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

In 1781, he published what he had printed long before, “A treatise on Civil Government,” in which his principal design is to counteract the doctrines of the celebrated Locke and his followers. This book made a considerable noise, and was attacked by several of the best writers on the democratic side of the question. The year following he closed his political career with a pamphlet entitled “Cui Bono?” in which he balances the profits and loss of each of the belligerent powers, and recapitulates all his former positions on the subject of war and colonial possessions. His publications after that period consisted of some tracts on the commercial regulations of Ireland, on the exportation of woollens, and on the iron trade.

In 1777 he published seventeen practical sermons, in one vol. 8vo. After he resigned his rectory in Bristol he resided mostly in Gloucester, where, in 1781, he married Mrs. Crowe, his housekeeper. He died of the gradual decays of age, November 4, 1799, and was interred in the South transept of Gloucester cathedral, where a monument has since been erected to his memory. It should be recorded to his praise, that though enjoying but very moderate preferment (for to a man of no paternal estate, or other ecclesiastical dignity, the deanery of Gloucester is no very advantageous situation), he was notwithstanding a liberal benefactor to several public institutions, and a distinguished patron of merit. About 1790 he thought of resigning his rectory in Bristol, and, without communicating his design to any other person, he applied to the chancellor, in whose gift it is, for leave to quit it in favour of his curate, a most deserving maq, with a large family. His lordship was willing enough that he should give up the living, but he refused him the liberty of nominating his successor. On this the dean resolved to hold the living himself till he could find a fit opportunity to succeed in his object. After weighing the matter more deliberately, he communicated his wish to his parishioners, and advised them to draw up a petition to the chancellor in favour of the curate. This was accordingly done, and signed by all of them, without any exception, either on the part of the dissenters or others. The chancellor, being touched with this testimony of love between a clergyman and his people, yielded at last to the application; in consequence of which the dean cheerfully resigned the living to a successor well qualified to tread in his steps.

, a learned divine of the sixteenth century, was the third son of Mr. William Tooker of Exeter, where he was born. He was educated at Winchester school, whence he went to New college, Oxford, and was admitted perpetual fellow in 1577. He completed his master’s degree in 1583, about which time he distinguished himself as a disputant before some illustrious visitors of the university. In 1585 he gave up his fellowship on being promoted to the archdeaconry of Barnstaple in Devonshire. He was afterwards made chaplain to queen Elizabeth, which, Prince says, was occasioned by his writing and dedicating a book to her majesty on the king’s evil, which we shall presently notice. He became afterwards prebendary of Salisbury, and took his degree of D. D. in 1594. He then became canon of the church of Exeter, and dean of Lichfield, but did not attain the latter preferment in consequence of the death of Dr. Boleyne, as Wood and Prince say, for he succeeded Dr. Montague, and was installed Fei>. 21, 1604. These biographers inform us that king James designed him for the bishopric of Gloucester, and that the conge d'elire was actually issued, but for some reason the king was pleased to revoke it. Dr. Tucker died at Salisbury March 19, 1620, and was buried in the cathedral there.

Dr. Tucker was esteemed an excellent Greek and Latin scholar. “The purity of his Latin pen,” says Fuller, “procured his preferment. He was an able divine, a person of great gravity and piety, and well read in curious and critical authors.” His publications are, 1. “Charisma, sive Donum Sanationis, seu Explicatio totius qusestionis de mirabilium sanitatum gratia, &c.” Lond. 1597, 4to. This is the work which, Prince says, introduced him to the favour of queen Elizabeth. It is a historical defence of the power of our kings in curing what is called the king’s evil. Deirio, the Jesuit, answered it, and “with him,” say Wood and Prince, “are said to agree most fanaticks,” and we may add, most persons of common sense. Tucker was, if we mistake not, the first who wrote in defence of the royal touch, and Carte, the historian, the last, or perhaps the celebrated Whiston, who has a long digression on the subject in his life. 2. “Of the Fabrick of the Church and Church-men’s Living,” Lond. 1604, 8vo. This appears’ to have been written to obviate the scruples of some of the puritan party. The subjects treated are: I. “Of parity and imparity of gifts; of competency and incompetency of men’s livings; and of the reward of men’s gifts or maintenance, so called; of parity and imparity of men’s livings, which ariseth out of the equality or inequality of men’s gifts, and of preferments so called; of singularity and plurality of beneh'ces, and of the cause thereof, viz. dispensations; of the friends and enemies of pluralities; and of supportance and keeping of the fabrick of the church upright, in which he vindicates the hierarchy and constitution of the church of England against the enemies thereof, who are for reducing all to a parity and equality.” 3. “Singulare Certamen cum Martino Becano Jesuita,” Lond. 1611, 8vo, in defence of James I. against Becan and Bellarmin.

, a learned divine, usually, but perhaps not very strictly, classed among nonconformists, was born in September 1599, at Kirton, near Boston in Lincolnshire, where his father was minister. He was, at fourteen years of age, matriculated of the university of Cambridge, being admitted of Emmanuel college there. His biographer, Dr. Salter, remarks that this circumstance “shews that he had been educated hitherto in a dislike to the church establishment; for that college, though it abounded for many years in most excellent scholars, and might therefore very justly be esteemed and flourish on their account, yet was much resorted to for another reason about this time; viz. its being generally look'd on, from its first foundation, (which Tuckney himself acknowledges) as a seminary of Puritans.” To this class Dr. Tuckney certainly belonged; he was a Calvinist, and so far a doctrinal puritan, but we find fewer symptoms of nonconformity about him than in the case of any man of his time.

Mr. Tuckney took his first degree in arts before he was seventeen years old, and was chosen fellow of his college three years after. In 1620 he proceeded M. A. and was some time in the earl of Lincoln’s family, before he resided on his fellowship. When he returned he became a very eminent tutor, and had many persons of rank admitted under him. In 1627 he took his degree of B. D.; after which he accepted the invitation of his countrymen, and went to Boston, as assistant to the famous vicar of that town, John Cotton, for whom, though a very zealous nonconformist, his diocesan bishop Williams, when lord keeper, procured a toleration under the great seal, for the free exercise of his ministry, notwithstanding his dissenting in ceremonies, so long as done without disturbance to the church. But this was probably not very long: for Mr. Cotton quitted his native country, before the rebellion, and withdrew to New England. On his departure the corporation of Boston chose Mr. Tuckney, who was now married, into this vicarage, and he kept it, at their request, till the restoration; or rather his title to it, for he took no part of the profit after he ceased to reside. Calamy mentions a Mr. Anderson as having been ejected at the restoration; he probably officiated there, but never was vicar, and Dr. How succeeded Mr. Tuckney in 1660.

When the Assembly of Divines met at Westminster, Mr. Tuckney was one of the two nominated for the county of Lincoln, and on this removed to London, and was appointed minister of St. Michael Querne in Cheapside. In 1645, when the earl of Manchester turned out Dr. Holdsworth, master of Emmanuel college, Mr. Tuckney was appointed to succeed him, but did not entirely reside on this employment until 1648, when being: chosen vice-chancellor he removed with his family to Cambridge, served that office with credit, and commenced D.D. the year after. While vicechancellor, Mr. Baker informs us, that he was very zealous for the conversion of the Indians, and the propagation of the gospel in America, and promoted these designs very vigorously with the assistance of the heads of the other colleges. In 1653, Dr. Hill master of Trinity dying, Dr. Tuckney preached his funeral sermon, and on the removal of Dr. Arrowsmith to Trinity college, was chosen master of St. John’s, and two years after regius professor of divinitv. But although thus legally possessed of these two considerable preferments, and although, Dr. Salter says, his behaviour in both was irreproachable and even highly commendable; though he ever consulted the interest both of the university and his college, and the honour of the chair, yet he was dvilly turned out of both, at the restoration, on pretence of his great age, which was only sixty-two.

Mr. Baker thus represents the treatment Dr. Tuckney met with: “A set of young men (for the old ejected members seem to have been content with their commons) were so intoxicated with the return of the king, and flushed with warmer expectations, as to forget all reverence and gratitude that was due to a venerable old man, and to turn upon their benefactor, to whom most of them owed encouragement, and some of them preferment. The same person, that had been so much reverenced by them, was now neglected. Complaints were brought by them, and preferred at court against him, where meeting with countenance, the good old man, partly awed with the terrors of the higher powers, and partly grieved and vexed with the ingratitude of his fellows; or possibly foreseeing a consequent necessity upon his non-compliance, was easily prevailed with to resign his preferments. He accordingly resigned his mastership of St. John’s and professorship June 22, 1661, a pension of 100l. per annum being reserved to him out of the emoluments of his professorship, which was duly paid him to his dying day.”

“The rest of his life,” adds Mr. Baker, “he spent in retirement, most part at London, where he had been pastor of St. Michael le Querne, and where he had been commissioner at the conference at the Savoy: but, either through diffidence of himself, or for other reasons, although he had filled the chair at Cambridge so many years with reputation, by acquitting himself extremely well, yet he never could be prevailed with to appear and act in that conference; whilst Mr. Baxter, who knew nothing of an university, nor was acquainted with any other chair save that of the pulpit, only in the strength of natural logic ventured to engage in mood and figure with some of our best and most experienced divines, with such success as usually attends rash undertakings.”

The Savoy conference Dr. Tuckney certainly never attended, which, Dr. Salter says, Mr. Baxter observes “with some indignation;” but this we cannot discover in Baxter’s account. Still less would he have hinted, as a cause for Dr. Tuckney’s absence, that he was silenced by the 1 Oo/. a year given him, which Dr. Salter, although otherwise his admirer, has done. According to Calamy, he preached sometimes in his own house, and occasionally in the families of several friends. In the time of the plague he lived at Colvvich hall near Nottingham, the seat of Robert Pierrepoint, esq. where he was soon troubled and confined, but was treated very civilly, and in a few months discharged. Upon the five-mile act, he removed to Oundle, and thence to Warmington, in Northamptonshire. After the fire of London (in which his library was burnt) he removed to Stockerston in Leicestershire, and then to Tottenham near London, whence in 1669-70 he removed to Spital-yard, where he continued until his death, February 1670, in the seventy-first year of his age. He was buried March 1, in the church of St. Andrew Undershaft, London.

From these writings, Dr. Salter remarks, that “our professor appears to have been a man of great reading and much knowledge; a ready and elegant Laiinist but narrow, stiff, and dogmatical no enemy to the royal or episcopal power, as it should seem but above measure zealous for church power and ecclesiastical discipline which such men as Tuckney, Arrowsmith, &c. very sincerely wished and hoped to have established, by authority of the parliament, following the repeated advice of the assembly; and they sadly regretted their disappointment; their new masters constantly turning a deaf ear to all such admonitions.” In his elections at St. John’s, when the president would call upon him to have regard to the godly, the master answered, “No one should have a greater regard to the truly godly than himself, but he was determined to choose none but scholars” adding, “They may deceive me in their godliness: they cannot in their scholarship.”

“One thing,” Mr. Baker adds, “may be said in favour of Dr. Tuckney, and his predecessor (Arrowsmith), or rather it is a right owing to their memory, that though they were not perhaps so learned as some of those that have before and since filled that post and station, yet their government was so good, and the discipline under them so strict and regular, that learning then flourished: and it was under them that some of those great men had their education who were afterwards the ornaments of the following age. I need not name them. Stillingfleet, Beveridge, Cave, &c. are names well known; names that will live in future ages, when their first instructors will perhaps be forgot.”

, an eminent canonist, was a native of Sicily, and commonly called Panormitanus, from his being at the head of a Benedictine abbey in Palermo, and afterwards archbishop of that city. He was born probably towards the close of the fourteenth century, some say in 1336, and became one of the most celebrated canonists of his time. He was present at the council of Basil, and had a considerable hand in the proceedings there against pope Eugenius; in recompense for which service he was made a 1 cardinal by Felix V. in 1440. He was afterwards obliged, by the orders of the king of Arragon his master, to return to his archbishopric, where he died of the plague in 1445. There is a complete edition of his works, Venice, 1617, in 9 vols. fol. Dupin mentions as his principal work a treatise on the council of Basil, which was translated into French about the end of the seventeenth century by Dr. Gerbais, of the Sorbonne, and printed at Paris.

, a gentleman of an ancient family in Yorkshire, deserves honourable mention in this work, although we can say little as to his biography, as the first inventor of the drill-plough, and the first Englishman, perhaps the first writer ancient or modern, who attempted with any tolerable degree of success to reduce agriculture to certain and uniform principles. After an education at one of our universities, and being admitted a barrister of the Temple, he made the tour of Europe, and, in every country through which he passed, was a diligent observer of the soil, culture, and vegetable productions. On his return to England he married, and settled in a paternal farm in Oxfordshire, where he pursued an infinite number of agricultural experiments, till by intense application, vexatious toil, and too frequently exposing himself to the vicissitudes of heat and cold in the open fields, he contracted a disorder in his breast, which, not being found curable in England, obliged him a second time to travel, and to seek a cure in the milder climates of France and Italy. Here he again attended more minutely to the culture of those countries; and, having little else to do, he employed himself, during three years residence abroad, to reduce his observations to writing, with a view of once more endeavouring to introduce them into practice, if ever he should be so happy as to recover his health, and be able to undergo the fatigues of a second attempt. From the climate of Montpelier, and the waters of that salutary spring, he found in a few months that relief which all the power of physic could not afford him at home; and he returned to appearance perfectly repaired in his constitution, but greatly embarrassed in his fortune. Part of his estate in Oxfordshire he had sold, and before his departure had settled his family on a farm of his own, called Prosperous Farm, near Hungerford in Berkshire, where he returned with a firm resolution to perfect his former undertaking, having, as he thought, devised means during his absence to obviate all difficulties, and to force his new husbandry into practice by the success of it, in spite of all the opposition that should be raised by the lower class of husbandmen against it. He revised and rectified all his old instruments, and contrived new ones proper for the different soils of his new farm; and he now went on pretty successfully, though not rapidly, nor much less expensively, in the prosecution of his new system. He demonstrated to all the world the good effects of his horsehoeing culture; and by raising crops of wheat without dunging for thirteen years together in the same field, equal in quantity, and superior in quality, to those of his neighbours in the ordinary course, he demonstrated the truth of his own doctrine, that labour and arrangement would snpply the place of dung and fallow, and would produce more corn at an equal or less expence. But though Mr. Tull was successful in demonstrating that this might be done, he was not so happy in doing it himself. His expences were enhanced various ways, but chiefly by the stupidity of workmen in constructing his instruments, and in the awkwardness and wickedness of his servants, who, because they did not or would not comprehend the use of them, seldom failed to break some essential part or other, in order to render them useless. These disadvantages were discernible only to Mr. Tull himself; the advantages attending the new husbandry were now visible to all the world; and it was now that Mr. Tull was prevailed upon, by the solicitations of the neighbouring gentlemen who were witnesses of its utility, to publish his theory, illustrated by a genuine account of the result of it in practice, which he engaged to do, and faithfully performed at no trivial expence.

His first publication was a “Specimen” only, in 1731; which was followed in 1733 by “An Essay on Horse-hoeing Husbandry,” 1733, folio; a work of so much refutation, that it was translated into French by Mr. Du Hamel. From this time to 1739, he continued to make several improvements in his method of cultivating wheat; and to publish at different times answers to such objections as had been made to his husbandry by “those literary vermin that are as injurious to the agriculture of England, as the fly is to our turnips.” We use here the words of a noble writer, vvho condescended to prefix an advertisement to a posthumous publication of the late Mr. Francis Forbes, entitled “The extensive Practice of the New Husbandry,” 1778, 8vo, a work which endeavoured to revive the ideas and practice of Mr. Tull, who died Jan. 3, 1740, at his seat at Prosperous,

Mr. Tull had a son, John, who in his early years travelled to France, Italy, and other parts of the continent. On his return, being a good mechanic, he was led to various inventions, which had various success. He was, among other schemes, the first who introduced post-chaises, and posttravelling by them, in England, for which he obtained a patent in 1737. He then appears to have gone into the army, and was an officer in the train of artillery, and aidde-camp to general James Campbell, who fell at the battle of Fontenoy, where Mr. Tull attended him. After his return he resumed his schemes, one of which was the bringing of fish to London by land-carriage. This he introduced in July and August 1761; but, failing for want of capital, he was arrested, and died in prison in 1764.

, a learned English divine and controversial writer, was born in St. Martin’s parish in the city of Carlisle, July 22, 1620, and was educated partly at the free-school there, and afterwards at Barton-kirk in Westmoreland. He was entered of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1634, where Gerard Langbaine was his tutor, and attained a fellowship. In 1642 he was created M. A. and became master of the grammar-school at Tetbury in Gloucestershire; but this he seems to have accepted rather as a retreat, while Oxford was garrisoned during the rebellion, for after the surrender of the garrison, he returned to his college, and became a noted tutor and preacher, and in 1657 was admitted bachelor of divinity. He was soon after made principal of Edmund-hall, which he found almost empty, but raised it, as Wood informs us, to a state as flourishing as that of any hall in Oxford. After the restoration, he was created D. D. and was made chaplain to his majesty. He was also presented to the rectory of Griggleton, or Grittleton, near Malmsbury in Wiltshire, by Thomas Gore of Alderton, esq. who had been one of his pupils, and in 1675 the king conferred upon him the deanery of Rippon, which he did not long enjoy, as he died on January 14 following, 1675-6, at the parsonage house at Griggleton, and was interred in the chancel of that church.

Wood says, Dr. Tully “was a pious man, and many ways very learned, chiefly read in the more ancient writers, yet not so wholly addicted to the perusal of them, but that at some times-he took delight to converse with later authors. He was a person of severe morals, puritanically inclined, and a strict Calvinist,” which Wood thinks was some hindrance to him in the way of promotion, but his promotions were certainly not inconsiderable. His principal works are, 1. “Logica Apodeictica, sive Tractatus brevis et dilucidus de demonstratione; cum dissertatiuncula Gassendi eodem pertinente,” Oxon. 1662, 8vo. 2. “A Letter to a friend in Wilts (his patron Mr. Gore) upon occasion of a late ridiculous pamphlet, wherein was inserted a pretended prophecy of Thomas Becket,” Lond. 1666, 4to. 3. “Enchiridion didacticum, cum appendice de coena Domini, expositione Symboli apostolici et orationis Dominica;,” London, 1673. According to Wood, some of the contents of this volume had been published separately. 4. “Justificatio Paulina sine Operibus, cum dissertat. ad Rom. vii. 14.” Oxon. 1674, 4to. This was levelled chiefly at Bull’s “Harinonia Apostolica,” (See Bull, vol. VII. p. 267), and Baxter’s “Aphorisms on Justification;” and both replied to Dr. Tully, Bull in his “Apology for the Harmony,” and Baxter in a “Treatise on Justifying Righteousness, &c.” To the latter Dr. Tully rejoined in “A Letter to Mr. Richard Baxter, &c.” Oxon. 1675, 4to. He also translated from French into English “A brief relation of the present troubles in England,” Oxon. 1645, 4to.

There was another of this name, George Tully, son of Isaac Tully of Carlisle, who, we conjecture, was a nephew of the above Dr. Tully. He was educated at Queen’s college, Oxford, and was beneficed in Yorkshire. He died rector of Gateside near Newcastle, subdean of York, &c. in 1697. He was a zealous writer against popery, and was suspended for a sermon he preached and published in 1686, against the worship of images, and had the honour, as he terms it himself, to be the first clergyman in England who suffered in the reign of James II. “in defence of our religion against popish superstition and idolatry.” He was one of the translators of “Plutarch’s Morals,” “Cornelius Nepos,” and “Suetonius,” all which were, according to the phrase in use, “done into English by several hands.” Thomas Tully, author of the funeral sermon on the death of bishop Rainbow, which is appended to Banks’s Life of that prelate, was, we presume, of the same family as the preceding. He died chancellor of Carlisle about 1727.

, an eminent physician, was the son of Peter Dirx, a rich merchant of Amsterdam, where he was born Oct. 11, 1593. He rarely went by his father’s name, having rather whimsically changed it to de Tulp, the name, or probably the sign of a house in which he lived on the emperor’s canal. He was at first a surgeon’s apprentice, but having a perfect acquaintance with the Latin language, and a turn for science, he determined to extend his studies to every thing connected with medicine, to which he accordingly applied at the university of Leyden. After taking his doctor’s degree he returned to Amsterdam, and carried on practice for fifty-two years with the greatest reputation. But his fame was not confined to his profession only. Possessing an accurate knowledge and much judgment in the political history of his country, he was raised to civic honours; in 1622 he was elected of the council of Amsterdam, and six times served the office of sheriff. In 1652 he was made burgomaster, an office which he filled also in 1656, 1660, and 1671. In 1672, when Louis XIV. attacked Holland, Tulp had a principal hand in exciting that spirit of resistance among his fellow-citizens by which Amsterdam was saved. Nor were they unmindful of his services, for when he died in 1674, aged eighty, a medal was struck to his memory.

In the medical world he is principally known by his “Observationum medicarum Libri tres,” Amst. 1641, 1652, 12mo, with engravings, reprinted with a fourth book, Amst. 1672, 1685, and Leyden, 1716. In these cases, which are very curious, and written in a Latin style, which is pure without affectation, and concise without obscurity, are some valuable anatomical remarks; and, according to Haller, Tulp was the first, or one of the first, who observed the lacteal vessels.

, a very learned, and in many respects a very excellent prelate of the church of Rome, was born at Hatchford, near Richmond, Yorkshire, about 1474. He was a natural son of a gentleman named Tunstall or Tonstal, by a lady of the Conyers family. He became a student at Baliol college, Oxford, about 1491, but, on the plague breaking out, went to Cambridge, where he became a fellow of King’s hall, now part of Trinity college. After having for some time prosecuted his studies there, he went to the university of Padua, which was then in high reputation, studied along with Latimer, and took the degree of doctor of laws. According to Godwin, he was by this time a man of extensive learning, a good Hebrew and Greek scholar, an able lawyer and divine, a good rhetorician, and skilled in various branches of the mathematics. These accomplishments, on his return, recommended him to the patronage of archbishop Warham, who constituted him vicar-general or chancellor, in August 1511. The archbishop also recommended him to Henry VIII. and in December of the same year, collated him to the rectory of Harrow-on-the hill, Middlesex; which he held till 1522.

In 1514 he was installed prebendary of Stow-Ionga, in the church of Lincoln, and the following year admitted archdeacon of Chester. In 1516 he was made master of the rolls, a post for which his extensive knowledge of the laws had well qualified him. The same year he was sent on an embassy, with sir Thomas More, to the emperor Charles V. then at Brussels, and there had the satisfaction of living in the same house with Erasmus, who said of him that he not only excelled all his contemporaries in the knowledge of the learned languages, but was also a man of great judgment, clear understanding, and uncommon modesty, and of a cheerful temper, but without levity. In the performance of his duty at the Imperial court, he made himself well acquainted with such circumstances as were of importance to his royal master and the interests of his country, and gave such satisfaction to the administration at home, that about ten days after his arrival in London in 1517, he was a second time sent on an embassy to the emperor.

On his return, apparently in 1519, he was rewarded by a succession of preferments, in this year by the prebend of Botevant, in the church of York; in May 1521 by another, that of Combe and Hornham, in the church of Sarum by the deanery of Salisbury; and in 1522 he wa promoted to the bishopric of London. In 1523 he was made keeper of the privy seal: and in 1525, he and sir Richard Wingfield went ambassadors into Spain, in order to confer with the emperor, after the king of France, Francis I was taken prisoner at the battle of Pavia.

In 1527, we find bishop Tunsiall employed in prosecuting several persons in his diocese for heresy; for he was strongly attached to the principles of the Romish church, but he never carried his zeal so far as to put any person to death for their opinions. On the contrary he was always an advocate for milder methods of reclaiming them from what he thought erroneous. Still his principles, the example of his contemporaries, and the spirit of the age in which he lived, were ajl too powerful for the natural mildness of his disposition; and although he shed no blood, he took many unjustifiable steps to obstruct the progress of the reformation, and that being at present but partial, he probably thought he might succeed without proceeding to the last extremities.

In July 1527, Tunstall attended cardinal Wolsey in his pompous embassy into France; and in 1529 was one of the English ambassadors employed to negociate the treaty of Camhray. It was on his return from this last place, that he exerted himself to suppress Tyndale’s edition of the New Testament, by means which will be noticed in our account of that celebrated reformer and martyr. Even in this matter, bishop Burnet observes that judicious persons discerned the moderation of Tunstall, who would willingly put himself to a considerable expence in burning the books of the heretics, but had too much humanity to be desirous, like many of his brethren, to burn the heretics themselves.

In the mean time he acquired great reputation by the political knowledge and talents which he displayed in his different embassies and negociations, and no promotion was thought too great for him. In 1530 he was translated to the rich bishopric of Durham. Before his removal from the see of London, he had bestowed a considerable sum of money in furnishing a library in Cambridge with valuable books, both printed and ms. which he had collected abroad; and now at Durham, he laid out large sums in adorning the city with public buildings, and in repairing, and improving his episcopal houses.

When the great question of Henry VIII. 's divorce was agitated, Tti install at first favoured the divorce, and even wrote on that side of the question; but, having reason afterwards to change his sentiments, he espoused the queen’s cause, which many of the Roman catholics then and now consider as the conscientious side. When Henry took the title of Supreme head of the church of England, Tunstall recommended it both in his injunctions, and in a sermon preached at Durham, although he had, in 1531, solemnly protested against that title. He also vindicated the king’s supremacy, in 1538, in a sermon preached before his majesty, upon Palm-sunday, in which he zealously condemned the usurpations of the bishop of Rome. In 1535, he was one of the commissioners for taking the valuation of ecclesiastical benefices, in order to settle the first fruits and tenths. And in 1537, the king commanded him, on account of his learning and judgment, to peruse cardinal Pole’s book of “Ecclesiastical Union,” which occasioned some letters between the cardinal and Tunstall, particularly, a severe one written jointly by him and by Stokesley, bishop of London, against the pope’s supremacy. The year following, he was appointed to confer concerning the reformation, with the ambassadors of the German protestant princes; but matters were not yet ripe for an alteration in this kingdom. In 1541 a new edition of the English Bible was revised by him and Nicholas Heath, bishop of Rochester. Attached as he was to popery, he appears to have taken in many cases a calm and judicious view of the questions agitated in Henry VIII.'s reign, and this led him to concur in some of the measures which were favourable to the reformation; and in that of Edward VI. he yielded obedience to every law which was enacted, and to all the injunctions, at the same time that he protested, in his place in parliament, against the changes in religion, which, Burnet says, he thought he might with a good conscience submit to and obey, though he could not consent to them. In the question of the corporal presence, he adhered to the popish opinion, and wrote on the subject.

In December 1551, Tunstall was committed to the Tower, upon an accusation of misprision of treason. What the particulars were, is not known; but Burnet thinks that the secret reason was that, if he should be attainted, the duke of Northumberland intended to have had the dignities and jurisdiction of that principality conferred on himself, and thus he count palatine of Durham. It appears, however, that Tunstall was charged by one Vivian Menville, with having consented to a conspiracy in the north for exciting a rebellion; and it is said, that something of this kind was proved, by a letter in the bishop’s own hand-writing, found when the duke of Somerset’s papers were seized. It has been conjectured, that he, being in great esteem with the popish party, was made privy to some of their treasonable designs against king Edward’s government: but which he neither concurred in, nor betrayed. However, on March 28, 1552, a bill was brought into the House of Lords, to attaint him for misprision of treason. Archbishop Cranmer spoke warmly and freely in his defence, but the bill passed the Lords. When, however, it came to the Commons, they were not satisfied with the written evidence which was produced, and having at that time a bill before them, that there should be two witnesses in case of treason, and that the witnesses and the party arraigned should be brought face to face, and that treason should not be adjudged by circumstances, but plain evidence, they therefore threw out the bill against Tunstall. This method of proceeding having been found ineffectual, a commission was granted to the chief justice of the King’s bench, and six others, empowering them to call bishop Tunstall before them, and examine him concerning all manner of conspiracies, &c. and if found guilty, to deprive him of his bishopric. This scheme, in whatever manner it might be conducted, was effectual, for he was deprived, and continued a prisoner in the Tower during the remainder of Edward’s reign. In 1553 also, the bishopric of Durham was converted into a county palatine, and given to the duke of Northumberland, which certainly favours bishop Burnet’s conjecture that there was a secret as well as an open cause for the deprivation of our prelate.

While in the Tower, Tunstall was frequently visited by his nephew, the celebrated Bernard Gilpin, who had probably been brought up to the church with a view of being advanced by this prelate, but he was now in no capacity to serve him otherwise than by his advice, and the advice he gave him about this time, places Tunstall in a very favourable point of view. When Gilpin, just entered on his parochial duties in the north, found that his mind was not quite settled in his religious opinions, he wrote to his uncle Tunstall, who told him, in answer, that he should thiuk of nothing till be had fixed his religion, and that, in his opinion, he could not do better than put his parish into the hands of some person in whom he conld confide, and spend a year or two in Germany, France, and Holland; by which means he might have an opportunity of conversing with some of the most eminent professors on both sides of the question. To this admirable advice, for such it surely is, from a popish bishop of that age, Giipin had but one objection, namely the expence; but the bishop wrote, that his living would do something towards his maintenance; and he would supply deficiencies. When they parted, the bishop gave him some books he had written while in the Tower, particularly one" on the Lord’s supper, which he wished to be printed under his inspection at Paris.

On the accession of queen Mary in 1553, Tunstall was restored to his bishopric; but still he was not a man to her mind, behaving with great lenity and moderation, and consequently his diocese escaped the cruel persecutions which prevailed in others. When he left London, he was strictly charged with the entire extirpation of heresy in his diocese; and was given to understand, that severity would be the only allowed test of his zeal. These instructions, says Mr. Giipin, he received in the spirit they were given; loudly threatening, that heretics should no where find a warmer reception than at Durham: and it was thought indeed that the protestants would hardly meet with much favour from him, as they had shown him so little. But nothing was further from his intention than persecution: insomuch that his was almost the only diocese where the poor protestants enjoyed any repose. When most of the other bishops sent in large accounts of their services to religion, very lame ones came from Durham; they were filled with high encomiums of the orthodoxy of the diocese, interspersed here and there with the trial of an heretic, but either the depositions against him were not sufficiently proved, or there were great hopes of his recantation; no mention however was made of any burnings. A behaviour of this kind was but ill relished by the zealous council: and the bishop lay deservedly under the calumny of being not actuated by true Romish principles. When his nephew Bernard Gilpin, an avowed protestant, came home from his travels, the bishop not only received him with great friendship, but gave this heretic the archdeaconry of Durham; and Fox tells us, that when one Mr. Russel, a preacher, was before bishopTunstail, on a charge of heresy, and Dr. Hinmer, his chancellor, would have examined him more particularly, the bishop prevented him, saying, “Hitherto, we have had a good report among our neighbours; I pray you bring not this man’s blood upon my head.”

From such a man it was naturally expected that, on the accession of queen Elizabeth, there would have been little difficulty in reconciling him to the reformation, and in fact the queen had nominated him as the first in a list of prelates to officiate at the consecration of several new bishops; but notwithstanding this, he refused to take the oath of supremacy, and was consequently deprived of his bishopric in July 1559. At the same time he was committed to the custody of Parker, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, and then in possession of Lambeth palace, by whom he was entertained in a very kind, friendly, and respectful manner; and Parker is said to have produced a change in some of his sentiments. It appears that Tunstall told Bernard Gilpin, that in the matter of transubstantiation, pope Innocent III. had done unadvisedly, in making it an article of faith; and he further confessed, that the pope committe<l a great error in the affair of indulgences, and in other things. Tunstall also held the doctrine of justification by faith only.

Bishop Tunstall did not continue long in this state of retirement, for he died Nov. 18, 1559, aged eighty-five, and was handsomely buried in the chancel of Lambeth church, at the expence of archbishop Parker, with a Latin epitaph by the learned Dr. Haddon. The character of Tunstall may in part he collected from the preceding particulars. Gilpin, who has frequently introduced notices of him in his Lives of Bernard Gilpin, Latimer, &c. says “he was a papist only by profession; no way influenced by the spirit of popery; but he was a good catholic, and had true notions of the genius of Christianity. He considered a good life as the end, and faith as the means; and never branded as an heretic that person, however erroneous his opinions might be in points less fundamental, who had such a belief in Christ as made him live like a Christian. He was just therefore the reverse of (his early patron) Warham, and thought the persecution of protestants one of the things most foreign to his function. For parts and learning he was very eminent: his knowledge was extensive, and his taste in letters superior to that o- most of his contemporaries. The great foible of which he stands accused in history, was the pliancy of his temper. Like most of the bishops of those times, he had been bred in a court; and was indeed too dextrous in the arts there practised.” On this last failing, Mr. Gilpin seems to us to lay too much stress, for even the particulars which, in the preceding sketch we have extracted from his life of Bernard Gilpin, shew decidedly that Tnnstall was no courtly complier in those measures which were particularly characteristic of the times, and which have been more or less the test of the worth of every eminent man who lived in them.

Bishop Tunstall’s writings that were published, were chiefly the following: 1. “In Laudem Matrimonii,” Lond. 1518, 4to. 2. “De Arte Supputandi,” Lond. 1522, 4to, dedicated to sir Thomas More. This was afterwards several times printed abroad. 3. “A Sermon on Palm Sunday” before king Henry the 8th, &c. Lond. 1539 and 1633, 4to. 4. “De Veritate Corporis & Sanguinis Domini in Eucharistia,” Lntet. 1554, 4to. 5. “Compendium in decem Libros Ethicorum Aristotelis,” Par. 1554, 8vo. 6. “Contra impios Blasphematores Dei praedestinationis,” Antw. 1555, 4to. 7. “Godly and devout Prayers in English and Latin,” 1558, in 8vo.

, a learned and amiable divine, was born about 1710, and educated at St. John’s college in Cambridge, of which he became fellow and a principal tutor. He was instituted to the rectory of Sturmer in Essex, in 1739, and, in 1741, elected public orator of the university. He afterwards became chaplain to Potter, abp. of Canterbury; and was there a person of such uniform meekness and humility as to make it said, after he left Lambeth, that “many a man came there, as chaplain, humble, but that none ever departed so except Dr. Tunstall.” He was created D. D. at Cambridge in 1714; was collated by the archbishop to the rectory of Great Chart in Kent, and to the vicarage of Minster in the Isle of Thanet, both which he resigned in 1757, for the valuable vicarage of Rochdale in Lancashire, given him by abp. Hutton, who married his wife’s aunt; but the exchange, from many circumstances, di i not answer his expectation; he wished for a prebend of Canterbury. It is supposed that either family uneasinesses, or the above disappointment, hastened his death, which took place March 28, 1772.

His writings are, 1. “Epistola ad virum eruditum Conyers Middleton, c.” Cant. 1741, 8vo. In this work, he calls in question the genuineness of the letters between. Cicero and Brutus, of which Dr. Middleton had made great use in his elegant “History of Cicero’s Life;” and shews, that he had not paid sufficient attention to the letters to Atticus and his brother Quintus. 2. “Observations on the present collection of Epistles between Cicero and Brutus.” This was to confirm what he had before advanced, and by way of answer to a preface of Miduleton’s to an edition of the epistles. Mr. Markland, in a private letter, says, “I have read over Mr. Tunstall’s book, twice more, since I came hither; and am more and more confirmed, that it can never be answered.” 3. “Sermon before the House of Commons, May 29, 1746.” 4. “A Vindication of the Power of the State to prohibit Clandestine Marriages, &c.” 1755. 5. “Marriage in Society stated, &c. in a second Letter to Dr. Stebbing,” 1755. 6. “Academica: part the first, containing Discourses upon Natural and Revealed Religion, a Concio, and a Thesis.” The second part be did not live to publish; but it is supposed to be included in “The Lectures on Natural and Revealed Religion,” published after his death, in 4to, hy the rev. Mr. Dodsworth, treasurer of Salisbury, ancl his brother-in-law.

, an English poet, descended from a family of considerable note in Dorsetshire, was a younger son of Nicholas Turbervile of Whitchurch, and supposed to have been born about 1530. He received hia education at Winchester school, and became fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1561, but left the university without taking a degree, and resided for some time in one of the inns of court. He appears to have accumulated a stock of classical learning, and to have been well acquainted with modern languages. He formed his ideas of poetry partly on the classics, and partly on the study of the Italian school. His poetical pursuits, however, did not interfere with more important business, as his well-known abilities recommended him to the post of secretary to Thomas Randolph, esq. who was appointed queen Elizabeth’s ambassador at the court of Russia. While in this situation, he wrote three poetical epistles to as many friends, Edward Davies, Edmund Spenser (not the poet), and Parker, describing the manners of the Russians. These may be seen, in Hackluyt’s voyages, vol. I. p. 381. After his return, he was much courted as a man of accomplished education and manners; and the first edition of his " Songs and Sonnets/* published in 1567, seems to have added considerably to his fame. A second edition appeared in 1570, with many additions and corrections.

Our author was living in 1594, and in great esteem, but we have no account of his death. There appear to have tieen two other persons of both his names, both natives of Dorsetshire and nearly contemporaries, one of whom was a commoner of Gloucester-hall in 1581, aged eighteen, and the other a student of Magdalen-hall in 1595, aged seventeen. Wood was not able to tell which of the three was the author of“Essays, politic and moral,” which were published in 1608, nor of the “Booke of Falconrye and Hawking, heretofore published by G. Turbervile, gent, and now revived, corrected, and augmented by another hand,” Lond. loll. But the intelligent editor of “Phillips’s Theatrum” is of opinion that this work was the production of our poet, from its having commendatory verses prefixed by Gascoigne; and the curious biographical tract of Whetstone, lately reprinted in the edition of the English Poets, before Gascoigne’s works, notices a production of that author on hunting, which Mr. Park thinks is the one printed with the above “Booke of Falconrye,” and usually attributed to Turbervile. Besides these, our poet wrote commendatory verses to the works of several of his contemporaries.

Turbervile was a sdnnetteer of great note in his time, although, except Harrington, his contemporaries and successors appear to have been sparing of their praises. It is probably to some adverse critics that he alludes, in his address to Sycophants. Gascoigne also used to complain of the Zoilus’s of his time. There is a considerable diversity of fancy and sentiment in Turbervile’s pieces: the verses in praise of the countess of Warwick are ingenipusly imagined, and perhaps in his best style, and his satirical effusions, if occasionally flat and vulgar, are characteristic of his age. Many of his allusions, as was then the fashion, are taken from the amusement of hawking, and these and his occasional strokes on large noses, and other personal redundancies or defects, descended afterwards to Shakspeare, and other dramatic writers. He entitles his pieces Epitaphs and Epigrams, Songs and Sonnets, but the reader will seldom recognize the legitimate characteristics of those species of poetry. His epitaphs are without pathetic reflection, being stuffed with common-place railing against “the cursed cruelty” of death; and his epigrams are often conceits without point, or, in some instances, the point is placed first, and the conclusion left “lame and impotent.” His love sonnets, although seemingly addressed to a real mistress, are full of the borrowed passion of a translator, and the elaborate and unnatural language of a scholar. The classics in his age began to be studied very generally, and were no sooner studied than translated. This retarded the progress of invention at a time when the language was certainly improving; and hence among a number of authors who flourished in this period, we seldom meet with the glow of pure poetry. It may, however, be added in favour of Turbervile, that he seldom transgresses against morals or delicacy.

, an ancient historian, of the eleventh century, was an Anglo-Saxon, of a good family in Lincolnshire. When a young man, he was delivered by the people of Lindsay, as one of their hostages, to William the Conqueror, and confined in the castle of Lincoln. From thence he made his escape to Norway, and resided several years in the court of king Olave, by whom he was much caressed and enriched. Returning to his native country, he was shipwrecked on the coast of Northumberland, by which he lost all his money and effects, escaping death with great difficulty. He then travelled to Durham; and applying to Walter, bishop of that see, declared his resolution to forsake the world, and become a monk; in which he was encouraged by that pious prelate, who committed him to the care of Aldwine, the first prior of Durham, then at Jarrow. From that monastery he went to Melross; from thence to Wearmouth, where he assumed the monastic habit; and lastly returned to Durham, where he recommended himself so much to the whole society, by his learning, piety, prudence, and other virtues, that, on the death of Aidwine, in 1087, he was unanimously chosen prior, and not long after was appointed by the bishop archdeacon of his diocese. The monastery profited greatly by his prudent government; the privileges were enlarged, and revenues considerably increased by his influence; and he promoted many improvements in the sacred edifices. In this office he spent the succeeding twenty years of his life, sometimes residing in the priory, and at other times visiting the diocese, and preaching in different places. At the end of these twenty years, he was, in 1107, elected bishop of St. Andrew’s and primate of Scotland, and consecrated by archbishop Thomas, at York, Aug. 1, 1109. Dissentions arising between our archbishop and the king of Scotland, the prelate’s anxiety and distress of mind brought on a decline of health, under which he obtained permission to return to England; and came back to Durham in 1115, where he resided little more than two months before his death. Stevens, in the “Monasticon,” says that he returned to Durham after the death of king Malcolm and his queen; and Spotiswood, in his “Church History,” that he died in Scotland, and was thence conveyed to and buried at Durham, in the Chapter-house, between bishops Walcher and William.

Some of his leisure hours he employed in collecting and writing the history of the church of Durham from the year 635 to 1096, in four books. But not having published this work, or made many transcripts of it, according to the custom of those times, it fell into the hands of Simeon, precentor of the church of Durham, who published it under his own name, expunging only a few passages that would have discovered its real author. This curious fact, of which we were not aware when we drew up our brief account of Simeon, is demonstrated by Selden, in his preface to sir Roger Twysden’s “Decem Scriptores,” and shews that literary fame was even then an object of ambition. Turgot composed several other works, particularly the lives of Malcolm Canmore, king of Scotland, and of his pious consort queen Margaret, which is often quoted by Fordun and others, but is not supposed to exist. Turgot had been confessor to queen Margaret, and as Papebroch has published in the “Acts of the Saints,” a life of her, under the name of Theodoric, also said to have been a confessor to the queen, it seems not improbable, according to lord Hailes and others, that Theodoric is another name for Turgot, or that the name of Theodoric has been prefixed to the saint’s life, instead of that of Turgot, by the mistake of some copier: but Papebroch certainly thinks they were two distinct persons.

, a French minister of state, was born at Paris, May 10, 1727, of a very ancient Norman family. His father was, for a long time, provost of the corporation of merchants. He was intended for the church, and went through the requisite preparatory studies; but whether he disliked the catholic religion, or objected to any peculiar doctrines, is not certain. It is generally supposed that the latter was the case, and the intimacy and correspondence he had with Voltaire, Diderot, D'Alembert, &c. afford very probable ground for believing him entirely of their opinion in matters of religion. He looked, however, to the political department, as that which was best adapted to his acquisitions, and the rer sources which he found in his ingenuity and invention. For this purpose he studied the sciences suited to his destination, and mixed experimental philosophy with mathematics, and history with political disquisition. He embraced the profession of the law, and at once displayed his views by fixing on the office of master of the requests, who is the executive officer of government, in operations of commerce and finance. His panegyrist, M. Condorcet, tells us, that a master of requests is rarely without a considerable share of influence respecting some one of the provinces, or the whole state; so that it seldom happens that his liberality or his prejudices, his virtues or his vices, do not, in the course of his life, produce great good or great mischief. About this period Turgot wrote some articles for the Encyclopedic, of which the principal were, Etymology, Existence, Expansibility, Fair, and Foundation. He had prepared several o.thers; but these five only were inserted. All these his biographer praises with more zeal than judgment; the article on Expansibility being very exceptionable, and that on Existence being little more than an ingenious commentary on the first principles of Des Cartes, and by no means deserving to be called the “only improvement in the science of the human mind since the days of Locke.”

In 1761, Turgot was appointed intendant of Limoges. The intendant is the confidential officer of the government. He carries their orders on the subject of commerce and finance into execution; and has occasionally the right of making provisional decisions. In this office, which Turgot discharged with great attention and ability for thirteen years, he spent the most useful, though not the most conspicuous, part of his life. He conferred many advantages on his province, corrected many abuses, and opposed many mistaken opinions. In particular, he gave activity to the society of agriculture established at Limoges, by directing their efforts to important subjects: he opened a mode of public instruction for female professors of midwifery: he procured for the people the attendance of able physicians during the raging of epidemic diseases: he established houses of industry, supported by charity, &c. &c. and during all this time he meditated projects of a more extensive nature, such as an equal distribution of the taxes, the construction of the roads, the regulation of the militia, the prevention of a scarcity of provisions, and the protection of commerce.

At the death of Louis XV. the public voice called M. Turgot to the first offices of government, as a man who united the experience resulting from habits of business, to all the improvement which study can procure. After being at the head of the marine department only a short time, he was, in August 1774, appointed comptroller-general of the finances. In this office he introduced a great many regulations, which were unquestionably beneficial, but it has been remarked, that he might have done more, if he had attempted less. He does not appear to have attended closely to the actual state of the public mind in France. He would have been an enlightened minister for a sovereign, where the rights of the people were felt and understood. He endeavoured, it is true, to raise them from the abject state in which they had long continued, but this was to be done at the expence of the rich and powerful. The attempt to establish municipalities probably put a period to his career. This scheme consisted in the establishment of many provincial assemblies for the internal government, whose members were elected according to the most rigorous rules of representation. These little parliaments, by their mutual contests, might, and indeed did, lay the foundation of great confusion, and created a spirit of liberty which was never understood, and passed easily into licentiousness. The nobility, whom he attempted to controul the clergy, whom he endeavoured to restrict; and the officers of the crown, whom he wished to restrain, united in their common cause. All his operations created a murmur, and all his projects experienced an opposition, which ended in his dismissal from office in 1776, after holding it about twenty months. From that period, he Jived a private and studious life, and died March 20, 1781, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. Condorcet has written a long life of him, but it is throughout the whole a pane-­gyric His countrymen now do not seem agreed in his chara< ter. By some it is considered that he might have saved the state by others he is classed among those who precipitated the revolution.

, an eminent critic and translator, was born at Andeli, a small village near Rouen in Normandy, in 1512. Two nations have contended for the honour of his hirth; the trench, who say he was descended of a noble but decayed family in Normandy; and the Scotch, who have discovered (Dempster, and after him Mackenzie) that his French name Tourncbceuf is no other than Turnbully and that he was the son of a Scotch gentleman of that name who married in Normandy. Whatever may be in this, Turnebus, for that is the name he took in his writings and correspondence, came to Paris at the age of eleven, and soon made such progress in classical and polite literature as to surpass all his fellow-students, and even, we are told, his masters. He had every qualification indeed to form an accomplished scholar, great memory, indefatigable application, and both taste and judgment far beyond his years. Before these all difficulties vanished, and his avidity and knowledge knew no intermi-sion in his after-life. Even on the day of his marriage, it is said, he devoted some hours to study.

The progress of his pursuits are not particularly detailed, but he is reported to have taught the classics at Toulouse, and afterwards, in 1547, was appointed Greek professor at Paris, where he had for his colleagues Buchanan and Muretus, whose joint reputation brought scholars from all parU of Europe. In 1552, Turnebus was appointed super* intendant of the royal printing-house for Greek books, and had William Morel for his associate, whom he left in sole possession of this office about four years after; on being appointed one of the royal professors. Such was his fame, that he had invitations and large offers from Italy, Spain, Portugal, Germany, and England, on condition of settling in. either of those countries; but he preferred the moderate circumstances enjoyed in his own country to the most tempting offers of riches elsewhere. He died June 12, 1565, in the fifty-third year of his age, and was buried on the evening of the same day, agreeably to his desire, in a very private manner, in the burial-place belonging to the college of Montaign, being followed to his grave by only a few friends. He was supposed to have embraced the doctrines of the Reformation; but this was not generally known; and so much was he admired, that both papists and protestants endeavoured to claim him as their own. It was his singular fate, that all who knew him, and all who read his works, loved him. This gave rise to some ingenious lines by Henry Stephens, in which, after putting the question, “Why does Turnebus please every body?” in various ways, he answers, that “he pleaded every body, because he did not please himself,” alluding to his extreme diffidence and modesty, and his very amiable manners. Such was the esteem in which he was held, that some of the German professors, when in their lectures they quoted the authority of Turnebus (or Cujacius, to whom the same compliment was paid) they used to move their right hand to their cap, as a token of veneration. He directed his studies chiefly to philological researches, and to translating the Greek authors. His translations have always been approved, and his criticisms were not less admired in his own and the succeeding age. It has been, indeed, sometimes objected, that he was too fond of conjectural emendations, and that, notwithstanding the constitutional gentleness of his temper, he displayed more than necessary warmth in his controversies with Ramus, and with Bodin but in general his style, as well us his sentiments, were liberal and he is said to have discovered nothing of the pedant but in his dress. His works were collected and published in three volumes, folio, which generally make but one, at Strasburg, 1600, and consist of his commentaries on various parts of Cicero, Varro, Horace, Pliny, &c.; his translations of Aristotle, Theophrastus, Plutarch, &c. and his miscellaneous pieces, letters, and poems. His “Adversaria” went through man)' editions, first in quarto, from 1564 to 1599, when the last was printed in folio. Niceron enumerates a few other separate publications, and comments contributed by him to some of the classics. Of his translations, Huetius says, that “he had every quality which is necessary for a perfect translator; for ho understood Greek thoroughly, and turned it into elegant Latin, closely and without departing in the least from his author, yet in a clear and pleasant style.”

, a dissenting minister of the baptist persuasion, was born at Blackwater-farm, in the parish of St. Michael, and district of St. Alban’s, Hertfordshire, on March 1, 17 10. He appears to have had some classical education, which he afterwards diligently improved, but was not regularly educated for the ministry. In 1738 he published “An abstract of English grammar and rhetoric,” and an advertisement at the end of this volume intimates that he then kept a boarding school. Two of his pupils have been ascertained, Dr. Hugh Smith, an alderman and eminent physician in London, and Dr. William Kenrick. He commenced preacher, without any of the usual forms of admission, but merely because he was thought capable of preaching, when he was about twenty years old; and having been approved of at his outset, he continued and was settled as minister of the baptist congregation at Reading. From this he was invited to become pastor of a similar congregation at Abingdon in 1748, where he spent the remainder of his long life. He began to preach and to print early in life, and he preached and printed to the last. Many of his publications were much approved, and produced occasional correspondence between him and some eminent men of his time, particularly Dr. Watts, Dr. Kennicott, and Dr. Lowth, bishop of London. He was a man of great piety, and of a disposition peculiarly candid, liberal, and benevolent. He died Sept. 5, 1798, in the eightyninth year of his age, and was interred in the baptist burying-ground at Abingdon.

, dean of Canterbury, was the son of Thomas Turner of Heckfield in Hampshire, alderman and mayor of Reading in Berkshire; and was born in the parish of St. Giles’s in that borough, in 1591. In 1610 he was admitted on the foundation at St. John’s college, Oxford, and had for his tutor Mr. Juxon, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury. His application to learning was assiduous and successful, and having entered into holy orders, he immediately distinguished himself as a divine of merit. Ira 1623 he was presented by his college to the vicarage of St. Giles’s in Oxford, which he held with his. fellowship, but relinquished it in 1628. Laud, when bishop of London, made him his chaplain, and in 1629, at which time Mr. Turner was B. D. collated him to the prebend of Newington in the church of St. Paul, and in October following to the chancellorship of the same church, in which also he was appointed by Charles I. a canon-residentiary. The king likewise made him one of his chaplains in ordinary, and gave him the rectory of St. Olave, Southwark, with which he held the rectory of Fetcham in the county of Surrey. In 1633, when Charle> I. resolved on a progress to Scotland for his coronation, Turner was commanded to attend his majesty; previous to which he was, April 1, 1633-4, created D D. by the university of Oxford. In 1641 he was preferred to the deanery of Rochester, and on the death of Ur. Eglionby to that of Canterbury, but of this last he could not obtain possession until the restoration. After the death of the king, to whom he had adhered with inflexible loyalty and attachment, he shared the fate of the other loyal clergymen in being stript of his preferments, and treated with much indignity and cruelty. On the restoration, in August 1660, he entered into full possession of the deanery of Canterbury, and might have been rewarded with a mitre, but he declined it, “preferring to set out too little rather than too much sail.” Instead of seeking further promotion, he soon resigned the rectory of Fetcham, “desiring to ease his aged shoulders of the burthen of cure of souls; and caused it to be bestowed upon a person altogether unacquainted with him, but recommended very justly under the character of a pious man, and a sufferer for righteousness.”

Having enjoyed an uninterrupted share of good health, during thirty years, he was at length attacked with that severe disease the stone; the sharpness of which he endured with exemplary fortitude and resignation. Nor did the “innocent gayety of his humour,” which made his company so agreeable to all, forsake him to the last. He reached the age of eighty-one, and died in Oct. 1672, with “the greatest Christian magnanimity, and yet with the deepest sense imaginable of godly sorrow, working repentance unto salvation not to be repented of.” He was buried in the dean’s chapel in Canterbury cathedral, and his funeral sermon, since printed, was preached by Dr. Peter du Moulin, prebendary of the church, who gives him a very high and apparently very just character. It is not known that dean Turner published more than a single sermon on Matt. ix.

13. mentioned by Wood. Prynne censures him as an Arnrinian, yet Du Moulin, who enters so fully and so affectionately into his character, in all respects both as a man and as a divine, was a zealous Calvinist.

, an English prelate, son of the preceding, received his education at Winchester school, and was thence elected fellow of New college, Oxford; where he took his degrees in arts, that of bachelor, April 14, 1659, and that of master in the beginning of 1663. He commenced B. I), and D. D. July 6, 1669, and in December following was collated to the prebend of Sneating in St. Paul’s. On the promotion of Dr. Gunning to the see of Chichester, he succeeded him in the mastership of St. John’s college, Cambridge, April 11, 1670. In 1683, he was made dean of Windsor, and the same year, was promoted to the see of Rochester, being consecrated on Nov. 11, and next year Aug. 23, was translated to the bishopric of Ely. Though he owed most of these preferments to the influence of the duke of York, afterwards James II. yet on the accession of that prince to the throne, as soon as he perceived the violent measures that were pursued, and the open attempts to introduce popery and arbitrary power, he opposed them to the utmost. He was one of the six bishops who joined archbishop Sancroft on May 18, 1688, in subscribing and presenting a petition to the king, setting forth their reasons, why they could not comply with his commands, in causing his majesty’s “Declaration for liberty of conscience” to be read in their churches. This petition being styled by the court, a seditious libel against his majesty and his government, the bishops were all called before the privy council; and refusing to enter into recognizances, to appear in the court of the king’s bench, to answer the misdemeanour in framing and presenting the said petition, were, on June 8, committed to the Tower; on the 15th of the same month they were brought by habeas corpus to the bar of the king’s bench, where, pleading not guilty to the information against them, they were admitted to bail, and on the 29th came upon their trials in Westminster-hall, where next morning they were acquitted to the great joy of the nation. However, when king William and queen Mary were settled on the throne, our bishop, among many others of his brethren and the clergy, refused to own the established government, out of a conscientious regard to the allegiance he had sworn to James II.; and refusing to take the oaths required by an act of parliament of April 24, 1689, was by virtue of that act suspended from his office, and about the beginning of the following year, deprived of his bishopric. After this he lived the rest of his days in retirement, and dying Nov. 2, 1700, was buried in the chancel of the parochial church of Therfteld in Hertfordshire, where he had been rector, but without any memorial except the word Expergiscar engraven on a stone over the vault.

Previously, however, to his retirement, Burnet informs us that he was concerned in a very ill-concerted plot to restore the abdicated king, for which some of his party were imprisoned, and he thought it prudent to abscond. His abilities were not considered as of the first order, but li was of great sincerity and integrity in private life, and it is impossible not to respect the character, whatever we may think of the opinions of a man whom neither gratitude nor interest could seduce from what he considered as his duty. He published a “Vindication of the late archbishop Sancroft and his brethren, the rest of the deprived bishops, from the reflections of Mr. Marshall, in his defence of our. Constitution.” “Animadversions on a pamphlet entitled The Naked Truth,” which were answered by Andrew Marvell, under the name of Rivet; and “Letters to the Clergy of his diocese.”

, brother to the above, was born a Bristol in 1645, and educated at Corpus Christi college, Oxford, of which he was elected. fellow; he afterwards became chaplain to Dr. Henry Compton, bishop of London, who collated him, Nov. 4, 1680, to the rectory of Thorley in Hertfordshire, and Dec. 20 following, to the archdeaconry of Essex; and in 1682, to the prebend of Mapesbury in St. Paul’s. He commenced D. D. at Oxford, July 2, 1683, was collated by his brother to a prebend of Ely, March 26, 1686, and elected president of Corpus, March 13, 1687-8. The same year, May 7, he was instituted to the sinecure rectory of Fulham, on the presentation of his brother, to whom the advowson, for that turn, had been granted (the bishop of London being then under suspension), and at length was made precentor and prebendary of Brownswood in St. Paul’s, Jan. 11, 1689. What his political principles were at the revolution, we are not told, although, by keeping possession of his preferments, it is to be presumed, he did not follow the example of his brother, but took the oaths of allegiance. However, we are informed, that after the act passed in the last year of king William III. requiring the abjuration oath to be taken before Aug. 1, 1702, under penalty of forfeiting all ecclesiastical preferments, Dr. Turner went down from London to Oxford, July 28, seemingly with full resolution not to take the oath, and to quit all his preferments; but, on better, advice, he made no resignation, knowing that if he was legally called upon to prove his compliance with the act, his preferments would be void in course; and so continued to act, as if he had taken the oath, by which means he retained his preferments to his death, without ever taking it at all. He died April 30, 1714, and was buried in the chapel of Corpus Christi college, where there is a monument, and an inscription written by Edmund Chishull, B. D.

Dr. Turner has left only one sermon in print, preached before the king, May 29, 1685, but he is memorable on another account. He was a single man, and remarkable for his munificence and charity in his life-time. By his will, he left the bulk of his fortune, which was very considerable, in public and charitable uses; for, besides 4000l. in legacies to his relations and friends, he gave or left to his college 6000l. for improving the buildings, and other purposes; to the dean and chapter of Ely 1000l. for augmenting the singing-men’s stipends and 100l. the interest of which was to be expended in putting out children of tha town of Ely apprentices, at the nomination of his successors in the stall he held; and the remainder of his effects, which amounted to 20,000l. his executors were directed to lay out" in estates and lands, and settle them on the governors of the charity for the relief of poor widows and children of clergymen. His executors accordingly purchased the manor of Stow in Northamptonshire, and other estates there, and at West-Wratting in Cambridgeshire, amounting to above 1000l. a year, and settled them in 1716, agreeably to his will. They also erected a sumptuous monument to his memory in Stow church, with an inscription. William Turner, the third son of the dean of Canterbury, was archdeacon of Durham, and rector of Stanhope in that county. He died at Oxford in 1635, and was buried in St. Giles’s church, and near his remains were deposited those of his mother, who died in 1692.

, a very eminent naturalist and divine, was born at Morpeth, in Northumberland, and was educated under the patronage of sir Thomas Wentworth, at the university of Cambridge, where he was chosen a fellow of Pembroke Hall, about 1531. He acquired great reputation for his learning, and about 1536 was admitted to deacon’s orders, at which time he was master of arts. He applied himself also to philosophy and physic, and early discovered an inclination to the study of plants, and a wish to be well acquainted with the materia medico, of the ancients. He complains of the little assistance he could receive in these pursuits. “Being yet a student of Pembroke Hall, where I could learn never one Greke, neither Latin, nor English name, even amongst the physicians, of any herhe or tree such was the ignorance of that time; and as yet there was no English herbal, but one all full of unlearned cacographies and falsely naming of herbes.”

At Cambridge, Turner imbibed the principles of the reformers, and afterwards, agreeably to the practice of many others, united the character of the divine to that of the physician. He became a preacher, travelling into many parts of England, and propagated, with so much zeal, the cause of the reformation, that he excited persecution from bishop Gardiner. He was thrown into prison, and detained for a considerable time; and on his enlargement submitted to voluntary exile during the remainder of the reign of Henry VIII. This banishment proved favourable to his advancement in medical and botanical studies; he resided at Basil, Strasburgb, and at Bonn, but principally at Cologn, with many other English refugees. He dwelt for some time at Weissenburgh; and travelled also into Italy, and took the degree of doctor of physic at Ferrara. As at this period the learned were applying with great assiduity to the illustration of the ancients, it was a fortunate circumstance for Dr. Turner, that he had an opportunity of attending the lectures of Lucas Ghinus, at Bologna, of whom he speaks in his “Herbal” with great satisfaction; and frequently cites his authority against other commen* tators. Turner resided a considerable time at Basil, whence he dates the dedication of his book “On the Baths of England and Germany.” During his residence in Switzerland he contracted a friendship with Gesner, and afterwards kept up a correspondence with him. Gesner had a high opinion of Turner, as a physician and man of general learning, whose equal, he says, he scarcely remembered. This encomium occurs in Gesner’s book “De Herb;s Lunariis.”

On the accession of Edward VI. he returned o England, was incorporated M. D. at Oxford, appointed physician to Edward, duke of Somerset, and, as a divine, was rewarded with a prebend of York, a canonry of Windsor, and the deanery of Wells. In 1552 he was ordained priest by bishop Ridley. He speaks of himself in the third part of his “Herbal,” as having been physician to the “erle of Embden, lord of East Friesland.” In 1551 he published the first part of his History of Plants, which he dedicated to the duke of Somerset his patron. But on the accession of queen Mary, his zeal in the cause of the reformation, which he had amply testified, not only in preaching, but in various publications, rendered it necessary for him to retire again to the continent, where he remained at Basil, or Strasburgh, with others of the English exiles, until queen Elizabeth came to the throne. He then returned, and was reinstated in his preferments. He had, however, while abroad, caught some of the prejudices which divided the early protestants into two irreconcilable parties, and spoke and acted with such contempt for the English discipline and ceremonies, as to incur censure, but certainly was not deprived, as some of those writers who are hostile to the church have asserted, for he died possessed of the deanery of Wells. It would appear, indeed, that he had given sufficient provocation, but found a friend in the queen on such occasions. In the dedication of the complete edition of his “Herbal” to her in 1568, he acknowledges with gratitude, her favours in restoring him to his benefices, and in other ways protecting him from troubles, having, at four several times, granted him the great seal for that purpose.

Dr. Turner seems to have divided his time between his deanery, where he had a botanical garden, of which frequent mention is made in his “Herbal,” and his house in Crutched Friars, London. He speaks also of his garden at Kew, and from the repeated notices he takes of the plants in Purbeck, and about Portland, Dr. Pulteney infers that he must have had some intimate connections in Dorsetshire. He died July 7, 1568, a few months after the publication of the last part of his “Herbal,” and was buried in the chancel of St. Olave’s church, Hart-street, London, where a monument was erected to his memory by his widow.

Dr. Turner was the author of many controversial treatises, chiefly written against popery. Among these were, 1. “The hunting of the Romish 'Fox,” c. Basil, 1543. 2. “Rescuing of the Romish Fox,” 1545. 3. “The hunting of the Romish Wolf,” 8vo all these were published under the name of William Wraughton. 4. “Dialogue, wherein is contained the examination of the Mass,” Loncl. 8vo. 5. “A preservative, or triacle against the Poison of Pelagius, lately renewed and stirred up again, by the furious secc of the anabaptists,” ibid. 1551, 12mo. 6. “A new book of spiritual physic for divers diseases,” 1555. 7. “The hunting of the Fox and Wolf, because they did make havock of the sheep of Jesus Christ,” 8vo. Tanner mentions a few other articles, and there are several of his tracts yet in manuscript, in various libraries. He collated the translation of the Bible with Hebrew, Greek, and Latin copies, and corrected it in many places. He procured to be printed at Antwerp a new and corrected edition of William of Newburgh’s “Historia gentis nostrse,” from a ms. he found in the library at Wells; but complains that the printer not only omitted certain articles sent by him, but left out the preface he sent him, and substituted one of his own. Our author also translated several works from the Latin, particularly “The comparison of the Old Learning and the New,” written by Urbanus Regius, Southwark, 1537, 8vo, and again 1538 and 1548.

His first work on the subject of plants was printed at Cologn, under the title of “Historia de naturis herbarum, scholiis et notis vallata,” 1544, 8vo. Bumaldus is the only writer who mentions this work, and it probably was not reprinted in England. It was followed by a small volume under the title of “Names of Herbes, in Greek, Latin, English, Dutch and French,” Lond. 1548. As his knowledge in natural history was not confined to botany, he published a treatise on birds, entitled “Avium praecipuarum, quarum apud Plinium et Aristotelem mentio est, brevis et succincta historia,” Cologn. 1543, 8vo. By a letter of his prefixed to Gesner’s “Historia Animalium,” edit. 1620, relating to the English fishes, it appears that he had no inconsiderable degree of knowledge in that part of zoology. But the work which secured his reputation to posterity, and entitles him to the character of an original writer on that subject, in England, is his “History of Plants,” printed at different times, in three parts, in fol. with cuts, under the title of a “New Herbal,” Lond. 1551, part first; part second at Cologn, in 1562; with this was reprinted the first part, and his “Book on the Bathes of England and Germany.” These were reprinted, with a third part, in 1568. Dr. Pulteney has given a minute account of the contents and progress of this work, and observes, that when we regard the time in which Dr. Turner lived, and the little assistance he could derive from his contemporaries, he will appear to have exhibited uncommon diligence, and great erudition, and fully to deserve the character of an original writer. He also paid early attention to mineral waters, and to wines; and wrote on both subjects.

It appears that at one time there was a design of placing Dr. Turner at the head of Oriel college. Kennet mentions a letter to that college (1550, July 5) “to accept Dr. Turner for master of the same, appointed by the king;” but this appointment certainly did not take place. But from a passage in his “Spiritual Physic,” he appears to have been once a member of the House of Commons. Fox speaks of Turner with great respect, as “a man whose authority neither is to be neglected, nor credit to be disputed.” He married Jane, daughter of George Ander, an alderman of Cambridge, who after his death married Cox, bishop of Ely. In memory of her first husband, she left some money and lands to Pembroke Hall.

By this lady Dr. Turner had a son, Peter, who was a physician, and practised in London, and resided the latter part of his life in St. Helen’s, Bishopsgate-street, London. He died in 1614, and was buried near his father in St. Olave’s church, where there is a monument to his memory. He married Pascha, sister to Dr. Henry Parr, bishop of Worcester, by whom he had eight children, one of whom is the subject of the following article.

, son to the preceding Dr. Peter, and grandson to Dr. William Turner, was born in 1585, and was admitted a probationer fellow of Merton college, Oxford, in 1607, where he proceeded in arts, and not being restricted to any particular faculty, as the fellows of other colleges are, became, according to Wood, versed in all kinds of literature. His first preferment was the professorship of geometry in Gresham college, in July 1620, but he continued to reside mostly at Oxford, and held this place together with his fellowship. In 1629, by the direction of Laud, then bishop of London, he drew up a scheme for the annual election of proctors out of the several colleges at Oxford in a certain order, that was to return every twenty-three years, which being approved of by his majesty, Charles I. was called the Caroline cycle, and is still followed, and always printed at the end of the “Parecbolae sive Excerpta, e corpore statutorum universitatis Oxon.” In the same year he acted as one of the commissioners for revising the statutes, and reducing them to a better form and order. In 1630, on the death of Briggs, Mr. Turner was chosen to succeed him as professor of geometry at Oxford, and resigned his Gresham professorship. How well he was qualified for his new office appears by the character archbishop Usher gives of him, “Savilianus in academia Oxoniensi inatheseos professor eruditissimus.” In 1634 the new edition of the statutes was printed in fol. with a preface by Mr. Turner; and to reward him for his care and trouble, a new office was founded, that of “custos archivorum,” or keeper of the archives, to which he was appointed, and made large collections respecting the antiquities of the university, which were afterwards of great use to Anthony Wood. In 1636, on a royal visit to Oxford, Mr. Turner was created M. D. but having adhered to his majesty in his troubles, and even taken up arms in his cause, he was ejected from his fellowship of Merton, and his professorship. This greatly impoverished him, and he went to reside with a sister, the widow of a Mr. Watts, a brewer in Southwark, where he died in Jan. 1651, and was interred in St. Saviour’s church. He was a man of extensive learning, and wrote much, but being fastidious in his opinion of his own works, he never could complete them to his mind. We have mentioned the only writings he published, except a Latin poem in the collection in honour of sir Thomas Bodley, called the “Bodleiomnema,” Oxf. 1613. Wood also mentions “Epistolae variae ad doctissimos viros;” but we know of no printed letters of his Dr. Ward, however, gives extracts from three ms letters in English to Selden, chiefly relating to some Greek writers on the music of the ancients.

, a pious English divine, was a native of Flintshire, and born near Broadoak, in that county, but in what year we have not discovered. Our particulars indeed of this gentleman are extremely scanty, he having been omitted by Wood. Previously to his going to Oxford, he was for some time an inmate in the house of the celebrated Philip Henry, partly as a pupil, and partly as an assistant in the education of Mr. Henry’s children, one of whom, Matthew, the commentator, was first initiated in grammar-learning by Mr. Turner. This was in 1668, after which Mr. Turner entered of Edmund hall, Oxford, where he took his degree of M.A.June 8, 1675. He became afterwards vicar of Walberton, in Sussex, and resided there in 1697, at the time he published his principal work, but the date of his death we have not been able to ascertain. In 1695 he published a “History of all Religions,” Lond. 8vo; but the work by which he is best known is his “Cornpleat history of the most remarkable Providences, both of Judgment and Mercy, &c. to which is added, whatever, is curious in the works of nature and art. The whole digested into one volume, under proper heads; being a work set on foot thirty years ago, by the rev. Mr. Pool, author of the ‘ Synopsis Criticorum;’ and since undertaken and finished by William Turner,” &c. 1697, fol. This curious collection ranks with the similar performances of Clark, and Wanley in his “History of the Little World,” but is superior, perhaps, to both in selection and conciseness. Dunton, in his “Life,” gives Mr. Turner the character of “a man of wonderful moderation, and of, great piety,” and adds, what it is very natural for a, bookseller to praise, that “he was very generous, and would not receive a farthing for his copy till the success was known.”

, the first of a celebrated family of protestant divines, was the son of Francis Turretin, descended from an ancient family at Lucca, who was obliged to fly his country for the cause of religion, and resided partly at Antwerp and Geneva, and lastly at Zurich, where he died. His son Benedict was born Nov. 9, 1588, and in his thirty-third year (1621) was appointed pastor, and professor of theology at Geneva. The same year the republic of Geneva being alarmed at the hostile preparations making by the duke of Savoy, sent Mr. Turretin to the States General of the United Provinces and to the prince of Orange, and he prevailed on their high mightinesses to advance the sum of 30,000 livres, and 10,000 livres per month, for three months, in case of a siege. He also obtained other pecuniary aid from the churches of Hamburgh, Embden, and Bremen. During his being in Holland, he had interviews with the French and English ambassadors, and had an audience of the king of Bohemia, to whom he communicated the sympathy which the state of Geneva felt on his reverse of fortune. In 1622 he returned to Geneva, and was received with all the respect due to his services. He died at Geneva, March 4, 1631, with the character of a very learned divine, and a man of great moderation and judgment. His works are, 1. A defence of the Geneva translation of the Bible, against the attack of father Colon in his “Geneve Plagiaire.” This extended to three parts, or volumes, printed from 1618 to 1626. 2. “Sermons,” in French, “sur rutilite” des chatiments.“3.” Sermons," in Italian, &c.

, son to the preceding, was born at Geneva, Oct. 17, 1623. After pursuing his studies in the classics and philosophy with great credit, he entered on the study of divinity, under the celebrated Calvinistic professors, John Diodati, Theodore Tronchin, Frederick Spanheim, &c. While a student he supported in 1640 and 1644, two theses, “De felicitate morali et politica,” and “De necessaria Dei gratia.” He afterwards went to Leyden, and formed an acquaintance with the most eminent scholars there; and afterwards to Paris, where he lodged with the celebrated Daille", and studied geography under Gassendi, whose philosophical lectures he also attended. He then visited the schools of Saumur and Montauban, and on his return to Geneva in 1647 was ordained, and in the following year served both in the French and Italian churches of that city. In 1650 he refused the professorship of philosophy, which was offered to him more than once, but accepted an invitation to the pastoral office at Lyons, where he succeeded Aaron Morus, the brother of Alexander. In 1653 he was recalled to Geneva to be professor of divinity, an office which Theodore Tronchin was now about to resign from age, and Turretin continued in it during the rest of his life. In 1661 he was employed on a similar business as his father, being sent to Holland to obtain assistance from the States General to fortify the city of Geneva. Having represented the case, he obtained the sum of 75,000 florins, with which a bastion was built, called the Dutch bastion. He had an interview with the prince and princess dowager of Orange at Turnhout in Brabant; a.nd having often preached while in Holland, he was so much admired, that the Walloon church of Leyden, and the French church at the Hague, sent him invitations to settle with them; but this he declined, and returned to Geneva in 1662. He had not been here long before the states general of Holland wrote most pressingly to the republic, requesting that Turretin might be permitted to settle in Holland and similar applications were made from Leyden, &c. in 1666 and 1672 but he could not be reconciled to the change, and resuming his functions, acquired the greatest fame, both as a divine and professor. He died Sept. 28, 1687.

, the most celebrated of the family, was the son of Francis Turretin, and was born at Geneva, Aug. 24, 1671. From his infancy he shewed a great ardour for study, which his father took every pains to improve and direct. Some of his early preceptors were divines who had fled from France for religion, and one of them, a Mons. Dautun, was particularly serviceable in correcting the exuberances of his compositions, and habituating him to revise and reconsider what he wrote. This at first was rather troublesome to the lively spirits of our author, but he soon saw that Dautun had reason on his side. He studied the Cartesian philosophy under Chouet, a very able professor. Bishop Burnet, who passed the winter at Geneva in 1685, conceived a very high opinion of young Turretin, often examined him on his tasks, and in the course of many conversations inspired him with that taste which Turretin always afterwards indulged for English literature. In 1687 he lost his father, but continued to pursue his theological studies under Louis Tronchin, Calendrini, and Pictet. Tronchin admired in him a great love for truth and peace, and said, “that young man begins where others end.” Turretin had many advantages on his side, an uncommon share of natural understanding, a great memory, a facility in discovering the important parts of a question; an aversion to idleness and frivolous amusements; learned friends, an ample library, and a patrimony which set him at ease from anxiety or precipitation in his studies. At the age of twenty, with these advantages, we are told he was “almost a great man,” (presque un grand homme).

In 16y3 he began his travels, and first resided for a considerable time in Holland, where his talents recommended him to the acquaintance and friendship of the most eminent scholars and divines of the time. He lived eight months at Rotterdam, and in the midst of the disputes between Jurieu and Bayle, was on good terms with both, without any sacrifice of principle on his own part. His chief object during his residence in Holland was the study of ecclesiastical history under Spanheim; and with that view he continued about eight months at Leyden, and maintained some theses which did him great credit, particularly “Pyrrhonismus pontificius, sive Theses Theologico-historicse de variationibus pontificiorum circa ecclesise infallibilitatem.” This was reprinted in the collection of his Dissertations. In July 1692 he came to England, but had not slept many nights in London before he was attacked by an asthmatic complaint, which disturbed him for the greater part of his life. He removed for better air to Chelsea, but preached in the French church in London, and visited the universities of Oxford and Cambridge. At the latter he first saw Mr. (afterwards sir) Isaac Newton, in whose modest manners and conversation he discerned the future illustrious character. It appears also that he held some amicable disputes with our divines on the respective constitutions of the churches of England and Geneva. He passed much of his time with his old friend bishop Burnet, at the palace at Salisbury, where he also met Dr. V/hitby and Mr. Allix: and by means of lord Galloway was introduced at court, and very graciously received by king William and queen Mary. Burnet also introduced him to Tillotson, Compton, Tenison, Lloyd, Wake, &c. &c. He learned English so well, that when after his return to Geneva, the duke of Bridgwater and lord Townsend, with hoth of whom he was intimate, engaged him to preach in English, he performed it with a facility which astonished his noble hearers; but he afterwards lost the art of speaking, although he could always write and read English with great ease and correctness.

After leaving England, which he did with much regret, in the spring 1693, he went to Paris, where he had equal reason to be pleased with his reception, being in the same manner caressed by Bossuet, Huet, Bignon, Nicaise, Mabillon, IVlalehranche, &c. &c. and in short all the learned men. of the day. On his return home he was ordained to the ministry in 1694, when only twenty-two years of age, a special mark of respect, as twenty-four is the lowest age appointed by law. For some time he had no fixed charge, but preached in the Italian church, with which his father and grandfather had always been connected, and he was a perfect master of the language. In 1697 the magistrates founded for him a professorship of ecclesiastical history, but without any salary, and M. Turretin was in a condition to accept it on such terms. He entered on his office in May, with a discourse on the utility and excellence of sacred antiquities, and afterwards began a course of ecclesiastical history, comprised in about three hundred lectures. He was often requested to print these, but pleaded that they were merely collections formed for the direction of the students, and were not sufficiently polished for publication.

In 1699 he embraced a favourable opportunity to make the tour of Swisserland, in the course of which he added considerably to the number of his friends and admirers. After his return, the commencement of a new century directed his attention to the secular games of the ancients, and produced from his pen a treatise entitled “De ludis ssECularibus Academicae Questiones,” Gen. 1701, 4to.In the same year he was chosen rector of the academy, in which office he remained until 1711, and delivered ten orations on the academic anniversary of each year. In 1702, he wrote a panegyric on William III, which was reprinted in England, and much admired. On the death of Tronchin, in 1705, he was appointed to succeed him in the divinity professorship, which he held with that of ecclesiastical history, but did not deliver a regular, systematic course of divinity lectures, for which he was blamed. In 1706 he joined those Geneva divines who sought to be excused from subscribing the form called the consensus, which had been introduced about thirty or forty years before. It appears from this that his notions were rather more latitudinarian than those of his ancestors; and it was remarked as rather singular that the son should be so zealous to abolish, what the father had been equally zealous to establish. We are assured, however, that friendly as he was to toleration, and somewhat inclined to Arminianism, he was a constant advocate for uniformity in all essential doctrines. In 1707, when the re-union of the protestant churches was agitated, the king of Prussia made Turretin a present of a gold medal, and he was chosen a member of the royal society of Berlin, as he had before of that of London. On the subject of any junction with the church of Rome, Turretin held that to be wholly impracticable, and his opinion had great weight. Such was indeed his reputation, that no strangers, of whatever rank, ever visited Geneva without a desire to be introduced to him, and to consult him on matters of importance.

In 1711 he began to print his theses on different subjects, but chiefly on the necessity of a revelation, and on the truth of the Christian religion, all of which were published at Geneva in 2 vols. 4to, 1737. In 1719 he published a “Dissertation on Fundamental Points,” which he had written at the request of two persons of rank of the Lutheran profession. Along with it was published his “Cloud of Witnesses.” The title was “Nubes Testium de moderate et pacifico de rebus theologicis judicio, et instituenda inter protestantes concordia. Premissa est brevis et pacifica de articulis fundamentalibus disquisitio, qua ad protestantium pacem, mutuamque tolerantiam via sternitur,” 4to. This work, which contains an assemblage of the sentiments of eminent men of all ages on the subject of toleration, was dedicated to archbishop Wake, who as well as the author laboured much to procure a re-union between the protestant churches; and Turretin derived no little reputation from this attempt, which many of the leading men among the Lutherans highly approved. About this time he had a controversy with Buddeus on the subject of miracles, which was conducted on both sides with great urbanity. Turretm also began to prepare for the press his lectures on natural religion, which form an excellent system on that subject. On the death of Pictet he succeeded him in his duties on. solemn academical festivals, and in delivering the accustomed harangues, prescribed by the laws of Geneva, not only in the council of two hundred, but in the half-yearly meetings of the burgesses. He also took an active part in various improvements introduced by the church of Geneva, as a revision of their liturgies, a translation of the new testament published in 1726, the establishment of a society for the education of the young, &c. In 1734 he published his abridgment of ecclesiastical history, in Latin, “Historiae Ecclesiastics compendium a Christo nato usque ad annum. 1700,” Genev. 8vo. This he used to dictate to his students, and it served as a text-book for his lectures. The preceding year he received from our queen Caroline, who had often shewn him marks of respect, a gold medal, brought by Sir Luke Schaub, but she was dead before it arrived. On the death of archbishop Wake in 1737, which Turretin very much regretted, the divines of Geneva having determined to write a letter to the new archbishop, Potter, congratulating him on his promotion, and requesting his protection to the foreign churches, Turretin was employed on the occasion, and this was the last letter of any importance which he wrote. His health, always delicate, now began to give way, and he died May I, 1737, in his sixty-sixth year, regretted as one of the most able divines of his church or time.

, a learned and indefatigable Jesuit of Rome, was born in 1545, and taught rhetoric in that city with reputation during twenty years, and was afterwards rector of several colleges. He promoted the study of the belles lettres in his society, and died at Rome, April 6, 1599, aged 54. His principal works, are, 1. “The Life of St. Francis Xavier;” the best edition of this is that of 1596, 4to. On this work we shall have occasion to make some remarks in our article of Xavier. 2. “The History of Loretto,” 8vo. 3. A treatise on the Latin Particles. 4. “An Abridgment of Universal History,” from the creation to 1598, &c. All the above are in elegant Latin. The best editions of his Universal History are those which have a continuation by father Philip Briet, from 1618 to 1661. The best French translation of it is by the abbe Lagneau, Paris, 1757, 4 vols. 12mo, with notes.

, an English poet of the sixteenth century, and styled the British Varro, was born, as it is supposed, about the year 1515, at Rivenhall near Witham in Essex. His father, William Tusser, married a daughter of Thomas Smith, of Rivenhall, esq. by whom he had five sons and four daughters; and this match appears to have been the chief foundation of “the gentility of his family,” for which he refers his readers to “the Heralds’ book.” The name and race, however, have long been extinct. At an early age, much against his will, he was sent by his father to a music-school; and was soon placed as a chorister or singing-boy in the collegiate chapel of the castle of Wallingford; and after some hardships, of which he complains, and frequent change of place, he was at length admitted into St. Paul’s, where he arrived at considerable proficiency in music, under John Redford, the organist of that cathedral, a man distinguished for his attainments in the science. From St. Paul’s he was sent to Eton school, and was some time under the tuition of the famous Nicholas Udall, of whose severity he complains, in giving him fiftythree stripes at once for a trifling fault. Hence he was removed to Cambridge, and, according to some, was first entered of King’s college, and afterwards removed to Trinity hall; but his studies being interrupted by sickness, he left the university, and was employed about court, probably in his musical capacity, by the influence of his patron, William lord Paget. He appears to have been a retainer in this nobleman’s family, and he mentions his lordship in the highest terms of panegyric.

In this situation, which must have been during the latter part of the reign of Henry VIIL and the first years of Edward VI. when his patron was in great favour, he remained ten years, and then retiring into the country, and marrying, turned farmer at Katwade, now Cattiwade, a hamlet of the parish of Brantham, in Sanfort hundred, Suffolk, near the river Stour. Here he composed his book of Husbandry, the first edition of which was published in 1557, and dedicated to his patron lord Paget. It is probable that he must have been acquainted with rural affairs, for several years at least, before he could produce even the rude essay which forms the germ of his future and more elaborate work. He appears to have suffered some reverse in his farming business, as we find him afterwards successively at Ipswich, where his wife died, at West Dereham, and at Norwich. He married, however, a second wife, of the name of Moon, which affords him a play of words; but this match did not add to his happiness, apparently from a disparity in age, she being very young. He then obtained, by the interest of Salisbury, dean of Norwich, a singing-man’s place in that cathedral. After this he tried farming again, at Fairsted, near his native place; but again failing, he repaired to London, which he mentions with due commendation, until being driven from it by the plague in 1574, he went to Cambridge. When the scourge abated he returned to London, and died there, as is generally supposed, about 1580, and was interred in St. Mildred’s church in the Poultry, with an epitaph, recorded by Stow.

For an author, the vicissitudes of his life present an uncommon variety of incident. “Without a tincture of careless imprudence,” saysWarton, “or vicious extravagance, this desultory character seems to have thriven in no vocation.” There are no data, however, to account for his frequent changes of life and his failures. Farming was his leading pursuit, and in that, although he was a good theorist for the time, he was unsuccessful in practice. Stillingfleet says, “He seems to have been a good-natured cheerful man, and though a lover of ceconomy, far from meanness, as appears in many of his precepts, wherein he shews his disapprobation of that pitiful spirit, which makes farmers starve their cattle, their land, and every thing belonging to them; choosing rather to lose a pound than spend a shilling. Upon the whole, his book displays all the qualities of a well-disposed man, as well as of an able farmer.” Mr. Stillingfleet adds, “Googe set Tusser on a level with Varro and Columella and Palladius; but I would rather compare him to old Hesiod. They both wrote in the infancy of husbandry; both gave good general precepts, without entering into the detail, though Tusser has more of it than Hesiod; they both seem desirous to improve the morals of their readers as well as their farms, by recommending industry and economy; and that which perhaps may be looked upon as the greatest resemblance, they both wrote in verse, probably for the same reason, namely, to propagate their doctrines more effectually.”

Tusser’s “Five Hundred Points of Good Husbandry” appears to have obtained a very favourable reception from the public, above twelve editions having appeared within the first fifty years, and afterwards many others were printed. The best editions are those of 1580 and 1585, but they are very scarce. In 1812 the public was favoured with a new edition, carefully collated and corrected by Dr. William Mavor, of whose biographical sketch we have availed ourselves in the present article. Dr. Mavor has rendered his edition highly valuable by a series of notes, georgical, illustrative, and explanatory, a glossary, and other improvements.

, a party writer in the reign of king James the second, very early in life became obnoxious to the government from the virulence of his writings. He was prosecuted for a political performance on the side of Monmouth, and being found guilty, was sentenced by Jefferies to be whipped through several market- towns in the west. To avoid this severe punishment he petitioned the king that the sentence might be changed to hanging. At the death of this unfortunate monarch he wrote an invective against his memory, which even the severity of his sufferings can hardly excuse. He was the author of “The Observator,” which was begun April I, 1702. Becoming obnoxious to the tories, he received a severe beating in August 1707, and died in much distress in the Mint, the 23d of September following, at the age of forty-seven. In some verses on his death he is called captain Tutchin. Besides political and poetical effusions, he wrote a drama entitled “The unfortunate Shepherd,” 1685," 8vo, which is printed in a collection of his poems.

, an eminent merchant in Pudding-lane, is said to have united to the integrity and skill of a man of business the accomplishments of a polite scholar and an intelligent antiquary. He was elected a member of the Society of Antiquaries June 26, 1755. In 1771 he married a cousin, but had not any issue. On the 5th of July, 1785, presently after supper, he received a sudden and unexpected paralytic strokej which in a few hours deprived him of speech and senses; in which state he lay till the 9th of July, being the day on which he had accomplished fifty-two years and eleven months. By his will he ordered his coins, medals, books, and prints, to be sold by auction (which was done from the llth of January to the 18th of February, 1786, inclusive) the produce to be added to the principal part of his estate, which his industry and extreme frugality had increased to a considerable fortune, the interest of which he bequeathed to his widow for her life; and after her to a female cousin of the same condition; the ultimate reversion equally amongst the children of his brother. Few of his survivors understood better the rare secret of collecting only what was truly valuable; a circumstance which invincible modesty alone prevented from being more generally known. To those who were favoured with his intimacy his treasures and his judicious communications were regularly open. His select and valuable library was remarkable for the neatness of the copies; and many of the books were improved by notes written in his own small but elegant hand-writing.

an enterprizing scholar of uncommon talents and, attainments, was born June I, 1769, at Threepwood, near Hexham, in the county of Northumberland. He was the son of Francis Tweddell, esq. an able and intelligent magistrate. His earlier years were passed under the care and instruction of a most pious and affectionate mother; and at the age of nine years he was sent to school at Hartforth, near Richmond, in the North Riding of Yorkshire, under the superintendance of the Rev. Matthew Raine (father of the late learned Dr. Raine, of the Charter-house), who early discovered those rare endowments which were shortly to win high distinction, and were cherished by him with a kind solicitude, and treated with no common skill. Previously to his commencing residence at the university of Cambridge he spent some time under the immediate tuition of the Rev. Dr. Samuel Parr, whose pre-eminent learning opened not its stores in vain to an ardent and capacious mind; and whose truly affectionate regard for his pupil spared no pains to perfect him in all the learning of Greece and Rome; nor is it too much to say, that the tutor saw his pains requited, and gloried in his charge; whilst he secured the grateful respect and lasting attachment of his accomplished scholar. Mr. Tweddell’s proficiency in his academical course procured him unprecedented honours. The “Prolusiones Juveniles,” which were published in the year 1793, furnish an ample and unequivocal testimony to the extent and versatility of his talents. Professor Heyne, of Goettingen, in a letter addressed to Dr. Burgess (the truly learned and venerable bishop of St. David’s), thus speaks of Mr. Tweddell’s productions “Redditos mihi his diebus sunt litters? tuae, missae ex urbe Dresdse, Saxoniae, inclusse litteris elegantissimis Jbannis Tweddell, juvenis ornatissimi; cujus visendi et compellandi copiam 'mihi haud obtigisse vehementer doleo; spirant litteroe ejus indolem ingenuam, ingenium venustum, mores amabiles et jncundos. Eruditionem autem ejus exquisitam ex prolasionibus ejus juvcnilibus perspexi, quas litteris adjunxerat; una cum generoso libertatis sensu, quern cum ipsa libertate sibi eripi haud videtur pati velle.”

In 1792 Mr. Tweddell was elected fellow of Trinity college; and, soon afterwards, entered himself a student of the Middle-Temple. By those who were acquainted with the vivacity and playfulness of his mind, and who remember with what an exquisite feeling he relished the beauties of poetic fiction and the graces of classical composition, it will not be thought surprising that the study of the law should be in a more than common degree distasteful; yet, such was his deference to the wishes of his father, that, although he could never overcome the prevailing aversion of his mind, he paid considerable attention to his professional studies. It appears, both from the records of his private sentiments, as well as from his large and constant intercourse with the best sources of English history, and his predilection for political economy, that he would have wished to employ his talents and cultivated address in diplomacy at the courts of foreign powers.

It was not without a view to this that Mr. Tweddell determined to travel, and employ a few years in acquiring a knowledge of the manners, policy, and characters of the principal courts and most interesting countries of Europe, which were not yet become inaccessible to an Englishman through the overwhelming dominion of republican France. He accordingly embarked on the“24th September 1795, for Hamburg; where that” Correspondence" commences which was lately published, and which may serve to illustrate, though very imperfectly, the progress, pursuits, and indefatigable researches of this traveller in Switzerland, the North of Europe, and various parts of the East, until the period of his arrival in the provinces of Greece: here, after visiting several of the islands in the Archipelago, he fixed his residence for four months in Athens, exploring with restless ardour, and faithfully delineating, the remains of art and science, discoverable amidst her sacred ruins. The hand of a wise but mysterious Providence suddenly arrested his career, on- the 25th of July, 1799.

Mr. Tweddell, in his person, was of the middle stature, of a handsome and well-proportioned figure. His eye was remarkably soft and intelligent. The profile, or frontispiece to the volume, lately published, gives a correct and lively representation of the original, though it is not in the power of any outline to shadow out the fine expression of his animated and interesting countenance. His address was polished, affable, and prepossessing in a high degree; and there was in his whole appearance an air of dignified benevolence, which pourtrayed at once the suavity of his nature and the independence of his mind. In conversation, he had a talent so peculiarly his own, as to form a very distinguishing feature of his character. A chastised and ingenious wit, which could seize on an incident in the happiest manner a lively fancy, which could clothe the choicest ideas in the best language — these, supported by large acquaintance with men and books, together with the further advantages of a melodious voice, and a playfulness of manner singularly sweet and engaging, rendered him the delight of every company: his power of attracting friendships was, indeed, remarkable; and in securing them he was equally happy. Accomplished and admired as he was, his modesty was conspicuous, and his whole deportment devoid of affectation or pretension. Qualified eminently to shine in society, and actually sharing its applause, he found his chief enjoyment in the retired circle of select friends; in whose literary leisure, and in the amenities of female converse (which for him had the highest charms) he sought the purest and the most refined recreation. “Of jhe purity of Mr. Tweddell’s principles, and the honourable independence of his character of his elevated integrity, his love of truth, his generous, noble, and affectionate spirit, the editor might with justice say much, but the traces and proofs of these, dispersed throughout the annexed correspondence, he cheerfully leaves to the police and sympathy of the intelligent reader.” Such is the language of his brother, the rev. Robert Tweddell, and the editor of a very interesting volume, entitled “Remains of the late John Tweddell, &c. being a selection of his Letters, written from various parts of the continent, together with a republication of his Prolusiones Juveniles,” 1815, 4to. It has been justly remarked on this volume, that, though some letters in the collection, and parts of others, would have been perhaps judiciously omitted, there are few instances of a private correspondence, written without the least view to publication, which will bear a severer scrutiny, either in point of good sense, elegant taste, or honourable sentiments. Full of candour and discrimination, Tweddell pourtrays with great spirit the manners and customs, and characters of the different nations he visited imbued with classical lore, and blessed with a fine imagination, he paints in glowing colours the magnificent scenery of nature in her wildest regions, and throws a double interest over the deserted relics of ancient art: educated in the strict principles of morality and religion, by the most excellent of parents, he repays their care and solicitude by the strong and vivid sentiments of attachment displayed throughout his whole correspondence, which is undefiled by a single sentence of a licentious tendency.

, a learned English divine, was educated at Jesus college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. in 1704-. In 1733 the university of Oxford conferred on him the degree of M. A. by diploma, in approbation, as we presume, of his “Critical Examination, &c.” hereafter mentioned. He was at that time vicar of St. Mary’s at Marlborough; but in 1737 was presented to the united rectories of St. Matthew, Friday-street, and St. Peter, Cheap. He was also a prebendary of St. Paul’s, and one of the lecturers of St. Dunstan’s in the West. Some of these promotions came late, nor had he more than 100l. a year to support a family of five children till within five years of his death, which took place Feb. 19, 1741-2. By the advice of some friends, two volumes of his sermons at Boyle’s and lady Moyer’s lectures were published for the benefit of his family, 1743, in 2 vols. 8vo. His publications in his life-time were, 1. “A Critical Examination of the late new text and version of the Testament, in Greek and English, in three parts;” the first two were printed in 1731, and the last in 1732, 8vo. The work here examined was entitled “The New Testament in Greek and English, containing the original text corrected, from the authority of authentic Mss. and a new version formed agreeably to the illustrations of the most learned commentators and critics, with notes and various readings, &c.” Mr. Twells’s object is to prove that the editor’s text is corrupt, his version false, and his notes fallacious, and that the tendency of the work is to injure Christianity in general, and the tenets of the Church of England in particular. Mr. Twells also published, 2. “A Vindication of the gospel of St. Matthew,” 1735, 8vo; and “A Supplement to the Vindication.” 3. “Answer to the Inquiry into the meaning of the Demoniacks in the New Testament,” 1737, 8vo. 4. “Answer to the ‘ Further Inquiry,’ 1738,” 8vo. 5. “The Theological Works of Dr. Pocock,” 1740, 2 vols. fol. with a life of Pocock, to which we have already referred, replete with curious information respecting that great orientalist, his contemporaries, and the times in which he lived. Mr. Twells, we are sorry to add, gained little by this pub-. Hcation. He himself states that his reward for writing the life, compiling indexes, collating and correcting the errors of the old edition, which with soliciting for subscriptions, travelling to London, Oxford, &c. more or less employed his time and exercised his patience for five years, would be in all probability not more than 50l.

, a learned divine, was the only son of an eminent tea-merchant by his first marriage, and born in 1734. He was intended by his father to succeed him in that house, which he had so well established; but the son, feeling an impulse towards literature and science, entreated his father to let him devote himself to study and a classical education; and, being indulged in his wish, he was matriculated at Sidney-college, Cambridge. Mr. T. was contemporary in that university with Gray, Mason, and Bate; and so able a musician, that, besides playing the harpsichord and organ in a masterly manner, he was so excellent a performer on the violin as to lead all the concerts, and even oratorios, that were performed in the university during term-time, in which Bate played the organ and harpsichord. His taste in music was enlarged and confirmed by study as well as practice, as few professors knew more of composition, harmonics, and the history of the art and science of music, than this intelligent and polished Dilettante.

In 1760 he took his degree of B. A. and that of A. M. in 1763. He became rector of White Notley, Essex, in private patronage, 1788, and of St. Mary’s, Colchester, to which he was presented by the bishop of London, on the death of Philip Morant, 1770. He died Aug. 6, 1804, in the seventieth year of his age. Sound learning, polite literature, and exquisite taste in all the fine arts, lost an ornament and defender in the death of this scholar and worthy divine. His translation of the “Poetics of Aristotle” must convince men of learning of his knowledge of the Greek language, of the wide extent of his classical erudition, of his acute and fair spirit of criticism, and, above all, of his good taste, sound judgment, and general reading manifested in his dissertations. Besides his familiar acquaintance with the Greek and Roman classics, his knowledge of modern languages, particularly French and Italian, was such as not only to enable him to read but to write those languages with facility and idiomatic accuracy. His conversation and letters, when science and serious subjects were out of the question, were replete with wit, humour, and playfulness. In the performance of his ecclesiastical duties Mr. T. was exemplary, scarcely allowing himself to be absent from his parishioners more than a fortnight in a year, during the last forty years of his life, though, from his learning, accomplishments, pleasing character, and conversation, no man’s company was so much sought. During the last 12 or 14 years of his life he was a widower, and has left no progeny. His preferment in the church was inadequate to his learning, piety, and talents; but such was the moderation of his desires, that he neither solicited nor complained. The Colchester living was conferred upon him by Dr. Lowth, bishop of London, very much to his honour, without personal acquaintance or powerful recommendation; but, from the modesty of his character, and love of a private life, his profound learning and literary abilities were little known till the publication of his Aristotle.

, a very learned nonconformist divine, was descended from German ancestors, of whom his grandfather is said to have been the first who settled in England. He was born about 1575. His father, who was a clothier at Newbury in Berkshire, perceiving this his sou to be weil qualified for a learned education, sent him to Winchester-school, whence he was in 1596 elected probationer fellow of New-college, Oxford, and two years after became actual fellow. According to Wood, he studied divinity for sixteen years together. In 1604 he proceeded in arts, and about that time taking orders, was a frequent and diligent preacher, “noted to the academicians for his subtile wit, exact judgment, exemplary life and conversation, and for the endowment of such qualities that were befitting men of his function.” He was not less esteemed as a logician and philosopher, and his learning appeared not only in his public lectures and disputations, but in the accuracy with which he corrected the works of the celebrated Bradwardine, published by sir Henry Savile. Besides his catechistical lectures, which he read every Thursday in term-time in the college chapel, he preached every Sunday at St. Aldate’s church; and at length his fame reaching the court, king James appointed him chaplain to his daughter Elizabeth, afterwards the unfortunate queen of Bohemia, who was then about to leave her native country and go to the Palatinate. On this he was admitted to his degree of D. D.

His stay abroad, however, was not long. In about two months he was called back to England, but on his arrival took a final leave of the court, and devoted himself to a learned retirement at Newbury, the place of his birth, of which he obtained the curacy. Here, such was his attachment to the quiet enjoyment of his studies, and the discharge of his parochial duties, that he refused some valuable preferments offered him entirely on the score of merit; among these were the wardenship of Winchester college, a prebend of Winchester, and a valuable living. This last he had some thoughts of accepting, provided the people of Newbury could be furnished with a suitable successor. With this view he waited upon the archbishop of Canterbury, who received him very kindly, granted his request, an'd added, that he would mention him to the king as a pious and learned divine, and no puritan. Twiss seems to have been alarmed at this last compliment, which he knew he did not deserve, and upon more mature consideration, remained at Newbury. About the same time he refused a professor’s chair at Oxford, and another in the university of Franeker.

Upon the publication of the “Book of Sports,” which did so much mischief to the royal cause, Dr. Twiss decidedly declared his opinion against it, and refused to read it, yet he was still such a favourite with king James that he forbade his being molested on this account. During the rebellion he suffered considerably by the violence of the soldiery; but when prince Rupert came to Newbury he entertained Dr. Twiss very courteously, wishing him to forsake the parliamentary cause, and write in defence of the king, which he refused. In 1640 he was chosen one of the sub-committee, to assist the committee of accommodation appointed by the House of Lords to consider the innovations introduced into the church, and to promote a more pure reformation. In 1643 he was nominated, by an order of the parliament, prolocutor to the assembly of divines. This appointment he repeatedly declined, but having at length been prevailed upon to accept it, he preached (the assembly opening on July 1.) before both Houses of parliament, in Henry VIHth’s chapel. “In his sermon,” says Fuller, “he exhorted his auditory to a faithful discharge of their duty, and to promote the glory of God and the honour of his church; but he was sorry that they wanted the royal assent. He hoped, however, that in due time it might be obtained, and that a happy union would be obtained between the king and parliament.” He appears to have been dissatisfied with the conduct of both of the great contending parties: “whilst some would have nothing reformed, others would have all things changed, and turned upside down.” These melancholy prospects gradually impaired his health, and some time after he sunk down in the pulpit while preaching, and being carried home, languished until July 20, 1646, when he expired, in the seventieth year of his age. During his illness the parliament voted him lOOl. as he had lost all his property while at Newbury, and had in London only one of the lectureships of St. Andrew’s, Holborn; and after his death \000l. to his family; but this, it is said, they never received *. Respecting his

* Dr. Twhs was buried in Westmin- This, we presume, must have been in

others, were dug up and thrown into was nothing inDr.Twiss’s conduct to rena pit, in St. Margaret’s churchyard, derhis memory particularly obnoxious. personal character, there seems no difference of opinion among historians. Fuller denominates him “a divine of great abilities, learning, piety, and moderation;” and Wood says, “his plain preaching was esteemed good; his solid disputations were accounted better; but his pious life was reckoned best of all.” Nor less favourably does bishop Sanderson speak of him, even while differing greatly from some of his opinions. Mr. Clark says, that he “had his infirmities, whereof the most visible was this: that he was of a facile nature, and too prone to be deceived by giving too much credit to those, whom, by information from others, or in his own opinion, he judged to be godly. Whence it came to pass that he was often imposed upon, especially by certain crafty heads, who solemnly professed that their chiefest care was the preservation of the purity of doctrine, and reformation of discipline, whereas, in deed and truth, they sought the utter subversion of both.”

His writings are all controversial, and more or less directed against Arminianism, of which, it seems to be agreed, even by his adversaries, he was the ablest and most successful opponent of his time. The authors against whom he wrote were, principally, Dr. Thomas Jackson, Mr. Henry Mason, Dr. Thomas Godwin, Mr. John Godwin, Mr. John Cotton, Dr. Potter, Dr. Heylin, and Dr. Hammond. His works were, 1. “Vindiciae gratioe,” Amst. 1632 and 164S, fol. against Arminius. 2. “A discovery of Dr. Jackson’s Vanity,” &c. 1631, 4to, printed abroad. 3. “Dissertatio de scientia media tribus libris absoluta,” &c. Arnheim, 1639, fol. 4. “Of the Morality of the Fourth Commandment,” Lond. 1641, 4to. 5. “Treatise of Reprobation,” ibid. 1646, 4to, with some other works printed after his death. There are fifteen of his letters in Mr. Joseph Mede’s Works, and he, left many Mss. in the hands of his son, who, WoocJ says, was a minister, but these are probably lost.

, one of a family of Oxford antiquaries, was the grandson of sir Brian Twyne, of Long Parish, in Hampshire, knight, and was born at Bolingdon, in the same county. He was educated at New Inn hall, Oxford, and admitted to the reading of the institutions in 1524, at a time when that society could boast of many excellent civilians. After he left the university he was appointed head master of the free-school at Canterbury, and in 1553 rose to be mayor of the city, in the time of Wyat’s rebellion. By the school he became so rich as to be able to purchase lands at Preston and Hardacre, in Kent, which he left to his posterity. He was a good Greek and Latin scholar, and devoted much of his time to the study of history and antiquities. He was held in great esteem by men able to judge of his talents, particularly by Leland, who introduces him among the worthies of his time in his “Encomia,” and by Camden, who speaks of him in his “Britannia” as a learned old man. Holinshed also mentions him as a learned antiquary, in the first edition of hia “Chronicle;” but this notice is for some reason omitted in the edition of 1587. It is said he was a violent papist, but Tanner has produced evidence of a charge more disgraceful to his character as a tutor and magistrate. This appears in a ms. in Bene't college library, Cambridge, No. CXX. “Anno 1560, Mr. Twyne, school- master, was ordered to abstain from riot and drunkenness, and not to intermeddle with any public office in the town.” He died in an advanced age, Nov. 24, 1581, and was buried in the chancel of the church of St. Paul, Canterbury, with an inscription, in which he is styled armiger. His only publication, which, however, did not appear until after his death, was his work “De rebus Albionicis, Britannicis atque Anglicis commentariorum libri duo,” Lond. 1590, 8vo. His Mss. which are on subjects of history and antiquities, were given by his grandson, Brian Twyne, to the library of Corpus Christi college, Oxford. Mr. Gough mentions his collections for a history of Canterbury, as being lost. Bishop Kennet says that he wrote an epistle prefixed to the“History of king Boccus and Sydracke,” 1510, 4to, a very rare book, of which there is a copy in St. John’s library, Oxford.

By his wife Alice, daughter of William Piper of Canter* bury, whom he married in 1524, which, according to Wood, must have been when he was at Oxford, he had three sons. The first, Lawrence, was a fellow of All Souls college, and bachelor of civil law, and an ingenious poet, but ventured no farther than some encomiastic verses prefixed to books. He lived and probably died on his father’s estate at Hardacre in Kent. He had a brother John, who also wrote verses prefixed to books; and a third, Thomas, of whom Wood has given us some farther particulars, although perhaps they are not very interesting. He was born in Canterbury, and admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, in 1560, and probationer fellow in 1564, being then bachelor of arts. He afterwards proceeded in arts, and then studied medicine, and in 1581 took his doctor’s degree, and practised at Lewes in Sussex, under the patronage of Thomas lord Buckhurst. He died in 1613, aged seventy, and was buried in the chancel of St. Anne’s church, Lewes. He wrote and translated many tracts, enumerated by Wood, but of very little value. He was an admirer of the mysterious philosophy of John Dee. Among his other publications tie completed Phaer’s translation of the Æneid, with Maphaeus’s thirteenth book, in 1583; translated Lhuyde’s “Breviary of Britayne, &q.;” and was editor of his father’s work “De rebus Albionicis,” which he dedicated to lord Buckhurst. He also wrote some contemptible rhirnes, then called poetry.

, son of Thomas, and grandson of John Twyne, was born in 1579, and admitted a scholar of Corpus Christi college in December 1594. After he had taken the degrees in arts, he was admitted probationer fellow in 1605, and entering into holy orders took the degree of bachelor of divinity in 1610. In 1614 he was made Greek reader of his college, in which office he acquitted himself with credit, but about 1623 left college to avoid being involved in some dispute between the president and fellows; because in this affair, Wood informs us, he could not vote on either side without the hazard of expulsion, having entered college on a Surrey scholarship, which, it seems, was irregular. He was afterwards presented to the vicarage of Rye in Sussex by the earl of Dorset, but seldom resided, passing most of his time in Oxford, where he had lodgings in Penverthing or Pennyfarthing street, in the parish of St. Aldate. He lived here in a kind of retirement, being, as Wood says, of a melancholy temper, and wholly given to reading, writing, and contemplation. Laud had a great regard for him, and employed him in drawing up the university statutes, all of which he transcribed with his own hand, and was rewarded with the place of custos archivorum, founded in 1634. He died at his lodging^ in St. Aldate’s, July 4, 1644, aged sixty-five, and was buried in Corpus chapel.

Twyne, who was an indefatigable collector of every document or information respecting the history and antiquities of Oxford, produced the first regular account of it, which was published in 1608, under the title of “Antiquitatis Academioe Oxoniensis Apologia, in tres libros divisa,” Oxon. 4to. The chief object of this work was to refute what Kaye or Caius had asserted in his history of Cambridge on the antiquity of that university, proving it to be 1267 years older than Oxford. So absurd an assertion would scarcely now be thought worthy of a serious answer, but Twyne was an enthusiast on the question, and mere antiquity was thought preferable to every other degree of superiority. He therefore produced his “Apologia,” in which he revives and endeavours to prove that Oxford was originally founded by some Greek philosophers, the companions of Brutus, and restored by King Alfred in 870. Smith, in his history of University college, has very ably answered his principal arguments on this question, which indeed has nothing more than tradition on its side. He was a young man when he wrote this book, and intended a new edition; but his interleaved copy for this purpose, with his additions, &c. was unfortunately lost in a fire at Oxford, which happened some time after his death. He left, however, several volumes of ms collections to the university, of which Wood availed himself in his history.

, the second baronet of the family, of Roydon hall, East Peckham, in Kent, was born in 1597. His father, William Twysden, esq. was one of those who conducted king James to London, when he first came from Scotland, to take possession of the English crown, and was first knighted and afterwards created a baronet by his majesty. Sir William had a learned education, understood Greek and Hebrew well, and accumulated a valuable collection of books and Mss. which he made useful to the public, both in defence of the protestant religion and the ancient constitutions of the kingdom. He died in January 1627-8. Sir Roger, his eldest son, had also a learned education, and was a good antiquary. He assisted Mr. Philpot in his Survey of Kent, who returns him acknowledgments, as a person to whom, “for his learned conduct of these his imperfect labours, through the gloomy and perplexed paths of antiquity, and the many difficulties that assaulted him, he was signally obliged.” He was a man of great accomplishments, well versed in the learned languages, and exemplary in his attachment to the church of England. He made many important additions to his father’s library, which seems seldom to have been unemployed by his family or his descendants. His brother, Thomas, was brought up to the profession of the law, and became one of the justices of the King’s Bench after the restoration, and was created a baronet, by which he became the founder of the family of Twisdens (for he altered the spelling of the name) of Bradbourn in Kent. Another brother, John, was a physician, and a good mathematician, and wrote on both sciences.

Sir Roger was loyal to his unfortunate sovereign, and detesting the undutiful behaviour of many of his subjects, was not content to sit still, but was one of the first to oppose their arbitrary proceedings, which drew on him a severe persecution. He was confined seven years in prison, his estate sequestered, his timber cut down, and paid a fine of 1300l. when he was restored to his estate. When he came again to his seat he lived retired, and his greatest comfort was, conversing with the learned fathers of the primitive church, and the ancient laws and constitution of his country, which he lived to see restored. The appearance of the “Decem Scriptores,” with other collections, were owing to his endeavours, and he wrote a learned preface to them. He was also the author of “The Historical Deience of the Church of England.” This worthy baronet died June 7, 1672, in the seventy-fifth year of his age.

, a musician of the sixteenth cen-, tury, born at Westminster, and brought up in the royal chapel, was musical preceptor to prince Edward, and probably to the other children of Henry VIII. In 1545 he was admitted to the degree of doctor in music at Cambridge and in 1548 was incorporated a member of the university of Oxford; in the reign of queen Elizabeth he was organist oithe royal chapel, and a man of some literature. In music he was excellent; and notwithstanding that Wood, speaking of his compositions, says they are antiquated, and not at all valued, there are very few compositions for the church of equal merit with his anthems.

The “Acts of the Apostles,” set to music by Dr. Tye, were sung in the chapel of Edward VI. and probably in other places where choral service was performed; but the success of them not answering the expectation of their author, he applied himself to another kind of study, the composing of music to words selected from the Psalms of David, in four, five, and more parts; to which species of harmony, for want of a better, the name of Anthem, a corruption of Antiphon, was given. In Dr. Boyce’s collection of cathedral music, lately published, vol. II. is aa anthem of this great musician, “I will exalt thee,” a most perfect model for composition in the church-style, whether we regard the melody or the harmony, the expression or the contrivance, or, in a word, the general effect of the whole. In the Ashmolean ms. fol. 189, is the following note in the hand-writing of Antony Wood “Dr. Tye was a peevish and humoursome man, especially in his latter days and sometimes playing on the organ in the chapel of Qu. Eliz. which contained much music, but little delight to the ear, she would send to the verger to tell him that he played out of tune; whereupon he sent word, that her ears were out of tune.” The same author adds, that Dr. Tye restored church-music after it had been almost ruined by the dissolution of abbeys. What sir John Hawkins, from whom this article appears to have been taken by our predecessors, has said of Tye, is confirmed by Dr. Burney, who says that he was doubtless at the head of all our ecclesiastical composers of that period. This eminent musical historian adds, that Dr. Tye, “if compared with his contemporaries, was perhaps as good a poet as Sternhold, and as great a musician as Europe then could boast; and it is hardly fair to expect marc perfection from him, or to blame an individual for the general defects of the age in which he lived.”

, a miscellaneous writer of considerable talents, was one of the two sons of Mr. Jonathan Tyers, the original embellisher of Vauxhall gardens, of which he was himself a joint proprietor till the end of the season of 1785, when he sold his share to his brother’s family. He was born in 1726, and being intended for one of the learned professions, was sent very early in life to the university of Oxford, where he entered of Exeter college, and was so young when he took his bachelor’s degree that he was called the boy bachelor. That of master of arts he completed in April 1745, when he was only nineteen. In 1753 he was admitted a student of the Inner Temple, and became, after he had kept his terms, a barrister in that house; but he tells us that, although his father hoped he would apply to the law, take notes, and make a figure in Westminster-hall, he never undertook any causes, nor went a single circuit. He loved his ease too much to acquire a character in that or any other profession. It is said that the character of Tom Restless (in the Idler, N 8 48) was intended by Dr. Johnson for Mr. Tyers, but he was certainly a man of superior cast to the person described under that name. It could not be said of Mr. Tyers that he sought wisdom more in conversation than in his library, for few men read more, and he was heard to say, not long before his death, that for the last forty years, he had not been a single day, when in health, without a book or a pen in his hand, “nulla dies sine linea.”

He began early to write, and when at college, or very soon after, published two pastorals, “Lucy,” inscribed to lord Chesterfield, and “Rosalind,” to earl Grenville. He was also the author of a great deal of vocal poetry, or what he called “sing song,” principally for Vauxhall-gardens; and the satisfactory description ofVauxhall, published in Mr. Nichols’s “History of Lambeth,” was drawriup by him. Having inherited from his father an easy fortune, and from nature an inclination to indulge in learned leisure, he was happily enabled “to see what friends and read what books he pleased.” He was, if any man could be said to be so, most perfectly master of his own time, which he divided at his pleasure between his villa at Ashted, near Epsom, and his apartments in Southampton-street. Indefatigable in reading the newest publications, either of belles lettres or politics, and blest with a retentive memory, he was every where a welcome guest; and, having the agreeable faculty of always repeating the good-natured side of a story, the anecdotes he retailed pretty copiously were rarely found either tedious or disagreeable. In the country he was considered by all the surrounding gentry as a man of profound learning, who had some little peculiarities in his manners, which were amply atoned for by a thousand good qualities both of the head and heart. In London he was in habits of intimacy with many whom the world have agreed to call both great and good. Dr. Johnson loved him, lord Hardwicke esteemed him, and even the mitred Lowth respected him. The literati in general had more regard for him than authors usually have for each other; as Mr. Tyers, though known for many years to have been a writer, was rather considered by them as an amateur than a professor of the art. He was certainly among the number of “gentlemen who wrote with ease;” witness hi* “Rhapsodies” on Pope and Addison; and particularly his Biographical sketches of Johnson, warm from the heart when his friend was scarcely buried, and which have not been exceeded by any one of our great moralist’s biographers. The “Political Conferences” of Mr. Tyers, however, will place him in a higher point of view; in that production, much ingenuity and sound political knowledge are displayed; and the work has received the plaudits it so well deserved, and passed through two editions. One part of Mr. Tyers’s knowledge he would have been happier had he not possessed. He had a turn for the study of medicine, and its operations on the human frame, which gave him somewhat of a propensity to hypochondriasm, and often led from imaginary to real ailments. Hence the least variation of the atmosphere had not unfrequently an effect both on his mind and body. The last year or two of his life were also embittered by the death of several near and dear friends, whose loss made a deep impression on his sensibility, particularly that of a very amiable lady, to whom he was once attached, and that of his only sister, Mrs. Rogers, of Southampton, who died but a few months before him. He died at his house at Ashted, after a lingering illness, Feb. 1, 1787, in his sixty-first year.

, otherwise named Hitchins, one of the first publishers of the Holy Scriptures in English, was born in 1500, about the borders of Wales, in what county is not mentioned. He was brought up from a child in grammar, logic, and philosophy at Oxford, for the most part in St. Mary Magdalen’s hall, where there is still a painting of him, but accounted an indifferent performance. Here he imbibed the doctrine of Luther, and privately taught it to some of the junior fellows of Magdalen college, and to other scholars. His behaviour was such, at the same time, as gained him a high reputation both for morals and learning, so that he was admitted a canon of cardinal Wolsey’s new college, now Christ-church. But as he made his opinions too public to remain here in safety, and, according to Tanner and Wood, was ejected, he retired to Cambridge, where he pursued his studies, and took a degree. After some time he went and lived at Little Sudbury, in Gloucestershire, with sir John Welch, knight, who had a great esteem for him, and appointed him tutor to his children. Here he embraced every opportunity to propagate the new opinions. Besides preaching frequently in and about Bristol, he engaged in disputation with many abbots and dignified clergymen, whom he met at sir John’s table, on the most important points of religion, which he explained in a way to which they had not been accustomed, and by references to the Scriptures, which they scarcely dared to search. Unable to confute him, they complained to the chancellor of the diocese, who dismissed him after a severe reprimand, accompanied with the usual threatenings against heresy.

Finding that this situation was no longer convenient, and that his patron could not with safety continue his protection, Tyndale came to London, and for some time preached in the church of St. Dunstan’s in the West. While here, having conceived a high opinion of Dr. Cuthbert Tunstall, who had been promoted to the bishopric of London, in 1522, on account of the great commendations bestowed on him by Erasmus, he wished to become one of his chaplains. With this view he applied to sir Henry Guildford, master of the horse, and controller to king Henry VIII. who was a great patron of learned men, a particular friend to Erasmus, and an acquaintance of sir John Welch; and presented to him an oration of Isocrates, translated from the Greek; an undoubted proof of his learning at a time when Greek was understood by very few in England. Sir Henry readily complied with Mr. Tyndale’s request, but the bishop’s answer was, “That his house was full; he had no more than he could well provide for; and therefore advised our author to seek out in London, where, he added, he could not well miss employment.” Not being able to obtain any, however, he was supported by Mr. Humphrey Monmoutb, alderman of London, and a favourer of Luther’s opinions, with whom he remained for half a year, living in the most abstemious manner, and applying closely to his studies. His thoughts were at this time bent upon translating the New Testament into English, as the only means to enlighten the minds of the people in the knowledge of true religion; but being sensible he could not do this with safety in England, he went abroad, receiving very liberal pecuniary assistance from Mr. Monmouth and other persons. He first went to Saxony, where he held conferences with Luther, and his learned friends, then came back into the Netherlands, and settled at Antwerp, where there was a very considerable factory of English merchants, many of whom were zealous adherents to Luther’s doctrine. Here he immediately began his translation of the New Testament, in which he had the assistance of John Fryth, and William Roye, the former of whom was burnt in Smithfield for heresy, July 1533, and the latter suffered that dreadful death in Portugal on the same accusation. It was printed in 1526, in octavo, without the translator’s name. As there were only 1500 printed, and all the copies which could possibly be got in England, were committed to the flames, this first edition is exceedingly rare. The industrious Mr. Wanley could never procure a sight of it; but there was one in Ames’s collection, which was sold after his death, for fourteen guineas and a half.

When this translation was imported into England, the supporters of popery became very much alarmed; they asserted that there were a thousand heresies in it; that it was too bad to be corrected, and ought to be suppressed; that it was not possible to translate the Scriptures into English; and that it would make the laity heretics, and rebels to their king. It is more painful, however, to record that such men as William Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, and Cuthbert Tunstall, bishop of London, issued their orders and monitions to bring in all the New Testaments translated into the vulgar tongue, that they might be burnt. To destroy them more effectually, Tunstall being at Antwerp in 1526 or 1S27, procured Augustin Packington, an English merchant, to buy up all the copies of the English Testament which remained unsold; these were accordingly brought to England, and publicly burnt at Paul’s cross. But this ill-fudged policy only took off many copies which lay dead upon Tyndale’s hands, and supplied him with, money for another and more correct edition, printed in 1534, while the first edition was in the mean while reprinted twice, but not by the translator. Of Tunstall’s singular purchase, the following fact is related: “Sir Thomas More being lord chancellor, and having several persons accused of heresy, and ready for execution, offered to compound with one of them, named George Constantine, for his life, upon the easy terms of discovering to him who they were in London that maintained Tyndale beyond the sea. After the poor man had got as good a security for his life as the honour and truth of the chancellor could give him, he told him it was the bishop of London who maintained Tyndale, by sending him a sum of money to buy up the impression of his Testaments. The chancellor smiled, saying that he believed he said true. Thus was this poor confessor’s life saved.” Strict search, however, continued to be made among those who were suspected of importing, and concealing them; of whom John Tyndale, our author’s brother, was prosecuted, and condemned to do penance. Humphrey Monmouth, his great patron and benefactor, was imprisoned in the Tower, and almost ruined.

But these rigorous measures not producing the intended effect; and burning the word of God, in any shape, being regarded by the people as a shocking profanation, sir Thomas More was induced to take up the pen. In 1529, he published “A Dyaloge,” in which he endeavoured to prove that the books burnt were not New Testaments, but Tyndale’s or Luther’s testaments; and so corrupted and changed from the good and wholesome doctrine of Christ to their own devilish heresies, as to be quite another thing. In 15 Jo, Tyndale published an answer to this Dialogue, and proceeded in translating the Five Books of Moses, from the Hebrew into English; but happening to go by sea to Hamburgh, to have it printed there, the vessel was wrecked, and he lost all his money, books, writings, and copies, and was obliged to begin anew. At Hamburgh he met with Miles Coverdale, who assisted him in translating the Pentateuch, which was printed in 1530, in a small octavo volume, and apparently at several presses. He afterwards made an English version of the prophecy of Jonas, with a large prologue, which was printed in 1531; but he translated no more books of the Scripture, as Hall, Bale, and Tanner, have asserted.

From Hamburgh he returned to Antwerp, and was there betrayed into the hands of his enemies. Henry VIII. and his council employed one Henry Philips on this disgraceful commission, who first insinuated himself into Tyndale’s acquaintance, and then got the procurator-general of the emperor’s court at Brussels, and other officers, to seize him, although the procurator declared that he was a learned, pious, and good man, and convey him to the castle of Villefort, where he remained a prisoner about a year and a half. The body of the English merchants procured letters from secretary Cromwell to the court at Brussels, for his release; but, by the farther treachery of Philips, this was rendered ineffectual, and Tyndaie was brought to trial, where he pleaded his own cause. None of his arguments, however, being admitted, he was condemned, by virtue of the emperor’s decree made in the assembly at Augsburg; and being brought to execution in 1536, he was first strangled and then burnt. His last words were, “Lord, open the king of England’s eyes.”

Besides his translations, he wrote various theological and controversial tracts, which were collected together, and printed by John Day, 1572, in one volume folio, together with John Fryth’s and Barnes’s works. Bale and Wood attribute some other pieces to him, and some translations from Luther. He was one of the ablest writers of his time.

Of his translation of the Scriptures, Dr. Geddes says, that “though it is far fr >m a perfect translation, yet few first translations will be found preferable to it. It is astonishing, how little obsolete the language of it is, even at this day: and in point of perspicuity and noble simplicity, propriety of idiom, and purity of style, no English version has yet surpassed it.” He elsewhere declares, that, if he had been inclined to make any prior English version the ground-work of his own, it would certainly have been Tyndale’s: and that perhaps he should have done this, if their Hebrew text had been the same. The edition of the English Bible printed in 1537, usually called Matthew’s, was, in Mr. Wanley’s opinion, Tyndale’s to the end of Chronicles, and the whole of the New Testament; and this edition, by Cranmer’s solicitation, was permitted by the king.

, a celebrated grammarian in the time of Pompey, was of Amisa in the kingdom of Pontus, and was a disciple of Dionysius of Thrace, at Rhodes. In the year 70 B. C. he fell into the hands of Lucullus, when that general of the Roman army defeated Mithridates, and seized his dominions; but his captivity was no disadvantage to him, since it procured him.an opportunity of becoming illustrious at Rome, and raising a fortune. This he partly expended in collecting a library of above 30,000 volumes; and it is probably owing to his care in collecting books that the writings of Aristotle have not perished together with innumerable other monuments of antiquity. The fate of that great philosopher’s works, as it is related by Strabo, is very remarkable. He left them, with his school and his other books, to his scholar Theophrastus; and Theophrastus left his library to Neleus, who had been his as well as Aristotle’s scholar. Neleus conveyed his library to Scepsis, a city of Troas, and in his country; and left it to his heirs, who, being illiterate persons, took no other care of it than to keep it shut up close: and when they were informed of the diligence with which the kings of Pergamus, whose subjects they were, sought out for books, they buried those of Neleus under ground. A considerable time after, their descendants took them out of their prison, much damaged, and sold those of Aristotle and Theophrastus to one Apellicon, who caused them to be copied, but with an infinite number of errors. After the death of Apellicon, his library was conveyed from Athens to Rome by Sylla, whose library-keeper permitted Tyrannio, a great admirer of Aristotle, to take the writings of that philosopher; and from him they came into the possession of the public.

, an English historian, descended from an ancient family, was the eldest son of sir Timothy Tyrrell, of Shotover near Oxford, kiit. by Elizabeth his wife, sole daughter of the celebrated archbishop Usher. He was born in Great Queen -street, Westminster, in May 1642, and educated chiefly at the free school of Camberwell in Surrey. In 1657 he was admitted a gentleman commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, where he continued three years under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Tully and Mr. Timothy Halton. After going to the Temple to study law, he returned to Oxford in September 1663, and was created M. A. In 1665 he was called to the bar, but did not practise, employing his time chiefly in historical researches, particularly respecting the history and constitution of England. Having an independent fortune, he resided chiefly on his estate at Onkeley, near Brill in Buckinghamshire, and was made one of the deputy lieutenants and justices of the peace for that county; in which offices he continued till king James If. turned him and the rest out of the commission, for not assisting in taking away the penal laws and test. On the revolution, he zealously espoused king William’s interest, and wrote with great effect in vindication of his right to the crown.

Having formed the plan of a History of England, he came to reside chiefly at Shotover, near Oxford, for the sake of easy access to the libraries in the university; and the remainder of his life appears to have been devoted to that and his other literary pursuits. He died in 1718, in his seventy-sixth year, and was buried in Oakeley church. He married Mary daughter and heir of sir Michael Hutchinson, of Fladbury in Worcestershire, knight, by whom he had lieutenant-general James Tyrrell, of Shotover, esq. governor of Gravesend and Tilbury Fort, &c. who died in August 1742, leaving his estate from the Tyrrell family to his kinsman Augustus Schutz.

Mr. Tyrrell’s first appearance as an author was in the dedication of a posthumous work of archbishop Usher’s. Wood says he published this, but the publisher was bishop Sanderson. It was entitled “The Power communicated by God to the Prince, and the obedience required of the Subject,” Lond. 1661, 4to. At this time Mr. Tyrrell was very young, and had not probably left Oxford, or was but just beginning his studies in the Temple; but it might perhaps be thought creditable to appear as the nearest relative of the venerable author, and he might not be sorry to have an early opportunity of paying his court to the restored monarch. This much we may infer from the dedication itself, which he concludes in these words: “I shall now make this my most humble suit to your majesty, that as the reverend author in his life-time publicly professed his loyalty to his sovereign, and constantly prayed for your majesty’s happy and glorious return to these your kingdoms, and in all things shewed himself your loyal subject, so you would be pleased to own him as such, by affording your gracious countenance to this his posthumous work, which will eternize the memory of the deceased author, and thereby confer the greatest temporal blessing on your majesty’s most loyal and obedient subject, James Tyrrell.”

In 1686 appeared his vindication of his father-in-law, printed at the end of Parr’s “Life of Archbishop Usher,” under the title of “An Appendix, containing a vindication of his opinions and actions in reference to the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England, and his conformity thereunto, from the aspersions of Peter Heylin, D. D. in his pamphlet called Respondet Petrus” This pamphlet of Heylin’s was his answer to Dr. Bernard’s book entitled “The Judgment of the late Primate of Ireland, &c. as he is made a party by the said Lord Primate in the point of the Sabbath,” Lond. 1658, 4to. (See Heylin, p. 442 and 443.) Mr. Tyrrell’s notions in politics were adverse to those of some of his contemporaries, who were for carrying the prerogative to its height, and vindicated passive obedience and non-resistance: he was clearly for a monarchy, but a limited monarchy, and therefore answered sir Robert Filmer in a small volume entitled “Patriarcha non Monarcha, or the Patriarch unmonarched, &c.” 1681, 8vo. This was animadverted upon by Edmund Bohun, in the preface to the second edition of sir Robert’s “Patriarcha;” but Mr. Tyrrell’s opinions on this and other subjects connected with it are most fully displayed in his political dialogues, which were first published at different times, in 1692, 1693, 1694, and 1695, in quarto, until they amounted to fourteen. They were afterwards collected into one volume folio, about the time of his death, and published under the name of “Bibliotheca Politica, or an Enquiry into the ancient Constitution of the English Government, with respect to the just extent of the regal power, and the rights and liberties of the subject. Wherein all the chief arguments, both for and against the late revolution, are impartially represented and considered. In fourteen dialogues, collected out of the best authors, ancient and modern,” Lond. 1718, reprinted 1727. It appears also that subjects of the religious kind sometimes employed his attention, as in 1692 he published an abridgment of bishop Cumberland’s work on the laws of nature, with the consent and approbation of the right reverend author. This, which was entitled “A brief Disquisition of the Law of Nature, &c.” was reprinted in 1701. But the work which had employed most of Mr. Tyrreli’s time was his “General History of England, both ecclesiastical and civil, from the earliest accounts of time,” 5 vols. fol. generally bound in three, Lond. 1700, 1704. He intended to have brought this down to the reign of William III. but what is published extends no farther than that of Richard II. and of course forms but a small part of the whole plan. It is thought that he left another volume or more ready for the press, but this has never appeared. His chief object seems to be to refute the sentiments of Dr. Brady in his “History of England,” particularly where he asserts that “all the liberties and privileges the people can pretend to were the grants and concessions of the kings of this nation, and were derived from the crown” and that “the commons of England were not introduced, nor were one of the three estates in parliament, before the forty-ninth of Henry III. Before which time the body of commons of England, or freemen collectively taken, had not any share or votes in making laws for the government of the kingdom, nor had any communication in affairs of state, unless they were represented by the tenants in capite.” In refuting these opinions Mr. Tyrrell will probably be thought not unsuccessful; but the work is ill digested, and less fit for reading than for consultation. As a compilation it will be found useful, particularly on account of his copious translations from our old English historians, although even there he has admitted some mistakes.

, an ancient Greek poet, who flourished in the seventh century B. C. was born at Miletus, but lived at Athens, and became celebrated by all antiquity for the composition of military songs and airs, as well as the performance of them and the successof his verses has advanced his name to the rank of the greatest heroes as well as the noblest poets. The Lacedaemonians, during the second Messenian war, about 685 B. C. by advice of the Pythian Oracle, applied to the Athenians for a general. The Athenians sent them Tyrtæus, perhaps in ridicule for, besides his occupation, utterly remote from military affairs, he is reported to have been short and very deformed, blind of one eye, and lame But a memorable victory which they obtained over the Messenians is attributed to the animating sound of a new military flute or clarion, invented and played upon by Tyrtæus; and his military airs were constantly sung and played in the Spartan army, to the last hour of the republic. The poems of Tyrtæus were first printed in a collection by Frobenius in 1532, and separately in 1764 by Klotz. His “War Elegies” have been versified in English by Mr. Polwhele, and imitated by the late Mr. Pye, with a reference to the late war.

, one of the most eminent scholars and critics of the last century, was the son of the rev. Dr. Robert Tyrwhitt, of a very ancient baronet’s family in Lincolnshire, a gentleman of considerable eminence in the church, who was rector of St. James’s, Westminster, which he resigned in 1732, on being appointed a canon residentiary of St. Paul’s. He held also the prebend of Kentishtown, in that cathedral, and was archdeacon of London. In 1740 he obtained a canonry of Windsor, and died June 15, 1742, and was buried in St. George’s chapel, Windsor. He married the eldest daughter of bishop Gibson, and so well imitated the liberality and hospitality of that prelate, that, dying at the age of forty-four years, he left a numerous family very moderately provided for.

Thomas Tyrwhitt, the subject of the present article, the eldest son of Dr. Tyrwhitt, was born March 29, 1730, and had his first education at a school at Kensington, to which he was sent in his sixth year. In 1741 he removed to Eton. Here, as well as afterwards, he manifested the strongest propensities tp literature, at an age when other boys are employed, every moment they can steal from books, in pursuit of pleasure. But Mr. Tyrwhitt, it has been justly said, never was a boy, his calm and contemplative disposition always leading him to manly and scholar-like studies. After a residence of six years at Eton, he was entered of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1747, and took the degree of bachelor of arts in 1750. He removed to Merton college, in consequence of being elected to a fellowship in 1755, and the following year took his degree of M.A. He remained on his fellowship until 1762, when he left the university, carrying with him an extensive fund of various knowledge, to which he afterwards added by most unwearied application.

He was now made clerk of the House of Commons, in the room of the deceased Jeremiah Dyson, esq. and resigned his fellowship. This, however, was not his first step in public life. He had previously resided for some time in the Temple, and had studied law; and in December 1756 was appointed deputy secretary at war, under his noble friend and patron, lord Barrington, with whom and his family he preserved, and highly valued, the most intimate friendship to the last hour of his life. If the too constant fatigues and late hours of his office, as clerk of the House of Commons, had not proved too much for his constitution, it is thought that some of the higher offices of the state were within his reach. But after getting through one long parliament, he resigned in 1768, or, as he says in a short list of the dates of his life now before us, he was liber factus, and retired to his beloved books. The remainder of his life was devoted entirely to literary pursuits. Besides a knowledge of almost every European tongue, he was deeplyconversant in the learning of Greece and Koine, and in the old English writers; and as his knowledge was directed by a manly judgment, his critical efforts to illustiate the text of Chaucer and Shakspeare are justly ranked among the happiest efforts of modern skill. The profundity and acuteness of his remarks also on Euripides, Babrius, the PseudoRowley, &c. bear sufficient witness to the diligence of his researches and the force of his understanding His mode of criticism is allowed to have been at once rigorous and candid. As he never availed himself of petty stratagems in support of doubtful positions, he was vigilant to strip his antagonists of all such specious advantages. Yet controversy produced no unbecoming change in the habitual gentleness and elegance of his manners. His spirit of inquiry was exempt from captiousness, and his censures were as void of rudeness, as his erudition was free from pedantry. In private life he was a man of great liberality, of which some striking instances are given in our authorities. In one year it is said he gave away 2000l.; and for such generous exertions he had the ability as well as the inclination, for he had no luxuries, no follies, and no vices to maintain. Of such a man it is unnecessary to add that he died lamented by all who knew the worth of his friendship, or enjoyrd the honour of his acquaintance. His constitution had never been of the athletic kind, and therefore easily gave way to a joint attack from two violent disorders, which ended his life, Aug. 15, 1786, in his fifty-sixth year. He died at his house in Welbeck-street, Cavendish-square, and was interred in St. George’s chapel, Windsor. He had for many years been a member of the Royal Society and the Society of Antiquaries. In 1784 he was, without the slightest private interest or solicitation, elected a curator of the British Museum, in the duties of which office, the highest honour that can be enjoyed by a literary man, he was indefatigably diligent.

The publications of this excellent scholar were, I. “An Epistle to Florio (Mr. Ellis, of Christ-church) at Oxford,” Lond. 1749,4to. 2. “Translations in Verse; Pope’s Messiah; Philips’s Splendid Shilling, in Latin,” and “the eighth Isthmian of Pindar, in English,” 1752, 4to. 3. “Observations and Conjectures on some passages in Sbakspeare,” 1766, 8vo. Mr. Tyrwhitt afterwards communicated many judicious remarks on our national bard to Mr. Steevens and Mr. Reed for the editions of 1778 and 1785. 4 “Proceedings and Debates in the House of Commons in 1620 and 1621, from the original ms. in the library of Queen’s college, Oxford, with an appendix, printed at the Clarendon press, 1766, 2 vols. 8vo. 5.” The manner of holding parliaments in England; by Henry Elsynge, Cler. Par. corrected and enlarged from the author’s original ms.“Lond. 1768, 8vo. With a view to raise a spirit of research into ancient classical Mss. his first critical publication in literature was, 6.” Fragmenta duo Plutarchi, 1773, from an Harleian ms. 5612.“He observes himself of this, that it had no great merit, and was only published to stimulate similar inquiries. 7.” The Canterbury Tales of Chaucer,“in 4 vols. 8vo, to which he afterwards added a 5th volume in 1778. There has since been a splendid edition printed at Oxford in 2 vols. 4to. This is certainly the best edited English classic that has ever appeared. 8.” Dissertatio de Babrio, Fabularum jsopicarum scriptore. Inseruntur fabnlse quaedam Æsopese nunquam antehac editae ex cod.ms. Bodl. AcceduntBabriifragmenta. 1776.“The object of this publication, which, though small in sjze, evinced the greatest critical acumen, was to shew, that many of the fables which pass under the name of Æsop, were from another antient writer of the name of Babrius, whose fragments are preserved in Suidas in verse. 9.” Notes on Euripides,“which, in Dr. Harwood’s opinion, form the most valuable part of Musgrave’s edition, 1778. 10.” Poems, supposed to have been written at Bristol in the 15th century, by Rowley and others; with a preface, an account of the Poems, and a Glossary.“This was twice re-published in 1778, with an appendix tending to prove that they were written, not by any antient author, but by Chatterton. This became the subject of warm controversy, which, however, was settled, by 11” A Vindication of the Appendix to the Poems called Rowley’s, in reply to the dean of Exeter, Jacob Bryant, esq. and others, by Thomas Tyrwhitt.“Mr. Tyrwhitt’s next work was of a different kind, namely, 12.” Περι Λιθων; de Lapidibus, Poema Orpheo a quibusdam adscriptum, Græce et Latine, ex edit. Jo. Matthæi Gesneri. Recensuit, notasque adjecit, Thomas Tyrwhitt. Simul prodit auctarium dissertationis de Babrio.“Mr. Tyrwhitt in this critical work, refers the poem” on Stones“to the age of Constant! us. He next printed for his private friends, 13.” Conjecturas in Strabonem;“and be also superintended, 14.” Two Dissertations on the Grecian Mythology, and an examination of sir Isaac Newton’s objection to the Chronology of the Olympiads,“by Dr. Musgrave. For this work a very liberal subscription was raised for the doctor’s family, entirely by the exertions of Mr. Tyrwhitt, who had before given up to the widow a bond for several hundred pounds which the Doctor had borrowed of him. His last literary labour was, 15.” A newly discovered Oration of Isaeus against Menecles," which Mr. Tyrwhitt revised in 1785, and enriched with valuable notes, at the request of lord Sandys. These few specimens are from the Medicean Library, and are sufficient to shew Mr. Tyrwhitt’s powers, and to make us regret that his modesty declined the proposal made to him of directing the publication of the second volume of Inscriptions collected by Mr. Chishull, and first laid open to the public by the sale of Dr. Askew’s Mss. How he succeeded in the illustration of such subjects will best appear by that most happy explanation of the Greek inscription on the Corbridge altar, which had baffled the skill of all preceding critics, and will be a lasting proof how critical acumen transcends elaborate conjecture. (See Archseologia, vol. III. p. 324, compared with vol. II. pp. 92, 98.) Nor raust his observations on some other Greek inscriptions in Archseologia, vol. III. p. 230, be forgotten.

, a learned physician, the son of Edward Tyson, of Clevedon, in Somersetshire, gent, was born in 1649, and admitted commoner of Magdalen Hall, Oxford, in 1667, where, after taking the degree of M. A. he entered on the study of medicine, was made fellow of the royal society, and proceeded M. D. at Cambridge in 1680. Soon after this he became fellow of the college of physicians, reader of the anatomical lecture in surgeons’ ­ball, and physician to the hospitals of Bethlevn and Bridewell, London, in which station he died Aug. 1, 1708. He was a skilful anatomist, and an ingenious writer, as appears by his essays in the Philosophical Transactions, and Mr. Hook’s collections. He published also “The anatomy of a Porpoise dissected at Gresham college,” Lond. 1680. “The anatomy of a Pigmy, compared with that of a Monkey, an Ape, and a Man,” Lond. 4to, with a “Philosophical essay concerning the Pygmies of the ancients,” ibid.

, a learned divine and ingenious artist, was the only child of the rev. Michael Tyson, dean of Stamford, archdeacon of Huntingdon, &c. who died in 1794, aged eighty-four, by his first wife, the sister of Noah Curtis, of Wolsthorp, in Lincolnshire, esq. He was born in the parish of All Saints, in Stamford, Nov. 19, 1740, and received his grammatical education in that country. He was then admitted of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, and passed regularly through his degrees; that of B. A. in 1764, of M. A. in 1767, and of B. D. in 1775; and after taking his bachelor’s degree was elected a fellow of his college. In the autumn of 1766 he attended a young gentleman of his college, Mr. Gough (afterwards the celebrated antiquary) in a tour through the north of England and Scotland, and made an exact journal of his several stages, with pertinent remarks on such places as seemed most interesting. At Glasgow and Inverary he had the freedom of the corporations bestowed upon him. After his return, in the following year he was elected a fellow of the society of antiquaries, and in 1769 a fellow of the royal society. In 1770 he was ordained deacon at Whitehall chapel, by Dr. Green, bishop of Lincoln. In 1773, his father being promoted to the archdeaconry of Huntingdon, he gave the officiality of it to his son, which was worth about 50l. per ann. and about the same time, being bursar of the college, he succeeded Mr. Cohnan in the cure of St. Benedict’s church, in Cambridge, as he did also in 1776, in the Whitehall preachership, at the request of the late Dr. Hamilton, sori-in-law of bishop Terrick, who had formerly been of Bene’t college.

In the same year, 177G, he was presented by the college to the rectory of Lambourne, near Ongar, in Essex; but, it being the first time that the college presented to it, the family from which it came litigated the legality of the society’s claim, which, however, after a suit in chancery, was determined in favour of the college. But when they threatened another prosecution, Mr. Tyson, who was eager to settle on his living, as he had an intention 1 of marrying, injudiciously entered into a composition with the parties, which, but for the liberality of the college, might have involved his family in debt. He died of a violent fever. May 3, 1780, in the fortieth year of his age, and was interred in Lambourne church. He left an infant son, who died in 1794. In his early days Mr. Tyson amused himself with sofne poetical attempts, of which two were published, one “On the birth of the prince of Wales,” the other “An Ode on Peace.” He was a good classical scholar, and studied with great success the modern languages, particularly Italian, Spanish, and French. He was also a skilful botanist, but his principal researches were in history, biography, and antiquities, which he very ably illustrated both as a draughtsman and engraver. His taste in drawing and painting is said to have been exquisite. There are several etchings by his hand, particularly the portrait of archbishop Parker, taken from an illumination by T. Berg, in a ms. preserved in the library of Bene't college, and prefixed to Nasmith’s catalogue of the archbishop’s Mss. Strutt also mentions the portrait of sir William Paulet; and of Jane Shore, from an original picture at King’s college, Cambridge. To these we may add that of Michael Dalton, author of “The Country Justice,” Jacob Butler, esq. of Barnwell, Mr. Cole, and others his private friends. He occasionally corresponded in the Gentleman’s Magazine, but his publications were few, as his career was short. In the Archseologia are two articles by him, a description of an illuminated picture in a ms. in Beue‘t college, and a letter to Mr. Gough, with a description and draught of the old drinkinghorn in Bene’t college, called Golclcorne’s horn. His skill was always liberally bestowed on his friends; and his contributions to works of antiquity, &c. were frequently and readily acknowledged by his learned contemporaries.

, an ingenious writer on historical and miscellaneous subjects, was born at Edinburgh, Oct. 12, 1711. He was the son of Mr. Alexander Tytler, writer (or attorney) in Edinburgh, by Jane, daughter of Mr, William Leslie, merchant in Aberdeen, and grand-daughter of sir Patrick Leslie of Iden, provost of that city. He was educated at the high school, and at the university of Edinburgh, and distinguished himself by an early proficiency in those classical studies, which, to the latest period of his life, were the occupation of his leisure hours, and a principal source of his mental enjoyments. At the age of thirty-one, Mr. Tytler was admitted into the society of writers to his majesty’s signet, and continued the practice of that profession with very good success, and with equal respect from his clients and the public, till his death, which happened Sept 12, 1792.

With the duties of his profession he combined a more than common share of classical learning, historical knowledge, and a singularly correct taste in the sister arts of poetry, painting, and music; all of which he continued to cultivate and enjoy to the close of his long life. To his other studies, he added those of metaphysics and moral philosophy; by means of which he had early become acquainted with Dr. Beattie, whom, as the biographer of the latter informs us, he loved and respected as an able champion of truth, and with whom he ever after continued to Jive on the footing of the most intimate friendship. He also possessed the esteem and regard of many of the most distinguished literary characters of the age, as lord Monbodclo, lord Kaimes, Dr. John Gregory, Dr. Reid, Principal Campbell, Dr. Gerard, and others. As an author, Mr. Tytler was first and principally distinguished for his “Inquiry, historical and critical, into the evidence against Mary queen of Scots, and an examination of the Histories of Dr. Robertson and Mr. Hume, with respect to that evidence,” 1759, 8vo, frequently reprinted, and in 1790 extended to 2 vols. 8vo, with large additions. In this work, he displayed an uncommon degree of acuteness in the examination of a question, which has been maintained on both sides with great ability, but not always with the temper and manners which guided Mr. Tytler’s pen. As a supplement to this work, he read in the Society of Antiquaries in Scotland, of which society he was a warm friend and protector, and for many years vice-president, “A dissertation on the marriage of queen Mary to the earl of Bothwell,” which forms a distinguished article in the first volume of the transactions of that society published in 1751, in 4to.

Mr. Tytler was father to the hon. Alexander Frazer Tytler, lord Woodhouselee, one of the judges of the supreme civil court of law in Scotland, to whom the public is indebted for a valuable and truly original “Essay on the Principles of Translation;” “Elements of General History,” the “Life of Lord Kaimes,” and other ingenious works. This very excellent scholar and upright judge died very lately, but we have not seen any tribute to his memory of which we could avail ourselves, although something of the kind may very naturally be expected from the same pen which has recorded the talents and virtues of his father.

, a celebrated grammarian of Constantinople, died about the end of the twelfth century. Being put under proper masters at fifteen, he learnt not only the belles lettres, and the whole circle of sciences, but even the Hebrew and Syriac tongues. He had a prodigious memory, and, it is said, was able to repeat all the Scriptures by heart. He seems to have been a most accomplished person, who understood almost every thing; but was a severe critic on the performances of others, and not without a considerable share of vanity. He wrote “Commentaries upon Lycophron’s Alexandria,” which he published first under the name of his brother, Isaac Tzetzes: they are inserted by Potter in his edition of this poet at Oxford, 1697, in folio. He wrote also “Chiliades,” or miscellaneous histories, in verse, which Fabricius calls his most celebrated work, as abounding with political and civil knowledge; “Scholia upon Hesiod;” “Epigrams and other Poems;” “Pieces upon Grammar and Criticism.” He mentions also “Allegories upon Homer,” which he dedicated to the empress Irene, wife of Manuel Comnenus. This empress was married in 1143, and died in 1158, which nearly ascertains the age of Tzetzes. The “Allegories” of this author were published by Morel, Paris, 1616, 8vo, and the “Chiliades,” at Basil, 1546, fol.

, was an eminent mathematician irt Italy, in the end of the sixteenth and early part of the seventeenth century, but no particulars are known of his life, nor when he died. The following occur in catalogues as his works: 1. “Mechanica,” Pis. 1577, fol. and Yen. 1615. 2. “Pianisphaeriorum universalium Theorica,” Pis. 1579, fol. and Col. 1581, 8vo. 3. “Paraphrasis in ArchimedisSquiponderantia,” Pis. 1588, fol. 4. Perspectiva,“ibid. 1600, fol. 5.” Problemata Astronomica,“Ven. 1609, fol. 6.” De Cochlaea," ibid. 1615, fol.

, an illuminator on vellum, who was in England in the reign of queen Elizabeth, appears to have been a native of Florence, and, while here, a teacher of the Italian language. Vertue speaks of some of his works as extant in his time, or as having very lately been so; as the Psalms of David in folio, with an inscription by Ubaldini to Henry earl of Arundel, whom he calls his Maecenas. The date is, London, 1565. There was another book on vellum, written and illuminated by him, by order of sir Nicholas Bacon, who presented it to the lady Lumley. This is, or was, at Gorhambury. There were other specimens of his skill in the royal library, now in the British Museum, and he appears also to have been an author. Walpole mentions one of his Mss. in the Museum, entitled “Scotiae descriptio a Deidonensi quodain facto, A. D. 1550, et per Petruccium Ubaldinum transcripta A. D. 1576,” which was published afterwards in Italian, with his name, at Antwerp, 1588, fol. The Museum catalogue attributes also the following to Ubaldini: 1. “Discourse concerning of the Spanish fleet invading England in 1588 and overthroweu,” Lond. 1590, 4to. 2. “Le Vite delle Donne illustri del regno d'lughilterra, e del regnb di Scotia, &c.” ibid. 1591. Walpole, who appears to have examined this work, gives, as a specimen of Petrucchio’s talents for history, two of his heroines. The first was Chembrigia, daughter of Gurguntius, son of king Bellinus, who, having married one Cantabro, founded a city, which, from a mixture of both their names, was called Cambridge. The other illustrious lady he styles expressly donna senza. name, and this nameless lady, as Walpole says, was the mother of Ferrex and Porrex in lord Dorset’s “Gorboduc,” who, because one of her sons killed the other that was a favourite, killed a third son in a passion. 3. “Precetti moral i, politici, et economici,” 1592, 4to. 4. “Scelta di alcune Attioni, e di varii Accidenti,” 1595, 4to. 5. “Rime,”

Thus far we have gathered from Walpole’s Anecdotes, who adds, that Ubaldini seems to have been in great favour at court, and is frequently mentioned in the rolls of new years-gifts, which used to be reposited in the jewel-office. There is a notice of this kind as far as 1588, but how much longer he lived is not known. But we find Baretti giving other particulars of Ubaldini. He says he was a nobleman of Florence, who lived many years in England, in the service of Edward VI. The “Lives of Illustrious Ladies” he penned with great gallantry and elegance, and he must certainly have been the favourite of the British (English) belles of his time, having been as handsome in his figure, and as valiant with his sword, as he was able at his pen. Baretti also in forms us that in the preface* to his Life of Charles the Great, he says it was the first Italian book that was printed in London; the date is 1581, printed by Wolf, and consequently the date given above from the Museum catalogue must have been a subsequent edition. Ubaldini adds, that he wrote it, because, “having seen how many fables and dreams the poets have writ of that emperor, he thought it the duty of a man, born to be useful to others, to explode, as much as possible, falsehood from the world, and substitute truth instead.” Baretti informs us that in the Foscarini library at Venice there is a manuscript history of Ubaldini, written with his own hand, of the reign of his master Edward.

, an Italian poet of the fourteenth century, was the descendant of an illustrious family of Florence, the Uberti, who, when the Guelphs became victorious, were banished from Florence, and their property divided among their enemies. Our poet was born in the poverty and obscurity to which his family had been reduced, and although the Florentines allowed him to return and reside in the country of his forefathers, he never became rich, and was obliged to attend the courts of the nobility, and gain a subsistence by chaunting his verses. Of those he composed a great many in the form of songs and other small pieces which were admired for their novelty; he is even thought to have been the inventor of the ballad species. In more advanced age, he undertook his “Dittamondo,” in imitation of Dante, who in his vision takes Virgil for his guide; Uberti takes Solinus, who conducts him over the whole habitable globe. By means of this fiction he includes geographical and historical matter, which has induced some to call his poem a geographical treatise. It is said to be written with energy and elegance, and was first printed, or at least a part of it, at Vicenza in 1474, fol. and reprinted at Venice in 1501. Both are rare, and chiefly valued for their rarity. Villani, who gives us a sort of eloge rather than a life of Uberti, says that he died at an advanced age in 1370.

, a loyal divine, although of the puritan stamp, was the son of John Udal, an eminent nonconformist of the sixteenth century, and a great sufferer for his nonconformity, being frequently silenced and imprisoned, and at last condemned to die for writing a seditious book called “A Demonstration of Discipline;” but he appears to have been respited, and died in the Marshalsea prison about the end of 1592. He wrote “A Commentary on the Lamentation’s of Jeremiah” “The State of the Church of England laid open in a conference, &c.” and probably the work above-mentioned for which he was condemned b.ut he is better known in the learned world, as the author of the first Hebrew grammar. in English, published onder the title of a “Key to the Holy Tongue,” with a Hebrew Dictionary, which is omitted in the second edition. The first is dated 1593, a year after his death.

When his son Ephraim was born, does not appear, but he was educated at Emanuel college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of A. B. in 1609, and that of A. M. in 1614. His only preferment in the church appears to have been the rectory of St. Augustine’s, Watling-street, but the time of his admission is not stated by Newcourt or Walker. He was sequestered, however, in 1643, although he had always been accounted, and indeed admired as a preacher of puritan principles. The truth was, that he early perceived the real designs of the republican party, and exerted himself to oppose them. In a sermon at Mercers’ chapel, he addressed himself to some of them in these words, “You desire truth and peace; leave your lying, and you may have truth; lay down your arms, and you may have peace.” He went farther than even this, by declaring openly for episcopacy and the liturgy, and publishing a learned (Treatise against sacrilege, entitled “A Coal from the Altar;” and another, “Communion comeliness,” in which he recommended the placing of rails around the communion-table. He also published a sermon, called “Noli me tangere,” containing many loyal sentiments and much attachment to the church. Crimes like these were not to be forgiven; and accordingly his house was plundered, his library and furniture carried off, and his old and lame wife literally turned into the street. Mr. Udal died about the latter end of May 1647. His funeral sermon was preached by the rev. Thomas Reeve, B. D. who was neither ashamed nor afraid to give him what he seems to have deserved, a high character for piety and zeal.

, an eminent schoolmaster of the sixteenth century, styled by Leland, in his “Encomia,” Odovallus, was born in Hampshire in 1506, and was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, June 18, 1520. He then took the degree of bachelor of arts, and became probationer fellow Sept. 3, 1524; but was prevented taking the degree of master soon afterwards, on account of his inclination to the tenets of Luther. He then obtained the mastership of Eton school, and, in the performance of his duty there, behaved, as Thomas Tusser the poet tells us, with great severity. He proceeded in arts in 1534, but in 15il was near losing his place, being suspected of some concern in a robbery of plate belonging to the college, with two of his scholars. For this fact he was examined by the king’s council, but we do not know the result of their inquiries. The charge probably was discovered to be ill-grounded, as he was at this time in possession of the living of Braintree in Essex, which he did not resign till 1544, and in 1552 was preferred to the rectory of Calbourne in the Isle of Wight. He afterwards was servant to queen Catherine Parr, and, in the beginning of Edward VI. 's time, was promoted to a canonry at Windsor. The time of his death is not known, unless by a manuscript note on a copy of Bale, in which that event is said to have taken place in 1557, and that he was buried at Westminster. In 1555 he had been appointed headmaster of Westminster-school, a circumstance not noticed by Wood. He is said to have written several comedies, and Bale mentions “The Tragedy of Popery.” But none of these now exist. A specimen, however, of his abilities in this wav, niay be seen in a long quotation from a rhiming interlude by him, printed in Wilson’s “Art of Logicke,” 1587, and reprinted in the new edition of Wood’s Athense. His more useful works were, 1. “Flowers for Latin speaking, selected and gathered out of Terence, and the same translated into English,” &c. often printed, particularly in 1533, 1538, 1568, and 1575. Both Leland and Newton wrote encomiastic verses on this book. 2. A translation of the “Apophthegms” of Erasmus, 1542 and 1564, 8vo. 3. “Epistolce et carmina ad Gul. Hormannum et ad Joh. Lelandum.” 4. A translation of Erasmus’s “Paraphrase on the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles,” 1551, fol. 5. A translation of Peter Martyr’s “Treatise on the Sacrament.*' He also drew up” An answer to the sixteen articles of the Commons of Devonshire and Cornwall," a ms. in the royal collection.

, an eminent artist, called Gio. Da Nanni, or Ricamatori, as Vasari promiscuously calls him, was born in 1494, at Udine in the Friul, and passed from the school of Giorgiorie to that of Raphael Sanzio, under whose direction he executed the greater part of the stuccoes and grotesque ornaments in the Logge and various apartments of the Vatican. In this branch of the art he is not only considered as the first, but as an inventor: for though under Alexander VI. Morto da Feltro had begun to paint in grotesque, he was not acquainted with stucco, which was first discovered in the baths of Titus, and successfully imitated by this artist. His bowers, plants, and foliage, his aviaries, mews, birds and fowls of every kind, impose on the eye by a truth of imitation less the result of labour than of sentiment: his touch is all character, and never deviates into the anxious detail of fac-similists. After the saccage of Rome he visited other parts of Italy, and left various specimens of his art at Florence, Genoa, and Udiue. He died in 1564.

a very learned German, was born at Frankfort Feb. 22, 1683, and was the son of a counsellor of that city, of an antient family. In 1694 he was sent for education to the college of Rudelstadt, where he applied with such ardour that his master was obliged to check him, and especially prevent his studying by night, to which he was much addicted. Besides the classics, which, young as he was, he always read with a pen in his hand, making such remarks or extracts as struck his fancy, he studied also the Hebrew language, and logic, and metaphysics, to which he soon added history, geography, chronology, &c. In 1698 he was obliged to return home to recover his health, which had probably been injured by intense application, and he for some time confined himself to lessons on history and geography from Arnold, then rector of the college of Frankfort. He was afterwards sent to the university of Strasburgh, where he studied the sciences, attended the anatomical lectures, &c. but his leading object was literary history and bibliography, in pursuit of which he passed much of his time in the public libraries. In 1700 he had the misfortune to lose both his parents, which obliged him to return to Frankfort. When his grief had in some degree subsided, he went to Halle, and continued his studies there about two years. In 1702 he took his degree of doctor of laws, and returned to Frankfort with a copious library, which he had collected in the course of his studies. He then visited some of the most famous universities on the continent; but in 1704 settled at Frankfort, where the library he formed was then considered among the best in Europe. To make it still more complete appears to have been the object of his ambition, and he re-commenced his travels for that purpose in 1708 and 1709. In one of those years he was at Oxford, and had some inducement to settle there, but imagined that the climate would not agree with his health. When he returned to Frankfort from these tours in 1711, he brought an addition of four thousand books to his collection. In 1721 he was made a senator of his native city, but became now so diligent in his civic duties as to have little time to spare to his studies, which inclined him in 1729 to publish a catalogue of his library, with a view to dispose of a considerable part of it. He died Jan. 6, 1734, universally regretted. He had begun several learned works, which his employments as a magistrate, and afterwards his bad state of health, prevented his finishing; among these were, 1. “Glossarium Germanicum medii sevi.” 2. A history of his life, in Latin. 3. “Selecta historiae litterariae et librarian,” in several volumes. These he bequeathed to John George Schelhorn, along with his literary correspondence in eighteen large quarto volumes. In 1736 John Christ. Wolff printed an account of two collections made by Uffembach, which he had just purchased 3 the first consisting of an immense quantity of letters, mostly originals, written by the eminent men of the two or three preceding centuries the second comprized various curious Mss. on literary subjects. Schelhorn, in his “Amcenitates litterariaB,” has availed himself much of UfFembach’s collections; and in vol. IX. has an article entitled “Deprimitiis typographicis, quae Haerlemi in civica et Francoforti in bibliotheca Uffembachiana adservantur.” And he afterwards published a Life of Uffembach, prefixed to his “Cornmercii Epistolaris Uffembachiani Selecta, &c.” 5 vols. 1753 1756, 8vo.

, an ecclesiastical historian, was born March 21, 1595, at Florence, of a good family. After pursuing his studies with great credit, he entered among the Cistertians, and held several honourable posts in his order. He was appointed abbot of Trois Fontaines at Rome, procurator in his province, and counsellor to the congregation of the Index. The popes Alexander VII. and Clement IX. esteemed Ughelli, and gave him a pension of 500 crowns; but he refused several bishoprics that were offered. He died at Rome, in his abbey, May 19, 1670, aged seventy-five. His principal work is, “Italia sacra, sive de Episcopis Italiae, et Insularum adjacentium,” &c. Rome, 1642 1662, 9 vols. folio. This work, which is esteemed of good authority, was reprinted at Venice, 1717 1722, 10 vols. with considerable additions; but this second edition is very incorrectly printed. A third, which is said to be free from this objection, and is very much enlarged, was published at Florence, 1763, &c. by the abbe del Riccio. Ughelli’s other works are the Lives of the cardinals of the Cistertian order, and some genealogical familyhistories.

, a celebrated Spanish mathematician, and a commander of the order of St. Jago, was born at Seville Jan. 12, 1716. He was brought up in the service of the royal marines, in which he at length obtained the rank of lieutenant-general. In 1735 he was appointed, with Don George Juan, to sail to South America, and accompany the French academicians who were going to Peru to measure a degree of the meridian. On his return home in 1745, in a French ship, he was taken by two English vessels, and after being detained some time at Louisbourg in Cape Breton, was brought to England, where his talents recommended him to Martin Folkes, president of the Royal Society, and he was the same year elected a member of that learned body. On his return to Madrid he published his “Voyage to South America,” which was afterwards translated into German and French. There is also an English translation, in two vols. 8vo, 1758, but miserably garbled and inaccurate. In 1755 he made a second voyage to America, where he collected materials for another work, which however did not appear until 1772, under the title of “Entretenimientos Physico-historicos.” He travelled afterwards over a considerable part of Europe to collect information respecting such improvements in arts and manufactures as might be serviceable to Spain, and was the means of introducing many which had not before been known in Spain, or very imperfectly carried on. He died on July 5, 1795. There are a few of his papers in the “Philosophical Transactions.”

, or Gulphilas, a Gothic bishop, and the first translator of a part of the Bible into that language, flourished in the fourth century, and during the reign of Valens, obtained leave of that emperor that the Goths should reside in Thrace, on condition of his, the bishop’s, embracing the Arian faith. Little else is known of this prelate, unless that he translated the Evangelists, and perhaps some other books of the New Testament, into the Gothic language, which he achieved by inventing a new alphabet of twenty-six letters. This translation is now in the library of Upsal, and there have been three editions of it, the best by Mr. Lye, printed at Oxford in 1750. Many disputes have been carried on by the learned both as to the antiquity and authenticity of this version. Of later years, however, another fragment of Ulphilas’s translation was discovered in the library at Wolfenbuttle, containing a portion of the Epistle to the Romans. This has been published by Knitel, archdeacon of Wolfenbuttle, who seems of opinion that Ulphilas translated the whole Bible.

, a classical scholar and editor, was the fourth son of a gentleman of Cheshire, and born at Wimslow, in that county, December 10, 1670. He was educated at Eton, and became a fellow of King’s college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. 1697, and M. A. 1701. He afterwards, at the request of Dr. Newborough, the head master, returned to Eton, where he was tutor to the famous sir William Wyndham, and was an assistant teacher at the school. He married the daughter of Mr. Proctor, who kept a boarding-house at Eton, but afterwards removed to Ilminster, in Somersetshire, upon the invitation of several gentlemen of the county, and particularly of the earl Powlett, to whom he was afterwards chaplain, and aii whose sons were under his tuition at Taunton. He remained a few years at Ihninster, and taught the learned languages there till he was elected to the care of the free grammarschool in Taunton: which he conducted with the highest reputation, and raised to be the largest provincial school at that time ever known in England. The number of his pupils amounted to more than 200; and many of them were from the first families in the West of England. He served for many years the church of Bishop’s-Hull, in which parish the school is situated. So early as 1711 he was in possession of the rectory of Brimpton, near Yeovil, in the presentation of the Sydenham family. In 1712 he was presented by sir Philip Sydenham to the rectory of Alonksilver, 14 miles from Taunton. He died August 13, 1749, aged seventy-nine.

In 1696 he published, at Cambridge, an excellent edition of Aristotle “de Arte Poetica,” with notes. In 1702, at Eton, Dionysius Halicarnassensis “de Structura Orationis.” In 1711, a revised and corrected edition of Roger Ascham’s “School-Master,” with explanatory notes. In 1726 his “Novus Historiarum Fabellarumque Delectus;” a very useful and much approved selection of passages from Greek authors, with a Latin translation. He was also the author of several single sermons, and there is a Latin ode of his writing in the Gent. Mag. for Oct. 1737.

He had two sons, one a captain of the navy, who died in the same year with his father; the other, John Upton, born in 1707, who, after receiving a classical education at his father’s school at Taunton, was entered of Exeter college, Oxford, of which he was elected fellow in 1728, and proceeded M. A. in 1732. In the same year the celebrated critic Toup became his pupil, and during the whole of his residence in the university had no other tutor. In 1736 he vacated his fellowship. Having been tutor to the sons of lord chancellor Talbot, that nobleman gave him a prebend in the cathedral of Rochester; besides which he had the rectory of Sevington cum Dinnington, in Somersetshire, by the gift of the earl Powlett; afterwards the rectory of Great Rissington, in Gloucestershire, conferred upon him by earl Talbot, who, as just mentioned, had been one of his pupils; and lastly, he was also rector of the sinecure of Llandrillo, in Denbighshire, in the diocese of St. Asaph, given to him by the bishop. He never married, and died at Taunton, Dec. 9, 1760, in the fifty-third year of his age.

Mr. Upton’s chief publication was an edition of Arrian’s “Epictetus,” printed at London, 1739 41, 2 vols. 4to. This Harwood accounts the most perfect edition that ever was given of a Greek ethical writer. There is his own copy of this edition in the possession of a gentleman of Exeter college, with his curte secundtf, written by him in the margins, and they are very copious and frequent. In 1758 he published an excellent edition of Spencer’s “Fairie Queene,” with a glossary and notes, explanatory and critical, 2 vols. 4to; and “Observations on Shakspeare,” of which Dr. Johnson, in his preface to his edition of that hard, gives no vry favourable opinion, nor indeed a just one.

, one of those pontiffs who deserve some notice on account of his learning, and attention to the interests of literature, was born at Florence in 1568. His family name was Maffei Barbarini, and his family was of the most ancient and honourable. His father dying while Maffei was an infant, he was entrusted to the care of his uncle Francis, a prothonotary of the Roman court, who sent for him to Rome, and placed him for education in the Jesuits’ college. Here he made great proficiency in classical studies under Tursellino and Benci, and was particularly distinguished for his taste for poetry. But as his uncle intended him for active life, he took him from his beloved studies, and sent him to Pisa, where he might acquire a knowledge of the law, so neoessary then to those who would rise to preferment; and here he applied with such diligence, that in his twentieth year the degree of doctor was deservedly conferred upon him. He then returned to Rome, where his uncle received him with the greatest kindness, and having always treated him as his son, bequeathed him, on his death, which happened soon after, a handsome fortune, as his sole heir. His first patron was cardinal Farnese, and by his interest and his own talents he soon passed through the various gradations of preferment which led, in 1606, to the rank of cardinal, bestowed on him by Paul V. In 1623, while cardinal legate of Bologna, he was elected pope, and took the name of Urban VIII. It is not our intention to detail the historical events in which he was concerned. The errors in his government, which were fewer than might have been expected in one so zealous for the church, arose from two circumstances, his early attachment to the Jesuits, and his nepotism, or family partiality. The latter was so powerful, that he bestowed on his relations red hats and temporal employments with a very liberal hand, and often entrusted the management of affairs to them; and the chief errors of his pontificate were imputed to them by the candid, although he only was blamed by the people at large. As a mjjn of learning, and a patron of learned merr, he has generally been praised; but he was no antiquary, and was justly censured for having destroyed some Roman antiquities, which the barbarous nations had spared when masters of Rome; and this gave occasion to the famous pasquinade, “Quod non fecerunt Barbari, fecerunt Barherini.” He wrote many Latin poems in an elegant style, of which an edition was published at Paris in 1642, fol. and a very beautiful one at Oxford, in 1726, 8vo, edited by Joseph Brown, M. A. of Queen’s college, and afterwards provost of that college, with a life and learned notes. Urban’s patronage of learned men was very liberal, and he received those of all nations with equal respect. Among others he extended his patronage to Ciampolo, Cesarini, Herman Hugo, and to Dempster and Barclay, two learned Scotchmen. The latter has celebrated him in his “Argenis” under the name of Ibburranis, the transposition of Barberini. Urban published a remarkable edition of the Romish breviary, aud several bulls and decrees which are in “Cherubini bullarium.” Among the most noticeable is that which abolishes the order of female Jesuits, and certain festivals; and others which relate to image worship; those by which, in compliance with the Jesuits, he condemns Jansenius; and that by which the title of eminence was conferred upon the cardinal-legates, the three ecclesiastical electors, and the grand master of Malta. Among his foundations was the college “De propaganda fide.” In the article of cardinals he was profuse, for he created no less than seventy-four. He died July 29, 1644, and was buried in St. Peter’s, in the stately tomb erected by his own orders by the celebrated Bernini.

, a learned Italian, was born at Rubiera in 1446. He gave himself the name of Codrus, a poor poet in Juvenal, in reply to a speech made to him. After a very learned education, he was invited to Forli, to teach the languages, and while here met with an accident which appears to have affected his brain. He had an apartment in the palace, but his room was so very dark, that he was forced to use a candle in the day-time; and one day, going abroad without putting it out, his library was set on fire, and some papers which he had prepared for the press were burned. The instant he was informed of this, he ran furiously to the palace, and vented his rage in the most blasphemous imprecations, after which he rushed from the city, and passed the whole day in a wood in the vicinity, without nourishment. He returned next day, and shut himself up for six months in the house of an artificer. After a residence of about thirteen years at Forli, he was invited to Bologna, where he was appointed professor of grammar and eloquence, and where he passed the remainder of his days with credit. He died at Bologna in 1500. His works, printed at Basil in 15*0, consist of speeches, letters, and poems: to which is prefixed an account of his life. He appears to have been much esteemed by his learned contemporaries, but modern critics seem less disposed to rank him among the ornaments of his age.

, a writer of romances, was born February 11, 1567, at Marseilles, and was descended from an illustrious house of Forez, originally of Suabia. He was educated among the Jesuits, and sent to Malta, but returned to Forez. In 1574 Anne d'Urfé, his brother, married Diana de Chateau-Morancl, a rich lady, sole heiress of that bouse; but having procured his marriage to be declared null in 1596, he took the ecclesiastical habit, and Honore“d'Urfe, whose interest it was to keep Diana’s very large fortune in his own family, married her, about 1601. Their union did not however prove happy, for the lady, then above forty, had rendered herself otherwise disgusting by having her apartments always filled with great dogs, and as she brought him no children, he left her, and retired to Piedmont, where he died, 1625, aged fifty-eight. His principal work is a celebrated romance, entitled” L' Astrée,“4 vols. 8vo, to which Baro, his secretary, added a fifth. It was reprinted, 1733, 10 vols. 12mo, and was read throughout Europe at one time as the first work of the kind, and was perhaps relished by some from the notion that it contained an account of the gallantries of Henry the Fourth 1 s reign. His other works are: a poem, entitled” La Sirene,“I6.ll, 8vo;” Epitres morales,“1620, 12mo;” La Savoysiade,“a poem, of which only part is in print; a pastoral in blank verse, entitled” La Sylvaniere,“8vo, and some” Sonnets.“Anne d'Urfe”, his eldest brother, was count de Lyon, lived in a very exemplary manner, and died 1621, aged sixty-six. He also was a literary man, and has left “Sonnets,” “Hymns,” and other poetical pieces 5 1603, 4to.

, an eminent archbishop of Rheims, in the fifteenth century, brother of William des Ursins. baron de Traynel, and chancellor ol France, was descended from an illustrious family of Champagne. After having distinguished himself in several posts, being master of requests, he took the ecclesiastical habit, became bishop of Beauvais in 1432, of Laon in 1444, and archbishop of Rheims in 1449, in which see he succeeded his brother James Juvenal des Ursins. He was one of those appointed in 146 1 to revise the sentence pronounced against the famous Maid of Orleans. He died July 14, 1473, aged eighty-five, leaving a “History of the Reign of Charles VI.” from 1380 to 1422, printed at the Louvre, folio. This family has produced several other great men.

, an eminent classical scholar and antiquary, was the illegitimate son of a commander of the order of Malta, of the Ursin family, and was born at Rome Dec. 2, 1529. His education would probably have been neglected, as his mother and himself were turned out of doors by the unnatural father, and were in great poverty, had not some early appearance of talents recommended him to the notice of a canon of the Lateran, Gentilio Delfini, who took him under his protection, and instructed him in classical literature; after which, by this benevolent patron’s interest, he obtained considerable preferment in the church of St. John of Lateran. His talents afterwards made him be taken into the service of the cardinals Ranutius and Alexander Farnese, who rewarded him liberally; and by this means an opportunity was afforded him of collecting a great number of books and ancient manuscripts, and employing them for the benefit of literature. He was in habits of correspondence with the most eminent literary characters of Italy, and he contributed much valuable assistance to the authors of that period. He had attained to great skill in discovering the antiquity and value of Mss., which he seems to have considered as an important secret. Cardinal Frederic Borromeo, being once in his company, requested Ursinus to point out from a book that lay before them, the rules by which he distinguished ancient from modern manuscripts; but he immediately shut the book, and turned the discourse. He died at Rome Jan. 18, 1600, at the age of seventy. He was author of several learned works, as “De Familiis Romanis;” and an Appendix to Ciaconio’s treatise “De Triclinio.” He also published notes oti Sallust, Cecsar, Livy, and most of the Roman historians, the writers de Re Rustica, Cicero, &c. He also caused engravings to be made of a large collection of statues, busts, and other monuments of antiquity, and published them under the title of “Imagines et Elogia Virorum illustrium et eruditorum ex antiquis lapidibus et numismatibus expressa, cum annotationibus Fulvii Ursini.” Mr. Pinkerton, however, says that this work is not to be depended on, and prefers that of Canini, which is better, although far from perfect. Ursinus, in order to keep together the books which, with great labour and at vast expence, he had accumulated, bequeathed them to the Vatican. Castalio published a Life of Ursinus, at Rome, 1657, 8vo. In his will, which is appended to this Life, be bequeaths two thousand crowns to Delfini, bishop of Camenuo, probably a near relation of his early patron.

, one of the most celebrated Protestant divines of the 16th century, was born at Breslau, in Silesia, July 28, 1534. He had already made a considerable progress, for one so young, when he was sent to Wittemberg in 1550, where he studied seven years, and, as his father was not rich, he was assisted by gratuities both private and public, and by the profits of taking pupils. At the same time, he applied himself so closely to study, that he acquired great skill both in poetry, lan-r guages, philosophy, and divinity. Melancthon, who was the ornament of that university, had a particular esteem and friendship for him. Ursinus accompanied him in 1557 to the conference of Worms, whence he went to Geneva, and afterwards to Paris, where he made some stay, in order to learn French, and improve himself in Hebrew under the learned John Mercerus. He was no sooner returned to Melancthon at Wittemberg, than he received letters from the magistrates of Breslaw in September 1558, offering him the mastership of their great school; and having accepted it, he discharged the duties of his employment in so laudable a manner, that he might have continued in it as long as he pleased, had he not been prosecuted by the clergy, the instant they perceived he was not a Lutheran. When he explained Melancthon’s book, “De examine ordinandorum ad Ministerium,” he handled the subject of the Lord’s supper in such a manner, as made the demagogues or factious orators (for so the author of his Life calls them) term him Sacramentarian. He wrote, however, a justification of himself, in which he discovered what his opinions were with regard to Baptism and the Lord’s Supper; and when he found that this did not pacify his adversaries, he obtained an honourable leave from the magistrates; and as he could not retire to his master Melancthon, he being dead a little before, in April 1560, he went to Zurich, where Peter Martyr, Bullinger, Simler, Gesner, and some other eminent personages, had a great friendship for him. From this place he was soon removed by the university of Heidelberg, which was in want of an able professor; and in September 1561 was settled in the Collegium Sapientiae (College of Wisdom) to instruct the students. He also attempted to preach, but finding he had not the talents requisite for the pulpit, he laid that aside. As a professor, he evinced, in the most eminent elegree, the qualifications requisite: a lively genius, a great fund of knowledge, and a happy dexterity in explaining things, and therefore, besides the employment he already enjoyed, he exercised the professorship of the loci communes, or common places in that university. To qualify him for this place, it was necessary for him, agreeably to the statutes, to be received doctor of divinity, and accordingly he was solemnly admitted to that degree the 25th of August, 1562, and he was professor of the common places till 1568. It was he who wrote the Catechism of the Palatinate, which was almost universally adopted by the Calvinists, and drew up an apology for it by ordtr of the elector Frederic III. in opposition to the clamours which Flacius Illyricus, Heshusius, and some other rigid Lutherans, had published in 1563. The elector, finding himself exposed, not only to the complaints of the Lutheran divines, but likewise to those of some princes, as if he had established a doctrine concerning the Eucharist, which was condemned by the Augsburg Confession, was obliged to cause to be printed an exposition of the une doctrine concerning the Sacraments. Ursinus the following year was at the conference of Maulbrun, where he spoke with great warmth against the doctrine of Ubiquity. He afterwards wrote on that subject, and against some other tenets of the Lutherans. The plan and statutes which he drew up for the elector, for the establishment of some schools, and several other services, raised him so high in his esteem, that finding him resolved to accept of a professorship in divinity at Lausanne in 1571, he wrote a letter to him with his own hand, in which he gave several reasons why it would not be proper for him to accept of that employment. This prince’s death, which happened in 1577, produced a great revolution in the palatinate; prince Lewis, his eldest son, who succeeded him, not permitting any clergyman to be there, unless he was a sound Lutheran; so that Ursinus and the pupils educated by him in the Collegium Sapientiae were obliged to quit it. He retired to Neustadt, to be divinity-professor in the illustrious school which prince Casimir, son to Frederic III. founded there at that time. He began his lectures there the 26th of May, 1578. He also taught logic there in his own apartment; published some books, and was preparing to write several more, when his health, which had been frequently and strongly attacked, occasioned by his incredible application to study, yielded at last to a long sickness, of which he died in Neustadt, the 6th of March, 1583, in the forty-ninth year of his age. His works were collected after his death, by the care of his only son, a minister, and by that of David Pareus and Quirinus Reuterus, his disciples; and to the last of these we are indebted for the publication of them in 1612, 3 vols. folio.

Ursinus was not unknown to our English divines, and some of his works were translated into English as, his “Catechism,” or rather, his lectures upon the catechism, entitled “The Summe of the Christian Religion,” translated by Henry Parrie, 1587, 4to. There were also at least two abridgments of it; and a translation of “A collection of learned Discourses,” 1600, &c. Ursinus was a very laborious student; and, that no interruption might be given, he caused the following inscription to be placed on the door of his library:

Sir Philip Sidney, while at Heidelberg, was particularly anxious to cultivate the friendship of Ursinus. “From this eminent scholar,” says Dr. Zouch, “Mr. Sidney learned to estimate the value of time: he learned how criminal it is to waste the hours of life in unedifying discourse, and much more so in vitious pursuits or guilty indulgences.” Dr. Zouch observes, that Ursinus’s moral character was still more excellent than his literary one. He was all humility, attributing nothing to himself, and perfectly uncorrupted by avarice or ambition.

Among other authors of the same name, was John Henry Ursinus, a learned Lutheran divine, superintendant of the churches of Ratisbon, where he died May 14, 1667, leaving “Parallela Evangelii” “Comment, in Joel, Amos, Jonam, Ecclesiasten” “Sacra Analecta;” “De Christianis Officiis” “Arboretum Biblic.” “Exercitationes de Zoroastre, Hermete, Sanchoniatone,” Norimbergae, 1661,8vo; “Sjlva TheologiaB Symbolicae,” 1685, 12mo; “Jeremiae virga vigilans;” “De Ecclesiarum Germanicarum origine et progressu,” 1664, 8vo. &LC. His son, George Henry Ursinus, a learned philologist, who died Sept. 10, 1707, aged sixty, left the following works: “Diatribe de Taprobana, Cerne et Ogyride veterum” “Disputatio de locustis” “Observationes Philologies;” “De variis vocum etymologicis et significationibus,” &c. “De Creatione mundi” “Notulce Criticae ad Eclogas Virgilii” “Annotationes in Senecae Troada;” “De primo et proprio Aoristorum usu” “Dioiiysii Terrse orbis descriptio cum notis.” He must be distinguished from George Ursinus, a learned Danish divine, who acquired honour by his “Hebrew Antiquities.”

, a writer distinguished for his skill in astronomy, was born at Henstedt in Dhhmarsen, which is part of the dukedom of Holstein, about 1550. He was a swineherd in his younger years, and did not begin to read till he was eighteen; and then he employed all the hours he could spare from his labours in learning to read and write. He afterwards applied himself to the study of the languages; and, having a good capacity and memory, made a very swift progress in Latin and Greek. He also learned the French tongue, mathematics, astronomy, and philosophy; and most of them without the assistance of a master. Having left his native country, he gained a livelihood by teaching which he did in Denmark in 1584, and on the frontiers of Pomerania and Poland in 1585. It was in this last place that he invented a new system of astronomy, very little different from that of Tycho Brahe. He communicated it in 1586 to the landgrave of Hesse, which gave rise to an angry dispute between him and Tycho Brahe. Tycho charged him with being a plagiary; who, as he related, happening to come with his master into his study, saw there, on a piece of paper, the figure of his system; and afterwards insolently boasted, that himself was the inventor of it. Ursus, upon this accusation, wrote with great severity against Tycho; called the honour of his invention into question, ascribing the system which he pretended was his own to Apollonius PergsBUs; and made use of such language, as almost brought on prosecution. He was afterwards invited, by his imperial majesty, to teach the mathematics in Prague, from which city, to avoid the presence of Tycho Brahe, he withdrew silently in 1589, and died soon after. He made some improvements in trigonometry, and wrote several works, which discover the marks of his hasty studies; his erudition being indigested, and his style incorrect, as is almost always the case with those who begin their studies late in life.

, a most illustrious prelate, and as he has been justly styled by Dr. Johnson, the great luminary of the Irish church, was descended from a very antient family, and born at Dublin, Jan. 4, 1580. His father, Arnold Usher, was one of the six clerks in chancery, a gentleman of good estate and reputation, and descended of a very ancient family, which in England bore the name of Nevil, till the reign of Henry II. when it was fchanged by one of his ancestors, who about 1185, passing with prince (afterwards king) John in quality of usher into Ireland, settled there by the name of his office, a practice very common in those early ages, and probably occasioned by the ambition of founding a family; and his descendants, spreading into several branches, filled the most considerable posts in and about Dublin for many ages, to the time of our author, who gave fresh lustre to the family. His mother was the daughter of James Stanyhurst (father of Richard the poet. See Stanyhurst) thrice speaker of the House of Commons, recorder of the city of Dublin, and one of the masters in chancery. This gentleman, of whom we took some notice in our account of his son, is yet more memorable for having first moved queen Elizabeth to found and endow a college and university at Dublin; in which he was vigorously seconded by Henry Usher , archbishop of Armagh, who was James Usher’s uncle. James discovered great parts and a strong passion for books from his infancy; and this remarkable circumstance attended the beginning of his literary pursuits, that he was taught to read by two aunts, who had been blind from their cradle, but had amazing memories, and could repeat most part of the Bible with readiness and accuracy; C<ecorum mens oculatissima. At eight years of age he was sent to a school, which was opened by Mr. James Fullerton and Mr. James Hamilton, two young Scots gentlemen, who were placed at Dublin by king James I. then only king of Scotland, to keep a correspondence with the protestant nobility and gentry there, in order to secure an interest in that kingdom, in the event of queen Elizabeth’s death: but her majesty being very sore upon this point, and unwilling to think of a successor, this was a service of some danger, and therefore it was thought expedient for them to assume the disguise of school-masters, a class of men which was very much wanted in Ireland at that time. Mr. Fullerton was afterwards knighted, and of the bed-chamber to king James; and Mr. Hamilton was created viscount Clandebois.

Having continued five years under these excellent masters, of whom he ever afterwards spoke with honour, and having made a progress far beyond his age, he was admitted into the college of Dublin, which was finished that very year, 1593. He was one of the first three students who were admitted; and his name stands to this day in the first line of the roll. Dr. Bernard seems to hint that he was the first graduate, fellow, and proctor, which we doubt, at least as to the fellowship, his uncle being first fellow, and his tutor at this time senior fellow, according to Harris. Here he learned logic, and the philosophy of Aristotle, under Mr. Hamilton, his tutor, and though, as we are told, his love of poetry and cards retarded his studies for some time, yet he soon recovered himself from these habits, applied to books again with great vigour, and at the same time acquired that pious turn which was ever afterwards a distinguishing; feature in his character. He is said to hare been wonderfully affected with that passage in Cicero, “Nescire quid antea quam natus sis accident, id est semper esse puerum” that is, “to know nothing of what happened before you were born is to be always a boy.” About this time, from meeting with Sleidan’s little book “De quatuor imperiis,” he contracted an extreme fondness for the study of history, which he afterwards pursued with equal depth and preciseness. At fourteen years of age he began to make extracts from all the historical books he could meet with, in order to fix the facts more firmly in his memory; and, between fifteen or sixteen, he had made such a proficiency in chronology, that he had drawn up in Latin an exact chronicle of the Bible, as far as the book of Kings, not much differing from his “Annals,” which have since been published. The difference chiefly consists in the addition of observations and the parallel chronofcugy of the heathens. Before he was full sixteen, he had entered upon theological studies, and perused the most able writers, on both sides, on the Romish controversy. Among the Romanists, he read Stapleton’s “Fortress of Faith;” and, finding that author confident in asserting antiquity for the tenets of Popery, and in taxing our church with novelty in. what it dissented from theirs, he kept his mind in suspense, till he could examine how the truth stood in that particular. He took it for granted, as his historian says, that the ancient doctrines must needs be the right, as the nearer the fountain the purer the stream; and that errors sprang up as the ages succeeded, according to that known saying of Tertullian, “Verum quodcunque primum, adulterum quodcunque posterius.” Bishop Jewel had adopted the same principle before him; and too much deference to the authority of the fathers prevailed in their days and long after. Yet they were far from being ignorant, as has been absurdly imputed to them, that the question concerning doctrines is not how ancient, but how true those doctrines are. The dispute was purely historical. Stapleton quoted the fathers as holding the doctrines of popery. Usher thought this impossible, and rather believed that Stapleton had misquoted them, at least had wrested and tortured them to his own sense. This made him then take up a firm resolution, that in due time (if God gave him life) he would himself read all the fathers, and trust none but his own eyes in searching out their sense: which great work he afterwards began at twenty years of age, and finished at thirty-eight; strictly confining himself to read a certain portion every day, from which he suffered no occasion to divert him.

In 1398, when the earl of Essex came over lord- lieutenant of Ireland, and chancellor of the university of Dublin, there was a solemn philosophy-act for his entertainment; and Usher, being then bachelor of arts, was appointed respondent, in which he acquitted himself with great success. But, while he was busily employed in these studies and great designs to fit himself for the ministry, his father’s inclinations lay towards the common law. He had all along designed his son for this study, and was about to send him over to the English inns of courts, in order that he might there cultivate it the better, but he died in 1588, and thus left him at liberty to pursue his own inclinations, which invariably led him to divinity. The paternal inheritance that was now fallen into his hands did not give the least interruption to his purpose; for, finding it somewhat incumbered with law-suits and sisters portions, and fearing those might prove a hindrance to his studies, which were all his care, he gave it up to his brothers and sisters; only reserving so much of it as might support him in a studious life at college.

Being now settled to his liking, and freed from worldly connexions and cares, he devoted himself entirely to the pursuit of every species of literature, human and divine; He was admitted fellow of the college, and acknowledged to be a model of piety, modesty, and learning. About this time, the learned Jesuit Fitz-simons (See Fitz-Simons), then a prisoner in Dublin-castle, sent out a challenge , defying the ablest champion that should come against him, to dispute with him about the points in controversy between the Roman and the Protestant churches. Usher, though but in his nineteenth year, accepted the challenge; and when they met, the Jesuit despised him as but a boy; yet, after a conference or two, was so very sensible of the quickness of his wit, the strength of his arguments, and his skill in disputation, as to decline any farther contest with him. This appears from the following letter of Usher, which Dr. Parr has inserted in his life; and which serves also to confute those who have supposed that there was not any actual dispute between them. “I was not purposed, Mr. Fitz-simons, to write unto you, before you had first written to me, concerning some chief points of your religion, as at our last meeting you promised; s but, seeing you have deferred the same, for reasons best known to yourself, I thought it not amiss to inquire farther of your mind, concerning the continuation of the conference begun betwixt us. And to this I am the rather moved, because I am credibly informed of certain reports, which I could hardly be persuaded should proceed from him, who in my presence pretended so great love and affection unto me. If I am a boy, as it hath pleased you very contemptuously to name me, I give thanks to the Lord, that my carriage towards you hath been such as could minister unto you no just occasion to despise my youth. Your spear belike is in your own conceit a weaver’s beam, and your abilities such, that you desire to encounter with the stoutest champion in the host of Israel; and therefore, like the Philistine, you contemn me as being a boy. Yet this I would fain have you know, that I neither came then, nor now do come unto you, in any confidence of any learning that is in me; in which respect, notwithstanding, I thank God I am what I am: but I come in the name of the Lord of Hosts, whose companies you have reproached, being certainly persuaded, that even out of the mouths of babes and sucklings he was able to shew forth his own praises. For the farther manifestation thereof, I do again earnestly request you, that, setting aside all vain comparisons of persons, we may go plainly forward in examining the matters that rest in controversy between us; otherwise I hope you will not be displeased, if, as for your part you have begun, so 1 also for my own part may be bold, for the clearing of myself and the truth which I profess, freely to make known what hath already passed concerning this matter. Thus intreating you in a few lines to make known unto me your purpose in this behalf, I end; praying the Lord, that both this and all other enterprises that we take in hand may be so ordered as may most make for the advancement of his own glory and the kingdom of his son Jesus Christ.” Tuus ad Aras usque,

In 1600 he was received master of arts, appointed proctor, and chosen catechetical lecturer of the university. In 1601, though under canonical age, yet on account of his extraordinary attainments, he was ordained both deacon and priest by his uncle Henry Usher, then archbishop of Armagh. Not long after, he was appointed to preach constantly before the state at Christ-church in Dublin on Sundays in the afternoon; when he made it his business to canvass the chief points in dispute between the papists and the protestants. He vehemently opposed a toleration, which the former were then soliciting, and some were consenting to; of which he gave his opinion from these words of Ezekiel, “And thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days; I have appointed thee each day for a year:” iv. 6. They are part of Ezekiel’s vision concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and of the Jewish nation, which he applied thus to the state of Ireland “From this year I reckon forty years and then those, whom you now embrace, shall be your ruin, and you shall bear their iniquity.” This being then uttered in a sermon, says Dr. Parr, seemed only the random-thought of a young man, who was no friend to popery; but afterwards, at the end of forty years, namely in 1641, when the Irish rebellion broke out, and many thousand of protestants were murdered, it was considered by many as even prophetical. On other occasions he was thought to betray an extraordinary foresight, and there was a treatise published “De predictionibus Usserii.” In 1603 he was sent over to England with Dr. Luke Challoner, in order to purchase books for the library at Dublin; the English army, who defeated the Spaniards at Kinsale, having contributed the sum of 1800l. for this purpose. On his arrival he found sir Thomas Bodley at London, employed in the same manner for his newlyerected library at Oxford, and they are said to have mutually assisted each other. It was during his absence upon this occasion that his mother was reconciled to the Romish religion, which gave him the most afflicting concern, and the more as she continued obstinate to the last, dying at Drogheda in the communion of that church. It appears also, that her father, the recorder, though outwardly a conformist to the new religion, after its establishment by Q. Elizabeth, yet still retained his old affection for popery, as appears from his supporting first in his own house Edmund Campian, afterwards the famous Jesuit, then a refugee from England, and in the next place recommending him to a friend in the country, where he might be secure from the danger of being seized and brought to justice for treasonable practices, in drawing her majesty’s subjects from their allegiance. The recorder took care however to conduct himself so prudently, as to give no umbrage to the government, and by that means continued unmolested in his post.

In 1606, the necessity of purchasing books and manuscripts relating to English history (in which study our author was then engaged) brought him again into England. He now contracted an intimate acquaintance and friendship with several learned men, and among others, sir Robert Cotton, Thomas Allen of Oxford, and Mr. Camden, which last, designing a new edition of his “Britannia,” consulted with him about publishing Ninias, St. Patrick, and Congal, and other writers or documents relating to the ancient state

of Ireland and the city of Dublin, a great part of the answers to which were inserted in the edition of the “Britannia,” published in 1607, with this elogy of our author: “For many of these things concerning Dublin I acknowledge myself indebted to the diligence and labour of James Usher, chancellor of the church of St. Patrick, who in various learning and judgment far exceeds his years.” The following year, 1607, he proceeded bachelor of divinity, and was chosen professor of that faculty in his college. He was also promoted to the chancellorship of the cathedral of St. Patrick the same year, by Dr. Loftus the archbishop. In his office of divinity-professor he continued thirteen years, reading lectures weekly throughout the year. In 1609 he made a third voyage to England, and became acquainted with other eminent and learned men, Selden, sir Henry Savile, Briggs, Ward, Lydiat, Dr. Davenant, &c. after which he constantly came over into England once in three years, spending one month at Oxford, another at Cambridge, and the rest of his time at London, chiefly in the Cottonian library. In 1609 he wrote a learned treatise concerning the “Herenach, Termon, and Corban lands, anciently belonging to the chorepiscopi of England and Ireland; which was held in great esteem, and presented by archbishop Bancroft to king James. The substance of it was afterward translated into Latin by sir Henry Spelman, in his” Glossary," and by sir James Ware in the 17th chapter of his Antiquities; but it never was published. The ms. is in the Lambeth library. In 1610 he was unanimously elected provost of Dublin college; but refused to accept that post, being apprehensive of its hindering him in those great designs he was then meditating for the promotion of learning and true religion.

In 1612 he took his doctor of divinity’s degree; and the next year, being at London, his first publication appeared, entitled “De Ecclesiarum Christianarum Successione & Statu,” in 4to. This is a continuation of bishop Jewel’s “Apology,” in which that eminent prelate had endeavoured to shew that the principles of protestants are agreeable to those of the fathers of the six first centuries. Usher’s design was to finish what Jewel had begun, by shewing that from, the sixth century to the reformation, namely, for 900 years, Christ has always had a visible church of true Christians, untainted with the errors and corruptions of the Roman church; and that these islands owe not their Christianity to Rome. This work is divided into three parts. The first reaches to the tenth century, when Gregory VII. was raised to the popedom. The second was to have reached from that period to the year 1370. And the third was to bring it to the reformation. How far he had brought it in this edition is stated in the followirig extract of a letter written to his brother-in-law, Thomas Lydiat, dated at Dublin, August 16, 1619: “You have rightly observed,” says be, “that in my discourse ‘ De Christianarum Ecclesiarum Successione et Statu,’ there is wanting, for the accomplishment of the second part, a hundred years [from 1240 to 1370, viz. the last chapter of this part]; which default, in the continuation of the work is by me supplied. I purpose to publish the whole work together, much augmented, but do first expect the publication of my uncle Stanyhurst’s answer to the former, which, I hear, since his death, is sent to Paris, to be there printed. I am advertised, also, that even now there is one at Antwerp who hath printed a treatise of my countryman De sacro Bosco (Holywood), ‘ De ver Ecclesise investigatione,’ wherein he hath some dealing with me. Both these I would willingly see before I set about reprinting my book, meaning, that if they have justly found fault with any thing, I may amend it; if unjustly, I may defend it.” His uncle’s answer, however, was never published, nor did our author publish any other edition of his work, as he here purposed; probably prevented by the distraction of the times. It was reprinted at Hanover in 1658, 8vo, without any amendments. In the last edition of 1687, containing likewise his Antiquity of the British Churches, are these words in the title-page: “Opus integrum ab Auctore auctum et recognitnm;” which, Dr. Smith observes, was a trick of the bookseller. Usher’s work was solemnly presented by archbishop Abbot to king James, as the eminent first fruits of the college of Dublin.

The same year, 1612, upon his return to Ireland, he married Phoebe, only daughter of Dr. Luke Challoner, who died this year April the 12th, and in his last will recommended our author to his daughter for a husband, if she was inclined to marry. In 1615 there was a parliament held at Dublin, and a convocation of the clergy, in which were composed certain articles relating to the doctrine and discipline of the church. These articles were drawn up by Usher, and signed by archbishop Jones, then lord chancellor of Ireland, and speaker of the house of bishops in convocation, by order from James I, in his majesty’s name. Among these articles, which amount to the number of one hundred and four, besides asserting the doctrine of predestination and reprobation in the strongest terms, one of them professes that there is but one catholic church, out of which there is no salvation; and another maintains thut the sabbath-day ought to be kept holy. Upon these accounts Dr. Heylin called the passing of these articles an absolute plot of the Sabbatarians and Calvinists in England to make themselves so strong a party in Ireland as to obtain what they pleased in this convocation. Our author was well known to be a strong asserter of the predestinarian principles; and being besides of opinion that episcopacy was not a distinct order, but only a different degree from that of presbyters, he certainly cannot be exculpated from the charge of puritanism. However, as he always warmly asserted the king’s supremacy, and the episcopal form of church government established, and all the discipline of it, it has been said that all the objections to him, as inclined to puritanism, were the effect of party, the church beginning about this time to be divided between the Calvinistic and Arminiau principles upon the quinquarticular controversy. Dr. Parr tells us, his enemies were of no great repute for learning and worth; and that our author, hearing of their attempts to deprive him of his majesty’s favour, procured a letter from the lord deputy and council of Ireland to the privy council in England, in defence of his principles, which he brought over to England in 1619, and satisfied his majesty so well upon that point, that in 1620 he promoted him to the bishopric of Meath. In November 1622 he made a speech in the castle-chamber at Dublin upon the censuring of certain officers, concerning the lawfulness of taking, and the danger of refusing, the oath of supremacy; which pleased king James so well that he wrote him a letter of thanks for it. In 1623 he was constituted a privy counsellor of Ireland, and made another voyage to England, in order to collect materials for a work concerning the antiquities of the churches of England, Scotland, and Ireland, which the king himself had employed him to write and soon afterhis return to Ireland was engaged in answering the challenge of Malone, an Irish Jesuit of the college of Louvain.

He was again in England, when king James, just before he died, advanced him to the archbishopric of Armagh; but, as he was preparing to return to Ireland, he was seized with a quartan ague, which detained him nine months. Before he left England he had a disputation with a popish priest at Drayton in Northamptonshire, the seat of lord Mordaunt, afterwards earl of Peterborough. He was scarce recovered from his ague, when this lord Mordaunt, then a zealous Roman catholic, being very desirous to bring his lady into the pale of that church, cpncluded that there could be no better or more certain way than to procure a disputation to be held between two learned and principal persons, one of each side, at which his lady should be present. In that resolution he chose, for the champion of his own cause, the Jesuit Beaumont, whose true name was Rookwood, being brother to that Rookwood who was executed for the gunpowder treason. Against this antagonist lady Peterborough chose our primate, who, notwithstanding his health was not sufficiently confirmed to engage in such a task, yet from the ardent zeal for the reformed doctrine with which he was constantly animated, and to save a soul from falling into the wiles of an artful Jesuit, he did not refuse to comply with her ladyship’s request. The place appointed for holding the disputation was my lord’s seat at Drayton, a place very proper for the business, as being furnished with a most copious library of the writings of all the ancient fathers of the church, which were ready at hand, if it should happen that any of them should be re-> ferred to in the engagement. The heads of the dispute were agreed to be upon transubstantiation, the invocation of saints, of images, and the perpetual visibility of the church. After it had been held for three days, five hours each day, in which our primate sustained the part of respondent, that office for the fourth day lay upon Beaumont, according to the regulation settled by himself. But he sent a letter to the baron, with an excuse, alleging, “that all the arguments which he had formed had slipt out of his memory, nor was he able by any effort to recollect them, imputing the cause of the misfortune to a just judgment of God upon him, for undertaking of his own accord, without the licence of his superiors, to engage in a dispute with a person of so great eminence and learning as the primate.” Such a shameful tergiversation sunk deeply into the mind of lord Mordaunt, so that, after some conferences with the primate, he renounced popery, and Cod­tinued in the profession of the protestant faith to the end of his life.

This account is given in the life of our archbishop by Dr. Nicholas Bernard, who says he had it from an eye and ear witness. And it is in a great measure confirmed by the reproach thrown upon Beaumont by Chaloner, a secular priest, who in a piece wrote against the Jesuit “admonishes him to beware of Drayton-house, lest he should there chance to light upon another Usher, and be again put to flight, to the great disgrace both of himself and his profession.” As to the primate, the eminent service done by this disputation to lady Peterborough could not but be very sensibly felt by her; and that it was so, she gave his grace sufficient proofs in that extraordinary kindness and respect which she shewed to him all his life after.

In 1634, the parliament of Ireland being ready to meet, there arose a dispute between the archbishops of Armagh and Dublin concerning precedence; but Usher asserted his right with such clearness and evidence that the point was determined in his favour. The convocation meeting at the same time with the parliament, he bad the principal hand in composing and establishing the Irish canons, in which the liberties of that church were maintained by him against Dr. Bramhall (See Bramhall), who was for the English canons, and was probably influenced by archbishop Laud. For when they were passed in convocation, Laud thus wrote to Usher: “For your canons, to speak truth, and with liberty and freedom, though I cannot but think the English canons entire (especially with some amendments) would have done better, yet since you and that church have thought otherwise, I do very easily submit to it.” His grace afterwards writes thus: “As for the particular about subscription, I think you have couched that very well, since, as it seems, there was some necessity to carry that article closely; and God forbid you should upon any occasion roll back upon your former controversy about the articles.” To explain his grace’s meaning, it must be observed, that those canons of the thirty-nine articles of the church of England were received, and declared to be the confession of the faith of the church of Ireland, to which every clergyman was obliged to subscribe. Upon which Dr. Heylin asserted, that the Irish articles of 1615 above mentioned were now repealed. But he recalled this error when he found (the truth) that the Irish articles were still retained and confirmed in these very canons. The doctor indeed observed, that the inconsistency of the several articles proved the virtual repeal of the Irish ones: yet it is plain that this was not so understood at that time, nor for several years after, since both the primate and all the rest of the Irish bishops, at all ordinations, took the subscription of the party ordained to both sets of articles, till the Irish rebellion put a stop to all ordinations. However, since the restoratiop of king Charles Ji. a subscription only to. the thirty-nine articles of the church of England is required.

All this while he kept a correspondence in every country for the advancement of learning, and procured in 1634 a very good copy of the Samaritan Pentateuch from the East; besides one of the Old Testament in Syriac, and other valuable manuscripts. It was one of the first of those Pentateuchs that ever were brought into these western parts of Europe, as Mr. Selden and Dr. Walton acknowledge; and the Syriac Testament was much more perfect than had hitherto been seen in these parts. The other manuscripts were procured by the means of one Mr. Davies, then a merchant at Aleppo. The archbishop collated the Samaritan with the Hebrew, and marked the differences, after which he intended it for the library of sir Robert Cotton. Bat this, as well as the other manuscripts, being borrowed of him by Dr. Walton, and made use of by hhn in the edition of the Polyglot Bible, were not recovered out of the hands of that bishop’s executors till 1686, and are novy in the Bodleian library. And notwithstanding the necessaryavocations in the discharge of his episcopal office, he prosecuted his studies with indefatigable diligence, the fruits of which appeared in 1638, when he pablished at Dublin, in 4to, his “Emmanuel, or a treatise on the Incarnation of the Son of God;” which was followed by his “Britannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates” in the ensuing year. This history contains a most exact account of the British church: From the first planting of Christianity in twenty years after our Saviour’s crucifixion, he brings it down both in Britain and Ireland, to the end of the seventh century. The piece was of great service, particularly to Dr. Lloyd and bishop Stillingfleet, his followers upon the same subject.

In the beginning of 1640 he came into England with his family, intending (as before) to return in a year or two at farthest. Soon after his arrival he went to Oxford for the more convenience of pursuing his studies: but these were unhappily interrupted by the urgent necessity of the times, which put him upon writing some pieces that were published at Oxford in 1641, on the subject of episcopacy: These were, 1. “The Judgment of Dr. Reynolds concerning the original of Episcopacy defended.” 2. “The Original of Bishops, or a chorographical and-historical disquisition touching the Lydian and proconsular Asia, and the seven metropolitan churches contained therein.” The design of this treatise is to prove, from Acts xix. 17, supported by Rev. ii. 1. and confirmed by ecclesiastical history, that bishops and metropolitans were instituted by the apostles; meaning only with regard to their superiority in degree; for he did not hold episcopacy to be a superior order to presbytery. He also endeavours to prove that the bishop of Ephesus was not only the metropolitan of the proconsular Asia, but the primate, or exarch, of all the provinces that were comprehended within the compass of the whole Asian diocese; and that he acted suitably to the patriarchal jurisdiction, which was in effect conferred upon him, In the prosecution of the argument he shews, 1. That the stars described in the Revelations are the angels of the seven churches. 2. That these angels were the several bishops of those churches, and not the whole college of presbyters. 3. That each of these seven churches was at that time a metropolis. 4. That these bishops were ordained by the apostles as constant permanent officers in the church, and so in a sortjwe (Tivino, not to be dispensed with except in cases of necessity. These tracts were printed, with others on the same subject, under the title “Certain brief Treatises,” &c. Oxf. 1641, 4to. It was about this, time also that he drew up his treatise on “The Power of the Prince and the Obedience of the Subject,” which, as we have mentioned in our account of his grandson, James Tyrrell, was published after the restoration. Archbishop Usher was a man of too much note, and of too high a station, not to. be < deeply involved in and affected with the succeeding troubles. He is charged by some writers with having advised the king to consent to the bill against the earl of Stratford, but is cleared by others; and Dr. Parr tells us, that when the primate lay extremely ill, and expected death at St. Donate’s castle in 164-5, he asked his grace concerning it, who flatly denied it, and said it was wrongfully laid to his charge; for, that he neither advised nor approved it. In the rebellion in Ireland he was plundered of everything except his library and some furniture in his house at Drogheda, whence the library was conveyed to England. On this the king conferred on him the bishopric of Carlisle, to be holden in commendam; the revenues of which, however, were reduced to almost nothing by the Scots and English armies quartering upon it. When all the lands belonging to the English bishoprics were seized by the parliament, they voted him a pension of 400l. per annum; which yet he never received above once or twice. It is said that he was invited into France by cardinal Richelieu, with a promise of the free exercise of his religion, and a considerable pension; and likewise by the States of Holland, who offered him the place of honorary professor at Leyden. Dr. Smith, one of his biographers, seems to doubt these facts, especially the first. But Dr. Parr thinks it not unlikely, from an instance of respect which Richelieu had before shewn to the archbishop, by sending him, in return for a copy of the “Antiquity of the British Churches,” which the author had presented to his eminence, a letter of much kindness and esteem, accompanied with a gold medal, which Dr. Bernard says “is still preserved.” It was in possession of the Tyrrell family in 1738, and was then exhibited to the society of antiquaries. The date is 1631. In 1642 the archbishop removed to Oxford, not lon before the king came thither, and preached every Sunday at some of the churches, principally All Saints. In 1643 he was nominated one of the assembly of divines at Westminster, but refused to sit among them: and this, together with some of his sermons at Oxford, in which he had spoke against their authority, giving offence to the parliament, they ordered his library to be seized, and it would have been sold, had not Dr. Featly, who sat among those divines while his heart was with the church and king, obtained it by means of Mr. Selden for his own use, and so secured it to the right owner, or at least the greater part, but some valuable articles were stolen, and never recovered. In 1644 he published at Oxford his valuable edition of “Polycarpi et Ignatii Epistolae.”

The king’s affairs declining, and Oxford being threatened with a siege, he left that city, and retired to Cardiff, in Wales, to the house of sir Timothy Tyrrell, who had married his only daughter, and who was then governor and general of the ordnance. He continued six months here in tranquillity, prosecuting his studies, particularly his “Annals,” and then went to the castle of St. Donate, whither he was invited by the lady dowager Stradling; but in his journey thither fell into the hands of the mountaineers, who took away his books and papers; yet these were, by the kindness of the gentlemen and clergy of that country, in a great measure restored. Before this had been achieved, and while his Mss, the labour of so many years, seemed irrecoverable, he was observed to be more concerned than at all his former sufferings. At St. Donate’s he found an excellent library: but a fit of sickness prevented him from making all the use of it he proposed. His sickness was of an extraordinary nature; it was at first a suppression of urine, with extremity of torture, ending in a violent bleeding at the nose for near forty hours, without any intermission; but when he was every moment expected to die, the bleeding stopped, and he gradually recovered. He went to London in 1646, upon an invitation from the countess of Peterborough to make her house his home and, in 1647, was chosen preacher of Lincoln’s Inn, This society ordered him handsome lodgings, ready furnished, and several rooms for his library, which was about this time brought up from Chester, being almost all the remains of his substance that had escaped the rebels. Mr. (afterwards lord chief justice) Hale was then a bencher of the society, and probably had the chief hand in procuring him this place; and it happened that the society was well rewarded for it by that treasure lodged in this library by the lord chief justice in four volumes, which were extracted from the primate’s manuscripts; of which Dr. Parr has subjoined to his Life of the primate a catalogue, consisting of thirty-three very curious books. Here the primate constantly preached all term-time for almost eight years, till at last, his eye-sight and teeth beginning to fail him, he could not well be heard in so large a congregation, and was forced to quit this place about a year and a half 'before his death, to the great regret of the society. In the mean time, amidst all the convulsions of the times, he continued his studies, and the year he was chosen to Lincoln’s Inn, published his treatise “De Romanae Ecclesiae Symbol^,” which he followed by his “Dissertatio de Macedonum et Asianorum anno solari” in the beginning of 1648, 8vo. la this tract, besides fixing the exact time of St. Polycarp’s martyrdom, he compares the Grecian and Macedonian months with the Julian and other nations; and, having laid down the method and disposition of the Macedonian and Asiatic year, he adds rules for finding out the cycles of the sun and moon, and Easter for ever, with several curious accounts of the celestial motions according to the ancient Greek astronomers, Melon, Calippus, Eudoxus, and others. To which is annexed an Ephemeris, or entire Greek and Roman calendar for the whole year, with the rising and setting of the stars in that climate.

About this time he was sent for to the Isle of Wight by his majesty, to assist him in treating with the parliament upon the point of episcopacy; when he proposed an expedient, which he called “Presbyterian and Episcopal Government conjoined,” which the king approved as the likeliest means of reconciling the then differences. But no proposals, how moderate soever, were able to satisfy the presbyterians, till his majesty was taken out of their hands by the army, and brought to the scaffold, the sight of which struck our primate with the utmost horror. The countess of Peterborough’s house, where the primate then lived, being exactly opposite to Charing Cross, several of the family, at the time of the king’s execution, went up to the leads of the house, which commanded a full view of Whitehall; and, as soon as his majesty came upon the scaffold, some of them went down and told the primate, asking him it' he would not see the king once more before he was put to death. Though unwilling at first, yet he was persuaded at length to go up, as well out of a desire to see the king once again, as from curiosity, since he could scarce believe what they told him. When he came upon the leads his majesty was in his speech. The primate stood still, and said nothing, but sighed; and, lifting his hands and eyes full of tears towards heaven, seemed to pray earnestly. But when the king had done speaking, and had taken off“his cloaths and doublet, and stood stript in his waistcoat, and the executioners in vizards began to put up the king’s hair, he grew pale, and would have fainted if he had not been immediately carried off. He kept the 30th of January as a private fast as long as he lived. In 1650 he published the first part of his” Annals of the Old Testament,“and the second in. 1654. The two parts were printed together, under the title of” Annales Veteris 11 Novi Testament!,“at Paris, 1673, and at Geneva, 1722, in folio. In 1652 he published his” Epistola ad Ludovicum Capellum de variantibus textus Hebraici lectionibu*,*' Lond. 1640.

His great reputation having excited in Cromwell a curiosity to see him, the primate, upon the usurper’s intimation of it to him, went, and was received with great civility: Cromwell made him also many promises, but never performed them, and it was on this occasion that the primate predicted the restoration, in a conversation with Dr. Parr, his biographer. “This false man hath broken his word with me, and refuses to perform what he promised. Well, he will have little cause to glory in his wickedness; for he will not continue long. The king will return: Though I shall not live to see it, you may. The government, both in church and state, is in confusion. The papists are advancing their projects, and making such advantages as will hardly be prevented.” The same year, 1654, he published his last piece, 6t De Graeca Septuaginta Interpretum verum Syntagma," &c. and preached Mr. Selden’s funeralsermon in the Temple-church. On March 20, 1655-6, he was taken ill, and died the day following, in the countess of Peterborough’s house at Kyegate in Surrey. Though he was seventy-six, his illness proved to be a pleurisy: for, upon opening his body, a great deal of coagulated blood was found settled in his left side. Preparations were making to bury him privately; but Cromwell ordered him to be interred with great magnificence in Erasmus’s chapel in Westminster-abbey, the funeral service being performed according to the liturgy of the church of England. This was a great indulgence, but the usurper meant to make himself popular, knowing what a high reputation the deceased had among all orders of men yet was politic enough to throw the expence of the funeral upon his relations, who were ill able to bear it. His funeral sermon was preached by Dr. Nicolas Bernard, who had formerly been his chaplain, and was then preacher of Gray’s-inn: it was printed, and contains many particulars of his life, related with the caution then necessary.

Usher left his library, being the chief part of his property, as a portion to his only daughter, who had been the mother of a numerous offspring. It was first bought by the officers and soldiers of Cromwell’s army in Ireland, and lodged in Dublin-castle, where it lay, though not without being much pillaged, till the restoration; which bringing it into the possession of king Charles II. he gave it, according to the primate’s first intention, to Dublincollege, where it now remains. This, in truth, had been the primate’s first intention; but, upon the loss of every thing else except his books, he was compelled to consider the necessities of his family, his daughter having before had nothing from him except some pieces of gold presented to him by Mr. Selden’s executors and other pqrsons of quality. The library consisted of ten thousand volumes printed and manuscript, and cost the primate many thousand pounds. Both the king of Denmark and cardinal Mazarine offered a good price for it by their agents here; but the executors were forbidden, by an order from Oliver and his council, to sell it to any one without his consent; so it was at last bought by the soldiers and officers of the then army in Ireland, who, out of emulation to the former noble action of queen Elizabeth’s army, were incited by some men of public spirit to the like performance, and they had it for much less than the real worth, or what had been offered for it before by the agents above mentioned. They had also with it all the manuscripts which were not of his own hand-writing, and a choice though not numerous collection of ancient coins. But, when this library was carried over into Ireland, the usurper and his son, who then commanded in chief there, would not bestow it upon the college, lest perhaps the gift should not appear so considerable there as it would do by itself; and therefore they gave out that they intended it for a new college or hall which they said they intended to build and endow. But it proved that, as these were not times, so they were not persons capable of any such noble or pious work; and this library lay in the castle of Dublin till Cromwell’s death; and, during the anarchy and confusion that followed, the rooms where it was kept being left open, many of the books, and most of the best manuscripts, were stolen away, or else embezzled by those that were intrusted with them.

Archbishop Usher was tall, well-shaped, and walked upright to the last. His hair was b'rown, his complexion sanguine, his countenance full of good-nature as well as gravity: yet, Dr. Parr says, the air of his face was hard to hit, and that, though many pictures were taken of him, he never saw but one like him, which was done by sir Peter Lely. He was a man who abounded in all graces, moral as well as spiritual; which, joined with the greatest abilities and learning, made him upon the whole a very complete character. Among his Mss. were many notes and observations upon the writings and characters of the fathers and ecclesiastical authors, which he designed as the foundation of a large and elaborate work, to be called “The.ologica Bibliotheca;” and this was indeed, of all his works, that which, he had most set his heart upon: yet the calamities of the times would not suffer him to finish it. He left these papers, however, to Dr. Gerard Langbaine, proTost of Queen’s college, as the only man on whose learning as well as friendship he could rely, to render them fit for the press: but Langbaine, while pursuing his task in the public library, got so severe a cold, that he died in 1657; and nothing farther appears to have been done, though Dr. Fell afterwards made some attempts to get it finished. A copy of it is lodged ip the Bodleian library. The works from his Mss. published after his death, were: 1. “Chronologia sacra seu Annorum & wadoncltcts Patriarcharum, isapoMiois Israelitarum in Ægypto Annorum etiamJudicum,RegumJudae Israelis, ^o3fi|<jChronologica,” Oxford, 166Q, in 4to, published by Dr. Thomas Barlow,. afterwards bishop of Lincoln. Reprinted with the Annals of the Old and New Testament at Geneva, in 1722, folio. This chronology is imperfect, the author dying while he was engaged in it. He proposed to have subjoined to it a tract “De primitive & veterurn Hebraeorum Kalendario.” 2. A collection of piece’s published by Dr. Nicholas Bernard at London, in 1658, 8vo, under the title of “The Judgment of the late Archbishop,” &c. 3. Dr. Bernard published likewise at London in 1659 our author’s “Judgment and sense of the present See of Rome from Apocal. xviii. 4.” 4. “The power of the prince and obedience of the subject stated;” with a preface by Dr. Robert Sanderson, published by James Tyrrell, esq. grandson to our author, at London, 1661. 5. A volume of “Sermons,” preached at Oxford before his majesty, and elsewhere. 6. “Historia Dogmatica Controversise inter Orthodoxos & Pontificios de Scripturis & sacris Vernaculis. Accessere ejusdem Dissertationes duoe de Pseudo-Dionysii scriptis & de Epistola ad Laodicenos. Descripsit, digessit, & Notis atque Auctario locupletavit Henricus Wharton,” London, 16yO, 4to. 7. “A Collection of three hundred Letters written to James Usher lord archbishop of Armagh, and most of the eminentest persons for piety and learning in his time both in England and beyond the seas. Collected and published from original copies under their own hands by Richard Parr, D. D. his lordship’s chaplain at the time of his death, uith whom the care of all his papers were intrusted by his lordship,” London, 1686, folio. To this Dr. Parr has prefixed the life of the archbishop, collected from authentic documents, and with the assistance of the Tyrrell family, his only descendants. This volume forms the best monument yet erected to his memory, and from the very names of his correspondents, gives us a high ictea of the respect in which he was held, and the high place he filled in the literary world.

, an ingenious writer, was the son of a gentleman-farmer in the county of Dublin, where he was born about 1720. He was descended from the venerable prelate of whom we have just given an account, but was of a Roman catholic family. He received a good classical education, though with no view to any of the learned professious. When grown up, he became a farmer, in imitation of his father, but after some years’ experience, had little success, and having sold his farm, stock, &c. settled for some time as a linen-draper in Dublin: for this business, however, he seems to have been as little qualified as for the other, and was a great loser. In truth he had that secret love of literature about him which generally inspired a train of thought not very compatible with the attention which trade requires: and finding himself, after some years, a widower with a family of four children, and but little prospect of providing for them in any business, he took orders in the church of Rome, sent his three sons for education to the college of Lombard in Paris, and his daughter to a monastery, where she soon after died. He then came to London, and while revolving plans for his support, and the education of his children, Mr. Molloy, an Irish gentleman, who had formerly been a political writer against sir Robert Walpole, died, and left him a legacy of three hundred pounds. With this money Mr. Usher thought of setting up a school, as the most likely way of providing for his sons; and with this view he communicated his intentions to the late Mr. John Walker, author of the Pronouncing Dictionary, and many other approved ' works on the construction and elegance of the English language. Mr. Walker not only approved the plan, but joined him as a partner in the business, and they opened a school under this firm at Kensington Gravel-pits. Mr. Usher’s acquaintance with Mr. Walker commenced during the former’s excursions from Dublin to Bristol, which latter place Mr. Walker’s business led him to visit occasionally. Their acquaintance soon grew into a friendship, which continued unbroken and undiminished to the close of Mr. Usher’s life. But the school these gentlemen were embarked in, did not altogether answer Mr. Walker’s purposes. Whether the profits were too little to divide, or whether he thought he could -do better as a private teacher, it is difficult to say; but Mr. Walker, after trying it for some time, quitted the connection, and commenced a private teacher, which he very successfully continued to the last. They parted, however, with the same cordiality they commenced, and the civilities and friendships of life were mutually continued.

Mr. Usher being now sole master of the school, he cultivated it with diligence and ability, and with tolerable success, for about four years; when he died of a consumption, at the age of fifty-two, in 1772. Mr. Usher’s first publication was a small pamphlet called “A New System of Philosophy,” in which he censures Locke, as leaning too much towards naturalism, a doctrine which he considered as the bane of every thing sublime, elegant, and noble. He next wrote some letters in the Public Ledger, signed “A Free Thinker” in which he shews the inconsistency and impolicy of the persecutions at that time going on against the Roman catholics. His next publication was entitled “Clio, or a discourse on Taste, addressed to a young lady;” in which he endeavours to prove, that there is in several respects an universal standard of taste in the soul of man, which, though it may be depraved or corrupted by education and habit, can never be totally eradicated. To this very ingenious essay, which is touched with elegance and observation, though, perhaps, with too much refinement, he afterwards added “An Introduction to the Theory of the Human Mind,” intended as a refutation of those deists who attack revealed religion under an apparent appeal to philosophy, but, by the occasional shifting of principles and systems, and a dexterous use of equivocal language, draw the dispute into a kind of labyrinth, in which the retreats are endless, and the victory always incomplete.

, a learned botanist, was born in the parish of St. Margaret, Westminster, May 25, 1642; educated at Westminster school under Dr. Busby; whence he was elected to Trinity college, Cambridge; B. A. 1662; M. A. 1666; LL. D. Com. Reg. 1682; and was master of the grammar school at Enfield about 1670. He resided in the old manor-house in that town called Queen Elizabeth’s Palace; and, being much attached to the study of botany, had a very curious garden there; and planted, among other trees, a cedar of Libanus, which (till within these few years) was one of the finest in the kingdom, measuring (in October 1793) 12 feet in the girth. In an account of the most remarkable gardens, near London in 1691, by J. Gibson, printed in the Archaeologia, vol. XII. p. 188, Dr. Uvedale is said to have “the greatest and choicest collection of exotics that perhaps was any where in this land.” Dr. Pulteney, hi his brief memoirs of Dr. Leonard Plukenet, says, “I regret that I cannot collect any material anecdotes relating to his friend and fellow collegian Dr. Uvedale, of whom Plukenet ever speaks in a style which indicates that he held him in great esteem.” “The garden which he cultivated at Enfield appears to have been rich in exotic productions; and though he is not known among those who advanced the indigenous botany of Britain, yet his merit as a botanist, or his patronage of the society at large, was considerable enough to incline Petiver to apply his name to a new plant, which Miller retained in his Dictionary, but which has since passed into the genus Polymnia, of the Linnsean system; the author of which has nevertheless retained Uvedalia, as the trivial name.” In the British Museum (Bibl. Sloan. 4064, Plut. 28 F.) are fifteen letters from him to sir Hans Sloane; also letters from him to Dr. Sherard, and Mr. James Petiver. Dryden, Dr. Uredale, and other learned men, having agreed to translate Plutarch’s Lives from the original Greek, Dr. Uvedale translated the Life of Dion, and the work was published in 1684. A whole length portrait of him, and another of his wife, were in the possession of the late admiral Uvedale, of Bosmere-house, Suffolk.

, a French poet of the lower order, was born January 1720, at Ham in Picardy, and carried to Paris, at five years old, by his father, a small tradesman, but he was so headstrong, wild, and dissipated in his youth, that nothing could make him attend to literature. This his biographers seem willing to consider as an advantage, and as giving a degree of originality to his works; yet they tell us that he afterwards read all the best French books. He invented a new species of poetry, which his countrymen called le genre Poissard (the Billingsgate style). In bringing this style to perfection, he carefully studied the manners of the fish-women, and their dialect, and introduced it in his most popular performances, and obtained from his admirers the title of the Teniers of poetry. His various Poissard operas, songs, parodies, &c. had great success but were mostly recommended by his manner of reciting or singing them; for then, say our authorities, it was not imitation, it was nature herself. But this nature, this Poissard style, this freedom of phrase, and licentious expressions, render the works of Vad6 very dangerous, and always disgusting to hearers of taste. They also exposed him to all the temptations of dissolute company; and his passion for gaming, convivial pleasures, and women, shortened his clays. He was become sensible of his errors, and had resolved to be wiser and better, but his resolution came late, and he was cut off in his thirty-seventh year, July 4, 1757. His collected works were published in 1758, 4 vols. 8vo, and since, in 1796, in 4to, with plates, but apparently only a selection, and probably as much as modern taste could bear.

, in German Von Watte, one of the most learned men of his nation or time, was born at St. Gal, Nov. 29, 1484, of which city his father, Joachim Von Watte, was a senator. After some education at home he was sent to Vienna to pursue the higher studies, but for some time entered more into the gaieties of the place, and was distinguished particularly for his quarrels and his duels, until by the sensible and affectionate remonstrances of a merchant of that city, to whose care his father had confided him, he was induced to devote his whole time and attention to books, and never relapsed into his former follies. When he had acquired a competent share of learning he wished to relieve his father from any farther expence, and with that honourable view taught a school at Villach, in Carinthia; but finding this place too remote from literary society, he returned to Vienna, and in a short time was chosen professor of the belles lettres, and acquitted himself with such credit, and gained such reputation by some poetry which he published, that the emperor Maximilian I. honoured him with the laurel crown at Lintz in 1514. After some hesitation between law and physic, both of which he had studied, he determined in favour of the latter, as a profession, and took his doctor’s degree at Vienna in 1518. He appears to have practised in that city, and afterwards at St. Gal, until the controversies arose respecting the reformation. After examining the arguments of the contending parties, he embraced the cause of the reformers; and besides many writings in favour of their principles, befriended them in his rank of senator, to which he had been raised. In 1526 he was farther promoted to the dignity of consul of St. Gal, the duties of which he performed so much to the satisfaction of his constituents that he was re-elected to the same office seven times. He died April 6, 1551, in his sixty-sixth year. He bequeathed his books to the senate of St. Gal, which were ordered to be placed in the public library of the city, with an inscription, honourable both to his character and talents. The latter were very extensive, for he was well versed and wrote well on mathematics, geography, philosophy, and medicine. He was also a good Latin poet, and, above all, a sound divine and an able controversial writer. Joseph Scaliger places him among the most learned men of Germany. He was intimate with our illustrious prelate, archbishop Cranmer, but preceded him in some of the doctrines of the reformation. About 1536 he wrote a book entitled “Aphorismorum libri sex de consideratione Eucharistiae,” &c. which was levelled at the popish doctrine of the corporal presence, and thinking it a proper work for the archbishop to patronize, presented it to him; but Cranmer had not yet considered the question in that view, and therefore informed Vadian that his book had not made a convert of him, and that he was hurt with the idea of being thought the patron of such unscriptural opinions. Vadian therefore pursued the subject at home, and wrote two more volumes on it. The only medical work he published was his “Consilium contra Pestem, Basil, 1546, 4to. Those by which he is best known in the learned world, are, 1. A collection of remarks on various Latin authors, in his” Epistola responsoria ad Rudulphi Agricolas epistolam,“ibid. 1515, 4to. 2. His edition of” Pomponius Mela,“first printed at Vienna in 1518, fol. and often reprinted. 3.” Scholia qoaedam in C. Plinii de Nat. Hist, librum secundum,“Basil, 153 1, fol. 4.” Chronologia Ablmtum Monasterii St.Galli“”De obscuris verborum significationibus epistola;“” Farrago antiquitatum Alamannicarum,“&c. and some other treatises, which are inserted in Goldnst’s” Alamanniae Scnptores."

, a learned Danish botanist, was born at Bergen in Norway, Oct. 10, 1749. He was educated first at Bergen, and afterwards at the university of Copenhagen, where he passed a year in attending the lectures of Zoega, on the plants of the botanical garden. After applying to the same study in Norway for three years, he went in 1769 to Upsal, where he became acquainted with Linnæus. In 1774 he returned to Copenhagen, and continued to pursue his favourite study of natural history until 1779, when he was appointed lecturer in the botanical garden. In 1783, by the king’s order he commenced his travels through various parts of Europe, and visited England, where he formed an acquaintance and attracted the esteem of sir Joseph Banks, Mr. Dryander, &c. On his return in 1785, he was honoured with the title of professor, and appointed to prepare a “Flora Danica,” for which purpose he went to Norway, and investigated every spot where materials for this work could be found.

In 1789 he was, by the Copenhagen society of natural history, appointed its first professor, and in 1799-1800 he made, at the expence of government, another journey to Paris and Holland, where he was received with the highest marks of esteem. On his return he was made professor of botany at the botanical garden, the plants of which were classed under his snperintendance, and a catalogue of them was printed. In 1804 he published his “Enumeratio Plantariwu,” a part of which only he lived to see printed, as he died in December of the same year at Copenhagen, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. Though botany was his chief pursuit, he did not neglect the other branches of natural history. His lectures, his different treatises on that subject, and his instructive collections, prove his knowledge of zoology to have been very extensive. Part of “Zoologia Danica,” still in ms, is by him and of the continuation of“Ascani Icones” he also supplied a part. Cuvier received from him many contributions to the natural history of quadrupeds, and Fabricius to that of insects.

By herborising himself from the extremity of Norway to Portugal, in several islands of the Mediterranean, and io Barbary, he had already collected a considerable herbarium, which was greatly augmented by the liberality of his friends. He also collected an uncommonly complete botanical library.

, a great medallist, to whom France was indebted for the science of medals, and Lewis XIV. for one half of his cabinet, was born at Beauvais, May the 24th, 1632. He lost his father when he was three years old, and fell under the care of an uncle, a brother of his mother, who educated him, and made him his heir. He was trained with a view of succeeding to a magistracy which his uncle possessed; but, being too young for this when his uncle died, he changed his views, and applied himself to physic, in which faculty he was admitted doctor at twenty-four. He had as yet discovered no particular inclination for the study of medals; but an occasion now presented itself, which induced him to engage in it. A farmer in the neighbourhood of Beauvais found a great quantity of ancient medals, and carried them to Mr. Vaiilant, who examined them at first slightly and in a cursory way, but afterwards sat down to study them with attention; and his taste for medals increased with the discoveries he made of their nature and use, till he devoted himself almost entirely to them.

Being called to Paris about business, he paid a visit to Mr. Seguin, who had a fine cabinet of medals, and was also greatly attached to this study. Seguin, from their conferences, soon perceived the superior genius of Vaillaiu, which seemed to him to promise much in a science yet in its infancy; and pressed him to make himself a little more known. He accordingly visited some antiquaries of reputation in medailic science; till at length, falling under the notice of the minister Colbert, he received a commission to travel through Italy, Sicily, and Greece, in quest of medals proper for the king’s cabinet; and after spending some years in this pursuit, returned with as many medals as made the king’s cabinet superior to any one in Europe, though great additions have been made to it since. Colbert engaged him to travel a second time; and accordingly, in 1674, he went and embarked at Marseilles with several other gentlemen, who proposed, as well as himself, to be at Rome at the approaching jubilee. But unfortunately, on the second day of their sailing, they were captured by an Algerine corsair; and it was not until a slavery of near five months, that Vaillant was permitted to return to France, and strong remonstrances having been made by the French court, he recovered at the same time twenty gold medals which had been taken from him. He then embarked in a vessel bound for Marseilles, and was carried on with a favourable wind for two days, when another corsair appeared, which, in spite of all the sail they could make, bore down upon them within the reach of cannonshot. Vaillant, dreading the miseries of a fresh slavery, resolved, however, to secure the medals which he had received at Algiers, and had recourse to the strange expedient of swallowing them. But a sudden turn of the wind freed them from this adversary, and cast them upon the coasts of Catalonia; where, after expecting to run aground every moment, they at length fell among the sands at the mouth of the Rhone. Vailiant got on shore in a skiff, but felt himself extremely incommoded with the medals he had swallowed, of which, however, nature afterwards relieved him.

Upon his arrival at Paris, he received fresh instructions, and made another and a more successful voyage. He penetrated into the very heart of Egypt and Persia, and there found new treasures, which made ample amends for all his fatigues and perils. He was greatly caressed and rewarded at his return. When Lewis XIV. gave a new form to the academy of inscriptions in 1701, Vaillant was at first made associate; and the year after pensionary, upon the death of M. Charpentier. He died of an apoplexy, October 23, 1706, in his 76th year. He had two wives, and by virtue of a dispensation from the pope had married two sisters, by whom he had several children, and one son. The first of 1m works was published at Paris in 1674, 1. “Numisroata imperatorum RomanoYum praestantiora a Julio Ceesare ad Posthninuni & tyrannos,” 4to. A second edition, with great additions, was printed 1694, in two volumes 4to; and afterwards a tnird. In this last he omitted a great number of medals which he had discovered to be spurious; but neglected to mention what cabinets each medal was to he found in, as he had done in the second edition, which has made the second generally preferred to it. 2. “Seleucidarnm imperium, seu historia regum Syriæ, ad fidem numismatutum accommodata,” Paris, 1681, 4to. This work throws much light upon an obscure part of ancient history, that of the kings of Syria, usually called Seleucides, from Seleucus, one of Alexander’s lieutenants, who founded that kingdom about 300 years before Christ. 3. “Numismata aerea imperatorum. Augustorirm, & Caesarum, in coloniis, rnunicipiis, & urbibus jure Latio donatis, ex omni mo.dula percussa,” Paris, 1688, 2 torn', folio. 4. “Numismata imperatdram & Csesarum, a populis Romanae ditionis GriEce loquentibus ex omni modulo percussa,” Paris, 1698, 4to. A second edition, enlarged with 700 medals, was printed at Amsterdam, 1700, in folio. 5. “Historia JPtolemasorum yEgypti regum ad fidem numismatum accommodata,” Amst. 1701, folio. 6. “Nummi antiqui familiarum Romanarum perpetuis interpretationibus illustrati,” Aaist. 1703, 12 tom, foilo. 7. “Arsacidarum impetium, sive regum Parthorum histoiia ad fidem numismatum accommodata,” Paris, 1725. 4to. 8. “Achaemenidarum imperium, sive” regum Ponti, Bosphori, Thracioe, & Bithynite historia, ad“fidem numismatum accommodata,” Paris, 1725, 4to. Besides these works, he was the author of some pieces wftich are printed in. the “Memoirs of the academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres.”

, son of the preceding, was born at Rome in 16G5, while his father was upon his travels in quest of medals and antiques. He was brought to Beauvais in 1669, and at twelve years of age sent to Paris, where he was instructed by the Jesuits in the belles lettres and philosophy. He applied himself, as his father had done, to the study of physic, and was received doctor in that faculty at Paris in 1691. He was initiated into the science of medals, and would have shone like his father if his life had been spared; yet his merit was reputed very great, and he was admitted into the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres in 1702. He died in 1708, about two years after his father, of an abscess in his head, which was supposed to have been occasioned by a fall. He wrote a professional tract on the virtues of coffee, and various dissertations on the subject of medallic history, and one on the Dii Cabiri.

, a distinguished botanist, was born May 26, 1669, at Vigny, near Pontoise. His first pursuits were various, having attained reputation as an organist, then as a surgeon, and afterwards as secretary to M. Fagon, chief physician to Louis XIV. Fagon appears to have given his talents the right direction, by placing him in the office of director of the royal garden, which he enriched with curious plants. Vaillant became afterwards professor and sub-demonstrator of plants in the abovementioned garden, keeper of the king’s cabinet of drugs, and a member of the academy of sciences. He died of an asthma, May 26, 1722, leaving a widow, but no children. His works are some excellent remarks on M. de Tournefort’s “Institutiones Rei herbariae” an essay on the structure of flowers, and the use of their various parts, Leyden, 1728, 4to, but rather too florid for philosophical narration “Botanicon Parisiense,” with plates, published by Boerhaave, Leyden, 1727, fol. When Vaillant found his health de*­clining, he was anxious to preserve his papers from oblivion, and had solicited Boerhaave to purchase and publish them. Our countryman, Dr. Sherard, who was then at Paris, negociated this business, and spent the greater part of the summer with Boerhaave, in reducing the manuscripts into order. To Sherard, therefore, principally, the learned owe the “Botanicon Parisiense,” to which is prefixed a Latin letter by Dr. Sherard, giving an account of this transaction.

, a French historian, was born in 1685, at Gaillac in Agenois. He was for some time king’s attorney in the country of the Albigenses, but in 1711 entered the Benedictine order in the priory of la Daurade at Toulouse. His studious turn, and taste for history, induced his superiors to send for him to Paris in 1713, where they employed him in writing the history of Languedoc with Claude de Vic. The first volume appeared 1730, and de Vic dying in 1734, the whole of this great work devolved on Vaissette, who executed it with success, and published the four other volumes. At the end of each are learned and curious notes, and throughout the whole he is candid and impartial, especially in speaking of the protestants. He had before written a small piece “On the Origin of the French Monarchy,” which was well received; and afterwards published an abridgment of his “History of Languedoc,” 1749, 6 vols. 12mo. Vaissette has also left a “Universal Geography,” 4 vols. 4to, and 12 vols. 12mo, which was formerly thought one of the best the French had, though not wholly free from errors. He died in the abbey of St. Germain-des-Pres’at Paris, April 10, 1756.

, a Spanish reformer of the sixteenth century, was of a noble family in Spain; and a soldier under Charles the Vth, who knighted him. After some years spent in a military life, he desired leave to retire; and when Charles inquired whether his request proceeded from disgust, his answer was, “It is necessary that a soldier, before his death, should give some time to religious meditation.*' He left his native country, and retired to Naples, where he became the head of a sect of the reformed, and many persons of great distinction attended his lectures. He was particularly connected with Bernard Ochin, Peter Martyr, and other learned men of great character amongst the reformers of that time; and he attacked, with success, many of the corruptions of the church of Rome. Thus far is collected from the old French preface to his” Considerations," and confirmed by Mr. Ferrar’s (the translator) account in a letter of Mr. George Herbert.

By some, Valdesso was thought to lean too much to the doctrines of the Unitarians, in opposition to the Trinitarian system. And this circumstance, we suppose, may account for a passage in Mr. George Herbert’s letter to Mr. Nicholas Ferrar concerning his translation of this work, which he earnestly desires may be published, notwithstanding some things which he does not approve. Mr. George Herbert was a conscientious Trinitarian; and, besides this, there are undoubtedly some passages in Valdesso, in which he seems to depreciate the authority of the Scriptures; which might give just cause of offence.

The French edition of Valdesso referred to above was published at Paris in 1565, and was taken from an Italian translation of the original Spanish: in which, it is said, were preserved, not only some of the idioms, but also many words of the Spanish original. Mr. Ferrar’s English translation was printed at Oxford in 1638, but without his name; and if it should be asked why Mr. Ferrar, who was perfect master of the Spanish, as well as the Italian language, chose to translate from a translation rather than the original, he himself has given the reason in his own preface: “These truly divine meditations of sir John Valdesso, a nobleman of Spain (who died almost a hundred years ago), having been so acceptable to pious Vergerius, to learned Caelius Secundus Curio, and to many other both French and Italian Protestants, that they have been translated out of the original Spanish copy, and printed three or four times in those languages; it seemeth to me a reasonable, and a charitable desire, to print them now in English, without any alteration at all from the Italian copy, the Spanish being either not extant, or not easy to be found.”

In a letter of Herbert’s he gives the following additional particulars of Valdesso: “John Valdesso was a Spaniard of great learning and virtue, much valued by Charles V. whom he had attended in all his wars. When he was grown old, and weary both of war and of the world, he took a proper opportunity to declare to the emperor his resolution to decline the military service, and betake himself to a quiet contemplative life, because, he said, there ought to be some vacancy of time between fighting and dying. It happened at that time the emperor himself had made, though not publicly declared, the same resolution. He therefore desired Valdesso to consider well what he had said, and conceal his purpose till they might have opportunity for a friendly discourse about it. This opportunity soon offered, and, after a pious and free discourse together, they agreed, that on a certain day they would publicly receive the sacrament. At which time the emperor appointed an eloquent friar to preach on the contempt of the world, and the happiness of a quiet contemplative life. After sermon, the emperor declared openly that the preacher had begotten in him a resolution to lay down his dignities, to forsake the world, and betake himself to a monastic life. And he pretended that he had also persuaded John Valdesso to do the like. Not long after they carried their resolutions into execution.”

The translation of the above work of Valdesso was printed at Oxford 1638, 8vo, and entitled “The hundred and ten Considerations of Signior John Valdesso, &c.” Subjoined is an epistle, written by Valdesso to lady Donna Julia de Gonzaga, to whom he dedicates “A Commentary upon the Epistle to the Romans.” It appears, that along with this commentary he sent to her all St. Paul’s epistles, translated from the Greek into the ordinary Castilian language. He says, that he had before translated the Psalms of David from the original Hebrew, for her use; and he promises to furnish her with the history of Christ in the same language, at such time and manner as shall please the “divine Majesty.”

, is the name, real or assumed, of a celebrated alchymist, and one of the founders of modern chemistry. The few particulars we have of his life are so contradictory that many have supposed that no such person ever existed, and that the name Basil Valentine, which is composed of a Greek and Latin word, signifying a powerful king, was a disguise under which some adept rvished to conceal his real name, and at the same time indicate the sovereign power of chemistry. At what time this adept lived is also a disputed point. Some say he lived ia the twelfth century, others make him a native of Erfurt, born in 1394, and give 1415 as the date of his writings, or as the time when he began to write, but this last is certainly inadmissible, as he mentions the morbus Galliots and Luts Gallica as being common in Germany, which we know could not be the ase before the end of the fifteenth century.

Those who make him a native of Erfurt tell us likewise that he was a Benedictine monk, and that after making some experiments on the stibium of the ancients, he threw a quantity of it to the hogs, whom it first purged and afterwards fattened. This suggested to him that it might be useful in order to give a little of the embonpoint to his brother monks, who had become lean by fasting and mortification. He accordingly prescribed it, and they all died, whence the medicine was afterwards known by the name of antimony, quasi anti-monk. It is added that his works were not known for a long time after his death, until on opening one of the pillars of the church of Erfurt, they were miraculously discovered. But unfortunately for these stories, Boerhaave has proved that there never was a monastery of Benedictines at Erfurt, and we have already proved that the books published under the name of Basil Valentine could not have been written in the beginning of the fifteenth century. It appears, however, whatever their date, that they were originally written in Dutch, and that a part only have been translated into Latin, and probably have received additions from other hands. All that have been published are still in considerable request, and are become scarce. Among them are; 1. “De microcosmo, deque magno mundi ministerio et medicina hominis,” Marpurg, 1609, 8vo. 2. “Azoth, sive Aureliae philosophorum,” Francfort, 1613, 4to. 3. “Practice, una cum duodecim clavibus et appendice,” ibid. 1618, 4to. 4. “Apocalypsis chymica,” Erfurt, 1624, 8vo. 5. “Manifestatio artificiorum,” Erfurt, 1624, 4to. 6. “Currus triumphalis antimonii,” Leip. 1624, 8vo, reprinted at Amsterdam, 1671, 12mo, “cum commentariis Theod. Kerkringii.” 7. “Tractatus chimicophilosophus de rebus naturalibus et praeternaftiralibus metallorum et mineralium,” Francfort, 1676, 8vo. 8. “HaKographia, de praeparatione, usu, ac virtutibus omnium salium mineralium, animalium, ac vegetabiliuni, ex manuscriptis Basilii Valentini collecta ab Ant. Salimncio,” Bologna, 1644, 8vo. There are editions of these in Dutch, and translations into French, English, and other languages of most of them. Whoever Basil was, his experiments are always to be depended on, and his style is clear and precise, unless where he talks of his arcana and the philosopher’s stone, on which he is as obscure as any of his brethren. After every preparation, he gives its medicinal uses, and it has been said that Van Helmont, Lemery, the father, and other moderns, are under greater obligations to his works than they have thought proper to acknowledge. He was the first who recommended the internal use of antimony, and he has enriched the pharmacopoeia with various preparations of that metal, particularly the empyreumatic carbonate of antimony, of which Sylvius Deleboe claimed the discovery.

, author of the heretical sect called Valeutinians, was an Egyptian, and, according to Danaeus, was educated at Alexandria. He aspired to the episcopal dignity; but being set aside by another, who was afterwards martyred, he formed the design to oppose the true doctrine of Christ. He came to Rome A.D. 140, during the pontificate of Hyginus, and there created great disturbances. In 143, he was censured by the church, and excluded the congregation; which was so far from humbling him, that he retired into Cyprus, where he propagated his erroneous doctrines with still greater boldness: He was learned, eloquent, and had studied the Grecian language, particularly the Platonic philosophy. Thus, from nice and witty, or sophistical, distinctions, mixing the doctrine of ideas, and the mysteries of numbers with the Theogony of Hesiod, and the Gospel of St. John, which was the only one received by him, he formed a system of religious philosophy, not very different from that of Basilides and the Gnostics, and in some respects more absurd than either. The rise of his heresy was in the reign of Adrian. Fleury places it A. D. 143, as do Danasus, Tillemont, and Echard. Valentine himself died A.D. 160. His errors spread at Rome, in Gaul, and Syria, but particularly in the Isle of Cyprus and Egypt, and continued until the fourth century. Bishop Hooper, in his tract “De Haeresi Valentiniana,” has deduced this heresy from the Egyptian mysteries. Irenseus was the principal writer against Valentinus, to whom may be added Tertullian, Clemens Alexandriuus, &c. and among the moderns, Buddeus “Dissert. de hreresi Valentiniana.” The author of this heresy is said to have at last abjured his errors, and was received into the church again, but we have no farther account of his personal history.

, a botanical and medical writer, was born at Giessen in Germany, Nov. 26, 1657, and having studied medicine, became a professor of the science in his native place, where he died March 13, 1726. He wrote a great many works on the subject of his profession, but is thought to have succeeded best in those which concern botany. Among his writings of both kinds are, 1. “Historia simplicimn reformata, Francfort, 1716, fol. 1726, both with plates. 2.” Amphitheatrurn Zootomicum,“ibid. 1720, fol. This was Becker’s translation from the original, published in German in 1704 1714, 3 vols. fol. and subjoined is a life of Valentinus, written in verse by himself. 3.” Medicina nova-antiqua,“ibid. 1713, 4to. 4.” Cynosura materiiE medicse,“Strasburgh, 1726, 3 vols. 5.” Viridarium reformatum,“Francfort, 1720, fol. with fine plates. 6.” Corpus juris medicolegale,“ibid. 1722, fol.; but this appears to be a second edition of his” Novellaj Medico-legales,“printed in 1711, 4to, and contains many curious cases and questions which illustrate the state of medical jurisprudence at a time when it was not much freed from superstition and credulity. Valentinus published also a” Praxis medicinae infallibilis,“in which he describes the filtering-stone now so well known; and another work, giving a history of philosophy,” Armamentarium Naturae systematic am, seu Introductio ad philosophiam modernorum naturalem,“Giessen, 4to. To this he adds an abridgment of the most remarkable papers on natural history from the transactions of the society” Naturae Curiosorum."

, or Valeriano Bolzam, an ingenious and learned Italian, was born at Belluno, in the state of Venice, about 1477. He lost his father at nine years of age, and was reduced with his mother and brethren to great poverty, which so retarded his studies that he was fifteen years old before he learned to read; but his uncle Urbanus Bolzanius (see vol. VI. p. 36), who was afterwards preceptor in the Greek language to Leo X. took him under his protection, and had him liberally educated. He studied the Latin and Greek tongues under Valla and Lascaris; and made so wonderful a progress, that he was accounted one of the most learned men of his age. Going to Rome under the pontificate of Julius II. he became the favourite of John de Medicis (afterwards Leo X.), who committed to his care the conduct and instruction of two nephews; and the cardinal Julius de Medicis, who entered upon the pontificate in 1523, under the name of Clement VII. shewed him the same regard. He offered him first the bishopric of Justinople, and then that of Avignon; but Valerianus refused them both, being fully satisfied with the place of apostolic notary. He was in imminent danger, when Rome was taken in 1527; and the year after retired to Belluno, for the sake of that tranquillity which he had never found at court. Yet he suffered himself to be drawn from his retirement by Hypolite de Medicis, one of his pupils; who, being made a cardinal in 1529, chose him for his secretary. He continued in this office till the death of the cardinal in 1535; and seems to have passed the next two years with his other pupil Alexander de Medicis, who had been made first duke of Florence in 1531. Upon the death of Alexander, in 1537, he retired to Padua; where he spent the remainder of his life among his books, and died in 1558.

Valerianus published also at different times two volumes of Latin poems, among which were “Amorum libri <juin- r que.” It may be proper to observe here, that Valerianus’s Christian name was Petej; but changed, according to the custom of those times, by one of his masters into Pieritls, in allusion to Pierides, a name of the Muses, and therefore probably done as a compliment to his talents for poetry.

, a learned prelate, was born April 7, 1531, at Venice, descended from one of the best families in that city. After having made a rapid progress in his studies, he was admitted among the Savii deir Ordini, a small society of five 5'oung men of the highest rank at Venice, who had access to the college where affairs relative to the republic were debated, that they might be trained up to the science of government. Valerio took a doctor’s degree in divinity and in canon law, became professor of philosophy at Venice, 1558, and having afterwards chosen the ecclesiastical profession, was appointed bishop of Verona, on the resignation of his uncle, cardinal Bernardo Naugerio, 1565. He discharged the duties of the episcopal station with great prudence, and to the edification of his diocese, and formed a friendship with St. Charles Borromeo. Pope Gregory XIII. created him cardinal, 1583, invited him to Rome, and placed him at the head of several congregations. Valerio acquired universal esteem by his skill in public affairs, his learning and virtue. He died at Rome, May 24, 1606, aged 75, and although so advanced, his death is supposed to have been hastened by chagrin, occasioned by the interdiction under which pope Paul V. had laid the republic of Venice. This learned bishop left several excellent works: the most known are, “The Rhetoric of a Preacher,” “De Rhetoric* Ecclesiastica libri tres,” Venice, 1574, 8vo, composed by the advice and according to the plan of his intimate friend, St. Charles Borromeo. This was so popular as to be printed eight times in the author’s life, besides being translated into French, of which there is an edition so late as 1750, 12mo, nor, say the French writers, can the study of it be too strongly recommended to young ecclesiastics. His other works are on subjects of philosophy and history. In 1719, appeared in 4to, a work entitled “De cautione adhibenda in edendis Libris,” which contains a complete list of Augustine Valerio’s other works both printed and ms.

, an ancient Latin writer, of whom remain “libri novem factorum dictorumque memorabilium,” dedicated to Tiberius Caesar, appears to have been a Roman, and lived under the reign of Tiberius Caesar, probably about 32 of the Christian usra; for, he treats the memory of Sejanus with scorn and abhorrence, though he does not expressly mention him. His style is not so pure as might be expected from the age he lived in; and therefore many learned men conjectured, that what we have is not the original work, but only an epitome made by some later writer. Fabricius calls it “opus jucundum, varium, utiLe,” as indeed it is; and many eminent critics have employed their lucubrations upon it. The first edition, of uncommon rarity and price, is that printed atMentz, 1471, fol. It was reprinted at Venice in the same year. The best editions since are, that by Thysius “cum Notis Variorum,” 1670, 8vo; that “in usum Delphini,” 1679, 4to; that by Torrenius at Leyden, 1726, in 2 vols. 4to, “cum notis integris Lipsii, Pighii, Vorstii, Perizonii, &c.” and that by Kappius, at Leipsic, 1782, 8vo.

, or Henry de Valois, a French critic of great abilities and learning, was born at Paris in 1603, of parents, whose circumstances supported them without any profession. He began his studies at Verdun in 1613, under the Jesuits, and the greatest hopes were formed of him from his childhood. He was recalled to Paris five years after, and continued there in the college of Clermont; where he learned rhetoric under Petavius, who, as well as father Sirmond, conceived a great esteem for him. After having maintained his theses in philosophy with much applause, he went to Bourges in 1622, to study the civil law; and at the end of two years returned to Paris, where he was received advocate. He frequented the bar for seven years, but more to oblige his father than out of any fondness for the law, which he at length quitted, and devoted himself entirely to literary pursuits. Greek and Latin authors were all his study, and all his pleasure. Sunday he consecrated to devotion, Saturday afternoon he allotted to his friends; but all the rest of the week was spent in reading and labour. His own library not sufficing, he borrowed books of every body; and he used to say, that he learned more from other people’s books than his own, because, not having the same opportunity of reviewing them, he read them over with more care. He acquired a great reputation by his learning and publications, when a misfortune befel him, which interrupted the course of his studies. He had always a weak sight; but continual application had hurt him so, in this respect, that he lost his right eye, and saw very indifferently with the left. This put him under the necessity of having a reader; for, though his father was of too sparing a humour to make him an allowance for this purpose, yet the defect was supplied by the generosity of his friends. His father, however, died in 1650; and then his circumstances were better suited to his necessities. The same year he composed an oration in praise of Christina queen of Sweden, who had just ascended the throne; and her majesty, by way of acknowledging the favour, promised to send him a gold chain, and gave him at the same time an invitation to accompany the learned Bochart to Sweden. But the chain never came, and the invitation ended in nothing, for which Valesius himself is said to have been to blame, having been so imprudent, while he was meditating this journey, as to make use of some satirical expressions on the learned in those parts; which, being related to the queen, occasioned her majesty’s neglect of him.

In 1734, Valesius had published at Paris, in 4to, “Excerpta Polybii, Diodori Siculi, Nicolai Damasceni, Dionysit Halicarnassensis, Appiani Alexandrini, Dionis, & Joannis Antiocheni, ex Collectaneis Constantini Augusti Porphyrogenitae, nunc primum Greece edita, Latine versa cum notis.” The emperor Constantine Porphyrogenetes, who died in the year 959, had made extracts from the Greek historians of such things as he thought most useful; and had ranged these extracts under certain titles and common places, in number fifty-three. Each contained two books; one of “Extracts from the writers of Universal History,” another of “Extracts from the Historians of the Emperors.” Only two of these titles are extant: one “de Legationibus,” the first book of which was published by Fulvius Ursinus, at Antwerp, 1582, in 4to; the second by David Ho3schelius, at Augsburg, 1603, in 4to; and both under the title of “Eclogse Legationum, &c.” The other title is “de Virtutibus & Vitiis,” and is the work under present consideration. A merchant of Marseilles had brought an ancient manuscript of it from the Isle of Cyprus, and sold it to Mons. Peiresc, who sent it to Paris. Here it lay neglected a long time till at length Pithaeus engaged Valesius to translate and publish it: which he did, and very properly dedicated it to Peiresc, to whom the public is obliged for it, and of whose ardour, in the promotion of letters, we have the following anecdote. Some time after, Valesius had read a passage in an ancient author, relating to the harbour of Smyrna, which could not be understood without viewing the situation upon the spot. He acquainted Peiresc with this difficulty; who immediately sent a painter, to take a view of that port, and afterwards communicated it to Valesius. Valesius thanked Peiresc for the trouble he had been at; but added, probably not in very guarded language, that it did not clear up the doubt so well as he could wish. Peiresc, vexed that he had been at so much expence, wrote back, that he had endeavoured to give him satisfaction; and that, if he had not succeeded, it must not be ascribed to either himself or the painter, but to his own temper and humour, which were satisfied with nothing.

In 1636 he gave a good edition of “Ammianus Marcellinus,” in 4to, corrected in a great number of places from the manuscripts, and illustrated with very ingenious and learned notes. A second edition, with more notes of Valesius, and those of Lindenbrog, came out at Paris, 1681, in folio, edited by his brother Adrian Valesius; and James Gronovius also published a third at Leyden, 1693, fol. and 4to. The critical talents and learning which Valesius had displayed in these publications, recommended him as the most proper person to superintend a work of greater importance, an edition of the ancient ecclesiastical historians. M. de Montchal, abp. of Tholouse, a learned man, whom the clergy of France had requested to give an edition of these historians, undertook the affair; and applied to Valesius to assist him privately. But Valesius was too jealous of his reputation, to let another person enjoy the fruits of his labours; and therefore absolutely refused his aid. The archbishop, either too much taken up with the business of his see, or despairing of success in what he had undertaken, soon after excused himself to the clergy; and at the same time advised them to apply to Valesius, as a man who was every way qualified for the task. To this Valesius had no objection, and his employers by way of encouragement settled a pension upon him. This was about 1650, and the Historians were published in Greek and Latin, with good notes, in the following order: “Eusebii Pamphili historia ecclesiastica, ejusdemque libri de vita Constantini, & panegyricus atque oratio Constantini ad sanctos,” Paris, 1659; “Socratis & Sozomeni historia ecclesiastica,” 166S; “Theodoreti et Evagrii historia ecclesiastica, item excerpta & historia ecclesiastica Philostorgii,” 1673. These were reprinted in 3 vols. folio, first at Amsterdam in 1699, and then at Cambridge in 1720; to which last edition some remarks, but very inconsiderable ones, scattered up and down in various authors, were collected and subjoined by the editor William Reading.