the apostles and first publishers of the Gospel were, and cannot justify that commission by miracles as they did, to affront the established religion of a nation, though it be false; and openly to draw men off from the profession of it, in contempt of the magistrate and the law. All that persons of a different religion can in such a case reasonably pretend to, is to enjoy the private liberty and exercise of their own conscience and religion; for which they ought to be very thankful, and to forbear the open making of proselytes to their own religion, though they be never so sure that they are in the right, till they have either an extraordinary commission from God to that purpose, or the providence of God makes way for it by the permission of the magistrate.” Dr. Hickes, who wrote a virulent libel against Tillotson after his death, styles this downright Hobbism; and tells us, that a witty lord, standing at the king’s elbow when it was delivered, said, “Sir, do you hear Mr. Hobbes in the pulpit?” Dr. Calamy’s account is, that the king having slept the most part of the time while the sermon was delivered, a certain nobleman stepped up to him, as soon as it was over, and said, “It is pity your majesty slept, for we have had the rarest piece of Hobbism that ever you heard in your life.” To which the km^ answered, ll Odds fish, he shall print it then;" and immediately gave orders to that purpose. Some animadversions were made upon it, and printed; but it does not appear that the dean took any further notice, except only to apologize privately among his friends, for having advanced an assertion which he savr could not be maintained. He excused himself by the hurry he was in, being called unexpectedly, and out of turn, to preach. It is indeed surprising that a man of Tillotson’s good sense should be hurried, by his zeal against popery, to advance against the papists what equally struck at our first reformers.

In 1682, the dean gave the public, from the manuscript! of bishop Wilkins, a volume in 8vo, of fifteen sermons; which he introduced with a preface, in defence of that prelate’s character, against the reflections cast upon it in the “Historia & antiquitates universitatis Oxoniensis.” Thi* was printed in 1674, under the inspection of bishop Fell; who is supposed to have made the alterations and additions, which are seen in that edition of Anthony Wood’s work. The task of preparing “Dr. Barrow’s Sermons” for the press, which had employed the dean for several years, -and cost him as much pains as would have produced many more of his own, was now finished; and the edition published at London in 1633, folio. The laborious office of an editor of such voluminous writings as those of Barrow, undertaken by one who had many years before appeared to so much advantage as an original writer, was as clear an evidence of modesty, as it was of sincere friendship, in Dr. Tillotson. The discovery of the R\e house plot the same year opened a melancholy scene, in which he had a large share of distress, on account of his friendship for lord Russel. He and Dr. Burnet were sent for by that lord, and both attended him till his death: and it i* remarkable, that they both urged him to disown the principle of resisting the powers above, for which they were severely censured, an<l doubtless afterwards felt reason to censure themselves. He published a discourse against “eransuh-tantiation,” in the Utter end of king Charles’s reign, and another against “purgatory” in the beginning of king James’s. The former debate upon that doctrine gave occasion to several tracts on both sides of the question, pubii>hecl during the controversy with the papists, which subsisted through king James’s reign; and which produced so many pieces, that the vast collection, in three volumes, folio, published many years ago, under the direction of Gibson, bishop of London, is only a part of those written by protestants.

During the cUbate in parliament concerning the settlement of the crown on king William for life, the dean was consulted upon that point by the princess Anne of Denmark; who was pressed by the Jacobites to form an opposition; and who, till lady Russel and Dr. Tillotson had discoursed with her, had refused to give her consent to it, as prejudicial to her own right. He was, afterwards admitted into an high degree of confidence with king William and queen Mary; and their majesties had the greatest reason to confide in him, for he was a true friend to their establishment on the throne of England. The vacancies of some bishoprics soon turned the thoughts of his majesty and his ministers upon the dean; but a bishopric was so far from being agreeable to him, that he used all possible solicitations to avoid it. He had been appointed clerk of the closet to the king, the 27th of March, 1689; in August he was appointed by the chapter of his cathedral, to exercise the archiepiscopal jurisdiction of the province of Canterbury, devolved to himself and that body, on the 1st of that month, by the suspension of Sancroft, for refusing the new oaths; and the king soon fixed upon him to succeed him. Til lotson’s desires and ambition had never extended further than to the exchange of his deanery of Canterbury for that of St. Paul’s, which was granted him in September, upon the promotion of Stillingtieet to the bishopric of Worcester: but, at the very time that he kissed the king’s hand for this, his majesty named the archbishopric to him. There is a letter of his to lady Ilussel, dated April 19, 1689, which shews how he stood affected to this proposal, and also clears bishop Burnet from many a grievous censure, as if he himself had had a view to the archbishopric. After acquainting her ladyship with the disposal of several church preferments, he proceeds: “but now begins my trouble. After I had kissed the king’s hand for the deanery of St. Paul’s, I gave his majesty my most humble thanks, and told him, that now he had set me at ease for the remainder of my life. He replied, No such matter, I assure you, and spoke plainly about a great place, which I dread to think of; and said, it was necessary for his service, and he must charge it upon my conscience. Just as he had said this, he was called to supper, and I had only time to say, that when his majesty was at leisure, I did believe I could satisfy him, that it would be most for his service that I should continue in the station in which he had now placed me. This hath brought me into a real difficulty; for, on the one hand, it is hard to decline his majesty’s commands, and much harder yet to stand out against so much goodness as his majesty is pleased to use towards me: on the other, I can neither bring my inclination nor my judgment to it. This I owe to the bishop of Salisbury, one or the best and worst friends I know; best for his singular good opinion of me, and the worst for directing the king to this method, which I know he did; as if his lordship and I had concerted the matter, how to finish this foolish piece of dissimulation, in running away from a bishopric to catch an archbishopric. This fine device hath thrown me so far into the briars, that, without his majesty’s great goodness, I shall never get off without a scratched face. And now I will tell your ladyship the bottom of my heart. I have of a long time, I thank God for it, devoted myself to the public service, without any regard for myself, and to that end have done the best I could, in the best manner I was able; of late God hath been pleased, by very severe ways, but in great goodness to me, to wean me perfectly from the love of this world;” (he alludes here, not only to the death of his friend lord Russel, but to the loss of two daughters, which were all his children;) “so that worldly greatness is now not only undesirable, but distasteful to me. And I do verily believe, that I shall be able to do as much or more good in my present station, than in a higher, and shall not have one jot less interest or influence upon any others to any good purpose: for the people na r turally love a man that will take great pains and little preferment. But, on the other hand, if I could force my inclination to take this great place, I foresee that I should sink under it, grow melancholy and good for nothing, and, after a little while, die as a fool dies.”

A man of Dr. Tillotson’s disposition and temper, which was mild, gentle, and humane, had certainly the greatest reason to dread the archbishopric; since whoever should succeed Sancroft must be exposed to the attacks of the Nonjurors. Accordingly, he made all the struggle, and all the opposition to it, which a subject could make against his king; and, when all would not do, he accepted it with the greatest reluctance. Of this we have the following account, in another letter to lady Russel, dated October the 25th, 1690; for there was ever a strict intimacy and correspondence between this lady and Dr. Tillotson, after the death of lord Russel, and there passed several letters between them upon this occasion. “I waited upon the king at Kensington, and he took me into his closet, where 1 told him, that 1 could not but have a deep sense of his majesty’s great grace and favour to me, not only to offer me the best thing he had to give, but to press it so earnestly upon me. I said, I would not presume to argue the matter any further, but I hoped he would give me leave to be still his humble and earnest petitioner to spare me in that thing. He answered, he would do so if he could, but he knew not what to do if I refused him. Upon that I told him, that I tendered my life to him, and did humbly devote it to be disposed of as he thought fit: he was graciously pleased to say, it was the best news had come to him this great while. I did not kneel down to kiss his hand, for, without that, I doubt I am too sure of it, but requested of him, that he would defer the declaration of it, and let it be a secret for some time. He said, he thought it might not be amiss to defer it till the parliament was up. I begged further of him, that he would not make me a wedge to drive out the present archbishop; that some time before 1 was nominated, his majesty would be pleased to declare in council, that, since his lenity had not had any better effect, he would wait no more, but would dispose of their places. This I told him I humbly desired, that I might not be thought to do any thing harsh, or which might reflect upon me: for now that his majesty had thought fit to advance me to this station, my reputation was become his interest. He said he was sensible of it, and thought it reasonable to do as I desired. I craved leave of him to mention one thing more, which in justice to my family, especially my wife, I ought to do, that I should be more than undone by the great and necessary charge of coming into this place, and must therefore be an humble petitioner to his majesty, that, if it should please God to take me out of the world, that I must unavoidably leave my wife a beggar, he would not suffer her to be so; and that he would graciously be pleased to consider, that the widow of an archbishop of Canterbury, which would now be an odd figure in England, could not decently be supported by so little as would have contented her very well if I had died a dean. To this he gave a very gracious answer, I promise you to take care of her.” His remark to the king, that “the widow of an archbishop would now be an odd figure in England,” was founded upon this fact, that only two, who had fiiied the see of Canterbury, had hitherto been married, Cranmer and Parker.

The king’s nomination of him to the archbishopric was agreed between them, as it appears, to be postponed till after the breaking up of the session of parliament, which was prorogued the 5th of January 1691; and then it was thought proper to defer it stiil longer, till the king should return from Holland, whither he was then going. He arrived at Whitehall the 13th of April, and nominated Tiilotson to the council on the 23d, who was consecrated the 31st of May, being Whitsunday, in Bow-church, by Mews, bishop of Winchester, Lioyd, bishop of St. Asaph. Burnet, bishop of Sarurn, Stillingrleet, bishop of Worcester, Iron* side, bishop of Bristol, and Hough, bishop of Oxford, in the presence of the duke of Norfolk, the marquis of Carmarthen, lord-president of the council, the earl of Devonshire, the earl of Dorset, the earl of Macclesfield, the carl of Fauconberg, and other persons of rank; and four days after his consecration was sworn of the privycouncil. His promotion was attended with the usual compliments of congratulation, out of respect either to himself or his station, which, however, were soon followed by a very opposite treatment froai the nonjuring party; the greatest part of whom, from the moment of his acceptance of the archbishopric, pursued him with an unrelenting rage, which lasted during his life, and was by no means appeased after his death. Before his consecration, the learned Mr. Dndwell, who was afterwards deprived of Camden’s historical lecture at Oxford, wrote him a letter, dated the 12th of May, to dissuade him from being, says he, “the aggressor in the new-designed schism, in erecting another altar against the hitherto acknowledged altar of your deprived fathers and brethren. If their places be not vacant, the new consecration must, by the nature of the spiritual monarchy, he null and invalid, and schisnuitical.” This letter of Mr. Dodwell was written with much greater mildness and moderation than another which was sent to the archbishop’s lady for him, and a copy of it to the countess of Derby, for the queen; and printed soon after. It called upon him to reconcile his acting since the Revolution with the principles either of natural or revealed religion, or with those of his own letter to lord iiussel, which was reprinted upon this occasion. The writer of it is said, by Dr. Hickes, to be a person of great candour and judgment, and once a great admirer of the archbishop, though he became so much prejudiced against him as to declare after his death to Dr. Hickes, that he thought him “an atheist, as much as a man could be, though the gravest certainly,” said he, “that ever was.” But these and other libels were so far from exasperating the archbishop against those who wt re concerned in dispersing them, that wht n some were seized on that account, he used all his interest with the government to screen them from punishment.

Dr. Tiilotsun, from his first advancement to the archiepiscopal see, had begun to form several designs for the good of the church and religion in general; and in these he was encouraged by their majesties. With this view he joined with the queen it) engaging the bishop of Salisbury to draw ii:> his “Discourse of the Pastoral Care,” in order to prepare the way for perfecting some parts of our ecclesiastical constitution. This was bishop Burnet’s favourite tract, anJ it was published in 1692. In the lew moments ofh s i.-i“;?'<*, Tiliotson revised his own sermons; and, in 1693, published four of them, concerning the divinity and incarnation of our blessed Saviour His chief design in this was to remove the imputation of Socinianism, which had long been, and was then more than ever, fixed upon him by those who did not love his principles, and thought that his defending religion upon what were called rational grounds, and his holding friendship and correspondence with Locke, Limborch, Le Clerc, and others who did the same, were circumstances liable to suspicion. Of this he indirectly complains in one of his sermons:” 1 know not how it comes to pass, but so it is, that every one that offers to give a reasonable account of his faith, and to establish religion upon rational principles, is presently branded for a Socinian; of which we have a sad instance in that incomparable person, Mr. Chillingworth, the glory of this age and nation, who for no other cause that 1 know of, but his worthy and successful attempts to make Christian religion reasonable, and to discover those firm and solid foundations upon which our faith is built, hath been requited with this black and odious character. But if this be Socinianism, for a man to inquire into the grounds and reasons of the Christian religion, and to endeavour to give a satisfactory account why he believes it, I know no way but that all considerate inquisitive men, that are above fancy and enthusiasm, must be either Socinians or Atheists.

The good of the church, and the reformation of all abuses among the clergy, were the constant object of the archbishop’s thoughts, and, among other resolutions and projects for this purpose, one was, to oblige the clergy to a more strict residence upon their cures: but there was such an evil and active spirit at work against him, that fault was found with every thing he said or did, and all opportunities were taken to blast and defame him; which tu*de a considerable impression on his spirits, so that he frew very uneasy in his high post. The malice and party rage, which he had felt in some measure before, broke out, after his advancement, in all forms of open insult. One day, while a gentleman was with him, who came to pay his jlompiiments, a packet was brought in, sealed and directed to him, upon opening which there appeared a mask, but nothing written. The archbishop, without any signs of moiion, threw it carelessly among his papers on the table; but on the gentleman’s expressing great surprise at the iHront, he only smiled, and said, that “this was a gentlci rebuke, compared with some others, that lay there in black and white,” pointing to the papers upon the table. Yet all this injurious treatment, and all the calumnies spread against him, could never provoke him to the least temper of revenge; noc did he ever indulge himself in any of those liberties of speaking about others, which were to so immeasurable a degree made use of against himself: and upon a bundle of libels found among his papers after his death, he put no other inscription than this, “These are libels, I pray God forgive them, I do *.”

He concurred again with the queen, in engaging the bishop of Salisbury to undertake his “Exposition of the thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England 5” which that indefatigable prelate performed in less than a year, though it was not published till 169y. He sent the manuscript to the archbishop, who, having revised and altered it in several pi-aces, returned it, with his judgment, in the following letter:

"I have, with great pleasure and satisfaction, read over the great volume you sent me, and am astonished to see so vast a work begun and finished in so short a time. In the article of the Trinity you have said all that, I think, can be said upon so obscure and difficult an argument. The Socinians have just now published an answer to us all, but I have not had a sight of it. The negative articles against the church of Rome you have very fully explained, and with great learning and judgment: concerning thes^ you will meet with no opposition among ourselves. The greatest danger was to be apprehended from the points’ in difference between the Calvinists and Remonstrants, in which you have shewn not only great skill and moderation, but great prudence, in contenting yourself to represent both sides impartially, without any positive declaration of your own judgment. The account given of Athanasius’s cree4 seems to me no wise satisfactory; I wish we were well ri^ of it. I pray God to preserve your lordship, to do more such services to the church. I am, my lord,

authors they were so remarkably dis- I have rewarded them accordingly.‘ 3 tinguished by his grace.- * Those,’ said He did not long survive the writing of this letter; for, Nov. I 8th following, he was suddenly seized with an illness, which, turning to a dead palsy, put an end to his life on the 24th, in the sixty-fifth year of his age. He was attended the two last nights of his illness by his dear friend Mr. Nelson, in whose arms he expired. The sorrow for his death was more universal than ever was known for a subject: anil his funeral was attended by a numerous train of coaches, filled with persons of the first quality, who went voluntarily to assist at the solemnity. His funeral-sermon was preached by th^ bishop of Salisbury; and, being soon after published, was remarked on by Dr. Hickes, in a piece entitled, “Some Discourses upon Dr. Burnet and Dr. Tillotson, &c.” The acrimony of this piece is scarce to be matched among the invectives of any age or language: bishop Burnet, however, gave a strong and clear answer to these discourses, in some Reflections on them; and shewed them to be, what they really are, a malicious and scurrilous libel. But whatever attempts were made against archbishop Tillotson, his character may safely be trusted to posterity; for his life was not only free from blemishes, but exemplary in all parts of it, as appears from facts founded on indisputable authority. In his domestic relations, friendships, and the whole commerce of business, he was easy and humble, frank and open, tender-hearted and bountiful to such an extent, that, while he was in a private station, he laid aside two tenths of his income for charitable uses. He despised money too much, insomuch that if the king had not forgiven his first-fruits, his debts could not have been paid; and he left nothing to his family but the copy of his posthumous sermons, which were sold for 2500 guineas; a poor maintenance for the widow of an archbishop, if the king had not increased it by an annuity of 400l. in 16‘jo, and the addition of ’200l. more in 1C98.

The death of the archbishop was lamented by Mr. Locke, in a letter to Limborch, not only as a considerable loss to himself of a zealous and candid inquirer after truth, whom he consulted freely upon all doubts in theological subjects, and of a friend, whose sincerity he had experienced for many years, but likewise as a very important one to the English nation, and the whole body of the reformed churches. He had published in his life-time as many sermons as, with his ' Rnle of faith,“amounted to one volume in folio: am a* many wore published after his death, by his chaplain, Dr. Barker, as amounted to* two more. They have been often printed, and translated into several languages; and the reputation of them in foreign countries was partly owing to M. Le Clerc, who, in his” Bibliotheque Choisse for 1705,“gave an account of the second edition, in 1699, folio, of those that were published in his life-time. Ha declares there, that” the archbishop’s merit was above any commendation which he could give; that it was formed from the union of an extraordinary clearness of head, a great penetration, an exquisite talent of reasoning, a profound knowledge of true divinity, a solid piety, a most singular perspicuity and unaffected elegance of style, with every other quality that could be desired in a man of his order; and that, whereas compositions of this kind are commonly merely rhetorical and popular declamation, and much better to be heard from the pulpit, than to be read in print, his are for the most part exact dissertations, and capable of bearing the tesjt of the most rigorous examination.' 7

As good sense, sound reasoning, and profound knowledge, justly entitled archbishop Tillotson to the character of a great and excellent divine, so copiousness of style, and ease of composition, have made him also esteemed and admired as an orator. Yet a polite writer of our own country, Melmoth, in “Fitzosborne’s Letters,” cannot allow this to him, but, on the contrary, “thinks that no man had ever less pretensions to genuine oratory, than this celebrated preacher. One cannot indeed but regret,” says he, “that Dr. Tillotson, who abounds with such noble and generous sentiments, should want the art of setting them off with all the advantage they deserve; that the sublime in morals should not be attended with a suitable elevation of language. The truth, however, is, his words are frequently ill chosen, and almost always ill placed; his periods are both tedious and unharmonious; as his metaphors are generally mean, and often ridiculous.” He imputes this chiefly to his “having had no sort of notion of rhetorical numbers,” which seems, indeed, to have been in some measure the case and, as far as this can detract from the character of a complete orator, it is necessary to make some abatement: yet there is certainly great copiousness, and, as this gentleman allows, “a noble simplicity,” in his discourses. As for his language, notwithstanding some exceptionable passages with regard to the use of metaphors, incident to the best authors, Dryden frequently owned with pleasure, that, if he had any talent for English prose (as certainly he had a very great one), it was owing to his having often read the writings of archbishop Tillotson. Addison likewise considered Tiltotson’s writings as the chief standard of our language and accordingly marked the particular pbrases in the sermons published during his life-time, as the ground-work of an English dictionary, which he had projected. But there are some very just sentiments of Tillotson in one of Warbiirton’s letters, which deserve more attention. Tillotson, Warburton says, “was certainly a virtuous, pious, humane, and moderate man, which last quality was a kind of rarity in those times. His notions of civil society were but confused and imperfect, as appears in the affair of lord Russel. As to religion, he was among the class of latitudinarian divines. I think the sermons published in Iris life-time are fine moral discourses. They bear indeed the character of their author, simple, elegant, candid, clear, and rational. No orator in the Greek and Roman sense of the word, like Taylor; nor a discourser in their sense, like Barrow: free from their irregularities, but not able to reach their heights. On which account I prefer them infinitely to him. You cannot sleep with Taylor; you cannot forbear thinking with Barrow. But you may be much at your ease in the mi^lst of a long lecture from Tillotson: clear, and rational, and equable as he is. Perhaps the last quality may account for it.”

, son of Martin Tzerclais, hereditary sénéchal of the county of Namur, was descended from an ancient and illustrious family, which was one of the seven patrician families of Brussels. It is said that he was originally a Jesuit; but, going into the army, he commanded the Bavarian troops under the duke Maximilian. He had a great share in the victory gained at Prague, November 8, 1620, over the unfortunate elector palatine Frederic V. and afterwards defeated successively the armies of count Mansfeldt, the duke of Brunswick, and the margrave of Baden Dourlach. At the battle of Lutter in Luneuburg, 1626, he conquered the Danish army, which their king commanded in person. In 1629, he was sent to Lubeck, as plenipotentiary for concluding a peace with Denmark, had the sole command of the imperial forces the following year, instead of Walstein, and took the city of Magdeburg by storm, in 1631, where his soldiers committed the most horrid cruelties, barbarities, and ravages during three days. This unhappy city, after having been given up to pillage, was destroyed by fire, and almost all the inhabitants,.men, women, and children, murdered in the most inhuman manner; a barbarous massacre, which will for ever tarnish the glory of this celebrated general. He then invaded Saxony, and took Leipsic; but was defeated three days after, Sept. 17, the same year, 1631, by Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden. Having rallied his forces he repulsed Horn, chief of the protestant party General Tilly was at length wounded by a cannon ball while defending the passage of Lech against the Swedes, and died of his wound, April 30, 1632. Tilly is said to have been remarkable for two virtues, seldom found in his profession, the strictest chastity and temperance. He was likewise very popular with his troops, to whom he was always kind and liberal, and at last bequeathed sixty thousand crowns to the old regiments which had served under him.

, the Locrian, was a philosopher of the Italic school, during the time of Plato, who was indebted to him, among other Pythagoreans, for his acquaintance with the doctrine of Pythagoras, and who wrote his dialogue, entitled “Timaeus,” on the ground of his book, “On the Nature of Things.” A small piece, which he wrote concerning the “Soul of the World,” is preserved by Proclus, and is in some editions prefixed to Plato’s “Timseus.” In this treatise, though generally following Pythagoras, he departs from him in two particulars; the first, that instead of one whole, or monad, he supposes two independent causes of nature, God, or mind, the fountain of intelligent nature, and necessity, or matter, the source of bodies; the second, that he explains the cause of the formation of the world, from the external action of God upon matter, after the pattern or ideas existing in his own mind. From comparing this piece with Plato’s dialogue, it will be found that the Athenian philosopher has obscured the simple doctrine of the Locrian with fancies drawn from his own imagination, or from the Ægyptian schools.

, a celebrated Grecian painter, was horn at Sicyon, or, according to some writers, at Cithnus, one of the Cyclades. He flourished towards the close of Alexander the Great’s rei^n, had a fertile invention, and the art of conveying ideas to the spectators beyond what his pictures represented. All the ancients bestow the highest encomiums on that of Iphigenia prepared to be sacrificed. In this celebrated picture the princess appeared with all the charms and grace belonging to her sex, age, and rank, with the dignity of a great soul devoting itself for its country, yet with the agitation which the approach of the sacrifice must necessarily cause. She was standing before the altar, the high priest Chalcis attending, whose countenance expressed that majestic sorrow becoming his office. Menelaus, Iphigenia’s uncle, Ulysses, Ajax, and the other Grecian princes were present at the sad spectacle, and the painter seemed to have so entirely exhausted every different species of grief, that he had no way left to describe that of the father, Agamemnon; but, by a stroke equally ingenious and touching, he covered the face of this prince with a veil, thus leaving the pitying spectator’s imagination to paint the dreadful situation of the unhappy parent. His idea has been several times adopted with success, and it has been the theme of unlimited praise from the orators and historians of antiquity, but the justice of this praise has been questioned by modern criticism, by sir Joshua Reynolds, in his “Eighth Discourse,” and by Mr. Fuseli, in his “First Lecture,” in which last the question is examined elaborately and scrupulously.

, the Phliasian, one of the chief disciples of Pyrrho, flourished in the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus. He early visited Megara, to be instructed by Stilpo in dialectics, and afterwards removed to Elea, that he might become a hearer of Pyrrho. He first professed philosophy at Chalcedon, and afterwards at Athens, whe r e he remained till his death. He took so little pains to invite disciples to his school, that it has been said of him, that, as the Scythians bhot flying, Timon gained pupils by running from them. This indifference to the profession which he had assumed was probably owing to his love of ease and indulgence; for he w is fond of rural retirement, and was so much addicted to wine, that he held a successful contest with several eelebratfd champions in drinking. It was this disposition, probably, which tempted him to embrace the indolent doctnne of scepticism, Tmion appears to have viewed the opinions and Jisputes of the philosophers in the same ludicrous point of light, in whici) Luciant'terwards contemplated them; for, like him, he wrote with sarcastic humour against the whole body. His poem, entitled “Silli,” oiten quoted by the ancients, was a keen satire, full of bitter invective both against men and doctrines. The remaining fragments o thi* poem have I); eti industriously collected by Henry Step!) ens, in his " Poesis Philosophical* This Timon (-.vho is not to be confounded witn Timon the misanthrope) lived to the age of ninety years.

, an English deistical writer, was the son of a clergyman of Beer-ferres, in Devonshire, and born about 1657. He became a commoner of Lincoln college, m Oxford, in 1672, where he had the famous Dr. Hickes for his tutor, and thence removed to Exeter college. In 1676 he took the degree of bachelor of arts, and was afterwards elected fellow of All Souls college In 1679 he took a bachelor of laws degree; and in July 1685, became a doctor in that faculty. In the reign of James II. he declared himself a Roman catholic, but afterwards renounced that religion. Wood says that he did not return to the protestant religion till after that king had left the nation; but, according to his own account, he returned to it before that memorable epocha. In 1694 he published, at London, in 4to, “An Esay concerning obedience to the supreme powers, and the duty of subjects iti all revolutions; with some considerations touching the present juncture of affairs;” and “An Essay concerning the Laws of Nations and the right of sovereigns,” &c. He published also some other pamphlets on the same subjects, particularly one concerning the doctrine of the Trinity and the Athanasian. creed; but was first particularly noticed for a publication which came out in 1706, v\itn this title, “The Rights of the Christian Church asserted, against the Romish and all other priests, who claim an independent power over it; with a preface concerning the government of the Church of England, as by law established,” 8vo. Tindal was aware of the. offence this work would give, and even took some pleasure in it; for, as Dr. Hickes relates, he told a gentleman who found him at it with pen in hand, that “he was writing a book which would make the clergy mad.” Perhaps few books were ever published which they more resented; and, accordingly, numbers among them immediately wrote against it. 'Among the most distinguished of his answerers were, I. “The Rights of the Clergy in the Christian Church asserted in a sermon preached at Newport Pagnell in Buckinghamshire, Sept. 2, 1706, at the primary visitation of the right reverend father in God, William lord bishop of Lincoln; by W. Wotton, B. D.” II. “The second pa/t of the Wolf stripped of Shepherd’s cloa thing, in answer to a late book entitled The Rights of the Christian Church asserted, published at London in March,” 1707. III. “Two treatises, one of the Christian Priesthood, the other of the dignity of the Episcopal Order, formerly written, and npw published to obviate the erroneous opinions, fallacious reasonings, and bold and false assertions, in a late book entitled The Rights of the Christian Church; with a large prefatory discourse, wherein is contained an Answer to the said book; all written by George Hickes, D. D.” London, 1707. IV. “A thorough examination of the false principles and fallacious arguments advanced against the Christian Church, Priesthood, and Religion, in a late pernicious book, ironically entitled The Rights of the Christian Church asserted, &c. in a dialogue between Demas and Hierarcha: humbly offered to the consideration of the nobility and gentry of England; by Samuel Hill, rector of Kilmington, and archdeacon of Wells.” London, 1707, 8vo. V. “Three short treatises, viz. 1. A modest plea for the Clergy, &c. 2. A Sermon of the Sacerdotal Benediction, &c. 3. A Discourse published to undeceive the people in point of Tithes, &c. formerly printed, and now again published, by Dr. George Hickes, in defence of the priesthood and true rights of the church against the slanderous and reproachful treatment of The Rights of the Christian Church,” London, 1709, 8vo. VI. “Adversaria; or truths opposed to some of the falsehoods contained in a book called The Rights of the Christian Church asserted,” c.; by Conyers Place, M. A. London, 1709, 8vo. VII. “A Dialogue between Timothy and Philatheus in which the principles and projects of a late whimsical book entitled The Rights of the Christian Church, &c. are fairly stated, and answered in their kinds, &c. written by a layman,” London, 3 vols. 8vo. Mr. Oldisworth was the author. Swift also wrote “Remarks” on Tindal’s book, which are in his works, but were left unfinished by the author. But, whatever disturbance this work might create at home, and whatever prejudices it might raise against its author, among the clergy of the church of England, some of the protestants abroad judged very differently, and even spoke of it in terms of approbation and applause. Le Clerc gave an account of it in his “Bibliotheque choisie,” which begins in these words: “We hear that this book has made a great noise in England, and it is not at all surprising, since the author attacks, with all his might, the pretensions of those who are called highchurchmen; that is, of those who carry the rights of bishops so far as to make them independent in ecclesiastical affairs of prince and people, and who consider everything that has been done to prevent the dependence of the laity on bishops, as an usurpation of the laics against divine right. I am far from taking part in any particular disputes, which the learned of England may have with one another, concerning the independent power and authority of their bishops, and farther still from desiring to hurt in any way the church of England, which I respect and honour as the most illustrious of all protestant churches; but I am persuaded that the wise and moderate members of this church can never be alarmed at such a book as this, as if the church was actually in danger. I believe the author, as himself says, had no design against the present establishment, which he approves^ but only against some excessive pretensions, which are even contrary to the laws of the land, ana* to the authority of the king and parlialiament. As I do not know, nor have any connection with him, I have no particular interest to serve by defending him, and I do not undertake it. His book is too full of matter for me to give an exact abridgment of it, and they who understand English will do well to read the original: they have never read a book so strong and so supported in favour of the principles which protestants on this side the water hold in common.”

The lower house of convocation, in queen Anne’s reign, thought that such a character of “The Rights of the Christian Church,” &c. from a man of Le Clerc’s reputation for parts and learning, must have no small influence in recommending the book, and in suggesting favourable notions of the principles advanced in it; and therefore, in their representation of the present state of religion, they judged it expedient to give it this turn, namely, “that those infidels” (meaning Tindal and others) “have procured abstracts and commendations of their own profane writings, and probably drawn up by themselves, to be inserted in foreign journals, and that they have translated them into the English tongue, and published them here at home, in order to add the greater weight to their wicked opinions.” Hence a notion prevailed in England, that Le Clerc had been paid for the favourable account he gave of Tindal’s book; upon which he took occasion to declare, in a subsequent journal, that there never was a greater falsehood, and protests as an honest man before God, “that, for making mention of that or any other hook, he had never had either promise or reward.*' It will easily be imagined that, in the course of this controversy, Dr. Tindal’s antagonists would object to him his variableness and mutability in matters of religion, and insult him not a little upon his Hrst apostatizing to the chjirch of Rome, upon the prospect of a national conversion to Popery, and then, at the revolution, reverting to Protestantism. To <his he replied, that” Coming, as most boys do, a rasa tabula to the university, and believing (his country education teaching him no better) that all human and divine knowledge was to be had there, he quickly fell into the then prevailing notions of the high and independent powers of the clergy; and meeting with none, during his long stay there, who questioned the truth of them, they by degrees became so fixed and riveted in him, that he no more doubted of them than of his own being: and he perceived not the consequence of them, till the Roman emissaries (who were busy in making proselytes in the university in king James*s time, and knew how to turn the weapons of high church against them) caused him to see, that, upon these notions, a separation from the church of Rome could not be justified; and that they who pretended to answer them as to those points, did only shuffle, or talk backward and forward. This made him, fur some small time, go to the Popish mass-house; till meeting, upon his going into the world, with people who treated that notion of the independent power as it deserved, and finding the absurdities of Popery to be much greater at hand than they appeared at a distance, he began to examine the whole matter with all the attention he was capable of; and then he quickly found, and was surprised at the discovery, that all his till then undoubted maxims were so far from having any solid foundation, that they were built on as great a contradiction as can be, that of two independent powers in the same society. Upon this he returned, as he had good reason, to the church of England, which he found, by examining into her constitution, disclaimed all that independent power he had been bred up in the belief of; Candlemas 1687-8 being the last time he saw any of the Popish tricks, the very next opportunity (namely, Easter) he publicly received the sacrament (the warden giving it him first) in his college chapel, &c. And thus having made his escape from errors which prejudice of education had drawn him into, he resolved to take nothing on trust for the future; and, consequently, his notions concerning our civil, as well as religious liberties, became very different from those in which he was educated.“What Dr. Tindal says here may be true; yet it is observable, that his conversion to Popery, and re-conversion to Protestantism, lay between February 1685, and February 1688, that is, between the twenty-seventh and thirtieth, year of his age; and many will be ready to suspect, that a man of his reasoning and inquiring turn must, before then, have been too much fixed and settled in his principles, either to be a dupe of Popish missionaries, or then to discover first the absurdity and falsehood of fundamental principles. In the mean time he endeavoured to defend his work, in a” Defence of the Rights of the Christian Church against a late visitation sermon, entitled The Rights of the Clergy in the Christian Church asserted, preached at Newport- Pagnell in the county of Bucks by W. Wotton, B. D. and made public at the command and desire of the bishop of Lincoln, and the clergy of the deaneries of Buckingham and Newport,“London, 1707, in 8vo, and in his” Second Defence of the Rights of the Christian Church, occasioned by two late indictments against a bookseller and his servant for selling one of thf said books. In a Letter from a- gentleman in London to a clergyman in the country. To which are added two tracts of Hugo Grotius on these questions; I. Whether the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper may be administered where there are no pastors? II. Whether it be necessary at all times to communicate with the Symbols? As also some tracts of Mr. John Hales of Eaton, viz. Of the Lord’s Supper, the Power of the Keys, of Schism, &c.“London, 1707, in 8vo. In 1709 he published at London in 8vo, a pamphlet entitled,” New High Church turned old Presbyterian“and in 1710 several pamphlets, viz.” An High Church Catechism;“” The jacobitism, perjury, and popery of High Church Priests;“”The merciful judgments of 'High Church-triumphant on offending clergymen and others in the reign of Charles I.“In 1711 and 1712 he published at London in 8vo,” The Nation vindicated from the aspersions cast on it in a late pamphlet entitled, A representation of the present State of Religion, with regard to the late excessive growth of infidelity, heresy, and profaneness, as it passed the Lower House of convocation,“in two parts. In 1713, and some following years he published several other pamphlets, mostly political, which attracted more or less attention, but are now forgotten. He had hitherto passed for an enemy to the church of England, but was soon determined to show himself equally hostile to revealed religion, and in 1730, published in 4to, his” Christianity as old as the Creation, or the Gospel a Republication of the Religion of Nature.“It might have been expected from the title of this book, that his purpose was to prove the Gospel perfectly agreeable to the law of nature; to prove, that it has set the principles of natural religion in the clearest light, and was intended to publish and confirm it anew, after it had been very much obscured and defaced through the corruption ct mankind. We should be further confirmed in this supposition from his acknowledging, that” Christianity itself, stripped of the additions which policy, mistake, and the circumstances of time, have made to it, is a most holy religion, and that all its doctrines plainly speak themselves to be the will of an infinitely wise and good God:“for this, and several declarations of a similar nature, he makes in his work; and accordingly distinguishes himself and his friends with the title of” Christian Deists.“Yet whoever examines his book attentively will find, that this is only plausible appearance, intended to cover his real design; which was to set aside all revealed religion, by showing, that there neither is, nor can be, any external revelation at all, distinct from what he calls” the external revelation of the law of nature in the hearts of all mankind;“and accordingly his refuters, the most considerable of whom was Dr. Conybeare, afterwards bishop of Bristol, Foster, and Leland, have very justly treated him as a Deist. It appears from a letter written by the rev. Mr. Jonas Proast to Dr. Hickes, and printed in Hickes’s” Preliminary Discourse“cited above, that Tindal espoused this principle very early in life; and that he was known to espouse it long before even his” Rights of the Christian Church" was published. The letter bears date the 2d of July, 1708, and is in the following terms:

"It is now, as I guess, between eleven and twelve years since Dr. Tindal expressed himself to me at All-souls-college in such a manner as I related to Mr. F concerning religion. At which I was the less surprised, because I knew at that time both his own inclination, and what sort of company he frequented when at London, which was usually a great part of the year: but not foreseeing then any occasion there might be for my remembering all that 1 was then said about that matter, I took no care to charge my memory with it. However, it could not be much, having passed in our walking but a very few turns in the college quadrangle just before dinner, where I then unexpectedly met with the doctor, newly returned after a pretty long absence from the college. What occasion the doctor took for so declaring himself, whether the mention of some book or pamphlet then newly come forth, or somewhat else, I am not able at this distance to recollect: but the substance and effect of what he said I do very clearly and distinctly remember to have bee$, that there neither is nor can be any revealed religion; that God has given man reason for his guide; that this guide is sufficient for man’s directions without revelation; and that therefore, since God does nothing in vain, there can be no such thing as revelation: to which he added, that he made no doubt but that within such a number of years as he then mentioned, and I do not now distinctly remember, all men of sense would settle in natural religion. Thus much I do so perfectly remember, that I can attest it, riot with my hand only, as I now do, but upon my oath likewise, if required; which yet I should not so forwardly offer against a person, who, for aught I know, never did any personal injury, were I not convinced of the need there is of it, in respect to some weak persons, who, having entertained too favourable an opinion of the doctor and his principles, are upon that account the more apt to be misled by him.

He died in London, August 16, 1733, fellow of All Souls college, and it appears that the faculties of his mind wore well; for, although he was about seventy-three when he published his “Christianity as old as the Creation,” yet he left a second volume of that work in manuscript, by way of general reply to all his answerers, the publication of which was prevented by Gibson bishop of London. He was, indisputably, a man of great reasoning powers and much learning, but had all the trick and disingenuousness of writers on his side of the question.

He was interred in Clerkenwell church, and was followed, among others, by Eustace Budgell, who is thought to have forged his will, and thus defrauded his nephew, the subject of our next article.

, nephew to the preceding, was born in 1687, and was entered of Exeter college, Oxford, where he took his degree of M. A. in June 1713. He was presented to the rectory of Alverstoke in Hampshire, by the bishop of Winchester, and to the vicarage of Great Waltbam, near Chelmsford, Essex, 1722, by Trinity college, Oxford, of which he had become a fellow. He quitted this last living in 1740, on being presented to the rectory of Colbourne in the Isle of Wight. He had previously, in 1738, being appointed by sir Charles Wager, chaplain to Greenwich hospital, where he died June 27, 1774, at: the advanced age of eighty-seven.

In 1724, he published in monthly numbers, “Antiquities sacred and profane, being a Dissertation on the excellency of the history of the Hebrews above that of any other nation,” &c. a translation from Calmet. He also began a history of Essex, of which he published a small part, in two quarto numbers, proposing to complete it in three quarto volumes, at one guinea each; but left this undertaking, in 1726, for the translation of Rapin’s “History of England,” which has served to perpetuate his name, and was indeed a work of great utility, and success. This translation, originally published in 1726, 8vo, and dedicated to Thomas lord Howard baron of Effingham, was reprinted in weekly numbers, in 1732 and 1733, 2 vols. folio; the first of which was inscribed, in a manly dedication, to Frederick prince of Wales, who rewarded Mr. Tindal with a gold medal worth forty guineas. The second volume of the 8vo edition had been inscribed to sir Charles Wager, when the translator was chaplain on board the Torbay in the Bay of Revel in the Gulph of Finland. Vol. IV. is dedicated to the same, from the same place, 1727. Vol. VI. from Great Waltham, 1728, to the English factors at Lisbon, where the translator officiated as chaplain five months in the absence of Mr. Sims. The “Continuation” was likewise published in weekly numbers, which began in 1744, and was completed March 25, 1747, which is the date of the dedication to the late duke of Cumberland. When the “History” was published, Mr. Tindal was “Vicar of Great Waltham.” In the “Continuation” he is called “Rector of Alverstoke, and chaplain to the royal hospital at Greenwich.” This last was printed in two volumes, but is accompanied with a recommendation to bind it in three; vol. III. to contain the reign and medals of king William; vol. IV. the reign of queen Anne; and vol. V the i\ ign of king George I. with the medals of queen Anne and king George; a summary of the History of England, and the index. A second edition of the “Continuation” appeared in 1751; and anew edition of the whole, in 1757, 21 vols. 8vo. Both in the Translation and Continuation he was materially assisted by Mr. Morant; and the sale of both so far exceeded the expectations of Messrs. Knapton, the booksellers, that they complimented Tindal with a present of 200l. In 1727, he translated the text printed uith Mr. Morant’s translation of the notes of Mess, de Beausobre and L'Enftmt on St. Matthew’s Gospel. On the discovery of the imposition practised on his uncle, he entered into a controversy with Budgell who had cheated him; and published, among other things, a pamphlet entitled “A Copy of the Will of Dr. Matthew Tindal, with an account of what passed concerning the same between Mrs. Lucy Price, Eustace Budgell, esq. and Mr. Nicholas Tindal,” 1733, 8vo. By this will 2000 guineas, and the ms. of a second volume of “Christianity as old as the Creation,” were bequeathed to Mr. Budgell; and only a small residue to his nephew, whom, by a regular will, he had riot long before appointed his sole heir. The transaction is alluded to in the well-known lines of Pope:

Indeed no person at that time seems to have entertained any doubt of the will being a forgery and perhaps Budgeli’s guilt became more obvious from the awkward attempts he made to defend himself in his periodical publication called “The Bee.” Mr. TindaPs last publication was a translation of “Prince Cantemir’s History of the Othmaii Empire,” folio. He was also editor of “A Guide to Classical Learning, or Polymetis abridged, for Schools;” a publication of mueh use, and which has passed through several editions. A portrait of him is prefixed to the second volume of his translation of Rapin. He had been elected a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries in Feb. 1736, but resigned it in June 1740.

, a celebrated Italian painter, called Tintoretto, because he was a dyer’s son, for his real name was Robusti, was born at Venice in 1512. He was a disciple of Titian, who, having observed something extraordinary in his genius, dismissed him from his family, lest he should become his rival. He still, however, pursued Titian’s manner of colouring, as the most natural, and studied Michael Angelo’s style of design, as the most correct. Venice was the place of his constant abode, where he was made a citizen, and wonderfully beloved. He was called the Furious Tintorer, for his bold manner of painting with strong lights and deep shades, and for the rapidity of his genius. Our information respecting his personal history, detached from his public character, is but scanty; we are told that he was extremely pleasant and affable, and delighted so much in painting and music, his beloved studies, that he would hardly suffer himself to taste any other pleasures. He died in 1594, aged eighty-two.

It might be wished, says Mr. Fuseli, whose elaborate opinion of Tintoretto, we shall now transcribe, that the mean jealousy of Titian, and its meaner consequence, the expulsion of Tintoretto from his school, had been less authenticated. What has been said of Milton, that at certain periods he was but one of the people, might be true of Titian whenever he was not before his canvas. Folly, always a principal, if not the chief, ingredient in the character of jealousy and ambition, generally runs into the extremes it wishes to avoid, and accelerates the effects it labours to repress. The genius of Tintoretto was not to be circumscribed by the walls of his master’s study; and to one who, under his eye, had the hardiness to think, and to choose for himself what he should adopt or not of his method, dismission was in fact emancipation. He now boldly aimed at erecting himself into the head of a new school, which should improve the principles of that established by Titian, and supply its defects: he wrote over the door of his apartment, “the design of Michael Angelo and the colour of Titian;” and this vast idea, the conception of an ardent and intrepid mind, he strove to substantiate by a course of studies equally marked by discretion and obstinate perseverance. The day was given to Titian, the night to Michael Angelo. The artificial light of the lamp taught him those decided masses, that energy of chiaroscuro, which generally stamps each group and single figure in his works. Whether he enjoyed the personal friendship of Michael Angelo (as Dot* tari thinks) may be doubted; that he procured casts from his statues, and copies from his frescoes, is evident from the incredible number of his designs after the former, and the various imitations and hints with which his works abound, from the latter. He modelled in wax and clay, and studied anatomy and the life to make himself master of the body, its proportions, its springs of motion, its foreshortenings, and those appearances which the 1 Italians distinguish by the phrase of “di sotto in su.” Add to this, exuberant fertility of ideas, glowing fancy, and the most picturesque eye; and what results might not have been expected from their union with such methods of study, had uniformity of pursuit, and equal diligence in execution, attended his practice?

But if Tintoretto, when he chose to exert his power, was equal to the greatest names, it is to be lamented with Agost. Caracci that he was too often inferior to himself, when, goaded on by the rage of doing singly the work of all, perverted by a false ornamental principle, and debauched by unexampled facility of execution, he gave himself neither time to conceive, to judge, or to finish; when, content to snatch a whim if it had novelty, he turned his subject into a farce, or trampled its parts into undistinguished masses, and sacrificed min;!, design, character, and sense, to incongruous imagery, fugitive effect, and puerile allurements: it was in such a fit that, in the “Temptation of the Desert,” he placed Christ on a tree; hid him in a crowd in the picture of the “Pool of Bethesda;” and in another turned the “Salutation of the Virgin” into profane irruption. It has already been observed that Tintoretto was a learned designer, but his style was rather muscular and robust than select and characteristic; in his male forms we every where recognize the Venetian model: the gondoliers of the canal furnished his heroes and apostles with limbs and attitudes, In his females he aimed at something ideal; the ruling principle of their forms is agility, though they are often too slender for action, and too contrasted for grace. The principle of dispatch which generally ruled him, equally influenced his colour. Now he gives us all the impasto the juice and glow of Titian; now little more than a chiaroscuro tinged with fugitive glazings. The dark primings which he is said to have preferred, as they assisted his effects, perhaps accelerated the ruin of his tints. In his touch, if he was ever equalled, he certainly has never been excelled; his work as a whole and in parts seems to have been done at once.

Tintoretto had a son and a daughter, who both excelled in the art of painting; Marietta, the daughter, particularly. She was so well instructed by her father in his own profession, as well as in music, that in both arts she acquired great reputation; and was especially eminent for an admirable style in portraits. She married a German, and died in 1590, aged thirty, equally lamented by her husband and father; and so much beloved by the latter, that he never would consent she should leave him, though she had been invited by the emperor Maximilian, by Philip II. king of Spain, and several other princes, to their courts.

Dominico, his son, gave great hopes in his youth, that he would one day render the name of Tintoretto yet more illustrious than his father had made it; but, neglecting to cultivate by study the talent which nature had given him, he fell short of what was expected from him. 4 He was more considerable for portraits than historical compositions; and died in 1637, aged seventy-five.

, Earl of Worcester, a patron of learning, and one of the few literary ornaments of England in the fifteenth century, was born at Everton, or Eversten, in Cambridgeshire, and educated at Baliol college, Oxford. He was son of the lord Tibetot, or Tiptoft, and Powys, and was created a viscount and earl of Worcester by king Henry VI. and appointed lord deputy of Ireland. By Edward IV. he was made knight of the garter, and constituted justice of North Wales for life. Dugdale says, he was soon after made constable of the Tower for life, and twice treasurer of the king’s exchequer, but other historians say he was twice lord high constable, and twice lord treasurer: the first time, according to Lud. Carbo, at twenty-five years old; and again deputy of Ireland for the duke of Clarence. But whatever dispute there may be about his titles in the state, there is no doubt that he was eminently at the head of literature, and so masterly an orator, that he drew tears from the eyes of pope Pius II. otherwise Æneas Sylvius, a munificent patron of letters. This was on pronouncing an oration before the pontiff when he visited Rome, through a curiosity of seeing the Vatican library, after he had resided at Padua and Venice, and made great purchases of books. He is said to have given Mss. tonne value of 500 marks to duke Humphrey’s library at Oxford. He was about this time on his return from a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, which expedition is partly attributed to the suspence of his lordship’s mind between gratitude to king Henry and loyalty to king Edward; but he seems not to have been much influenced by the former, in the opinion of lord Orford. It is certain that Richard Nevil, earl of Warwick, did not ascribe much gratitude to him, nor did Worcester confide much in any merit of that sort; for, absconding during the short restoration of Henry, and being taken concealed in a tree in Wey bridge-forest in Huntingdonshire, he was brought to London, accused of cruelty in his administration of Ireland, particularly towards two infant sons of the earl of D^mon.il, and condemned and beheaded at the Tower in 1470. For his imputed offences, some authors are inclined to allow a foundation, but in these turbulent times malice and political intrigue are supposed to have frequently had a share in fallen greatness. Pennant, however, is of opinion that all his love for the sciences did not protect him from imbibing the temper of the unhappy times he lived in.

Caxton, who was his printer, says that he “in his tyme flowred in vertue and cunnyng, and to whom he knew none lyke emong the lordes of the temporalite in science and moral vertue.” He translated “Cicero de Amicitia,” and “Two Declarations made by Publius Cornelius Scipio, and Gayus Flamyneus, competitors for the love of Lucrece,” which he dedicated to Edward IV. He also wrote some other orations and epistles, and Englished “Ceaser’s Commentaries, as touching British affairs,” published without the name of printer, place, or date, but supposed to be printed by Rastell, from its type. The margin contains the original Latin in Roman character. In the reign of Edward IV. he drew up “Orders for placing the nobility in all proceedings,” and “Orders and Statutes for justs and triumphs,” both Mss. in the Cotton library. In the Ashmolean collection are “Ordinances, statutes, and rules, made by John Tiptoft, earle of Worcester, and constable of England, by the king’s commandment, at Windsor, to be observed in all manner of justes of peirs within the realm of England, &c.” These ordinances were again revived in the 4th of> Elizabeth, and are printed in Mr. Park’s edition of Harrington’s “Nugge Antique.” He is also said to have written “A petition against the Lollards,” and an “Oration to the citizens of Padua” In the Mss. belonging to the cathedral of Lincoln, lord Orford mentions a volume of some twenty epistles, of which four are written by our earl, and the rest addressed to him; but the late MrGough, after a careful search, could not find them in that collection.

, one of the most valuable Italian writers of the last century, was born at Bergamo, in the Venetian states, Dec. Js, 1731. He was sent to the Jesuits’ college at Monza; and when his course of education was completed in 1746, he entered into the order of that society. In 1754, when in his twenty-third year, he was appointed preceptor of grammar, and afterwards of rhetoric, in the college of Brera, in Milan. In that station, in 1755, he republished, for the use of his pupils, the well-known vocabulary of his late colleague, father Mandosio, “Vocabolorio Italiano e Latino del P. Mandosio accrescinto e corretto” and, from 1756 to 1760, he wrote several orations and other fugitive pieces, in which inight be perceived the bent of his mind towards civil and literary history. Of these Fabroni mentions only one as having been published, “DePatriae Oratio,” Milan, 1759. During his professorship he was appointed assistant keeper of the copious and valuable library of the college of Brera, and began to collect original and curious records from printed books and manuscripts. His knowledge of books had already recommended him to the esteem of the illustrious count Firaiian, then Austrian plenipotentiary in Lombardy; and it is not improbable that he might have a share in the compilation of the catalogue of the vast and curious library of that justly renowned patron of letters, which was afterwards printed at Milan in 1783, in nine parts or volumes, 4to.

The first remarkable work of Tiraboschi, and that which procured him a great reputation, was his “Vetera H.umiliatorum monumenta annotationibus ac dissertationibus, prodromis illustrata,” Milan, 1766, 3 vols. 4to; a work which throws much light on the ecclesiastical, civil, and literary history of the middle ages. -Soon after this publication, he was appointed librarian of the ducal library at Modena, to which he accordingly removed in 1770, and in the following year published the first volume of his justly celebrated “History of Italian Literature,” which was continued by successive publications, and the twelfth and last volume Appeared in 17 8:2. The plan of this woik was very extensive; schools, academies, museums, libraries, printing-offices, travellers, patrons, collectors, artists, and, in short, whatever was directly or indirectly connected with the history of the sciences and literature in Italy, had their appropriate places in this elaborate undertaking, in which, it has been ju^lysaid, that the author discovers uncommon penetration, prodigious learning, great industry, a refined spiru oi criticism, with much facility of composition and elegance of style. Its importance was therefore soon felt ah over Europe. In ttie same order as they appeared at Motlc-na, the sexcral volumes were soon republished in Florence, Home, and Naples; two abridgments also were made of the work, one in France, by Landi, another in Germany; and the literary reviews in every part of Europe seemed to want words to express their applause. Among other effects, not very remote, this work has tended to revive, in this country, a taste for Italian literature, which has been successfully cultivated of late years by Messrs. Matthias, Roscoe, and others. Mr. Matthias, it is weil known, has lately republished what regards Italian poetry, from Tiraboschi, in four volumes, judiciously divided into seven chapters the first of these explains the common principles of Italian and Provencalpoetry the second relates the state and vicissitudes of the Provencal poetry from the year 1183 to 1300; the third gives the progress of Italian poetry during the same period; the fourth exhibits its history from 1300 to 1400; the fifth, a similar account of the improvements which took place from 1400 to 1,500; and the sixth and seventh are devoted to the description of the two subsequent periods from 1500 to 1600, and from 1600 to 1700, the latterof which constituted the limits of Tiraboschi' s general history. This elegant work is a suitable companion to Mr. Matthias’s former publications, his “Select Sonnets and Canzonets” from Petrarch; his “Lyric Productions of the most celebrated poets of Italy,” and his new edition of Crescembini.

Tiraboschi’s work encountered some criticisms during the progress of publication; and it would not be surprizing to find many blemishes in such a vast undertaking. Of these criticisms, where just, he availed himself in his second edition, but entered into no controversy, unless with the Spanish ex-Jesuit Lampillas. Tiraboschi was of opinion, that the Spaniards had been greatly instrumental in the corruption of taste in Italy; and on this principle he had, in his work, severely criticised Martial, Seneca, and Lucan, all Spaniards by birth. This excited the patriotic zeal of some of the Spanish ex- Jesuits settled in Italy, and especially of Lampillas, who wrote an “Apologetic Essay on Spanish Literature,” which Tiraboschi answered.

Before this great work had been completed, Tiraboschi began his “Modenese Library,” or memoirs of the Modenese writers, in 6 vols. 4to, the last of which appeared in 1786. This work alone might have secured him the reputation of one of the ablest bibliographers in Europe; but unfortunately, for the sake of rendering it more complete, he joined to it, in the sixth volume, several notices of painters, sculptors, engravers, architects, and even musicians, born in that state, and as he possessed neither accurate information, nor a sound judgment on these subjects, his work, in this part, proved notoriously defective. While it was in progress, he published the “History of the celebrated abbey of Nonantula,” 2 vols. fol. His last voluminous work.was the “Memorie Storiche Modanesi,” 3 vols. 1793, 4to, containing a judicious collection of records relative to the bishops of Modena and Reggio, to the family of Pio, lords of Carpi, and that of Pico, princes of Mirandula. These works met with public approbation; but that, from the nature of the subjects, must be supposed limited to his own country.

It was likewise during the same interval that he was promoted to higher literary and even civil honours, both by the duke and the city of Modena. In 1780 the duke appointed him superintendant of the cabinet of medals, and gave him the order of knighthood-, and in 1781 the city sent him the diploma of Modenese nobility, and declared him one of the conservatori, with as many prerogatives and privileges as were enjoyed by the natives themselves. The city of Bergamo also, in 1785, ordered that his portrait, with a proper inscription, should be placed in the hall of the great council. It is almost superfluous to add, that during the same period he was nominated a member of the most distinguished academies in Italy. It is seldom that literary merit is so amply rewarded, but his country owed him much, for no man had done so much for its honour. His last labours were 011 a new edition of his “History of Italian Literature,” published at Modena from 1787 to 1794, 15 vols. 4to, the only one which is novr complete. This immediately preceded his death, at Modena, June 3. 1794, in the sixty-third year of his age.

His death was highly regretted by every friend of learning. After a solemn funeral, performed in the ducal church of St. Dominic, his remains were transferred to the parish church of St. Faustina, in the suburbs, in which a monument was erected by his heirs. His moral character is said to have been worthy of his literary fame. He left behind him some manuscript writings, and had maintained an extensive correspondence with some of the most eminent among his contemporaries, all whose letters were digested by him in twenty-eight volumes, which are said to be full of valuable matter.

, or Tiraquellus, a learned French lawyer of the sixteenth century, was a native of Poitou, and became a counsellor in the parliament of Bour­*Jeaux, and afterwards in that of Paris. He laboured very diligently to drive chicanery from the bar, and being employed by Francis I. and Henry II. in many affairs of consequence, approved himself in all things a man of strict and singular integrity. Though he must have been much employed in public business, he was so diligent with his pen that his works amount to seven volumes in folio. Frank. 1597. Tiraqueau died, at a very advanced age, in 1574. Among his numerous works, those particularly noticed are, 1. “Commentaries on Alexander ab Alexandro,” published separately, in two volumes folio, Leyden, 1673. 2. “Commentarius de Nobilitate et jure primogenitorum,” Leyden, 1617, folio. He was a married man, and it is said that he produced a book and a child every year, till there were twenty of each, or as some say thirty. This, with the circumstance of his being a water-drinker, occasioned the following jocular epitaph: “Hie jacet, qui aquam bibendo viginti liberos suscepit, viginti libros edidit. Si merum bibisset, totum orbem implevisset.”

, called IL Garofalo, an Italian artist, was born at Ferrara in 1481. He left his masters at Ferrara and Cremona, to go to Home, where he entered the school of Raphael. He imitated his design, the character of his faces, the expression, and much of his colour, though he added something of a more inflamed and stronger cast derived from the Ferrarese school. His pictures of evangelic subjects abound at Home, Bologna, and other cities of Italy; they are of different merit, and not painted all by him. His large pictures, many of which are in the Chigi gallery, are more genuine and more singular. The visitation of Mary in the palace Doria, is one of the master-pieces in the collection. Tisi used to mark his pictures with a painted violet, which the vulgar in Italy call Garofalo, a flower allusive to his name. It does not appear from Vasari, and others, that Garofalo had any share in the works which were executed by the scholars of Raphael under his direction. He returned to Ferrara, and became the head of that school, and died there in 1559, aged seventy-eight.

, the great master of colour, was born at the castle of Caclor in Friuli, 1480. His education under Sebastiano Zuccati, of Trevigi, and afterwards under Giovanni Bellini, rendered him a diligent and subtle observer of every object that strikes the senses: so that when at a inaturer age he entered into a competition of finish with Albert Durer, and painted at Ferrara the picture of “Christ with the tribute-mon^y,” now at Dresden, he excelled, in nicety of penciling, that master of minuteness; with this difference of result, that though the hairs on the heads and hands of his figures might be counted, though every pore of the flesh was discriminated, and the objects reflected in the pupils of the eyes, the effect of the whole was not diminished, but seemed to gain more breath and grandeur by distance. To this work, however, he made no companion, and at an early period appears to have adopted that freer and less anxious method found by Giorgioue, his. fellow-scholar first, and then his rival. Some portraits painted by Titian during that short period cannot be distinguished from those of Giorgione himself; but he soon found a new style, perhaps less vapoury, not so fiery nor so grand; but sweeter a style which ravishes the beholder less by the novelty of its effect than by a genuine representation of truth. The first work of this style, all his own, is the “Archangel Raphael leading Tobiah, in the sacristy of S. Marziale,” painted in his thirtieth year; and the “Presentation of the Virgin” at the Carita, one of his richest and most numerous compositions remaining (for many perished by fire), is said by Ridolft to have followed it at a very short interval.

To no coiourist, before or after him, did Nature unveil herself with that dignified familiarity in which she appeared to Titian. His organ, universal, and equally fit for all her exhibitions, rendered her simplest to her most compound appearances with equal purity and truth. He penetrated the essence and the general principle of the substances before him, and on these established his theory of colour. He invented that breadth of local tint which no imitation has attained; by taking the predominant quality of colour in an object, for the whole, painting flesh which abounded in demitints, entirely in demitints; and depriving of all demitints, what had but few. He first expressed the negative nature of shade. Perfect master of contrast, of warm and cold tints, he knew by their balance, diffusion, and recall, to tone the whole. His are the charms of glazing, and the mystery of reflexes, by which he detached, rounded, connected, or enriched, his objects. He was the first who changed stuffs to drapery, gave it local value, and a place, subordination, and effect. His harmony is less indebted to the force of light and shade, than to true gradation of tone. His tone springs out of his subject, grave, solemn, gay, minacious, or soothing. His eye tinged Nature with gold, without impairing her freshness. She dictated his scenery. Landscape, whether it be considered as the transcript of a spot, or the rich combination of congenial objects, or as the scene of a phenomenon, as subject and as back-ground, dates, if not its origin, its real value, from him. He is the father of portrait-painting; of resemblance with form, character with dignity, grace with simplicity, and costume with taste.

In design Titian had a style, and in composition and expression occasionally excelled, though on the whole they were little more for him than vehicles of colour. That he possessed the theory of the human frame, needs not to be proved from the doubtful designs which he is said to hare furnished for the anatomical work of Vesalio; that he had familiarised himself with the line of Michael Angelo, and burned with ambition to emulate it, is less evident from adopting some of his attitudes in the pictures of “Pietro Martire,” and the battle of Ghiaradadda, than from the elemental conceptions, the colossal style, and daring foreshortenings, which astonish on the cieling of the Salute. In general, however, his male forms have less selection than sanguine health; often too fleshy for character, Jess elastic than muscular, and vigorous without grandeur. His females are the fair, dimpled, Venetian race, soft without delicacy, too full for elegance, for action too plump. Titian was abundantly honoured in his life-time. He made three several portraits of the emperor Charles V. who honoured him with knighthood, created him count palatine, made all his descendants gentlemen, and assigned him a considerable pension out of the chamber at Naples. The respect of Charles V. for Titian was as great as that of Francis I. for Leonardo da Vinci; and many particulars of it are recorded. It is said, that the emperor one day took up a pencil, which fell from the hand of this artist, who was then drawing his picture; and that, upon the compliment which Titian made him on this occasion, he replied, “Titian has merited to be served by Caesar.” And when some lords of the emperor’s court, not being able to conceal their jealousy of the preference he gave of Titian’s person and conversation to that of all his other courtiers, the emperor freely told them, “that he could never want courtiers, but could not have Titian always with him.” Accordingly, he heaped riches on him; and whenever he sent him money, which was usually a large sum, it was with the compliment, that “his design was not to pay him the value of his pictures, because they were above any price.” He painted also his son Philip II. Soliman emperor of the Turks, two popes, three kings, two empresses, several queens, and almost all the princes of Italy, together with the famous Ariosto and Peter Aretine, who were, his intimate friends. Nay, so great was the name and reputation of Titian, that there was hardly a person of any eminence then living in Europe, from whom he did not receive some particular mark of esteem: and his house at Venice was the constant rendezvous of all the virtuosi and people of the best quality. That he had his weaknesses, we have already noticed in our account of Tintoretto. He was so happy in the constitution of his body, that he had never been sick till 1576 and then he died of the plague, at the extraordinary age of ninety-nine. It has been remarked that we have many instances of the longevity of painters. Ninety is an extraordinary age for any man, but Spinello lived beyond it. Carlo Cignani died at ninetyone; Titian at the same age; M. Ang. Buonarotti at ninety; Leonardo da Vinci at seventy-five; Calabrese at eighty-six; Claude Lorraine at eighty-two; Carlo Maratti at eighty-eight, and prodigious numbers of eminent painters from sixty upwards.

Titian left behind him two sons and a brother, of whom Pomponio, the eldest, obtained preferment in the church. Horatio, the youngest, painted several portraits, which might stand in competition with those of his father. He was celebrated also for many history pieces, which he painted at Venice, in concurrence with Paul Veronese and Tintoret. But bewitched at last with chemistry, and the hopes of finding the philosopher’s stone, he laid aside the pencil; and having reduced what he got by his father to nothing, died of the plague in the same year with him. Francesco Vecelli, Titian’s brother, was trained to arms in the Italian wars; but peace being restored, applied himself afterwards to painting. He became so great a proficient in it, that Titian grew jealous of him; and fearing, lest in time he should eclipse his reputation, sent him upon pretended business to Ferdinand king of the Romans. Afterwards he followed another profession, and made cabinets of ebony adorned with figures; which, however, did not hinder him from painting now and then a portrait far a friend.

, a polite scholar, was born in 1700, and received his education at Westminster- school, where he was much befriended by bishop Atterbury, who chose him for his son’s tutor, in which capacity he resided in the bishop’s family about the time of the supposed plot in 1722. From Westminster Mr. Titley went off to Trinitycollege, Cambridge, in 1719, in which he for many years held the lay-fellowship founded for a civilian. He was early in life sent envoy extraordinary to the court of Copenhagen, where he died Feb. 1768, after a long residence, very highly esteemed on account of his many amiable qualilies. Of his productions as an author, which were rather little elegant trifles than elaborate performances, a good specimen may be seen in his celebrated “Imitation of Horace,*' book IV. Ode 2. And some of his Latin \erses are in the” Reliquiae. Galeanae.“He bequeathed iOOo/. to Westminster-school, Iooo/. to Trinity-college, Cambridge, and Iooo/. to the university of Cambridge, part of which was to be applied to the public buildings. This sum in 1768, when sir James Marriot, master of Trinity-hall, was vice-chancellor, was voted to erect a music-room, of which a plan was engraved to solicit a further aid from contributions, but failed of success. It would have given us pleasure to have given more particular memoirs of this ingenious gentleman, of whom so little has yet been said. Bishop Newton characterises him, among his contemporaries at Westminster, as” a very ingenious young man, at first secretary to the embassy at Turin, afterwards for many years his majesty’s envoy to the court of Denmark. During the time that he was a king’s scholar, he lived with bishop Atterbury as tutor to his son, and his taste and learning were much improved by the bishop’s conversation. His plan of life, as laid down by himself, was, to prosecute his studies at Cambridge till he should be thirty, from thirty to sixty to be employed in public business, at sixty to retire and return to college, for which purpose he would keep his fellowship. This plan he nearly pursued; he kept his fellowship; he resigned his public employment; but, instead of returning to college, where in a great measure there was a new society, and few or none were left of* his own age and standing, he remained at Copenhagen, where, by his long residence, he was in a manner naturalized, and there lived and died, greatly respected and lamented by all ranks of people."

, the projector of a French Parnassus, was the son of one of the king’s secretaries, and born at Paris in 1677. He studied at the Jesuits’ college in Paris, where he acquired a taste for the belles lettres that predominated during the whole of his life. Being destined for the military profession, he had in his fifteenth year a company of 100 fuzileers, which bore his name; and was afterwards a captain of dragoons. After the peace of Ryswick, he purchased the place of maitre d‘hotel to the dauphiness, the mother of Louis XV. Losing this situation at her death, he took a trip to Italy, and there improved his taste in painting, of which he was esteemed a connoisseur. On his return he was appointed provincial commissary at war, an office in which he conducted himself with uncommon generosity. His attachment to Louis XIV. and his admiration of the men of genius of that monarch’s time, induced him, in 1708, to project a Parnassus, in bronze, to commemorate the glories of his sovereign, and the genius of the most celebrated poets and musicians. This was no hasty performance, however, for he did not complete his plan before 1713. This Parnassus was nothing else than a mountain, with a good elevation, on which appeared Louis XIV. in the character of Apollo, crowned with laurels, and holding a lyre in his hand. Beneath him were the three French graces, madame de la Suze, madame des Houlieres, and mademoiselle de Scuderi. Round this Parnassus was a grand terras, on which were eight poets and a musician; namely, Peter Corneille, Moliere, Racan, Segrais, La Fontaine, Chapelle, Racine, Boileau, and Lully. Inferior poets were commemorated by medallions. Boileau is said to have been Tillet’s adviser in some part of this scheme, and, his biographer says, it were to be wished that celebrated poet had likewise advised him as to the selection of those on whom he was conferring immortality. His next object was to get this Parnassus erected in some public place or garden. He proposed the scheme therefore to Desforts, the minister then at the head of the ’finances, and asked only, by way of bonus, the place of farmer-general; but Desforts contented himself with praising his disinterestedness. Disappointed in this, he published, in 1727, a description of his work under the title of “Le Parnasse Francois,” 1732, fol. and afterwards three supplements, the last in 1760, containing the lives of the poets down to the last date; but the grand scheme remained unexecuted. Titon, who is represented as a generous patron of literary merit, died Dec. 26, 1762, at the advanced age of eighty- five. Besides the description of his Parnassus, he published an “Essai sur les honneurs accordés aux Savaiis,” 12mo.

, generally known by his assumed name Ravisius Textor, was lord of Ravisy, in the district of Nivernois, whence he took the former of his latinized names. He was esteemed as a scholar in his own time, which was the commencement of the sixteenth century, and taught polite literature in the college of Navarre, at Paris, with considerable success. He died in 1522, and, as some say, in great poverty. His writings were chiefly, if not entirely, in Latin; and there are extant of them, 1. “Epistles,” Lyons, 1569, 8vo. 2. “Dialogues,” Rott. 1651, 12mo, published also with the epistles. 3. “Epigrams,” 4. “Epithetorum Opus,” Bas. 1592, 4to. There is an epitome of this work published at London in 1657, 12mo. 5. “Expositio Nominum.” 6. An edition of the “Opera Scriptorurn de claris Mulieribus,” Paris, 1651, fol. This, however, as is evident, must have been a republication from his edition.

, a learned Italian meteorologist, was born in 1719, at Pianez^a, in Vincenza, and educated at Padua, where he took a degree as doctor of theology, but was principally attached to mathematical studies. He obtained in the mean time some ecclesiastical preferment, and in 1762 was appointed professor of astronomy and meteorology in the university of Padua, where his talents were well known. Here he procured an observatory to be built, which was completed in 1774, and furnished with some instruments from England. About three years after, he was elected an honorary member of our royal society, and had contributed some articles to the Philosophical Transactions. He was first known throughout Europe by an ingenious work on the influence of the heavenly bodies on the weather and atmosphere, “Delia vera Influenza,” &c. 1770, 4to, and became afterwards yet more known by his “Meteorological Journal,” which he began in 1773, and continued till his death. His reputation was afterwards extended by a variety of publications, separate, or in the literary Journals, on meteorological subjects, of which Fabroni has given a large list. He died in Nov. 1797, in the seventy-ninth year of his age, and his private character is said to have been no less estimable than his public.

, D.D. a learned English divine, was born in 1658, at Blencow in Cumberland, became a poor scholar of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1672, and when B. A. taberdar of that house. He was elected fellow of University college, Dec. 23, 1678; and proceeding M. A. July 2, 1679, became chaplain to Dr. Smith, bishop of Carlisle. He was appointed one of the four canon residentiaries of Carlisle, in 1635; and the same year obtained the vicarage of Stanwix, which he resigned in 1688. He accumulated the degrees of B. and D. D. Dec. 12, 1692. By a petition presented to the House of Commons by Dr. Todd, requesting to be heard by counsel before the bill “to dvoid doubts and questions touching statutes, &c.” should pass, it appears that “the bishop of Carlisle (Dr. Nicolson) had cited the dean and chapter before him in his visitation held at Carlisle in September 1707, and exhibited articles tof inquiry against them; and the petitioner appeared, and entered his protest against the bishop’s power, being informed, the right of local visitor was in the crown; but the said bishop, in an illegal manner, suspended the petitioner ab officio et beneficio, and afterwards excommunicated him.” The apprehensions of Dr. Todd were, that, if the bill should pass, it would “subject him to further inquiries and arbitrary censures of the bishop in his visitations.” The bill passed the Commons, with some amendments, March 17, and received the royal assent March 20, 1708. He resigned his residentiaryship in 1720, which was then given to Dr. Tullie, and died vicar of Penrith in 1728. He was also rector of Arthuret at the time of his death. His publications are, “The description of Sweden,” 1680, folio; “An Account of a Salt-spring and another medicinal spring on the banks of the river Weare, or Ware, in the bishopric of Durham,” 1684, Phil. Trans. No. 163; and “The Life of Phocion,” 1684. He left also in ms “Notitia EcclesiiE Cathedralis Carliolensis una cum Catalogo Priorum, dum Conventualis erat, & Decanorum & Canonicorum quum Collegiata. Notitia Prioratus de Wedderhall cum Catalogo omnium Benefactorum qui ad ambas has sacras Ædes stfuendas, dotandas, & ornandas, pecuniam, terras & ornamenta, vel aliqua alia beneficia, pie & munifice contulerunt.” These two were written in 1688, and dedicated by the author to the dean and chapter of Carlisle. They are now in the Lambeth library. He left also in ms. “A History of the Diocese of Carlisle, containing an. account of the Parishes, Abbeys, Nunneries, Churches, Monuments, Epitaphs, Coats of Arms, Founders, Benefactors, &c. with a perfect catalogue of the Bishops, Priors, Deans, Chancellors, Arch-deacons, Prebendaries, and of all Rectors and Vicars of the several Parishes in the said Diocese,” 1689. He was also one of the translators of Plutarch’s Morals, and of Cornelius Nepos. By Ballard’s ms letters in the Bodleian library it appears, that Dr. Todd sent achartulary of Fountains Abbey to the University college library and that he was solicited by Dr. Hickes to assist in publishing some Saxon books .

, an English writer, one of the founders of modern Deism, was born Nov. 30, 1669, in the most northern peninsula of Ireland, in the isthmus of which stands Londonderry. His Christian name was Janus funius; but, the boys at school making a jest of it, the master ordered him to be called John, which name he retained ever after. Some say he was of a good family, but that his parents were Papists. This last particular we learn from himself; for he tells us, that he “was educated from his cradle in the grossest superstition and idolatry; but God was pleased to make his own reason, and such as made use of theirs, the happy instruments of his conversion for he was not sixteen years old when he became as zealous against Popery, as he ever since continued.” Others have affirmed, that his father was a Popish priest; and this seems to be the general opinion, although one of his biographers has somewhat hardily asserted, that “the contrary is notorious, and has been proved.”

From the school at Redcastle near Londonderry, he went in 1687 to the college of Glasgow in Scotland; and, after three years stay there, visited the university of Edinburgh, where he was created master of arts in June 1690, and received the usual diploma or certificate from the professors. He then went back to Glasgow, where he made but a short ttay, and intended to have returned to Ireland; but he altered his mind, and came into England, “where, he tells us, he lived in as good Protestant families as any in the kingdom, till he went to the famous university of Leyden in Holland, to perfect his studies.” There he was generously supported by some eminent Dissenters in England, who had conceived great hopes from his uncommon parts, and might flatter themselves that in time he would be serviceable to them in the quality of a minister; for he had lived in their communion ever since he forsook Popery, as he himself owns in effect in his “Apology.” In 1692, Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Daniel Williams, a very eminent Dissenting minister, having published a book entitled “Gospel truth stated and vindicated,” Mr. Toland sent it to the author of the “Bibliotheque universelle,” and desired him to give an abstract of it in that journal: at the same time he related to him the history of that book, and of the controversy it referred to. The journalist complied with his request (vol. XXIII); and to the abstract of Mr. Williams’ s book he prefixed the letter he received from Mr. Toland, whom he styles “student in divinity.”

After having remained about two years at Leyden, he came back to England, and soon after went to Oxford, where, besides the conversation of learned men, he had the advantage of the public library. He collected materials upon various subjects, and composed some pieces; among others, a Dissertation to prove the received history of the tragical death of Regulus, a fable; the substance, however, of which he owns he took from Palmerius, who had examined the subject in his “Observationes in optimos fere Authores Graecos.” Toland began likewise a work of greater consequence, in which he undertook to show, that there are no mysteries in the Christian religion; but he left Oxford in 1695, before it was finished, and went to London, where he published it the next year in 12mo with this title, “Christianity not mysterious: or, a treatise shewing, that there is nothing in the Gospel contrary to reason, nor above it, and that no Christian doctrine can be properly called a mystery.” For the foundation of this proposition, Mr. Toland defines mystery, as ha says it is always used in the New Testament, to be a thing intelligible in itself, but which could not be known without a special revelation; contending, as those do who have since called themselves rational Christians, that there is nothing in the New Testament either against or above reason. His treatise was no sooner abroad, than the public were very much alarmed, and several books came out against it. It was even presented by the grand-jury of Middlesex; but, as usual, without any effect in preventing the sale.

This book being sent by the London booksellers into Ireland, made no less noise there than it had made in England; and the clamour wa much increased when he went thither himself in 1697. Many particulars concerning this affair are related in the correspondence hetween Mr. Locke and Mr. Molyneux, which will serve also to illustrate the temper and character of Toland himself, who was certainly a very extraordinary man. In a letter, dated Dublin, April the 6th, 1697, Mr. Molyneux writes thus to Mr. Locke: “In my last to you, there was a passage relating to the author of * Christianity not mysterious.' I did not then think that he was so near me as within the bounds of this city; but I find since that he is corne over hither, and have bad the favour of a visit from him. I now understand, as I intimated to you, that he was born in this country; but that he hath been a great while abroad, and his education was for some time under the great Le Clerc. But that for which I can never honour him too much, is his acquaintance and friendship to you, and the respect which on all occasions he expresses for you. I propose a great deal of satisfaction in his conversation: I take him to be a candid free thinker, and a good scholar. But there is a violent sort of spirit that reigns here, which begins already to shew itself against him; and, I believe, will increase daily; for I 6nd the clergy alarmed to a mighty degree against him; and last Sunday he had his welcome to this city, by hearing himself harangued against out of the pulpit, by a prelate of this country.” In a letter, dated May the 3d, Mr. Locke replies to Mr. Molyneux: “I am glad to hear that the gentleman does me the favour to speak well of me on that side the water; I never deserved *tfoer of him, but that he should always have done so on this. If his exceeding great value of himself do not deprive the world of that usefulness that his parts, if rightly conducted, might be of, I shall be very glad. I always value men of parts and learning, and I think I cannot do too much in procuring them friends and assistance: but there may happen occasions that may make one stop one’s hand; and it is the hopes young men give, of what use they will make of their parts, which is to me the encouragement of being concerned for them: but if vanity increases with age, I always fear, whither it will lead a man. I say this to you, because you are my friend, for whom I have no reserves, and think 1 ought to talk freely, where you inquire, and possibly may be concerned; but I say it to you alone, and desire it may go no farther. For the man I wish very well, and could give you, if it needed, proofs that I do so, and therefore I desire you to be kind to him; but I must leave it to your prudence in what way, and how far. If his carriage with you gives you the promises of a steady useful man, I know you will be forward enough of yourself, and I shall be very glad of it; for it will be his fault alone, if he prove not a very valuable man, and have not you for his friend.” Mr. Molyneux thanks Mr. Locke for these hints concerning Mr. Toland, in a letter -dated May the 27th, and says, that “they perfectly agree with the apprehensions he had conceived of him. Truly,” says he, “to be free, I do not think his management, since he came into this city, has been so prudent. He has raised against him the clamours of all parties; and this not so much by his difference of opinion, as by his unseasonable way of discoursing, propagating, and maintaining it. Coffee-houses and public tables are not proper places for serious discourses, relating to the most important truths: but when also a tincture of vanity appears in the whole cours.e of a man’s conversation, it disgusts many that may otherwise have a due value for his parts and learning.-. Mr. ToJand also takes here a great liberty on all occasions, to vouch your patronage and friendship, which makes many, that rail at him, rail also at you. I believe you will not approve of this, as far as I am able to judge, by your shaking him off, in your letter to the bishop of Worcester.” The reader is requested to keep in mind these early discoveries of Toland’s vanity. They unfold his whole character. Vanity was predominant with him from first to last; and if the lives of other infidels are examined with Care, from Toland to the last garbler of Toland in our own days, it will be found that vanity was the ruling passion, and the inspirer of those paradoxical opinions which they maintained with obstinacy even when, it is to be feared, they did not believe them themselves. It is with good reason, and certainly with shrewdness and ability, that in a late ingenious work, the life of Toland is sketched as an instance of one of the “victims of immoderate vanity .”

Stillingfleet, bishop of Worcester, in his “Vindication of the doctine of the Trinity,” had taken occasion to animadvert on Mr. Toland' s “Christianity not mysterious;” and, as he supposed that Toland had borrowed some principles from Locke’s “Essay on human understanding,” in support of his heretical doctrines, he bestowed some animadversions also on that work. This, and Mr. Toland’s persisting to represent him as his patron and friend, together with his very exceptionable conduct, made Locke renounce all regard for him, and almost disclaim the little countenance he had given him. To this purpose he expresses himself, in a letter dated the 15th of June: “As to the gentleman to whom you think my friendly admonishments may be of advantage for his conduct hereafter, I must tell you, that he is a man to whom 1 never writ in my life; and, I think, I shall not now begin: and as to his conduct, it is what I never so much as spoke to him of; that is a liberty to be taken only with friends and intimates, for whose conduct one is mightily concerned, and in whose affairs one interests himself. I cannot but wish well to all men of parts and learning, and be ready to afford them all the civilities and good offices in my power: but there must be other qualities to bring me to a friendship, and unite me in those stricter ties of concern; for I put a great deal of difference between those whom I thus receive into my heart and affection, and those whom I receive into my chamber, and do not treat there with a perfect strangeness. I perceive you think yourself under some obligation of peculiar respect lo that person, upon the account of my recommendation to you; but certainly this comes from nothing but your over-great tenderness to oblige me. For if I did recommend him, you will find it was only as a man of parts and learning for his age; but without any intention that they should be of any other consequence, or lead you any farther, than the other qualities you shall find in him shall recommend him to you; and therefore whatsoever you shall, or shall not do, for him, I shall no way interest myself in.” At that time Mr. Peter Brown, senior fellow of Trinity college near Dublin, afterwards bishop of Cork, having published a piece against Mr. “Poland’s book, Mr. Molyneux serit it to Mr. Locke, with a letter dated the 20th of July:” The author, says he, “is my acquaintance but two things I shall never forgive in his book one is the foul language and opprobrious names he gives Mr. Toland; the other is upon several occasions calling in the aid of the civil magistrate, and delivering Mr. Toland up to secular punishment. This indeed is a killing argument; but some will be apt to say, that where the strength of his reasoning failed him^ there he flies to the strength of the sword.” At length the storm rose to such a height that Toland was forced to retire from Ireland; and the account which Mr. Molyneux gives of the manner of it, in a letter dated the llth of September, would excite pity, were it not considered as representing the natural consequences of his vanity. “Mr. Toland is at last driven out of our kingdom: the poor gentleman, by his imprudent management, had raised such an universal outcry, that it was even dangerous for a man to have been known once to converse with him. This made all wary men of reputation decline seeing him, insomuch that at last he wanted a meal’s meat, as I am told, and none would admit him to their tables. The little stock of money which he brought into this country being exhausted, he fell to borrowing from any one that would lend him half a crown; and ran in debt for his wigs, cloatbs, and lodging, as I am informed. And last of all, to complete his hardships, the parliament fell on his book; voted it to be burnt by the common hangman, and ordered the author to be taken into custody of the sergeant at arms, and to be prosecuted by the attorney-general at law. Hereupon he is fled out of this kingdom, and none here knows where he has directed his course.” Many in Englan-o approved this conduct in the Irish parliament; and Dr. Gonth in particular was so highly pleased with it, that he complimented the archbishop of Dublin upon it, in the dedication of his third volume of “Sermons,” printed in 1698. After having condemned our remissness here in England, for bearing with Dr. Sherlock, whose notions of the Trinity he charges with heresy, he adds, “but, on the contrary, among you, when a certain Mahometan Christian (no new thing of late) notorious for his blasphemous denial of the mysteries of our religion, and his insufferable virulence against the whole Christian priesthood, thought to have found shelter among you, the parliament to their immortal honour presently sent him packing, and, without the help of a faggot, soon made the kingdom too hot for him.” As soon as Poland was in London, he published an apologeticai account of the treatment he had received in Ire-< land, entitled “An Apology for Mr Toland, &c. 1697” and was so little discouraged with what had happened to him there, that he continued to write and publish his thoughts on all subjects, without regarding in the least who might, or who might not, be offended at him. He had published, in 1696, “A discourse upon Coins,” translated from the Italian of signior Bernardo Davanzati, a gentleman of Florence: he thought this seasonable, when clipping of money was become a national grievance, and several methods were proposed to remedy it. In 1698, after the peace of Hyswick, during a great dispute among politicians, concerning the forces to be kept on foot for the quiet and security of the nation, many pamphlets appeared on that subject, some for, others against, a standing army; and Toland, who took up his pen among others, proposed to reform the militia, in a pamphlet entitled “The Militia Keformed, &c.” The same year, 1698, he published “The Life of Milton,” which was prefixed to Milton’s prose works, then collected in three volumes folio. In this he asserted that the “Icon Basilike” was a spurious production. This being represented by Dr. Blackall, afterwards bishop of Exeter, as affecting the writings of the New Testament, Toland vindicated himself in a piece called, “Amyntor; or, a Defence of Milton’s Life, 1699,” 9vo. This Amyntor however did not give su< h satisfaction, but that even Dr. Samuel Clarke and others thought it necessary to animadvert on it, as being an attack on the canon of the scriptures. Yet Toland had the confidence afterwards (in the preface to his “Nazarenus”) to pretend that his intention in his “Amyntor” was not to invalidate-, but to illustrate and confirm the canon of the New Testanunt; which, as Leland justly observes, may serve as one instance, among the many that might be produced, of the vfriter’s sincerity. The same year, 1699, he published “The Memoirs of Denzil lord Holies, baron of IfieJd in Sussex, from 1641 to 1648,” from a manuscript communicateJ to him by the late duke of Newcastle, who was ono of his patrons and benefactors.

In 1700 he published Harrington’s “Oceana,” and his other works, with his life in folio; and about the same time came out a pamphlet, entiiled “Clito, a poem on the force of eloquence.” In this piece, under the character of Atieisidaemon, which signifies unsuperstitious, he promises in effect not to leave off writing till he had detected knavery and imposture of every kind. In 1701 he published two political pieces, one called “The Art of governing by Parties;” the other “Propositions for uniting the two East India Companies.” The same year, being informed that the lower house of convocation had appointed a committee to examine impious, heretical, and immoral books, and that his “Christianity not mysterious,” and his “Amyntor,” were under their consideration, he wrote two letters to Dr. Hooper, the prolocutor, either to give such satisfaction as should induce them to stop their proceedings, or desiring to be heard in his own defence, before they passed any censure on his writings but, without paying any regard to this application, the committee extracted five propositions out of his “Christianity not mysterious,” and re-“solved, that,” in their judgment, the said book contained pernicious principles, of dangerous consequence to the Christian religion; that it tended, and (as they conceived) was written on a design, to subvert the fundamental articles of the Christian faith; and that the propositions extracted from it, together with divers others of the same nature, were pernicious, dangerous, scandalous, and destructive of Christianity.“This representation was sent to the upper house, which likewise appointed a committee to examine Toland’s book, and, upon receiving their report, unanimously determined to proceed (as far as they legally might) against the. work and the author: but, having taken the opinions of some able lawyers upon the point, they were obliged to declare, that they did not find, how, without a licence from the king (which they had not yet received), they could have sufficient authority to censure judicially any such books. This declaration of the bishops gave occasion to several pamphlets on the subject, and Toland published a defence of himself, under the title of” Vindieiqs Liberius, or Mr. Toland’s defence against the lower house of convocation, &c." in which he gave full scope to his vanity, and removed much of the disguise with which he had hitherto covered some of his principles both religious and political.

Upon the passing of an act of parliament, in June 1701, for settling the crown, after the decease of king William and the princess Anne, and in default of their issue, upon the princess Sophia, electress dowager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants, Toland published his “Anglia libera, or, the limitation and succession of the crown of England explained and asserted, c.” 8vo; and when the earl of Macclesfield was sent to Haribver with this act, Toland attended him. He presented his “Anglia libera' 7 to her electoral highness, and was the first who had the honour of kissing her hand upon the act of succession. The earl recommended him particularly to her highness, and he stayed there five or six weeks; and on his departure he was presented with gold medals and pictures of the electress dowager, the elector, the young prince, and the queen of Prussia. He then made an excursion to the court of Berlin, where he had a remarkable conversation with M. Beausobre, upon the subject of religion, in the presence of the queen of Prussia. Beausobre communicated an account of it to the authors of the” Bibliotheque Germanique,“who printed it in that journal; and from thence we learn, that it was concerning the authority of the books of the New Testament, which Mr. Toland, with his usual self-sufficiency, undertook to question and invalidate. On the llth of November, 1701, a proclamation was issued out, for dissolving the parliament, and calling another to meet in December. While the candidates were making interest in their respective countries, Toland published the following advertisement in the Post-man:” There having been a public report, as if Mr. Toland stood for Blechingly in Surrey, it is thought fit to advertise, that sir Robert Clayton has given his interest in that borough to an eminent citizen, and that Mr. Toland hath no thoughts of standing there or any where else.“This advertisement afforded matter of pleasantry to an anonymous writer, who published a little pamphlet, entitled” Modesty mistaken: or, a Letter to Mr. Toland, upon his declining to appear in the ensuing parliament."

In 1702 he published three pieces: “Paradoxes of state, &c.” in 4to; “Reasons for addressing his majesty to invite into England the electress dowager and elector of Hanover; 7 ' and his” Vindicius liberius,“already mentioned. After the publication of this book, he went to the courts of Hanover and Berlin, where he was received very graciously by the princess Sophia, and by the queen of Prussia, both ladies who delighted in conversing with men of learning and penetration, whose notions were new or uncommon. He had the honour to be often aumitted to their conversation; and, as he made a longer stay at Berlin than at Hanover, so he had frequent opportunities of waiting upon the queen, who took a pleasure in asking him questions, and hearing his paradoxical opinions. After his return therefore into England, he published in 1704? some philosophical letters; three of which were inscribed td Serena, meaning the queen of Prussia, who, he assures us> was pleased to ask his opinion concerning the subject of them. The title rr.ns thus:” Letters to Serena, containing, 1. The origin and force of prejudices. 2. The history of the soul’s immortality among the heathens. 3. The origin of idolatry, and reasons of heathenism; as also, 4. A letter to a gentleman in Holland, shewing Spinoza’s system of philosophy to be without any principle or foundation. 5. Motion essential to matter, in answer to some remarks by a noble friendon the confutation of Spinoza. To which is prefixed a preface, declaring the several occasions of writing them,“8vo. About the same time he published an” English translation of the Life of Æsop, by M. de Meziriac,“and dedicated it to Anthony Collins, esq. It was prefixed to” The fables of;sop," with the moral reflections of M. Baudoin.

In 1705 he published several pamphlets’. “Socinianism truly stated, &c.” to which is prefixed, “Indifference in disputes recommended by a Pantheist to an orthodox friend,” in 4to; “An account of the courts of Prussia and Hanover,” in 8vo; “The ordinances, statutes, and privileges of the* academy erected by the king of Prussia in the city of Berlin,” translated from the original, in 8vo; “The memorial of the state of England, in vindication of the queen, the church, and the administration, &c.” This last was published, without the name of the author, by the direction of Mr. Harley, secretary of state; and afterwards a defence of it was written, by order of the same person, but for some reasons suppressed, after six or seven sheets Of it were printed. Mr. Harley was one of Toland’s chief patrons and benefactors, and used to employ him as a spy, Harley having accidentally found, among other manuscripts, a Latin oration, to excite the English to war against the French, communicated it to Toland, who published it in 1707, with notes and a preface, under this title, “Oratio Philippica ad excitandos contra Galliam. Britannos; maxime vero, ne de pace cum victis pra; matur& agatur: sanctiori Anglorum concilio exhibita, anno Christi 1514.” Soon after he published, at the request of the elector’s minister, “The elector Palatine’s declaration in favour of his Protestant subjects.”

He set out for Germany in the spring of 1707, and went first to Berlin; but an incident too ludicrous to be mentioned, says Mr. Des Maizeaux, obliged him to leave that place sooner than he expected. What that incident was cannot now be gathered from his correspondence. From thence he went to Hanover, on the territories of a neighbouring prince. He proceeded to Dusseldorp, 'and was very graciously received by the elector Palatine; who, in consideration of the English pamphlet he had published, presented him with a gold chain and medal, and a purse of an hundred ducats. He went afterwards to Vienna, being commissioned by a famous French banker, then in Holland, who wanted a powerful protection, to engage the Imperial ministers to procure him the title of count of the empire, for which he was ready to pay a good sum of money; but they did not think fit to meddle with that affair, and all his attempts proved unsuccessful. From Vienna he visited Prague in Bohemia; and now, his money being all spent, he was forced to make many shifts to get back to Holland. Being at the Hague, he published, in 1709, a small volume, containing two Latin dissertations: the first he called “Adeisidaemon sive, Titus Livius a superstitione vindicatus” the second, “Origines Judaicse; sive, Strabonis de Moyse & religione Judaica historia breviter illustrata.” In the first of these pieces, he endeavours to vindicate Livy from the imputation of superstition and credulity, although his history abounds with relation* of prodigies and portents; in the second, he seems inclined to prefer Strabo’s account of Moses and the Jewish religion to the testimony of the Jews themselves. In this dissertation, also, he ridicules Huetius for affirming, in his “Demonstratio evangelica,” that many eminent persons in the “Old Testament” are allegorized in the heathen mythology, and that Moses, for instance, is understood by the name of Bacchus, Typho, Silenus, Priapus, Adonis, &c. and, if he had never done any thing worse than this, it is probable that the convocation would not have thought him an object of their censure. Huetius, however, was greatly provoked with this attack; and expressed his resentment in a French letter, published in the “Journal of Trevoux,” and afterwards printed with some dissertations of Huetius, collected by the abbé Tilladet.

He continued in Holland till 1710; and, while he was there, had the good fortune to get acquainted with prince Eugene, who gave him several marks of his generosity. Upon his return to England, he was for some time sup* ported by the liberality of Mr. Harley, and by his means was enabled to keep a country-house at Epsom in Surrey. He published, in 1711, “A Description of Epsom, with the Humours and Politics of that Place.” He afterwards lost the favour of this minister, and then wrote pamphlets against him. He published in 1710, without his name, a French piece relating to Dr. Sacheverell, “Lettre d'urt Anglois a un Hollandois an sujet du docteur Sacheverell:” and the three following in 1712: “A Letter against Popery, particularly against admitting the authority of fathers or councils in controversies of religion, by Sophia Charlotte, the late queen of Prussia;” “Queen Anne’s reasons for creating the electoral prince of Hanover a peer of this realm, by the title of duke of Cambridge;” and, “The grand Mystery laid open, viz. by dividing the Protestants to weaken the Hanover succession, and, by defeating the succession, to extirpate the Protestant religion.” At that time he also undertook to publish a new edition of Cicero’s works by subscription, and gave an account of his plan in a “Latin dissertation,” which has been printed among his posthumous pieces.

In 1713 he published “An Appeal to honest People, against wicked Priests,” relating to Sachevereirs affair; aixi another pamphlet called “Dunkirk or Dover, or, the queen’s honour, the nation’s safety, the liberties of Europe, and the peace of the world, all at stake, till that fort and port be totally demolished by the French.” In 1714- he published a piece which shewed that he was very attentive to times and seasons, for it ran through ten editions within a quarter of a year: the title is, “The art of Restoring, or, the piety and probity of general Monk in bringing about the last restoration, evidenced from his own authentic letters; with a just account of sir Roger, who runs the parallel as far as he can.” This sir Roger was intended for the earl of Oxford, who was supposed to be then projecting schemes for the restoration of the Pretender. The same year, 1714, he produced “A collection of Letters by general Monk, relating to the restoration of the royal family;” “The Funeral Elegy of the princess Sophia,” translated from the Latin; and “Reasons for naturalizing the Jews in Great Britain and Ireland, on the same foot with all other nations; with a defence of the Jews against all vulgar prejudices in all countries. He prefixed to this an ingenious, but ironical dedication to the superior clergy. In 1717 he published” The State Anatomy of Great Britain," &c. which being answered by Dr. Fiddes, chaplain to the earl of Oxford, and by )aniel De Foe, he produced 9 second part, by way of vindication of the former.