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

He was the author of the following works 1 <c De Aquis & Aquae-ductibus Veteris Romae Dissertationes tres,“Romae, 1680, 4to. This book may serve to illustrate Frontinus, who has treated of the aqueducts of Rome, as they were in his time under the emperor Trajan. It is inserted in the fourth volume of Graevius’s” Thesaurus Antiquitatum Romanarum.“. 2.” De Columna Trajana Syntagma. Accesseruntexplicatio Veteris Tabellae Anaglyphae Homeri Iliadem, atque ex Stesichoro, Arctino, et Lesche Ilii excidium continentis, et emissarii lacus Fucini descriptio,“Romae, 1683, folio. 3.” Jasithei ad Grunnovium Apologema, in ej usque Titivilitia, sive de Tito Livio somnia, animadversiones,“Neapol. 1686, 4tp. This work is an answer to James Gronovius’ s” Responsio ad Cavillationes R. Fabretti,“printed at Leyden, 1685. Fabretti had given, occasion to this dispute, by censuring, in his book” De Aquae-ductibus,“some corrections of Gronovius; and thus had drawn upon himself an adversary, who treated him witk very little ceremony. Fabretti replied to him here, under the name Jasitheus, and treated him with equal coarseness. Gronovius called him Faber fiusticus, which he retorted by styling his antagonist Grunnovius. 4.” Inscriptionum Antiquaruni, quae in aedibus paternis asservantur, explicatio et additamentum,“Romae, 1699, folio. Fabretti had an admirable talent in decyphering the most difficult inscriptions, and discovered a method of making something out of those which seemed entirely disfigured through age, and the letters of which were effaced in such a manner as not to be discernible. He cleaned the surface of the stone, without touching those places where the letters had been, engraven. He then laid upon it a piece of thick paper well moistened, and pressed it with a spunge, or wooden pin covered with linen; by which means the paper entered into the cavity of the letters, and, taking up the dust there, Discovered the traces of the letters. M. Baudelot, in his book” De FUtilitc* des Voyages,“informs us of a secret very like this, in order to read upon medals those letters which are difficult to be deciphered. 5.” A Letter to the abb Nicaise,“containing an inscription remarkable for the elegance of its style, inserted in the” Journal des Seavans“of Dec. 1691. He left unfinished” Latium vetus illustratum." Fabretti discovers in his writings a lively genius, a clear and easy conception, and a great deal of learning.

His other works, not already mentioned, are, 1. f< Dialochi di Focione del Mably, trad, del Francese.“2.” Lettere del Magolotti,“Florence, 1769. 3.” Lettered'Uomini dotti a Leopoldo Medici.“4.” Istoria dell' arte del disegno.“5.” Dissertazione sulla fabola di Niobe.“5.” Prefazioni al I. e II. tomo degli Uomini Illustri Pisani.“6.” Vita Laurentii Medicei,“4to. 7.” Historia Lycaei Pisani,“3 vols. 4to. He was at one time rector of the university of Pisa, but his employment ceased with the incursions of the French army. 8.” Viaggi d'Anacarsi.“9.” Vita Leonis X.“4to. 10.” Vita Cosnii Medicei,“4to. 11.” Epistolae Francisci Petrarchae,“4to. 12.” Vita F. Petrarchae,“4to. 13.” Vita Pallantis Stroctii,“4to. 14.” Elogi d'illustri Italiani, cioe di Michelangelo Giacomelli, Eust. Zanotti, Tomaso Perelli, Paolo Frisi, Innocenzo Frugeni, e Pietro Metastasio.“15.” Elogi di Dante Alighieri, di Angelo Poliziano, di Ludovico Ariosto, e di Torquato Tasso,“Parma, 1800. 16.” Oratio ad S. R. E. Cardinales cum subrogandi Pontificis causa conclave Venetiis ingressuri essent,“Pisa, 1800. 17.” Oratio in funere Franc. Leopoldi Austriaci,“Pisa, 1800. 18.” Devoti AfFetti in prepa.;zione alle Feste del S. natale,“&c. ibid. 1801. 19.” Novena in onore di Maria S. S. Ausiliatrice, colP aggiunta di dodici Meditazioni," isa, 1803.

There have been five editions of Fabyan; the first printed by Pynson, in 1516, the great rarity of which is attributed by Bale to cardinal Wolsey, who ordered some copies “exemplaria nonnulla” to be burnt, because the author had made too clear a discovery of the revenues of the clergy. This obnoxious part, Mr. Ellis thinks, was the abstract of the bill projected by the house of commons in the eleventh year of Henry IV. for depriving ecclesiastics of their temporal possessions. Bale’s assertion, however, is unsupported by any other writer. The second edition was printed by Rastell in 1533; the third by John Reynes in 1542; the fourth by Kingston in 1559, all in folio; and the fifth makes part of the series of Chronicles lately reprinted by a society of the most eminent booksellers of London, and was edited by Henry Ellis, esq. F. R. S. and F. S. A. with such collations and improvements as give it a very superior value. It is reprinted from Pynson’s edition of 1516, the first part collated with the editions of 1533, 1542, and 1559, and the second with a manuscript of the author’s own time, as well as the subsequent editions including the different continuations.

, a very active man in the parliaments service during the civil wars, and at length general of their armies, was the eldest son of Ferdinando, lord Fairfax, by Mary his wife, daughter of Edmund Sheffield earl of Mulgrave. He was born at Denton within the parish of Otley, in Yorkshire, in January, 1611. After a proper school education, he studied sometime in St. John’s college, in Cambridge, to. which, in his latter days, he became a benefactor. He appears to have been a lover of learning, though he did not excel in any branch, except it was in the history and antiquities of Britain, as will appear in the sequel. Being of a martial disposition even in his younger years, but finding no employment at home, he went and served in Holland as a volunteer under the command of Horatio lord Vere, in order to learn the art of war. After some stay there (but how long we cannot learn) he came back to England; and, retiring to his father’s house, married Anne, fourth daughter of lord Vere. Here he contracted a strong aversion for the court; either by the instigation of his wife, who was a zealous presbyterian, or eLe by the persuasions and example of his father, who, as Clarendon says, grew “actively and factiously disaffected to the king.” When the king first endeavoured to raise a guard at York for his own person, he was entrusted by his party to prefer a petition to the king, beseeching him to hearken to his parliament, and not to take that course of raising forces, and when his majesty seemed to shun receiving it, Fairfax followed him with it, on Heyworth-moor, in the presence of near 100,000 people, and presented it upon the pommel of his saddle. Shortly after, upon the actual breaking out of the civil wars, in 1642, his father having received a commission from the parliament to be general of the forces in the North, he had a commission under him to be general of the horse. His first exploit was at Bradford in Yorkshire, which he obliged a body of royalists to quit, and to retire to Leeds. A few days after, he and captain Hotham, with some horse and dragoons marching thither, the royalists* fled in haste to York. And the former having advanced to Tadcaster, resolved to keep the pass at Wetherby, for securing the West Riding of Yorkshire, whence their chief supplies came. Sir Thomas Glemham attempted to dislodge them thence; but, after a short and sharp encounter, retired. On this, Will, am Cavendish earl of Newcastle, and Henry Clifford earl of Cumberland, united their forces at York, amounting to 9000 men, and resolved to fall upon Tadcaster: which being judged untenable, the lord Fairfax, and his son sir Thomas, drew out to an advantageous piece of ground near the town: but, alter a six hours fight, were beaten, and withdrew in the night to Selby. Three days after, sir Thomas marched in the night by several towns Inch the royalists lay, and came to Bradford, where he entrenched himself. But having too many soldiers to lie idle, and too few to be upon constant duty, he resolved to attack his enemies in their garrisons. Accordingly, coming before Leeds, he carried that town (Jan. 23, 1642-3) after a hot dispute, and found a good store of ammunition, of which he stood in great want. He next defeated a party of 700 horse and foot at Gisborough, under the command of colonel Slingsby; and then Wakefield and Doncaster yielded themselves to the parliament. But, For these overt acts, William earl of Newcastle, the king’s general, proclaimed sir Thomas and his father traitors, and the parliament did the like for the earl. In the mean time, the lord Fairfax, being denied succour from Hull and the East Riding, was forced to forsake Selby, and retire to Leeds: of which the earl of Newcastle having intelligence, lay with his army on Clifford-moor, to intercept him in his way to Leeds. On this sir Thomas was ordered, by his father, to bring what men he could to join with him at Sherburne, on purpose to secure his retreat. To amuse the earl, sir Thomas made a diversion at Tadcaster, which 'the garrison immediately quitted, but lord Goring marching to its relief, with twenty troops of horse and dragoons, defeated sir Thomas upon Bramham-moor: who also received a second defeat upon Seacroft-moor, where some of his men were slain, and many taken prisoners, and himself made his retreat with much difficulty to Leeds, about an hour after his father was safely come thither. Leeds and Bradford being all the garrisons the parliament had in the North, sir Thomas thought it necessary to possess some other place: therefore with about 1100 horse and foot, he drove, on the 21st of May, the royalists out of Wakefield, which they had seized again; and took 1400 prisoners, 80 officers, and great store of ammunition. But, shortly after, the earl of Newcastle coming to besiege Bradford, and sir Thomas and his father having the boldness, with about 3000 men, to go and attack his whole army, which consisted of 10,000, on Adderton-moor; they were entirely routed by the earl r on the 30th of June, with a considerable loss. Upon that, Halifax and Beverly being abandoned by the parliamentarians, and the lord Fairfax having neither a place of strength to defend himself in, nor a garrison in Yorkshire to retire to, withdrew the same night to Leeds, to secure that town. By his order, sir Thomas stayed in Bradford with 800 foot, and 60 horse, but being surrounded, he was obliged to force his way through: in which desperate attempt, hjs lady, and many Bothers, were taken prisoners. At his coming to Leeds, he found things in great distraction; the council of war having resolved to quit the town, and retreat to Hull, which was sixty miles off; with many of the "king’s garrison in the way, but he got safely to Selby, where there was a ferry, and hard by one of the parliament’s garrisons at Cawood. Immediately after his coming to Selby, being attacked by a party of horse which pursued him, he received a shot in the wrist of his left arm, which made the bridle fall out of liis hand, and occasioned such an effusion of blood, that he was ready to fall from his horse. But, taking the reins in the other hand in which he had his sword, he withdrew himself out of the crowd; and after a very troublesome and dangerous passage, he came to Hull. Upon these repeated disasters, the Scots were hastily solicited to send 20,000 men to the assistance of the parliamentarians, who were thus likely to be overpowered. Lord Fairfax, after his coming to Hull, made it his first business to raise new forces, and, in a short time, had about 1500 foot, and 700 horse. The town being little, sir Thomas was sent to Beverly, with the horse and 600 foot: for, the marquis of Newcastle looking upon them as inconsiderable, and leaving only a few garrisons, was marched with his whole army into Lincolnshire; having orders to go into Essex, and t>lock up London on that side. But he was hastily recalled northward, upon lord Fairfax’s sending out a large party to make an attempt upon Stanford-bridge near York. The marquis, at his return into Yorkshire, first dislodged, from Beverly, sir Thomas, who retreated into Hull, to which the marquis laid siege, but could not carry the place. During the siege, the horse being useless, and many dying every day, sir Thomas was sent with them over into Lincolnshire, to join the earl of Manchester’s forces, then commanded by major-general Cromwell. At Horncastle, or Winsby, they routed a party of 5000 men, commanded by sir John Henderson: and, at the same time, the besieged in Hull making a sally upon the besiegers, obliged them to retire. These two defeats together, the one falling heavy upon the horse, the other upon the foot, kept the royalists all that winter from attempting any thing; and the parliamentarians, after the taking of Lincoln, settled themselves in winter quarters. But sir Thomas had not long the benefit of them; for, in the coldest season of the year, he was commanded by the parliament to go and raise the siege of Nantwich in Cheshire, which lord Byron, with an army from Ireland, had reduced to great extremity. He set forward from Lincolnshire, December 29, and, being joined by sir William Brereton, entirely routed, 911 the 21st of January, lord Byron, who was drawn out to meet them. After that, they took in several garrisons in Cheshire, particularly Crew-house, &c. Sir Thomas, having stayed in those parts till the middle of March, was ordered back by his father into Yorkshire, that by the conjunction of their forces he might be abler to take the field. They met about Ferry-bridge; and colonel Bellasis, governor of York, having advanced to Selby to hinder their junction, they found means, notwithstanding, to join, and entirely defeated him, on the llth of April, 1644. This good success rendered sir Thomas master of the field in Yorkshire, and nothing then hindered him from marching into Northumberland, as he had been ordered by the parliament, to join the Scots, which were kept from advancing southward by the superior forces of the marquis of Newcastle, quartered at Durham. But that stroke having thrown York into the utmost distraction, the inhabitants speedily sent to the marquis to haste back thither; by which means a way was left open for the Scots, who, with cold, and frequent alarms, were reduced to great extremity. They joined the lord Fairfax at Wetherby, on the 20th of April, and, marching on to York, laid siege to that city *, wherein the marquis of Newcastle had shut himself up, being closely pursued, on the way thither, by sir Thomas, and major-general Desley. And, when prince Rupert was advancing out of Lancashire to the relief of that place, they marched with 6000 horse and dragoons, and 5000 foot, to stop his progress: but he, eluding their vigilance, and bringing round his army, which consisted of above 20,000 men, got into York. Whereupon the parliamentarians raised the siege, and retired to Hessey-moor. The English were for fighting, and the Scots for retreating; which last opinion prevailing, they both marched away to Tadcaster, there being great differences and jealousies between the two nations. But the rash and haughty prince, instead of harassing and wearing them out by prudent delays, resolved, without consulting the marquis of New­* fa our account cf Dodsworth (vol. XII. p. 181), will be found some circumstances favourable to sir Thomas Fairfax’s character in the conduct of this. castle, or any of his officers, to engage them, on Marstonmoor, eight miles from York, on the 2d of July: where that bloody battle was fought which entirely ruined the king’s affairs in the north. In this battle, sir Thomas Fairfax commanded the right wing of the horse. The prince, after his defeat, retiring towards Lancashire, and the marquis, in discontent, sailing away to Hamburgh, the three parliament-generals came and sat down again before York, which surrendered the 15th of July: and the North was now wholly reduced by the parliament’s forces, except some garrisons. In September following, sir Thomas was sent to take Helmesley-castle, where he received a dangerous shot in one of his shoulders, and was brought back to York, all being doubtful of his recovery for some time. Some time after, he was more nearly killed by a cannonshot before Pomfret-castle.

Although much of his life was spent in active business, he found leisure to produce the following works: 1. An English translation in rhyme of Guarini’s “II Pastor Fido, or the Faithful Shepherd,” 1646, 4to. 2. A translation from, English into Latin verse of Fletcher’s “Faithful Shepherdess,” 1658. 3. In the octavo edition of “The Faithful Shepherd,” are inserted the following poems of our author; An Ode on his majesty’s Proclamation in 1630, commanding the gentry to reside upon their estates in the country; an English translation of the fourth book of Virgil’s Aneid Odes of Horace, translated into English; and a summary Discourse of the Civil Wars of Rome. 4. He translated from Portuguese into English, Canpens’ “Lusiad, or Portugal’s Historical Poem,” 1655, folio. 5. After his decease were published two pieces in 4to, 1671 r “luerer per solo querer,” “To love only for love’s sake,” a dramatical romance, represented before the king and queen of Spain and “Fiestas de Aranjeuz,” Festival at Aranjeuz. Both written in Spanish by Antonio de Mendoza, upon celebrating the birth-day of Philip VI. in 1623, at Aranjuez; and translated by our author in 1654, during his confinement. 6. His correspondence was published in 1701, in one volume, 8vo, under this title: “'Original Letters of his excellency sir Richard Fanshawe during his embassy in Spain and Portugal; which, together with divers letters and answers from the chief ministers of state in England, Spain, and Portugal, contain the whole negotiations of the treaty of peace between those three crowns.” The publisher received these letters from the hands of a daughter of sir Richard, who had them in her possession. He also composed other things, remaining in manuscript, which he wrote in his younger years, but had not tha leisure to complete. Even some of the preceding printed pieces have not all the perfection which our ingenious author could have given them: for, as his biographer observes, “being, for his loyalty and zeal to his master’s service, tossed from place to place, and from country to country, during the unsettled times of our anarchy, some of his manuscripts falling by misfortune into unskilful hands, were printed and published without his consent or knowledge, and before he could give them his last finishing strokes.” But that was not the case with his translation of “II Pastor Fido,” which was published by himself, and procured him much reputation.

, an Italian painter, was born at Verona in 1522; his mother dying in labour of him. He was a disciple of Nicolo Golfino, and an admirable designer, but not altogether so happy in his colouring: though there is a piece of his painting in St. George’s church at Verona, 50 well performed in both respects, that it does not seem inferior to one of Paul Veronese, which is placed next to it. He was famous also for being an excellent swordsman, and a very good orator, and Strutt mentions some engravings by him. He had considerable knowledge in sculpture and architecture, especially that part of it which relates to fortifications. His last moments are said to have been as remarkable as his first, on account of the death of his nearest relation. He lay upon his death-bed in 1606; and his wife, who was sick in the same room, hearing him cry out r 4< He was going,“told him,” She would bear him company; and actually did so, as they both expired at the same minute.

His works are: 1. “Notse ad Juveualis et Persu Satyras,” Lond. 1612, 8vo. The third edition was printed at London, in 1620, under the following title “Junii Juvenalis et Auli Persii Flacci Satyrse cum annotationibus ad marginem, quse obscurissima quseque dilucidare possint. Tertia Editio, prioribus multo emendatior et auctior.” book is dedicated to Henry prince of Wales, who received the author very kindly, and in some measure commanded him to write such comments on all the Latin poets. 2. “Notae ad Seneca? Tragcedias,” Lond. 1613, 8vo. The third edition was printed at the same place, in 1634, under the following title: “L. et M, Annaei Senecte Trngccdisc. Post omnes omnium editiones recensionesque editio tertia auctior et emendatior, opera et studio Thorn te Farnabii.” To this edition is prefixed a privilege granted him from the king, dated October 1634, for the sole printing of that, and several other of his works, for one-and-twenty years. The book is accompanied with commendatory verses, by Daniel Heinsius, Richard Andrews, M. D. Hugh Holland, Laurence Whitaker, and Na, Tomkins. 3. “Notrc ad Martialis Epigrammata,” Lond. 1615, 8vo. Other editions in 12 mo, were afterwards printed, both at London and Geneva. These notes were dedicated to sir Robert Killegrew. 4. “Lucani Pharsalia, sive de Bello Civili Caesaris et Pompeii Libri X. Adjeclis ad marginem notis T. Farnabii, quae loca obscuriora illustrent,” London, 1618, 8vo. Dedicated to sir Francis Stuart. To this edition are prefixed commendatory verses by R. A. M. D.and Mr. Selden. 5. “Index Rhetoricus Scholis et Institutioni tenerioris Ætatis accommodatus,” Lond. 1625, 8vo. To an edition published in the same city, in 1646, were added, “Formulae Oratoriae et Index Poeticus.” The fifth edition was printed at London, in 1654, under the following title: “Index Rhetoricus et Oratorius, Scholis et Institutioni tenerioris Ætatis accommodatus. Cui adjiciuntur Formula; Oratoriae et Index Poeticus. Opera et studio Thomae Farnabii. Editio quinta, prioribus emendation” This book is dedicated to Dominico Molino, Senator of Venice. The Index Poeticus, annexed to this, was first printed at London in 1634. In the preface to the “Index Rhetoricus,” Mr. Farnabie informs his readers, that he had published, about twenty years before, his Scheme of Tropes, in verse, without his nume which, meeting with success, was claimed by a certain plagiary upon which our author composed his “Index Rhetoricus.” Mons. Gibert speaks of this work with commendation, and observes that Mons. BaiHet has passed a favourable judgment upon it. Father Vavasseur, though he afiirms that Mr. Farnabie' s Latin is sometimes exceptionable, allows him, nevertheless, to have been a diligent and learned writer. 6. “Florilcgium Epigrammatum Graecorum, eorumque Latino versu a variis redditorum,” London, 1629, 8vo, &c. 7. “Notae ad Virgilium,” London, 1634, 8vo. 8. Ci Systeraa Grammaticum,“London, 1641, 8vo. King Charles the First ordered Mr. Farnabie to write a Latin grammar, for the use of all the schools, when that which had been established by law, and against which many complaints had been made, was to be reformed. 9.” Notae in Ovidii Metamorphoses,“Paris, 1637, folio; and London, in 12mo, 1677, &c. 10.” Phrasiologia Anglo-Latina,“London, 8vo. 11.” Tabula? Graeca? Linguae,“London, 4to. 12.” Syntaxis,“London, 8vo. 13.” Notse in Terentium.“Our author had finished his notes upon Terence only as far as the fourth comedy, when he died. But Dr. Meric Casaubon completed the two last comedies, and published the whole at London, 1651, 12mo. Anthony Wood hath added to the catalogue,” Epistolac variae ad doctissimos Viros." But this article does not refer to a distinct publication, but to the letters occasionally written by Farnabie to learned men, and particularly to Vossius.

"What the inducements were, which engaged him to leave his own country, in order to serve the queen in Irelaud, cannot easily be discovered; it is, however, certain that he went thither well recommended, and that being in particular favour with Arthur lord Grey, then lord deputy in that kingdom, he was sworn of the privy-council about 1581. It is more than probable that his interest might be considerably strengthened by his marriage with Alice, the daughter of Dr. Robert Weston, some time lord chancellor of Ireland, and dean of the arches in England, a man of great parts, and who had no small credit with the earl of Leicester, and other statesmen in the court of Elizabeth; and when he was once fixed in the office of secretary, his own great abilities and superior understanding made him so useful to succeeding governors, that none of the changes to which that government was too much subject in those days, wrought any alteration in his fortune. One thing, indeed, might greatly contribute to this, which was the stron<r interest he found means to raise, and never was at a loss to maintain, in England; so that whoever was lord lieutenant in Ireland, sir Geoffrey Fenton continued the queen’s counsellor there, as a man upon whom she depended, from whom she took her notions of state affairs in that island, and whose credit with her was not to be shaken by the artifices of any faction whatever. He took every opportunity of persuading the queen that the Irish were to be governed only by the rules of strict justice, and that the safety and glory of her government in that island depended on her subjects enjoying equal laws and protection of their property. The queen frequently sent for her secretary Fenton, to consult with him on her Irish affairs, which shews the high opinion she entertained of his understanding, though it often happened that when he was returned to his duty, the advisers of Elizabeth persuaded her to adopt measures the reverse of what Fenton had recommended. He was the means of extinguishing more than one rebellion, and of totally reducing the kingdom to submit to English government.

Fielding’s genius excelled most in those strong, lively, and natural paintings of the characters of mankind, and the movements of the human heart, which constitute the basis of his novels; yet, as comedy bears the closest affinity to this kind of writing, his dramatic pieces, every one of which is comic, are far from being contemptible. His farces and ballad pieces, more especially, have a sprightImess of manner, and a furcibleness of character, by which it is impossible not to be agreeably entertained; and in itiose which he has in any degree borrowed from Moliere, or;.ny other writer, he has done great honour and justice t>j Irs original, by the manner in which he has treated the subject. Having married a second time, he left a wife and four children, who were educated under the care of their uncle, with the aid of a very generous donation given annually by Ralph Allen, esq. the celebrated man of Bath. One of his sons is still living, a barrister of considerable reputation. This second wife died at Canterbury, in May 1802, at a very advanced age. Fielding’s frame was naturally very robust, and his height rather above six feet. It was thought that no picture was taken of him while he lived, and it is certain that the portrait prefixed to his Works was a sketch executed by his friend Ho r garth, from memory. We find, however, in Mr. Nichols’s new edition of the Life of Bowyer, a beautiful engraving from a miniature in the possession of his grand-daughter, Mrs. Sophia Fielding. His character as a man, may in great measure be deduced from the incidents of his life, but cannot perhaps be delineated better than by his biographer Mr. Murphy, with whose words this article may properly be closed.

, of the family of the lord keeper, was the son of sir Thomas Finch of Eastwell in Kent, and was born in that county, and educated at Oriel college, Oxford. From that he went to Gray’s Inn, and after pursuing the usual course of law studies, became a counsellor of reputation, and was autumn or summer reader of that house in 2 James I. In 1614 he attained the rank of a Serjeant, and two years after was knighted. He died Oct. 11, 1625, leaving a son, John, who was afterward created lord Finch of Fordwich, and was keeper of the great seal. Sir Henry Finch wrote “Nomotechnia, ou description del Commun Leys d'Angleterre, &c.” Lond. 1613, fol. This “Description of the Common Law” was afterwards published by himself in English, under the title “Of Law, or a Discourse thereof,” Lond. 1627, (636, and 1661, 8vo. But a better translation was published in 1758 by an anonymous hand. He published also “On the Calling of the Jews,” a work which Wood has so imperfectly described that it is not easy to discover its drift. Finet (Sir John), a man considerable enough to be remembered, was son of Robert Finet of Soulton, near Dover, in Kent, and born in 1571. His great grandfather was of Sienna, in Italy, where his family was ancient; and coming into England a servant to cardinal Campegius, the pope’s legate, married a maid of honour to queen Catherine, consort to Henry VIII. and settled here. He was bred up in the court, where, by his wit, mirth, and uncommon skill in composing songs, he very much pleased James I. In 1614 he was sent into France about matters of public concern; and the year after was knighted. In 1626 he was made assistant to the master of the ceremonies, being then in good esteem with Charles I. He died in 1641, aged seventy. He wrote a book entitled “Fineti Philoxenus: Some choice observations touching the reception and precedency, the treatment and audience, the punctilios and contests of foreign ambassadors in England, 1656,” 8vo published by James Howel, and dedicated to lord LTsle. He also translated from French into English “The beginning, continuance, and decay of Estates, &c. 1606;” written originally by R. de Lusing.

Having, however, calculated by these tables an eclipse of the sun, which was to happen June 22, 1666, he imparted it to a relation, who shewed it to Mr. Halton of Wingfield manor in Derbyshire, a good mathematician, as appears from some pieces of his, in the appendix to Foster’s “Mathematical Miscellanies.” He came to see Flamsteed soon after; and finding he was not acquainted with the astronomical performances of others, he sent him Riccioli’s “Almagestum Novum,” and Kepler’s “Tabulae Rudolphinae,” to which he was before a stranger. He prosecuted his astronomical studies from this time with all imaginable vigour and success. In 1669, he collected some remarkable eclipses of the fixed stars, by the moon, which would happen in 1670, calculating them from the Caroline Tables; and directed them to lord Brouncker, president of the royal society. This produced very good effects; for his production being read before that society, was so highly approved, that it procured him letters of thanks, dated Jan. 14, 1669-70, from Oldenburg their secretary, and from Mr. John Collins, one of their members, with whom he corresponded several years. These Jetters were in the hands of William Jones, esq. F. R. S, father of the celebrated sir William Jones. Extracts from them are given in the “Biographia Britannica.”

We have already mentioned ten publications of this author, besides occasional sermons, of which he published many that were very excellent. There remain yet to be mentioned some pieces of a smaller kind; as, II. “The Counsellor’s Plea for the Divorce of sir G. D. (Downing) and Mrs. F.” 1715. This relates to an affair which was brought before -the house of lords. 12. “Papists not excluded from the Throne upon the account of Religion. Being a vindication of the right reverend lord bishop of Ban go r' a Preservative, &c. in that particular. In a short Dialogue,” 1717. 13. “A Letter from Mr. T. Burdett, who was executed at Tyburn for the murder of capt. Falkner, to some attorneys’ clerks of his acquaintance; written six days before his execution,” 1717. 14. “A Letter td an Inhabitant of the Parish of St. Andrew’s, Holborn, about new ceremonies in the church,” 1717. 15. “A Defence of Praying before Sermon, as directed 'by the 55th canon.” All these were published without his name. The indefatigable labours of this prelate brought him at length into a bad state of health, which made life troublesome to him a good while before his death. He died at Tottenham, in Middlesex, whither he had retired for the benefit of the air, Aug. 4, 1723 and was interred in the cathedral church of Ely, where a monument was erected to him by his lady, who did not long survive him. He left behind him an only son, Dr. Charles Fleetwood, who inherited his paternal estate in Lancashire; and had been presented a few years before by his father, as bishop of Ely, to the great rectory of Cottenham, in Cambridgeshire, which he did not long enjoy.

, a miscellaneous writer in the sixteenth century, and a classical translator, was a native of London. In 1575 he published a version of the “Bucolics of Virgil,” with notes, a plain and literal translation verse for verse. In 589 he published a new version, both of the “Bucolics and Georgics” with notes, dedicated to John Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury. This is in the regular Alexandrine verse, without rhyme. He supervised, corrected, and enlarged the second edition of Holinshed’s Chronicle in 1585. He translated “Ælian’s Various History” into English in 1576, which he dedicated to Goodman, dean of Westminster, und^r the title of “Ælian’s Registre of Hystories,” 4to. He published also “Certaine select Epistles of Cicero into English,” Lond. 1576, 4to; and in the same year he imparted to our countrymen a fuller idea of the elegance of the ancient epistle, by his “Panoplie of Epistles from Tully, Isocrates, Pliny, and others,” Lond. 4to. He translated Synesius’s Greek “Panegyric on Baldness,” which had been brought into vogue by Erasmus’s “Moriae Encomium,” Lond. 1579', 12mo; at the end is his “Fable of Hermes.” Among some other pieces he Englished many celebrated books written in Latin about the fifteenth century and at the restoration of learning, which was a frequent practice, after it became fashionable to compose in English, and our writers had begun to find the force and use of their own tongue. Among his original pieces are, 1. “A memorial of the charitable almes deedes of William Lambe, gentleman of the chapel under Henry VIII. and citizen of London,” Lond. 1580, 8vo. 2. “The Battel between the Virtues and Vices,” ibid. 1582, 8vo. 3. “The Diamant of Devotion, in six parts,” ibid. 1586, 12mo. 4. “The Cundyt of Comfort,” 1579, &c. Verses by him are prefixed to various works published in his time. Sir William Cordall, the queen’s solicitor-general, was his chief patron. He had a brother, Samuel, who assisted in compiling the index to Holinshed, and who wrote an elegant Latin life of queen Mary, never printed. He has also a Latin recommendatory poem to Edward Grant’s “Spicilegium of the Greek Tongue,” &c. Lond. 1575, 8vo.

, another eminent physician, nephew to the preceding, was born in Aberdeen, November 18, 1736, and was the only and posthumous child of Mr. George Fordyce, the proprietor of a small landed estate, called Broadford, in the neighbourhood of that city. His mother, not long after, marrying again, he was taken from her when about two years old, and sent to Fovran, at which place he received his school-education. He was removed thence to the university of Aberdeen, where, it is said, he was made M. A. when only fourteen years of age, but this we much doubt. In his childhood he had taken great delight in looking at phials of coloured liquors, which were placed at the windows of an apothecary’s shop. To this circumstance, and to his acquaintance with the late learned Alexander Garden, M. D. F. R. S. many years a physician in South Carolina, and in this city, but then apprentice to a surgeon and apothecary in Aberdeen, he used to attribute the resolution he very early formed to study medicine. He was in consequence sent, when about fifteen years old, to his uncle, Dr. John Fordyce, who at that time practised medicine at Uppingham, in Northamptonshire. With him he remained several years, and then went to the university of Edinburgh, where, after a residence of about three years, he received the degree of M. D. in October 1758. His inaugural dissertation was upon catarrh. While at Edinburgh, Dr. Cullen was so much pleased with his diligence and ingenuity, that, besides shewing him manyother marks of regard, he used frequently to give him private assistance in his studies. The pupil was ever after grateful for this kindness, and was accustomed to speak of his preceptor in terms of the highest respect, calling him often “his learned and revered master.” About the end of 1758 he came to London, but went shortly after to Leyden, for the purpose, chiefly, of studying anatomy under Albinus. He returned in 1759 to London, where he soou determined to fix himself as a teacher and practitioner of medicine. When he made known this intention to his relations, they highly disapproved of it, as the whole of his patrimony had been expended upon his education. Inspired, however, with that confidence which frequently attends the conscious possession of great talents, he persisted in his purpose, and, before the end of 1759, commenced a course of lectures upon chemistry. This was attended by nine pupils. In 1764 he began to lecture also upon materia medica and the practice of physic. These three subjects he continued to teach nearly thirty years, giving, for the most part, three courses of lectures on each of them every year. A course lasted nearly four months; and, during it, a lecture of nearly an hour was delivered six times in the week. His time of teaching commenced about 7 o'clock in the morning, and ended at 10; his lectures upon the three above-mentioned subjects being given one immediately after the other. In 1765 he was admitted a licentiate of the college of physicians. In 1770 he was chosen physician to St. Thomas’s hospital, after a considerable contest; the number of votes in his favour being 109, in that of his antagonist, Dr. Watson, 106. In 1774 he became a member of Dr. Johnson’s, or the literary club and in 1776 was elected a fellow of the royal society. In 1787 he was admitted a fellow of the college of physicians. No circumstance can demonstrate more strongly the high opinion entertained of his abilities by the rest of his profession in London, than his reception into that body. He had been particularly active in the dispute, which had existed about twenty years before, between the fellows and licentiates, and had, for this reason, it was thought, forfeited all title to be admitted into the fellowship through favour. But the college, in 1787, were preparing a new edition of their Pharmacopoeia; and Knowing his talents in the branch of pharmaceutical chemistry, suppressed their resentment of his former conduct, and, by admitting him into their body, secured his assistance in the work. In 1793 he assisted in forming a small society of physicians and surgeons, which has since published two volumes, under the title of “Medical and Chirurgical Transactions;” and continued to attend its meetings most punctually till within a month or two of his death. Having thus mentioned some of the principal events of his literary life, we shall next give a list of his various medical and philosophical works; and first of those which were published by himself, 1. “Elements of Agriculture and Vegetation.” He had given a course of lectures on these subjects to some young men of rank; soon after, the close of which, one of his hearers, the late Mr. Stuart Mackenzie, presented him with a copy of them, from uotes he had taken while they were delivered. Dr. Fordyce corrected the copy, and afterwards published it under the above-mentioned title. 2. “Elements of the Practice of Physick.” This was used by him as a text-book for a part of his course of lectures on that subject. 3. “A Treatise on the Digestion of Food.” It was originally read before the college of physicians, as the Gulstonian lecture. 4. “Four Dissertations on Fever.” A fifth, which completes the subject, was left by him in manuscript, and has since been published. His other works appeared in the Philosophical Transactions, and the Medical and Chirurgical Transactions. In the former are eight papers by him, with the following titles: 1. Of the light produced by inflammation. 2. Examination of various ores in the museum of Dr. W. Hunter. 3. A new method of assaying copper ores. 4. An account of some experiments on the loss of weight in bodies on being melted or heated. 5. An account of an experiment on heat. 6. The Cronian lecture on muscular motion. 7. On the cause of the additional weight which metals acquire on being calcined, &c. Account of a new pendulum, being the Bakerian lecture. His papers in the Medical and Chirurgical Transactions are, 1. Observations on the small-pox, and causes of fever. 2. An attempt to improve the evidence of medicine. 3. Some observations upon the composition of medicines. He was, besides, the inventor of the experiments in heated rooms, an account of which was given to the royal society by the present sir Charles Blagden; and was the author of many improvements in various arts connected with chemistry, on which he used frequently to be consulted by manufacturers. Though he had projected various literary works in addition to those which have been mentioned, nothing has been left by him in manuscript, except the dissertation on fever already spoken of; and two introductory lectures, one to his course of materia medica, the other to that of the practice of physic. This will not apear extraordinary to those who knew what confidence he ad in the accuracy of his memory. He gave all his lectures without notes, and perhaps never possessed any; he took no memorandum in writing of the engagements he formed, whether of business or pleasure, and was always most punctual in observing them; and when he composed his works for the publick, even such as describe successions of events found together, as far as we can perceive, by no necessary tie, his materials, such at least as were his own, were altogether drawn from stores in his memory, which had often been laid up there many years before. In consequence of this retentiveness of memory, and of great reading and a most inventive mind, he was, perhaps, more generally skilled in the sciences, which are either directly subservient to medicine, or remotely connected with it, than any other person of his time. One fault, however, in his character as an author, probably arose, either wholly or in part, from the very excellence which has been mentioned. This was his deficiency in the art of literary composition; the knowledge of which he might have insensibly acquired to a much greater degree than was possessed by him, had he felt the necessity in his youth of frequently committing his thoughts to writing, for the purpose of preserving them. But, whether this be just or not, it must be confessed, that notwithstanding his great learning, which embraced many subjects no way allied to medicine, he seldom wrote elegantly, often obscurely and inaccurately; and that he frequently erred with respect even to orthography. His language, however, in conversation, which confirms the preceding conjecture, was not less correct than that of most other persons of good education. As a lecturer, his delivery was slow and hesitating, and frequently interrupted by pauses not required by his subject. Sometimes, indeed, these continued so long, that persons unaccustomed to his manner, were apt to fear that he was embarrassed. But these disadvantages did not prevent his having a considerable number of pupils, actuated by the expectation of receiving from him more full and accurate instruction than they could elsewhere obtain. His person is said to have been handsome in his youth; but his countenance, from its fulness, must have been always inexpressive of the great powers of his mind. His manners too, were less refined, and his dress in general less studied, than is usually regarded as becoming the physician in this country. From these causes, and from his spending a short time with his patients, although sufficient to enable him to form a just opinion of their disorders, he had for many years but little private employment in his profession; and never, even in the latter part of his life, when his reputation was at its height, enjoyed nearly so much as many of his contemporaries. This may have partly resulted too, from his fondness for the pleasures of society, to which he often sacrificed the hours that should have been dedicated to sleep; he has frequently indeed, been known in his younger days, to lecture for three hours in a morning, without having undressed himself the preceding night. The vigour of his constitution enabled him to sustain for a considerable time, without apparent injury, this debilitating mode of life; but at length he was attacked with the gout, which afterwards became irregular, and for many years frequently affected him with excruciating pains in his stomach and bowels; in the latter part of his life, also, his feet and ankles were almost constantly swollen, and a little time before his death he had symptoms of water in the chest. To the first mentioned disease (gout), he uniformly attributed his situation, which, for several weeks previous to his dissolution, he knew to be hopeless. This event took place at his house in Essex-­street, May 25, 1802.

In April 1463, he embarked with queen Margaret, prince Edward, and many persons of distinction, who followed the fortunes of the house of Lancaster, at Hamburg, and landed at Sluys in Flanders; whence they were conducted to Bruges, thence to Lisle, and thence into Lorrain. lu this exile he remained for many years, retiring from place to place, as the necessities of the royal family required: for though, during that space, the queen and prince were often in motion, and great efforts were made to restore. Henry, yet, considering the age of Fortescue, it is not probable that he was suffered to expose himself to such hazards; especially as he might do them better service by soliciting their interest at different courts. It is certain, that he was not idle; but, observing the excellent understanding of prince Edward, who applied himself wholly to military exercises, and seemed to think of nothing but qualifying himself for an expert commander, he thought it high time to give him other impressions, and to infuse into his mind just notions of the constitution of his country, as well as due respect to its laws; so that, if Providence should favour his designs, he might govern as a king, and not as a tyrant, or a conqueror. With this view 1 as we learn from his introduction, he drew up his famous work, entitled “De Laudibus Legtirn Anglise;” which, though it failed of its primary intention, that hopeful prince being not long after cruelly murdered, will yet remain an everlasting monument of this great and good man’s respect and affection for his country. This very curious and concise vindication of our laws was received with great esteem when it was communicated to the learned of that profession; yet it was not published till the reign of Henry VIII. when it was printed hy Edward Whitchurch, in 16mo, but without a date. In 1516 it was translated by Robert Mulcaster, and printed by R. Tottel, and again in 1567, 1573, and 1575; also by Thomas White in 1598, 1599, and 1609. Fortescue, with HenghamVs “Summa magna et parva,” was likewise printed in 1616 and 1660, 12mo, and again, with Selden’s notes, 1672, 12mo. In 1737 Fortescue was printed in folio; and lastly, in 1775, an English translation with the original Latin, was published in 8vo, with Selden’s notes, and a great variety of remarks relative to the history, antiquities, and laws of England, with a large historical preface by F. Gregor, esq. In 1663, E. Waterhouse, esq. published “Fortescue illustratuV” a commentary on the “De Laudibus,” which, although prolix and defective in style, Mr. Hargrave thinks may be resorted to with great advantage, and may very much facilitate the labours of more judicious and able inquirers. When lord chancellor, sir John is said to have drawn up the statute 2$ Henry VI. “of resumption of certain grants of the crown,” which, though much relied upon by the writers on that subject, is not extant in any present edition of the statutes. The house of Lancaster having afterwards a prospect of retrieving their fortunes, the queen and the prince went over to England, Fortescue with many others accompanying them. They did not succeed, so that this chancellor was forced to reconcile himself as well as he could to the victorious Edward IV.; for which purpose he wrote a kind of apology for his own conduct. Tlws treatise, though it has never been published, Selden had seen; as he tells us in his preface to Fortescue' s book, “L)e Laudibus, <kc.” After all these extraordinary changes of masters and fortunes, he preserved his old principles in regard to the English constitution; as appears from another valuable and learned work, written by him in English, and published in the reign of queen Anne, with this title: “The difference between an absolute and limited monarchy, as it more particularly regards the English constitution: being a treatise written by sir John Fortescue, knight, lord chief justice, and lord high chancellor of England, under king 'Henry VI. Faithfully transcribed from the manuscript copy in the Bodleian library, and collated with three other manuscripts (which were afterwards printed). Published with some remarks by John Fortescue Aland, of the Inner Temple, esq. F. R. S. 1714,” 8vo. There is a manuscript of this work in the Cotton library, in the title of which it is said to be addressed to Henry VI. but many passages in it shew it to have been plainly written in favour of, and for the service of, Edward IV. A second edition, with amendments, was published in 1719, 8vo. As for this author’s other writings, which were pretty numerous, as they were never printed, we know nothing more of them than we learn from the titles, and the commendations bestowed upon them by those who had perused them. They have, however, been carefully preserved in libraries, some of them being still extant under the following titles “Opusculum de natura Legis Naturae, et de ejus censura in successione regnorum supremorum;” “Defensio juris Domus Lancastriae” “Genealogy of the House of Lancaster” “Of the title of the House of York” “Genealogise Ilegum Scotios” “A Dialogue between Understanding and Faith” "A Prayer Book which savours touch of the times we live in,' 1 &c. It would certainly be a gratification, if not a benefit, to the learned world, if his manuscripts were printed; for he was a man of general knowledge, great observation, and his writings would probably throw much light upon the dark parts of our history and antiquities.

Bending their course northward, they came on the 24th within sight of Fara, one of the islands of Shetland; and on the llth of July discovered Friezeland r which stood high, and was all covered with snow. They could not land by reason of the ice and great depth of water near the shore; the east point of this island, however, they named “Queen Elizabeth’s Foreland.” On the 28th they had sight of Meta Incognita, being part of New Greenland; on which also they could not land, for the reasons just mentioned. August the 10th, he went on a desert island three miles from the continent, but staid there only a few hours. The next day he entered into a strait which he called “Frobisher’s Strait;” and the name is still retained. On the J2th, sailing to Gabriel’s Island, they came to a sound, which they named Prior’s Sound, and anchored in a sandy bay there. The 15th they sailed to Prior’s Bay, the 17th to Thomas Williams’s Island, and the 18th came to an anchor under Burcher’s Island. Here they went on shore, and had some communication with the natives; but he was so unfortunate as to have five of his men and a boat taken by those barbarians. They were like the Tartars, or Samoeids, with long black hair, broad faces, flat noses, and tawny; the garments both of men and women were made of seal-skins, and did not differ in fashion; but the women were marked in the face with blue streaks down the cheeks, and round the eyes. Having endeavoured in vain to recover hit men, he set sail again for England the 26th of August; and, notwithstanding a terrible "storm on the 7th, arrived safe at Harwich on the 2d of October.

, called Bibaculus, perhaps from his excessive drinking, an ancient Latin poet, was born at Cremona about the year of Rome 650, or 100 before Christ. He wrote annals, of which Macrobius has preserved some fragments. They are inserted in Maittaire’s “Corpus Poetarum. >r Quintilian says, that he wrote iambics also irt a very satirical strain, and therefore is censured by Cremutius Cordus, in Tacitus, as a slandering and abusive writer. Horace is thought to have ridiculed the false sublime of his taste; yet, according to Macrobius, Virgil is said to have imitated him in many places. But some are of opinion that the” Annals" may be attributed to Furius Antias, or Anthius, a contemporary poet, whose fragments are likewise in Maittaire’s collection.

, esq. F. R. and A. Ss. eldest son of the preceding, was born in 1672, and was educated under his father at St. Paul’s school, whence he was admitted of Trinity-college, Cambridge, 1691, made scholar of 'that house 1693, and afterwards fellow (being then B. A.) in 1697. He was possessed of a considerable estate at Scruten, in Yorkshire, now in the possession of his grandson Henry Gale, esq. and represented North Allerton, in that county, in 1705, 1707, 1706, and 1710. His name was added to the commissioners of stamp duties, Dec. 20, 1714, and was continued in a subsequent commission, May 4, 1715-, and he was appointed a commissioner of excise Dec. 24 of the same year. In this he continued uutii 1735, when he was wantonly displaced by sir Robert Waipole, for which no other reason was assigned than that sir Robert wanted to provide for one of his friends, an act of arbitrary tyranny which cannot be too severely condemned. Mr. Gale was the first vice-president of the society of antiquaries; and when that learned body, in 1721, proposed to collect accounts of all the ancient coins relative to Great Britain and its dominions, Mr. Gale undertook the Reman series, and his brother Samuel the Danish. Though he was considered as one of the most learned men of his fege, he only published the following books:

1. “Antonini Iter Britanniarum Commentariis illnstratutn Thomae Gale, S, T. P. nuper Decani Ebor. Opus posthumum revisit, auxit, edidit R. G. Accessit Anonymi Ravennatis Britannia; Chorographia, cum amographo Regis Galliae Mss. & cociice Vaticano collata adjiciuntur conjecturse plurimae, cum nominibus locorum Anglicis, quotquot iis assignari potuerint,” Lond. 1709, 4to. In the preface to this book, Mr. Gale very properly points out what parts of it were his father’s and what his own. Mr. Gough had, among the books which he bequeathed to the Bodleian library, three copies of this edition, enriched with many valuable ms notes by Mr. Roger Gale, Nicholas Man, esq. and Dr. Abraham Francke, fellow of Trintycollege, Cambridge, and rector of West Dene in Wiltshire, 1728; and a fourth with ms various readings from the two Mss. whence H. Stephens first printed this Itinerary . 2. “The Knowledge of Medals, or Instructions for those who apply themselves to the study of Medals both ancient and modern, by F. Jobert,” translated from the French, of which two editions were published without his name; one of them in 1697, the other in 1715, 8vo. 3. “Registrum Honoris de Richmond,” Lond. 1722, folio. His discourse on the four Roman Ways in Britain, is printed in the sixth volume of Leland’s Itinerary. His “Remarks on a Roman Inscription found at Lanchester,” in the Philosophical Transactions, vol. XXX. p. 823 and in vol. XLIII. p. 265, extracts of two of his letters to Mr. Peter Collinson, F. R. S. concerning “the vegetation of melon seeds 33 years old,” and of “a fossil skeleton of a man found at Lathkill-dale near Bakewell, in the county of Derby,” dated in 1743 and 174-1-f. “Explanation of a Roman altar found at Castle Steeds in Cumberland,” in Gent. Mag. vol. XII. p. 135. In Horsley’s “Britannia Romana,” p. 332, &c. is published, “An Account of a Roman Inscription found at Chichester. By Roger Gale, esq.” “Observations on an Inscription at Spello, by Fred. Passarini and Roger Gale, esq.” are printed in the Archaeologia, vol. II. p. 25. He presented to Mr. Drake’s History of York a plate of a beautiful little bronze female bust, which he supposed to be a Lucretia, found at York, and in his possession, engraved by Vertue. To him also Mr. Drake acknowledges himself obliged for a discovery that fixes the building of the Chapter-house at York to archbishop Grey. He died at Scruton, June 25, 1744, in his 72d year, universally esteemed, and much lamented by all his acquaintance; and left all his Mss. by will to Trinity-college, Cambridge, of which he was once fellow, and his cabinet of Roman coins to the public library there, with a complete catalogue of them drawn up by himself, of which Mr. Nichols printed twenty copies in 1780, for the use of particular friends. His correspondence included all the eminent antiquaries, of his time; and the late Mr. George Allan of Darlington possessed, by the gift of his grandson, a large collection of letters to and from him, the principal of which are printed in the “Reliquiae Galeanae,” as a valuable addition to antiquarian literature. The originals are still in the possession of Henry Gale, esq. The “Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica,” No. II. contains many other fragments and notices of the labours of Mr. Gale.

, was an Italian poet of the sixteenth century, protected and beloved by cardinal Alexander Farnese r whose writings were much esteemed in his day, but now are thought flat and insipid. He wrote, 1. “A Latin treatise on Poetry, in which he dissuades Christian poets from using pagan mythology.” This was the amende honorublt for many licentious and profane poems written in his youth. 2. “A Latin poem on Columbus.” Also eclogues, entitled, “Venatoria,” and other productions. Muretus treats this author with the greatest contempt, bnt he is highly praised by Giraldi and Manutius. He died in 1586, at the age of 90.

As he had a great deal of spirit and imagination, and a strong voice, he became a popular preacher in the chief cities of France. He acquitted himself in the pulpit with uncommon vivacity, and had a peculiar turn for the wit then in vogue, which, being enforced by a suitable delivery, made deep impressions upon his audience. But he was not content with the honour he thus did to his order. His ambition led him to aim at being more extensively serviceable by his writings. With that spirit, while yet in his noviciate, he published in 1614 a defence of the Jesuits against three of their adversaries at once. This piece he entitled “The Horoscope of Anti-Coton, together with the life, death, burial, and apotheosis of his two cousingermans Marteliere and Hardeviliere.” The treatise appeared under a feigned name, and was drawn up in the ironical style, but too much vitiated by buffoonery; and, in the same name and style, he printed in 1615, “The Calvinistic Elixir, or Reformed Philosopher’s Stone, first dug up by Calvin at Geneva, and afterwards polished by Isaac Casaubon at London, with the testamentary codex of Anti-Coton, lately found upon Charenton-bridge.” The first of these is entitled “Andrew Schioppii Casparis fratris horoscopus,” &c. Antwerp, 1614, 4to. The second “Andres Schioppii Casparis fratris Elixir Calvinisticum,” &c. ibid. 1651, 8vo. In the first he attacked the three following pieces; 1. “L'Anticoton, on refutation de la Lettre declaratoire du Pere Colon,” 1610, 8vo. 2. “Playdoye du Pierre de la Martiliere Avocat en Parlement pour le Recteur de l'University de Paris contre lesJe-r suits,” Paris, 1612, 8vo. 3. “Petri Hardovilierii Actiopro Academia Parisiensi adversus Presbyteros & Scholasticos Collegii Claromontanii habita in Senatu Parisiensi. ann. 1611,” Paris, 1612, 8vo. Niceron observes, that our author’s satirical style was very like that of the famous Schioppius, which was apparently the reason of his chusing that mask, which suited him exactly well.

Upon his coming to London he was called before the council, Sept. 25, 15-17; and there refusing to promise either to receive the homilies, or pay obedience to the visitors, if they came into his diocese, he was committed close prisoner to the Fleet. Some days after, he was sent for to the deanery of St. Paul’s by Cranmer, who, with other bishops, discoursed in defence of the hornily upon justification; which he had censured, as excluding charity from any share in obtaining it. The archbishop proceeded to apologize for Erasmus’s “Paraphrase on the New Testament,” as the best extant; which, being ordered by the injunctions to be set up in all churches, had been objected to by Gardiner. His grace, seeing no hopes from arguments, which made no impression, let fall some words of bringing him into the privy-council, in case of his concurrence with them; hut that too having no effect, he was remanded to the Fleet, where he continued till the parliament hroke up, Dec. 24, and then was set at liberty by the general act of amnesty, nsuajly passed on the accession of a prince to the throne. He was never charged with any offence judicially, every thing being done in virtue of that extent of prerogative which had been assumed by Henry VIII. which was thought necessary for mortifying the pre r late’s haughty temper, as well as to vindicate their proceedings from the contempt he had shewn them.

Having thus tried his powers before a provincial audience, and taken all the necessary steps for a London stage, he made his appearance at Gwodman’s-fields, Oct. 19, 1741,- when he acted Richard III. for the first time. His acting was attended with the loudest acclamations of applause; and his fame was so quickly propagated through the town, that the more established theatres of Drury-lane and Covent-garden were deserted. The inhabitants of the most polite parts of the town were drawn after him; and, Goodman’s-fields were full of the splendor of St. James’s and Grosvenor-square. We must not wonder, that the players were the last to admire this rising genius; who, according to his biographer (and surely he must know), “are more liable to envy and jealousy than persons of most other professions,” and Q,uin and Gibber could not conceal their uneasiness and disgust at his great success. The patentees also of Drury-lane and Covent-garden were seriously alarmed at the great deficiency in the receipts of their houses, and at the crouds which constantly filled the theatre of Goodman’s-fields; for Giffard, the manager there, having found his advantage from Garrick’s acting, had admitted him to a full moiety of the profits; and Garrick, in consequence of his being perpetually admired, acted almost every night. Nay r --to a long and fatiguing character i the play, he would frequently add another in the farce. Those patentees, therefore, united their efforts, to destroy the new-raised seat of theatrical empire, and for this purpose intended to have recourse to law. An act of parliament, the llth of George II. co-operated with their endeavours; which were further aided by sir John Barnard, who, for some reasons, was incensed against the comedian^ of Goodman’s-fields; in consequence of which, Garrick entered into an agreement with Fleetwood, patentee of Drury-lane, for 500l. a-year; and Giffard and his wife, soon after, made the best terms they could with the same“proprietor. During the time of Garrick’s acting in Goodman’s-fields, he brought on the stage two dramatic pieces,” The Lying Valet, a Farce“and a dramatic satire, called” Lethe" which are still acted with applause. The latter was written before he commenced actor.

, an eminent German physician, was born at Heidelberg in 1705, and was educated partly among the Jesuits, and partly in the orphan-house at Halle, under the celebrated professor Franke. He became afterwards a pupil of the learned Boerhaave, and a professor of medicine in the university of Leyden, where he took the degree of doctor in 1725. He died Nov. 29 r 1780, leaving several works of considerable value. 1. “Dissertatio Inauguralis de solidis humani corporis partibus,” Leyden, 1725. 2. “Libellus de methodo concinnandi formulas medicamentorum,” ibidem, 1739, 1767; Franckfort, 1750, and in French, Paris, 1749. 3. “De fregimine Mentis, quod Medicorum est,” Leyden, 1747; 1763. In this work he describes the effects resulting from the empire of the body over the mind. 4. “Institutiones Pathologiae Medicinalis,” ibid. 1758; This work also passed through several editions and translations. 5. “Adversariorum varii argument! Liber unus,” ibid. 1771. 6. “Oratio Panegyrica in auspicium sseculi tertii Academic Batavse quae Leidse est,” &c. 1775, foh an excellent historical sketch of the rise and progress of the university of Leyden

He went still further: for, having got into his hands his majesty’s meditations, &c. written by himself, he took a copy of the ms. and immediately resolving to print it with all speed, he prevailed with Mr. Royston, the king’s printer, to undertake the work. But when it was about half printed, a discovery was made, and all the sheets then wrought off were destroyed. However, this did not damp Gauden’s spirit. He attempted to print it again, but could by no possible means get it finished, till some few days after his majesty’s destruction; when it came out under the title of “Emuv B<r<xuo),” or, “The Portraiture of his sacred majesty in his solitude and sufferings.” Upon its first appearance, the powers then at the helm were immediately sensible, how dangerous a book it was to their cause; and therefore set all their engines at work to discover the publisher; and having seized the ms. which had been dispatched to the king, they appointed a committee to examine into the business. Gauden, having notice of this proceeding, withdrew privately in the night from his own house to sir John Wentworth’s, near Yarmouth, with a design to convey himself beyond sea: but Mr. Symonds, his majesty’s chaplain, and rector of Raine in Essex, near Bocking, who had communicated the ms. to the doctor, and had been taken up in a disguise, happening to die before his intended examination, the committee were not able to make any discovery. Upon this, the doctor changed his resolution, and stayed in England; where he directed his conduct with so much policy, as to keep his preferments during the several periods of the usurpation, although he published several treatises in vindication of the Church of England and its ministers, among which are, 1. “Hieraspistes, or An Apology of the Ministers of the Churcii of England,” 1653. 2. “The Case of Ministers’ maintenance by tithes (as in England) plainly discussed in conscience and prudence,” 1653. N. B. Tithes were abolished about this time. 3. “Christ at the Wedding, or, a treatise of Christian marriages to be solemnly blessed by ministers.” N. B. Justices of the peace were empowered to perform that rite in those times. 4. “A Petitionary Remonstrance presented to O. P. by John Gauden, D. D. a son, servant, and supplicant for the Church of England, in behalf of many thousands, his distressed brethren, ministers of the gospel, and other good scholars, who were deprived of all public employment,” 1659. Abp. Usher went to the protector at the same time to intercede for them. Besides these, he published, with the same spirit of vindicating the doctrine of the Church of England, “A Discourse concerning public oaths, and the lawfulness of swearing in judicial proceedings, in order to answer the scruples of the Quakers,” 1649.

An attack had been made upon him as an infidel, in the Gentleman’s Magazine, soon after his death, and it was said that “his dying recantation, like that of Voltaire, had been studiously concealed.” In answer to this, his learned, but somewhat too affectionately partial biographer, John Mason Good, F. R. S. gives an account of an interview between Dr. Geddes and M. St. Martin, a catholic priest, which we shall transcribe.

Dr. Geddes died the day after this interview, Feb. 26, 1802, and was buried in Paddington church-yard. IJe was unquestionably a man of extensive learning, although, not entitled to the superiority which his friends have assigned to him, and which indeed he too frequently arrogated to himself. It was this want of knowledge of his real powers, and the vanity superinduced upon it, that made him ambitious of the character of a wit and a poet, without either temper or genius. His wit was mere flippancy, and his poetry had rarely any other attribute than that of rhyme. The list of his works will show that in the employment of his talents there was something undignified and trifling, that showed a mind vexed with restlessness, rather than seriously anduniformly employed for the public good. While engaged in so important a work as the translation of the Bible., he was perpetually stooping to pick up any little paltry anecdote of the day, as the subject -for a pamphlet or <a poem, and while he was suffering: by the neglect or censure of those whose religious opinions he had shocked, he was seeking comfort in ridiculing the characters of men who had never offended him by any species of provocation. Of his private character, while he is praised for his benevolence and catholic 1 spirit, we find also, and not very consistently, that its leading feature was irritability upon the most trifling provocations, if they deserved the name, which discovered itself in the most gross and offensive language. One instance of this species of insanity, for such it appeared to be in him, is given by his biographer, which we shall throw into a note, for its excellence as a genuine portrait of the man . Dr. Geddes published, 1. “Select Satires of Horace,” &c. London, 1779, 4to. 2. “Linton, a Tweedale Pastoral,” Edinburgh, 4to. 3. “Cursory Remarks on a late fanatical publication entitled a Full Detection of Popery,” Lond. 1783, 8vo. 4. Prospectus of a New Translation of the Bible,“&c. ibid. 1786, 4to. 5.” Letter to the Bishop of London, containing doubts, queries, &c. relative to a vernacular translation of the Holy Scriptures,“ibid. 1787, 4to. 6.” Letter to the Rev. Dr. Priestley, in which the author attempts to prove by one prescriptive argument, that the divinity of Jesus Christ was a primitive tenet of Christianity,“ibid. 1787, 8vo. 7.” Letter to a, member of parliament on the case of the Protestant Dis-' senters, and the expediency of a general repeal of all penal statutes that regard religious opinions,“ibid. 1787, 8vo. 8.” Proposals, &c.“for his translation, ibid. 1788, 4to. 9.” Dr. Geddes’s general answer to queries, counsels,“&c. ibid. 1790, 4to. 10.” An answer to the bishop of Comana’s pastoral letter; by a protesting catholic,' 1 1790, 8vo. II. “A Letter to the right rev. the archbishops and bishops of England; pointing out the only sure means of preserving the church from the dangers that now threaten her. By an Upper Graduate,” 1790, 8vo. 12. “Epistola macaronica ad fratrem, de iis quo; gesta stint in nupero Dissentientium conventu,” 1790, 4to. 13. “Carmen seculare pro Gallica gente tyrannicli aristocraticae erepta,” 1790, 4to. 14. “Encyclical letter of the bishops of Rama, Acanthos, and Centuriæ, to the faithful clergy and laity of their respective districts, with a continued commentary for the use of the vulgar,” 1791, 8vo. 15. “An (ironical) apology for Slavery,” 1792, 8vo. 16. “The first book of the Iliad of Homer, verbally rendered into English verse; being a specimen of a new translation of that poet; with critical annotations,” 1792, 8vo. This was intended to rival Cowper’s Homer. 1*7. “L'Avocat du Diable the Devil’s Advocate,” &c. 1792, 4to. 18. “The Holy Bible, translation of, vol. I.” 1792, 4to. 19. Carmina Saecularia tria, pro tfibus celeberrirnis libertatis Gallicae epochis,“1793, 4to. 20.” Ver-Vert,“from the French of Gresset, 1793, 4to. 21.” Dr. Geddes’s address to the public on the publication of the first volume of his new Translationof the Bible,“1793. 22.” Letter to the right rv. John Douglas, bishop of Centurice, and vicar-apostolic in the London district/' 1794, 4to. 23. “A Norfolk Tale; or a Journal from London to Norwich,” 1794, 4to. 24. “Ode to the Hon. Thomas Pelham, occasioned by his speech in the Irish House of Commons on the Catholic bill,” 1795, 4to. 25. “A Sermon preached before the university of Cambridge, by H. W. C(6ulthurst)> D. D. &c.” in doggrel rhymes, 1796, 8vo. 26. “The Battle of B(a)ng(o)r; or the Church’s triumph a comic-heroic poerh,” 1797, 8vO. 27. “Translation of the Bible, vol. II.” 1797. 28. “A New-year’s gift to the good people of England, being a sermon, or something like a sermon, in defence of the present War,” &e. 1798, 8vo. 29. “A Sermon preached on the day of the general fast, Feb. 27, 1799, by Theomophilus Brown,” &c. 1799, 8vo. 30. “A Modest Apology for the Roman Catholics of Great Britain, addressed to all moderate Protestants,” &c. 1800, 8vo. 31. “Critical Remarks,” before mentioned, vol. I. 1800, 4to. 32. “Bardomachia, poema macaronico-Latinum,” 1800, 4tb. 33. “Paci feliciter feduci Ode Sapphica,” 1801, 4to. Besides these Dr. Geddes wrote many fugitive pieces, essays, poems in the riews- papers and magazines, and was a considerable contributor to the Analytical Review. After his death appeared in 1807, his “Translation of the Book of Psalms,” as far as Psalm CXVIII. In this, as may be expected, he gives up the prophetic sense of the Psalms.

, an eminent German poet and moral writer, was born at Haynichen, in Saxony, July 4, 1715. His father was a clergyman of a small income, who had thirteen children. Gellert was educated at home, where his poetical powers first appeared in a poem on the birth-day of his father, which was succeeded by many others, but all these in his maturer years he committed to the flames. He was afterwards sent to school at Meissen r where he learned Greek and Latin, and in 1734 he went to Leipsic, whence, after studying four years, his father’s narrow income obliged him to recall him. Gellert wished much to continue at the university, but he submitted to necessity, and at home had an opportunity of again turning his attention to those poetical pursuits for which he had early displayed a predilection; and perhaps it is to his recall from the university that we owe the beauty and simplicity of his fables. At this time he occasion-ally composed sermons, which are in general distinguished both for spirit and sound reasoning, but they contain several indications of a taste not very correct, and a judgment not arrived at maturity. In 1741 he again returned to the university of Leipsic, with a nephew of his own, of whose education he had the charge. Here he met with some friends, from whose conversation and directions he confesses that he derived very considerable advantage. About this time he published several tales and fables in a periodical publication. In 1745 he acquired the right of giving public lessons in the university, particularly on- morals. He had early received an impression of the importance of Christian morality, and thought that he could not pass over the subject in silence, without neglecting one of the most essential duties of his Situation. Soon after the commencement of his academical labours, he published his “Tales and Fables.” Amongst these, the manner in which the character of a devotee was drawn, was much admired. This suggested to Gellert the idea of his comedy of the “Devotee,” which was first published in the Bremen Magazine, but afterwards caused him much vexation. Many condemned it because it appeared to them to have a mischievous tendency, by exposing piety and seriousness to ridicule. But Gellert was not a man who could attempt to sap the foundations of real religion and morality, though he wished to expose hypocrisy and affectation to merited contempt. Among the many flattering instances of public approbation which the “Tales and Fables” produced, Gellert was particularly pleased with that of a Saxon peasant. One day, about the beginning of winter, he saw the man drive up to his door a cart loaded with fire-wood. Having observed Gellert, he asked him whether he was the gentleman who wrote such fine tales? Being answered in the affirmative, he begged pardon for the liberty which he took, and left the contents of his cart, being the most valuable present he could make. At this time the Germans had no original romances of any merit. In order to give some celebrity to this species of composition in his own country, he published the “Swedish Countess,” a work of a melancholy cast, and containing many indications of that depression of spirits which embittered the latter days of Gellert. In 1747 he published a book entitled “Consolations for Valetudinarians,” which was received with as much eagerness as his other works, and translated into various languages. It contains a melancholy representation of the sufferings which he himself endured. Nothing, however, could overcome his activity, and in 1748 the continuation of hisf “Tales and Fables” was published. About this time he was deprived of the society of several friends who had often dispersed the gloom that resulted from his disorder. The only intimate friend that remained was Havener, who persuaded Gellert to give to the public some of his letters. In 1754 he published his “Didactic Poems,” whicu were not so well received as his Tales and Fables, and he himself seems to have been sensible that they were not so agreeable, although useful and instructive. He bestowed particular care on some sacred songs, which were received with great enthusiasm all over Germany, both in the Roman catholic and protestant states. About this time he was appointed professor extraordinary in philosophy, and gave lectures on the Belles Lettres. From this period Gellert suffered extremely from an hypochondriac affection. His days were spent in melancholy reflections, and his rights in frightful dreams. But he made prodigious efforts to resist this malady, and to continue to perform his academical duties; and these efforts were often successful. The constant testimonies of the approbation with which his works were received, and the sympathy of his friends, were never-failing sources of consolation, and served to spread many cheerful moments over the general languor of his life. The calamities of war which desolated Germany after 1757, induced Gellert for some time to quit Leipsic. While in the country, he was attacked by a severe illness, from which, however, contrary to all expectation, he recovered. In 1761 the chair of a professor in ordinary was offered him, but he refused to accept it, from a persuasion that the state of his health was such as to render him incapable of discharging the duties of the situation with that regularity and attention which he thought necessary. In 1763-4, Gellert went to Carlsbad by the advice of his physicians to drink the waters, which, however, seem to have given him little relief. After a few years more of almost constant suffering, GeHett died at Leipsic, on the 13th of December. 1769. Some time before his death he revised and corrected his moral lessons, which he published at the request of the elector of Saxony. He was a man of the easiest and most conciliating manners; pleasing even to strangers; and of a disposition to form and preserve the most valuable friendships. He was open and enthusiastic in his attachments, ready at all times to givtt his counsel, labour, and money, to serve his friends. In himself, of a timid and hypochondriac habit, and disposed to criticise both his own character and works with a severity of which his friends could not acknowledge the justice. He had a constitutional fear of death, which, notwithstanding, receded as the hour of trial approached; so that he died with calmness and fortitude. In this he is thought to have resembled our Dr.Johnson, but in other respects his character and habit seem to approach nearer to those of Cowper. His works were published in ten vols. 8vo, in 1766; and after his death a more complete edition at Leipsic, in eight rolumes, with engravings. Kutner has celebrated his various excellencies; he says, “a century will perhaps elapse, before we have another poet capable of exciting the love and admiration of his contemporaries, in so eminent a degree as Gellert, and of exercising so powerful an influence on the taste and way of thinking of all ranks.” Though not deserving all this, he was an agreeable and fertile writer; the poet of religion and virtue; an able reformer of public morals. His “Moral Lessons” were translated into English, and published by Mrs. Douglas of Eduam house, 1805, 3 vols. 8vo, with an excellent life of the author, to which this article is chiefly indebted.

, brother of the preceding, having studied ethics with success, entered among the bare-footed Carmelites but, not finding this reform sufficiently austere to satisfy his excessive zeal, he took the habit of la Trappe 1695, and insinuated himself so much into the favour of the celebrated abbé de Raneé, as to be appointed abbot of la Trappe on the death of Dom. Zozime 1696. The abbé, however, soon repented of his choice; for the new abbot began immediately to raise oni r mosities, and foment divisions among the monks, endeavouring to set them against de Raneé, and to undo all that this reformer had done; but the abbé engaged hiip artfully to resign, and got his resignation approved by the king. Grvaise, finding himself deprived of his abbey, left la Trappe, and drew up a long “Apology.” He frequently changed his place of abode afterwards, always living, however, according to the rules of la Trappe; but, when the first volume of his “Hist, generate de Citeaux,” 4to, appeared, the Bernardines, who were violently attacked in, that work, obtained an order from the court against him, and he was arrested at Paris, conducted to the abbey of Notre-Dame de Reclus, where he was confined, and died there in 1755. Besides his “Apology,” and his “Hist, de la reforme de Citeaux,” which is very scarce, he left “La Vie de St. Cyprien,” with dissertations, 4to “La Vie d‘Abailard et d’Heloise,” 2 vols. 12mo; “Lettres d'Abailard à Heloise,” 2 vols. 12mo. This is a very paraphrastical translation. “Hist, de l'Abbé Suger,” 3 vols. 12mo “La Vie de St. Irenee,” 2 vols. 12mo “La Vie de Rufin,” 2 vols. 12mo; “La Vie de l'Apotre St. Paul,” 3 vols. 12mo; “La Vie de St. Paulin,” with dissertations, 4to; two Letters on the Anglicau Ordinations, against P. Courayer; “Hist, de l'Abbé Joachim,” 2 vols. 12mo “La Vie de St. Epiphane,” 4to, &c. He also left in ms. “Traite des devoirs des Evques” an abridgement of M. de Fleury’s Ecclesiastical History; and other pieces. This author’s disposition may be discovered in all his works; violent, fickle, and inconstant. In general, he follows and copies good books and memoirs, but spoils them by additions and reflections of his own, which are frequently ill placed, and by no means judicious. His criticism is often faulty, and his theology not always just.

It may not be unuseful to give in this place the titles at least, of the principal writings which his bold and disingenuous attack on Christianity called forth. These were, i. “Remarks on the two last Chapters of Mr. Gibbon’s History. In a letter to a friend.” (See Art. 8.) 2. “An Apology for Christianity, in a series of letters, addressed to Edward Gibbon, esq. By R. Watson, D. D. F. R. S. and regius professor of divinity in the university of Cambridge” (now bishop of Llandaff), 1776, 12mo. 3. “The History of the establishment of Christianity, compiled from Jewish and Heathen authors only; translated from the French of professor Bullet, &c. By William Salisbury, B. D. with notes by the translator, and some strictures on Mr. Gib ­bon’s Account of Christianity, and its first teachers,” 1776, 8vo. 4. “A Reply to the reasonings of Mr. Gibbon in his History, &c. which seem to affect the truth of Christianity, but have not been noticed in the answer which Dr. Watson hath given to that book. By Smyth Loftus, A. M. vicar of Coolock,” Dublin, 1778, 8vo. 5. “Letters on the prevalence of Christianity, before its civil establishment. With observations on a late History of the Decline of the Roman Empire. By East Apthorpe, M. A. vicar of Crovdon, 1778, 8vo. 6.” An Examination of the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Chapters of Mr. Gibbon’s History. In which his view of the progressof the Christian religion is shown to be founded on the misrepresentation of the authors he cites; and numerous instances of his inaccuracy and plagiarism are produced. By Henry Edward Davis, B. A. of Baliol college, Oxford,“1778, 8vo. 7.” A few Remarks on the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire; relative chiefly to the Two last Chapters. By a gentleman,“8vo. 8.” Remarks on the Two last Chapters of Mr. Gibbon’s History. By James Chelsum, D. D. student of Christ Church, Oxford, and chaplain to the lord bishop of Worcester: the second edition enlarged," 1778, 12mo. This is a second edition of the Anonymous Remarks mentioned in the first article, and contains additional remarks by Dr. Randolph, Lady Margaret’s professor of divinity in the university of Oxford.

This affair also involved Glanvil in a scurrilous dispute with Henry Stubbe, who was then, as Wood observes, a summer practitioner at Bath; and bearing no good-will to the proceedings of Glanvil, took Crosse’s part, and encouraged him to write against the virtuosi, and at the time entered the lists himself and the follpwing pamphlets passed between them. I. “The Plus Ultra reduced to a Nonplus,” &c. 1670, 4to, Stubbe. 2. “A prefatory Anwer to Mr. HenryStubbe, the doctor of Warwick, wherein the malignity, &c. of his Animadversions are discovered. 1 * 1671, 12mo, Glanvil. 3.” A Preface against Ecebolius Glanvil, F. R.S. subjoined to his Reply, &c. Oxford,“167 I, 4to, Stubbe. The doctor also fell upon his antagonist, in his” Epistolary Discourse concerning Phlebotomy,“167 t, 4to; upon which Glanvil immediately published” A farther Discovery of Mr. Stnbbe, in a brief reply to his last pamphlet,“1671, 8vo, to which was added,” Ad clerum Somersetensem Epistola Προσφωνησισ.“And the doctor among other things, having censured the new philosophy, as tending to encourage atheism our author published his” Philosophia Pia,“&c. 1671, 8vo, which closed the controversy. When, however, Dr. Meric Casaubon entered the lists in his” Letter to Peter du Moulin," 1663, and managed the argument with more candour and greater knowledge, Glanvil chose to be silent; because not willing to appear in a controversy with a person, as he says, of fame and learning, who had treated him with so much civility, and in a way so different from that of his other assailants. While he was thus pleading the cause of the institution in general, he shewed himself no unuseful member in respect to the particular business of it. The society having given out some queries to be made about mines, our author communicated a paper in relation to those of Mendip hills, and such as respect the Bath, which was well received, ordered to be registered, and afterwards printed in their transactions.

, one of the early and most celebrated composers of music to the metrical French translations of the psalms for the use of the protestants, was a native of Franche-Comte, who lost his life at Lyons, on the day of the massacre of Paris in 1572, for having set to music the psalms of Clement Marot. Goudimel has been much celebrated by the protestants in France for this music, which was never used in the church of Geneva, and by the catholics in Italy for instructing Palestrina in the art of composition, though it is doubtful whether this great harmonist and Goudimel had ever the least acquaintance or intercourse together. He set the “Chansons Spirituelles” of the celebrated Marc- Ant. De Muret, in four parts, which were printed at Paris, 1555. We may suppose Goudimel, at this time, to have been a catholic, as the learned Muret is never ranked among heretics by French biographers. Ten years after, when he set the psalms of Clement Marot r this version was still regarded with less horror by the catholics than in later times; for the music which Gpudimei had set to it was printed at Paris by Adrian Le Roy, and Robert Ballard, with a privilege, 1565. It was reprinted in Holland, in 1607, for the use of the protestants. His works are become so scarce, that his name and reputation are preserved by protestant historians, more in pity of his misfortunes, than by any knowledge of their excellence. The earliest mention of Goudimel, as a composer, is in a work entitled “Liber quartus Ecclesiasticarum Cantionum quatuor vocum vulgo Motetae vocant,” printed at Antwerp, by Susato, 1554-, eighteen years before his death. These motets resemble in gravity of style, simplicity in the subjects of fugue, and purity of harmony, the ecclesiastical compositions of our venerable countryman Bird. Some of his letters are printed among the poems of his intimate friend Melissus, published under the title of “Melissi Schediasmatum Reliquiae,” 1575, 8vo.

It is not difficult to conceive that his parents and friends would be desirous to encourage a turn of mind which indicated so powerful a sense of the value of time and instruction; and accordingly we find him in about three years completing a translation of “The Customs of the Israelites, translated from the French of the abbot Fleury, by R. G.” 1750, 8vo. This was also printed for distribution among friends. He had about this time fully prepared for the press, even to the title-page and preface, a work of great labour and research, under the title of “Atlas Renovatus, or Geography Modernized; being a particular description f the world as far as known to the ancients, and the present names of such places as now subsist; containing all the cities, towns, villages, castles, &c. mentioned in ancient authors, with all the remarkable occurrences that happened at the several places; the birth-places of famous men, the memorable sieges and battles, &c. the bounds, soil, air, manners, government, religion of each country. The whole being the most complete system ever composed before. To which is annexed a list of the Roman ways, and a copious index to facilitate the whole. Drawn upon the plans of Hornius’s and Cellarius’s maps.” This is a folio volume, dated 1751, fairly written, and now preserved in Mr. Nichols’s library, as a memorial of his consummate industry. Such a compilation, indeed, at the age of sixteen, is probably without a parallel; for much of the design, arrangement, &c. is perfectly original, and such intenseness of application could not have been recommended by any master. After the death of his father (July 13, 1751) Mr. Gough was admitted, in July 1752, fellow-commoner of Bene'tcollege, Cambridge. The college tutor at this time was Dr. John Barnardiston, afterwards master; but Mr. Gough’s private tutor was the rev. John Cott, fellow of the college, and afterwards rector of Braxted, in Essex, “to whom,” says Mr. Gough, “I regularly repeated my lesson, without a grain of instruction on his part.” To the university Mr. Gough brought a considerable fund of classical literature, and having already imbibed a curiosity after matters of antiquity, found his enthusiasm heightened by a connexion with a college eminent for producing a succession of British antiquaries; and it is certain that he here laid the plan of his “British Topography*.” He applied, in the mean time, to academical studies, with an ardour which even at this age was become habitual, and the knowledge he acquired in philosophy and the sciences was often displayed in his future labours; some of which prove that he had paid no little attention to subjects of theology and sacred criticism; and indeed it was inferred by the friends who kpew his acquisitions most intimately, that he might have passed into any of the learned professions by a very easy transition. Before he left the university he had prepared for the press, although they all remain still in ms. the following works: 1. “Notes on Memnon, annexed to the abbe Gedoyn’s French translation.” 2. “Astro-mythology; or, a short account of the Constellations, with the names of the principal stars in each, and their connexion with mythology.” 3. The History of Bythynia, translated from the French of the abbe“Sevin.” 4. “Memoirs of celebrated Professors of the belles lettres in the academy of inscriptions, &c. at Paris, translated and abridged from the Elogia, &c.” 5. “Reflections on the Egyptian Government; and also on the Jewish, Persian, Cretan, Carthaginian, Spartan, Athenian, and Roman Governments.” 6. “Memoirs of the Life and Character of Mithridates, king of Pontus, extracted from various and genuine authors.” All these, with many voluminous commonplace books, were executed before our author had reached

, an English printer and historian, was descended of a good family, and appears to have been brought up a merchant, and his works, as an author, evince him to have had a tolerable education. He tells us himself that he wrote the greatest part of Hall’s chronicle (who died in 1547), and next year printed that work, entitled “The union of the two noble and illustre famelies of Lancastre and Yorke,” &c. continued to the end of the reign of Henry VIII. from Hall’s Mss. according to Ant. Wood. It had been printed by Berthelet in 1542, but brought down only to 1532. In 1562 Grafton’s “Abridgment of the Chronicles of England,” was printed by R. Tottyl, and reprinted the two succeeding years, and in 1572. And as Stowe had published his “Summarie of the Englyshe Chronicles” in 1565, Grafton sent out, as a rival, an abridgement of his abridgement, which he entitled “A Manuell of the Chronicles of England;” and Stowe, not to be behind with him, published in the same year his “Summarie of Chronicles abridged.” This rivalship was accompanied by harsh reflections on each other in their respective prefaces. In 1569 Grafton published his “Chronicle at large, and meere History of the affaires of England,” &c. some part of which seems to have been unjustly censured by Buchanan. In the time of Henry VIII. soon after the death of lord Cromwell, Grafton was imprisoned six weeks in the Fleet, for printing Matthews’s Bible, and what was called “The Great Bible” without notes, and, before his release, was bound in a penalty of lOOl. that he should neither sell nor print, or cause to be printed, anymore bibles, until the king and the clergy should agree upon a translation. As Whitchurch was concerned with him in printing those Bibles, he very probably shared the same fate. Grafton was also called before the council, on a charge of printing a ballad in favour of lord Cromwell; and his quondam friend bishop Bonner being present, aggravated the cause, by reciting a little chat between them, in which Grafton had intimated his “being sorry to hear of Cromwell’s apprehension;” but the lord chancellor Audley, disgusted probably at this meanness of spirit in Bonner, turned the discourse, and the matter seems to have ended. In a few years after, Grafton was appointed printer to prince Edward, and he with his associate Whitchurch had special patents for printing the church-service books, and also the Primers both in Latin and English.

In 1758 he published a translation of the “Elegies of Tibullus,” begun during the hours he snatched from business or pleasure when in the army, and finished in London, where he had more leisure, and the aid and encouragement of his literary friends. This work involved him in the unpleasant contest with Smollett, to which we have just referred. Its merits were canvassed in the “Critical Review” with much severity. The notes are styled “a huge farrago of learned lumber, jumbled together to very little purpose, seemingly calculated to display the translator’s reading, rather than to illustrate the sense and beauty of the original.” The Life of Tibullus, which the translator prefixed, is said to contain “very little either to inform, interest, or amuse the reader.” With respect to the translation, “the author has not found it an easy task to preserve the elegance and harmony of the original.” Instances of harshness and inelegance are quoted, as well as of the use of words which are not English, or not used by good writers, as noiseless, redoubtable, feud, &c. The author is likewise accused of deviating not only from the meaning, but from the figures of the original. Of these objections some are groundless, and some are just, yet even the latter are by no means characteristic of the whole work, but exceptions which a critic of more candour would have had a right to state, after he had bestowed the praise due to its general merit. In this review, however, although unqualified censure was all the critic had in view, no personal attack is made on the author, nor are there any allusions to his situation in life. This appeared in the “Critical Review” for December 1758. In the subsequent number for January 1759, the reviewer takes an opportunity, as if answering a correspondent, to retract his objection against the word noiseless, because it is found in Shakspeare, but observes very fairly, that the authority of Shakspeare or Milton will not justify an author of the present times for introducing harsh or antiquated words. He acknowledges himself likewise to blame in having omitted to consult the errata subjoined (prefixed) to Dr. Grainger’s performance, where some things are corrected which the reviewer mentioned as inaccuracies in the body of the work. But this acknowledgment, so apparently candid, is immediately followed by a wretched attempt at wit, in these words: “Whereas one of the Owls belonging to the proprietor of the M(on)thly R(evie)w, which answers to the name of Grainger, hath suddenly broke from his mew, where he used to hoot in darkness and peace, and now screeches openly in the face of day, we shall take the first opportunity to chastise this troublesome owl, and drive him back to his original obscurity.” The allusion here is to Dr. Grainger’s “Letter to Tobias Smollett, M. D. occasioned by his criticism on a late Translation of Tibullus,” a performance some parts of which every friend to the author must wish had not been published. In this letter, however, Grainger, after quoting a passage from the plan or prospectus of the “Critical Review,” in which the authors promise to revive the true spirit of criticism, to act without prejudice, &c. &c. endeavours to prove, that they have forfeited their word, by notoriously departing from the spirit of just and candid criticism, and by introducing gross partialities and malevolent censures. And these assertions, which are certainly not without foundation, are intermixed with reflections on Dr. Smollett’s loose novels, and insinuations that his partialities arise from causes not very honourable to the character of an independent reviewer.

, curate and canon of Loudun in France, famous for his intrigues and tragical end, was the son of a notary royal of Sable, and born at Bouvere near Sable, in the latter part of the fifteenth century, but we know not in what year. He was a man of reading and judgment, and a famous preacher; for which the rnonka of Loudun soon hated him, especially after he had urged the necessity of confessing sins to the parochial priests at Easter. He was a handsome man, of an agreeable conversation, neat in his dress, and cleanly in his person, which made him suspected of loving the fair sex, and of being beloved by them. In 1629, he was accused of having had a criminal conversation with some women in the very church of which he was curate on which the official condemned him to resign all his benefices, and to live in penance. He brought an appeal, this sentence being an encroachment upon the civil power; and, by a decree of the parliament of Paris, he was referred to the presidial of Poitiers, in which he was acquitted. Three years after> some Ursuline nuns of Loudun were thought, by the vulgar, to he possessed with the devil; and Grandier’s enemies, the capuchins of Loudun, charged him with being the author of the possession, that is, with witchcraft. They thought, however, that in order to make the charge succeed according to their wishes, it was very proper to strengthen themselves with the authority of cardinal Richlieu. For this purpose, they wrote to father Joseph, their fellowcapuchin, who had great credit with the cardinal, that Grandier was the author of the piece entitled “La Cordonnierre de Loudun,” or “The Woman Shoemaker of Loudon,' r a severe satire upon the cardinal’s person and family. This great minister, among many good qualities, harboured the most bitter resentment against the authors of libels against him; and father Joseph having persuaded him that Grandier was the author of” La Cordonniere de Loudun," he wrote immediately to De Laubardemont, counsellor of state, and his creature, to make a diligent inquiry into the affair of the nuns. De Laubardemont accordingly arrested Grandier in Dec. 1633; and, after he had thoroughly examined the affair, went to meet the cardinal, and to take proper measures with him. In July 1634, letters patent were drawn up and sealed, to try Grandier; and were directed to De Laubardemont, and to twelve judges chosen out of the courts in the neighbourhood of Loudun; all men of honour indeed, but very credulous, and on that account chosen by Grandier’s enemies. In Aug. 18, upon the evidence of Astaroth, the chief of possessing devils; of Easas, of Celsus, of Acaos, of Eudon, &c. that is to say, upon the evidence of the nuns, who asserted that they were possessed with those devils, the commissaries passed judgment, by which Grandier was declared well and duly attainted, and convicted of the crime of magic, witchcraft, and possession, which by his means happened on the bodies of some Ursuline nuns of Loudun, and of some other lay persons, mentioned in his trial; for which crimes he was sentenced to make the amende honor' able, and to be burnt alive with the magical covenants and characters which were in the register-office, as also with the ms. written by him against the celibacy of priests; and his ashes to be thrown up into the air. Grandier heard this dreadful sentence without any emotion; and, when he went to the place of execution, suffered his punishment with great firmness and courage, April 18, 1634.

Mr. Graves’s publications were very numerous. His first was The Festoon; or, a collection of Epigrams, with an Essay on that species of composition.“In 1772 he produced” The Spiritual Quixote,“in 3 vpls. intended as a satire on the itinerant and illiterate preachers among the methodists, and which might have been pronounced one of the most amusing and interesting novels of his time, had he not, in pursuit of his main object, incautiously introduced the language of scripture, which, whether used by methodists, or others, can never be a legitimate subject of ridicule. He next published” A Translation from the Italian of Galates; or, a treatise on Politeness, by De la Casa, archbishop of Benevento.“He soon after published” Columelia, or the distressed Anchoret,“in 2 vols. to show the consequence of a person of education and talents retiring to solitude and indolence in the vigour of youth: in this it is thought he alluded to his friend Shenstone. He also published two volumes of poems under the title o” Euphrosyne,“which have gone through several editions, but he is rather entitled to the merit of an agreeable versifier, than that of a genuine poet. Then appeared his” Eugenius; or, Anecdotes of the Golden Vale,“in 2 vols. In 1778 appeared” Recollections of some particulars in the life of William Shenstone, esq. in a series of letters to W. Seward, esq. F. R. S.“This was published to vindicate the character of his friend from the criticisms and censure of Dr. Johnson, Mr. Gray, and Mr. Mason. The following is a list of his subsequent publications, although probably not in chronological order.” Plexippus; or, the aspiring Plebeian,“in 2 vols.” Hiero on the condition of Royalty,“from the Greek of Xenophon” Fleurettes,“a translation of Fenelon’s Ode on Solitude, and other French authors” The Life of Commodus,“from the Greek of Herodian” The Rout,“from a young man in town to his friend in the country” The Meditations of Antoninus, translated from the Greek;“” The Reveries of Solitude,“consisting of pieces of prose and verse” The Coalition or, Opera rehearsed,“a comedy in three acts” The Farmer’s Son,“a moral tale, in the ballad metre” Sermons on various subjects,“in 1 vol.” Senilities,“consisting of pieces in prose and verse. His last publication was” The Invalid, with the obvious means of enjoying Life, by a Nonagenarian.“The above, we believe, is a tolerably correct list of the publications of Mr. Graves; whose works, although the” Spiritual Quixote" only will be much called for hereafter, will always be read with pleasure, there being a sprightliness and epigram* matic turn in his writings which was peculiar to himself, and which he retained to the last. In Mr. Graves ended the bright associates of their time, composed of Shenstone, Whistler, and Jago.

, an empiric, whose wori r derful cures have been attested by some of the most eminent men of the seventeenth century, was the son of William Greatrakes, esq. and born at Affane, co. Waterforcl, in Ireland, Feb. 14, 1628. He was educated a protestant in the free-school of Lismore, until the age of thirteen, when his friends intended to have removed him to Trinity college, Dublin, but the rebellion breaking out, his mother took refuge with him in England, where he was kindly received by his great uncle Edmund Harris, brother to sir Edward Harris, knt. his grandfather by the mother’s side. After his uncle’s death he spent some years in the study of the classics and divinity under a clergyman in Devonshire, and then returned to Ireland, which was at that time in so deplorable a state that he retired to the castle of Caperquin, where he spent a year in contemplation, and seems to have contracted a species of enthusiasm which never altogether left him. In 1649 he entered into the service of the parliament, and continued in the army until 1656, when, a great part of the English being disbanded, he retired to his native country of Aflfane, and by the interest of the governor there, was made clerk cf the peace for the county of Cork, register for transplantation, and justice of the peace. At the Restoration all these places were taken from him, and his mind being disturbed partly with this disappointment, and partly for want of any regular and useful occupation, he felt an impulse, as he calls it, that the gift of curing the king’s evil was bestowed upon him and accordingly he began his operations, which were confined to praying, and stroking the part affected and such wonderful cures were effected, that he determined not to stop here. Three years after, he had another impulse that he could cure all kinds of diseases, and by the same simple remedy, which must be administered by himself. When however he pretended to some supernatural aid, and mentioned the Holy Ghost with irreverent presumption, as his assistant, he was cited to the bishop’s court, and forbid to take such liberties. This probably was the cause of his coming to England in January 1665, where he performed many cures, was invited by the king to Whitehall, and his reputation spread most extensively. Even Dr. Henry Stubbe, an eminent physician, published a pamphlet in praise of his skill. Having failed in one instance, that of a Mr. Cresset in Charterhouse square, there appeared a pamphlet entitled “Wonders no miracles: or Mr. Valentine Greatrakes Gift of Healing examined,” &c. Lond. 1666, 4to. This was written by Mr. David Lloyd, reader to the Charter-house, who treated Greatrakes as a cheat. In answer to this, he published “A brief account of Mr. Valentine Greatrakes, and divers of his strange cures,” &c. ibid. 1666, 4to. This was drawn up in the form of a letter to the right hon. Robert Boyle, who was a patron of our physician, as was also Dr. Henry More, and several other members of the royal society, before whom Greatrakes was examined. To his cures we find the attestations of Mr. Boyle, sir William Smith, Dr. Denton, Dr. Fairclough, Dr. Faber, sir Nathaniel Hobart, sir John Godolphin, Dr. Wilkins, Dr. VVhichcot (a patient), Dr. Cudworth, and many other persons of character and reputation. The truth seems to be, that he performed cures in certain cases of rheumatism, stiff joints, &c. by friction of the hand, and long perseverance in that remedy; in all which there would have been nothing extraordinary, as the same is practised till this day, had be not excited the astonishment and enthusiasm of his patients by pretensions to an extraordinary gift bestowed upon him, as he insinuates in one place, to cure the people of atheism. When he left England or died is not known. Mr. Harris says he was living in Dublin in 168 1.

, an English poet and miscellaneous iter of the Elizabethan age, and memorable for his tants and imprudence, was a native of Norwich, and born ubout 1560. His father appears to have been a citizen of Norwich, the fabricator of his own fortune, which it is thought he had accumulated by all the tricks of selfishness and narrow prudence. He educated his son, however, as a scholar, at St. John’s college, Cambridge. Here he took the degree of A. B. in 1578, and for some time travelled into Italy and Spain. Ou his return, he took his master’s degree at Clare-hall, in 1583, and was incorporated in the same at Oxford in 1588, no inconsiderable proof that hiproficiency in his studies had been very conspicuous, and that there was nothing at this time grossly objectionable in his moral demeanour. It is supposed that he took orders after his return from his travels, and that he was the same Robert Greene who was presented to the village of Tollesbury, in Essex, June 19, 1584. If this be the case, it is probable that he did not long reside, or was perhaps driven from Tollesbury, by his irregular life, the greater part of which was spent in London. Here, from some passages cited by Mr. Beloe, it would appear that he gave himself up to writing plays and love pamphlets, and from the date of his “Myrrour of Modestie,” 1584, it is probable that from this time he became an author by profession; but as four years after he was incorporated M. A. at Oxford, we are still willing to believe that his career of folly had not commenced so soon, or been so generally known as it was some time after. It was his fate to fall among dissolute companions, who, though men of genius like himself, probably encouraged each other in every sensual enjoyment. Among these were Christopher Mario w, George Peele, and Thomas Nash; for Dr. Thomas Lodge, another of their associates, is not loaded with the same stigma. “The history of genius,” says one of our authorities, with equal justice and feeling, “is too often a detail of immoral irregularities, followed by indigence and misery. Such, in after times, was the melancholy tale of Otway and Lee, of Savage, Boyse, Smart, Burns, Dermody, and many others. Perhaps the writers of the drama have, of all others, been the most unfortunate in this respect; perhaps there is something which more immediately seizes all the avenues of the fancy in the gorgeous exhibitions of the stage; which leads men away from the real circumstances of their fortune, to the delusions of hope, and to pursue the fairy lights so hostile to sober truth.” In what species of dissipation, and to what degree Greene indulged, it were useless now to inquire his faults were probably exaggerated by the rival wits of his day and his occupation as a playwriter being in itself at that time looked upon as criminal, was barely tolerated. Among his errors, about which we are afraid there is now no doubt, may be mentioned his marrying an amiable lady, whom he deserted and ill-used. His career, however, was short. He died Sept. 5, 1592, at an obscure lodging near Dowgate, not without signs of contrition, nor indeed without leaving behind him written testimonies that he was more frequently conscious of an. ill-spent life than able or willing to amend it. In some of his works also, he made strenuous exertions to warn the unthinking, and expose the tricks, frauds, and devices of his miscreant companions. His works, says one of his biographers, contain the seeds of virtue, while his acts display the tares of folly. From such of his writings as have fallen 'in our way, he appears to possess a rich and glowing fancy, great command of language, and a perfect knowledge of the manners of the times. As a poet he has considerable merit, and few of his contemporaries yield a more pleasant employment to the collectors of specimens. His writings attained great popularity in his day, but until very lately, have been seldom consulted unless by poetical antiquaries. The following list of his works, by Mr. Haslewood, is probably complete: 1. “The Myrrour of Modestie,” 1584. 2. “Monardo the Tritameron of Love,” 1534, 1587. 3. “Planetomachia,” 1585. 4. Translation of a funeral Sermon of P. Gregory XIII. 1585. 5. “Euphues’s censure to Pbilautus,” 1587, 1634. 6. “Arcadia or Menaphon, Camillae’s alarm to slumbering Euphues,” 1587,1589, 1599, 1605, 1610, 1616, 1634. 7. “Pandosto the Triumph of Time,” 1588, 1629. 8. “Perimedes the blackesmith,” 1588. 9. “The pleasant and delightful history of Dorastiis and Favvnia,” 1588, 1607, 1675, 1703, 1723, 1735. 10. “Alcida, Greene’s Metamorphosis,” 1617. 11. “The Spanish Masquerade,” 1589. 12. “Orpharion,” 1599. 13. “The Royal Exchange, contayning sundry aphorisms of Philosophic,” 1590. 14. “Greene’s mourning garment, given him by Repentance at the funerals of Love,” 1590, 1616. 15. “Never too late,” 1590, 1600, 1607, 1616, 1631. 16. “A notable discovery of Coosenage,” 1591, 1592. 17. “The ground work of Conny Catching,” 159U 18. “The second and last part of Conny Catching,” 1591, 1592. 19. “The third and last part of Conny Catching,” 1592. 20. “Disputation, between a hee conny-catcher and a shee conny-catcher,” 1592. 21. “Greene’s Groatsworth of wit bought with a million of repentance,” 1592, L-600,1616, 1617, 1621, 1629, 1637. Of this a beautiful edition was lately printed by sir Egerton Brydges, M. P. at the private press at Lee Priory, (only 61 copies for presents), with a biographical preface, to which this article is essentially indebted: his and Mr. Haslewood’s account of Greene, are compositions dictated by true taste and discrimination, and by just moral feeling. 22. “Philomela, the lady FitzwalterV nightingale,” 1592, 1615, 163h 23. “A quip for an upstart courtier,” r$92, 162O, 1625, 1635, and reprinted in 1 the Harleian Miscellany. 24. “Ciceronis amor, Tullie’s love,” 1592, 1611, 1615, 1616, 1628, 1639. 25. “News both from heaven and hell,” 159-3. 26. “The Black Book’s Messenger, or life and death of Ned Browne,” 1592. 27. “The repentance of Robert Greene,” 1592. 28. “Greene’s vision at the instant of his death,” no date. 29. “Mamillia, or the triumph of Pallas,” 1593. 30. “Mamillia, or the second part of the triumph of Pallas,” 1593. 31. “Card of Fancy,” 1593, 1608. 32. “Greene’s funerals,” 1594; but doubtful whether his. 33. “The honourable history of Fryer Bacon and Fryer Bongay, a comedy,” 1594, 1599, 1630, 1655. 34. “The history of Orlando Furioso, a play,” 1S94, 1599. 35. “The comical historic of Alphonsus king of Arragon, a play,” 1597, 1599. 36. “A looking-glass for London and England,” a comedy, jointly with Lodge, 1594, 1598. 37. “The Scottish Historic of James the Fourthe, si ai ue at Flodden, intermixed with a pleasant comedie,” 1598, 1599. 38. “Penelope’s Webb,” 1601. 39. “Historic of Faire Bellora,” no date, afterwards published, as “A paire of Turtle doves, or the tragical history of Bellora and Fidelio,” 1606. 40. “The debate between Follie and Love, translated out'of French,” 1608. 41. “Thieves falling out, true men come by their goods,” 1615, 1637, and reprinted in the Harleian Miscellany. 42. “Greene’s Farewell to Folie,” 1617. 43. “Arbasto, the history of Arbasto king of Denmarke,” 1617, 1626. 44. “FairEmme, a comedy,” 1631. 45. “The history of lobe,” a play, destroyed, but mentioned in Warburton’s list. A few other things have been ascribed toGreene on doubtful authority.

In the year 599, he wrote a letter to Serenus bishop of Marseilles, commending his zeal in breaking some images which the people had been observed to worship, and throwing them out of the church; and the same year a circular letter to the principal bishops of Gaul, condemning simoniacal ordinations, and the promotions of laymen to bishoprics he likewise forbad clerks in holy orders to live with women, except such as are allowed by the canons and recommended the frequent holding assemblies to regulate the affairs of the church. The same year he re-r fused, on account of some foreseen opposition, to take cognizance of a crime alleged against the primate of Byzacena, a province in Africa. About the same time he wrote an important letter to the bishop of Syracuse, concerning ceremonies, in which he says, “That the church of Rome followed that of Constantinople, in the use of ceremonies; and declares that see to be undoubtedly subject to Rome, as was constantly testified by the emperor and the bishop of that city.” He had already this year reformed the office of the church, which is one of the most remarkable actions of his pontificate. In this reform, as it is called, he introduced several new customs and superstitions; amongst the rest, purgatory. He ordered pagan temples to be consecrated by sprinkling holy water, and an annual feast to be kept, since called wakes in England, on that day; with the view of gaining the pagans in England to the church-service. Besides other less important ceremonies, added to the public forms of prayer, he made it his chief care to reform the psalmody, of which he was excessively fond. Of this kind he composed the “Ainiphone ,” andnch tiines as hest suited the psalms, the hymns, the prayers, the verses, the canticles, the lessons, the epistles and gospels, the prefaces, and the Lor-i’s prayer. He likewise instituted an academy of chanters for all the clerks, as far as the deacons exclusively: he gave them lessons himself, and the bed, in which he continued to chant amidst his last illness, was preserved with great Generation in the palace of St. John Lateran for a long time, together with the whip with which he used to threaten the young clerks and singing hoys, when they sang out of tune. He was so rigid in regard to the chastity of ecclesiastics, that he was unwilling to admit a man into the priesthood who was not strictly free from defilement by any commerce with women. The candidates for orders were according to his commands questioned particularly on that subject. Widowers were excepted, if they had observed a state of continency for some considerable tiifie.

, an eminent professor of law, was born in 1632, at Leipsic. His father, who was minister in that city, dying in 1685, the celebrated Mencke married the widow, and took great care of her son’s education. Gribner assisted in the “Leipsic Journal,” was professor of law at Wittenburgh, then at Dresden, and finally at Leipsic, where he was chosen to succeed M. Mencke. He died in 1734. Besides several academical dissertations, he left < Principia processes Judiciarii“” Principia Juris* prudentite naturalis;^ a small work much esteemed; *' Opuscula Juris public! et privatl," He was also a benefactor to the university of Letpsic, by leaving a considerable legacy co the library, a sum of money as a provision for the widows of the professors, and an annual sum as an exhibition >Y,r a. law student.

He was revising Tacitus in order to a new edition, when he lost his youngest daughter, September 12, 1716, and he survived her not many weeks. The loss proved insupportable; he fell sick a few days after it, and died of grief, October 21, aged seventy-one. He left two sons, both bred to letters; the eldest being a doctor of physic, and the youngest, Abraham, professor of history at Utrecht. His valuable library, long retained in the possession of the family, and for which 30,000 florins had been offered by the late empress of Russia, was sold by auction at Leyden about 1785, and produced only 5000 florins. It is remarked of James Gronovius, that he fell short of his father, in respect of modesty and moderation, as far as he exceeded him in literature: in his disputes, he treated his antagonists with such a bitterness of style as procured him the name of the second Scioppius, the justness of which censure appears throughout his numerous works, although they must be allowed to form a stupendous monument of literary industry and critical acumen. The following list is probably correct: 1. “Macrobius, cum notis variorum,” Leyd. 1670, 8vo, London, 1694, 8vo. 2. “Polybius cum suis ae ineditis Casauboni, &c. notis,” Gr. & Lat.“Amst. 1670, 2 vols. 8vo. 3.” Tacitus/* ibid. 1672, 2 vols, 8vo, and Utrecht, 1721, 4to, enlarged by his son Abraham. Hanvood says it is an infinitely better and more useful edition than that of Brotier. 4. “Supplementa lacunarum in ^nea Tactico, Dione Cassio, et Arriano,” Leyden, 1675, 8vo. 5. “Dissertationes Epistolicae,” Amst. 1678, 8vo, consisting of critical remarks on various authors. Those he made on Livy involved him in a dispute with Fabretti, who having attacked our critic in his work “De Aquis et Aqureductibus veteris Romoe,” Gronovius answered him in, 6. “Responsio ad cavillationes R. Fabretti,” Leyden, 1685, 8vo. Fabretti, who is treated here with very little ceremony, took his revenge in a work, the title of which is no bad specimen of literary railing, “Jasithei ad Gronovium Apologema, in ej usque Titivilitia seu de Tito Livio somnia animadversiones,” Naples, 1686, 4to. 7. “Fragmentum Stephani Byzantini Grammatici de Dodone, &c.” Leyden, 1681, 4to. 8. “Henrici Valesii Notae, &c. in Harpocrationem,” Leyden, 16&2, 4to, reprinted in Blancard’s edition of Harpocration, in 1683. 9. “Senecae Tragediae,” Amst. 1682, 12mo. This is the edition which his father was preparing when he died. 10. “Exercitationes aca­<Jemicae de pernicie et casu Judoe,” Leyden, 1683, 4to, an endeavour to reconcile the accounts of St. Matthew and St. Luke of the death of Judas. This involved him in a quarrel with Joachim Feller, against whom Gronovius defended himself in a second edition of this tract published at Leyden in 1702, and opened there a controversy with Perizonius. This produced from Gronovius, 11. “Notitia et illustratio dissertationis nuperse de morte Juda?,” Leyden, 1703, 4to; to which Perizonius replied, but the combatants became so warm that the curators of the university of Leyden thought proper to silence them both. 12. “Castigationes ad paraphrasim Graeeam Enchiridii Epicteti ex codice Mediceo,” Delft, 1683, 8vo. This includes the notes published in Berkelius’s edition of 1670. 13. “Dissertatio de origine Romuli,” Leyden, 1684, 8vo, in which he treats the commonly received notion of the origin of Romulus and Remus, and their being nursed by a wolf, as fabulous. 14. “Gemmae et sculpturae antiquse, &c.” a Latin translation of Leonard Augustini’s Italian description of these antiquities, with a learned preface by our author. 15. “Pomponii Melae libri tres de situ orbis,” Leyden, 1685, 8vo, without his name, and containing an on Vossius’s observations on that author. Vossius having defended himself in an appendix to his “Observationes ad Melam,” printed at London in 1685, 4to, Gronovius replied in, 16. “Epistola de argutiolis Isaaci Vossii,” 1687, 8vo, with his usual severity, which he increased in his notice of Vossius in a new edition of P. Mela, in 1696. This edition, besides the extracts of the cosmography of Julius and Honorius, and that ascribed to Æthicus, which were inserted in the former edition, contains the anonymous geographer of Ravenna. 17. “Epistola ad Johannem Georgium Graevium V. Cl. de Pallacopa, ubi Descriptio ejus ab Arriano facta liberatur ab Isaaci Vossii frustrationibus,” Leyden, 1686, 8vo. 18. “Notae ad Lucianum,” printed in Graevius’s edition of Lucian in 2 vols. Amst. 1686, 8vo. 19. “Variae Lectiones &, Notae in Stephanum Byzantinum de Urbibus:” inserted in the edition of that author published by Abraham Berkelius at Leyden in 1683, folio. 20. “Cebetis Thebani Tabula Graece & Latine,” Amst. 1689, 8vo. 21. “Auli Gellii Noctes Atticae, cum Notis & Emendationibus Johannis Frederici Gronovii,” Leyden, 1687, 8vo, 1706, 4to. 22. “M. T. Ciceronis Opera quae extant omnia,” Leyden, 1692, 4 vols. 4to, and 11 in 12mo. 23. “Ammiani Marcellini Rerum gestarum, qui de XXXI supersunt, Libri XVIII.” Leyden, 1693, in folio and 4to. 24. “Johannis Frederici Gronovii de Sestertiis seu subsecivarum Pecuniae veteris Graecae & Romance Libri IV. &c.” Leyden, 1691, 4to, with several additions. 25. “De Icuncula Smetiana qua Harpocratem indigitarunt,” Leyden, 1693, 4to. 26. “Memoria Cossoniana; id est, Danielis Cossonii Vita breviter clescripta, cui annexa nova Editio veteris Monument! Ancyrani,” Leyden, 1695, 4to. 27. “Abraham! Gorlaei Dactylotheca cum Explicationibus,” Leyden, 1695, 4to. 28. “Harpocrationis tie Vocibus Liber; accedit Diatribe Henrici Stephani ad locos Isocrateos,” Leyden, 1696, 4to. 29. “O ratio de primis Incrementis Urbis Lugduni,” Leyden, 1696, 4to. 30. “Thesaurus GriEcarum Antiquitatum,” Leyden, 1697, &c. 13 vols. folio. Gronovius cannot be sufficiently commended for having undertaken this work after the example of Graevius, who published a body of the Roman antiquities. Laurent Beger, having found some things to object to in the three first volumes of this work, published at Berlin in 1702, in folio, “Colloquii quorundam de tribus primis Thesauri Antiquitatum GriEcarum voluminibus, ad eorum Auctorem Relatio.” 31. “Geographia antiqua; hoc est, Scylacis Periplus Maris Mediterranei, &c. &c.” Leyden, 1697, 4to. 32. “Appendix ad Geographiam antiquani,” Leyden, 1609, 4to. 33. “Manethonis Apotelesmaticorum Libri sex, nunc primum ex Bibliotheca Medicea eruti,” Leyden, 1698, 4to. 34. “De duobus LapU dibus in agro Dnyvenvoordiensi repertis,” Leyden, 1696, 4to. 35. “Rycquius de Capitolio Romano, cum Notis Gronovii,” Leyden, 1696, 8vo. 36. “.Q. Cnrtius cum Gronovii & Variorum Notis,” Amsterdam, 1696, 8vo. 37. “Suetonius a Salmasio recensitus cum Emendationibus J. Gronovii,” Leyden, 1698, 12mo. 33. “Phredri Fabulae cum Joan. Fred. Gronovii & Jac. Gronovii Notis & Nicolai Dispontini collectaneis,” Leyden, 1703, 8vo, 39. “Arriani Nicomediensis Expeditionis Alexandri Libri septem, & Historia Indica,”“Leyden, 1704, folio. This edition is a very beautiful one; and Gronovius displays in it the same extent of learning, which he does in all his other writings, and the same rude censure of all men of learning, who are not of his opinion. 40.” Minutii Felicis Octavius: accedunt Csecilius Cyprianus de Idolorum Vanitate, & Julius Firmicus Materuus de Errore profanarum Religionum,“Leyden, 1709, 8vo. 41.” Infamia Emendationum in Menandri Reliquias nuper editarum. Trajecti ad Rhenum, auctore Phiieleuthero Lipsiensi. Accedit Responsio M. Lucilii Profuturi ad Epistolam Caii Veracii Philelienis, qua; extat parte IX Bibliothecae selectte Jo. Clerici,“Leyden, 1710, 12mo. In this he attacks Dr. Bentley, who had assumed the name of Phileleutherus Lipsiensis; and Le Clerc, who had published an edition of the fragments of Menander and Philander, and to whom he ascribes the letter inserted in the” Bibliotheque choisie,“which he animadverts upon. 42.” Decreta Romana & Asiatica pro Judseis ad cultum divinum per Asios Minoris urbes secure obeundum, a Josepho coliecta in Libro XIV. Archseologiae, sed male interversa & expuncta, in ^ublicam lucem restituta. Accedunt Suidae aliquot loca a vitiis purgata,“Leyden, 1711, 8vo. The notes on Suidas are levelled against Ludolfus Knster, who had published an edition of Suidas at Cambridge in 1705 in 3 vols. folio, and who wrote in vindication of himgelf,” Diatriba L. K. in qua Editio Suidse Cantabrigiensis contra Cavillationes Jacobi Gronovii Aristarchi Leydensis defenditur,“inserted in the 24th tome of the Bibiiotheque choisie, p. 49, and printed separately in 12mo. There was likewise a new edition with additions published at Amsterdam in 1712, 8vo, under the title of” Diatriba Anti-Gronoviana.“43.” Ludibria malevola Clerici, vel Prose riptio pravse Mercis ac Mentis pravissimae, quam exponit in Minutio Felice Joannes Clericus torn. 24. Bibliothecse selectae,“Leyden, 1712, 8 vo. 44.” Recensio brevis Mutilationum, quas patitur Suidas in Editione nupera Cantabrigise anni 1705, ubi varia ejus Auctoris loca perperam intellecta illustrantur, emendantur, & supplentur,“Leyden, 1713, 8vo. 45.” Severi Sancti, id est, Endeleichii Rhetoris de Mortibus Bourn Carmen ab Elia Vineto & Petro Pithseo servatum, cum Notis Job. Weitzii & Wolfgangi Seberi,“Leyden, 1715, 8vo, with a preface, though without his name. 46.” Herodoti Halicarnassei Historiarum Libri IX. Greece & Latine, cum Interpretatione Laurentii Vallx ex Codice Mediceo^“Leyden, 1715, folio. This edition had not the general approbation of learned men, who discovered very gross errors in it. The reader may see upon this subject a piece of Kuster, entitled” Examen Criticum Editionis novissimae Herodoti Gronovianae," inserted in the 5th tome of M. le Clerc’s Bibliotheque ancienne & moderne, p. 383, and another of Stephen Bergler in the Acta Eruditorum of Leipsic for 1716, p. 201, 337, and 417. Gronovius in this edition has attacked in the most furious manner several of the greatest men in the republic of letters, particularly Laurentius Valla, ^milius Portus, Henry Stephens, Holstenius, Dr. Thomas Gale, Ezechiel Spanheim, Salmasius, Isaac Vossius, Tanaquii Faber, John le Clerc, Kuster, Bochart, Grsevius, &c. He had a very extensive correspondence with the men of learning in Europe, and the utmost that can be said for his intemperate treatment of so many learned contemporaries, is, as we have been told, that his thoughts of many of them were kinder than his words.

, a learned French theologian, was born in December 1675, at Rheims, of obscure and poor parents. The religious of St. Genevieve, who served the parish of St. Denis at Rheims, undertook his education, and he was admitted doctor of divinity in that city in 1702, and became successively chaplain at Notre Dame, canon of the collegiate church of St. Symphorien, and, in 1704, canon of the cathedral at Rheims. He was also made governor of the little seminary of St. James by M Le Tellier, but was deprived of that office on this gentleman’s death in 1710, and forbidden to preach or confess, on account of his zealous opposition to the bull Unigenitus. Being afterwards excommunicated by M. de Maille, who succeeded M. le Tellier as archbishop of Rheims, he went to Paris, and afterwards to Holland, where he remained ubout a year with father Quesnel and Messrs. Petitpied and Fouillou; but when Louis XIV. died, the proceedings at Rheims were declared null, and M. le Gros returned thither in 1716. He was a zealous promoter of the appeal to a future council, and was the soul of the faculty of theoJogy; but M. de Mailli obtained a lettre dt cachet against him in 1721, by which he was banished to St. John de Luz. This sentence, however, he evaded, by living concealed four or five years. In 1725, he went into Italy to observe what passed in the council appointed by Benedict XIIL and at length retired to Holland, and there spent the last twenty-five years of his life, excepting a voyage he made to England. The archbishop of Utrecht chose him professor of divinity in his seminary at Amersfort, and he died at Rhinwick, near Utrecht, December 4, 1751, aged 76. His principal works are, 1. “Le Renversement des Libenes de l'Eglise Gallicane dans r affaire de la Constitution Unigenitus,” 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “La Sainte Bible traduite sur les textes originaux, avec les differences de la Vulgate,” 1739, 8vo. M. Rondet published a new edition of this work 1756, in 6 small vois. 12mo.; but, on account of some alterations, it is not esteemed. 3. “Sept Lettres Theolo^iques contre le Traite des Prets de Commerce, et en ge‘ne’ral contre toute Usure,” 4to. 4. “Dogma Ecclesiae circa Usurum expositum, et vindicatum;” with several other pieces in Latin against usury, 4to. 5. “Observations sur une Lettre attribute a ieu M. de Launoi sur l'Usure,” 4to. 6. “Eclaircissement historique et dogmatique sur la Contrition,” 12mo. 7. “Motifs invincible* d‘Attachement a l’Eglise Romaine pour les Catholiqnes, ou de Re-union pour les pretendus Reformes,” 12mo. 8. “Meditations sur la Concorde des Evangiles,” 3 vols. 12mo. 9. “Sur l'EpStre aux Remains,” 2 vols. 12mo. 10. “SurlesEpitrescanoniques,” 2 vols. 12mo. ll.“Memoire sur les Droits du second Ordre,” 4to. 12. “Me”­moire sur l'Appel au futur Concile,“4to; several tracts on the Constitution, the Miracles, ascribed to M.Paris; the Convulsions, &c. 13.” Manuel du Chretien,“which contains the Psalms, the New Testament, and the Imitation, 24to. A book in twelves, entitled” Eclaircissement sur les Conciles genéraux," is also attributed to M. le Gros.

He died at Buckden, Oct. 9, 1255, and the corpse was carried to Lincoln, where it was met by archbishop Boniface, who attended the funeral. He was interred in the upper south transept. For an account of his tomb, &c. we must refer to our principal authority. The pope, who rejoiced at his death, ordered a Letter to be written to king Henry, enjoining him to take up the bishop’s bones, cast them out of the church, and burn them, but this letter was not sent. As Grosseteste was a person of acknowledged piety and strictness of manners, he easily arrived at the beatitude, or title of Beatus, and even at sanctity 9 in the general estimation; but he could never obtain these jhonours from the church, though they were solicited for him in the strongest terms. Indeed, as l>r. Pegge observes, it would have been improper and absurd for the popes to repute and proclaim a person to be now an holy beatified saint in heaven, who in their opinion had so openly traduced, insulted, and vilified both the see and court of Rome, which were still pursuing the very same measures he condemned, and continued to be invariably the same depraved, venal, and corrupt body. It is, however, for the honour of bishop Grosseteste, that for his piety and integrity, his learning and abilities, he still lives valued and revered in the breasts of all sober and reasonable men. It is plain that he did not suffer the least in the esteem of the world, any more than he did in his own opinion, by the anathema which pope Innocent had denounced against him. Indeed the papal censures, of which our prelates stood so much in dread at Lyons, in 1245, had been of late so infamously prostituted, that they seem to have lost their efficacy. Grosseteste, in particular, paid no regard to that which was denounced against him, for he still continued to exercise his function; his clergy also made no scruple of obeying him when under the sentence; and his exequies were solemnized not only by the secular but even by the regular clergy of his diocese.

Grotius, having chosen the law for his profession, had taken an opportunity before he left France, to obtain a doctor’s degree in that faculty; and upon his return he attended the law-courts, and pleaded his first cause at Delft with universal applause, though he was scarcely seventeen; and he maintained the same reputation as lung as he continued at the bar. This employment, however, not filling up his whole time, he found leisure to publish the same year, 1599, another work, which discovered as much knowledge of the abstract sciences in particular as the former did of his learning in general. Stevin, mathematician to prince Maurice of Nassau, composed a small treatise for the instruction of pilots in finding a ship’s place at sea; in which he drew up a table of the variations of the needle, according to the observations of Plancius, a celebrated geographer, and added directions how to use it. Grotius translated into Latin this work, which prince Maurice had recommended to the college of admiralty, to be studied by all officers of the navy; and, because it might be equally useful to Venice, he dedicated his translation to that republic. In 1600, he published his “of Aratus,” which discovers a great knowledge in physics, and especially astronomy. The corrections he made in the Greek are esteemed very judicious: the notes shew that he had reviewed several of the rabhies, and had some knowledge of the Arabic tongue; and the verses he made to supply those of Cicero that were lost have been thought very happy ‘imitations of that writer’s style. In the midst of these profound studies, this extraordinary young man found time to cultivate the muses, and with such success, that he was esteemed one of the best Latin poets in Europe. The prosopopoeia, in which he makes the city of Ostend speak, after having been three years besieged by the Spaniards, was reckoned a masterpiece, and was translated intoJFrench by Du Vae’r, Rapin, Pasquier, and Malherbe; and Casanbon turned it into Greek. Neither did Grotius content himself with writing small pieces of verse; he rose to tragedy, of which he produced three specimens; the first, called “Adamus Exul,” was printed in Leyden, in 1601, with which, however, he became afterwards dissatisfied, and would not let it appear in the collection of hi* poems published by his brother. “Christus patiens,” his second tragedy, was printed at Leyden in 1608, and much approved: Casaubon greatly admires its poetical fire. Sandys translated it into English verse, and dedicated it to Charles I. It was favourably received in England, and in Germany proposed as the model of perfect tragedy. His third was the story of Joseph, and its title “Sophornphanceus,” which, in the language of Egypt, signifies the Saviour of the World; he finished this in 1633, and the following year, at Hamburgh.

, a celebrated printer of Lyons, in France, was a German, and born at Suabia, near Augsburg, in 1493. He performed the duties of his profession with so much honour as to receive the approbation of the most learned men. Conrad Gesner has even “dedicated one of his books, namely, the twelfth of his pandects, to him and takes occasion to bestow the following praises on him” You, most humane Gryphius, who are far from meriting the last place among the excellent printers of this age, came first into my mind: and especially on this account, because you have not only gained greater fame than any foreigner in France, by a vast number of most excellent works, printed with the greatest beauty and accuracy, but because, though a German, you seem to be a countryman, by youV coming to reside amon<r us.“Baillet says, that Julius Scaliger dedicated also to him his work” De Causis Linguae Latinae:“but this seems a mistake. Scaliger wrote a kind letter to Gryphius, which is printed at the head of the work: but the dedication is to Silvius Scaliger, his eldest son, to whom he also addressed his” Ars Poetica." Gryphius is allowed to have restored the art of printing at Lyons, which was before exceedingly corrupted; and the great number of books printed by him are valued by the connoisseurs. He printed many books in HebreV, Greek, and Latin, with new and very beautiful types; and his editions are no less accurate than beautiful. He was himself a very learned man, and perfectly versed in the languages of such books as he undertook to print. Vulteius, of Reims, an epigrammatist, has observed, that Robert Stephens was a very good corrector, Colinaeus a very good printer, but that Gryphius was both an able printer and corrector.

, an eminent Scotch divine, the son of an opulent tradesman in Aberdeen, was born in that city in 1586, and received *a liberal education at Marischal college, then recently founded, with a view to the church. Before he took orders, however, he appeared as an autii:>r, by publishing, when only in his twentieth year, a treatise entitled “The New Sacrifice of Christian Incense,” London, 1608 and the same year, “The only way to Salvation,” printed also at London. Immediately after the publication of these, he appears to have taken orders, and was called to the pastoral charge of the parish of King EJward in the presbytery of Turriff and synod of Aberdeen. Here he passed some of the happiest years of his life, in high favour with Jiis parishioners and here in 1610 he married Katherine Rowen, daughter of Mr. Rowen or Rolland of Disblair, by whom he had no issue. In 1617, when king James I. visited Scotland, with a view to establish episcopacy, and brought bishop Andrews of Ely with him to assist in the management of that very delicate and ultimately unsuccessful attempt, Dr. Andrews, among other eminent men of the Scotch clergy whom he consulted, paid great regard to Mr. Guild; and the following year, when Andrews was promoted to the see of Winchester, Mr. Guild dedicated to him, one of his most useful works, entitled “Moses unveiled,” pointing out those fgures in the Old Testament which allude to the Messiah. Mr. Guild became, much about the same time, acquainted with Dr. Young, a countryman of his own, dean of Winchester, who introduced him to the king, by whom he was appointed one of the royal chaplains. This obligation he afterwards acknowledged in the dedication to his “Harmony of the Prophets,” a work which he published in the beginning of the reign of Charles I. It was afterwards printed with his “Moses unveiled,” in an edition now before us, dated Edinburgh, 1684.

About 1636 he wrote his tract on “Schism” for the use of his friend Chilling-worth, in which, as already noticed, he expresses his sentiments on liturgies, forms of worship, &c. in exact conformity with those who are for dispensing with all obligations of the kind in established churches. Being informed that archbishop Laud was displeased with it, he drew up a vindication of himself in a letter addressed to his grace, who in 1638 sent for him to Lambeth, and after a conference of several hours, appears to have been reconciled to him. Of this conference we have a curious account by Dr. Heylin, in his “Cyprianus Anglicus,” some particulars of which have been eagerly contested by Des Maizeaux, in his Life of Hales. What seems most clear is, that Hales made some kind of declaration to the^ archbishop, purporting that he was a true son of the church of England, both in doctrine and discipline, which certainly implies a change or intended change of opinion, unless we allow to the writer of his life in the Biographia Britannica, that “a true son of the church,” or an “or­* Such is the story given by all his 87 and 92, we shall see more reasor. biographers; but if we consult his to think that he was influenced by the Letters in the” Golden Remains,“p. opinions of Martinius. thodox son of the church,” were phrases used, not in opn ^ition to heretics, but to puritans. In either way, the archbishop appears to have been satisfied, and informed Mr. liuies that he might have any preferment he pleased. Hales at this time modestly declined the offer, but the year following was presented by the archbishop at a public dinner, with a canonry of Windsor, in which he was installed June 27, 1639. With respect to the letter above-r ttientioned, which he wrote to the archbishop, it is said to have been first published by Dr. Hare in the seventh edition of his pampnlet entitled “Difficulties and Discouragements which attend the study of the Scriptures in the way of private judgment.” Des Maizeaux says it was probably found among the papers of archbishop Laud, which after the restoration were taken from Prynne; but this conjecture is erroneous; it was found in the house of Mrs. Powney, where Mr. Hales died, and there are even some reasons for doubting whether it was ever sent to the archbishop, although this is certainly not improbable. The original is at Eton, and appeared in print before it fell into the hands of Dr. Hare, the author of “Difficulties and Discouragements,” if indeed Dr. Hare was that author, which has been questioned.

* It was published with the title " A printed in the same year R. C. i.e.

divine," London, 4to, printed for R. B. occasioned some controversy, not uew

, an English poet of some note, was born at Durham, August 1627, and after one year spent at St. John’s college, Cambridge, removed to Gray’s-inn, London, where he was called to the bar; but entering into the politics of the times, and writing on subjects favourable to the rebellion, he attracted the notice of parliament, who sent him into Scotland to attend Oliver Cromwell, and afterwards distinguished him by other marks of favour: but, being too much addicted to pleasure, he fell a sacrifice to its indulgence; and returning to his native city of Durham, died there, August 1, 1656. In 1646 (during his short residence at Cambridge), being then but nineteen years of age, he published “Horas Vacivse, or Essayes,” a sufficient proof of his abilities. His poems came out the same year. He published the first English version of Longinus, which he entitled “The Height of Eloquence,” Lond. 1652, 8vo. This he translated from the Greek, as he also did “Hierocles upon the Golden Verses of Pythagoras;” before which is an account of the ingenious translator and his works, by John Davis of Kidwelly, by whom it was published in 1657, 8vo. Several of his poems are preserved in Nichols’s “Select Collection,” reprinted from a little volume, entitled “Poems by John Hall, Cambridge, printed by Roger Daniel, printer to the universitie, 1646, for J. Rothwell at the Sun in St. Paul’s Churchyard,” to which in 1647 was added “The Second Booke of Divine Poems by J. H.” which is now become exceedingly scarce. Recommendatory verses are prefixed to it by Jo. Pawson (his tutor), H. More, W. Dillingham, W. Harrington, Ja. Windet, R. Marshall, T. Smithsby, and Edw. Holland.

In 1596 he took his degree of master of arte, and acquitted himself on every public trial with great reputation. He read also the rhetoric lecture in the schools, but resigned it, when he found that it interfered with an object more dear to him, the study of divinity; and he soon after entered into holy orders. As we have no account of him when at college, except the few particulars in his “ Specialities,” written by himself, we cannot trace the progress of his muse. It is not improbable that, like other juvenile poets, he had written some pieces at a very early period of life. All that is certain, however, is, that his satires were published in 1597 and 1598 in the following order: “Virgidemiarurn (i. e. a gathering or harvest of rods), sixe bookes. First three bookes of tooth-lesse satyrs, 1. Poetical. 2. Academical!. 3. Moral.” Printed by T. Creede for R. Dexter. “The three last bookes of byting satyrs,” by R. Bradock for Dexter, 1598; both parts, 1599*.

, an English bishop, was born in London, and educated at Eton, whence he was admitted of King’s college, Cambridge, in 1688, and took his degree of A. B. in 1692, and of A. M. 1696. He afterwards became tutor in the college, and in that capacity superintended the education of the celebrated Anthony Collins, who was fellow-commoner there. He had also the tuition of the marquis of Blandford, only son of the illustrious duke of Marlborough, who appointed him chaplain-general to the army; but this promising young nobleman died in 1702, and was buried in King’s college chapel. The inscription on his monument is by our author. In 1708 Mr. Hare took his degree of D. D. obtained the deanery of Worcester, and in 1726 the deanery of St. Paul’s. In Dec. 1727, he was consecrated bishop of St. Asaph, where he sat about four years, and was translated, Nov. 25, 1731, to the bishopric of Chichester, which he held with the deanery of St. Paul’s to his death. He was dismissed from being chaplain to George I. in 1718, by the strength of party prejudices, in company with Dr. Moss and Dr. Sher-r lock, persons of distinguished rank for parts and learning. About the latter end of queen Anne’s reign he published a remarkable pamphlet, entitled “The difficulties and discouragements which attend the Study of the Scriptures, in the way of private judgment;” in order to shew, that since such a study of the scriptures is an indispensable duty, it concerns all Christian societies to remove, as much as possible, those discouragements. This work was thought to have such a direct tendency to promote scepticism, and a loose way of thinking in matters of religious concern, that the convocation judged it right to pass a severe censure on it; and Whiston says, that, finding this piece likely to hinder preferment, he aimed to conceal his being the author. The same writer charges him with being strongly inclined to scepticism that he talked ludicrously of sacred matters and that he would offer to lay wagers about the fulfilling of scripture prophecies. The principal ground for these invidious insinuations some suppose to be, that, though he never denied the genuineness of the apostolical constitutions (of which he procured for Whiston the collation of two Vienna Mss.), yet “he was not firm believer enough, nor serious enough in Christianity, to hazard any thing in this world for their reception.” He published many pieces against bishop Hoadly, in the Bangorian controversy; and also other learned works, which were collected after his death, and published in four volumes, 8yo. 2. An edition of “Terence,” with notes, in 4to. 3. “The Book of Psalms, in the Hebrew, put into the original poetical metre,” 4to. In this last work he pretends to have Discovered the Hebrew metre, which was supposed to be irretrievably lost. But his hypothesis, though defended by some, yet has been confuted by several learned men, particularly by Dr. Lowth in his “Metrics Hareaue brevis confutatio,” annexed to his lectures “De Sacra Poesi Hebreeorum.” He was yet more unfortunate in the abovementioned edition of Terence, which sunk under the reputation of that of Dr. Bentley, of whom he was once the warm admirer, and afterwards the equally warm opponent. During their friendship the emendations on Menander and Philemon were transmitted through Hare, who was then chaplain-general to the army, to Burman, in 1710; and Bentley’s “Remarks on the Essay on Freethinking” (supposed to be written by Collins) were inscribed to him in 1713. As soon as the first part of these were published, Hare formally thanked Dr. Bentley by name for them, in a most flattering letter called “The Clergyman’s Thanks to Phileleutherus,” printed the same year; but, in consequence of the rupture between them, not inserted in the collection of Hare’s works. This rupture took place soon after the above-mentioned date, and Bentley in the subsequent editions of his “Remarks” withdrew the inscription. Hare was excessively piqued at the utter annihilation of his Terence and Phoedrus, the one soon after its birth, the other before its birth, by Bentley’s edition of both together in 1726, who never once names Hare.

About 1750, a piece was ignorantly published under sir R. Weston’s name, entitled “A treatise concerning the Husbandry and Natural History of England,” 8vo, which is a poor jejune abridgment of “Hartlib’s Legacy.” It seems that Hartlib afterwards, in order to enlarge and better explain this famous discourse, published another edition, and annexed Dr. Beati’s annotations to it.

In 1652 Hartlib published “His Legacy, or an enlargement of the discourse of Husbandry used in Brabant and Flanders,” Lond. 4to. This work was only drawn up at Hartlib’s request; and passing through his correction and revision, was published by him. It consists of one general answer to the following query, namely, “what are the actual defects and omissions, as also the possible improvements, in English husbandry” The real author was Robert Child. To it are annexed various correspondences from persons eminent for skill in agriculture at this time; as C. D. B. W. R. H. T. Underbill, Henry Cruttenden, W. Potter, &c. as also the “Mercurius Laetificans” and twenty large experiments by Gabriel Plattes together with annotations on the legacy by Dr. Arnold Beati, and replies to the animadversions by the author of the Legacy. In the preface Hartlib laments greatly that no public director of husbandry was established in England by authority; and that we had not adopted the Flemish custom of letting farms upon improvement. Cromwell, as Harte says, in consequence of this admirable performance, allowed Hartlib a pension of IQOl. a year; and it was the better to fulfil the intentions of his benefactor, that he procured Dr. Beati’s excellent annotations before-mentioned, with the other valuable pieces from his numerous correspondents.

, an English historian, was educated at Cambridge, where he took the degree of LL. D. In 1599 he published, in 4to, The first Part of the Life and Raigne of King Henrie IV. extending to the end of the first yeare of his raigne,“dedicated to Robert earl of Essex; for which he suffered a tedious imprisonment, on account of having advanced something in defence of hereditary succession to the crown. We are informed, in lord Bacon’s” Apophthegms,“that queen Elizabeth, being highly incensed at this book, asked Bacon, who was then one of her council learned in the law,” whether there was any treason contained in it?“who answered,” No, madam for treason, I cannot deliver my opinion there is any but there is much felony.“The queen, apprehending it, gladly asked,” How and wherein“Bacon answered,” because he had stolen many of his sentences and conceits out of Cornelius Tacitus.“This discovery is thought to have prevented his being put to the rack. Carnden tells us, that the book being dedicated to the earl of Essex, when that nobleman and his friends were tried, the lawyers urged, that” it was written on purpose to encourage the deposing of the queen;“and they particularly insisted on these words in the dedication* in which our author styles the earl” Magnus & present! judicio, & futuri temporis expectatione.“In 1603 he published, in quarto,” An Answer to the first part of a certaine Conference concerning Succession, published not long since under the name of R. Doleman.“Tais R. Doleman was the Jesuit Parsons. In 1610 he was appointed by king James one of the historiographers of Chelsea college, near London, which, as we have often had occasion to notice, was never permanently established. In 1613, he published in 4to,” The Lives of the Three Normans, kings of England; William I; William II.; Henry I.“and dedicated them to Charles prince of Wales. In 1619, he received the honour of knighthood from his majesty, at Whitehall. In 1624, he published a discourse entitled” Of Supremacie in Affaires of Religion,“dedicated to prince Charles, and written in the manner of a conversation held at the table of Dr. Toby Matthews, bishop of Durham, in the time of the parliament, 1605. The proposition maintained is, that supreme power in ecciesiasticaJ affairs is a right of sovereignty. He wrote likewise,” The Life and Raigne of King Edward VI. with the beginning of the Raigne of queen Elizabeth,“1630, 4to, but this was posthumous; for he died June 27, 1627. He was the author of several works of piety, particularly” The Sr.nctuarie of a troubled soul,“Lond. 1616, 12mo;” David’s Tears, or an Exposition of the Penitential Psalms,“1622, 8vo. and te Christ’s Prayer on the Crosse for his Enemies,” 1623. Wood says that “he was accounted a learned and godly man, and one better read in theological authors, than in those belonging to his profession; and that with regard to his histories, the phrase and words in them were in their time esteemed very good; only some have wished that in his” History of Henry IV.“he had not called sir Hugh Lynne by so light a word as Mad-cap, though he were such; and that he had not changed his historical style into a dramatical, where he introduceth a mother uttering a woman’s passion in the case of her son.” Nicolson observes, that “he had the repute in his time, of a good clean pen and smooth style; though some have since blamed him for being a little too dramatical,” Strype recommends that our author “be read with caution that his style and language is good, and so is his fancy but that he uses it too much for an historian, which puts him sometimes on making speeches for others, which they never spake, and relating matters which perhaps they never thought on.” In confirmation of which censure, Kennet has since affirmed him to be “a professed speech-maker through all his little history of Henry IV.”

, an ingenious English divine, and miscellaneous writer, descended of an ancient Derbyshire family, whose property was injured during the civil wars, was born Dec. 16, 1721, at Barrow upon Soar, in Leicestershire. His father was then curate of that place, but afterwards had the vicarage of Sileby in that county, and the rectory of Morton in Derbyshire. He died in 1765. His mother was a daughter of Simon Ockley, Arabic professor at Cambridge. He passed the first fourteen years at home with his father, who taught him Greek and Latin, but in April 1736, sent him to the public school of Chesterfield, where he continued five years under the rev. William Burrow, a learned man, and a very skilful teacher. In April 1741 r he was admitted sizar of Jesus college, Cambridge, and in Jan. 1745, took his degree of A. B. and soon after entered intered into holy orders. In March 1748 he undertook the cure of St. Margaret’s, Leicester, and the year after waspresented to the small vicarage of Barkby, in the neighbourhood, which, with his curacy (worth 50l. yearly) he says made him “well to live.” In July 1748, he took his master’s degree, and at the same time withdrew his name from college, having in view a marriage with miss Margaret Mompesson, a Nottinghamshire la;iy of good family, which tie accomplished in August 1750, and whose fortune, in his estimation, made him independent. This lady died April 12, 1790.

, a celebrated botanist, was born Oct. 8, 17 So, at Cronstadt, in Transylvania, where his fatbi-r was one of the magistrates. After the first rudiments of domestic education at home, he studied for four years at the public school of his native town. On the death of his father in 1747, he went for further improvement to the university of Presburg in Hungary, where he remained two years, and then proceeded toZittau in Upper Lusatia. In 1752 he removed to Leipsic, where his diligence and talents, as well as his personal character, procured him the favour and friendship of the celebrated Ludwig in particular, by whose lectures of various kinds, as well as those of Hebenstreit, Boehmer, and others, he rapidly and abundantly profited. In 1756, he was taken into the house of professor Bose, to assist him in the demonstration of plants-in his botanical lectures, as well as in the care of patients at the infirmary; and it is supposed that this engagement was full as advantageous to the master as to the pupil. Having at length finished his studies, he was defcirons of settling as a physician in Ills native place, but was prevented by an exclusive law in favour of such as are educated in some Austrian school. In 1759 he took his degree of doctor of physic at Leipsic, and was induced to establish himself at Chemnitz. He was now so far master of his own time, that he found himself able to alleviate the labours of his profession by almost daily attention to his favourite studies. His morning hours in summer, from five till breakfast-time, were spent in the fields and woods, and his evenings in the investigation of what he had collected, or else in the care of a little garden of his own. To pursue with success his inquiries, he found it necessary, at forty years of age, to learn drawing, which enabled him to publish some of the most curious and authentic botanical figures. The first and greatest fruit of Hedwig’s labours, was the determination of the mule and female Mowers of mosses, the theory of which was h'rst clearly detailed by him. He also first beheld the bladder-like anther, of the Liuneeaii Biyum pulvinaliun, discharging its pollen, on the 17th of January, 177O. He was already satisfied that what Linnteus, misled by Dillenius against his own previous opinion, had taken for anthers, were in fact the capsules of mosses, and produced real (seed. A history of his discoveries was published in a German periodical work at Leipsic in 1779. In 1782 appeared his valuable “Fuiuiamentum Historise Nuturalis Muscorum Frondosorum,” a baudsome Latin quarto, in two parts, with 20 coloured microscopical plates. The earliest account given of Hedwig’s opinions in England, was from the communications of the late professor J. Sibthorp, who had just then visited him, to Dr. Smith, in 1786, and is annexed to a translation of Limiaeus’s “Dissertation on the Sexes of Plants,” published that year. Hedwig lost his first wife in 1776, and again married a very accomplished lady the following year, who was, like the former, a native of Leipsic. By her persuasion he removed to Leipsic in 1781, and the following year the work above mentioned was there published. The same subject is happily followed up in his “Theoria generationis et fructificationis plant arum cryptogamicarum Linnaet,” published at Petersburgh in 1784. This work gained its author the prize from that academy in 1783, of 100 gold ducats. In it the fructification and germination of mosses is further illustrated, and a view is also taken of the fructification of the other cryptogam ic families, the author being very naturally desirous of extending his discoveries throughout that obscure tribe of plants. A new and encreased edition of this work appeared in 1798.

, an English gentleman of parts and learning, was the son of sir R ->bert Henley, of the Grange in Hampshire, descended from the Henleys of Henley in Somersetshire; of whom sir Andrew Henley was created a baronet in 1660. This sir Andrew had a son of the same name, famous for his frolics and profusion. His seat, called Bramesley, near Hartley-row, in the county of Southampton, was very large and magnifirent. He had a great estate in that and the other western counties, which was reduced by him to a very small one, or to nothing. Sir Robert Henley of the Grange, his uncle, was a man of good sense and osconomy. He held the master’s place of the King’s-bench court, on the pleas side, many years; and by the profits of it, and good management, left his son, Anthony Henley, of the Grange, of whom we now treat, possessed of a very fine fortune, above 3000l. a-year, part of which arose from the ground-rents of LincolnVinnfields. Anthony Henley was bred at Oxford, where he distinguished himself by an early relish for polite learning. He made a great proficiency in the study of the classics, and particularly the ancient poets, by which he formed a good taste for poetry, and wrote verses with success. Upon his coming to London, he was presently received into the friendship and familiarity of persons of the first rank for quality and wit, particularly the earls of Dorset and Sunclerland. The latter had especially a great esteem and affection for him; and as every one knew what a secret influence he had on affairs in king William’s court, it was thought strange that Mr. Henley, who had a genius for any thing great, as well as any thing gay, did not rise in the state, where he would have shone as a politician, no Jess than he did at Will’s and Tom’s as a wit. But the Muses and pleasure had engaged him. He had something of the character of Tibullus, and, except his extravagance, was possessed of all his other qualities; his indolence, his gallantry, his wit, his humanity, his. generosity, his learning, his taste for letters. There was hardly a contemporary author, who did not experience his bounty. They soon found him out, and attacked him with their dedications; which, though he knew how to value as they deserved, were always received as well as the addressers could wish; and his returns were made so handsomely, that the manner was as grateful as the present.

Having now succeeded to his utmost wishes as a vender of charts and prints, he resolved to retire from business, and with this view purchased a country residence at dieshunt in Hertfordshire, and turned his whole attention to editing “Ames’s Typographical Antiquities,” the first volume of which he at length published in 1785, in 4to, under the title of “Typographical Antiquities, or an Historical Account of the Origin and Progress of Printing in Great Britain and Ireland containing memoirs of our ancient Printers, and a register of books by them from the year 1471 to 1500. Begun by the late Joseph Ames, F. R. and A. Ss. and secretary to the society of antiquaries. Considerably augmented, both in the Memoirs and number of books. By William Herbert of Cheshunt, Herts.” The second volume appeared in 1786, and the third and last in 1790. The reception of this work by the public was proportionate to its utility; but he did not live long to enjoy the fruit of his labours. He was seventy-two years of age when -he published the last volume, and yet went on improving the work, with a view to a future edition. At length exhausted by constant mental as well as bodily activity, he gradually sunk under the accumulated afflictions of disease and debility attendant on age, and died March 18, 1795, in his seventy-seventh year. His body was interred in Cheshunt church-yard. Mr. Herbert a man of great integrity, simplicity, and modesty, but his manner was somewhat odd and peculiar. His valuable library was scattered at his decease, by a priced catalogue. These particulars of his life we have selected from the fuller account given of him, by his able successor Mr. DuV din, whose first two volumes of the new edition afford the well-grounded hope that we may say of him, as he has of Herbert, that “no single country can boast of such an acquisition to its history of ancient literature as our own;” in his typographical labours.

He was a very voluminous writer, and although few of his works can be recommended to general perusal, there are none perhaps of the whole series which may not be consulted with advantage, by those who have leisure and inclination to study the history of parties, in the distracted period in which he lived. Many of his lesser pieces were published together in 1681, in a folio volume, with a life of the author by the rev. George Vernon, which having given offence to his relations, a new life was published by his son-in-law Dr. Barnard, 1682, 12mo. It is from a comparison of both (Vernon’s has since been published in 12mo) that a proper judgment can be formed of Dr. Heylin. His other works of most note are, 1. “An Help to English History,” &c. 1641, 8vo, published under the name of Robert Hall, gent, republished with the additions of Christopher Wilkinson a bookseller, but with Heylin’s name in 1670, 8vo. It was again republished, and brought down to 1709 and in 1773 an improved edition was published by Paul Wright, D. D. in 1773, a lar^e 8vo. Capt. Beatson’s “Political Index” may be considered as a continuation of this work. 2. “History of the Sabbath,” 3636, 4to, intended to reconcile the public to that dreadful error in the conduct of the court, the “Book of Sports,” which did incalculable injury to the royal cause. 3. “Theologia Veterum; the Sum of the Christian Theology contained in the creed, according to the Greeks and Latins, &c. Lond. 1654, fol. reprinted 1673. 4. Ecclesia Vindicata; or the Church of England justified, 1. In the way and manner of her Reformation, &c. 2. In officiating by a public Liturgy. 3. In prescribing a set form of Prayer to be used by preachers before their sermons. 4. In her right and patrimony of tithes. 5. In retaining the episcopal government, and therewithal the canonical ordination of priests and deacons,” London 1657, in 4to, dedicated to Mr. Edward Davys, vicar of Shilton in Berkshire, formerly his master in the free-school of Burford in Oxfordshire. 5. “Short View of the Life and Reign of King Charles (the second monarch of Great Britain) from his birth to his burial,” London, 1658, in 8vo. This Life Wood supposes to be the same with that which was printed with and prefixed to “Reliquiae sacrae Carolina,” printed at the Hague, 1649, in 8vo. 6. “Examen Historicum or a discovery and examination of the mistakes and defects in some modern histories, viz. 1. In the Church History of Britain, by Tho. Fuller. To which is added, an Apology of Dr. Jo. Cosin, dean of Peterborough, in answer to some passages in the Church History of Britain, in which he finds himself concerned. 2. In the History of Mary Queen of Scots, and of her son King James VI,; the History of King James I. of Great Britain; and the History of King Charles I. from his cradle to his grave, by Will. Sanderson, esq. London, 1658, in a large 8vo. To this is ndded, An Appendix in an answer to some passages in a scurrilous pamphlet called A Post-haste Reply, &c. by Will. Sanderson, esq.” Soon after Dr. Thomas Fuller published a thin folio, entitled “The Appeal for injured Innocence,” which was commonly bound up with the remaining copies of his Church History in quires; and Mr. Sanderson wrote. a pamphlet, entitled “Peter pursued; or Dr. Heylin overtaken, arrested, and arraigned upon his three Appendixes: 1. Respondet Petrus. 2. Answer to Post-Haste Reply. 3. Advertisements on three Histories. viz. of Mary Queen of Scots, King James, and King Charles,” 1658, in 8 sheets in 4to. 7. “Historia QuinquArticularis: or a declaration of the Judgment of the Western Churches, and more particularly of the Church of England, in the five controverted points, reproached in these last times by the name of Arminianism. Collected in the way of an Historicall Narration out of the public acts and monuments, and most approved authors of those scverall churches,” London, 1660, in 4to. This involved him in a controversy with some able writers. 8. “History of the Reformation of the Church of England from the first preparations to it made by King Henry VIII. until the legal settling and establishing of it underQueen Elizabeth,*' &c. London, 1661, 1670, and 1674, in folio. 9.” Cyprianus Anglicus r or the History of the Life and Death of William (Laud) Archbishop of Canterbury,“&c. London, 1668 and 1671, fol. 10.” Aerius Redivivus: or the History of the Presbyterians. Containing the beginning, progress, and successes of that sect. Their oppositions to monarchical and episcopal government. Their innovations in the church; and their inbroylments of the kingdoms and estates of Christendom in the pursuit of their designes. From the year 1536 to the year 1647," London, 1670 and 1672, in folio.

, an English divirre of uncommon abilities and learning, was born June 20, 1642, at Newsham in Yorkshire, where his parents were settled on a very large farm-. He was sent to the grammar school at North Allerton, and thence in 1659, to St. John’s college in Oxford. Soon after the Restoration he removed to Magdalen colJege, from thence to Magdalen hall; and at length, in 3664, was chosen fellow of Lincoln college, taking the degree of M. A. the year after. In June 1666 he was> admitted into orders, became a public tutor r and discharged that office with great reputation for seven years. Being then in a bad state of health, he was advised to travel; upon which sir George Wheeler, who had been his pupil, and had conceived a filial affection for him, invited him to accompany him to the continent. They set out in Oct. 1673, and made the totir of France; after which they parted, Hickes being obliged to return to take his degree of B. D. At Paris, where he staid a considerable time, he became acquainted with Mr. Henry Justell, who in confidence told him many secret affairs, particularly that of the intended revocation of the edict of Nantes, and of a design in Holland and England to set aside the family of the Stuarts. He committed to him also his father’s ms. of the “Codex canonum ecclesiae universalis,” to be presented in his name to the university of Oxford.

The principal works of Dr. Hickes are the three following: 1. “Institutiones Grammaticse Anglo-Saxonicae & Maeso-Gothicae. Grammatica Islandica Runolphi Jonas. Catalogus librorum Septentrionalium. Accedit Edwardi Bernardi Etymologicum Britannicum,” Oxon. 1689, 4to. inscribed to archbishop Sancroft. While the dean was writing the preface to this book, there were great disputes in the house of commons, and throughout the kingdom, about the original contract; which occasioned him to insert the ancient coronation oath of our Saxon kings, to shew, what was not very necessary, that there is not the least footstep of any such contract. 2. “Antiquae literature Septentrionalis libri duo: quorum primus G. Hickesu S. T. P. Linguarum Veterum Septentrionalium thesaurum grammatico-criticum & Archaeologicum, ejusdem de antique literatures Septentrionalis militate dissertationem epistolarum, & Andreas Fountaine equitis aurati numismata Saxonica& Dano-Saxonica, complectitur alter contn Humfredi Wanleii librorum Veterum Septentnonaliiim, qui in Ano-liae Bibiiothecis extant, c.ialogum histonco-cr im, necmTn multorum veteruni codicum Septentrionalium alibi extantiuro notitiam, cum totius operis sex mdicibus, Oxon. 1705, 2 or sometimes 3 vols. folio. Foreigners as well as Englishmen, who had any relish for antiquities, have justly admired this splendid and laborious work, which is now scarce and dear. It was originally published at 3l. 3s. the small, and 5l. 5s the large paper. The latter now rarely appears, and the former is worth 15l. The great duke of Tuscany' s envoy sent a copy of it to his master, which his highness looking into, and finding full of strange characters, called a council of the Dotti, and commanded them to peruse and give him an account of. They did so, and reported it to be an excellent work, and that they believed the author to be a man of a particular head; for this was the envoy’s compliment to Hirkes, when he went to him with a present from his master. 3. Two volumes of Sermons, most of which were never before printed, with a preface by Mr. Spinckes, 1713, 8vo. After his death was published another volume of his Sermons, with some pieces relating to schism, separation, &c. 4.” A Letter sent from beyond the seas to one of the chief ministers of the ndnconforming party, &c. 1674“which was afterwards reprinted in 1684, under the title of” The judgment of an anonymous writer concerning these following particulars first, a law for disabling a papist to inherit the crown secondly, the execution of penal laws against protestant dissenters; thirdly, a bill of comprehension all briefly discussed in a letter sent from beyond the seas to a dissenter ten years ago.“This letter was in reality an answer to his elder brother, Mr. John Hickes, a dissenting minister, bred up in Cromwell’s time at the college of Dublin; whom the doctor always endeavoured to convince of his errors, but without success. John persisted in them to his death, and at last suffered for his adherence to the duke of Monrnouth; though, upon the doctor’s unwearied application, the king would have granted him his.life,^ but that he had been falsely informed that this Mr. Hickes was the person who advised the duke of Monmouth to take upon him the title of king. 5.” Ravillac Redivivus, being a narrative of the late trial of Mr. James Mitchel, a conventicle preacher, who was executed Jan. 18, 1677, for an attempt on the person of the archbishop of St. Andrew’s, &c.“6.” The Spirit of Popery speaking out of the mouths of fanatical Protestants; or, the last speeches of Mr. John Kid and Mr. John King, two presbyterian ministers, who were executed for high treason at Edinburgh, 'ten Aug. 14, 1679.“These pieces were published in 1630, and they were occasioned by his attendance on the duke of Lauderdale in quality of chaplain. The spirit of faction made them much read, and did the author considerable service with several great personages, and even with the king. 7.” Jovian; or, an answer to Julian the apostate;“printed twice in 1683, 8vo. This is an ingenious and learned tract in defence of passive obedience and nonresistance, against the celebrated Samuel Johnson, the author of” Julian.“8.” The case of Infant Baptism, 1683;“printed in the second vol. of the” London Cases, 168.5,“4to. 9.” Speculum beatae Virginis, a discourse on Luke i. 28. of the due praise and honour of the Virgin Mary, by a true Catholic of the Church of England, 1686.“10.” An apologetical Vindication of the Church of England, in answer to her adversaries, who reproach her with the English heresies and schisms, 1686,“4to; reprinted, with many additions, a large preface, and an appendix of” Papers relating to the Schisms of the Church of Rome,“1706, 8vo. 11.” The celebrated story of the Thebati Legion no fable: in answer to the objections of Dr. Gilbert Burners Preface to his Translation of Lactantius de mortibus persecutorum, with some remarks on his Discourse of Persecution;“written in 1687, but not published till 1714, for reasons given in the preface. 12.” Reflections upon a Letter out of the country to a member of this present parliament, occasioned by a Letter to a member of the house of commons, concerning the Bishops lately in the Tower, and now under suspension, 1689.“The author of the letter to which these reflections are an answer, was generally presumed to be Dr. Bumet, though that notion was afterwards contradicted, 13.” A Letter to the author of a late paper entitled A Vindication of the Divines of the Church of England, &c. in defence of the history of passive obedience, 16S9.“The author of the” Vindication,“was Dr. Fowler, bishop of Gloucester, though his name was not to it. 14.” A Word to the Wavering, in answer to Dr. Gilbert Burnet’s Inquiry into the present state of aflairs, 1689.“15.” An Apology for the new Separation, in a letter to Dr. Sharp, archbishop of York, &c. 1691.“16.” A Vindication of some among ourselves against the false principles of Dr. Sherlock, &c. 1692.“17.” Some Discourses on Dr. Burnet and Dr.Tillotson, occasioned by the lute funeral sermon of the former upon the latter, 1695.“It is remarkable, that in this piece Hickes has not scrupled to call Tiilotson an atheist. 18.” The Pretences of the Prince of Wales examined and rejected, &c. 1701.“19. A letter in the” Philosophical Transactions,* entitled, “Epistola viri Rev. D G. Hickesii S. T. P ad D. Hans Sloane, M. D. & S. R. Seer, de varia lectione inscriptions, quse in statua Tagis exaratur per quatuor alphabeta Hetrusca” 20. “Several Letters which passed between Dr. G. Hickes and a Popish priest, &c. 1705.” The person on whose account this book was published, was the lady Theophila Nelson, wife of Robert Nelson, esq. 21. “A second collection of controversial Letters relating to the church of England and the church of Rome, as they passed between Dr. G. Hickes and an honourable lady, 1710.” This lady was the lady Gratiana Carew, of Hadcomb in Devonshire. 22. “Two Treatises; one of the Christian Priesthood, the other of the dignity of the episcopal order, against a book entitled, The Rights of the Christian Church.” Trie third edition in 1711, enlarged into two volumes, 8vo. 23. “A seasonable ana 1 modest apology in behalf of the Rev. Dr. Hickes and other nonjurors, in a letter to Thomas Wise, D. D. 1710.” 24. “AVindication of Dr. Hickes, and the author of the seasonable and modest apology, from the reflections of Dr. Wise, &c. 1712.” 25. “Two Letters to Robert Nelson, esq. relating to bishop Bull,” published in Bull’s life. 26. “Some Queries proposed to civil, canon, and common lawyers, 1712;” printed, after several editions, in 1714, with another title, “Seasonable Queries relating to the birth and birthright of a certain person.” Besides the works enumerated here, there are many prefaces and recommendations written by him, at the earnest request of others, either authors or editors.

, a physician and anatomist, mentioned in the preceding lite, was born at Fordingbridge, in Hampshire, Feb. 6, 1613, and educated at Oxford, where he was elected a scholar of Trinity college in 1632, and took his degree of M. D. in 1642. After this he practised at Sherbourne, in Dorsetshire, with a considerable share of reputation, and died there March 21, 1684. He was buried at Candle Purse in that county, of which place his lather had been rector. Though wiih limited opportunities of dissection, he pursued the study of anatomy with zeal, and his name has been given to some discoveries not strictly his; as that of the ant mm inaxillare, of which he obtained a view from an extracted tooth, which suggested the operation of piercing into it from the jaw, practised by Cowper. Casserius had mentioned the cavity under the name of ant rum gente. His principal work is, “Corporis Humani Disquisitio Anatomica,” printed at the Hague in 1651, in folio, the descriptions in which are too. brief, the reasonings unnecessarily copious, and the figures chiefly copied from Vesalins. His other writings are, “Exercitationes cliuc, quanun prior de passione hysterica, altera de affectione hypochondnaca,” Oxon. 1660, abounding with physiological remarks and hypotheses, some of which are ingenious, but being attacked by Dr. Willis, Highmore printed, in H,70, “De hysterica et hypochondriaca passione, Responsio Epistolaris ad Willisium.” “A History of Generation,” 8vo, 1651, which has some good figures of the embryo in the egg, during the state of incubation; “Considerations on the Scarborough Spa,” and “Accounts of the Springs at FarinHon r.nd East Chennock,” both in the Philosophical Transactions.

But the disposition of Dr. Hill was greatly changed with his circumstances: from being humble and diffident, he had become vain and self-sufficient. There appeared in him a pride, which was perpetually claiming a more than ordinary homage, and a vindictive spirit, which could never forgive the refusal of it. Hence his writings abounded with attacks on the understandings, morals, or peculiarities of others, descending, even to personal abuse and scurrility. This licence of his pen engaged him frequently in disputes and quarrels; and an Irish gentleman of the name of Browne, supposed to be ridiculed in an “Inspector,” proceeded so far as to cane him in the public gardens at Ranelagh. He had a paper war with Woodward the comedian was engaged with Henry Fielding in the affair of Elizabeth Canning and concerned in a contest with the Royal Society, Of this, the origin and progress has been thus detailed by one who had every opportunity of knowing the circumstances. When Mr. Hill had started all at once as before related, from a state of indigence and distress, to taste the comforts of very considerable emoluments from his labour, giddy with success, and elated beyond bounds with the warm sunshine of prosperity, he seemed to be seized with a kind of infatuation. Vanity took entire possession of his bosom, and banished from thence every consideration but of self. His conversation turned on little else, and even his very writings were tainted with perpetual details of every little occurrence that happened to him. His raillery, both in company and in his writings, frequently turned on those who closely attached themselves to philosophical investigations, especially in the branches of natural philosophy. The common -place wit of abusing the medal-scraper, the butterfly-hunter, the cockle-shell-merchant, &c. now appeared in some of his Magazines and Inspectors, and in two or three places he even indulged some distant glances of satire at the Royal Society. Notwithstanding which, however, when the Supplement to “Chambers’s Dictionary” was nearly finished, the proprietors of that work, very sensible of the weight of an F. R. S. annexed to the author’s name, were very desirous that Dr. Hill should have this addition as well as Mr. Scott, his colleague in the work. In consequence of this design, Dr. Hill procured Mr. Scott to propose him for election into that honourable body; but the doctor’s conduct for some time past having been such as had rendered him the object of contempt to some, of disgust to others, and of ridicule to almost all the rest of his former grave and philosophical acquaintances, he now stood but a very indifferent chance for carrying an election, where an opposition pf one third was sufficient to reject the candidate; and as. the failing in that attempt might have done our author more essential prejudice than the succeeding in it could even have brought him advantage, the late ingenious and worthy president, Martin Folkes, esq. whose remembrance must ever live in the highest estimation with all who ever had the honour of knowing him, notwithstanding that Dr. Hill had given him personal occasion of offence against him, yet with the utmost generosity and candour, advised Mr. Scott to dissuade his friend, for his own sake, against a design which there appeared so little probability of his succeeding in. This advice, however, Dr. Hill, instead of considering in the generous light it was meant, misinterpreted into a prejudiced opposition against his interest, am would have persisted in his intention even in despite of it, had net his being unable to obtain the subscription o requisite number of members to his recommendation^ obliged him to lay it aside, from a conviction that he could not expect to carry an election in a body composed of three hundred members, of which he could not prevail on three to set their names to the barely recommending him as a candidate. Thus disappointed, his vanity piqued, and his pride lowered, no relief was left him but railing and scurrility, for which purpose, declaring open war with the society in general, he first published a pamphlet entitled *' A Dissertation on Royal Societies,“in a letter from a Sclavonian nobleman in London to his friend in Sclavonia; which, besides the most ill-mannered and unjust abuse on the whole learned body he had been just aiming, in vain, to become a member of, is interlarded with the grossest personal scurrility on the characters of Mr. Folkes and Mr. Henry Baker, two gentlemen to whom Dr. Hill had formerly been under the greatest obligations, and whose respective reputations in both the moral and literary world had long been too firmly established for the weak efforts of a disappointed scribbler to shake or undermine. Not contented with this, he proceeded to compile together a large quarto volume entitled” A Review of the Works of the Royal Society,“in which, by the most unfair quotations, mutilations, and misrepresentations, numbers of the papers read in that illustrious assembly, and published under the title of the” Philosophical Transactions,“are endeavoured to be rendered ridiculous. This work is ushered into the world with a most abusive and infamous dedication to Martin Folkes, esq. against whom and the afore-mentioned Mr. Henry Baker the weight of this furious attack was chiefly aimed but the whole recoiled upon himself; and by such personal abuse, malignant altercation, proud and insolent behaviour, together with the slovenliness and inaccuracy of careless and hasty productions, he wrote himself out of repute both with booksellers and the town; and, after some time, sunk in the estimation of the public nearly as fast as he had risen. He found, however, as usual, resources in his own invention. He applied himself to the preparation of certain simple medicines namely,” the Essence of Water-dock; Tincture of Valerian Pectoral Balsam of Honey and Tincture of Bardana.“The well-known simplicity of these preparations led the public to judge favourably of their effects; they had a rapid sale, and once more enabled the doctor to live in splendour. Soon after the publication of the first of these medicines, he obtained the patronage of the earl of Bute; under which he published a very pompous and voluminous botanical work, entitled” A System of Botany;“but is said to have been a very considerable loser by this speculation. His botanical works, however, had a favourable influence in promoting the science in general. To wind up the whole of so extraordinary a life, having a year or two before his death presented an elegant set of his botanical works to the king of Sweden, that monarch invested him with one of the orders of his court, that of Vasa, in consequence of which he assumed the title of Sir John. He died Nov. 22, 1775, of the gout, which he professed to cure others. As to his literary character, and the rank of merit in which his writings ought to stand, Hill’s greatest enemies could not deny that he was master of considerable abilities, and an amazing quickness of parts. The rapidity of his pen was ever astonishing, and he has been known to receive within one year, no less than 1500l. for the works of his own single hand; which, as he was never in such estimation as to be entitled to any extraordinary price for his copies, is, we believe, at least three times as much as ever was made by any one writer in the same period of time. But, had he written much less, his works would probably have been much more read. The vast variety of subjects he handled, certainly required such a fund of universal knowledge, and such a boundless genius, as were never perhaps known to centre in any one man; and it is not therefore to be wondered, if, in regard to some he appears very inaccurate, in some very superficial, and in others altogether inadequate to the task he had undertaken. His works on philosophical subjects seemed most likely to have procured him fame, had he allowed himself time to digest the knowledge he possessed, or preserved that regard to veracity which the relation of scientific facts so rigidly demands. His novels, of which he has written many, such as” The History of Mr. Lovell,“(in which he had endeavoured to persuade the world he had given the detail of his own life),” The Adventures of a Creole,“” The Life of Lady Frail,“&c. have, in some parts of them, incidents not disagreeably related, but the most of them are merely narratives of private intrigues, containing throughout the grossest calumnies, and endeavouring to blacken and undermine the private characters of many worthy persons. In his” Essays,“which are by much the best of hia writings, there is, in general, a liveliness of imagination, and adroitness in the manner of extending, perhaps some very trivial thought, which at first may by many be mistaken for wit; but, on a nearer examination, will be found to lose much of its value. A continued use of smart short periods, bold assertions, and bolder egotisms, produces a transient effect, but seldom tempts the spectator to take a second glance. The utmost that can be said of Hill is, that he had talents, but that, in general, he either greatly nisapplied them, or most miserably hackneyed them for profit. As a dramatic writer he stands in no estimation^ nor has he been known in that view by any thing but three very insignificant pieces: namely, 1.” Orpheus,“an opera, 1740. 2.” The Critical Minute,“a farce, published in 1754, but not acted, 3.” The Rout," a farce, 1754*. A large volume might be written on the life and! adventures of this extraordinary man, as affording a complete history of literary quackery, every branch of which he pursued with a greater contempt for character than perhaps any man in our time.

* Archbishop Seeker one day, at be Christians, replied, “If they were, his table, when the Monthly Reviewers it was certainly ‘secundum usum Winwt-re said, by one of the company, to ton’.” the list of persons to be created doctors of physic: but either by chance or management, his name was not found in the last list; and he had not his degree of M. D, till about a month after, by a particular mandamus. He was elected F. R. S. in 1726, when he was very young, and had the honour of being made known to the learned world as a philosopher, by “A Letter from the rev. Dr. Samuel Clarke to Mr. Benjamin Hoadly, F. R. S. occasioned by the present controversy among the mathematicians concerning the proportion of Velocity and Force in bodies in motion.” He was made registrar of Hereford while his father filled that see; and was appointed physician to his majesty’s household so early as June 9, 1742. Jt is remarkable, that he was for some years physician to both the royal households; having been appointed to that of the prince of Wales, Jan. 4, 1745-6, in the place of Dr. Lamotte, a Scotch physician, whom the prince had himself ordered to be struck out of the list, on some imprudent behaviour at the Smyrna coffee-house at the time of the rebellion in 1745. The appointment was attended with some circumstances of particular honour to Dr. Hoadly. The prince himself, before the warrant could be finished, ordered the style to be altered; and that he should be called physician to the household, and not extraordinary, as the other had been: observing, that this would secure that place to him in case of a demise, and be a bar against any one getting over him. Nay, not content with this, his royal highness voluntarily wrote a letter to the bishop with his own hand “that he was glad of this opportunity of giving him a token of his gratitude for his services formerly to his family; and that he was his affectionate Frederic, P.” Dr. Hoadly is said to have filled these posts with singular honour. He married, 1. Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Betts, esq. of Suffolk, counsellor at law, by whom he had one son, Benjamin, that died an infant. 2 Anne, daughter and co-heiress of the honourable general Armstrong, by whom he left no issue. He died in the lifetime of his father, Aug. 10, 1757, athishouM it Chelsea, which he had built ten years before. He published, 1. “Three Letters on the Organs of Respiration, read at the royal college of physicians, London, A. D. 1737, being the Gulstonian lectures for that year. To which is added, an Appendix, containing remarks on some experiments of Dr. Houston, published in the Transactions of the Royal Society for the year 1736, by Benjamin Hoadly, M. B. fellow of the college of physicians, and of the royal society, London,” 1740, 4to. 2. “Oratio anniversaria in Theatro Coll. Medicor. Londinensium, ex Harveii instttuto habita die 18 Oct. A. D. 1742, a Benj. Hoadly, M. D. Coll. Med. & S. R. S.” 1742, esteemed a very elegant piece of Latin. 3. “The Suspicious Husband, a Comedy.” 4. “Observations on a Series of Electrical experiments, by Dr. Hoadly and Mr. Wilson, F. R. S.” 1756, 4to. The doctor was, in his private character, an amiable humane man, and an agreeable sprightly companion. In his profession he was learned and judicious; and, as a writer, has been long known in the theatrical world as the author of a comedy, “The Suspicious Husband,” which appeared first in 1747, and has kept its place on every stage since with undiminished attractions.

, an English historian, and famous for the Chronicles that go under his name, was descended from a family which lived at Bosely, in Cheshire: but neither the place nor time of his birth, nor scarcely any other circumstances of his life, are known. Some say he had an university education, and was a clergyman; while others, denying this, affirm that he was steward to Thomas Burdett, of Bromcote in the county of Warwick, esq. Be this as it will, he appears to have been a man of considerable learning, and to have had a particular turn for history. His “Chronicles” were first published in 1577, in 2 vols. folio; and then in 1587, in three, the two first of which are commonly bound together. In this second edition several sheets were castrated in the second and third volumes, because there were passages in them disagreeable to queen Elizabeth and her ministry: but the castrations were reprinted apart in 1723. Holinshed was not the sole author or compiler of this work, but was assisted in it by several other writers. The first volume opens with “An historical Description of the Island of Britaine, in three books,” by William Harrison; and then, “The Hislorie of England, from the time that it was first inhabited, until the time that it was last conquered,” by R. Holinshed. The second volume contains, “The description, conquest, inhabitation, and troublesome estate of Ireland; particularly the description of that kingdom:” by Richard Stanihurst. “The Conquest of Ireland, translated from the Latin of Giraldus Cambrensis,” by John Hooker, alias Vowell, of Exeter, gent. “The Chronicles of Ireland, beginning where Giraldus did end, continued untill the year 1509, from Philip Flatsburie, Henrie of Marleborow, Edmund Campian,” &c. by R. Holinshed; and from thence to 1586, by R. Stanihurst and J. Hooker. “The Description of Scotland, translated from the Latin of Hector Boethius,” by R. H. or W. H. “The Historie of Scotland, conteining the beginning, increase, proceedings, continuance, acts and government of the Scottish nation, from the original thereof unto the yeere 1571,” gathered by Raphael Holinshed, and continued from 1571 to 1586, by Francis Boteville, alias Thin, and others. The third volume begins at “Duke William the Norman, commonly called the Conqueror; and descends by degrees of yeeres to all the kings and queenes of England.” First compiled by R. Holinshed, and by him extended to 1577; augmented and continued to 1586, by John Stow, Fr. Thin, Abraham Fleming, and others. The time of this historian’s death is unknown; but it appears from his will, which Hearne prefixed to his edition of Camden’s “Annals,” that it happened between 1578 and 1582.

, an English antiquary, born in 1662, at Skipton, in Craven, Yorkshire, became about 1695 clerk to William Petyt, esq. keeper of the records at the Tower; and continued near sixty years deputy to Mr. Petyt, Mr. Topham, and Mr. Polhill. On the death of Mr. Petyt, which happened Oct. 9, 1707, Mr. Holmes was, on account of his singular abilities and industry, appointed by lord Halifax (then president of a committee of the House of lords) to methodize and digest the records deposited in the Tower, at a yearly salary of 200l. which was continued to his death, Feb. 16, 1748-9, in the 87th year of his age. He was also barrack-master of the Tower. He married a daughter of Mr. Marshall, an eminent sword-cutler in Fleet-street, by whom he had an only son George, who was bred at Eton, and was clerk under his father, but died, aged 25, many years before him. Holmes re-published the first 17 volumes of Rymer’s “Fœdera,” in 1727. His curious collections of books, prints, and coins, &c. were sold by auction in 1749. His portrait was engraved by the society of antiquaries, with this inscription: "Vera effigies Georgii Holmes generosi, R. S. S. & tabularii publici in Turre Londinensi Vicecustodis; quo munere annos circiter LX summa fide & diligentia perfunctus, XIV kalend. Mart. A. D. MDCCXLVIII, ætatis suæ LXXXVII, fato demum concessit. In fratris sui erga se meritorum testimonium hanc tabulam Societas Antiquariorum Londini, eujus commoda semper promovit, sumptu suo æri incidendum curavit, MDCCXLIX. R. Van Bteek, p. 1743. G. Vertue del. & sculp.“—In Strype’s London, 1754, vol. I. p 746, is a fac-simile of an antique inscription over the little door ftext to the cloister in the Temple church. It was in old Saxon capital letters, engraved within an half-circle; denoting the year when the church was dedicated, and by whom, namely, Heraclius the patriarch of the church of the Holy Resurrection in Jerusalem; and to whom, namely, the Blessed Virgin; and the indulgence of forty days pardon to such who, according to the penance enjoined them, resorted thither yearly. This inscription, which was scarcely legible, and in 1695 was entirely broken by the workmen, having been exactly transcribed by Mr. Holmes, was by him communicated to Strype. Mrs. Holmes out-lived her husband, and received of government 200l. for his Mss. about the records, which were deposited and remain in his office to this day. Few men, in a similar office, were ever more able or willing to assist the researches of those who applied to him, than Mr. Holmes; and he received many handsome acknowledgements of his politeness and abilities, in that respect, from Browne Willis, Dr. Tovey, principal of New-Inn-hall, Oxford, Dr. Richardson, editor of” Godwin de Presulibus," and others.

, an eminent prelate and martyr, was horn in Somersetshire, in 1495, and entered of Merton college, Oxford, in 1514, under the tuition of his uncle John Hooper, a fellow of that house. In 1518 he was admitted B. A.; the only degree he took in this university. It is supposed that he afterwards became one of the number of Cistercians, or white monks, and contir nued some years, until, becoming averse to a monastic life, he returned to Oxford, where, by the writings of some of the reformers which had reached that place, he was in-r duced to embrace the principles of protestantism. In. 1539, when the statute of the six articles was put in execution, he left Oxford, and got into the service of sir Thomas Arundel, a Devonshire gentleman, to whom he became chaplain, and steward of his estate; but this gentleman discovering his principles, withdrew his protection, and he was then obliged to go to France, where he conti r nued for some time among the reformed, until his dislike of some of their proceedings made him return to England; but, being again in danger here, he in the disguise of a, sailor escaped to Ireland, and thence to Holland and Swisserland. At Zurich be met with Bullinger, himself a refugee from his country for the sake of religion, and who, therefore, gave Hooper a friendly reception. During his residence here, Hooper married a Burgundian lady.

His love for retirement seems to have increased with his age, and for some years he was only at Rome in the spring, passing the summer in the country, and the winter at Tarentum. He never could be prevailed on to undertake any great work, though he was strongly solicited to it; yet his gratitude to Augustus called upon him sometimes to sing his triumphs over Pompey and Antony, or the victorious exploits of Tiberius and Drusus. His “Carmen saeculare” be composed at the express command of Augustus; and to oblige him, wrote also the first epistle of the second book. That prince had kindly reproached him with having said so little of him in his writings; and asked him in a letter written on this occasion, “whether he thought it would disgrace him with posterity, if he should seem to have been intimate with him r” upon which he addressed the epistle just mentioned to him.

In 1768 he went to Christ church, Oxford, as private tutor to Heneage earl of Aylesbury, then lord Guernsey. To this university he appears to have become attached; and his first mathematical publication was elegantly printed at the Clarendon press, “Apollonii Pergaci inclinationum libri duo. Resthuebat S. Horsley,” 1770. This work was criticised with some severity at the time, but does not appear to have injured his rising reputation, especially wnh the members of the royal society, who chose him to the office of secretary in November 1773. In 1774 he was incorporated B.C. L. at Oxford, and immediately proceeded to the degree of D. C. L. and was presented by his patron, the earl of Aylesbury, to the rectory of Aldbiiry in. Surrey, with which he obtained a dispensation to hold the rectory of Newington. In the same year he published “Remarks on the Observations made in the late Voyage towards the North Pole, for determining the acceleration, of the Pendulum, in latitude 79 51'. In a letter to the hon. Constantinefohn Phipps,” 4to. His intention in this pamphlet, which ought ever to be bound up with “Phipps’s Voyage,” is to correct two or three important errors and inaccuracies that had been introduced, by Israel Lyons, the mathematician employed on the voyage, in the numerous mathematical calculations which appear in that valuable work; and this it was acknowledged, was performed by our learned author with equal skill, delicacy, and candour. I>r. Horsley had long meditated a complete edition of the works of sir Isaac Newton, and in 1776 issued proposals for printing it, by subscription, in 5 vote. 4to, having obtained the royal permission to dedicate it to his majesty; but the commencement of it was for a considerable time delayed by severe domestic affliction, arising from the illness of his wife, for whom he had the tenderest regard. She died in the following year, and some time after, the works of Newton were put to press, but were not finally completed until 1785. In the mean time his great diligence and proficiency in various sciences attracted the notice of an excellent judge of literary merit, the late Dr. Lowth, bishop of London, who on his promotion to that see in 1777, appointed Dr. Horsley his domestic chaplain; and collated him to a prebend in St. Paul’s cathedral. He also, by the same interest, succeeded his father as clerk in orders at St. Martin’s in the Fields.

Bishop Horsley’s works not yet mentioned, were, besides various occasional Sermons and Charges, 1. “On the properties of the Greek and Latin languages,” 1796, 8vo, without his name. 2. “On the acronychal rising of the Pleiades,” a dissertation appended to his friend Dr. Vincent’s “Voyage of Nearchus,” 1797. 3. “A circular Letter to the diocese of Rochester, on the Scarcity of Corn,” 1796. 4. Another circular Letter to that diocese, on “the Defence of the Kingdom,” 1798. 5. Critical Disquisitions on the 18th chapter of Isaiah: in a letter to Edward King, esq. F. R. S. &c.“1799, 4to. Towards the close of this discussion, in which he applies the words of Isaiah to the aspect of the times, he says, with almost a prophetic spirit,” I see nothing in the progress of the French arms which any nation fearing God, and worshipping the Son, should fear to resist: I see every thing that should rouse all Christendom to a vigorous confederate resistance. I see every thing that should excite this country in particular to resist, and to take the lead in a confederacy of resistance, by all measures which policy can suggest, and the valour and opulence of a great nation can supply.“6.” Hosea, translated from the Hebrew; with notes explanatory and critical,“1801, 4to. Archbishop Newcome, in his” Improved Version of the Minor Prophets,“had preceded bishop Horsley in translating Hosea; but our prelate has thought proper in so many instances to reject his emendations, that bishop Horsley’s labours will probably be thought indispensable to a just illustration of the sacred text. This was reprinted with large additions in 1804. 7.” Elementary treatises on the fundamental principles of practical Mathematics; for the use of students,“1801, 8vo. These tracts were at first composed, without any design of publication, for the use of his son, then a student of Christ-church; and the work was to be considered, although then first published, as the third and last in the order of the subject, of three volumes of elementary geometry, to be issued one after another from the university press of Oxford, The first accordingly appeared in 1802, under the title of” Euclidig Elementorum Libri priores XII. ex Commandini et Gregorii versionibus Latinis,“Oxon, 8vo; and the second in J 804,” Euclidis datorum liber, cum additamento, necnon tractatus alii ad geometriam pertinentes," ibid. 8vo.

In 1762 we find him warmly engaged in controversy, supporting his claim to different anatomical discoveries, in, a work entitled “Medical Commentaries,” the style of which is correct and spirited . As an excuse for the tardiness with which he brought forth this work, he observes in his introduction, that it required a good deal of time, and be had little to spare; that the subject was unpleasant, and therefore he was very seldom in the humour to take it up. In 1762, when our present excellent queen became pregnant, Dr. Hunter was consulted; and two years after he had the honour to be appointed physicianextraordinary to her majesty. About this time his avocations were so numerous, that he became desirous of lessening his fatigue, and having noticed the ingenuity and assiduous application of the late Mr. William Hewson, F. R. S. who was then one of his pupils, he engaged him, first as an assistant, and afterwards as a partner in his lectures. This connection continued till 1770, when some disputes happened, which terminated in a separation. [See Hewson]. Mr. Hewson was succeeded in the partnership by Mr. Cruikshank, whose anatomical abilities were deservedly respected.

April 30, 1767, Dr. Hunter was elected F. R. S. and the year following communicated to that learned body “Observations on the Bones commonly supposed to be Elephants’ bones, which have been found near the river Ohio in America.” This was not the only subject of natural history on which Dr. Hunter employed his pen; for in a subsequent volume of the “Philosophical Transactions,” we find him offering his “Remarks on some Bones found in the Rock of Gibraltar,” which he proves to have belonged to some quadruped. In the same work, likewise, he published an account of the Nyl-ghau, an Indian animal not described before, and which, from its strength and swiftness, promised, he thought, to be an useful acquisition to this country.

Of the magnitude and value of his anatomical collection, some idea may be formed, when we consider the great length of years he employed in making anatomical preparations, and in the dissection of morbid bodies; added to the eagerness with which he procured additions, from the collections that were at different times offered for sale in London. His specimens of rare diseases were likewise frequently increased by presents from his medical friends and pupils, who, when any thing of this sort occurred to them, very justly thought they could not dispose of it more properly than by placing it in Dr. Hunter’s museum. Before his removal to Windmill-street, he had confined his collection chiefly to specimens of human and comparative anatomy, and of diseases; but now he extended his views to fossils, and likewise to the branches of polite literature and erudition. In a short space of time he became possessed of “the most magnificent treasure of Greek and Latin books that has been accumulated by any person now living, since the days of Mead.” A cabinet of ancient medals contributed likewise greatly to the richness of his museum. A description of part of the coins in this collection, struck by the Greek free cities, has been published by the doctor’s learned friend Mr. Combe, under the title of “Nummorum veterurn populorum & urbium qui in museo Guliehni Hunter asservantur descriptio figuris illustrata. Opera & studio Caroli Combe, S. R. & S. A. Soc. Londini,” 1783, 4to. In a classical dedication of this elegant volume to the queen, Dr. Hunter acknowledges his obligations to her majesty. In the preface, some account is given of the progress of the collection, which had been brought together since 1770, with singular taste, and at the expence of upwards of 20,000l. In 1781, the museum received a valuable addition of shells, corals, and other curious subjects of natural history, which had been collected by the late Dr. Fothergill, who gave directions by his will, that his collection should be appraised after his death, and that Dr. Hunter should have the refusal of it at 500l. under the valuation. This was accordingly done, and Dr. Hunter purchased it for the sum of 1200l.

In the end of February 1788, was published in 7 vols. 4to, a complete edition of the Works of bishop Warburton, prepared by our prelate, but who did not publish the “Life” until 1795. In March 1788, a fine gold medal was given to him by his majesty at the queen’s house; the king’s head on one side; the reverse was taken from the bishop’s seal (a cross with the initials on a label, 1. N. R. I. a glory above, and the motto below sx irurleus), which his majesty chanced to see and approved. The die was cut by Mr. Burch, and the medal designed for the annual prize-dissertation on theological subjects, in the university of Gottingen. In the summer of the same year he was honoured with a visit from their majesties at Hartlebury castle.

, a celebrated divine and martyr, was born at a town in Bohemia, called Hussenitz, about 1376, and liberally educated in the university of Prague. Here he took the degree of B. A. in 1393, and that of master in 1395; and we find him, in 1400, in orders, and a minister of a church in that city. About this time the writings of our countryman Wickliffe had spread themselves among the Bohemians, which was owing to the following circumstance: Queen Anne, the wife of Richard II. of England, was daughter to the emperor Charles IV. and sister to Wenceslaus king of Bohemia, and Sigismund emperor of Germany. She was a princess of great piety, virtue, and knowledge, nor could she endure the implicit service and devotion of the Romish church. Her death happened in 1394, and her funeral was attended by all the nobility of England. She had patronized Wickliffe, and after her death, several of Wickliffe’s books were carried by her attendants into Bohemia, and were the means of promoting the reformation there. They had also been carried into the same country by Peter Payne, an Englishman, one of his disciples, and principal of Edmund-hall. Fox mentions another person, a young nobleman of Bohemia, who had studied some time at Oxford, and carried home with him several of Wickliffe’s tracts. They were particularly read by the students at Prague, among the chief of whom was Huss; who, being much taken with Wickliffe’s notions, began to preach and write with great zeal against the superstitions and errors of the church of Rome. He succeeded so far, that the sale of indulgences gradually decreased among the Bohemians; and the pope’s party declared, that there would soon be an end of religion, if measures were not taken to oppose the restless endeavours of the Hussites. With a view, therefore, of preventing this danger, Subinco, the archbishop of Prague, issued forth two mandates in 1408; one, addressed to the members of the university, by which they were ordered to bring together all Wickliffe’s writings, that such as were found no contain any thing erroneous or heretical might be burnt; the other, to all curates and ministers, commanding them to teach the people, that, after the consecration of the elements in the holy Sacrament, there remained nothing but the real body and blood of Christ, under the appearance of bread and wine. Hjiss, whose credit and authority in the university were very great, as well for his piety and learning, as on account of considerable services he had done, found no difficulty in persuading many of its members of the unreasonableness and absurdity of these mandates: the first being, as he said, a plain encroachment upon the liberties and privileges of the university, whose members had an indisputable right to possess, and to read all sorts of books; the second, inculcating a most abominable error. Upon this foundation they appealed to Gregory XII. and the archbishop Subinco was summoned to Rome. But, on acquainting the pope that the heretical notions of WicklifTe were gaining ground apace in Bohemia, through the zeal of some preachers who had read his books, a bull was granted him for the suppression of all such notions in his province. By virtue of this bull, Subinco condemned the writings of Wickliffe, and proceeded against four doctors, who bad not complied with his mandate in bringing in their copies. Huss and others, who were involved in this sentence, protested against this projcedure of the archbishop, and appealed from him a second time, in June 1410. The matter was then brought before John XXIII. who ordered Huss, accused of many errors and heresies, to appear in person at the court of Rome, and gave a special commission to cardinal Colonna to cite him. Huss, however, under the protection and countenance of Wenceslaus king of Bohemia, did riot appear, but sent three deputies to excuse his absence, and to answe'r all which should be alledged against him. Colonna paid no regard to the deputies, nor to any defence they could make; but. declared Huss guilty of contumacy to the court of Rome, and excommunicated him for it. Upon this the deputies appealed from the cardinal to the pope, who commissioned four other cardinals to examine into the affair. These commissaries not only confirmed all that Colonna had done, but extended the excommunication, which was limited to Huss, to his friends and followers: they also declared him an Heresiarch, and pronounced an interdict against him.

Dr. Huxham' s writings display a most intimate acquaintance with the writings of the ancients, and a great veneration for those of Hippocrates in particular; and he quotes the ancient languages, and writes the Latin, with great fluency and familiarity. He appears to have spent his life ;at Plymouth in the active exercise of his profession for he kept a register of the state of health and reigning diseases at that place, together with an account of the variety of the seasons, for nearly thirty years, (namely, from 1724 to 1752 inclusive); which were published in Latin, under the title of“Gbservationes de Acre et Morbis Epidemicis,” tc. in 3 vols. 8vo. The first of these volumes commences with an account of the year 1728 but in the dedication to sir Hans Sloane, he refers to an account of the constitution and diseases of the seasons from 1724 to 1727, already published. The third volume was edited in 1770, after the death of the author, by his son J. Cor. Huxham, A. M. F. R. S.; who, it is to be regretted, did not insert any memoirs of his father’s life.

In the parliament which began at Westminster April 10, 1640, he served as burgess for Wotton-Basset in Wiltshire; and distinguished himself upon the following occasion. His majesty having acquainted the house of commons, that he would release the ship-money, if they would grant him twelve subsidies, to be paid in three years, great debates arose in the house that day and the next; when Hampden, seeing the matter ripe for the question, desired it might be put, “whether the house should comply with the proposition made by the king, as it was contained in the message?” Serjeant Glanvile, the speaker, for the house was then in a committee, endeavoured in a pathetic speech to persuade them to comply with the king, and so reconcile him to parliaments for ever. No speech ever united the inclination of a popular council more to th speaker than this did and if the question had been immediately put, it was believed that few would have opposed it. But, after a short silence, the other side recovering new courage, called again with some earnestness, thai Hampden’s question should be put; which being like to meet with a concurrence, Hyde, who was desirous to preserve a due medium, after expressing his dislike of Hampden’s question, proposed, that “to the end every man might freely give his yea or no, the question might be put only upon giving the king a supply; and if this was carried, another might be put upon the manner and proportion: if not, it would have the same effect with the other proposed by Mr. Hampden.” This, after it had been some time opposed and diverted by other propositions, which were answered by Hyde, would, as it is generally believed, have been carried in the affirmative, though positively opposed by Herbert the solicitor-general, if sir Henry Vane the secretary had not assured them as from his majesty, that if they should pass a vote for a supply, and not in the proportion proposed in his -majesty’s message, it would not be accepted by him, and therefore desired that the question might be laid aside. This being again urged by the solicitor-general, and it being near five in the afternoon, a very late hour in those days, it was readily consented to, that the house should adjourn till the reXt morning, at which time they were suddenly dissolvea. And within an hour after Hyde met St. John, who was seldom known to smile, but then had a most cheerful aspect; and observing Hyde melancholy, asked him, “what troubled him r” who answered, “The same he believed that troubled most good men, that, in a time of so much confusion, so wise a parliament should be so imprudently dissolved.” St. John replied somewhat warmly, “that all was well: that things must grow worse, before they would grow better; and that that parliament would never have done what was requisite.”

"My Lord, your Lordship’s, K r c.

Being now about to quit the kingdom in exile, before he departed he drew up an apology, in a petition to the house of lords, in which he vindicated himself from any way contributing to the late miscarriages, in such a manner as laid the blame at the same time upon others. The lords received it Dec. 3, and sent two of the judges to acquaint the commons with it, desiring a conference. The duke of Buckingham, who was plainly aimed at in the petition, delivered it to the commons; and said, “The lords have commanded me to deliver to you this scandalous and seditious paper sent from the earl of Clarendon. They bid me present it to you, and desire you in a convenient time to send it to them again; for it has a style which they are in love with, and therefore desire to keep it.” Upon the reading of it in that house, it was voted to be “scandalous, malicious, and a reproach to the justice of the nation;” and they moved the lords, that it might be burnt by the hands of the common hangman, which was ordered and executed accordingly. The chancellor retired to Rouen in Normandy; and, the year following, his life was attempted at Evreux near that city by a body of seamen, in such an outrageous manner, that he with great difficulty escaped. In the Bodleian library at Oxford, there is an original letter from Mr. Oliver Long, dated from Evreux, April 26, 1668, to sir William Cromwell, secretary of state, in which the following account is given of this assault. “As I was travelling from Rouen towards Orleans, it was my fortune, April 23, to overtake the earl of Clarendon, then in his unhappy and unmerited exile, who was going towards Bourbon, but took up his lodgings at a private hotel in a small walled town called Evreux, some leagues from Rouen. I, as most English gentlemen did to so valuable a patriot, went to pay him a visit near supper-time; when he was, as usual, very civil to me. Before supper was done, twenty or thirty English seamen and more came and demanded entrance at the great gate; which, being strongly barred, kept them out for some time. But in a short space they broke it, and presently drove all they found, by their advantage of numbers, into the earl’s chamber; whence, by the assistance of only three swords and pistols, we kept them out for half an hour, in which dispute many of us were wounded by their swords and pistols, whereof they had many. To conclude, they broke the windows and the doors, and under the conduct of one Howard, an Irishman, who has three brothers, as I am told, in the king of England’s service, and an ensign in the company of cannoneers, they quickly found the earl in his bed, not able to stand by the violence of the gout; whence, after they had given him many blows with the;r swords and staves, mixed with horrible curses and oaths, they dragged him on the ground in the middle of the yard, where they encompassed him around with their swords, and after they had told him in their own language, how he had sold the kingdom, and robbed them of their pay, Howard commanded them all, as one man, to run their swords through his body. But what difference arose among themselves before they could agree, God above, who alone sent this spirit of dissention, only knows. In this interval their lieutenant, one Svvaine, came and disarmed them. Sixteen of the ringleaders were put into prison; and many of those things they had rifled from him, found again, which were restored, and of great value. Mons. la Fonde, a great man belonging to the king of France’s bed-chamber, sent to conduct the earl on his way thither, was so desperately wounded in the head, that there were little hopes of his life. Many of these assassins were grievously wounded; and this action is so much resented by all here, that many of these criminals will meet with an usage equal to their merit. Had we been sufficiently provided with fire-arms, we had infallibly done ourselves justice on them; however, we fear not but the law will supply our defect.”

The vast extent of his learning and industry will yet appear more extraordinary by a list of the works which, according to Wood, he had planned, and partly prepared for the press. These are, 1. “Grammatica pro Lingua Persica,” 4to. 2. “Lexicon Persico-Latinum,” in a thick 4to. 3. “Lexicon Turcico-Latinum,” in a thick 4to. 4. “Nomenclator Mogolo-Tartaricum, cum Grammatic& ejusdem Linguae.” 5. “Dissertatio de Tartaria. Item Historia Chartiludii & Dissertatio de Numerorum Notis, earundemque origine & combinandi ratione, doctrina nova,” 8vo. 6. “Curiosa Cbinensia & Selanensia,” 8vo. 7. “Historia Gemmarum Arabice & Latin^, cum Notis,” 8vo. 8. “Historia Tamerlanis Arabice & Latine cum Notis,” 4to. 9. “Liber Bustan Persice & Latine cum Notis Liber elegantissimus, autore Scheia Shadi,” 4to. 10. “Divini Poetae Haphix Opus Persice & Latine, cum Notis,” 4to. 11. “Abulfeda3 Geographia Arabice & Latine, cuoj Notis,” 4to. 12. “Liber Bttharistan eloquentissimo stylo corrscriptus, meri ingenii specimina continens, Libruna Gulistan cequans, si non superans, Persice & Latine, cum Notis,” 4to. 13.“Maimonidis Liber More Nevochim transcriptus ex characteribus Hebraicis quibus a Maimonide scriptum est, in proprios Arabicos, cum nova Versione &. Notis, Arabice & Latine,” in a thick 4to. 14. “Historia Regum Persica? ex ipsorutn monumentis & autoribus extracta,” 4to. 15. “Annotntiones in difficiliora loca Biblica ex Literatura Oriental!,” in a thick 4to. 16. “Periplus Marium Mediterranei & Archipelagi,Turcice & Latine, cum circulo ventorum in variis Linguis, Arabica, Persica, Chinensi,” &c. 8vo. 17. “Zoroastris Perso-Medi Opera omnia Mathematico-medico-physico-Theologica, Persice & Latine,” folio. 18. “Liber Erdaviraph-name, Persice & Latine,” 4to. 19. “Lexicon Hebraicum emendatum ex Mss. Lexicis Rabbi Pinchon, R. Jonae, & R. Jesaiae, atque ex collatione cum Linguis Arabica & Persica & aliis Linguis Orientalibus,” 4to. 20. “Coelum Orientale ArabicoPersicum, atq; Occidentale Graeco-Latinum, una cum Saphh Figurationibus Stellarum duplici situ, prout in Coelo, & prout in Globo apparent, cum earum nominibus secundu-rn harum gentium doctrinam,” 4to. 21. “Commentarius in Pentateuchum Arabice, auctor Manstir Syro-Arabe ex Scriptura Gershumi in Arabicam transcriptus & Latinitate donatus,” 4to. 22. “Urbium Armeniae Nomenclaturae ex eorum Geographia excerpta,” &c. 23. “Varia Chinensia, scil. eorum Idololatria, Opiniones de Deo & de Paradiso atque de Gehenna, & de Gradibus & modis supplicii de eorum ^Literatura & Libris & Charta, & de imprimendi modo atque antiquitate, c. omnia excerpta ex ore & scriptis nativi Chinensis Shin Fo-burg,” 8vo. 24> “Varia Seianensia, ubi insula? Selan (vulgo Batavis Ceylon) Historica quasdam & vocabularium genuinis eorum characteribus exaratum cum eorum Alphabeto & aliis rebus,” 8vo, 25. “Batamense Alphabetum a Legato scriptum cum Literarum potestate & numerorum notis,” 8vo. 26. “Notas Arithmetics variarum Gentium, ubi talium Notarum origo & combinandi ratio docetur,” 8vo. 27. “Dialog! Arabico-Persico-Turcici, Latine versi,” 8vo. 28. “Liber de '1 urcarum opinionibus in rebus religiosis, Turcice & Latine,” 8vo. 29. “Utilia, mensalia, scil. quid in Conversatione Convivali decorum est, Arabice & Latine,” 8vo. 30. “Rivolae Lexicon Arrneniacum cum Linguis Orientalibus (scil. Arabica, Persica, & Turcica) collatum & in margine notatum,” 4to. 31. “Evangeliuoa Lucas & AcU Apostolorum Lingua & Charactere Malaico,” 4to. He also translated into English the letters of several Eastern kings and princes sent to king Charles II, king James II, and king William III.

, an Arabian philosopher, was contemporary with Averroes, who died about the year 1198. He composed a philosophical romance, entitled “The Life or History of Hai Ebn Yokdhan” in which he endeavours to demonstrate, how a man may, by the mere light of nature, attain the knowledge of things natural and supernatural; particularly the knowledge of God, and the affairs of another life. He lived at Seville in Spain, as appears from one or two passages in this work, and was famous for his medical skill, and for his knowledge of the Peripatetic philosophy, of which this work exhibits a favourable specimen, as it was taught among the Saracens. He wrote some other pieces, which are not come to our hands; but, that this was well received in the East, appears from its having been translated by R. Moses Narbonensis, into Hebrew, and illustrated with a large commentary. It was published in 1671, with an accurate Latin version, by Mr. Edward Pococke, son of Dr. Pococke, professor of the Oriental languages at Oxford; and, in 1708, an English translation of it from the Arabic was given by Simon Ockley, soon after Arabic professor at Cambridge. It is written with great elegance of language, and vigour of imagination.

, an ingenious letter-founder, whose history affords one of those edifying examples which cannot be too often placed before the eyes of the young artisan, was born in Old-street, London, Sept. 4, 1733, and was educated at Fuller’s school in that neighbourhood. At the usual age he was put apprentice to Mr. Caslon, letterfounder, son to the first of that family. Having acquired a knowledge of the common operations, he had an ambition to learn the method of cutting punches; which was so much a secret, that both his master and his master’s father always locked themselves into a private apartment, when employed in that important branch of the business. Mr. Jackson, however, surmounted this difficulty, by boring a hole through the wainscot, and prying into their operations with such success, that he was soon enabled to finish a punch, and brought it in triumph to his master, probably expecting some reward. His surprise and chagrin must have therefore been great, when his master gave him a hard blow, and threatened him with Bridewell, if ever he made such another felonious attempt. Mr. Jackson, however, whose conscience was more easily reconciled to his crime, than his temper was to his punishment, was, by the assistance of his mother, provided with the necessary tools, and took every opportunity of improving himself in the art at her house. He continued also to work for his master for some time after the expiration of his apprenticeship, until a dispute respecting wages occasioned his being discharged, along with a Mr. Cottrell, with whom he united in partnership; but, on the death of his mother, in 1759, went on board the Minerva frigate, as armourer. He appears to have returned to London after the peace of 1762-3, and worked for some time under Mr. Cottrell, until, determining to adventure in business for himself, he was encouraged in the scheme, by two life-guardsmen, his felJow workmen, who engaged to allow him a small pittance for his subsistence, and to supply money to carry on the trade, for two years. Taking a small house in Cock-lane, he soon satisfied his partners that the business would be productive, before the time promised. When he had pursued his labours about six months, Mr. Bowyer, the cele.­brated printer, accidentally calling to inspect some of his punches (for he had no specimen), approved them so much, that he promised to employ him. Business increasing rapidly, Mr. Jackson removed to larger premises in Dorsetstreet; and about 1771 was applied to by the late duke of Norfolk, to make a mould to cast a hollow square. His grace informed him, that he had applied to allthe skilful mechanics in London, Mr. Caslon not excepted, who declared it impossible. Mr. Jackson howeve'r undertook, and in the course of three months produced it. He proceeded then in raising the reputation of his foundery; and among other articles of superior difficulty, we may mention the fac-simile types for the Domesday-book, and for the Alexandrian New Testament, and the types for Macklin’s Bible. Mr. Jackson died at his house in Dorset-street, Salisburysquare, Jan. 14, 1722.

His works are, 1. “Philobiblion R. Dunelmensis,” 1599, 4to. 2. “Ecloga Oxonio-Cantabrigiensis,” Lond. 1600, 4to. 3. “Cyprianus Redivivus, &c.” printed with the “Ecloga.” 4. “Spicilegium divi Augustini hoc est, libri de fide ad Pet. Diacon. collatio & castigatio,” printed also with the “Ecloga.” 5. “Bellum papale seu concordia discors Sext. V. & dementis VIII. circa Hieronym. Edition.” Lond. 1600, 4to, and 1678, 8vo. 6. “Catalogus Librorum in Bibliotheca Bodleiana,” Oxford, 1605, 4to, reprinted with many additions in 1620, 4to, to which was added an appendix in 1636: in this catalogue is inserted that of all the Mss. then in the Bodleian library. 7. “Concordantiae Ss. patrum, i.e. vera & pialibri Canticorum per patres universes, &c.” Oxford, 1607, 4to. 8. “Apology for John Wickliffe, &c.” Oxford, 1608, 4to to this is added the “Life of John Wickliffe.” 9. “A Treatise of the Corruption of Scriptures, Councils, and Fathers, &c.” Lond. 1611, 4to, and 1688, 8vo; this is reckoned his principal work. It is amply analyzed by Oldys in his “Librarian.” 10. “The Jesuits’ Downfall threatened for their wicked lives, accursed manners, heretical doctrine, and more than Machiavelian policy,” Oxford, 1612, 4to; to this is added “The Life of father Parsons, an English Jesuit.” 11. “Filius Papae papalis,” ch. 1. Lond. 1621; translated from Latin into English by William Crashaw: the author’s name is not put to it 12. “Index generalis sanct, Patrum ad singulos versus cap. v. secundum Matthseum, &c.” Lond. 1624, 8vo. 13. “Notae ad Georg. Wicelium de methodo concordiae ecclesiasticae,” &c. 1695, 8vo. 14. “Vindiciae Gregorianae, seu restitutus Gregorius Magnus ex Mss. &c. de Genevas,” 1625. 15. “Manuduction, or Introduction unto Divinity, &c.” Oxford, 1625, 4to. 16. “Humble and earnest Request to the Church of England, for and in the behalf of books touching Religion,” in one sheet, 1625, 8vo. 17. “Explanation or enlarging of the Ten Articles in his Supplication lately exhibited to the clergy of the church of England,” Oxford, 1625, 4to. 18. “Specimen Corruptelarum poutificiorum in Cypriano, Ambrosio, Greg. Magno, &c.” Lond. 1626. 19. “Index librorum prohibitorum a pontificiis, Oxford,” 1627, 8vo. 20. “Admonitio ad theologos protestantes de libris pontificiorum caute legendis,” ms. 21. “Enchiridion theologicum,” ms. 22. “Liber de suspicionibus & conjecturis,” ms. These three Wood says he saw in the Lambeth library, under D. 42, 3; but whether printed, says he, I know not, perhaps the “Enchiridion” is. Dr. James likewise translated, from French into English, “The Moral Philosophy of the Stoics,” Lond. 1598, 8vo; and published two short treatises against the order of begging friars, written by Wickliffe; with a book entitled “Fiscus papalis, sive catalogus indulgentiarum,” &c. Lond. 1617, 4to: but some were of opinion this book was published by William Crashaw, already mentioned. Several letters of our author are in the appendix to Parr’s “Life of Usher.”

R. James."

, a learned civilian and able statesman, was descended from a family in Wales, being the son of Leoline Jenkins, who was possessed of an estate of 40l, a year, at Llantrisaint, in Glamorganshire, where this son was born about 1623. He discovered an excellent genius and disposition for learning, by the great progress he made in Greek and Latin, at Cowbridge-school, near Llantrisaint; whence he was removed in 1641 to Jesus-r college, in Oxford, and upon the breaking out of the civil war soon after, took up arms, among other students, on the side of the king. This, however, did not interrupt his studies, which he continued with all possible vigour; not leaving Oxford till after the death of the king. He then retired to his own country, near Llantrythyd, the seat of sir John Aubrey, which, having been left void by sequestration, served as a refuge to several eminent loyalists; among whom was Dr. Mansell, the late principal of his college. This gentleman invited him to sir John Aubrey’s house, and introduced him to the friendship of the rest of his fellow-sufferers there, as Frewen, abp. of York, and Sheldon, afterwards abp. of Canterbury; a favour which through his own merit and industry, laid the foundation of all his future fortunes. The tuition of sir John Aubrey’s eldest son was the first design in this invitation; and he acquitted himself in it so well, that he was soon after recommended in the like capacity to many other young gentlemen of the best rank and quality in those parts, whom he bred up in the doctrine of the church of England, treating them like an intimate friend rather than a master, and comforting them with hopes of better times.

In the same year he received a diploma from Trinity college, Dublin, complimenting him with the title of doctor of laws; and after many delays, his edition of Shakspeare was published in eight volumes octavo. The preface is universally acknowledged to be one of the most elegant and acute of all his compositions. But as an illustrator of the obscurities of Shakspeare, it must be allowed he has not done much, nor was this a study for which he was eminently qualified. He was never happy when obliged to borrow from others, and he had none of that useful industry which indulges in research. Yet his criticisms have rarely been surpassed, and it is no small praise that he was the precursor of Steevens and Malone. The success of the Shakspeare was not great, although upon the whole it increased the respect with which the literary world viewed his talents. Kenrick made the principal attack on this work, which was answered by an Oxford student named Barclay. But neither the attack nor the answer attracted much notice. In 1766 he furnished the preface, and some of the pieces which compose a volume of poetical “Miscellanies” by Mrs. Anna Williams. This lady was still an inmate in his house, and was indeed absolute mistress. Although her temper was far from pleasant, and she had now gained an ascendancy over him which she often maintained in a fretful and peevish manner, he forgot every thing in her distresses, and was indeed in all his charities, which were numerous, the most remote that can be conceived from the hope of gratitude or reward. His house was filled by dependants whose perverse tempers frequently drove him out of it, yet nothing of this kind could induce him to relieve himself at their expence. His noble expression was, “If 1 dismiss them, who will receive them r” Abroad, his society was now very extensive, and included almost every man of the age distinguished for learning, and many persons of considerable rank, who delighted in his company and conversation.

“The king of Denmark, then upon a visit to this country (1768), had brought with him an eastern manuscript, containing the life of Nadir Shah, which he was desirous of having translated in England. The secretary of state, with whom the Danish minister had conversed upon the subject, sent the volume to Mr. Jones, requesting him to give a literal translation of it in the French language: but he wholly declined the task, alleging for his excuse, the dryness of the subject, the difficulty of the style, and chiefly his want both of leisure and ability, to enter upon an undertaking so fruitless and laborious. He mentioned, however, a gentleman, with whom he was not then acquainted, but who had distinguished himself by the translation of a Persian history, and some popular tales froi the Persic, as capable of gratifying the wishes of his Danish Majesty. Major Dow, the wriu-r alluded to, excuse himself on account of his numerous engagements; and tl application to Mr.lono, uus renewed. It was hinted, th his compliance would be of no small advantage to him, at his entrance into life; that it would procure him some mark of distinction, which would be pleasing to him; and above all, that it would be a reflection upon this country, if the king should be obliged to carry the manuscript to France. Incited by these motives, and principally the last, unwilling to be thought churlish or morose, and eager for reputation, he undertook the work, and sent the specimen of it to his Danish majesty, who returned his approbation of the style and method, but desired that the whole translation might be perfectly literal, and the oriental images accurately preserved. The task would have been far easier to him, if he had been directed to finish it in Latin; for the acquisition of a French style was infinitely more tedious, and it was necessary to have every chapter corrected by a native of France, before it could be offered to the discerning eye of the public, since in every language there are certain peculiarities of idiom, and nice shades of meaning, which a foreigner can never attain to perfection. The work, however arduous and unpleasant, was completed in a year, not without repeated hints from the secretary’s office, that it was expected with great impatience by the court of Denmark. The translation was not, however, published until 1770. Forty copies upon large paper were sent to Copenhagen; one of them, bound with uncommon elegance, for the king himself: and the others as presents to his courtiers.”

The “Tale of a Tub,” and the “Magnetic Lady,” were his last dramatic pieces, and bear very few marks of his original powers. He penned another masque in 1634, and we have a “New Year’s Ode” dated in 1G35, but the remainder of his life appears to have been wasted in sickness of the paralytic kind, which at length carried him off, Aug. 16, 1637, in the sixty-third year of his age. Three days afterwards he was interred in Westminster- abbey, at the north-west end near the belfrey, with a common pavement stone laid over his grave, with a short and irreverend inscription of “O rare Ben Jonson,” cut at the expence of sir John Young of Great Milton in Oxfordshire. His death was lamented as a public loss to the poetical world. About six months after this event, his contemporaries joined in a collection of elegies and encomiastic poems, which was published under the title of “Jonsonius Virbius; or the Memory of Ben Jonson revived by the friends of the Muses.” Dr. Duppa, bishop of Chichester, was the editor of this volume, which contained verses by lords Falkland and Buckhurst, sir John Beaumont, sir Francis Wortley, sir Thomas Hawkins, Messrs. Henry King, Henry Coventry, Thomas May, Dudley Diggs, George Fortescue, William Habington, Edmund Waller, J. Vernon, J. Cl. (probably Cleveland) Jasper Mayne, Will. Cartwright, John Rutter, Owen Feltham, George Donne, Shakerley Marmio'n, John Ford, R. Brideoak, Rich. West, R. Meade, H. Ramsay, T. Terrent, Rob. Wasing, Will. Bew, and Sam. Evans. A subscription also was entered hi to for a monument in the Abbey, but prevented by the rebellion. The second earl of Oxford contributed the bust in basrelievo which is now in Poet’s-corner. Jonson had several children, but survived them all. One of them was a poet, and, as Mr. Malqne has discovered, the author of a Drama written in conjunction with Brome. It should seem that he was not on good terms with his father. Fuller says that “Ben was not happy in his children.”

, a very famous genealogist, born of a noble family at Nuremberg, in 1651, was a lawyer in that city, and one of its senators. He was considered as having a profound knowledge of the interests of princes, the revolutions of states, and the history of the principal families in Europe. He died in 1728. His works were, L “Genealogies excellentium in GaHia familiarum,” Norimb. 1687, folio. 2. “Genealogise familiarum Bellomaneriae,” &c. Norimb. 1638, folio. 3. “Historia Genealogica Regum Magnae Britanniae,” Norimb. 1690, folio. 4. “Notitia procerum 5. R. imperil,” Tubingen, 1693, folio. 5. “Historia Italiae et Hispaniae genealogica,” Norimb. 1701, folio. 6. “Corpus Historic genealogicae Italiae et Hispaniae,” Norimb. 1702, folio. 7. “Recherches Historiques et Genealogiques des Grands d'Espagne,” Amst. 1708, folio. 8. “Stemma regium Lusitanicum,” Amst. 1708, folio. 9. “Genealogiae 20 illustrium in Hispama famiharum,” Leipsic, 1720, folio.

, abbot of Croyland, and author of the history of that abbey, was born in London about 1030. He received the first part of his education at Westminster, and when he visited his father, who belonged to the court of Edward the Confessor, he was so fortunate as to engage the attention of queen Edgitha, who took a pleasure in the progress of his education, and in disputing with him in logic, and seldom dismissed him without some present as a mark of her approbation. From Westminster he went to Oxford, where he applied to the study of the Aristotelian philosophy, in which he made greater proficiency than many of his contemporaries, and, as be says, “clothed himself down to the heel in the first and second rhetoric of Tully.” When he was about twenty-one years of age, ho was iotroduced to> William duke of Normandy (who visited the court of England in 105 l) y and made himself so agreeable to that prince, that be appointed him his secretary, and carried him with him into his. Owt dominions. In a little time he became the prime favourite of his prince, and the dispenser of all preferments; but he himself confesses that he did not behave in this station with sufficient modesty and prudence, and that he incurred the envy and hatred of the courtiers, to avoid which he obtained leave from the duke to go on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. In the course of this journey, his attendant pilgrims at one time amounted to seven thousand, but either from being attacked and killed by the Arabs, or other disasters, twenty only of this goodly company were able to return home, and those half-starved, and almost naked. Ingulph now resolved to forsake the world, and became a monk in the abbey of Fontanelle in Normandy, of which he was in a few years made prior. When his old master William of Normandy was preparing for his memorable expedition into England, in 1066 r lagulphus was sent by hiw abbot with one hundred: marks in money, and twelve young men, nobly mounted and completely armed, as a present their abbey. In consequence of this, William raised him afterwards to the government of the rich abbey of Croyland in Lincolnshire, in 107S. Here Ingulphus spent the last thirty-four years of his life, governing that society with great prudence, and protecting their possessions from the rapacity of the neighbouring barons by the favour of his royal master; and here he died Dec. 1, 1109. He wrote, but in a homely Latin style, a very curious and valuable history of Croyland abbey from its foundation, in the year 664 to 1091. It was printed by sir H. Saville,' London, 1596, and is among Gale’s “Scriptores.” There is also an edition of Francfort in 1601, and one of Oxford, 1684, which last is thought the most complete.

, was the only son of one of the most eminent merchants at Yarmouth, where he was born in 1751. He was entered of Caius college, Cambridge, where he did not long reside; but, returning to Yarmouth, became acquainted -with that celebrated antiquary Thomas Martin of Palgrave, and caught from him that taste for antiquities which he pursued during the short period of his life. He was elected F. S. A. 1771, and F. R. S. 1772; and, by favour of the earl of Suffolk, in him the honour of Suffolk herald extraordinary was revived; an office attended with no profit, but valuable to him by the access it gave to the Mss. muniments, &c. of the heralds college, of which he thereby became an honorary member. His first attempt at antiquarian publication was by proposals (without his name) in 1771, for printing an account of Lothingland hundred in Suffolk; for which he had engraved several small plates of arms and monuments in the churches of Friston, Gorleston, Loud, Lowestoffe, and Somerliton, from his own drawings. His next essay was the short preface to Mr. Swinden’s “History and Antiquities of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, 1772,” 4to. Mr. Svvinden, who was a schoolmaster in Great Yarmouth, was a most intimate friend of Mr. Ives, who not only assisted him with his purse, and warmly patronized him while living, but superintended the book for the emolument of the author’s widow, and delivered it to the subscribers . In 1772 he caused to be cut nine wooden plates of old Norfolk seals, entitled “Sigilla antiqua Norfolciensia. Impressit Johannes Ives, S. A. S.” and a copper-plate portrait of Mr. Martin holding an urn, since prefixed to Martin’s “History of Thetford.” On Aug. 16, 1773, by a special licence from the archbishop of Canterbury, he was married at Lambeth church to Miss Kett (of an ancient family in Norfolk), and afterwards resided at Yarmouth.

Mr. Fuseli, who was honoured by the friendship of Angelica, and cherishes her memory, says, that he “has no wish to contradict those who make success the standard of genius, and as their heroine equalled the greatest names in the first, suppose that she was on a level with them in powers. Angelica pleased, and deserved to please, the age in which she lived, and the race for which she wrought. The Germans, with as much patriotism at least as judgment, have styled her the Paintress of Minds (Seelen Mahlerin): nor can this be wondered at from a nation, who, in A. R. Mengs, flatter themselves to possess an artist equal to Raffaello. The male and female characters of Angelica never vary in form, features, and expression, from the favourite ideal she had composed in her mind. Her heroes are all, the man to whom she thought she could have submitted, though him perhaps she never found; and to his fancied manner of acting and feeling, she, of course, submitted the passions of the subject. Her heroines are herself; and whilst suavity of countenance and alluring graces shall be able to divert the general eye from the sterner demands of character and expression, can never fail to please.”

The importance of the work being generally acknowledged, numberless articles of information were received from various parts of Europe, and the learned in everyquarter seemed willing to promote the success of a plan so apparently beneficial to the interests of revelation. Some, however, doubted the necessity, and some the usefulness of the undertaking; and objections soon were started by different persons, some with a friendly view, and some with a petulant one. Amongst others, the professor of divinity at Cambridge, Dr. Rutherforth, published, “A Letter to the Rev. Mr. Kennicott, in which his Defence of the Samaritan Pentateuch is examined, and his Second Dissertation on the State of the printed Hebrew Text of the Old Testament is shewn to be in many instances injudicious and inaccurate. With a postscript, occasioned by his advertizing, before this Letter was printed, that he had an Answer to it in the press,” 1761, 8vo. To this Dr. Kennicott published an immediate reply, under the title of “An Answer to a Letter from the Rev. T. Rutherforth, D. D. F. R. S.” &c. 1762, 8vo, in the postscript to which he declared it to be his resolution not to be diverted from his principal design by engaging in any further controversy.

In January 1775, he commenced his “London Review,” and along with his own name, placed in the title those of H. Reimarus, J. U. D. R. Williams, M D. E. Warner, A. M. and the rev. S. T. Maty. Except Reimarus, we believe it will be difficult to find these names in any list of “gentlemen of the first rank in the world of letters.” Review, however, went on for some years, and contains, from the pen of its chief author, repeated attacks upon his brethren in every profession. It continued a few months after his death, and then sunk into oblivion. In the same year 1775, he began a translation of Buffon, to be published in numbers, and in 1778 a translation of Voltaire’s works. His last dramatic attempt was “The Lady of the Manor,” a comic opera, taken from Johnson’s “Country Lasses;” and his last original publications, both of some degree of merit, were “Observations on the marriage contract;” and “Observations on Jenyns’s View of the Internal Evidence, &c.” This last had formed an article in his Review, whence other articles of equal ability might be selected, were they not all contaminated by a style vituperative and malignant. In his latter days, his constitution was so much injured by inebriety, that he generally wrote with a bottle of brandy at his elbow, which at length terminated his career June 10, 1779, less lamented than perhaps any person known in the literary world, yet possessed of talents which, under a steady and virtuous direction, might have procured him an honourable place among the authors of his time.

After the two young barons Bernstorf had been ten years under his care, he went with them to Tubingen, at which university they remained a year and a half. Then they set out on a grand tour, visiting the upper part of Germany, Switzerland, and Italy; and then returned to Vienna, where they spent three months. Their next progress was in Upper Hungary, Bohemia, and other parts of Germany. In 1731 they passed through Lorrain into France, thence crossed the channel into England, and made Holland the last stage of their travels. From this tour proceeded a large and entertaining work, which has been translated into English, in 4 vols. 4to and 8vo, and published under the following title, “Travels through Germany, Bohemia, Hungary, Switzerland, Italy, and Lorrain; giving a true and just description of the present state of those countries; their natural, literary, and political history, manners, laws, commerce, manufactures, painting, sculpture, architecture, coins, antiquities, curiosities of art and nature, &c. illustrated with copper- plates engraven from drawings taken on the spot. By John George Keysler, F. R. S. Carefully translated from the second edition of the German, Lend. 1756,” Keysler, after his return, spent the remainder of his days under the patronage and protection of his noble pupils, who committed to his care their fine library and museum, and allowed him a very handsome income. He led a happy tranquil life, declining all public employment, keeping himself single that he might not be incumbered with family affairs, and chiefly conversing with the illustrious dead, who were the companions of his retirement. He died in his fifty-fourth year, June 20, 1743, of an asthma, after viewing with intrepidity the gradual approach of death.

, a dissenting divine, was born at Wantage in Berkshire, Dec. 1, 1692, and was educated at a private grammar-school in Wantage, under the rev. Mr. Sloper, an excellent scholar, who was also tutor to bishop Butler. At this school, Mr. Kimber made considerable progress in Greek and Latin, after which, turning his thoughts to the ministry, he went to London to complete his knowledge of the languages under professor Ward of Gresham-college, and also to attend the dissenting academy under the rev. John Eames. For some, time after he was admitted into the ministry, he had little encouragement; and having married, he found it necessary to employ his pen for a subsistence. One of his first productions was “The Life of Oliver Cromwell/' 8vo, and soon after he was concerned with Messrs. Bailey, Hodges, and Ridpath, in compiling a” History of England,“4 vols. 8vo, the third and fourth volumes of which were entirely his. A few years afterwards he wrote” The Life of bishop Beveridge,“prefixed to the folio edition of his works, of which he was the editor. In 1724 he was called, in conjunction with Mr. Samuel Acton, to the pastoral charge of Namptwich in Cheshire, but, owing to differences of opinion with his hearers, he was obliged to leave them at the latter end of 1727. On his return to London, he officiated, as morning preacher, or assistant, to Dr. John Kinch, in Old Artillery-lane, and occasionally, at Pinner’s hall, for Dr. Hunt; and was also engaged as a corrector of the press for Mr. John Darby, and others. About the same time he compiled a periodical pamphlet called” The Morning Chronicle,“which subsisted from Jan. 1728 to May 17-32, and was then dropped. In part of this period, he was likewise concerned with Mr. Drew of the Union fire-office, as his assistant, and supported these various labours with a quiet and even temper, and a cheerful mind, though visited with a heavy affliction in his wife’s being deprived of her reason. During the remainder of his life, he was chiefly supported by his firm friend Mr. Charles Akers, an eminent printer in London; In 1740 he wrote an account of the reign of George II. which is added to HowelTs” Medulla Hist. Angl.“and soon afterwards an abridgment of the History of England, in 1 vol. 8vo, 1745. He died in 1758, about which time a volume of his ce Sermons” was printed, with an account of his life, from which the preceding particulars are taken. He had a son Edward, who was a compiler of various works for the booksellers, and died in 1769. Among his compilations, are the Peerages of Scotland and Ireland, the Baronetage of England, in conjunction with R.Johnson, 3 vols; 8vo, a History of England, 10 vols. 8vo, &c.

, a learned and philosophical antiquary, was a native of Norfolk, where he was born in 1735, and having inherited from an uncle, Mr. Brown of Exeter, an ample fortune, was early enabled to pursue his inclinations, which led him chiefly to the study of antiquities. He was partly educated at Clare-hall, Cambridge, but afterwards entered of Lincoln’s-inn, and, we presume, studied the law, as he was afterwards chosen recorder of Lynn in Norfolk. He was elected F.R.S. in 1767, and F.S.A. in 1770; and to the Archecologia made various communications, which gave him such reputation with the society, that in 1784, on the demise of Dr. Milles, he was elected president, on which occasion he introduced a number of new regulations, and the appointment of two regular secretaries, and a draughtsman, to attend constantly. On St. George’s day following, however, he was obliged to resign the chair, in favour of George lord de Ferrars, afterwards earl of Leicester and marquis Townsend, a majority of nearly two to one having appeared against him. He afterwards printed a letter in vindication of himself, and reflecting upon the noble earl, and from that period ceased to make any communications to the society.

Soon after his admission into the Royal Society, he published a pamphlet, entitled “Observations on the late Contests in the Royal Society,” 1784, 8vo, with a view of allaying the animosities that subsisted in that body, which produced a good effect. His intimate connection with sir John Pringle, bart. who was formerly president of the royal society, led Dr. Kippis, after his decease, to republish his “Six Discourses, delivered at the assignment of sir Godfrey Copley’s medal,” to which he has prefixed a valuable life of the author, 1783, 8vo. At the close of the American war he published a political pamphlet, formed from materials which were communicated to him by persons in office, and designed to justify the peace, which was entitled “Considerations on the Provisional Treaty with America, and the Preliminary Articles of Peace with France and Spain.” He also published several single discourses, which were delivered on particular occasions; some of which are reprinted in his volume of sermons, 1794. His sentiments as a divine were originally Calvinistic, but approached in his latter days to those of the modern Socinians, or Unitarians as they affect to be called. To these works we may also add his account of the “Life and Voyages of captain Cook,” 1788, 4to his new edition of “Dr. Doddridge’s Lectures,” with a great number of additional references; his life of Doddridge, prefixed to a new edition of his Exposition of the New Testament, 1792; his “Life of Dr. Lardner,” prefixed to the complete collection of his works, in 11 vols. 8vo, 1788; “An Address delivered at the Interment of Richard Price, D. D. F. R. S. &c.” 1791 and an “Ordination Charge,” 1788, 8vo. He also assisted in selecting and preparing “A Collection of Hymns and Psalms, for public and private Worship,” 1795, 8vo and 12mo, which is used in some places of worship among the dissenters. But the work to which Dr. Kippis devoted his principal attention, for many of the last years of his life, was the “Biographia Britannica.” “His indefatigable industry in collecting materials for it, his access to the best sources of information, his knowledge of men and books, his judgment in selecting and marking every circumstance that could serve to distinguish talents and character, and the habit which he had acquired', by long practice, of appreciating the value of different works, qualified him in a very high degree, for conducting this elaborate performance.” He did not, however, live to carry on this edition of the “Biographia” farther than to about a third part of the sixth volume, which was destroyed in the fire at Mr. Nichols’s premises.

About this time, he published “An Appendix to a catalogue of all the graduates in divinity, law, and physic,” &c. written by R. Peers, superior beadle of arts and physic. Langbaine’s appendix contains the names of all “who proceeded from the 14th of June 168S, where Peers left off, to the 6th of August 1690. He did not survive this long, some disorder carrying him off in June 1692. But he is best known as the author of the” Account of the English dramatic poets,“His first attempt in this way was by a republication of a catalogue of plays collected original ir by Kirkman, a London bookseller, and appended to” Nicomede,“a translation of a play from Corneille in 1671. This Langbaine followed in 1688 by” MomusTriumphans,“which appeared afterwards under the title of” A new Catalogue of English Plays,“&c. The author at length digested his work anew, with great accessions and improvements, which he entitled” An Account of the English Dramatic Poets,“&c. Oxford, 1691, 8vo, reprinted by Gildon in 1699. Langbaine’s own collection amounted, as he says, to” above 980 English plays and masques, basides drolls and interludes.“The copy of his” Account" in the British Museum, with Oldys’s ms notes, is fell known to every student of dramatic history.

Besides these projects to promote learning, there is another still behind of a more extensive view, both in its nature and use; he set himself to invent a language so easy and so perspicuous, as to become the common language of all nations of the world. This is what is called “The Universal Language,” and the design occupied the thoughts of our philosopher a long time. The thing had been attempted before by d'Algarme, and Dr. Wilkins, bishop of Chester; but Leibnitz did not approve of their method, and therefore attempted a new one. His predecessors in his opinion had not reached the point; they might indeed enable nations who did not understand each othe,r, to correspond easily together; but they had not attained the true real characters, which would be the beat instruments of the human mind, and extremely assist both the reason and memory. These characters, he thought, ought to resemble as much as possible those of algebra, which are simple and expressive, and never superfluous and equivocal, but whose varieties are grounded on reason. In order to hasten the execution of this vast project, he employed a young person to put into a regular order the definitions of all things whatsoever; but, though he laboured in it from 1703, yet his life did not prove sufficient to complete it*. In the meantime, his name became famous over Europe; and his merit was rewarded by other princes, besides the elector of Hanover. In 1711, he was made aulic counsellor to the emperor; and the czar of Moscovy appointed him privy-counsellor of justice, with a pension of a thousand ducats f. Leibnitz undertook at the same time to establish an academy of sciences at Vienna; but that project miscarried a disappointment which some have ascribed to the plague. However that be, it is certain he only had the honour of attempting it, and the emperor rewarded him for it with a pension of 2000 florins, promising him to double the sum, if he would come and reside at Vienna, which his death prevented. In the mean time, the History of Brunswick being interrupted by other works which he wrote occasionally, he found at his return to Hanover, in 1714, that the elector had appointed Mr. Eckard for his colleague in that history. The elector was then raised to the throne of Great Britain; and soon after his arrival, the electoral princess, then princess of Wales, and afterwards queen Caroline, engaged Leibnitz in a dispute with Dr. Samuel Clarke upon the subject of free-will, the reality of space, and other philosophical subjects. This controversy was carried on by letters which passed through her royal' high ness’s bands, and ended only with the death of Leibnitz, Nov. 14, 1716, occasioned by the gout and stone, at the age of seventy.

, a learned French writer in the eighteenth century, was born at Bazoches, in Beausse, April 13, 1661. He was son of Paul Lenfant, minister at Chatillon, who died at Marbourg, in June 1686. He studied divinity at Saumur, where he lodged at the house of James Cappel, professor of Hebrew, by whom he was always highly esteemed; and afterwards went to Geneva, to continue his studies there. Leaving Geneva towards the end of 1683, he went to Heidelberg, where he was ordained in August, 1684. He discharged the duties of his function there with great reputation as chaplain of the electress dowager of Palatine, and pastor in ordinary to the French church. The descent of the French into the Palatinate, however, obliged him to depart from Heidelberg in 1688. Two letters which he had written against the Jesuits, and which are jnserted at the end of his “Preservatif,” ren r dered it somewhat hazardous to continue at the mercy of a society whose power was then in its plenitude. He left the Palatinate, therefore, in October 1688, with the consent of his church and superiors, and arrived at Berlin in November following. Though the French church of Berlin had already a sufficient number of ministers, the elector Frederic, afterwards king of Prussia, appointed Mr. Lenfant one of them, who began his functions on Easter-day, March the 21st, 1689, and continued them thirty-nine years and four months, and during this time added greatly to his reputation by his writings. His merit was so fully acknowledged, as to be rewarded with every mark of distinction suitable to his profession. He was preacher to the queen of Prussia, Charlotta-Sophia, who was eminent for her sense and extensive knowledge, and after her death he became chaplain to the king of Prussia. He was counsellor of the superior consistory, and member of the French council, which were formed to direct the general affairs of that nation. In 1710 he was chosen a member of the society for propagating the gospel established in England; and March the 2d, 1724, was elected member of the academy of sciences at Berlin. In 1707 he took a journey to Holland and England, where he had the honour to preach before queen Anne; and if he had thought proper to leave his church at Berlin, for which he had a great respect, he might have had a settlement at London, with the rank of chaplain to her majesty. In 1712, he went to Helmstad; in 1715 to Leipsic; and in 1725, to Breslaw, to search for rare books and manuscripts necessary for the histories which he was writing. In those excursions he was honoured with several valuable materials from the electress of Brunswic-Lunebourg, princess Palatine; the princess of Wales, afterwards Caroline queen of Great Britain; the count de Fleming; mons. Daguesseau, chancellor of France; and a great number of learned men, both protestants and papists, among the latter of whom was the abbé Bignon. It is not certain whether he first formed thedesign of the “Bibliotheque Germanique,” which began in 1720; or whether it was suggested to him by one of the society of learned men, which took the name of Anonymous; but they ordinarily met at his house, and he was a frequent contributor to that journal. When the king of Poland was at Berlin, in the end of May and beginning of June 1728, Mr. Lenfant, we are told, dreamt that he was ordered to preach. He excused himself that he was not prepared; and not knowing what subject he should pitch upon, was directed to preach upon these words, Isaiah XxxtiiL 1. “Set thine house in order, for thou shalt die, and not live.” He related this dream to some of his friends, and although not a credulous man, it is thought to have made some impression on him, for he applied with additional vigour to finish his “History of the War of the Hussites and the Council of Basil.” On Sunday July the 25tn following, he had preached in his turn at his church; but on Thursday, July the 29th, he had a slight attack of the palsy, which was followed by one more violent, of which he died on the 7th of the next month, in his sixtyeighthyear. He was interred at Berlin, at the foot of the pulpit of the French church, where he ordinarily preached since 1715, when his Prussian majesty appointed particular ministers to every church, which before were served by the same ministers in their turns. His stature was a little below the common height. His eye was very lively anil penetrating. He did not talk much, but always well. Whenever any dispute arose in conversation, he spoke without any heat; a proper and delicate irony was the only weapon he made use of on such occasions. He loved company, and passed but few days without seeing some of his friends. He was a sincere friend, and remarkable for a disinterested and generous disposition. In preaching, his voice was good; his pronunciation distinct and varied; his style clear, grave, and elegant without affectation; and he entered into the true sense of a text with great force. His publications were numerous in divinity, ecclesiastical history, criticism, and polite literature. Those which are held in the highest estimation, are his Histories of the Councils of Pisa, Constance, and Basil, each in 2 vols. 4to. These are written with great ability and impartiality, and they abound with interesting facts and curious researches. Lenfant, in conjunction with M. Beausobre, published “The New Testament, translated from the original Greek into French,” in 2 vols. 4to, with notes, and a general preface, or introduction to the reading of the Holy Scriptures, useful for students in divinity. He is known also by his “De iuquirenda Veritate,” which is a translation of Malebranche’s “Search after Truth” “The History of Pope Joan” “Poggiana or, the life, character,- opinions, c. of Poggio the Florentine, with the History of the Republic of Florence,” and the abovementioned “History of the Wars of the Hussites,” Utrecht, 1731, 2 vols. in 4to, dedicated by his widow to the prince royal of Prussia. This was the last work in which our author was engaged. He had revised the copy of the first volume, and was reading over that of the second, when he was seized with the apoplexy. But for this it appears to have been his intention to continue his History to about 1460. To this History is added monsieur Beausobre’s “Dissertation upon the Adamites of Bohemia.”

, whose proper name was R. Jehudah Arie, was born at Modena about 1574 was for a considerable time chief of the synagogue, and esteemed a good poet both in Hebrew and Italian. He was author of a valuable work on the ceremonies and customs of the Jews, which is held in estimation by the learned of all nations. It is entitled “Istoria de Riti Hebraici vita et Osservanze de gli Hebre'i di questi Tempi;” the best edition of which is that of Venice, 1638. It was translated into the French language in 1674, by Richard Simon, with supplements relating to the sects of the Karaites^and Samaritans. He intended to have given an Italian translation of the Old Testament, but the inquisition laid its commands on him to desist. His Hebrew and Italian dictionary, entitled “The Mouth of the Lion,” was published at Venice in 1612, and was afterwards reprinted in an enlarged form at Padua, in 1640. Leo died at Venice in 1654.

, an eminent oriental and classical scholar, was born at Utrecht, April 26, 1624, of reputable parents, who died when he was very young. He studied at the schools and university of Utrecht, and took his degree of master of arts in 1647. To his philosophical course, he then added the study of theology, and particularly the oriental languages, in which he made great proficiency. In 1649, he was admitted among the number of candidates for the ministry, and then went to Amsterdam to acquire a more perfect knowledge of the Hebrew, and of the Jewish customs, availing himself of the instructions of two learned Jews, one of whom, being an Arabian, gave him a favourable opportunity of adding that language to his stock. On his return to Utrecht in January 1650, he was licensed to teach the oriental languages, an honour which induced him to return once more to Amsterdam, to study the Talmud and the Rabbins. In July of the same year, the curators of the university of Utrecht appointed him professor extraordinary of Hebrew. He was required to give only two lectures per week, which, however, he increased to three, and included the oriental languages and theology; and when he received a call to a congregation in Flanders, the curators of the university, unwilling to part with a man of such ability, promoted him to the chair of professor in ordinary, which he filled with great reputation. In 1658 he travelled through the Palatinate and the neighbourhood, and afterwards visited France and England. On his return he married, and had a numerous family. Three of his sons attained considerable eminence, Rodolph as a physician, John William as a counsellor and burgomaster, and James as a divine. After long enjoying a good state of health, the result of temperance and exercise, he was attacked by the nephritic colic, which, afte'r tormenting him for some weeks, occasioned his death, Sept. 30, 1699, in his seventy-fifth year. He was a man of a frank, liberal temper, and benevolent he was very kind to foreign students, particularly those from Hungary, and used to be called the Father of the Hungarians. His manner of teaching was clear and methodical; and by that, and a strict discipline, he produced many eminent scholars.

, a voluminous polemic in the seventeenth century, was born at Warwick, Feb. 4, 1583, and edu r cated at Christ church, Oxford. After his admission into holy orders he was presented to the vicarage of Great Budworth in Cheshire, where he continued a constant preacher for several years. He was afterwards made prebendary and subdean of Chester, and had a weekly lecture at St. Peter’s church. He was also once or twice a member of the convocation. On the commencement of the rebellion, he espoused the cause of the parliament, took the covenant, was chosen one of the assembly of divines, appointed Latin examiner of young preachers, and by his writings, encouraged all the opinions and prejudices of his party, with whom his learning gave him considerable weight. He accepted of various livings under the republican government, the last of which was that of Solihull, in Warwickshire, which he resigned on being disabled by breaking of a blood-vessel, and retired to Sutton Colfield? in the same county, where he died May 16, 1662. His works, of which Wood enumerates about thirty articles, relate mostly to the controversies of the times, except his sermons; and his share in the “Assembly’s Annotations on the Bible,” tp which he contributed the annotations on the Pentateuch and the four Evangelists.

His writings are, 1. “An Almanack and Kalendar; containing the day, hour, and minute, of the change of the moon for ever,” &c. 8vo. 2. “Commentarioli Britannicae Descriptionis Fragmentuni. Colon. Agrip.” 1572: of which a new edition was published by Mr. Moses Williams, under the title of “Humfredi Lhwyd, Armigeri, Britannicie Descriptionis Comrnentariolum: necnon de Monfi Insula, & Britannica Arce sive Armamentario Romano Disceptatio Epistolaris. Accedunt^raa Cambro-Britannicae. Accurante Mose Gulielmo, A.M. R. S. Soc.” Lond. 1731, 4to. Thi? was translated into English by Tho. Twyne, who entitled it, “The Breviary of Britain,” Lond. 1753, 8vo. 3. “De JVionfi Druidum Insula, Antiquitati sine restitutfi;” in a letter to Abraham Ortelius, April 5, 1568. 4. “De mentario Romano.” These two last are printed at the end of “Historic Britannicae Defensio; written by sir John Price,” Lond. 1573, 4to. 5. “Chronicon Wallisr, a Rege Cadtvalladero, usque ad Ann. Dom. 1294,” ms. in the Cottontail library. 6. “The History of Cambria, now called Wales, from Caradoc of Lancarvan, the Registers of Con­^ray and Stratflnr; with a Continuation, chiefly extracted from Mat. Paris, Nic. Trivet, &c.” He died before this was quite finished; but sir Henry Sidney, lord -president of Wales, having procured a copy of it, employed Dr. David Powel to prepare it for the press, who published it under this title: “The Historic of Cambria, now called Wales; a part of the most famous yland of Britaine; written in the Brytish language above two hundred years past; translated into English by H. Lloyd, gent, corrected, augmented, and continued out of Records and best approved Authors,” Lond. 1584, 4to. Our author translated also, 7. “The Treasure of Health; containing many profitable Medicines, written by Peter Hispanus.” To which were added, “The Causes and Signs of every Disease, with the Aphorisms of Hippocrates,” Lond. 1585. And 8. “The Judgment of Urines,” Lond. 1551, 8vo.

Lily’s works are, 1. “Brevissima institutio, seu ratio grammatices cognoscendi,” Lond. 1513; reprinted often, and used at this day, and commonly called “Lily’s Grammar.” The English rudiments were written by Dr. Colet, and the preface to the first edition, by cardinal Wolsey. The English syntax was written by Lily; also the rules for the genders of nouns, beginning with Propria quse maribus; and those for the preter-perfect tenses and supines, beginning with “As, in prsesenti.” The Latin syntax was chiefly the work of Erasmus. See Ward’s preface to his edition of Lily’s grammar, 1732. 2. “In senigmatica Bossi Antibossicon primum, secundum, tertium, ad G. Hormannum,” Lond. 1521, 4to. 3. “Poemata varia,” printed with the former. 4. “Apologia ad R. Whyttingtonum.” 5. “Apologia ad Joan. Skeltonum,” in answer to some invectives of that poet. 6. “De laudibus Deipari Virginis.” 7. “Super Philippi archiducis appulsu.” 8. “De Caroli quinti Caesaris adventu panegyricum.” Some other pieces are attributed to him on doubtful authority.

, LL. D. an English divine and poet, was educated upon the royal foundation at Etonschool, where, under the care of that learned and excellent master. Dr. Snape, his school-exercises were much admired, and when his turn came, he was elected to King’s college, Cambridge, in 1716, with equal applause. Here he took his degrees of A. B. 1720, A.M. 1724, and LL.D. 1728. Having some talent for poetry, he had not been long at the university, before he diverted a school-fellow, whom he had left at Eton, with a humourous poem on the subject of his various studies, and the progress he had made in academical learning, which was followed by his more celebrated one “on a spider.” Dr. Morell, the editor of his “Discourses,” and his biographer, procured a genuine copy of them, as transcribed by a gentleman then at Eton school from the author’s own writing, with such remains as could be found of a Pastoral Elegy, written about the same time by Mr. Littleton, on the death of R. Banks, scholar of the same college. The two former are now correctly printed in the edition of Dodsley’s Poems of 1782, edited by Isaac Reed. Dr. Morell found also a poetical epistle sent from school to Penyston Powney, esq.; but as this was scarcely intelligible to any but those who were then at Eton, he has not printed it. In 1720 Mr. Littleton was recalled to Eton as an assistant in the school; in which office he was honoured and beloved by his pupils, and so esteemed by the provost and fellows, that on the death of the rev. Mr. Malcher, in 1727, they elected him a fellow, and presented him to the living of Mapledurham, in Oxfordshire. He then married a very amiable woman, Frances, one of the daughters of Barnham Goode, who was under-master of Eton school. In June 1730, he was appointed chaplain in ordinary to their majesties. Though an admired preacher and an excellent scholar, he seems to have been little ambitious of appearing in print. He died of a fever in 1734, and was buried in his own parish church of Mapledurham, leaving behind him a widow and three daughters; for whose benefit, under the favour and encouragement of queen Caroline, his “Discourses” were first printed by Dr. Morell, with an account of the author, from which the above particulars are taken. Dr. Burton, Mr. Littleton’s successor in the living of Mapledurham, afterwards married his widow, as we have noticed in his Jife. 1 -.;.

, a celebrated English judge, descended of an ancient family, was the eldest son of Thomas Westcote, of the county of Devon, esq. by Elizabeth, daughter and sole-heir of Thomas Littleton or Lyttleton, of Frankley in Worcestershire, in compliance with whom she consented that the issue, or at least the eldest son, of that marriage should take the name of Lyttleton, and bear the arms of that family. He was born about the beginning of the fifteenth century at Frankley. Having laid a proper foundation of learning at one of the universities, he removed to the Inner-Temple; and, applying himself to the law, became very eminent in that profession. The first notice we have of his distinguishing himself is from his learned lectures on the statute of Westminster, “de donis conditionalibus,” “of conditional gifts.” He was afterwards made, by Henry VI. steward or judge of the court of the palace, or marshalsea of the king’s household, and, in May 1455, king’s serjeant, in which capacity he went the Northern circuit as a judge of the assize. Upon the revolution of the crown, from the house of Lancaster to that of York) in the time of Edward IV. our judge, who was now made sheriff of Worcestershire, received a pardon from that prince; was continued in his post of king’s serjeant, and also in that of justice of assi/r for the same circuit. This pardon passed in 1462, the second year of Edward IV.; and, in 1466, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of Common Pleas. The same year, he obtained a writ to the commissioners of the customs of London, Bristol, and Kingston-upon-Hull, enjoining them to pay him a hundred and ten marks annually, for the better support of his dignity; a hundred and six shillings and eleven pence farthing, to furnish him whh a furred robe; and six shillings and six-pence more, for another robe called Li num. In 1473, we find him residing near St. Sepulchre’s church, London, in a capital mansion, the property of the abbot of Leicester, which he held on lease at the yearly rent of 1 <'>.-. In 1475 he was created, among others, knight of the Hath, to grace the solemnity of conferring that order upon the king’s eldest son, then prince of Wales, afterwards Edward V. He continued to enjoy the esteem of his sovereign and the nation, on account of his profound knowledge of the laws of England, till his death, Aug. 23, 1481, the day after the date of his will. He was then said to be of a good old age, but its precise length has not been ascertained. He was honourably interred in the cathedral church of Worcester, where a marble tomb, with his statue, was erected to his memory; his picture was also placed in the church of Frankley; and another in that of Hides-Owen, where his descendants purchased a good estate. He married, and had three sons, William, Richard, and Thomas. Kichard, bred to the law, became eminent in thut profession; and it was for his use that our judge drew up his celebrated treatise on tenures or titles, which will probably hand his name down to the latest posterity. The judge’s third son, Thomas, was knighted by Henry VII. for taking Lambert Simnel, the pretended earl of Warwick. His eldest son and successor, sir William Littleton, after living many years in great splendour, at Frankley, died in 1508; and from this branch the late celebrated lord Lyttelton of Frankley co. Worcester, who was created a baron of Great Britain, Nov. 1756, derived his pedigree; but who, owing to the alteration in the spelling of the name (which, however, appears unnecessary) will occur in a future part of this work.

The memory of judge Littleton is preserved by his “Tenures” and the various editions through which his book has passed are the best evidence of its worth. Dr. Middleton supposes the first edition to have been that printed in French by Lettou and Machlima, near the church of All-Saints, or All-Hallows, in London, without date: and he thinks that it was put to press by the author himself in 1481, the year he died; but lord Coke supposes the French edition in folio, printed without date, at Rouen, by W. Le Tailleur, for R. Pinson, to have been the first. The point however has not yet been settled; and perhaps cannot now be settled with precision. The various opinions on the subject may be found in our authorities. That it was often reprinted is a matter of less doubt: the editions from 1539 to 1639 only, amount to twenty-four. The original composition of this celebrated work is justly esteemed as the principal pillar on which the superstructure of the law of real property in this kingdom is supported; and the valuable “Commentary” of lord Coke has uniformly been considered, by the most eminent lawyers, as the result and repository of all his learning on the subjects there treated. Of this work a republication was made in folio, 1738, which, independent of the valuable annotations of lord Hale and lord chancellor Nottingham, has been greatly improved by the learning and indefatigable labours of Mr. Hargrave and Mr. Butler. There was a book written in the reign of Edward III. which is called “Oki Tenures,” to distinguish it from Littleton’s book. It gives an account of the various tenures by which land was holdeu, the nature of estates, and some other incidents relating to landed property. It is a very scanty tract, but has the merit of having led the way to Littleton’s famous work.

In 1668, he attended the earl and countess of Northumberland into France; but the earl’s death did not allow him to remain long in that country. On his return, Mr. Locke lived, as before, at lord Ashley’s, who was then chancellor of the exchequer, but made frequent visits to Oxford, in the prosecution of his studies, as well as for change of air, which appeared to be necessary to his health. While he was at lord Ashley’s, he had the care of the education of that nobleman’s eldest son, who was then about sixteen years of age. This province he executed with great care, and to the full satisfaction of his noble patron. The young lord being of a weakly constitution, his father wished to see him married, lest the family should be extinct by his death; and as he thought him too young to make a proper choice for himself, he not only consulted Mr. Locke on the subject, but even requested he would make a suitable choice for the youth. This was an affair of some delicacy, and no small risk; for, although lord Ashley did not regard fortune, yet he conditioned for a lady of a good family, an agreeable temper, and a fine person; of good education, and of good understanding, and whose conduct would be different from that of the generality of court-ladies. In all these respects Mr.Xocke had the happiness to succeed, and the marriage was fruitful. The eldest son, afterwards the author of the “Characteristics,” was committed to the care of Mr. Locke in his education, and his pupil, when lord Shaftesbury, always spoke of Mr. Locke with the highest esteem, and manifested on all occasions a grateful sense of his obliga r tions to him, but there are some passages in his works, in which he speaks of Mr. Locke’s philosophy with great severity. It will not, however, be thought a very serious objection to Mr. Locke, that his philosophy did not give entire satisfaction to lord Shaftesbury.

Thus far we might suppose the dean had advanced enough in behalf of the innocence of Mr. Locke. What follows, however, will be read with regret, that so good a man as bishop Fell should have given such advice. “Notwithstanding this, I have summoned him to return home, which is done with this prospect, that if he comes not back, he will be liable to expulsion for contumacy; and if he does, he will be answerable to the law for that which he shall be found to have done amiss. It being probable that, though he may have been thus cautious here, where he knew himself suspected, he has laid himself more open at London, where a general liberty of speaking was used, and where the execrable designs against his majesty and government were managed and pursued. If he don't r^­turn by the first of January, which is the time limited to him, I shall be enabled of course to proceed against him to expulsion. But if this method seems not effectual or speedy enough, and his majesty, our founder and visitor, shall please to command his immediate remove, upon the receipt thereof, directed to the dean and chapter, it shall accordingly be executed.” In consequence of this, a warrant came down to the dean and chapter, dated Nov. 12, in these words: “Whereas we have received information of the factious and disloyal behaviour of Locke, one of the students of that our college; we have thought fit hereby to signify our will and pleasure to you, that you forthwith remove him from his student’s place, and deprive him of all rights and advantages thereunto belonging, for which this shall be your warrant,” &c. And thus, on the 16th following, one of the greatest men of his time was, expelled the college at the command of Charles II. without, as far as ia known, any form of trial or inquiry. After the death of Charles II. William Penn, the celebrated quaker, who had known Mr. Locke at the university, used his interest with king James to procure a pardon for him) an J would have obtained it, if Mr. Locke had not said, that he had no occasion for a pardon, since he had not been guilty of any crime.

During this concealment Mr. Locke wrote his “Letter on Toleration,” in Latin, which was printed at Gouda, 1689, under the title “Epistola de Tolerantia, ad clarissimum virum T. A. R. P. T. o. L. A. (i. e. Theologiae apud remonstrautes professorem, tyrannidis osorem, Limburgium Amstelodamensem) scripta a. P. A. p. o. I. L. A. (i. e. Pacis amico, persecutions osore, Joanne Lockio Anglo). This letter was translated into English by Mr. Popple (who was nephew to Andrew Marvell, and author of the” Rational Catechism,") and printed twice in London, 1689, 4to, and 16l>0, 12mo. It involved Mr. Locke in a controversy with the rev. Jonas Proast, M. A. of Queen’s-college, Oxford; and some pamphlets passed between them, to the last of which, published by Mr. Proast, a short time before Mr. Locke’s death, the latter left a reply unfinished, which was published in his posthumous works. While at Amsterdam, Mr. Locke formed a weekly assembly, consisting of Limborch, Le Clerc, and others, for conversation upon important subjects, and had drawn up in Latin rules to be observed by them; but those conferences were much interrupted by the frequent changes he was obliged to make of his places of residence.

He was next appointed one of the Assembly of Divines, and minister of St. Lawrence Jury, and is said also to have been chosen minister of St. Anne’s, Aldersgate-street. He was one of the London ministers who signed a declaration against the king’s death. He was afterwards engaged in a plot, which cost him his life, and was known at the time by the name of Love’s plot, either because he was a principal agent, or a principal sufferer. Mr. Love, we have already noticed, was a presbyterian, and when he found that the independents were gaining the ascendancy, he united with various gentlemen and ministers of his own way of thinking to assist the Scotch (before whom Charles II. had taken the covenant, and by whom he had been crowned,) in their endeavours to advance that sovereign to the crown of England. Cromwell, howev&r, was too watchful for the success of such a design in London; and the chief conspirators being apprehended, Mr. Love and a Mr. Gibbons were tried and executed, the rest escaping by interest, or servile submission. Mr. Love appears on his trial to have used every means to defeat its purpose, and was certainly more tenacious of life, than might have been expected from the boldness of his former professions. Great intercessions were made to the parliament for a pardon: his wife presented one petition, and himself four; several parishes also, and a great number of his brethren interceded with great fervour; but all that could be obtained was the respite of a month. It is said that the affairs of the commonwealth being now at a crisis, and Charles II. having entered England with 16,000 Scots, it was thought necessary to strike terror in the presbyterian party, by making an example of one of their favourite ministers. Some historians say that Cromwell, then in the north, sent a letter of reprieve and pardon for Mr. Love, but that the post-boy was stopped on the road by some persons belonging to the late king’s army, who opened the mail, and finding this letter, tore it in pieces, exclaiming that “he who had been so great a firebrand at Uxbridge, was not fit to live.” Whatever truth may be in this, he was executed, by beheading, on Tower-hill, Aug. 22, 1651. He was accompanied at his death by the three eminent nonconformists, Simeon Ashe, Edmund Calamy, and Dr. Manton. The latter preached a funeral sermon for him, in which, while he avoids any particular notice of the cause of his death, he considers him, as the whole of his party did, in the light of a saint and martyr. The piety of his life, indeed, ereated a sympathy in his favour which did no little harm to the power of Cromwell. Thousands began to see that the tyranny of the republic would equal all they had been taught to hate in the mo larchv. The government, we are told, expressed some displeasure at Dr. Manton’s intention of preaching a funeral sermon, and their creatures among the soldiers threatened violence, but he persisted in his resolution, and not only preached, but printed the sermon. The loyalists, on the other hand, considered Love’s death as an instance of retributive justice. Clarendon says that he “was guilty of as much treason as the pulpit could contain;” and his biographers have so weakly defended the violence of his conduct during the early period of the rebellion, as to leave this fact almost indisputable. His works consist of sermons and pious tracts, on various subjects, mostly printed after his death, and included in three volumes, 8vo. They were all accompanied by prefaces from his brethren, of high commendation.

Ludolph did not here conclude his travels. He had a great desire to go into the East, and to inform himself of the state. of the Christian church in the Levant. He began this journey in March 1698, and in November following arrived at Smyrna. Hence he travelled to Jaffa, from Jaffa to Jerusalem, from Jerusalem to Cairo; and made manyuseful observations relating to the productions of nature and art, and the government and religion of the countries through which he passed. The conversation he had with the commander of a Turkish ship in his passage to Alexandria is not the least remarkable thing in his travels. While he was on board, he was reading our Saviour’s sermon on the mount in the New Testament in Arabic, which was printed in that language at the charge of Mr. Boyle. The captain, having listened some time, asked, “what book that was r” to which Ludolph answering, “that it was the system of the Christian religion,” he replied, “that could not possibly be, since they practised quite the contrary.” To this Ludolph rejoined, “that he was mistaken; and that he did not wonder at it, as the Turks had little opportunity of conversing with any other than sailors and merchants, few of whom they reckoned to be good Christians,” c. The Turk seemed to be very-well satisfied, and afterwards was extremely kind to him.

This is the doctrine of Luther’s thesis; in which, if he does not attack indulgences directly, he certainly represents them as useless and ineffectual. He also condemns in it several propositions which he attributes to his adversaries, and inveighs against several abuses of which he affirms them guilty, as for example, “The reserving ecclesiastical penances for purgatory, or commuting them into the pains of purgatory; teaching that indulgences free men from all the guilt and punishment of sin; preaching that the soul, which they please to release out of purgatory, flies immediately to heaven when the money is cast into the chest; maintaining, that these indulgences are an inestimable gift, by which man is reconciled to God; exacting from the poor, contrary to the pope’s intentions; causing the preaching the word of God to cease in other churches that they may have a greater concourse of people in those where indulgences are preached; advancing this scandalous assertion, that the pope’s indulgences hare such a virtue, as to be able to absolve a man though he has ravished the mother of God, which is a thing impossible; publishing, that the cross with the arms of the pope, is equal to the cross of Christ, &c. Such positions as these,” says he, “have made people ask, and justly, why the pope, out of charity, does not deliver all souls tfut of purgatory, since he can deliver so great a number for a little money, given for the building of a church? Whv he suffers prayers and anniversaries for the dead, which are certainly delivered out of purgatory by indulgences? Why the pope, who is richer than several Croesuses, cannot build the church of St. Peter with his own money, but at the expence of the poor r” &c. In thus attacking indulgences, and the commissioners appointed to publish them, Luther seemed to attack Albert, the archbishop of Ment7, under whose name and authority they were published. Of this he was himself aware; and, therefore, the very eve on which he fixed up his thesis, he wrote a letter to him, in which, after humbly representing to him the grievances just recited, he besought him to remedy and correct them; and concluded with imploring pardon for the freedom he had taken, protesting that what he did was out of duty, and with a faithful and submissive temper of mind.

The next day, which was Oct. 12 r Luther returned to a second conference with the legate, accompanied with four counsellors of the empire, and a notary; and brought with

In October 1524, Luther threw off the monastic habit; which, though not premeditated and designed, was yet a very proper preparative to a step he took the year after; we mean, his marriage with Catherine de Bore. Catherine cie Bore was a gentleman’s daughter, who had been a nun, and was one of those whom we mentioned as escaping from tue nunnery in 1523. Luther had a design to marry her to Glacius, a minister of Ortamuncien; but she did not like Glacius, and Luther married her himself, June 13, 1525. This conduct of his was blamed not only by the catholics, but, as Melancthon says, by those of his own party. He was even for some time ashamed of it himself; aud owns, “that his marriage had made him so despicable, that he hoped his humiliation would rejoice the angels, and vex the devils.” Melancthon found him so afflicted with what he had done, that he wrote some letters of consolation to him: he adds, however, that “this accident may possibly not be without its use, as it tends to humble him a little: for it is dangerous,” says he, “not only for a priest, but for any man, to be too much elated and puffed up; great success giving occasion to the sin of a high mind, not only, as the orator says, in fools, but sometimes even in wise men.” It was not so much the marriage, as the circumstances of the time, and the precipitation with which it was done, that occasioned the censures passed upon Luther. He married very suddenly, and at a time when Germany was groaning under the miseries of war, which was said at least to be owing to Lutheranism. It was thought also an indecent thing in a man of forty-two years of age, who was then, as he declared, restoring the gospel and reforming mankind, to involve himself in marriage with a woman of six and twenty, upon any pretext. But Luther, as soon as he had recovered himself a little from this abashment, assumed his former air of intrepidity, and boldly supported what he had done with reasons. “I took a wife,” says he, “in obedience to my father’s commands, and hastened the consummation, in or 1 r to prevent impediments, and stop the tongues of slanderers.” It appears from his own confessions, that,this reformer was very fond of Mrs. de Bore, and used to call her his Catherine; which occasioned some slanderous reflections and therefore, says he, “I married of a sudden, not only that J might not be obliged to hear the clamours which I knew would be raised against me, but to stop the mouths of those who reproached me with Catherine de Bore.” Luther also gives us to understand, that he did it partly as concurring with his grand scheme of opposing the catholics. “See,” says he, “because they are thus mad, I have so prepared myself, that, before I die, I may be found by God in the state in which I was created, and, if possible, retain nothing of my former popish life. Therefore let them rave yet more, and this will be their last farewell; for my mind presages, that I shall soon be called by God unto his grace: therefore, at my father’s commands, I have taken a xtife.” In another letter he speaks thus: “1 hope I shall live a little longer, and I would not deny this last obedience to my father, who required it in hopes of issue, and also to confirm the doctrines I have taught.”

His works are, 1. “Ancient characters of the visible Church, 1625.” 2. “Via tuta, the safe way, &c.” reprinted several times, and translated into Latin, Dutch, and French, printed at Paris, 1647, from the sixth edition published in 1636, 12mo, under the title of “Popery confuted by Papists,” &c. 3. “Via devia, the by-way,” &c. 1630 and 1632, 8vo. 4. “A Case for the Spectacles; or, a Defence of the Via tuta,” in answer to a book written by J. R. called “A pair of Spectacles,” &c. with a supplement in Vindication of sir Humphrey, by the publisher, Dr. Daniel Featly. A book entitled “A pair of Spectacles for sir Humphrey Lynde,” was printed at Roan, 1631, in 8vo, by Robert Jenison, or Frevil, a Jesuit. 5. “An account of Bertram, with observations concerning the censures upon his Tract De corpore et sanguine Christi,” prefixed to an edition of it at London, 1623, 8vo, and reprinted there in 1686, 8vo, by Dr. Matthew Brian.

, an ancient Latin poet, was born at Verona, and flourished about the year 24 B. C. Eusebius relates, that he died a few years after Virgil. Ovid speaks of a poem by him, on the nature and quality of birds, serpents, and herbs; which, he says, Macer, being then very old, had often read to him, and he is said also to have written a supplement to Homer; but the work by which his name is chiefly known, first printed at Naples in 1477, 4to, and often since under the title “De virtutibus Herbarum,” is unquestionably spurious, and the production of a much later writer. By some it is ascribed to Odo or Odobonus, a French physician of the ninth century. This barbarous poem is in Leonine verse, and various manuscripts of it are in our public libraries of Oxford, Cambridge, the British Museum, &c. It was, according to Dr. Pulteney, in common use in Enprland before the sera of printing, and was translated into English by John Lelamar, master of Hereford-school, who lived about 1473. Even Linacre did not disdain to employ himself on this work, as in “Macer’s Herbal practysed by Dr. Lin aero, translated out of Latin into English.” Lond. 1542, 12mo. This jejune performance, adds Dr. Pulteney, which is writ-r ten wholly on Galenical principles, treats on the virtues of not more than eighty eight simples.

, a political and miscellaneous writer, was born in Scotland in 1734, and educated in the university of Edinburgh. He came to London at an early period of life, and for many years keptan academy of considerable reputation at Walthamstow. He was also much engaged in the political disputes at the beginning of the reign of his present majesty, and concentrated his sentiments on them, in a “History of the Reign of George III.” an octavo volume, which was published in 1770. A dispute occurring between him and his bookseller, the late Mr. Thomas Evans of Paternoster-row, the latter employed another person to continue the history, of which vol. II appeared in 1782, and vol. III. about 1794. Mr. Macfarlane being then reconciled to his employer, published a fourth volume. The whole is com-r piled from the journals of the day, and cannot, either in point of style or matter, entitle Mr. Macfarlane, or the other writers, to the character of historians. In early life, also, he was editor of the Morning Chronicle and London Packet, in which he gave the debates with great accuracy and at considerable length, and wrote many letters and papers under fictitious names, in favour of the politics of the opposition. Being an enthusiastic admirer of Ossian, and an assistant, as has been said, to Mr. Macpherson in the arranging and publishing of these poems, he conceived the very preposterous design of translating them into Latin verse. Accordingly, in 176.9, he published “Temora,” as a specimen, and issued, at the same time, proposals for publishing the whole by subscription, in one volume, 4to: but few subscribers appearing, he desisted from his plan. During the latter years of his life, he resumed it, and was employed in it at the time of his death. Curiosity led him one evening to witness the triumphs of an electionmob coming from Brentford, when he fell under a carnage, and was so much hurt as to survive only half an hour. This happened on August 8. 1804. He had at this time in the press, an “Essay on the authenticity of Ossian and his Poems.”

, was an ancient Latin writer, who flourished towards the latter part of the fourth century. What countryman he was, is not clear Erasmus, in his Ciceronianus, seems to think he was a Greek and he himself tells us, in the preface to his “Saturnalia,” that he was not a Roman, but laboured under the inconveniences of writing in a language which was not native to him. Of what religion he was, Christian or pagan, is also uncertain. Barthius ranks him among the Christians; but Spanheira and Fabiicius suppose him to have been a heathen. It seems, however, agreed that he was a man of consular. dignity, and one of the chamberlains, or masters of the wardrobe to Theodosius; as appears from a rescript directed to Florentius, concerning those who were to obtain that office. He wrote “A Commentary upon Cicero’s Somnium Scipiouis,” full of Platonic notions, and seven books of “Saturnalia;” which resemble in plan the “Noctes Atticae” of Aulus Gellius. He termed them “Saturnalia,” because, during the vacation observed on these feasts of Saturn, he collected the principal literati of Rome, in his house, and conversed with them on all kinds of subjects, and afterwards set down what appeared to him, most interesting in their discourses. His Latinity is far from being pure, but as a collector of facts, opinions, and criticism, his works are valuable. The “Somnium Sci r pionis,” and “Saturnalia,” have been often printed; to which has been added, in the later editions, a piece entitled “De difterentiis & societatibus Graeci Latinique verbi.” The best editions are those of the Variorum; of Gronovius in 1670, and Leipsic in 1777. There is a specimen of an English translation of the “Saturnalia” in the Gent. Mag. for 1760, but it does not appear to have been completed.

Thus this great philosopher and divine passed a life of tranquillity in writing books, making experiments, and reading lectures. He was perpetually consulted by the most eminent philosophers, and was obliged to carry on a very extensive correspondence. Such was the activity of his mind that he is said to have studied even in his sleep; for his very dreams employed him in theorems, and he was frequently awaked by the exquisite pleasure which he felt upon the discovery of a demonstration. The excellence of his manners, and his unspotted virtues, rendered him no less worthy of esteem than his genius and learning. He died at Toulouse Oct. 29, 1676, aged seventy-five. It is said of him, that he composed with great ease, and without any alterations at all. See a book entitled “De vita, moribus, & scriptis R. patris Emanuelis Maignani Tolosatis, ordinis Minimorum, philosophi atque mathematici pracstantissimi, elogium,” written by F. Saguens, and printed at Toulouse in 1697, a work in which are some curious facts, not, however, unmixed with declamatory puerilities.

From 1728 to 1732 he was employed in publishing, “Marmorum Arundellianorum, Seldenianorum, aliorumque Academies Oxoniensi donatorum, una cum Commentariis & Indice, editio secunda,” folio to which an “Appendix” was printed in 1733. “Epistola D. Mich. Maittaire ad D. P. Des Maizeaux, in qua Indicis in Annales Typographicos methodus explicatur,” &c. is printed in “The Present State of the Republic of Letters,” in August 1733, p. 142. The life of Robert Stephens, in Latin, revised and corrected by the author, with a new and complete list of his works, is prefixed to the improved edition of R. Stephens’s Thesaurus, 4 vols. in folio, in 1734. In 1736 appeared, “Antiques Inscriptiones cluae,” folio; being a commentary on two large copper tables discovered near Heraclea, in the bay of Tarentum. In 1738 were printed at the Hague, “Graecse Linguae Dialecti in Scholse Regias Westmonasterrensis usum recogniti opera Mich. Maittaire. Prosfationem & Appendicem ex Apollonii Discoli fragmento inedito addidit J. F. Reitzius.” Maittaire prefixed a dedication of this volume to the marquis of Granby, and the lords Robert and George Manners, his brothers; and a new preface, dated 3 Cal. Octob. 1737. This was again printed at London in 1742. In 1739, he addressed to the empress of Russia a small Latin poem, under the title of “Carmen Epinicium Augustissimae Russorum Imperatrici sacrum.” His name not having been printed in the titlepage, it is not so generally known that he was editor of Plutarch’s “Apophthegmata,” 1741, 4to. The last publication of Mr. Maittaire was a volume of poems in 4to, 1742, under the title of “Senilia, sive Poetica aliquot in argumentis varii generis tentamina.” It may be worth mentioning, that Baxter’s dedication to his “Glossarium Antiquitatum Britannicarum,” was much altered by Maittaire; who died August 7, 1747, aged seventy-nine. There is a good mezzotinto print of him by Faber, from a painting by B. Dandridge, inscribed, “Michael Maittaire, A. M. Amicorum jussu.” His valuable library, which he had been collecting fifty years, was sold by auction, by Messrs. Cock and Langford, at the close of the same year, and the beginning of the following, taking up in all forty-four nights. Mr. Cock, in his prefatory advertisement, tells us, “In exhibiting thus to the public the entire library of Mr. Maittaire, I comply with the will of my deceased friend; and in printing the catalogue from his own copy just as he left it (though, by so doing, it is the more voluminous), I had an opportunity not only of doing the justice I owe to his memory, but also of gratifying the curious.” Maittaire, it may be added, was patronized by the first earl of Oxford, both before and after that gentleman’s elevation to the peerage, and continued a favourite with his son the second earl. He was also Latin tutor to Mr. Stanhope, the earl of Chesterfield’s favourite son, and was esteemed by so many persons of eminence that we cannot wonder at his portrait being engraven jussu amicorum. He possessed many amiable qualities; in religion was orthodox and zealous ; in temper modest and unassuming despising the pride of learning, yet fond of friendly intercourse.

, dean of the cathedral of Munster, and celebrated for his inquiries into typographical antiquities, was certainly a learned man, but very turbulent and ambitious. Hence it happened that he was named to two bishoprics without taking possession of either, and that he died in prison for his opposition to another prelate. The emperor Ferdinand I. appointed him to the bishopric of Ratzebourg, and he was, a few days after, elected to the see of Minden. But his ambition was to be bishop of Munster, and not succeeding, in 1650, he intrigued and raised seditions against the bishop who had succeeded, till in 1655, he was degraded from his dignity of dean. Nor yet warned, he continued his machinations, and in 1657, the bishop had him arrested and confined in the castle of Otteinzheim. Here he continued till his death, which happened suddenly, March 7, 1664. He wrote in Latin, 1. “De natura et usu Literarum,” Munster, 1638, 4to. 2. “De ortu et progressu artis Typographica;,” Cologne, 1639, 4to, and since reprinted in Wolfs collection of “Monumenta Typographica,” vol. I. 1740. 3. “De Archicancellariis S. R. imperil,” Munster, 1640, 4to. 4. “Paralipomenon de Historicis Gracis,” Cologne, 1656, 4to.

, commonly called the marquis Malvezzi, an Italian writer of eminence, was born of a noble family at Bologna, in 1599. After having finished his classical and philosophical studies, he applied to the law, and became a doctor in that faculty in 1616, although not quite seventeen years of age. After this he cultivated other sciences, and spent some time and pains upon physic, mathematics, and divinity. He even did not neglect astrology; in favour of which he always entertained high prejudices, although he affected outwardly to despise it. Music and painting were also among the arts in which he exercised himself for his amusement. He afterwards became a soldier, and served under the duke Feria, governor of the Milanese. Philip the Fourth of Spain employed him in several affairs, and admitted him into his council of war. Letters, however, occupied a good part of his time, and he was member of the academy of the Gelati at Bologna. He was the author of several works in Spanish and Italian: among the latter were, “Discourses upon the first book of Tacitus’s Annals,” which he composed at the age of twenty-three, and dedicated to Ferdinand II. great duke of Tuscany. There is a great shew of learning in it; too much, indeed, for there are many quotations from the fathers and scripture, which have but little to do with Tacitus and modern politics. There are also in it certain logical distinctions, and subtile reasonings, which savour of pedantry, and had better become a professor of philosophy, than a writer upon government and stateaffairs. He died at Bologna, Aug. 11, 1654. His discourses upon Tacitus were translated and published in English, by sir R. Baker, Lond. 1642, folio. His “Davide perseguitato” was translated by Robert Ashley, 1647, in 12mo; his “Romulus and Tarquin,” by lord H. Gary, 1638, 12mo; and his “Successi della monarchia di Spagna” by Robert Gentilis, 1647, 12mo.

Sir John Mandevile visited Tartary about half a century after Marco Polo, who was there in 1272. In this interval a true or fabulous account of that country, collected by a cordelier, one Oderic D'Udin, who set out in 1318, and returned in 1330, was published in Italian, by Guillaume de Salanga, in the second volume of Ramusio, and in Latin and English by Hakluyt. It is suspected that sir John made too much use of this traveller’s papers; and it is certain that the compilers of. the “Histoire Generale des Voyages” did not think our English knight’s book so original, or so worthy of credit, as to give any account of it in their excellent collection. Sir John indeed honestly acknowledges that his book was made partly of hearsay, and -'partly of his own knowledge; and he prefaces his most improbable relations with some such words as these, thei seyne, or men seyn^ but I have not sene it. His book, however, was submitted to the examination of the pope’s council, and it was published after that examination, with the approbation of the pope, as Leland thinks, of Urban V. Leland also affirms that sir John Mandevile had the reputation of being a conscientious man, and that he had religiously declined an honourable alliance to the Soldan-of Egypt, whose daughter he might have espoused, if he would have abjured Christianity. It is likewise very certain that many things in his book, which were looked upptv as fabulous for a long time, have been since verified beyond all doubt. We give up his men of fifty feet high r but his hens that bore wool are at this day very well known, under the name of Japan and silky fowls, &c. Upon the whole, there does not appear to be any very g.ood reason why sir John Mandevile should not be believed in any thing that he relates on his own observation. He was, as may be easily credited, an extraordinary linguist, and wrote his book in Latin, from which he translated it into French, and from French into English, and into Italian; and Vossius says that he knows it to be in Belgic and German. The English edition has the title of “The Voiyage and Travaile of Sir John Maundevile, knight, which treateth of the way to Hierusalem, and marvayles of lude,” &c. Lond. 1568, 4to, reprinted in 1684, same form, and again in 1727, 8vo. All these are in the British Museum, together with copies of the French, Spanish, Latin, and Italian. Of the last there are two editions, printed at Venice in 1537 and 1567, both in 8vo. The original English ms, is in the Cotton library. The English editions are the most valuable to us, as written in the very language used by our countrymen three hundred years ago^ at a time when the orthography of the English language was so little fixed, that it seems to have been the fashionable affectation of writers, to shew their wit and scholarship by spelling the same words in the greatest variety of ways imaginable. The reader will be amused by Addison’s pretended discovery of sir John Mandevile’s Mss. and the pleasant fiction of “the freezing and thawing of several short speeches which sir John made in the territories of Nova Zembla.” This occurs in the Tatler, No. 254, the note upon which has principally furnished us with the above account.

In 1741 he was elected to a fellowship of his college, in right of which he had the living of St. Botolph, in Cambridge, which he held until his marriage, in 1755. He took the degree of M. A. in 1744, and that of B. D. in 1753. In 1760, Dr. Thomas, bishop of Lincoln, to whom he was chaplain, gave him the prebend of Milton Ecclesia, in the church of Lincoln, consisting of the impropriation and advowson of the parish of Milton, co. Oxford. In 1763 he was presented by Dr. Greene, dean of Salisbury, to the vicarage of Godalming, in Surrey, and was instituted Dec. 22, he preferring the situation to that of St. Nicholas in Guildford (though a better living) which was offered to him by the same patron. Here he constantly resided till the time of his death, beloved and respected by his parishioners, and discharging his professional duty in the most punctual and conscientious manner. In 1769 he was presented to the rectory of Pepperharrow, an adjoining parish, by viscount Middleton. He was elected F. R. S. in 1767, and F. S. A. in 1770. To the sincere regret of his parishioners, and of all who knew him, Mr. Manning died Sept. 9, 1801, after a short attack of pleurisy, having entered his eighty-first year. By Catherine, his wife, daughter of Mr. Reade Peacock, a quaker, mercer, of Huntingdon, he had three sons and five daughters, all of whom survived him, except his eldest son, George Owen, and one of the daughters.

, a miscellaneous French writer, was born at Paris, Aug. 15, 1750, and was bred up to the bar, which he quitted for the more general pursuits of literature. He became librarian to the Mazarine college, and from time to time published a great many works, on various subjects of polite literature, criticism, manners, poetry, &c. most of which shew considerable genius and learning, and all were well received by the public. His very amiable private character appears to have procured him many friends and much respect, although his principles were not always sound, his person had little to recommend it, and an impediment in his speech rendered his conversation somewhat painful. He retired to the country about the close of his life, as he said, “that he might enjoy the sun more at his ease.” He died at Montrouge, Jan. 18, 1805. His principal works are: 1. “De Bergeries,” 1770, 12mo. 2. “Le Temple de Hymen,” 1771, 12mo. 3. “Bibliotheque des Amans,” 1777, J6mo. 4. “Tombeau de J. J. Rousseau,” 1779, 8vo. 5. “Le Livre de tous les ages,” 1779, 12mo. 6. “Fcagmens d'un poeme moral sur Dieu, ou, Nouvelle Lucrece,” 1781, a poem which the Diet. Hist, says is neither moral nor religious. 7. “L‘age d’or,” 1782, 12mo, an agreeable collection of anecdotes. 8. “Prophetic d'Arlamek,” 12mo. 9. “Livre echappe” au deluge,“1784, 12mo, a collection of psalms in the orie'ntal style, of which the moral is pure; but we are told it afforded his enemies a pretence to get him dismissed from his office of librarian to the Mazarine college. 10.” Recueil des poetes moralistes Franais r “1784, 2 vols. 18mo. 11.” Costumes civils actuels de tous les peuples,“1784, 4to. 12.” Tableau de la fable,“1787. 13.” Paris et la Province, ou Choix des plus beaux moriumens d'architecture en France,“1787. 14.” Catechisme de cure 1 Meslier,“1789, 8vo. 15.” Dictionnaire d'amour,“1789, 16mo. 16.” Le Pantheon, ou les figures de la fable, avec leurs histoires,“1791, 8vo. 17.” Almanee des honnetes gens,“1788, a publication containing some impieties, for which he suffered imprisonment. 18. ”Decades tlu cultivateur,“2 vols. 18mo. 19.” Voyage de Pythagore,“1798, 16 vols. 8vo, in imitation of the Anacharsis of Barthelemi, but greatly inferior. 20.” Dictionnaire des athees," 1800. He was also the author of prefaces and introductions to various collections of engravings, as the hjstory of Greece, 1795, 5 vols. 4to, the Florence Museum, 6 vols. 4to, &C.

, a physician, appears to have been a native of Scotland, where he was born in 1702, and entered upon the study of medicine at Edinburgh in 172O, whence he went to Leyden; and, after prosecuting the same study there for some time, was admitted to his degree of M. D in 1725. He then returned to Scotland, and practised his art at St. Andrew’s. In 1740, while about to publish his Commentaries on Eustachius, he was r< quested by lord Cathcart, to accompany him, as physician to the forces under his command on the American expedition. The difficulties of the voyage, and the change of climate, he bore with chearfulness, but the death of that muchloved commander greatly afflicted him. Soon after he was seized with a bilious fever, which proved fatal in 1743, in the forty-first year of his age. His first publication was entitled “Tractatus de similibus animalibus, et animalium calore:” after which appeared his “Essays Medical and Philosophical,” 1740, 8vo. He contributed also some papers to the Edinburgh “Medical Essays,” and to the “Philosophical Transactions.” We find in Dr. Thomson’s list of the fellows of the royal society the name of George Martini, M. D. elected in 1740, who was probably our author. Being possessed, when a student at Edinburgh, of the earliest edition of “Eustachius’s Tables,” he applied himself diligently to correct and enlarge Lancisi’s explanation of those tables, and compared the descriptions of the parts as delivered by authors with these figures, and carefully registered what he read upon the subject. Being at length furnished with many rich materials, he considered of repairing, in some measure, the loss of Eustachius’s commentaries “De dissentionibus et controversiis anatomicis,” and was, as we have observed, about to publish his own Commentaries, when he went abroad. It fell at length into the hands of the first Dr. Monro of Edinburgh, who published it in 1755, under the title of “Georgii Martinii, M. D. in Bartholomaei Eustachii Tabulas anatomicas Coinmentaria,” 8vo. Notwithstanding Albinus’s explanation, Dr. Monro considers this work as indispensably necessary to those who are in possession of Eustachius’s Tables.

*About this time he was an unsuc- Transactions“from 1720 to that time, cessful candidate for the post of secre- in conjunction with Mr, John Eames, taryto the royal society. His oppo- who, however, abridged only three nent was Dr. Mortimer, who had the chapters, while Mr. Martyn completinterest of s r Hans Sloane and of the ed the whole in 3 vols. 4to. 1734, as coim, which, Mr. Martyn’s son says, a continuation of the previous abridgwas” too prevalent for 1 he literary ment in 5 vols, by Lowthorp and part of the society;“In 1731 he was Jones. Among his other literary laengaged in putung together Churchill’s hours, he was also engaged in the Collect ion of Voyages and Travels;” General Dictionary, including Bayle,“published proposals fir an edition of 1 vols, fol. but his articles appear only Virgil’s Georgics, anl entered into ar- in the first three volumes, tides for abridging the” Philosophical air disagreeing with his constitution, which was asthmatic, he removed to Chelsea, where he married, on the 20th of August, 1732, Eulalia, youngest daughter of John King, D. D. rector of Chelsea, and prebendary of York, by whom he had three sons and five daughters. Four of the latter died young, but the other children survived him.

, recorder of Exeter, was born in that city in 1562, and educated in the grammar school, whence he was sent to Broadgates-hall, now Pembroke college, Oxford, in 1579. Here he is supposed to have taken one degree in arts, and then removed to some of the inns of court in London to study law. In 1605, he was elected reeofder of his native city, where he died April 12, 1617. He is noticed here as the author of a history or chronicle of the kings of England, entitled “The History and Lives of the Kings of England, from William the Conqueror to King Henry VIII.” Lond. 1616, folio, reprinted in 1618, an amusing, and not ill-written work, taken principally from the Chronicles. An appendix was published in 1638, by B. R M. A. including the history of Edward VI., Mary, and Elizabeth. It is said that king James took offence at some passages in Mr. Martyn’s work respecting his own family or the Scottish nation, and that the author was brought into some trouble. Of what kind this trouble was we are not told, but that it preyed on his mind, and hastened his death. Mr. Martyn also published a book for the use of one of his sons, entitled “Youth’s Instruction,” Lond. 1612, 'Jto, which Wood saysj shows a great deal of reading. His family appears to have been somewhat poetical, as his history was preluded by copies (if verses by his three sons, and his son-in-law. 1 Ma&Tyr, Justin, see Justin. Martyr, Peter. See Anghiera. Martyr (Peter), a very distinguished divine, was born at Florence, Sept. 8, 1500. His family name was VermiliUs; but his parents gave him that of Marty*, from one Peter a martyr, whose church happened to stand near their house. The first rudiments of literature he received from his mother, who was a very ingenious lady; and used, as it is said, to read Terence and other classics to him in the original. When he was grown up, he became a regular Augustine in the monastery of Fiesoli; and, after three years’ stay there, was sent to the university of Padua, to study philosophy and the Greek language. At twenty-six, in 1526, he was made a public preacher, and preached first at Brixia, in the church of Afra, then at Rome, Venice, Mantua, and other cities of Italy. He read lectures of philosophy and divinity in his college, and applied himself to the study of the Hebrew tongue, the knowledge of which he attained by the assistance of one Isaac, a Jewish physician. Such was his fame at this time, that he was made abbot of Spoletto, in the duchy of Umbria, where he continued three years. Afterwards, he was made go1 Prince’s Worthies 6f Devon. Fuller’s Worthies. Ath. Ox. vol I. vernor of the monastery of St. Peter ad aram in Naples. Here he first became acquainted with the writings of Zuinglius and Bucer, which led him to entertain a good opinion of protestantism: and afterwards his conversation with Valdes, a Spanish lawyer, so confirmed him in it, that he made no scruple to preach it at Rome privately to many persons of quality, and sometimes even publicly. Thus when he came to I Cor. iii. 13, he boldly affirmed, that place not to be meant of purgatory “because,” said he, “the fire there spoken of is such a fire, as both good and bad must pass through and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.” “And this,” says Fuller, in his quaint manner, “seeming to shake a main pillar of purgatory, the pope’s furnace, the fire whereof, like the philosopher’s stone, melteth all his leaden bulls into pure gold; some of his under-chemists, like Demetrius and the craftsmen, began to bestir themselves, and caused him to be silenced.”

Dr. Maskelyne’s private character was likewise truly estimable. He was indeed exemplary in the discharge of every duty. In his manners he was modest, simple, and unaffected. To strangers he appeared distant, or rather diffident; but among his friends he was cheerful, unreserved, and occasionally convivial. He was fond of epigrammatic thoughts and classical allusions; and even somelimes indulged in playful effusions of this kind, at an advanced period of life. He maintained a regular correspondence with the principal astronomers of Europe. He was visited also by many illustrious foreigners, as well as eminent characters of his own country, but his warmest attachments were always manifested to the lovers of astronomy. Among his most intimate friends may be reckoned Dr. Herschel, Dr. Hutton, Messrs. Wollastons, Mr. Aubert, bishop Horsley, sir George Shuckburgh, baron Maseres r professor Robertson; and also professor Vince, whose publications so ably illustrate Dr. Maskelyne’s labours, and whom he appointedthe depositary of his scientific papers.

, a French translator, and in some degree a poet, was born at Noyon, in 1619, and for a time followed the profession of an advocate but being disgusted with the lavi r went into the church, where he became an abbe, and canon of the cathedral of Rheims. In that city he died in 1708, at the age of ninety. His works consist chiefly of translations, which are written in a pure, but not an animated style. The principal of them are these: 1. “The Philippics of Demosthenes.” 2. “The Euthydemus, and the greater Hippias of Plato.” 3. Some Orations of Cicero. 4. “The Rationarium Temporum of father Petau,” 1683, 3 vols. 12mo. 5. “Sanderus’s History of the English Schism,” 1678, 2 vols. 12mo. 6. “The Lives of cardinal Pole and Campeggio.” 7. “The Homilies of St. Chrysostom, addressed to the people of Antioch.” Maucroix was intimately connected with Boileau, Racine, and particularly with La Fontaine; in conjunction with whom, he published in 1685, a collection of their miscellaneous works, in 2 vols. 12mo. In 1726 were published, “Les nouvelles Oeuvres de Maucroix,” among which are some poems, more remarkable for a certain natural style, than for brilliancy of imagination.

, a Greek historian, who is thought to have flourished in the time of Augustus, wrote a history of the affairs of Heraclea in Pontus, sixteen books of which were abridged by Photius. They come down to the death of an Heraclean ambassador to Julius Caesar, then emperor. A Latin translation of his history was published at Oxford in 1597, under the title “Memnonis historicorum, quae supersunt omnia, e Gr. in Lat. traducta per R. Brett,” 16mo. Richard Brett was a fellow of Lincoln, of whom we have given some account in vol. VI.

, an eminent mathematician and astronomer, whose name in High-Dutch was Kauffman, was born about 1640, at Holstein in Denmark. From his works we learn, that he had an early and liberal education, suitable to his distinguished genius, by which he was enabled to extend his researches into the mathematical sciences, and to make very considerable improvements: for it appears from his writings, as well as from the character given of him by other mathematicians, that his talent rather lay in improving, and adapting any discoveries and improvements to use, than invention. However, his genius for the mathematical sciences was very conspicuous, and introduced him to public regard and esteem in his own country, and facilitated a correspondence with such as were eminent in those sciences, in Denmark, Italy, and England, In consequence, some of his correspondents gave him an invitation to this country, which he accepted; and he afterwards continued in England till hi death. In 1666 he was admitted F. R. S. and gave frequent proofs of his close application to study, as well as of his eminent abilities in improving some branch or other of the sciences. But he is charged sometimes with borrowing the inventions of others, and adopting them as his own, and it appeared upon some occasions that he was not of an over-liberal mind in scientific communications. Thus, it had some time before him been observed, that there was an analogy between a scale of logarithmic tangents and Wright’s protraction of the nautical meridian line, which consisted of the sums of the secants; though it does not appear by whom this analogy was first discovered. It appears, however, to have been first published, and introduced into the practice of navigation, by Henry Bond, who mentions this property in an edition of Norwood’s Epitome of Navigation, printed about 1645; and he again treats of it more fully in an edition of Gunter’s works, printed in 1653, where he teaches, from this property, to resolve all the cases of Mercator’s sailing by the logarithmic tangents, independent of the table of meridional parts. This analogy had only been found to be nearly true by trials, but not demonstrated to be a mathematical property. Such demonstration seems to have been first discovered by Mercator, who, desirous of making the most advantage of this and another concealed invention of his in navigation, by a paper in the Philosophical Transactions for June 4, 1666, invites the public to enter into a wager with him on his ability to prove the truth or falsehood of the supposed analogy. This mercenary proposal it seems was not taken up by any one; and Mercator reserved his demonstration. Our author, however, distinguished himself by many valuable pieces on philosophical and mathematical subjects. His first attempt was, to reduce astrology to rational principles, which proved a vain attempt. But his writings of more particular note, are as follow: 1. “Cosmographia, sive Descriptio Cceli & Terrse in Circulos, qua fundamentum sterniter sequentibus ordine Trigonometric Sphericorum Logarithmicse, &c. a” Nicolao Hauffman Holsato,“Dantzic, 1651, 12mo. 2.” Rationes Mathematics subductse anno 1653,“Copenhagen, 4to. 3.” De Emendatione annua Diatribae duae, quibus exponuntur & demonstrantur Cycli Soiis & Lunce,“&c. 4to. 4.” Hypothesis Astronomica nova, et Consensus ejus cum Observationibus,“Lond. 1664, folio. 5.” Logarithmotechnia, sive Method us construendi Logarithmos nova, accurata, et facilis; scripto antehac communicata anno sc. 1667 nonis Augusti; cui nunc accedit, Vera Quadratura Hyperbolae, & inventio summae Logaritbmorum. Auctore Nicolao Mercatore Holsato e Societate Regia. Huic etiam jungitur Michaelis Angeli Riccii Exercitatio Geometrica de Maximis et Minimis, hie ob argument! praestantiam & exemplarium raritatem recusa,“Lond. 1668, 4to. 6.” Institutionum Astronomicarum libri duo, de Motu Astrorum communi & proprio, secundum hypotheses veterum & recentiorum praecipuas deque Hypotheseon ex observatis constructione, cum tabulis Tychonianis, Solaribus, Lunaribus, Lunae-solaribus, & Rudolphinis Solis, Fixarum &*quinque Errantium, earumque usu prajceptis et exemplis commonstrato. Quibus accedit Appendix de iis, quae uovissimis temporibus coelitus innotuerunt,“Lond. 1676, 8vo. 7.” Euclidis Elementa Geometrica, novo ordine ac methodo fere, demonstrata. Una cum Nic. Mercatoris in Geometriam Introductione brevi, qua Magnitudinum Ortus ex genuinis Principiis, & Ortarum Affectiones ex ipsa Genesi derivantur," Lond. 1678, 12mo. His papers in the Philosophical Transactions are, 1. A Problem on some Points of Navigation vol. I. p. 215. 2. Illustrations of the Logarithmo-technia vol. Hi. p. 759. 3. Considerations concerning his Geometrical and Direct Method for finding the Apogees, Excentricities, and Anomalies of the Planets; vol. V. p. 1168. Mercator died in 1594, about fifty-four years of age.

This confusion in his affairs was partly occasioned by his intrusting that to servants which it was in their power to abuse without his knowledge, and partly by imprudently becoming a joint security for a considerable sum with a printer in Edinburgh, to whom one of his brothers was then apprentice, which, on his failure, Mickle was unable to pay. In this dilemma, had he at once compounded with his creditors, and disposed of the business, as he was advised, he might have averted a series of anxieties that preyed on his mind for many years; and he perhaps might have entered into another concern more congenial to his disposition, with all the advantage of dear-bought experience. But some friends interposed at this crisis, and prevailed on his creditors to accept notes of hand in lieu of present payment, a measure which, however common, is in general futile, and seldom fails to increase the embarrassment which it is kindly intended to alleviate. Accordingly within a few months, Mickle was again insolvent, and almost distracted with a nearer view of impending ruin ready to fall, not only on himself, but on his whole family. Perhaps an unreserved acknowledgment of iasolvency might not yet have been too late to shorten his sufferings, had not the same friends again interfered, and again persuaded his creditors to allow him more time to satisfy their demands. This interference, as it appeared to be the last that was possible, in some degree roused him to a more close application to business; but as business was ever secondary in his thoughts, he was induced at the same time to place considerable reliance on his poetical talents which, as far as known, had been encouraged by some critics of acknowledged taste in his own country. He therefore began to retouch and complete his poem on “Providence/' from which he conceived great expectations, and at length had it published in London by Becket, in August 1762, under the title of” Providence, orArandusand Emilee.“The character given of it in the Critical Review was highly flattering; but the opinion of the Monthly, which was then esteemed more decisive, being less satisfactory, he determined to appeal to lord Lyttelton. Accordingly', he sent to this nobleman a letter dated January 21, 1763, under the assumed name of William More, begging his lordship’s opinion of his poem,” which,“he tells him,” was the work of a young man friendless and unknown, but that, were another edition to have the honour of lord Lyttelton’s name at the head of a dedication, such a pleasure w r ould enable him to put it in a much better dress than what it then appeared in." He concluded with requesting the favour of an answer to be left at Seagoe’s Coffee-house, Hoiborn. This letter he consigned to the care of his brother in London, who was to send it in his own hand and call for the answer. But before this could arrive, his affairs became so deranged that, although he experienced many instances of friendship and forbearance, it was no longer possible to avert a bankruptcy; and suspecting that one of his creditors intended to arrest him for an inconsiderable debt, he was reduced to the painful necessity of leaving his home, which he did in the month of April, and reached London on the 3th day of May. Here for some time he remained friendless and forlorn, reflecting with the utmost poignancy that he had in all probability involved his family and friends in, irremediable distress.

With respect to his talents as a writer, he tells his patron, lord Hervey, in his dedication of “The Life of Cicero,” that “it was Cicero who instructed him to write your lordship,” he goes on, “who rewards me for writing for next to that little reputation with which the public has been pleased to favour me, the benefit of this subscription is the chief fruit that I have ever reaped from my studies.” Of this he often speaks, sometimes in terms of complaint, and sometimes, as in the following passage, in a strain of triumph: “I never was trained,” says he, “to pace in the trammels of the church, nor tempted by the sweets of its preferments, to sacrifice the philosophic freedom of a studious, to the servile restraints of an ambitious life: and from this very circumstance, as often as I reflect upon it, I feel that comfort in my own breast, which no external honours can bestow. I persuade myself, that the life and faculties of man, at the best but short and limited, cannot be employed more rationally or laudably, than in th$ search of knowledge, and especially of that sort which relates to our duty, and conduces to our happiness, &c.” This, however, was the philosophy of a disappointed man. It is true, indeed, that he felt the free spirit he describes, which was manifest in all his writings, yet from many of them it is no less clear that he felt anger and disappointment also, at not being preferred, according t;o his own internal consciousness of merit. So inconsistent are even the most able men. He made his preferment impossible, and then repined at not obtaining it. Some of his late biographers have endeavoured to prove what a “good Christian” he was; he had the same opinion of himself, but it is not easy to discover what, in his view, entered into the character of a good Christian. That he was an apostate, as some of his antagonists have asserted, may be doubtful, r perhaps easily contradicted. From all we have seen of his confidential correspondence, he does not appear to have, ever had much to apostatize from. As far back as 1733, he says, in one of his letters to lord Hervey, “It is my misfortune to have had so early a taste of Pagan sense, as to make me very squeamish in my Christian studies.” In the following year he speaks of one of the most common observances of religion in a manner that cannot be misunderstood: “Sunday is my only day of rest, but not of liberty; for I am bound to a double attendance at church, to wipe off the stain of infidelity. When I have recovered my credit, in which I make daily progress, I may use more freedom.” With such contempt for church and churchmen, it can be no wonder that Dr. Middleton failed both of preferment and respect.

, a public-spirited man, and a great benefactor to the city of London, by bringing in thither the New River, was a native of Denbigh in North Wales, and a citizen tind goldsmith of London. This city not being sufficiently supplied with water, three acts of parliament were obtained for that purpose; one in queen Elizabeth’s, and two in king James the First’s reign; granting the citizens of London full power to bring a river from any part of Middlesex and Hertfordshire. The project, after much calculation, w r as laid aside as impracticable, till sir Hugh Middleton undertook it: in consideration of which, the city conferred on him and his heirs, April 1, 1606, the full right and power of the act of parliament; granted unto them in that behalf. Having therefore taken an exact survey of all springs and rivers in Middlesex and Hertfordshire, he made choice of two springs, one in the parish of Am well near Hertford, the other near Ware, both about twenty miles from London; and, having united their streams, conveyed them to the city with very great labour and expence. The work was begun Feb. 20, 1608, and carried on through various soils, some oozy and muddy, others extremely hard and rocky. Many bridges in the mean time were built over his New River; and many drains were made to carry off land-springs and commonsewers, sometimes over and sometimes under it. Besides these necessary difficulties, he had, as may easily be imagined, many others to struggle with; as the malice and derision of the vulgar and envious, the many hindrances and complaints of persons through whose grounds the channel was to be cut, &c. When he had brought the water into the neighbourhood of Enfield, almost his whole fortune was spent upon which he applied to the lord mayor and commonalty of London but they refusing to interest themselves in the affair, he applied next to king James. The king, willing to encourage that noble work, did, by indenture under the great seal, dated May 2, 1612, between him and Mr. Middleton, covenant to pay half the expence of the whole work, past and to come; and thus the design was happily effected, and the water brought into the cistern at Islington on Michaelmas-day, 1613. Like all other projectors, sir Hugh greatly impaired his fortune by this stupendous work: for though king James had borne so great a part of the expence, and did afterwards, in 1619, grant his letters-patent to sir Hugh Middleton, and others, incorporating them by the name of “The Governors and Company of ttfe New River, brought from Chadwell and Am well to London” impowering them to choose a governor, deputy-governor, and treasurer, to grant leases, &c. yet the profit it brought in at first was very inconsiderable. There was no dividend made among the proprietors till the year 1633, when III. 195. Id. was divided upon ea^h share. The second dividend amounted only to 3l. 4s. 2d. and instead of a third dividend, a call being expected, king Charles I. who was in possession of the royal moiety aforesaid, re-conveyed it again to sir Hugh, by a deed under the great seal, Nov. 18, 1636; in consideration of sir Hugh’s securing to his majesty and his successors a fee-farm rent of 500l. per annum, out of the profits of the company, clear of all reprises. Sir Hugh charged that sum upon the holders of the king’s shares. He was at last under the necessity of engaging in the business of a surveyor, or what is now denominated a civil engineer, and in that capacity rendered essential services to his country, by various schemes of mining, draining, &c. In 1622 he was created a baronet, and he died in the year 1631; since which, the value of the shares in this New River, as it is still called, advanced so much as to create large fortunes to thje heirs of the original holders. A hundred pounds share, some years since, sold as high as fifteen thousand pounds. Of late, however, there have been several acts of parliament passed in favour of other projects, which have reduced the value of the New River shares full one half. It is the fashion now to decry the company as extravagant in their charges for supplies of water; but it should be remembered, that the shares of this corporation, like those of other commercial companies, are perpetually changing their masters; and it is probable that the majority of share-holders, when their value was even at the highest, had paid their full price, so as to gain only a maderate interest upon their purchase money.

The emoluments of his preferment, however, being not very considerable, he was encouraged, by the success of his first play, above mentioned, to have recourse to dramatic writing. This step being thought inconsistent with his profession, produced some warm remonstrances from a prelate on whom he relied for preferment, and who, finding him resolute, withdrew his patronage. Our author greatly aggravated his offence afterwards by publishing a ridiculous character, in a poem, which was universally considered as intended for the bishop. He then proceeded with his dramatic productions, and was very successful, until he happened to offend certain play-house critics, who from that time regularly attended the theatre to oppose any production known to be his, and finally drove him from the stage. About this time he had strong temptations to employ his pen in the whig interest; but, being in principle a high church-man, he withstood these, although the calls of a family were particularly urgent, and all hopes of advancement in the church at an end. At length, however, the valuable living of Upcerne was given him by Mr. Carey of Dorsetshire, and his prospects otherwise began to brighten, when he died April 23, 1744, at his lodgings in Cheyne-walk, Chelsea, before he had received a twelvemonth’s revenue from his new benefice, or had it in his power to make any provision for his family. As a dramatic writer, Baker thinks he has a right to stand in a very estimable light; yet the plays he enumerates are now entirelyforgotten. Besides these, he wrote several political pamphlets, particularly one called “Are these things so” which was much noticed. He was author also of a poem called “Harlequin Horace,” a satire, occasioned by some ill treatment he had received from Mr. Rich, the manager of Covent- Garden theatre; and was likewise concerned, together with Mr. Henry Baker, F. R. S. in a complete translation of the comedies of Moliere, primed together with the original French, and published by Mr. Watts. After his death was published by subscription a volume of his “Sermons,” the profits of which his widow applied to the satisfaction of his creditors, and the payment of his debts; an act of juctice by which t>he left herself and family almost destitute of the common necessaries of life.

Though his controversial, and other engagements, had for some time suspended the exertion of his poetical talents, yet he did not suffer his character as a poet to sink into oblivion, and in 1645, he published his juvenile poems in Latin and English, including, for the first time, the “Allegro” and “Penseroso.” in 1646, Milton’s wife produced her first child, and in the following year, in which his father died, the family of the Powells returned to their own mansion, and his house was resigned once more to literature. In this house, in which his second daughter Mary was born, he did not continue long, but exchanged it for one of smaller cKmensions in High Holborn. He is not known to have published any thing afterwards till the king’s death, when finding that measure condemned by the Presbyterians, he wrote a treatise to justify it. Of all Milton’s political works this reflects least credit on his talents, or his principles. Even those who have been most disposed to vindicate him against all censure, and to represent him invulnerable both as a politician and a poet, seem to shrink from the task of defending him in this instance, and candidly tell us, that they meet with an insuperable difficulty in the very title of the book “TheTenure of Kings and Magistrates proving, that it is lawful, and hath been held so through all ages, for any who have the power, to call to account a tyrant or wicked king: and after due conviction, to depose and put him to death, if the ordinary magistrate have neglected or denied to do it.” Here, therefore, the right to punish kings belongs to any who have the power, and their having the power makes it lawful, a doctrine so monstrous as to be given up by his most zealous advocates, as “a fearful opening for mischief:” but it was, in truth, at that time, what Milton intended it to be, a justification, not of the people of England, for they had no hand in the king’s murder, but of the army under Ireton and Cromwell. That Milton was also at this time under the strong influence of party-spirit, appears from his attack on the Presbyterians in this work, the avowed ground of which is their inconsistency. When, however, we examine their inconsistency, as he has been pleased to state it, it amounts to only this, that they contributed in common with the Independents and other sectaries and parties, to dethrone the king; but r wished to stop short of his murder. Every species of opposition to what they considered as tyranny in the king, they could exert, but they thought it sufficient to deprive him of power, without depriving him of life.

From a very recent writer, we have some account of his mode of living and general conduct while at Berlin, which was highly honourable to his sense and spirit. When he first arrived at Berlin, he had occasioned some perplexity to those who invited him to their houses, for he played no game of chance, so that his hosts constantly said to each other, “What shall we do with this Englishman, who never plays at cards” In a short time, however, the contest was, who should leave the card -table to enjoy the conversation of sir Andrew Mitchell, whose understanding, they discovered, was no less admirable than the virtues of his character. His bon-mots came into circulation, and were long retailed. Thiebault has recorded a few which, as he says, explain rather his principles than his understanding. On one occasion that three English mails were due, the king said to him, at the levee, “Have you not the spleen, Mr. Mitchell, when the mail is thus delayed r” “No, Sire, not when it is delayed, but often enough when it arrives duly.” This alludes to his being frequently dissatisfied with his own court. During the seven years’ war, in which, as we have already noticed, he constantly served immediately under Frederic, the English government had promised Frederic to send a fleet to the Baltic, for the protection of commerce, and to keep off the Swedes and Russians; but as this fleet never made its appearance, the Swedes were enabled to transport their army without interruption to Pomerania, together with all the necessaries for its support, and the Russians conveyed provisions for their troops by sea, and laid siege to Colberg, &c. All this could not fail to give umbrage to Frederic, and he incessantly complained to sir Andrew, who found himself embarrassed what reply to make. At length the ambassador, who had before been daily invited to dine with the king, received no longer this mark of attention; the generals, meeting him about the king’s hour of dinner, said to him, < It is dinner-time, M. Mitchell.“” Ah gentlemen,“replied he,” no fleet, no dinner“This was repeated to Frederic, and the invitations were renewed. Frederic in his fits of ill-humour was known to exercise his wit even at the expence of his allies; and the English minister at home expressed to sir Andrew Mitchell a wish that he would include some of these splenetic effusions in his official dispatches. Sir Andrew, however, in reply, stated the distinction between such kind of intelligence, and that which properly belonged to his office; and the application was not repeated, by which he was saved from the disgrace, for such he considered it, of descending to the littlenesses of a mere gossip and tale-bearer. We shall only add one more repartee of sir Andrew Mitchell, because, if we mistake not, it has been repeated as the property of other wits. After the affair of Port Mahon, the king of Prussia said to him,” You have made a bad beginning, M. Mitchell. What! your fleet beaten, and Port Mahon taken in your first campaign The trial in which you are proceeding against your admiral Byng is a bad plaister for the malady. You have made a pitiful campaign of it; this is certain.“” Sire, we hope, with God’s assistance, to make a better next year.“” With GocVs assistance, say you, Sir I did not know you had such an ally.“” We rely much upon him, though he costs us less than our other allies."

, M. A. and F. S. A. a learned and indefatigable antiquary and biographer, the son of Stephen Morant, was born at St. Saviour’s in the isle of Jersey, Oct. 6, 1700; and, after finishing his education at Abingdon-school, was entered Dec. 16, 1717, of Pembrokecollege, Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. June 10, 1721, and continued till Midsummer 1722; when he was preferred to the office of preacher of the English church at Amsterdam, but never went to take possession. He took the degree of M. A. in 1724, and was presented to the rectory of Shellow Bowells, April 20, 1733; to the vicarage of Bromfield, Jan. 17, 1733-4; to the rectory of Chicknal Smeley, Sept. 19, 1735; to that of St. Mary’s, Colchester, March 9, 1737; to that of Wickham Bishops, Jan. 21, 1742-3; and to that of Aldham, Sept. 14, 1745. All these benefices are in the county of Essex. In 1748 he published his “History of Colchester,” of which only 200 copies were printed at the joint expence of Mr. Bowyer and himself. In 1751, Mr. Morant was elected F. S. A. In February 1768, he was appointed, by the lords subcommittees of the House of Peers, to succeed Mr. Blyke, in preparing for the press a copy of the rolls of parliament; a service to which he diligently attended to his death, which happened Nov. 25, 1770, in consequence of a cold, caught in returning by water from the Temple to Vauxhall, in his way to South Lambeth, where he resided for the convenience of attending to his parliamentary labours; for which, as a native of Jersey, and excellently skilled in the old Norman French, he was particularly well qualified. This work, after his death, devolved on Thomas Astle, esq. F. R. and A. Ss. who had married his only daughter, and who communicated to Mr. Nichols the following exact account of Mr. Morant’s writings, from a list of them drawn up by himself. 1. “An Introduction to the Reading of the New Testament, being a translation of that of Mess, de Beausobre and Lenfant, prefixed to their edition of the New Testament,” 1725, 1726, 4to. 2. “The Translation of the Notes of Mess, de Beausobre and Lenfant on St. Matthew’s Gospel,” 1727, 4to. N. Tindal translated the text printed therewith. 3. “The Cruelties and Persecutions of the Romish Church displayed, &c.” 1728, 8vo, translated into Welsh by Thomas Richards, curate of Coy church in Glamorganshire, 1746, with the approbation of Dr. Gilbert, the bishop of Landaff. 4. “1 epitomised those Speeches, Declarations, &c. which Rapin had contracted out of Rushworth in the Life of King James I. King Charles I. &c.” 1729, 1730. 5. “Remarks on the 19th Chapter of the Second Book of Mr. Selden’s Mare Clausum.” Printed at the end of Mr. Fallens “Account of Jersey,” 1731. 6. “1 compared Rapin’s History with the 20 volumes of Rymer’s Fcedera, and Acta Publica, and all the ancient and modern Historians, and added most of the notes that were in the folio edition,” 1728, 1734. This is acknowledged at the end of the preface in the first volume of Rapin’s History. 7. “Translation of the Notes in the Second Part of the Othman History, by Prince Cantemir,” 1735, fulio. 8. Revised and correeled “The History of England, by way of Question and Answer,” for Thomas Astley, 1737, 12mo. 9. Revised and corrected “Hearne’s Ductor Historicus,” and made large additions thereto, for J. Knapton. 10. “Account of the Spanish Invasion in 1588, by way of illustration to the Tapestry Hangings in the House of Lords and in the King’s Wardrobe. Engraved and published by J. Pine,” 1739, folio. 11. “Geographia Antiqua & Nova; taken partly from Dufresnoy’s ‘ Methode pour etudier la Geographic;’ with Ceilarius’s Maps,” 1742, 4to. 12. “A Summary of the History of England,” folio, and “Lists at the end of Mr. TindaPs Continuation of Rapin’s History, in vol. III. being 55 sheets. Reprinted in three volumes,” 8vo. 13. “The History and Antiquities of Colchester,” 1748, folio; second edition, 1768. 14. “All the Lives in the Biographia Britannica marked C. 1739, 1760, 7 vols. folio. I also composed Stiliingfleet, which hath no mark at the end.” 15. “The History of P:ssex,” 1760, 1768, 2 vols. folio. 16. “I prepared the Rolls of Parliament for the Press” (as far as the 16 Henry IV.) Other works in ms.: 17. “An Answer to the first Part of the Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion, in a Letter to a Friend, 1724. Presented in ms. to Edmund Gibson, bishop of London.” Never printed. This was the beginning of Mr. Morant’s acquaintance with the bishop, whom he acknowledged as his only patron, and who gave him several livings in the county of Essex. 18. “The Life of King Edward the Confessor.” 19. About 150 Sermons.

When the society for the encouragement of arts, manufactures, and commerce, gave premiums for the best historical pictures, Mortimer contended for the prize with Huytfian and several other artists, painted a picture of St. Paul converting the Britons, was adjudged worthy of the palm, and received one hundred guineas as a reward for his superiority, and an encouragement to his perseverance. -This picture, at a future day, became the property of Dr. Bates of Great Missenden, and, in 1778, was by him presented to the church of Chipping-Wycombe in Buckinghamshire, of which it now forms the altar-piece. At the time of painting it he was an inhabitant of Covent-garden parish, and lived in the piazza, where he contracted an intimacy with Charles Churchill, Lloyd, and several other eccentric characters, more distinguished by the brilliancy of their wit, than the regularity of their conduct. He afterwards removed to a r^ouse in the church-yard of the same parish, and resided there until the year 1775, when he married, and removed to Norfolk-street, where he lived four years during the winter, but in the summer months, pursued his professional studies at a house at Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire. In this retirement, secluded from the society to whom he had, in early life, devoted many of his hours, he recovered his health, gave a new tone to his mind, and cultivated his art with more enthusiastic ardour.

The works of this prelate were, 1. “Apologia Catholica,” parti. Lond. 1605, 4to, dedicated to Dr. Richard Bancroft, archbishop of Canterbury. 2. “An exact Discovery of Romish Doctrine in the case of Conspiracy and Rebellion or Romish Positions and Practices,” &c. Lond. 1605, 4to, occasioned by the discovery of the gunpowdertreason-plot. 3. “Apologia Catholica,” part II. Lond. 1606, 4to. 4. “A full Satisfaction concerning a double Romish Iniquitie, hainous Rebellion, and more than heathenish Æquivocation containing three parts. The two former belong to the Reply upon the Moderate Answer: the first for confirmation of the discovery in these two points, treason and equivocation; the second is a justification of protestants touching the same points. The third part is a large discourse confuting the reasons and grounds of other priests, both in the case of rebellion and ^equivocation: published by authoritie,” Lond. 1606, 4to. Father Robert Parsons, the Jesuit, undertook to vindicate his friend, the writer of the “Moderate Answer:” in a book published under the name of P. R. and entitled “ATreatise, tending to Mitigation towards Catholic subjects in England, against Tho. Morton,” 1607, 4to. To this our author returned an answer, entitled, 5. “A Preamble unto an Incounter with, P. R. the author of the deceitful Treatise of Mitigation,” Lond. 1608, 4to. To this book and some others of our

the temper of the people ia those parts Day“author, father Parsons having made a reply under the title of” A sober Reckoning with Mr. Tho. Morton,“printed in 160y, 4to; the latter wrote, 6.” The Encounter against Mr. Parsons,“Lond. 1609, 4to. 7.” An Answer to the scandalous Exceptions of Theophiltis Higgons,“London, 1609, 4to. 8.” A Catholike Appeale for Protestants out of the Confessions of the Romane Doctors, particularly answering the misnamed Catholike Apologie for the Romane Faith out of the Protestants, manifesting the antiquitie of our Religion, and satisfying all scrupulous objections, which have been urged against it,“Lond, 1610, fol. He was engaged in writing this work by archbishop Bancroft, as he observes in his dedication; and Dr. Thomas James took the pains to examine some of his quotations in the Bodleian library. It has never yet been answered. 9.” A Defence of the Innocencie of the three Ceremonies of the Church of England, viz. the Surplice, Crosse after Baptisme, and Kneeling at the receiving of the blessed Sacrament. Divided into two parts. In the former whereof the generall arguments urged by the nonconformists, and in the latter part their particular accusations against these three ceremonies, are severally answered and refuted. Published by authority.“Second edit. London, 1619, in 4to. This was attacked by an anonymous author, generally supposed to be Mr. William Ames; which occasioned a Defence of it, written by Dr. John Burges of Sutton Colefield in Warwickshire, and printed at London in 1631, 4to, under the title of” An Answer to a Pamphlet entitled A Reply to Dr. Morton’s general Defence of three innocent Ceremonies.“10.” Causa Regia,“London, 1620, 4to, written against cardinal Be) tannin’s book,” De Officio Principis Christiani.“11.” The Grand Imposture of the now Church of Rome, concerning this Article of their Creed, The holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church.“The second edition enlarged was printed at London in 1628, 4to. There was an answer published to this, under the name of J. S. and entitled” Anti-Mortonns.“12.” Of the Institution of the Sacrament, &c. by some called the Mass,“&c. Lond. 1631, reprinted with additions in 1635, folio. As some strictures were published on the first edition by a Romish author, under the name of an English baron, Dr. Morton replied in, 13.” A Discharge of five Imputations of Mis- allegations charged upon the bishop of Duresme by an English baron,“London, 1633, 8vo. 14.” Antidotum adversus Ecclesiae Romans de Merito ex: Condigno Venenum,“Cambridge, 1637, 4to. 15.” Replica sive Refutatio Confutationis C. R.“Lond. 1638, 4to. This is an answer to a piece published by C. R. who was supposed to be the bishop of Chakedon, against the first part of our author’s Catholic Apology. 16. A Sermon preached before the king at Newcastle, upon Rom. xiii. 1. Lond. 1639, 4to. 17.” De Eucharistia Controversiae Decisio,“Cambridge, 1640, 4to. 18.” A Sermon on the Resurrection,“preached at the Spittle in London April 26. Lond. 1641, 8vo. 1.9. A Sermon preached at St. Paul’s June 19, 1642, upon 1 Cor. xi. 16. and entitled” The Presentment of a Schismatic.!*,“” Lond. 1642, 4to. 20. “Confessions and Proofs of Protestant Divines,” &c. Oxford, 1644, 4to, published without his name or knowledge of it, and written in defence of episcopal government, and sent to archbishop Usher, who committed it to the press with some other excellent collections of his own upon the same subject. 21. “Ezekiel’s Wheels,” &c. Lond. 1653, in 8vo. The subject of this book is meditations upon God’s Providence. Besides these printed works, he left a considerable number of manuscripts, “some in my custody,” says Dr. Barwick, “which 1 found by him at his death; and some (that I hear of) in the hands of others: all of them once intended for the press, whereof some have lost their first perfection by the carelessness and negligence of some that should have kept them others want his last hand and eye to perfect them and others only a seasonable time to publish them. And he might and would have left many more, considering how vigorous his parts were even in his extreme old age, if the iniquity of the times had not deprived him of most of his notes and papers.” Among these unpublished Mss. were: 1. “Tractatus de externo Judice iniallibili ad Doctores Pontificios, imprimis vero ad Sacerdotes Wisbicenses.” 2. “Tractatus de Justificatione.” Two copies, both imperfect. 3. “Some Papers written upon the Controversy between bishop Montague and the Gagger.” 4. “A Latin edition of his book called the Grand Imposture.” Imperfect. 5. Another edition of both the parts of his book called “Apologia Catholica.” 6. “An Answer to J. S. his Anti-Mortonus.” Imperfect. 7. His treatise concerning Episcopacy above mentioned, revised and enlarged. 8. A treatise concerning Prayer in art tinknown tongue. 9. A Defence of Infants 1 Baptism against Mr. Tombes and others. 10. Several Sermons. II. “A Kelation of the Conference held at York by our author, with Mr. Young and Mr. Stillington; and a further confutation of R. G. in defence of the Articles of the church of England.” Almost the last act of his life was to procure from the few remaining bishops in England, a refutation of the fable of the Nag’s Head ordination, which was revived by some of the popish persuasion in 1658. What he procured on the subject was afterwards published by bishop Uramhai.

Regiomontanus was the author of some other works besides those before mentioned. Peter Ramus, in -the account he gives of him, tells us, that in his work-shop at Nuremberg-, was an automaton in perpetual motion; that he made an artificial fly, which taking its flight from his hand, would fly round the room, and at last, as if weary, would return to his master’s hand; that he fabricated an eagle, which, on the emperor’s approach to the city, he sent out, hi< r h in the air, a great way to meet him, and that it kept him company to the gate of the city. “Let us no more wonder,” adds Ramus, “at the dove of Archytas, since Nuremberg can shew a fly, and an eagle, armed with geometrical wings. Therefore, those famous artificers, who were formerly in Greece, and Egypt, are no longer of any account, since Nuremberg can boast of her Regiomontanuses. For the senate and people of this city did all in their power to have a continual succession of RegiomontaDuses. For Wernerus first, and then the Schoneri, father and son, afterwards revived the spirit of Regiomontanus.”

, a celebrated German enthusiast, called sometimes Moncerus and Monetardus, was born at Stollberg in the Hartz, towards the end of the fifteenth century. His father is said to have been executed for some crime, and on this account the son was thought desirous of taking his revenge on the government of Stollberg. He studied probably at Wirtemberg, and acquired that knowledge in divinity which Melancthon praises, and which appears in his writings. By his own account he taught, in early life, in the schools of Aschersleben and Halle in Saxony; and most probably he was then in orders. It is certain, however, that he soon became attached to the mystics, and entertained the wildest notions of fanaticism, which pleased the lower classes of the people, while he preached at Stollberg and Zwickau, where he was settled as a preacher in 1520. Here, while he was violent against popery, he was as little contented with the progress of Luther’s reformation; the church, he maintained, was but half reformed, and a new and pure church of the true sons of God remained to be established. About this time he connected himself with Nicholas Storck, a leader among the baptists, who pretended to have communications with the Almighty, and to hold greater purity of doctrine than the r^st of the party. Muncer was a convert to his notions, and became ardent in making proselytes. He maintained that for men to avoid vice, they must practise perpetual mortification. They must put on a grave countenance, speak but little, wear a plain garb, and be serious in their whole deportment. Such as prepared their hearts in this manner, might expect that the Supreme Being would direct all their steps, and by visible signs discover his will to them; if that illumination be at any time withheld, he says we may expostulate with the Almighty, and remind him of his promises. This expostulation will be acceptable to God, and will at last prevail on him to guide us with the same unerring hand which conducted the patriarchs of old. He also maintained, that all men were equal in the sight of God, and that, therefore, they ought to have all things in common, and should on no account exhibit any marks of subordination or pre-eminence. With these sentiments he endeavoured to establish in Alstadt a new kingdom upon earth, or a society of pious, holy, and awakened people. With these people he was accused, in 1524, of having plundered a church in a neighbouring village, burnt a chapel, and committed many other outrages; and as the affair made a great noise, he was cited to answer to the charges at Weimar; but finding that the utmost severity was to be used against him, he remained at Alstadt, where his companions were so riotous, that he was under the necessity of removing to a distance. After some little time he settled at Nuremberg, where he published a vehement censure upon Luther, which, with some irregularities, occasioned his expulsion by the government. Taking then a journey into Swabia, he found every where numerous and attentive hearers. His stay in Swabia gave rise to the report that he was the author of the famous twelve articles of the peasants; but his biographer endeavours to prove that he had no part in the insurrection which broke out in that part of the country. In the beginning of 1525, he returned back into Saxony, and was received with great favour by the citizens of Muhlhausen, and, against the consent of their council, appointed their preacher. Here his influence soon became predominant: the old council was entirely set aside, and a new one chosen: the monks were driven away, and their estates sequestered. Muncer himself was elected into the council, and proposed an equal communication of property, and similar reforms, agreeable to the taste of the people. The tumults in Swabia and Franconia were the signal ta Muncer to attempt the same in Thuringia. Churches, monasteries, castles, were plundered and the success attending these first attempts increased the popular fury and the monks, the nuns, and the nooility, were the particular objects of their resentment. It is unnecessary to repeat here the history of these troubles; suffice it, that Muncer was at last overpowered in 1526, and put to death. At his execution he is said to have shewn signs of penitence.

, an Oxford divine, was born at Yeate, in Gloucestershire, in 1519, and was educated under the care of his uncle Alexander Belsire, who was afterwards first president of St. John’s college, at Winchester school. From this he was removed to New college, Oxford, in 1538, and admitted fellow in 1540. He also took his degree of M. A. and six years afterwards was admitted into holy orders. He was reckoned an able divine, but was most noted for his skill in Greek and Hebrew, on which account sir Thomas White, the founder of St. John’s college, encouraged him by a yearly pension often pounds. His adherence to the popish religion induced him to go to the university of Paris, during king Edward the Sixth’s reign, where he took his degree of bachelor of divinity. On his return during Mary’s reign, he held the rectory of Thenford in Northamptonshire, and became chaplain to bishop Bonner but on the accession of queen Elizabeth, according to Dodd, he suffered himself to be deprived of his spiritualities, retired to Oxford, and entered himself a commoner in Hart-hall. He had not been long here before he professed conformity to the newly-established religion, and in 1559 was appointed Hebrew professor of the foundation of Henry VIII. in which office he remained until 1569. When first appointed he built lodgings opposite Hart-hall, joining to the westend of New college cloister, which were for some time known by the name of Neal’s lodgings. During queen Elizabeth’s visit to the university in 1566, he presented to her majesty, a ms. now in the British Museum, entitled “Rabbi Davidis Kimhi commentarii super Hoseam, Joellem, Amos, Abdiam, Jonam, Micheam, Nahum, Habacuc, et Sophonian; Latine redditi per Thomam Nelum, Heb. linguae profess. Oxonii; et R, Elizabethse inscripti.” He presented also to her majesty a little book of Latin verses, containing the description of the colleges, halls, &c.; and a few days after exhibited a map of Oxford, with small views very neatly drawn with a pen by Bereblock. These views, with the verses, were published by Hearne at the end of “Dodwell de parma equestri.” The verses are in the form of a dialogue between the queen and the earl of Leicester, chancellor of the university, and are not wanting in that species of pedantic flattery so frequently offered to her majesty. Neal, however, was never a conformist irr his heart, and in 1569 either resigned, or being known to be a Roman catholic, was ejected from his professorship, and then retired to the village of Cassington near Oxford, where he lived a private and studious life. Wood can trace him no further, but Dodd says that he was frequently disturbed while at Cassington on account of his religion, and being often obliged to conceal, or absent himself, went abroad. The records of Doway mention that one Thomas Neal, an ancient clergyman, who had suffered much in prison in England, arrived there June 1, 1578, and returned again to England January 7, 1580. How long he lived afterwards is uncertain. He was certainly alive in 1590, as appears by an inscription he wrote for himself to be put upon his tomb-stone in Cassington church, which also states that he was then seventy-one years old. In the British Museum, among the royal Mss. is another ms. of his, entitled “Rabbinicae qusedam Observationes ex praedictis commentariis.” Wood speaks of one of his names, of Yeate in Gloucestershire, who dying in 1590, his widow had letters of administration granted, and adds, “whether it be meant of our author I cannot justly say, because I could never learn that he was married.” But nothing can be more improbable than the marriage of -a man who had suffered so much for a religion that prohibits the marriage of the clergy, and who was so inveterate against the reformed religion, that we are told the fable of the Nag’s-head ordination was first propagated by him.

In 1680 he was chosen F. R. S. probably by the introduction of his friend and school-fellow, Dr. Halley, for whom he had a particular regard, and in whose company he set out on his travels the same year. In the road to Paris they saw the remarkable comet which gave rise to the cometical astronomy of sir Isaac Newton; and our author, apparently by the advantage of his fellow-traveller’s instructions, sent dean Tillotson a description of it. Before he left Paris he received a letter from a friend in the English court, suggesting to him to purchase a place there, and promising his assistance in it. But although Nelson had a great affection for king Charles and the duke of York, and was at first pleased with the thoughts of aU taching himself to the court, on which, however, at that time, he was more likely to confer honour, than to derive any from it, yet he could not resolve upon an affair of such consequence without the approbation of his mother and uncle. He first, therefore, applied to Tillotson to obtain their opinion, with assurances of determining himself by their and the dean’s advice; but, finding no encouragement from either of the parties, he relinquished his intention, and pursued his journey with his fellow-traveller to Rome. Here he became acquainted with a lady considerably older than himself, the lady Theophila Lucy, widow of sir Kingsmili Lucy, of Broxburne, Herts, bare, and second daughter of George earl of Berkeley, who soon discovered a strong passion for him, which concluded in a marriage, after his arrival in England, in 1682. His disappointment was, however, very great, when he found that she had deceived him in one very essential point, that of her having been won over to the popish religion while on this tour; and it was some time before she confessed this change, which was owing to her acquaintance with Bossuet, and conversations at Rome with cardinal Philip Howard, who was grandson of the earl of Arundel, the collector of the Arundelian marbles, &c. and had been raised to the purple by Clement X. in May 1675. Nor was this important alteration of her religious sentiments confined to her own mind, but involved in it her daughter by her first husband, whom she drew over to her new religion; and her zeal for it prompted her even to become a writer in one of the controversies so common at that time. She is the supposed authoress of a piece printed in 1686, 4to, under the title of “A Discourse concerning a Judge of Controversy in matters of Religion, shewing the necessity of such a judge.”

, an English poetical writer, was a native of Kent, descended from the ancient and honourable family of Nevil, was the son of Richard Nevil of the county of Nottingham, esq. by Anne Mantel, daughter of sir Walter Mantel, of Heyford in Northamptonshire, knight. He was born in 1544. If not educated at Cambridge, his name occurs as having received the degree of M. A. there, along with Robert earl of Essex, July 6, 1581. He was one of the learned men whom archbishop Parker retained in his family, and was his secretary at his grace’s death in 1575. It is no small testimony of his merit and virtues that he was retained in the same of-, fice by the succeeding archbishop, Grindal, to whom, as well as to archbishop Parker, he dedicated his Latin narrative of the Norfolk insurrection under Kett. To this he added a Latin account of Norwich, accompanied by an engraved map of the Saxon and British kings. These were both written in archbishop Parker’s time, who assisted Nevile in the latter. The title is, “Kettus, sive de furoribus Norfolciensium Ketto duce,” Lond. 1575, 4to. reprinted both in Latin and English the same year, in Latin in 1582, and in English in 1615 and 1623. Prefixed are some verses on the death of archbishop Parker, and the epistle dedicatory to Grindal, with a recommendatory Latin poem, by Thomas Drant, the first translator of Horace. His “Norvicus,” published with the preceding, is the first printed account of Norwich; the plates are by R. Lyne and Rem. Hogenbergius, both attached to the household of the learned and munificent Parker. There are copies of almost all the preceding editions in Mr. Cough’s library at Oxford. Strype has published, in the appendix to his Life of Parker, an elegant Latin letter from Nevile to Parker, which is prefixed to the “Kettus.” The first Latin edition, printed in 1575, is dedicated solely to -Parker: and the second, of the same year, which has the two dedications, has also a passage, not in the former, and probably struck out by Parker, which gave offence to the Welsh. It occurs at p. 132, “Sed enim Kettiani rati,” &c, to “Nam prosterquam quod,” &c. p. 133.

To the university of Oxford he was a steady friend and frequent benefactor. The admired cast of the Florentine boar in Queen’s college library, the Florentine museum, and other books in the library of University college, Piranesi’s works in the Bodleian, and those exquisite spe r cimens of ancient sculpture, the Candelabra in the Radciiffe library (which cost 1800/,) were some of his donations. In 1755 he was honoured by the countess dowager of Pomfret (who was aunt to the first lady Newdigate) with a commission to intimate to the university her ladyship’s intention of presenting them with what are now called the Arundelian marbles. In 1805 sir Roger made an offer to the university of the sum of 2000l. for the purpose of removing them to the Radcliffe library, but some unexpected difficulties were started at that time, which prevented the plan from being executed, although it is to be hoped, it is not finally abandoned. He gave also 1000l. to be vested in the public funds, in the name of the vice-chancellor and the master of University college, for the time being, in trust, part of it to go for art annual prize for English verses on ancient sculpture, painting, and architecture, and the remainder to accumulate as a fund towards the amendment of the lodgings of the master of University college. His charitable benefactions in the neighbourhood of his estate were extensive, and have proved highly advantageous, in ameliorating the state of the poor, and furnishing them with education and the means of industry. But we must refer. to our authority for these and other interesting particulars of this worthy baronet.

, an English clergyman, whose extraordinary history has long been before the public, was born in London, July 24, 1725. His father was many years master of a ship in the Mediterranean trade, and in 1748 went out as governor of York Fort, in Hudson’s Bay, where he died in 1750. His mother, who died when he was only seven years old, had given him such religious instruction as suited his capacity, which was apt and good. By school education he profited little. He appears indeed to have been at a school at Stratford, in Essex, about two years, and acquired some knowledge of the L&tin, but his master’s method being too precipitate, he soon lost all he had learned. At the age of eleven he was taken to sea by his father, and before 1742 had made several voyages, at considerable intervals, which were chiefly spent in the country, excepting a few months in his fifteenth year, when he was placed with a very advantageous prospect at Alicant, where, as he says, “he might have done well, if he had behaved well.” For about two years something like religious reformation appeared in him, but he adds, “it was a poor religion, and only tended to make him gloomy, stupid, unsocial, and useless;” and from this he was seduced into the contrary extreme, by perusing some of the writings of Shaftesbury, which he found in a petty shop at Middleburgh, in Holland. In 1742, when his father proposed to leave off going to sea, he endeavoured to provide his son with a situation, and an eligible one occurred of his going to Jamaica; but happening to meet with the lady who became afterwards his wife, he abhorred the thought of living from her at such a distance as Jamaica, and that perhaps for four or five years, and therefore absented himself on a visit to Kent, until the ship sailed without him. His father, though highly displeased, became reconciled, and in a little time Mr. Newton sailed with a friend of his father’s to Venice. In this voyage, being a common sailor, and exposed to the company of some profligate comrades, he began to relax from the regularity which he had preserved in a certain degree, for more than two years; and in this and his subsequent voyages, represents himself as extremely thoughtless, vi-r cious, and abandoned. The consequences of this conduct led to those adventures which he has so interestingly de-r tailed in his life, published in 1764, and to which we must refer as to a work that does not admit of a satisfactory abridgment. If his vices were great, his sufferings seem also to have amounted to the extremes of misery and disgrace; but at length, about 1747, he was rescued by his father from this state of wretchedness, and in 1748, appears to have been for the first time awakened to a proper sense of his past life, which gradually improved into a real reformation. After this he was employed in ships concerned in the African slave-trade, and acquired that knowledge which many years afterwards enabled him to contribute, by his evidenoe before parliament, to the abo-i lition of that detestable traffic.

About this time he was induced by Mrs. Anne Deanes Devenish, an acquaintance whose friendship proved afterwards of great importance to him, to superintend an edition of Mr. Jlowe’s works, who had been her first husband. This edition was executed at the request of the Prince of Wales, who was very partial to that poet, and who honoured Mrs. Devenish with his friendship; and it was the means of JMr. Newton’s being made known to his royal highness. Nor was this the only obligation he owed to the good services of Mrs. Devenish, as she first introduced him ito the acquaintance of Mr. Pulteney, who, when lord Bath, appointed him his chaplain. Mr. Newton, in his life, gives a curious detail of that famous political revolution which occasionedthe resignation of sir Robert Walpole. This he appears to have written at the time, and it is no small proof of the authenticity of the facts, that Mr. Coxe, in his excellent Life of sir R. Walpole, seems disposed to admit it. It is indeed written with every internal mark of candour and honesty.

, an able mathematician, was born at Paris in 1613. Having finished his academical studies with the most promising success, he entered into the order of Minims, took the habit in 1632, and as usual, changed the name given him at his baptism for that of Francis, the name of his paternal uncle, who was also a Minim, or Franciscan. The inclination which he had for mathematics appeared early during his philosophical studies; and he devoted to this science all the time he could spare from his other employments, after he had completed his studies in theology. Ah the branches of the mathematics, however, did not equally engage his attention; he confined himself particularly to optics, and studied the rest only as they were subservient to his more favourite pursuit. He informs us in the preface to his “Thaumaturgus Opticus,” that he went twice to Rome; and that, on his return home, he was appointed teacher of theology. He was afterwards chosen to accompany father Francis de la Noue, vica^r-general of the order, in his visitation of the convents throughout all France. Amidst so many employments, it is wonderful that he found so much time to study, for his life was short, and must have been laborious. Being taken sick at Aix, in Provence, he died there, September 22, 1646, aged only thirty-three. He was an intimate acquaintance of Des Cartes, who had a high esteem for him, and presented him with his works. Niceron’s writings are, 1. “L'Interpretation des Chiffres, ou Regies pour bien entendre et expliquer facilement toutes sortes des Chiffres Simples,” &c. Paris, 1641, 8vo. This was only a translation oh the art of decyphering, written by Cospi in Italian, but is much improved by Niceron, who justly conceived it to be a work of utility. 2. “La Perspective curieuse, ou Magie artificielle des effets marveilleux de l'Optique, Catroptique, et Dioptrique,” intended as an introduction to his, 3. “Thaumaturgus Opticus: sive, Admiranda Optices, Catoptrices, et Dioptrices, Pars prima, &c.” 1646, fol. He intended to add two other parts, but was prevented by death.

In November 1705, bishop Nicolson was elected F.R.& and published his “Leges Marchiarum, or Border Laws; with a preface, and an appendix of Charters and Records relating thereto,” Lond. 8vo, reprinted in 1747. In 1713 he wrote an essay, or discourse, to be affixed to Mr. Chamberlayne’s collection of the Lord’s prayer in one hundred different languages. Dr. Hickes bestows the highest praises on this essay: “I know not,” says he, “which is most to be admired in it, the vast variety of reading, or the putting all his observations together in so short, clear, and easy a discourse, which mightily confirms the history of Moses, and refutes the vain cavils which atheists, and deists, and latitudinarians are wont to make against the truth of it.” In 1718 he wrote a preface to the third edition of Dr. Wilkins’s “Leges Anglo-Saxonicae.” This appears to be the last of his literary performances, to the list of which may be added. seven occasional sermons, published in the course of his life.

, an eminent Dutch philosopher and mathematician, was born Aug. 10, 1654, at Westgraafdyk in North Holland, of which place his father vvas minister. He discovered a turn for learning in his first infancy, and his father designed him for the ministry; but when he found him averse from this study, he suffered him to gratify his own taste. He then applied himself to logic, and the art of reasoning justly; in which he grounded himself upon the principles of Des Cartes, with whose philosophy he was greatly delighted. Thence he proceeded to the mathematics, where he made a great proficiency; and added so much to his stock of various knowledge, that he was accounted a good philosopher, a great mathematician, a celebrated physician, and an able and just magistrate. Although naturally of a grave and serious disposition, yet his engaging manner in conversation made him be equally admired as a companion and friend, and frequently drew over to his opinion those who, at first, differed very widely from him. Thus accomplished, he acquired great esteem and credit in the council of the town of Purmerende, where he resided; as he did also in the states of that province, who respected him the more, as he never interfered in any cabals or factions. His disposition inclined him to cultivate the sciences, rather than to obtain the honours of the government and he therefore contented himself with being counsellor and burgomaster of the town, without wishing for more bustling preferments, which might interfere with his studies, and draw him too much out of his library. He died May 30, 1718, in the sixty-third year of his age. His works are, 1. “Considerationes circa Analyseos ad Quantitates infinite parvas applicator principia,” &c. Amst. 1694, 8vo. 2. “Analysis infinitorum seu curvilineorum Proprietates ex Polygpnorum natura deductse,” ibid. 1695, 4to. 3. “Considerationes secundoe circa differentialis Principia r & Responsio ad Yirum nobilissimum G. G. Leibnitium,” ibid. 1696, 8vo. This piece was attacked by John Bernoulli and James Hermant, celebrated geometricians at Basil. 4. “A Treatise upon a New Use of the Tables of Sines and Tangents.” 5. “Le veritable Usage de la Contemplation de TUnivers, pour la conviction des Athees & des Incredules,” in Dutch. This is his most esteemed work; and went through four editions in three or four years. It was translated into English by Mr. John Chamberlaine, and printed three or four times under the title of the “Religious Philosopher,” &c. 3 vols. 8vo. This was, until within these forty years, a very popular book in this country. We have also, by our author, one letter to Bothnia of Burmania, upon the 27th article of his meteors, and a refutation of Spinosa, 1720, 4to, in the Dutch language.

He now became a frequent preacher at St. Paul’s cross, and on one occasion, a passage of his sermon was much talked of, and grossly misrepresented by the papists, as savouring of an uncharitable and persecuting spirit. He had little difficulty, however, in repelling this charge, which at least shews that his words were considered as of no small importance, and were carefully watched. One of his sermons at St. Paul’s cross was preached the Sunday following a very melancholy event, the burning of St. Paul’s cathedral by lightning, June 4, 1561. Such was. his reputation now, that in September of this year, when archbishop Parker visited Eton college, and ejected the provost, Richard Bruerne, for nonconformity, he recommended to secretary Cecil the choice of several persons fit to supply the place, with this remark, “that if the queen would have a married minister, none comparable to Mr. Nowell.” The bishop of London also seconded this recommendation; but the queen’s prejudice against the married clergy inclined her to give the place to Mr. Day, afterwards bishop of Winchester, who was a bachelor, and in all respects worthy of the promotion. In the course of the ensuing year, 1562, No well was frequently in the pulpit on public occasions, before large auditories; but his labours in one respect commenced a little inauspiciously. On the new-year’s day, before the festival of the circumcision, he preached at St. Paul’s, whither the queen resorted. Here, says Strype, a remarkable passage happened, as it is recorded in a great man’s memorials (sir H. Sidney), who lived in those times. The dean having met with several fine engravings, representing the stories and passions of the saints and martyrs, had placed them against the epistles and gospels of their respective festivals, in a Common Prayer-book; which he caused to be richly bound, and laid on the cushion for the queen’s use, in the place where she commonly sat; intending it for a new-year’s gift to her majesty, and thinking to have pleased her fancy therewith. But it had a quite contrary effect. For she considered how this varied from her late injunctions and proclamations against the superstitious use of images in churches, and for the taking away all such reliques of popery. When she came to her place, and had opened the book, and saw the pictures, she frowned and blushed; and then shutting the book (of which several took notice) she called for the verger, and bade him bring her the old book, wherein she was formerly wont to read. After sermon, whereas she used to get immediately on horseback, or into her chariot, she went straight to the vestry, and applying herself to the dean, thus she spoke to him: “Mr. Dean, how came it to pas’s, that a new service-book was placed on my cushion r” To which the dean answered, “May it please your majesty, I caused it to be placed there.” Then said the queen, “Wherefore did you so” “To present your majesty with a new year?s gift.” “You could never present me with a worse.” “Why so, madam?” “You know I have an aversion to idolatry, to images, and pictures of this kind.” “Wherein is the idolatry, may it please your majesty?” “In the cuts resembling angels and saints; nay, grosser absurdities, pictures resembling the blessed Trinity.” “I meant nq harm; nor did I think it would offend your majesty, when I intended it for a new-year’s gift.” *“You must needs be ignorant then. Have you forgot our proclamation against images, pictures, and Romish reliques, in the churches? Was it not read in your deanery?” “It was read. But be your majesty assured I meant no harm when I caused the cuts to be bound with the service-book.” “You must needs be very ignorant to do this after our prohibition of them.” “It being my ignorance, your majesty may the better pardon me.” “I am sorry for it; yet glad to hear it was your ignorance rather than your opinion.” “Be your majesty assured it was my ignorance.” “If so, Mr. dean, God grant you his spirit, and more wisdom for the future.” “Amen, I pray God.” “I pray, Mr. Dean, how came you by these pictures who engraved them” “I know not who engraved them I bought them.” “From whom bought you them” “From a German.” “It is well it was from a stranger. Had it been any of our subjects, we should have questioned the matter. Pray let no more of these mistakes, or of this kind, be committed within the churches of our realm for the future.” “There shall not.” Strype adds to this curious dialogue, that it caused all the clergy in and about London, and the churchwardens of each parish, to search their churches and chapels; and to wash out of the walls all paintings that seemed to be Romish and idolatrous; in lieu whereof, suitable texts of Holy Scripture were written.

In 1572 he completed the endowment at one and the same time, of a free- school at Middleton in Lancashire, and of thirteen scholarships in Brazen-nose college and as these benefactions were both of them established by royal patent (her majesty also of her free bounty encouraging and assisting him), he chose that the school should be called queen Elizabeth’s school, and the scholars queen Elizabeth’s scholars. This benefaction to the college was peculiarly seasonable, as in consequence of a severe plague at Oxford, in the preceding year, and for want of exhibitions to assist them in their studies, some of the scholars were compelled to go about requesting alms, having licence so to do, as an act of parliament required, under the common seal of the university. Nowell was at all times a zealous patron of learning, and was much looked up to in that character, as appears not only by his being frequently consulted on schemes for the promotion of liberal education, but also by the numerous dedications of learned books to him. Books that had a tendency to inculcate the principles of the reformation were also frequently published under the protection of his name, as one acknowledged “to be a learned and faithful preacher of God’s word, and an earnest furtherer of all godliness.” In 1580 the queen granted him a licence of non-residence for three months and fourteen days, that he might visit his scholars of Brasen-nose, and the school at Middleton, her majesty “having long, by sure proof, known his experience and skill in business, as well as earnest desire and constant solicitude for the training up of youth in learning and virtue.” It was indeed his great success as a preacher, and his eminence as an opponent of popery, that procured him the honour of having his works proscribed in the “Index librorum prohibitorum;” and his name, together with that of Fox, Fleetwood the recorder, and others; inserted at Rome in a “bede-roll,” or list of persons, that were to be dispatched, and the particular mode of their death, as by burning or hanging, pointed out. Campion, the great emissary from Rome, being apprehended, Nowell, and May dean of Windsor, held, in August 1581, a conference with him in the Tower, of which an account was afterwards published under the title of “A True Report of the disputation or rather private conference had in the Tower of London, with Ed. Campion Jesuite, &c.” Lond. 1583, 4 to. In 1588 Nowell quitted the prebend (Willand) he had so long held in St. Paul’s for another, that of Tottenham in the same church, and upon this occasion resigned his living of Hadham. In the following year the queen gave him the next presentation to a canonry of Windsor, “in consideration of his constant preaching of the word of God, during the space of almost forty years;” and because he had lately resigned the rectory of Hadham and prebend of Willand, as being, through age and imbecility of body, not equal to the duties of them; nor likely, on account of his extreme age and infirm health, long to enjoy either his present or any future preferment. He lived, however, to succeed to a canonry of Windsor in 1594. In 1595, on the death of Mr. Harris, the fourth principal of Brasennose college, Nowell was chosen to succeed him. This election of a man now on the verge of ninety was perhaps intended or accepted rather as a compliment, than with a view to the performance of much actual service, and ac-r cordingly he resigned it in a few months.

This gentleman has often been confounded with Christopher Nugent, M. D. and F. R. S. who died Nov. 12, 1775, and whose daughter became the wife of the celebrated Edmund Burke. Sir John Hawkins says he was an ingenious, sensible, and learned man 1 of easy conversation, and elegant manners. Dr. Johnson had a high opinion of him, and always spoke of him in terms of great respect. We know of only one publication from his pen, which appeared ia 1753, an “Essay on the Hydrophobia.”

In 1643, he was appointed one of the assembly of divines, became a great champion of the Presbyterians, and a zealous assertor of the solemn league and covenant; and was sent, with Stephen Marshall, whose daughter he,had married, the same year, to procure the assistance of the Scotch, and join with them in their favourite covenant: and when r after his return, both houses of parliament took the covenant in St. Margaret’s church, Westminster, he was the person who read it from the pulpit, and preached a sermon in defence of it, shewing its warrant from scripture, and was rewarded for his good service with the rectory of Acton near London. He was also one of the committee who drew up the preface to the “Directory,” which was ordered to be substituted for the Book of Common Prayer; but, when the majority of the assembly of divines determined on establishing the Presbyterian form of churchgovernment, he dissented from them; and, closing with the Independents, when they became the reigning faction, paid his court to the grandees of the army, who often made use of his advice. In December 1647, he was sent by them, with Stephen Marshall, to the king, at Carisbrookcastle, in the Isle of Wight, in attendance upon the commissioners then appointed to carry the four dethroning votes , as they are now called for which service they were rewarded with no less than 500l. a-piece. About the same time also Nye was employed by the same masters to get subscriptions from the apprentices in London, &c. against a personal treaty with the king, while the citizens of that metropolis were petitioning, for one. In April of the next year, he was employed, as well as Marshall and Joseph Caryl, by the Independents, to invite the secluded members to sit in the house again; but without success. In 1653, he was appointed one of the triers for the approbation of public preachers; in which office he not only procured his son to be clerk, but, with the assistance of his father-in-law, obtained for himself the living of St. Bartholomew, Exchange, worth 400l. a-year. In 1654, he was joined with Dr. Lazarus Seaman, Samuel Clark, Richard Vines, Obadiah Sedgwick, Joseph Caryl, &c. as an assistant to the commissioners appointed by parliament to eject such as were then called scandalous and ignorant ministers and school-masters in the city of London. After Charles the Second’s restoration, in 1660, he was ejected from the living of St. Bartholomew, Exchange; and it was even debated by the healing parliament, for several hours together, whether he, John Goodwin, and Hugh Peters, should be excepted for life: but the result was, that if Philip Nye, clerk, should, after the 1 st of September, in the same year 1660, accept, or exercise, any office, ecclesiastical, civil, or military, he should, to all intents and purposes in law, stand as if he had been totally excepted for life.

Of the writings of Mr. Oldys, some of which were anonymous, the following account is probably very imperfect: I. In the British Museum is Oidys’s copy of “Langbaine’s _ Lives,” &c. not interleaved, but filled with notes written in the margin, and between the lines, in an extremely small hand. It came to the Museum as a part of the library of Dr. Birch, who bought it at an auction of Oidys’s books and papers for one guinea. Transcripts of this have been made by various literary gentlemen. 2. Mr. Gough, in the first volume of his “British Topography,” p. 567, tells us, that he had “been favoured, by George Steevens, esq. with the use of a thick folio of titles of books and pamphlets relative to London, and occasionally to Westminster and Middlesex, from 1521 to 1758, collected by the late Mr. Oldys, with many others added, as it seems, in another hand. Among them,” he adds, “are many purely historical, and many of too low a kind to rank under the head of topography or histpry. The rest, which are very numerous, I have inserted, marked O, with corrections, &c. of those I had myself collected. Mr. Steevens purchased this ms. of T. Davies, who bought Mr. Oidys’s library. It had been in the hands of Dr. Berkenhout, who had a design of publishing an English Topographer, and riiay possibly have inserted the articles in a different hand. It afterwards became the property of sir John Hawkins.” 3. “The British Librarian, exhibiting a compendious Review of all unpublished and valuable books, in all sciences,” which was printed without his name, in 1737, 8vo, and after having been long neglected and sold at a low price, is now valued as a work of such accuracy and utility deserves. 4, A “Life of sir Waiter Raleigh,” prefixed to his “History of the World,” in folio. 5. “Introduction to Hay ward’s British Muse (1738);” of which he says, “that the penurious publishers, to contract it within a sheet, left out a third part of the best matter in it, and made more faults than were in the original.” In this he was assisted by Dr. Campbell. 6. “His Observations on the Cure of William Taylor, the blind boy at Ightharn, in Kent, by John Taylor, jun. oculist, 1753,” 8vo. Thetide of the pamphlet here alluded to was, “Observations on the Cure of William Taylor, the blind Boy, of Ightham, in Kent, who, being born with cataracts in both eyes, was at eight years of age brought to sight on the 8th of October, 1751, by Mr. John Taylor, jun. oculist, in Hattongarden; containing his strange notions of objects upon the first enjoyment of his new sense; also, some attestations thereof; in a letter written by his father, Mr. William Taylor, farmer, in the same parish: interspersed with several curious examples, and remarks, historical and philosophical, thereupon. Dedicated to Dr. Monsey, physician to theRoyal hospital at Chelsea. Also, some address to the public, for a contribution towards the foundation of an hospital for the blind, already begun by some noble personages,” 8vo. 7. Various lives in the “Biographia Britannica,” with the signature G, the initial letter of Gray’sInn, where he formerly lived. He mentions, in his notes on Langbaine, his life of sir George Etherege, of Caxton, of Thomas May, and of Edward Alleyn, inserted in that work. He composed the “Life of Atherton;” which, if it ever deserved to have had a place in that work, ought not to have been removed from it any more than the “Life of Eugene Aram,” which is inserted in the second edition. That the publishers of the second edition meant no indignity to Oldys, by their leaving out his “Life of Atherton,” appears fram their having transcribed into their work a much superior quantity of his writings, consisting of notes and extracts from printed books, styled “Oldys’s Mss.” Of these papers no other account is given than that “they are a large and useful body of biographical materials;” but we may infer, from the known industry and narrow circumstances of the writer, that, if they had been in any degree prepared for public consideration, they would not have so long lain dormant. 8. At the importunity of Curll, he gave him a sketch of the life of Nell Gvvin, to help out his V History of the Stage.“9. He was concerned with Des Maizeaux in writing the” Life of Mr. Richard Carew,“the antiquary of Cornwall, in 1722. 10.” Observations, Historical and Critical, on the Catalogue of English Lives.“Whether this was ever printed we know not. 11.” Tables of the eminent persons celebrated by English Poets.“This he seems to quote in a manuscript note on Langbaine, but it does not appear to have been printed. 12. He mentions, ibidem, the first volume of his” Poetical Characteristics,“on which we may make the same remark. If these two works continued in ms. during his life-time, it is probable that they were not finished for publication, or that no bookseller would buy them. 13. O,idys seems to have been concerned likewise as a writer in the” General Dictionary,“for he mentions his having been the author of” The Life of sir-John Talbot,“in that work and in Birch’s Mss. is a receipt from him for \.L 5s. for writing the article of Fas tolf 14. He mentions likewise, in his notes on Langbaine, that he was the author of a pamphlet against Toland, called” No blind Guides.“15. He says, ibidem, that he communicated many things to Mrs. Cooper, which she published in her” Muse’s Library.“16. In 1746 was published, in 12mo,” health’s Improvement; or, Rules comprising the nature, method, and manner, of preparing foods used in this nation. Written by that ever famous Thomas Moffett, doctor in physic; corrected and enlarged by Christopher Bennet, doctor in physic, and fellow of the College of Physicians in London. To which is now prefixed, a short View of the Author’s Life and Writings, by Mr. Oldys; and an Introduction by R. James, M. D.“17. In the first volume of British Topography,” page 31, mention is made of a translation of “Gamden’s Britannia,” in 2 vols. 4to, “by W. O. esq.” which Mr. Gough, with great probability, ascribes to Mr. Oldys. 18. Among the Mss. in the British Museum, described in Mr. Ayscough’s Catalogue, we find p. 24, “Some Considerations upon the publication of sir Thomas Roe’s Epistolary Collections, supposed to be written by Mr. Oldys, and by him tendered to Sam. Boroughs, esq. with proposals, and some notes of Dr. Birch.” 19. In p. 736, “Memoirs of the family of Oldys.” 20. In p. 741, “Two small pocket books of short Biographical Anecdotes of many Persons,” and “some Fragments of Poetry,” perhaps collected by Mr. Oldys? 21. In p. 750, and p. 780, are two ms letters “of Mr. Oldys,” 1735 and 1751. 22. It is said, in a ms paper, by Dr. Dticarel, who knew him well, that Oldys had by him, at the time of his death, some collections towards a “Life of Shakspeare,” but not digested into any order, as he told the doctor a few days before he died. 23. On the same authority he is said to be a writer in, or the writer of, “The Scarborough Miscellany,” 1732, and 1734. 24. “The Universal Spectator,” of which he was some time the publisher, was a newspaper, a weekly journal, said; on the top of the paper, which appeared originally in single sheets, to be “by Henry Stonecastle, in Northumberland,” 1730 1732. It was afterwards collected into two volumes 8vo to which a third and fourth were added in 1747. In one of his Mss. we find the following wellturned anagram

, M. A. president of Clare r haH in Cambridge, and vicar of Great Gransden in Huntingdonshire, was born at Thorp, near Wakefield in Yorkshire (of which place his father was vicar), and was proctor of the university in 1635. On the breaking out of the rebellion, he was very active in collecting the university-plate, and was intrusted in conveying it to the king at Nottingham in August, 1642; but for this, and other acts of loyalty, he was turned out of his fellowship by the earl of Manchester, April 8, 1644, and forced to quit his vicarage. After having suffered much during the usurpation, he was, in 1660, restored both to his fellowship and vicarage; and Sept. 4, that year, installed prebendary of Worcester; and bishop Gunning (to whom he had formerly been tutor), collated him to the archdeaconry of Ely, Nov. 8, into which he was inducted, by proxy, Nov. 17, 1679. This dignity, however, after a little more than a year’s possession, he voluntarily resigned, not thinking himself, in his great humility, sufficient to discharge the duty of it. He was a Jearned man, and no less eminent for his piety and charities. He published “Dr. Jackson’s works,” and Mr. Herbert’s “Country Parson,” to each of which he prefixed a preface. He dred Feb. 20, 1C 86, and was interred in Great Gransden church, where is an inscription to his memory, recording his various charities.

, son and disciple of the preceding, was born in 1601, and by the precepts and example of his father, he arrived at a degree of perfection in miniature portrait painting confessedly superior to his instructor, or any of his contemporaries, as he did not confine his subjects to a head only. His pictures, like his father’s, are spread among the houses of the nobility and gentry, and are alike justly esteemed. The works which he executed upon a larger scale are much more valuable than those of his father, and are also more numerous, though not very frequently to be met with. L6rd Orford mentions that there were thirteen works of Peter Oliver in the collection of Charles I. and of James II.; and that seven of them are preserved in queen Caroline’s closet at Kensington; and he also speaks of a portrait of Mrs. Oliver by her husband, in possession of the duchess of Portland, as his finest work. Lord Orford thinks it extraordinary that more of the works of this excellent master are not known, as he commonly made duplicates of his pictures, reserving one of each for himself. On this subject, he adds, that Russel the painter, related to or connected with the Olivers, told Vertue a remarkable story. The greater part of the collection of king Charles I. being dispersed in the troubles, among which were several of the Olivers, Charles II. who remembered, and was desirous of recovering them, made many inquiries about them after the Restoration; at last, he was told by one Rogers of Islevvorth, that both the father and son were dead, but that the son’s widow was living at Isleworth, and had many of their works. The king went very privately and unknown with Rogers, to see them; the widow shewed several finished and unfinished; with many of which the king being pleased, he asked if she would sell them; she replied she had a mind the king should see them first, and if he did not purchase them, she should think of disposing of them. The king discovered himself; on which she produced some more pictures, which she seldom shewed. The king desired her to set a price she said she did not care to make a price with his majesty she would leave it to him but promised to look over her husband’s books, and let his majesty know what prices his father, the late king, had paid. The king took away what he liked, and sent Rogers to Mrs. Oliver with the options of \OOOl. or an annuity of 30Q/. for her life. She chose the latter. Some years afterwards it happened that the king’s mistresses having begged aril or most of these pietures r Mrs. Oliver said, on hearing it, that if she had thought the king would have given them to such whores and strutn* pets and bastards, he never should have had them. This reached the court, the poor woman’s salary was stopped* and she never received it afterwards. The rest of the Winnings which the king had not taken, fell into the hands of Mrs. Russel’s father. Peter Oliver is supposed to have died before the restoration, probably about 1654. Isaac Oliver, the glass -painter, appears to have been of this family.

Soon after this, some disputes between him and count de Tarouca, plenipotentiary at the imperial court from that of Lisbon, induced him to give up his post as secretary. What the nature of these disputes were, we are not informed, but it appears that they exposed him to the hostility of a powerful party of that nobleman’s relations and friends at the court of Lisbon, while his growing attachment to Protestantism making him less guarded in his expressions, the inquisition of Lisbon found a pretence to censure him. Accordingly, when the first volume of the “Memoirs of his Travels” was published at Amsterdam m 1741, though much esteemed by the Portuguese in general, it was soon prohibited by the inquisition; and the three volumes of his “Letters, familiar, historical, political, and critical,” printed at the Hague, in 1741 and 1742, underwent the same fate. These works being writ-r ten in the Portuguese language, a stop was thus put to the sale of them; but his “Memoires concernant le Portugal,” Hague, 1741—1743, 2 vols. 8vo, in the French language, were well received by the public, and gained him great reputation.

After the death of Koribut, Olzoffski had a principal share in procuring the election of John Sobieski, who made him archbishop of Guesne, and primate of the kingdom; and he would have obtained a cardinal’s hat, if he had not publicly declared against it. However, he had not been long possessed of the primacy before his right to it was disputed by the bishop of Cracow; who laid claim also to other prerogatives of the see of Guesne, and pretended to make the obsequies of the Polish monarchs. On this Olzoffski published a piece in defence of the rights and privileges of his archbishopric. He also some time afterwards published another piece, but without putting his name to it, entitled “Singularia Juris Patronatus R. Poloniae,” in support of the king of Poland’s right of nomination to the abbeys. In 1678, going by the king’s command to Dantzic, in order to compose certain disputes between the senate and people of that city, he was seized with a disorder which carried him off in three days, aged about 60. He was particularly distinguished by eloquence, and love for his country and his death was lamented throughout all' the palatinates.

In April 1741, died Mr. Berry, the minister of the Presbyterian meeting at Shrewsbury; and about the same time Mr. Dobson, the pastor of the Independent Church in that town, to which Mr. Orton’s father belonged, removed to Walsall, in Staffordshire. These two societies being thus vacant, concurred in an invitation to Mr. Orton, to accept the pastoral charge among them, promising, that in that case they would unite together in one congregation. Accordingly, having accepted their offer, he removed, in October 1741, to Shrewsbury, and, on the 18th of that month, preached his first sermon to the united congregations. In the following month, he had the misfortune to lose his father, who died at the age of fifty- two. This event was not only a great personal affliction to Mr. Orton, but brought upon him such a weight of cares, in addition to his various duties as a minister, that his health was materially injured; the consequence of which was, that he was laid under the necessity of having several assistants, in succession: as Mr. Francis Boult, who continued at Shrewsbury till the end of the year 1745; Mr. Moses Carter, who died in 1747; and Mr. Joseph Fownes. By Dr. Doddridge’s death Mr. Orton lost his much-honoured tutor, father, and friend, whose life he afterwards published. In March 1752, Mr. Orton was invited to assume the pastoral charge of the congregation belonging to Dr. Doddridge. Upon this his people at Shrewsbury were alarmed; and, apprehending that he might listen to the application, they sent him a most respectful, affection-r ate, and unanimous address, to intreat that he would not leave them. A separate address, to the same purpose, was made to him by the young persons of the society. He had no inclination to quit a situation in which he was comfortable and useful; especially as there were some circumstances at Northampton that were of a discouraging nature. Nevertheless, he thought it a proper piece of respect to take some time to consider of the invitation, which at length he declined.

“He was more famous abroad for his learning, and more esteemed than at home. Several great mathematicians came over into England on purpose to be acquainted with him. His country neighbours (though they understood not his worth) knew that there must be extraordinary worth in him, that he was so visited by foreigners.” “When Seth Ward, M. A. and Charles Scarborough, M. D. came, as in a pilgrimage, to see and admire him, they lay at the inue at Sheeres (the next parish); Mr. Oughtred had against their coming prepared a good dinner, and also he had dressed himselfe thus; an old red russet cloak, cassock that had been black in days of yore, girt with an old leather girdle, an old-fashioned russet hat, that had been a bever tempore R. Eliz. When learned foreigners came and saw how privately he lived, they did admire and bless themselves, that a person of so much worth and learning should not be better provided for.” Aubrey seems to confirm the report that he was not uninfected with astrological delusions. We more admire his mathematical enthusiasm. “He has told bishop Ward, and Mr. Elias Ashmole (who was his neighbour) ‘on this spot of ground, or leaning against this oak, or that ash, the solution of such or such a problem came into my head, as if infused by a divine genius, after I had thought of it without success for a year, two, or three.’” “His wife was a penurious woman, and would not allow him to burn candle after supper, by which means many a good notion is lost, and many a problem unsolved; so that Mr. Henshaw (one of his scholars) when he was there, bought candle, which was a great comfort to the old man.”

Although, according to Aubrey, he burnt “a world of papers” just before his death, yet it is certain that he also left behind him a great number of papers upon mathematical subjects; and, in most of his Greek and Latin mathematical books there were found notes in his own handwriting, with an abridgment of almost every proposition and demonstration in the margin, which came into the museum of the late William Jones, esq. F. R. S. father to sir William Jones. These books and manuscripts then passed into the hands of sir Charles Scarborough, the physician; the latter of which were carefully looked over, and all that were found fit for the press, printed at Oxford, 1676, under the title of “Opuscula Mathematica hactenus inedita.” This collection contains the following pieces: 1. “Institutiones mechanics.” 2. “De variis corporum generibus gravitate et magnitudine comparatis.” 3. “Automata.” 4. “Qusestiones Diophanti Alexandrini, libri tres.” 5. “De triangulis planis rectangulis.” 6. “t)e divisione superficiorum.” 7. “Musicae elemental 8.” De propugnaculornm munitionibus.“9.” Sectiones angulares.“In 1660, sir Jonas Moore annexed to his arithmetic, then printed in octavo, a treatise entitled” Conical sections; or, the several sections of a cone; being an analysis or methodical contraction of the two first books of Mydorgius, and whereby the nature of the parabola, hyperbola, and ellipsis, is very clearly laid down. Translated from the papers of the learned William Oughtred." Oughtred, says Dr. Hutton, though undoubtedly a very great mathematician, was yet far from having the happiest method of treating the subjects he wrote upon. His style and manner were very concise, obscure, and dry and his rules and precepts so involved in symbols and abbreviations, as rendered his mathematical writings very troublesome to read, and difficult to be understood.

, an eminent Greek, flourished about 1280, under the reign of Michael Paleologus, and Andronicus his successor. He was a person of high birth r and had acquired no less knowledge in church-affairs in the great posts he had among the clergy of Constantinople, than of state-matters in the high employments he held m the court of the emperor; so that his “History of Michael Paleologus and Andronicus” is the more esteemed, as he was not only an eye-witness of the affairs of which he writes, but had also a great share in them. This history was published by Poussines, a Jesuit, Gr. et Lat. “ex intorpr. et cum not. P. Possini,” Rome, 1666—69, 2 vols. fol. Pachymera composed also some Greek verses; but they were little esteemed, and never printed. Brucker mentions a compendium of the Aristotelian philosophy published from his manuscripts; and Tilman published his paraphrase on the epistles of Dionysius the Areopagite, “Georgii Pachymerae Paraphrasis in decem epistolas bead Dionysii Areopagitæ,” Paris, 1538.

At length, in June 1768, he quitted Petersburg, in company with Messrs. Falk, Lepekin, and Guldenstadt, as his associates; passed through Moscow, Vlodimir, Kasimof, Murom, Arsamas, to Casan; and having examined great part of that province, wintered at Simbirsk. From thence he departed, in March of the following year; and penetrated through Samara and Orenburg, as far as Gurief, a small Russian fortress, situated at the mouth of the river Yaik or Ural. There he examined the confines of Kalmuc Tartary, and the neighbouring shores of the Caspian, and returning through the province of Orenburg, passed the second winter at Ufa. After several expeditions in the adjacent parts of that province, he left Ufa on the I 6th of May 1770; prosecuted his route through the Uralian mountains to Catharinenburgh; visited the mines of that district; proceeded to Tcheliabinsk, a small fortress in the government of Orenburg; and in December made an excursion as far as Tobolsk. The next year he was employed in traversing the Altai mountains, and in tracing the course of the Irtish up to Omsk and Koly van; where having inspected the celebrated silver mines, he made for Tomsk, and finished that year’s expedition at Krasnoyarsk, a town upon the Yenisei. In that place, situated only in 56 north latitude, the cold was so intense, that the learned professor was witness to the natural freezing of quicksilver; which curious phenomenon he has minutely described. From Krasnoyarsk he issued on the 7th of March, 177-2; and proceeded by Irkutsk, and across the lake Baikal, to Udinsk, Selenginsk, and Kiakta, where the trade between Russia and China is principally carried on. Having penetrated into that part of Dauria which is situated in the south-easternmost part of Siberia, he journeyed between the rivers Ingoda and Argoon, at no great distance from the Amoor; thence tracing the lines which separate the Kussian empire from the Mongui hordes dependent upon China, he returned to Selenginsk, and again wintered at Krasnoyarsk. In the summer of 1773 he visited Tara, Y r aitsk, and Astracan, and concluded his route for that year at Tzaritzin, a town upon the Volga; from whence he continued his journey in the ensuing spring; and arrived at Petersburg on the 30th of July, 1774, after an absence of six years.

On his arrival in London, by the recommendation of his Paris friends, he was introduced to the acquaintance of Dr. Mead, sir Hans Sloane, and Dr. James Douglas. This great anatomist made use of his assistance, not only in his anatomical preparations, but also in his representations of morbid and other appearances, a list of several of which was in the hands of his friend Dr. Maty; who had prepared an eloge on Dr. Parsons, which was never used, but which, by the favour of Mrs. Parsons, Mr. Nichols has preserved at large. Though Dr. Parsons cultivated the several branches of the profession of physic, he was principally employed in midwifery. In 1738, by the interest of his friend Dr. Douglas, he was appointed physician to the public infirmary in St. Giles’s. In 1739 he married miss Elizabeth Reynolds, by whom he had two sons and a daughter, who all died young. Dr. Parsons resided for many years in Red Lion-square, where he frequently enjoyed the company and conversation of Dr. Stukeley, bishop Lyttleton, Mr. Henry Baker, Dr. Knight, and many other of the most distinguished members of the royal and antiquarian societies, and that of arts, manufactures, and commerce; giving weekly an elegant dinner to a large but select party. He enjoyed also the literary correspondence of D'Argenville, Button, Le Cat, Beccaria, Amb. Bertrand, Valltravers, Ascanius, Turberville Needham, Dr. Garden, and others of the most distinguished rank in science. As a practitioner he was judicious, careful, honest, and remarkably humane to the poor; as a friend, obliging and communicative; cheerful and decent in conversation; severe and strict in his morals, and attentive to fill with propriety all the various duties of life. In 1769, finding his health impaired, he proposed to retire from business and from London, and with that view disposed of a considerable number of his books and fossils, and went to Bristol. But he returned soon after to his old house, and died in it after a week’s illness, on the 4th of April, 1770, much lamented by his family and friends. By his last will, dated in October 1766, he gave his whole property to Mrs. Parsons; and, in case of her death before him, to miss Mary Reynolds, her only sister, “in recompence for her affectionate attention to him and to his wife, for a long course of years, in sickness and in health.” It was his particular request that he should not be buried till some change should appear in his corpse; a request which occasioned him to be kept unburied 17 days, and even then scarce the slightest alterution was perceivable. He was buried at Hen don, in a vault which he had caused to be built on the ground purchased on the death of his son James, where his tomb had a very commendatory inscription. A portrait of Dr. Parsons, by Mr. Wilson, is now in the British Museum; another, by Wells, left in the hands of his widow, who died in 1786; with a third unfinished; and one of his son James; also a family piece, in which the same son is introduced, with the doctor and his lady, accompanied by her sister. Among many other portraits, Mrs. Parsons had some that were very fine of the illustrious Harvey, of bishop Burnet, and of Dr. John Freind; a beautiful miniature of Dr. Stukeley; some good paintings, by her husband’s own hand, particularly the rhinoceros which he described in the “Philosophical Transactions.” She possessed also his Mss. and some capital printed books; a large folio volume entitled “Figure quaedam Miscellaneae qu0e ad rem Anatomicam Historiamque Naturalem spectant quas propria adumbravit manu Jacobus Parsons, M. D. S S. R. Ant.” &c. another, called “Drawings of curious Fossils, Shells,” &c. in Dr. Parsons’s Collection, drawn by himself;" &c. &c. Mrs. Parsons professed herself ready to give, on proper application, either to the royal or antiquarian society, a portrait of her husband, and a sum of money to found a lecture to perpetuate his memory, similar to that established by his friend Mr. Henry Baker.

Dr. Pearce published in his life-time nine occasional sermons, a discourse against self-murder, which is now in the list of tracts distributed by the Society for promoting Christian knowledge; and soon after the publication of his “Commentary,” his editor gave the public a collee-r tion of the bishop’s “Sermons on various subjects,” 4 vols, 8vo. Besides what 'have been already specified, our author published in 1720, a pamphlet entitled “An Account of Trinity college, Cambridge;” and in 1722, “A Letter to the Clergy of the Church of England,” on occasion of the bishop of Rochester’s commitment to the Tower. He had also a short controversy with Dr. Middleton, against whom he published “Two Letters,” and fully convicted that writer of disingenuousness in quotation. His editor, Mr. Derby, who had married his neice, did not long suryive his benefactor, dying Oct. 8, 1778, only five days after the date of his dedication of the bishop’s “Sermons.”

, a very learned English bishop, was born Feb. 12, 1612, at Snoring in Norfolk; of which place his father was rector. In 1623 he was sent to Eton school; whence he was elected to King’s college, Cambridge, in 1632. He took the degree of B. A. in 1635, and that of master in 1639; in which year he resigned his fellowship of the college, and lived afterwards a fellow-commoner in it. The same year he entered into orders, and was collated to a prebend in the church of Sarum. In 1640 he was appointed chaplain to Finch, lord-keeper of the great seal; by whom in that year he was presented to the living of Torrington, in Suffolk. Upon the breaking out of the civil war he became chaplain to the lord Goring, whom he attended in the army, and afterwards to sir Robert Cook in London. In 1650 he was made minister of St. Clement’s, Eastcheap, in London. In 1657 he and Gunning, afterwards bishop of Ely, had a dispute with two Roman catholics upon the subject of schism. This conference was managed iivwriting, and by mutual agreement nothing was to be made public without the consent of both parties; yet a partial account of it was published in 1658, by one of the Romish disputants, cum privilegw, at Paris, with this title, “Schism unmasked a late conference,” &c. In 1659 he published “An Exposition of the Creed,” at London, in 4to; dedicated to his parishioners of St. Clement’s, Eastcheap, to whom the substance of that excellent work had betn preached several years before, and by whom he had been desired to nnake it public. This “Exposition,” which has gone through twelve or thirteen editions, is accounted one of the most finished pieces of theology in our language. It is itself a body of divinity, the style of which is just; the periods, for the most part, well turned the method very exact; and it is, upon the whole, free from those errors which are too often found in theological systems. There is a translation of it into Latin by a foreign divine, who styles himself “Simon Joannes Arnoldus, Ecclesiarum ballivise, sive praefecturae Sonnenburgensis Inspector;” and a very valuable and judicious abridgment was in 1810 published by the rev. Charles Burney, LL. D. F. R. S. In the same year (1659) bishop Pearson published “The Golden Remains of the ever-memorable Mr. John Hales, of Eton;” to which he wrote a preface, containing the character of that great man, with whom he had been acquainted for many years, drawn with great elegance and force. Soon after the restoration he was presented by Juxon, then bishop of London, to the rectory of St. Christopher’s, iri that city; created D. D. at Cambridge, in pursuance of the king’s letters mandatory; installed prebendary of Ely, archdeacon of Surrey, and made master of Jesus college, Cambridge; all before the end of 1660. March 25, 1661, he succeeded Dr. Lore in the Margaret professorship of that university; and, the first day of the ensuing year, was nominated one of the commissioners for the review of the liturgy in the conference at the Savoy, where the nonconformists allow he was the first of their opponents for candour and ability. In April 1662, he was admitted master of Trinity college, Cambridge; and, in August resigned his rectory of St. Christopher’s, and prebend of Sarum. In 1667 he was admitted a fellow of the royal society. Jn 1672 he published, at Cambridge, in 4to, “Vindiciae F.pistolarum S. Ignatii,” in answer to mons. Dailie; to which is subjoined, “Isaaci Vossii epistolas duæ adversus Davidem Blondellum.” Upon the death of Wilkins, bishop of Chester, Pearson was promoted to that see, to which he was consecrated Feb. 9, 1673. In 1684- his “Annales Cynrianici, sive tredecim annorum, quibus S. Cyprian, inter Christianos versatus est, historia chronologica,” was published at Oxford, with Fell’s edition. of that father’s works. Dr. Pearson was disabled from all public service by ill health, having entirely lost his memory, a considerable time before his death, which happened at Chester, July 16, 1686. Two years after, his posthumous works were published by Dodweli at London, “Cl. Jaannis Pearsoni Cestriensis nuper Episcopi opera posthuma, &c. &c.” There are extant two sermons published by him, 1. “No Necessity for a Reformation,' 7 1661, 4to. 2.” A Sermon preached before the King, on Eccles. vii. 14, published by his majesty’s special command," 1671, 4to. An anonymous writer in the Gentleman’s Magazine (1789 p. 493) speaks of some unpublished Mss. by bishop Pearson in his possession. His ms notes on Suidas are in. the library of Trinity college, Cambridge, and were used by Kuster in his edition.

The greater part of Mr. Peck’s Mss. became the property of sir Thomas Cave, bart. Among others, he purchased 5 vols. in 4to, fairly transcribed for the press, in. Mr. Peck’s own neat hand, under the title of “Monasticon Anglicanum.” These volumes were, on the 14th of May, 1779, presented to the British Museum, by the last sir Thomas Cave, after the death of his father, who twenty years before had it in contemplation to bestow them on that excellent repository. They are a most valuable and almost inestimable collection, and we hope will not be neglected by the editors of the new edition of Dugdale. Mr. Peck’s other literary projects announced in the preface to his “Desiderata,” and at the end his “Memoirs of Cromwell,” are, 1. “Desiderata Curiosa,” vol. III. Of this Mr. Nichols has a few scattered fragments. 2. “The Annals of Stanford continued.” 3. “The History and Antiquities of the Town and Soke of Grantham, in Lincolnshire.” 4. “The Natural History and Antiquities of Rutland.” 5. “The Natural History and Antiquities of Leicestershire.” The whole of Mr. Peck’s Mss. relative to this work, were purchased by sir Thomas Cave, in 1754, whose grandson, with equal liberality and propriety, presented them to Mr. Nichols for the use of his elaborate history of that county. It appears from one of Mr. Peck’s Mss. on Leicestershire, that he meditated a chapter on apparitions, in which he cordially believed. 6. “r rhe Life of Mr. Nicholas Ferrar, of Little Gidding, in the county of Huntingdon, gent, commonly called the Protestant St. Nicholas, and the pious Mr. George Herbert’s Spiritual Brother, done from original Mss.” This ms. of Ferrar is now in the possession of Mr. Gilchrist of Stamford, before mentioned, who informs us that there is nothing in it beyond what may be found in Peckard’s Life of Ferrar. 7. “The Lives of William Burton, esq. author of the Antiquities of Leicestershire, and his brother Robert Burton, B. D. student of Christ-church, and rector of Seagrave, in Leicestershire, better known by the name of Democritus jun.” Mr. Nichols had also the whole of this ms. or plan, which was merely an outline. 8. “New Memoirs of the Restoration of King Charles the Second (which may be considered also as an Appendix to secretary Thurloe’s Papers), containing the copies of Two Hundred and Forty-six Original Letters and Papers, all written annis 1658, 1659, and 1660 (none of them ever yet printed). The whole communicated by William Cowper, esq, Clerk of the Parliament.” In 1731, Mr. Peck drew up a curious “Account of the Asshebys and De la Launds, owners of Bloxham, in the county of Lincoin,” a ms. in the British Museum. Mr. Gilchrist has a copy of Langbaine’s Lives, carefully interlined by him, whence it should seem that he meditated an enlargement of that very useful volume. Mr. Peck also left a great many ms sermons, some of which are in the possession of the same gentleman, who has obligingly favoured us with some particulars of the Stamford antiquary.

, son of the preceding, was born in 1731. He studied law, and became a barrister of the MiddleTemple; one of the grooms of his majesty’s privy-chamber, and one of the esquires of the king’s household. He was, like his father, a frequent contributor to the Gentleman’s Magazine. He was also author of “Curialia; or an historical account of some branches of the Royal Household,” part I, 1782; part II, 1784, and part III, 1791. He had been several years engaged in preparing the remaining numbers of the “Curialia” for the press; the materials for which, and also his very amusing “Anecdotes of the English Language,” he bequeathed to Mr. Nichols, who published the “Anecdotes” in 1803, 8vo, a second edition in 1814; and the fourth and fifth numbers of the “Curialia” in 1806. He also assisted Mr. Nichols in publishing his father’s ' “History of Beauchief Abbey,” and wrote his father’s life, to which we have referred in the preceding article. He died May 22, 1800, aged sixtyseven, and was buried on the west side of Kensington church-yard. By his first wife, he had one son, Christopher Pegge, M. D. F. R. S. knighted in 1199, and now regins professor of physic at Oxford.

, fifth baronet of the family, and first earl of Egmont, was born at Barton, in the county of York, July 12, 1683, and received his education at Magdalen college, Oxford. On quitting the university, in June 1701, he made the tour of England, and was admitted F. R. S. at the age of nineteen. Upon the death of king William, and the calling of a new parliament in Ireland, he went over with the duke of Ormorid, and though not of age, was elected for the county of Cork, and soon after appointed a privy-counsellor. In July 1705, he began the tour of Europe, which he finished in October 1707; and returning to Ireland in May 1708, was again, representative for the county of Cork. In 1713, he erected a lasting monument of his charity, in a free-school at Burton. On the accession of George I. he was advanced to the peerage of Ireland by the title of baron Perceval, in 1715, and viscount in 1722. In the parliament of 1722 and 1727, he was member for Harwich, in Essex, and in 1728 was chosen recorder of that borough. Observing, by the decay of a beneficial commerce, that multitudes incapable of finding employment at home, mightbe rendered serviceable to their country abroad, he and a few others applied to the crown for the grant of a district of land in America, since called Georgia, which they proposed to people with emigrants from England, or persecuted Protestants from other parts of Europe, by means of private contribution and parliamentary aid. The charter being granted, in June 1732, Lord Perceval was appointed first president; and the king having long experienced his fidelity to his person and government, created him earl of Egmont in. Nov. 1733. Worn out by a paralytic decay, he died May 1, 1748. His lordship married Catherine, daughter of sir Philip Parker a Morley, by whom he had seven children, who all died before him, except his eldest son and successor, of whom we shall take some notice.

The first earl of Egmont, according to Mr. Lodge, appears to have been a man of an exemplary character, both in public and private life, and a writer of considerable elegance and acuteness. He published, 1. “A Dialogue between a member of the church of England and a Protestant Dissenter, concerning a repeal of the Test Act,” 1732. 2. “The Question of the Precedency of the Peers of Ireland in England,” 1739. Part only of this book was written by the earl of Egmont; which was in consequence of a memorial presented by his lordship to his majesty Nov. 2, 1733, upon occasion of the solemnity of the marriage of the princess-royal with the prince of Orange. 3. “Remarks upon a scandalous piece, entitled A brief account of the causes that have retarded the progress of the colony of Georgia,” 1743. His lordship published several other tracts about that time, relating to the colony; and many letters and essays upon moral subjects, in a paper called “The Weekly Miscellany.” His Lordship also formed a collection of the “Lives and Characters of eminent men in England, from very ancient to very modern times.” Dr. Kippis appears to have had the use of this collection, when employed on the Biographia. It is in the possession of lord Arden. The earl of Egmont wrote a considerable part of a genealogical history of his own family, which was afterwards enlarged and methodized by Anderson, author of the Royal Genealogies; and by Mr. W r histon, of the Tally Court. This book, which was printed by the second carl of Egmont, is entitled “A genealogical History of the house of I very,” and is illustrated by a great number of portraits and plates. It was not intended for sale; but a few copies are got abroad, and sell at a very high price. Lord Orford, in the first edition of his “Royal and Noble Authors,” attributed “The great Importance of a religious Life,” to this nobleman, which, however, was soon discovered to be from the pen of Mr. Melmoth.

The variety of pursuits in which sir William Petty was engaged, shews him to have had a genius capable of any thing to which he chose to apply it; and it is very extraordinary, that a man of so active and busy a spirit could find time to write so many things, as it appears he did by the following catalogue 1. “Advice to Mr. S. Hartlib,” &c. 1648, 4to. 2. “A brief of Proceedings between sir Hierom Sankey and the author,” &c. 1659, fol. 3. “Reflections upon some Persons and Things in Ireland,” &c. 1660, 8vo. 4.' “A Treatise of Taxes and Contribution,” &c. 1662, 1667, 1685, 4to, all without the author’s name. This last was republished in 1690, with two other anonymous pieces, “The Privileges and Practice of Parliaments,” and “The Politician discovered” with a new tide-page, where they are all said to be written by sir William, which, as to the first, is a mistake. 5. “Apparatus to the hjstory of the common practice of Dyeing,” printed in Sprat’s History of the R. S. 1667. 6. “A Discourse concerning the use of Duplicate Proportion, together with a new hypothesis of springing or elastic Motions,” 1674, i 2mo. See an account of it in “Phil. Trans.” No. cix. and a censure of it in Dr. Barlow’s “Genuine Remains,” p. 151. 1693, -8vo. 7.“Colloquium Davidis cum aniina sua,” &c. 1679, fol. 8. “.The Politician discovered,” &c. 1681, 4to. 9. “An Essay in Political Arithmetic,” &c. 1682, 8vo. 10. “Observations upon the Dublin Bills of Mortality in 1681,” &c. 1683, 8vo. II. “An account of some Experiments relating to Land-carriage,” Phil. Trans. No. clxi. 12. “Some Queries, whereby to examine Mineral Waters,” ibid. No. clxvi. 13. “A Catalogue of mean, vulgar, cheap, and simple Experiments,” &c. ibid. No. clxvii. 14. “Maps of Ireland, being an actual Survey of the whole kingdom,” &c. 1685, folio. This contained thirty-six accurate maps viz. a general map the province of Leinster, consisting of eleven counties, each in a distinct map that of Munster of six Ulster nine; and Connaught five. Another edition was afterwards made from the same plates. Sir William’s surveys, says Mr. Gough, as far as they go are tolerably exact as to distances and situations, but neither the latitudes nor roads are expressed, nor is the sea-coast exactly laid down; his design being only to take an account of the forfeited lands; many other tracts are left blank, and from such a survey his maps are formed. 15. “An Essay concerning the Multiplication of Mankind,” 1686, 8vo. N. B. The Essay is not printed here, but only the substance of it. 16. “A further assertion, concerning the Magnitude of London, vindicating it from the objections of the French,” Phil. Trans, clxxxv. 17, “Two Essays in Political Arithmetic,” c. 1687, 8vo. An extract of these is in Phil. Trans. No. clxxxiii. 18. “Five Essays in Political Arithmetic,” &c. 1687, 8vo, printed in French and English on opposite pages. 19. “Observations upon London and Rome,” 1687, 8vo, three leaves. His posthumous pieces are, 1. “Political Arithmetic,” &c. 1690, 8vo, and 1755, with his Life prefixed; and a Letter of his never before printed. 2. “The Political Anatomy of Ireland,” to which is added, “Verbum Sapienti,” 1691, 1719. In the title-page of the second edition this treatise is called “Sir William Petty’s Political Survey of Ireland.” This latter was criticized in “A Letter from a gentleman,” &cr. 1692, 4to. 3. “A treatise of Naval Philosophy, in three parts,” &c. printed at the end of “An account of several new Inventions, &c. in a discourse by way of letter to the earl of Marlborougb,” &c. 1691, 12mo. Wood suspects this may be the same with the discourse about the building of ships, mentioned above to be many years in the hands of lord Brounker. 4. “What a complete Treatise of Navigation should contain,” Phil. Trans. No. cxcviii. This was drawn up in 1685. Besides these, the following are printed in Birch’s History of the H. S. 1. “A discourse of making Cloth and Sheep’s Wool.” This contains the history of the clothing trade, as No. 5. above, does that of dyeing; and he purposed to have done the like in other trades; in which design some other members of the society engaged also at that time. 2. “Supellex Philosophica.”

The cardinal was at a convent of the Benedictines at Maguzano, in the territory of Venice, whither he had retired when the tranquillity of Rome was disturbed by the French war, when the important news arrived of the accession of the princess Mary to the throne of England, by the death of her brother Edward VI. It was immediately determined by the court of Rome that he should be sent as Jegate to England, in order to promote that object to which his family had been sacrificed, the reduction of the kingdom to the obedience of the holy see. Pole, however, who did not know that his attainder was taken off, determined first to send his secretary to England to make the necessary inquiries, and to present letters to the queen, who soon dissipated his fears by an ample assurance of her attachment to the catholic cause. He then set out in Oct. 1553, but in his way through Germany, was detained by the emperor, who was then negociating a marriage between his son Philip and the queen of England, to which he imagined the cardinal would be an obstacle. This delay was the more mortifying as the emperor at the same time refused to admit him into his presence, although he had been commissioned by the pope to endeavour to mediate r a peace between the emperor and the French king. But the greatest of all his mortifications came from queen Mary herself, who under various pretences, which the cardinal saw in their proper light, contrived to keep him abroad until her marriage with Philip was concluded.

is the name of many eminent personages recorded in ancient writers, particularly Julius Polysenus, of whom some Greek epigrams are extant, in the first book of the Anthologia. But the Polyænus who is best known, flourished in the second century, and is the author of the eight books of the “Stratagems of illustrious Commanders in war.” He appears to have been a Macedonian, and probably was a soldier in the younger part of his life; but we are more certain that he was a rhetorician, and a pleader of causes and that he enjoyed a place of trust and dignity under the emperors Antoninus and Veriis, to whom he dedicated his work. The “Strategemata” were published in Greek by Isaac Casaubon, with notes, in 1589, 12mo but no good edition of them appeared, till that of Leyden; 1690, in 8vo. The title-page runs thus: “Polygeni Strategematum libri octo, Justo Vulteio interprete, Pancratius Maasvicius recensuit, Isaaci Casauboni nee non suas notas adjecit.” This was followed, in 1756, by Mursinua’s edition, Berlin, and by that of Coray, at Paris in 1809, 8vo. We have now an excellent English translation by Mr. R. Shepherd, 1793, 4to. It contains various stratagems, of above three hundred commanders and generals of armies, chiefly Greeks and Barbarians, which are at least entertaining, and illustrative of the manners of the times in which those commanders lived but it may be doubted whether a modern soldier would gain much advantage by making himself master of this tricking study. The original has come down to us incomplete, and with the text considerably mutilated and corrupted; but the style is classical, and even elegant.

In the same year, 1711, he produced the “Rape of the Lock,” a poem which at once placed him higher than any modern writer, and exceeded every thing of the kind that had appeared in the republic of letters. It was occasioned by a frolic of gallantry, in which Lord Petre cut off a favourite lock of Mrs. Arabella Fermor’s hair, and this familiarity being so much resented as to occasion a serious rupture between the two families, Mr. Caryl, a friend to both, de-r sired Pope to write something that might bring them into better humour. Two cantos were accordingly produced in a fortnight, and published in one of Lintot’s Miscellanies and finding these received with universal applause, he next year enlarged the poem to five cantos and by the addition of the machinery of the Sylphs, placed the “Rape of the Lock” above all other mock heroic poems whatever.

phyrius addicted himself,concurred with lity of his mind.“Brucker. his natural propensity towards melanwould have reaped any great benefit from these, since neither his judgment nor his integrity was equal to his learning; and neither the splendour of his diction, nor the variety of his reading, can atone for the credulity or the dishonesty, which fill the narrative parts of his works with so many extravagant tales; or interest the judicious reader in the abstruse subtleties, and mystical flights of his philosophical writings. Of his works which remain, the four following,” De abstinentia ab esu animalium“” De vita Pythagone“” Sententite ad intelligibilia ducentes“” De Antro Nymphorum“with a fragment” De Styge,“preserved by Stobaeus, were printed at Cambridge in 1655, 8vo, with a Latin version, and the Life of Porphyry subjoined, by Lucas Holstenius. The” Life of Pythagoras,“which, however, is but a fragment, has since been published by Kusterus, at Amsterdam, 1707, in 4to, in conjunction with that written by Jamblichus, who was a disciple of this philosopher. It should have been observed, that the above pieces of Pythagoras, printed at Cambridge, were published jointly with Epictetus and Arrian’s Commentary, and the Tabula Cebetis. His treatise” De Antro Nymphorum“was reprinted in Greek and Latin, with notes, by R. M. Van Goens, at Utrecht in 1765, 419; anc1jac.de Rhoer published a new edition of the treatise” De Abstinentia" at the same place in 1767.

His most valuable publications were, the “Universal Dictionary of Trade and Commerce,” 2 vols. folio, of which a second edition was published in 1757 and “Great Britain’s true System” one part of which is to recommend, during war, to raise the supplies within the year. His other publications, with the merits of which we are less acquainted, were, <6 1. “The Merchant’s public Counting House,” 4to. 2. “State of the French Trade and Navigation,” 8vo. 3. “Britain’s Commercial Interest explained and improved,” 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “The Importance of the African Expedition considered,” &c. In the papers of 1763, we find mention of a James Postlethwayt, F. R. S. who wrote “The History of the public Revenue,” folio, but whether related to Malachi is uncertain. Malachi was chosen F. S. A. March 21, 1734.

In 1635 he was promoted to the deanery of Worcester, having before had a promise of a canonry of Windsor, which he never enjoyed. In 1640 he was vice-chancellor of the university of Oxford, in the execution of which office he met with some trouble from the members of the long parliament. Upon breaking out of the civil wars, he sent all his plate to the king, and declared, that he would rather, like Diogenes, drink in the hollow of his hand, than that his majesty should want; and he afterwards suffered much for the royal cause. In consideration of this, upon the death of Dr. W r alter Balcanqual, he was nominated to the deanery of Durham in January 1645-6; but was prevented from being installed by his death, which happened at his college March the 3d following. He was interred about the middle of the chapel there and over his grave was a marble monument fastened to the north wall, at the expence of his widow Elizabeth, daughter of Dr. Charles Sonibanke, some time canon of Windsor, afterwards wife of Dr. Gerard Langbaine, who succeeded Dr. Potter in the provostship of Queen’s college. He was a person esteemed by all that knew him to be learned and religious exemplary in his behaviour and discourse, courteous in his carriage, and of a sweet and obliging nature, and comely presence. But he was more especially remarkable for his charity to the poor; for though he had a wife and many children, and expected daily to be sequestered, yet he continued his usual liberality to them, having, on hearing Dr. Hammond’s sermon at St. Paul’s, been per* suaded of the truth of that divine’s assertion, that charity to the poor was the way to grow rich. He translated from Italian into English, “Father Paul’s History of the Quarrels of Pope Paul V. with the State of Venice,” London, 1626, 4to and left several Mss. prepared for the press, one of which, entitled “A Survey of the Platform of Predestination,” falling into the hands of Dr. William Twisse, of Newbury, was answered by him. This subject perhaps is more fully discussed in his controversy with Mr. Vicars, which was republished at Cambridge in 1719, in a “Collection of Tracts concerning Predestination and Providence.” The reader to whom this “Collection” may not be accessible, will find an interesting extract, from Dr.Potter’s part, in Dr. Wordsworth’s “Ecclesiastical Biography,” vol. V. p. 504, &c. Chillingworth likewise engaged in the controversy against Knott.

He had a vigorous and comprehensive mind which by a liberal education, and constant cultivation during along series of years, was furnished with an uncommon fund of various knowledge, both as a politician and antiquary but not, in both characters, without some singular opinions. His works were very numerous. The first, and most popular, which went through several editions, was his “Ad ministration of the Colonies.” 2. Observations on a Bread Bill, which he introduced in parliament and, 3< “Of the Laws and Commissions of Sewers” both printed, but not published. 4. An ironical pamphlet, entitled “Considerations on the indignity suffered by the Crown, and dishonour brought upon the Nation, by the Marriage of his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland with an English subject,” 1772, 4to. 5. A pamphlet on “The high price of Bread,” &c. 1774, 8vo. 6. “A Topographical Description of such parts of North America as are contained in the annexed map of the middle British Colonies, &c. in North America,” 1776, folio. 7. “A Letter to Adam Smith, LL.D. F. R. S.” respecting his “Wealth of Nations,” 1776, 4to. 8. “Drainage and Navigation, but one united work,” 1776, 8vo. 9. “A Treatise on the study of Antiquities,” 1782, 8vo. 10. “A Memorial addressed to the Sovereigns of America,” 1782 *. 11. “Two Memorials, with an explanatory Preface.” 12. “Memorial addressed to the Sovereigns of Europe and the Atlantic,” 1783. 13. “Proposal for founding University Professorships for Architecture, Painting, and Sculpture,” 1786. 14. “Answer to a Letter on the Jutae or Viti.” 15. “Notices and Descriptions of Antiquities of the Provincia Romana of Gaul, now Provence, Languedoc, and Dauphiny: with Dissertations on the subjects of which those are exemplars and an Appendix, describing the Roman Baths and Thermae, discovered in 1784, at Badenweiler,” 1787, 4to. 16. “An Antiquarian Romance, endeavouring to mark a line by which the most ancient people, and the processions of the earliest inhabitancy of Europe, may be investigated, 11 1795, 8vo. 17.” Descriptions and Explanations of the Remains of some Roman Antiquities dug up in the city of Bath in 1790, with an Engraving from Drawings made on the spot,“1795, 4to. 18.” Considerations on the Scarcity and high Prices of Bread Corn,“&c, 1796. He contributed also many papers to the Archaeologia of the Society of Antiquaries, of which he was chosen a fellow in 1772, He was elected F. R.S. in 1765. He is also said to have been the author of” The Right, Interest, and Duty, of Governments, as concerned in the affair of the East Indies,“1781, 8vo.” Intellectual Physics, an Essay concerning the nature of Being,“4to, 1803 and a” Treatise on Old Age."

Besides the “Catechism” already mentioned, bishop Poynet was the author of: 1. “A Tragedie or Dialoge of the unjust usurped primacie of the bishop of Rome,” translated from Bernard Ochinus,“1549, 8vo. 2.” A notable Sermon concerning the ryght use of the Lordes Supper,“&c. preached before the king at Westminster,” 1550, 8vo. When abroad, he wrote, which was published the year after his death, a treatise on the same subject, entitled :t Dialecticon viri boni et literati de veritate, natura, atque substautia corporis et sanguinis Christi in Eucharistia“in which, Bayle says, he endeavoured to reconcile the therans and Zuinglians. 3.” A short Treatise of Politique Power, and of the true obedience which subjectes owe to kynges and other civile governours, with an exhortacion to all true naturall Englishe men, compyled by D. I. P. B. R. V.V. i.e. Dr. John Poynet, bishop of Rochester and Winchester,“1556, 8vo. The contents of this may be seen in Oldys’s Catalogue of Pamphlets in the Harleian Library, No. 409. It was reprinted in 1639 and 1642 which gave a suspicion that it contained sentiments respecting queen Mary, which at this time were thought applicable to a far milder sovereign. Dr. Poynet wrote” A Defence for Marriage of Priests,“1549, 8vo; and has been thought the author of an answer to the popish Dr. Martin on the same subject, entitled” An Apologie, fully aunswering, by Scriptures and anceant doctors, a blasphemose book, gathered by D. Stephen Gardiner," &c. &c. But Wharton, in his observations on Strype’s Memorials of Cranmer, assigns very sufficient reasons why it could not be Poynet’s.

The following are the works of the abbé Prevot 1. “Memoires d'un Homme de Qualite, qui s’est retire du monde,” 6 vols. 12mo. This romance has been translated into English in 2 vols. 12mo, and in 3 vols. 12mo, under the title of the “Memoirs of the marquis de Bretagne” to which is added, another romance of Prevot' s. See art. 3. 2. “Histoire de M. Cleveland, fils naturel de Cromwell,” 1732, 6 vols. 12mo; an English translation also, 5 vols. J2mo. 3. “Histoire du Chevalier des Grieux, & de Man on Lescaut,” 1733, 12mo. An English translation of this romance has been published separately, and is also affixed to the translation of art. 1. in 3 vols. 4. “Pour & Contre,” a literary journal, 1733, and continued in the following years, 20 vols. 12mo. 5. “The first volume of a translation ofThuanus,” 1733, 4to. 6. “A translation of Dryden’s play, All for Love,” 1735. 7. Le Doyen de Killerine,“1733, 6 vols. 12mo, translated into English, 3 vols. 12mo, under the title of” The Dean of Coleraine.“8.” History of Margaret of Anjou,“1740, 2 vols. 12mu. translated into English, 2 volumes 12mOr 9.” Histoire d'une Grecque Moderne,“1741, 2 vols. 12mo, translated into English, 1 vol. 12mo. 10.” Campagnes Philosophiques, ou Memoires de M. de Montcalm,“1741, 2 vols. 12mo, part history, and part fiction. 11.” Memoires pour servir a Histoire de Malthe,“1742, 12mo. 12.” Histoire de Guillaume le Conquerant Roi d'Angleterre,“1742, 12mo. 13.” Voyages du Captaine R. Lade,“1744, 2 vols. 12mo. 14.” A translation of Cicero’s Letters to Brutus,“with notes, 1744, 12mo; and a translation of his Familiar Letters, 1746, 5 vols. 12mo. 15.” A translation of Middleton’s Life of Cicero,“1743, 4 vols. 12mo. 16.” Memoires d'un honnete homme,“1745. 17.” Histoire generale des Voyages,“1745, &c. 16 vols. 4to, and 64 vols. 12ino. La Harpe has abridged this compilation in 21 vols. 8vo; he has also added, Cook’s Voyages. 18. A Dictionary of the French language, 1751, 8vo, and a new edition, 2 vols. 8vo. 19 and 20.” Clarissa Harlowe,“1751, 12 parts; and,” Sir Charles Grandison,“8 parts, 1755 both translated from Richardson. 21.” Le Monde Moral,“1760, 4 vols. 12mo. 22.” A translation of Hume’s history of the Stuarts,“1760, 3 vols. 4to, and 6 vols. 12mo. 23.” Memoires pour servir a la Histoire de la Vertu,“1762, 4 vols. 12mo, translated from the English. 24.” Almoran and Hamet,“translated from Hawkesworth, 1762, 2 vols. 12mo. And, 25. A posthumous translation from the English, entitled” Letters de Mentor, a une jeune Seigneur," 1764, 12mo.

Dr.Prideaux’s works were, 1. “Tabulae ad Grammaticam Groecam Introductorioe,” Oxford, 1608, 4to. 2. “Tirocinium ad Syllogismum cohtexendum.” 3. “Heptades Logicae, siveMonitaadamplioresTractatus introductoria.” These two last pieces were printed with the “Tabulae ad Grammaticam Graecam,” &c. Mr. David Lloyd observes, that our author’s Greek Grammar and Logick were both but a fortnight’s work. 4. “Castigatio cujusdam Circulatoris, qui R. P. Andream EudsBmon-Johannem Cydonium soc. Jesu seipsum nuncupat, opposita ipsius calumniis, in Epistola Isaaci Casauboni ad Frontonem Ducaeum,” Oxford, 1614, 8vo. 5. “Alloquium sereniss. Reg. Jacobo Woodstochio habitum, 24 Aug. 1624,” in one sheet, 4to. 6. “Orationes novem inaugurates de totidem Theologiae apicibus, prout in promotione Doctorum Oxoniae publice proponebantur in Comitiis,” Oxford, 1626, 4to. 7. “Lectiones decem de totidem Religionis Capitibus, praecipue hoc tempore controversis, prout publice habebantur Oxoiiiae in Vesperiis,” Oxford, 1625, 4to. 8. “Lectiones 22, Orationes 13, Conciones 6, et O ratio ad Jacobum Regem,” Oxford, 1648, folio. Among which are contained the preceding lectures, orations, and speeches to king James at Woodstock. 9. “Concio ad Artium Baccalaureos pro more habita in Ecclesia B. Marias Oxon. in die Cinerum in Act. ii. 22. Ann. 1616.” 10. “Fasciculus Controversiarum ad Juniorum aut occupatorum captum colligatus,” &c. Oxford, 1649, 1651, 4to. 11. “Theologiaa Scholasticae Syntagma Mnemonicum,” Oxford, 1651. I2.“Conciiiorum Synopsis,” printed with the “Fasciculus.” 13. “Epistola de Episcopatu,” folio. 14. “Manuductio ad Theologiam Polemicam,” Oxford, 1657, 8vo, published by Mr. Thomas Barlow, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, with a Latin Epistle before it in the name of the printer. 15. “Hypomnemata Logica, Rhetorica, Physica, Metaphysica,” &c. Oxford, 8vo. 16. Several Sermons, as, l.“A Sermon at the consecration of Exeter-college Chapel,” on. Luke xix. 46, Oxford, 1625, 4to. 2nd, “Perez Uzzah, A Sermon before the king at Woodstock,” on 1 Samuel vi. 6, 7, Oxford, 1625, 4to. Both these sermons are printed with another volume, entitled, 17. “Twenty Sermons,” Oxford, 1636, 4to. The two first are entitled, “Christ’s Counsel for ending Law-cases,” dedicated to his kinsman Edmund Prideaux, esq. 18. “Nine Sermons on several occasions,” Oxford, 1641, 4to. 19. “A Synopsis of the Councils,” subjoined to “An easy and compendious Introduction to History,” published, as we have just noticed, in the name of his son Matthias Prideaux. 20. “Histories of Successions in States, Countries, or Families,” &c. Oxford, 1653. 21. “Euchologia or, The Doctrines of Practical Praying being a Legacy left to his daughters in private, directing them to such manifold uses of our Common Prayer Book, as may satisfy upon all occasions, without looking after new lights from extemporal flashes,” dedicated to his daughters, Sarah Hodges and Elizabeth Sutton, London, 1655, 8vo. 22. “The doctrine of Conscience, framed according to the form in the Common Prayer;” left as a legacy to his wife, containing many cases of conscience, and dedicated to Mrs. Mary Prideaux, relict of the Right Reverend Father in God John, late Lord Bishop of Worcester, by T. N.; London, 1656, 8vo. 23. “Sacred Eloquence or, The Art of Rhetoric, as it is laid down in Scripture,” London, 1659, 8vo.

But though Dr. Pringle was thus deprived of the immediate protection of a nobleman who knew and esteemed his worth, his conduct in the duties of his station procured him effectual support. He attended the army in Flanders, through the campaign of 1744, and so powerfully recommended himself to the duke of Cumberland, that, in the spring following, March 11, he had a commission from his royal highness, appointing him physician general to his majesty’s forces in the Low Countries, and parts beyond the seas; and on the next day he received a second commission from the duke, by which he was constituted physician to the royal hospitals in the same countries. On March 5, he resigned his professorship in consequence of these promotions. In 1745 he was with the army in Flanders, but was recalled from that country in the latter end of the year, to attend the forces which were to be sent against the rebels in Scotland. At this time he had the honour of being chosen F. R. S. Dr. Pringle, at the beginning of 1746, in his official capacity, accompanied the duke of Cumberland in his expedition against the rebels, and remained with the forces, after the battle of Culloden, till their return to England, in the middle of August. We do not find that he was in Flanders during any part of that year. In 1747 and 1748, he again attended the army abroad and in the autumn of 1748 he embarked with the forces for England, upon the conclusion of the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. From that time he principally resided in London, where, from his known skill and experience, and the reputation he had acquired, he might reasonably expect to succeed as a physician. In April 1749, Drt Pringle was appointed physician in ordinary to his royal highness the duke of Cumberland. In 1750 he published, in a letter to Dr. Mead, “Observations on the Gaol or Hospital Fever.” This work, which passed through two editions, and was occasioned by the gaol-distemper that broke out at that time in the city of London, was well received by the medical world, though he himself afterwards considered it as having been hastily written. After supplying some things that were omitted, and rectifying a few mistakes that were made in it, he included it in his grand work on the “Diseases of the Army,” where it constitutes the seventh chapter of the third part of that treatise. It was in the same year that Dr. Pringle began to communicate to the Royal Society his famous “Experiments upon Septic and Antiseptic substances, with remarks relating to their use in the theory of Medicine” These experiments, which comprehended several papers, were read at different meetings of the society the first in June, and the two next in the November following three more in the course of 1751 and the last in Feb. 1752. Only the three first numbers were printed in the “Philosophical Transactions,” as Dr. Pringle had subjoined the whole, by way of appendix, to his “Observations on the Diseases of the Army.” These experiments upon septic and antiseptic substances, which have accompanied every subsequent edition of the treatise just mentioned, procured for him the honour of sir Godfrey Copley’s gold medal. Besides this, they gained him a high and just reputation, as an experimental philosopher. In February 1753, he presented to the Royal Society “An Account of several Persons seized with the Gaol Fever by working in Newgate and of the manner by which the Infection was communicated to one entire family.” This is a very curious paper and was deemed of such importance by the excellent Dr. Stephen Hales, that he requested the author’s permission to have it published, for the common good of the kingdom, in the “Gentleman’s Magazine;” where it was accordingly printed, previous to its appearance in the Transactions. Dr. Pringle’s next communication was, “A remarkable Case of Fragility, Flexibility, and Dissolution of the Bones.” In the 49th volume of the “Transactions,” we meet with accounts which he had given of an earthquake felt at Brussels; of another at Glasgow and Dunbarton and of the agitation of the waters, Nov. 1, 1756, in Scotland and at Hamburgh. The 50th volume contains, Observations by him on the case of lord Walpole, of Woolterton; and a relation of the virtues of Soap in dissolving the Stone, as experienced by the reverend Mr. Matthew Simson. The next volume is enriched with two of the doctor’s articles, of considerable length, as well as value. In the first, he has collected, digested, and related the different accounts that had been given of a very extraordinary fiery meteor, which appeared on Sunday the 26th of November, 1758, between eight and nine at night; and, in the second, he has made a variety of remarks upon the whole, in which no small degree of philosophical sagacity is displayed. It would be tedious to mention the various papers, which, both before and after he became president of the Royal Society, were transmitted through his hands. Besides his communications in the Philosophical Transactions, he wrote, in the Edinburgh Medical Essays, volume the fifth, an “Account of the success of the Vitrum ceratum Antimonii.”

From his earliest days Mr. Pye was devoted to reading. When he was about ten years old, his father put Pope’s Homer into his hand: the rapture which he received from this exquisite paraphrase of the Grecian bard was never to be forgotten, and it completely fixed him a rhymer for' life, as he pleasantly expressed it. To this early love of reading Mr. Pye was indebted for the various learning he possessed. His first literary production, probably, was an “Ode on the birth of the Prince of Wales,” published in the Oxford Collection and the following distinct publications have successively appeared from his prolific pen 1.“Beauty > a poetical essay,” 1766. 2. “'Elegies on different occasions,” 1768, 4to. 3. “The Triumph of Fashion, a vision,” 1771, 4to. 4. “Faringdon Hill, a poem in two books,” 1774, 4to. 5. “Six Olympic Odes of Pindar, being those omitted by Mr. West, translated into English verse, with notes,” 1775, 12mo. 6. “The Art of War, a poem, translated from the French of the king of Prussia,” written and published in 1778, at his leisure hours during the encampment at Coxheath. 7. “The Progress of Refinement, a poem, in three parts,” 1783, 4to; forming a history of the procedure of the human mind, in manners, learning, and taste, from the first dawnings of cultivated life to the present day. The poem displays the great knowledge of the author, the elegance of his genius, and the soundness of his judgment. His descriptions are just and beautiful, and his versification correct, polished, and harmonious. 8. “Shooting, a poem,” 1784, 4to. 9. “Poems on various Subjects,” in two vols. 8vo, in which several of the beforementioned pieces were collected, and a few new ones added, 1787. 10. “An elegant and very faithful English Translation of the Song of Harmodius and Aristogeiton, is to be found, among other excellent pieces, in this collection. 11.” A Translation of the Poetics of Aristotle, first published in an octavo volume in 1788, and afterwards prefixed to a Commentary on that Work, published in a quarto volume. 12. “Amusement, a poetical essay,” 1790. 13. “The Siege of Meaux, a tragedy, in three acts,” acted at Covent-Garden theatre, 1794, 8vo. 14. “The War Elegies of Tyrtseus imitated, and addressed to the people of Great Britain with some Observations on the Life and Poems of TyrtEeus,” 1795. 15. “The Democrat; interspersed with Anecdotes of well-known Characters,” 1795, 2 vols. 12mo. 16. “Lenore, a tale, translated from the German of Gottfried Augustus Burger,” 1796, 4to. Of the several translations of this tale which have appeared, Mr. Pye’s is esteemed the best but nei r ther English morals nor English taste are likely to be benefited by the translation of such poems as “Lenore.” 17. “Naucratia, or Naval dominion, a poem,” 2d edit. 1798. 18. “The Inquisitor, a tragedy in five acts, altered from the German by the late James Petit Andrews and Henry James Pye,” 1798, 8vo. 19. “The Aristocrat, by the author of the Democrat,” 1799, 2 vols. 12mo. 2O. “Carmen Seculare for the year 1800.” 21. “Adelaide, a tragedy,” acted at Drury-lane theatre, 1800, 8vo, but calculated rather for the closet than the stage. 22. “Alfred, an epic poem in six books,” 1802, 4to. 23. “Verses on several subjects, written in the vicinity of Stoke Park, in the summer and autumn of 1801,” 1802. sm. 8vo. 24. “A second Collection of his Poems, in two octavo volumes, comprising, besides several of those already mentioned, a volume of sketches on various subjects and a translation of Xenophon’s Defence of the Athenian Democracy, with, notes.” 25. “A Prior Claim, a comedy,” acted at Drurylane Theatre, 1805, 8vo, in which he was assisted by Mr. Samuel James Arnold, his son-in-law. 26. “Comments on the Commentators on Shakspeare with preliminary observations on his genius and writings, and on the labours of those who have endeavoured to elucidate them,” 1807, 8vo. 27. “A Translation of the Hymns and Epigrams of Homer,” 1810. He published also many occasional poems, besides his odes for the new year, for his majesty’s birthday, and for the anniversary of the Literary Fund, which are preserved in the magazines. Mr. Pye died Aug. 11, 1813, in the sixty-ninth year of his age.

In the pulpit, the excellent choice and arrangement of his subject, and the graceful dignity of his manner, combined with a superior eloquence and harmony of voice, commanded the attention of his hearers, and whenever he preached, the chapel of GrayVinn was thronged by a numerous and enlightened audience. But his labours were not confined to the school and the pulpit. He was one of the first and most active managers of the London Institution and the “Society of Schoolmasters” is mainly in-r debted to his generous support for its present respectability and importance.

At length he became an attendant on the “levees of great men,” and luckily applied himself to political writing, for which he was well qualified. When the duchess of Marlborough, about 1742, published memoirs of her life, Ralph was employed to write an answer, which he called “The other side of the question.” This, says Davies, was written with so much art, and made so interesting, by the author’s management, that it sold very well. His pamphlets and political papers at length appeared of so much importance^ that towards the latter end of the Walpole administration, it was thought proper to buy him off with an income. Whether his paper called “The Remembrancer,” recommended him to Doddington, lord Melcombe, or was written in consequence of his acquaintance with that statesman, does not appear but from Doddington’s celebrated (< Diary,“we learn that he was much in the confidence of the party assembled round the prince of Wales, and was not only constantly employed to carry messages and propositions to the leaders of the party, but was frequently, consulted as to the subject of such messages. Nor indeed do his talents as a politician seem much inferior to those who employed him. He had like-r wise before this acquired considerable fame by his” Use and Abuse of Parliaments,“174-4, 2 vols. 8vo, and still more by his” History of England, during the reign of William III.; with an introductory review of the reigns of Charles II. and James II.“1744 6, 2 vols. folio, written upon principles avowed by his party. This was always considered as an useful work. Ralph had read a great deal, and was very conversant in the history and politics of this country. He applied himself, with great assiduity, to the study of all writings upon party matters: and had collected a prodigious number of pamphlets relating to the contests of whig and tory, the essence of which he incorporated in his work so as to make it a fund of curious information and opinions, of which more regular historians might afterwards avail themselves. Mr. Fox, in his late” Historical Work,“pronounces him” an historian of great acuteness, as well as diligence, but who falls sometimes into the common error of judging too much from the event."

Soon after the first edition, in octavo, of this pastoral was published, and about the time of the publication of his second volume in quarto, the “Beggar’s Opera” made its appearance, with such success that it soon produced a great number of other pieces upon the same musical plan. Amongst the rest, Ramsay, who had always been a great admirer of Gay, especially for his ballads, was so far car-r ried away by the current as to print a new edition of his pastoral, interspersed with songs adapted to the common Scotch tunes. He did not reflect at the time that the “Beggar’s Opera” was only meant as a piece of ironical satire, whereas his “Gentle Shepherd” was a simple imitation of nature, and neither a mimickry nor mockery of any other performance. He was soon, however, sensible of his error, and would have been glad to have retracted those songs; but it was too late; the public was already in possession of them, and as the number of singers is always greater than that of sound critics, the many editions since printed of that pastoral have been almost uniformly in this vitiated taste. He comforted himself, however, with the thought that the contagion had not infected his second volume in quarto, where the “Gentle Shepherd” is still to be found in its original purity.

Before he left Leadhills he had no opportunity of reading any books but such as were in the hands of the country people all over Scotland. Amongst those were the hktory in verse of king Robert the Bruce, the exploits of sir William Wallace, and the poems of sir David Lindsey , a favourite of king James V. which coming at an early period to one not distracted by a variety of studies, made a deep impression upon his mind, and gave a cast to all his after sentiments, particularly with regard to the dignity and independence of Scotland, in the history and antiquities of which he became very knowing. In the “Ever Green,” a collection of old Scottish poems, published by him in 1724, there are two pieces of his own, one of them called “The Vision,” said to have been written in Latin, about 1300, and translated in 1524, and which has for its subject the sufferings of Scotland under Edward I. and the Balioi faction. It consists of twenty pages, and is full of poetical imagery. What were his motives for writing so long a poem without reaping any fame from it, is not easy to guess. Perhaps it was only for the sake of amusing himself with the profound remarks of learned critics and antiquaries upon it; perhaps some political ideas not very orthodox had their share in the concealment But whatever might be his reason for concealing himself at this time, he certainly did not mean that this should continue always a secret, as appears by his communicating it to his son, from whom the writer of this article had the information; and by his putting, by way of name to the end of it, A R. Scot, which, though it appears at first sight to mean Archibald Scot, is no other than the two initials of his own name, with his country added to them. His notions about the independency of Scotland had made him, for some time, consider the union of the two crowns as a hardship: an opinion which he held in common with many worthy men and sincere friends of their country in those days; and there is a poem of his in print called “The Tale of the Three Bonnets,” in which the manner of bringing about that treaty is handled with a great dea4 of satirical humour: but his good sense and observation getting, at length, the better of those early prejudices, this poem never obtained a place in any of his two volumes, and is now difficult to he met with.

, the late bishop of London, was the younger son of the preceding, and was born July 6, 1749. He became a student of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, and took his degrees at the usual periods that of M. A. in 1774; B. D. in 1782 D. D. by diploma, in 1783. In 1776 he was appointed prselector of poetry, and in 1782 regius professor of Greek. In the same year he was presented to a prebend of Salisbury; and in 1783 became canon of Christ church, regius professor of divinity, and rector of Ewelnoe. In the year 1799 he was elevated to the bishopric of Oxford; translated to that of Bangor in 1807; and thence to London in 1809. He was elected F. R. S. in 1811. He passed a great part of his life in the university of Oxford, and it was generally believed that when he was raised to the see of Oxford, the university was complimented with the nomination by the crown. His lordship was author of many single sermons, and charges delivered on different occasions: also of “De Grsecae Linguae Studio Prselectio habita in Schola Linguarum,” 1783, and “Concio ad Clerum in Synodo Provinciali Cantuariensis Provincial ad D. Pauli,” 1790. One of his last works was a report of the progress made by the National School Society, to which the general committee referred in terms of gratitude, at their first meeting after his lordship’s decease. They notice his lordship as one “whose latest employment had been to state, for the information qf the public, the progress of a work to which he had contributed his time, his labour, and his counsels. The committee therefore could not fail to entertain a common sentiment of profound regret for the loss which they have sustained, and to cherish in their minds the liveliest recollection of the service which has been so successfully fulfilled by him in this second report. They wish, therefore, to add to this document, designed for general circulation, their sense of what is due from the public, and themselves, to the. memory of one who was a constant and assiduous promoter of this salutary institution, from its first establishment to the last hour of his life. The committee trust, that this testimony, though limited to a single object in the large field of pastoral duty in which he was incessantly engaged, may serve to denote the benefits which have resulted from his prompt, unwearied, and effectual exertions.” The following is the character drawn of him by Mr. archdeacon Jefferson, and which alludes to his zeal for the church, of which he was an active member: “Fearless now of being censured for mercenary adulation, or reproved by unconscious merit, a just tribute may be paid to the character of that departed and exalted prelate, who is, and will be, most lamented where he was best and most entirely known. This opportunity, therefore, is willingly embraced of offering a heartfelt condolence to the ministry of the diocese on the affecting and important loss, which, in these perilous times of contending sects and unsettled opinion, has arisen to them, and to the church: To them, in the premature privation of a diocesan, firm in his support of ecclesiastical authority, but considerate in its application; eminently versed in the letter of ecclesiastical law, but liberal in its practical construction, reluctant in interference, but determined in duty, slow in the profes-. sion of service, but prompt in its execution; disinterested, in patronage, unwavering in measures, correct in judgment, attentive in council, and kind and compassionate to distress: To the church, in the premature privation of a father, diligent in her rites and services, but unostentatious in piety and devotion; sound and unrelaxing in her doctrines and faith, but discreet in zeal, and comprehensive in charity; ever vigilant in defending her interests, ever forward in asserting her privileges, and ever able in the assertion and the defence.” This high character, how-, ever, has been thought capable of abatement. It was perhaps unfortunate that he succeeded a prelate of the mild and conciliating temper of Dr. Porteus, and that he undertook the government of a diocese, which, above all others, requires such a temper. It was, perhaps, not less unfortunate that in his first charge to the clergy of this diocese, he betrayed no little ignorance of the state of religious opinions, and the creeds of those sectaries against whom he wished to warn his clergy.

In his will, after leaving to his mistress a sufficiency to live independent, he bequeathed the rest of his property to a relation at Urbino, and to two of his scholars, Julio Romano, and Francesco Penni; appointing an intimate friend Turini da Pescia his executor. His body lay in state in the tall of his own house, and the celebrated picture of the Transfiguration, which he had just finished, was placed at the head of the room. His remains were afterwards removed with great funeral pomp to the Pantheon, where the last ceremonies were performed, and at the request of Leo X. cardinal Bembo wrote an inscription, to honour his memory, and mark the place of his interment. These particulars we have selected from the best life of this great artist that has appeared in this country, written by R. Duppa, esq. and prefixed to his splendid publication of “Heads from the Fresco pictures of Raffaello in the Vatican,” 1802, as a companion to his “Heads of Michael Angela*” Mr. Duppa concludes with a critical essay on the merits of Raphael, too long for our limits, and too valuable to be injured by abridgment. In Sir Joshua Reynolds’ lectures are many interesting and important observations on the same subject, which in truth must enter deeply into every discussion on the art. We might refer likewise to Opie’s lectures, Barry’s works, and other authors who have professedly or incidentally treated of Raphael. The present professor of painting has a note on the subject which may not form an improper conclusion to our article, as he appears to have on this occasion exerted his highest powers of discriminative criticism.

Rastall is sometimes called a lawyer, and besides being printer, certainly had a considerable hand in composing or compiling some law books. In 1517, he printed and published his “Tables to Fitzherbert’s Abridgment,” in folio, which in 1565 were reprinted by R. Tottel. According to Herbert, he also had some concern in first printing Fitzherbert’s Abridgment, and he composed a table to the “Book of Assizes,” which is printed with the latter editions of the work. In 1527, we find “An Exposition of Law Terms and the Nature of Writs, with divers cases and rules of the Law, collected as well from books of Master Littleton, as other Law Books,” printed in small octavo by J. Rastall, and again by him in French and English, folio, without date. This appears to have been originally composed as well as printed by Rastall, both in French and English, notwithstanding the conjecture that has been formed in favour of his son William, by lord Coke and others, as author or translator of it. John RastalPs other publications appear to have been, “Tables of the Years of our Lord God, and of the Kings, in opposite columns,” printed by Walley in 1558, and again in 1563, by William Rastail in 1563, and often reprinted by others; and in 1566 “Entries of Declarations, Bars, Replications,” &c. folio, commonly called “RastalPs Entries,” and sometimes quoted as the “New Book of Entries.” The author, in his preface, tells the reader that his collection is chiefly compiled from l.The old Book of Entries: 2. A Book of Precedents written by Master Edward Stubbes, one of the Prothonotaries in the Common Pleas: 3. A Book of Precedents gathered by John Lucas, secondary to Master William Roper, prothonotarie of the King’s Bench: 4. A Book of good Precedents of his grandfather sir John More (father of sir Thomas More), one of the justices of the King’s Bench, but not of his collection; all which he had incorporated in this volume.

“This great man’s conduct,” says Mr. Lodge, “united all the splendid qualities of those eminent persons who jointly rendered Elizabeth’s court an object of admiration to Europe, and was perfectly free from their faults. Wise and loyal as Burghley, without his blind attachment to the monarch; vigilant as Walsingham, but disdaining his low cunning; magnificent as Leicester, but incapable of hypocrisy; and brave as Ralegh, with the piety of a primitive Christian; he seemed above the common objects of human ambition, and wanted, if the expression may be allowed, those dark shades of character which make nien the 1 heroes of history. Hence it is, probably, that our writers have bestowed so little attention on this admirable person, who is but slightly mentioned in most historical collections, unless with regard to his disputes with Leicester, whom he hated almost to a fault.” Mr. Lodge justly esteems himself peculiarly fortunate in having been the instrument of disclosing the earl of Sussex’s letters to the public. They form a very valuable part of the “Historical Illustrations,” and, a small number excepted, are the only ones to be met with in print. These letters display both his integrity and ability in a very striking light, and are written in a clear and manly style. Four of them are particularly curious two to the queen, onthe treaty of marriage with the archduke of Austria; one to sir William Cecil, on the state of parties in Scotland; and one to her Majesty, concerning the duke of Alen$on. The letter on the affairs of Scotland is considered by Mr. Lodge as an inestimable curiosity. Farther light will be thrown on the earl of Sussex’s character, by transcribing the manly language in which he complains that his services were neglected, and declares his purpose of retiring to private life. It is in a letter to sir William Cecil. “I was firste a Lieuten‘te; I was after little better than a Marshal; I had then nothing left to me but to direct hanging matters (in the meane tyme all was disposed that was w th in my comission), and nowe I ame offered to be made a Shreif’s Bayly to deliver over possessions. Blame me not, good Mr. Secretarie, though my pen utter somewhat of that swell in my stomake, for I see I ame kepte but for a brome, and when I have done my office to be throwen out of the dore. I ame the first nobel man hathe been thus used. Trewe service deserveth honor and credite, and not reproche and open defaming; but, seeing the one is ever delivered to me in the stede of the other, I must leave to serve, or lose my honor; w^h, being continewed so long in my howse, I wolde be lothe shoolde take blemishe wth me. These matters I knowe procede not from lacke of good and honorable meaning in the Q,’ ma 1 towards me, nor from lacke of dewte' and trewthe in me towards her, which grevethe me the more and, therefore, seing I shall be still a camelyon, and yelde no other shewe then as it shall please others to give the couller, I will content my self to live a private lyfe. God send her Mate others that meane as well as I have done; and so I comitt you to th* Almightie.” From the next letter it appears that the queen had too much wisdom to part with so faithful a counsellor and servant. The earl of Sussex had a high regard and esteem for Lord Burghley. In one of his letters, dated June 28, 1580, he expresses himself, to that great statesman, in the following terms: “The trevve fere of God w^h yo r actyons have alwayes shewed to be in yo r harte, the grete and deepe care wch you have always had for the honor and salfty of the Q‘. Ma*’s most worthy p’son; the co‘tinual troubell w ch yqu have of long tyme taken for the benefyting of the com’on-welthe and the upryght course wich ye have alwaye’s taken, respectying the mattr and not the p’son, in all causes (wch be the necessary trusts of him that ferethe God trewly, s’rveth his Soverayne faythfully, and lovethe his countrey clerely) have tyed me to yo r L. in that knotte w cli no worldly fraylty can break; and, therfor, I wyll never forbere to runne any fortune that may s’rve you, and further you' godly actyons. And so, my good L. forberyng to entrobell you w th words, I end; and wysh unto you as to my self, and better, yf I may.”