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

, archbishop of Lyons, was one of the most celebrated and learned prelates of the ninth century. Dr. Cave and Olearius tell us he was a Frenchman, but Du Pin says there is no absolute proof of this. He was born in the year 779, as father Mabillon deduced from a short martyrology, upon which Agobard seems to have written some notes with his own hand. In the year 782 he came from Spain to France. Leidrade, archbishop of Lyons, ordained him priest in the year 804, and nine years after he was appointed coadjutor, or corepiscopus to that prelate, and when, in the year 816, Leidrade returned to a monastery at Soissons, Agobard was substituted in his room with the consent of the emperor, and the whole synod of the French bishops, who highly approved of the choice which Leidrade had made of a successor. This ordination, however, was objected to, as it is contrary to the canons, that a bishop should choose his successor himself. Agobard notwithstanding enjoyed the see quietly till he was expelled from it by the emperor Louis le Debormaire, because he had espoused the party of his sou Lothaire, and been one of the chief authors of deposing him in the assembly of bishops at Compiegne in the year 833. For Lewis, having secured himself against the injustice and violence which had been offered by Lothaire and the bishops of his party, prosecuted the latter in the council of Thionville in the year 835. Agobard, who had retired to Italy, with the other bishops of his party, was summoned three times before the council, and refusing to appear, was deposed, but no person was substituted in his room. His cause was again examined in the year 836, at an assembly held at Stramiac near Lyons: but it continued still undetermined, on account of the absence of the bishops, whose sole right it was to depose their brother. At length, the sons of the emperor having made their peace with him, they found means to restore Agobard, who was present in the year 838, at an assembly held at Paris; and he died in the service of his sovereign, in Xaintonge, June 5, in the year 840. This church honoured him with the title of saint. He had no less share in the affairs of the church, than those of the empire; and he shewed by his writings that he was a much abler divine than a politician. He was a strenuous defender of ecclesiastical discipline, very tenacious of the opinions he had once espoused, and very vigorous in asserting and defending them. Dupin, however, acknowledges that he was unfriendly to the worship of images, and it appears that he held notions on that subject which would have done honour to more enlightened times. He wrote a treatise entitled “Adversus dogma Faslicis ad Ludovicum Imp.” against Felix Orgelitanus, to shew that Christ is the true son of God, and not merely by adoption and grace. He wrote likewise several tracts against the Jews, a list of which may be seen in the General Dictionary, 10 vols. fol. from whence our account of him is principally taken. His style is simple, intelligible, and natural, but without elevation or ornament. He reasons with much acuteness, confirming his arguments, as was the custom then, by the authority of the fathers, whom he has largely quoted. His works were buried in obscurity for several ages, Until Papirius Masso found a manuscript of them by chance at a bookseller’s shop at Lyons, who was just going to cut it to pieces to bind his books with. Masso published this manuscript at Paris in 1603 in 8vo, and the original was after his death deposited in the king of France’s library. But Masso having suffered many errors to escape him in his edition, M. Baluze published a more correct edition at Paris, 1666, 2 vols. 8vo, from the same manuscript, and illustrated it with notes. He likewise added to it a treatise of Agobard entitled “Contra quatuor libros Amalarii liber,” which he copied from an old manuscript of Peter Marnæsius, and collated with another manuscript of Chifflet. This edition has been likewise reprinted in the “Bibliotheca Patrum.”

, an eminent Spanish statesman, and cardinal, was born May 15, 1664. His birth and early employments afforded no presage of his future ambition and fame. He was the son of a gardener near Parma, and when a boy, officiated as bell-ringer, and attended upon the parish church of his village. The rector, finding him a shrewd youth, taught him Latin. Alberoni afterwards took orders, and had a small living, on which he resided. While here, M. Campistron, a Frenchman^ secretary to the duke of Vendome, who commanded Louis XIV's armies in Italy, was robbed, and stripped of his clothes and money, by some ruffians near Alberon^s village. Alberoni, hearing of his misfortune, took him into his house, furnished him with clothes, and gave him as much money as he could spare, for his travelling expences. Campistron, no less impressed with the strength of his understanding than with the warmth of his benevolence, took him to the head quarters, and presented him to his general, as a man to whom he haxi very great obligations.

, a Swedish historian, was born at Helsingfors, Feb. 9, 1695, and died July 14, 1777. He published various political works, principally relating to the history of his own country, none of which have been very highly esteemed. He was, however, indefatigable in his researches for the materials of history and biography; and about the time of his death, a “History of Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden,” was published at Breslaw in 2 vols. 8vo. originally written by Mauvillon, a Frenchman; but now much improved from the Mss. of M. Arckenholz. He published in his life-time, “Memoirs concerning Christina, queen of Sweden,” 4 vols. 4to, Amst. 1751—1760, a work which may be consulted with advantage, although it has few of the charms of elegance or conciseness. A long account of this writer may be seen in Adelung’s continuation of Jocher’s Lexicon.

, or Earnulph, or Ernulph, bishop of Rochester in the reign of king Henry I, was a Frenchman by birth, and for some time a monk of St. Lucian de Beauvais. Observing some irregularities among his brethren, which he could neither remedy nor endure, he resolved to quit the monastery but first he took the advice of Lanfranc archbishop of Canterbury, under whom he had studied in the abbey of Bee. That prelate, who was well acquainted with his merit, invited him over into England, and placed him in the monastery of Canterbury, where he lived till Lanfranc’s death. Afterwards, when Anselm came into that see, Arnulph was made prior of the monastery of Canterbury, and afterwards abbot of Peterborough, and to both places he was a considerable benefactor, having rebuilt part of the church of Canterbury, which had fallen down, and also that of Peterborough, but this latter was destroyed by an accidental fire, and our prelate removed to Rochester before he could repair the loss. In 1115, he was consecrated bishop of that see, in the room of Radulphus or Ralph, removed to the see of Canterbury. He sat nine years and a few days, and died in March 1124, aged eighty-four. He is best known by his work concerning the foundation, endowment, charters, laws, and other things relating to the church of Rochester. It generally passes by the name of Textus Roffensis, and is preserved in. the archives of the cathedral church of Rochester. Mr. Wharton, in his Anglia Sacra, has published an extract of this history, under the title of “Ernulphi Episcopi Roffensis Collectanea de rebus Ecclesise Roffensis, a prima sedis fundatione ad sua tempora. Ex Textu Roffensi, quern composuit Ernulphus.” This extract consists of the names of the bishops of Rochester, from Justus, who was translated to Canterbury in the year 624, to Ernulfus inclusive benefactions to the church of Rochester; of the agreement made between archbishop Lanfranc, and Odo bishop of Bayeux how Lanfranc restored to the monks the lands of the church of St. Andrew, and others, which had been alienated from them how king William the son of king William did, at the request of archbishop Lanfranc, grant unto the church of St. Andrew the apostle, at Rochester, the manor called Hedenham, for the maintenance of the monks and why bishop Gundulfus built for the king the stone castle of Rochester at his own expence a grant of the great king William Of the dispute between Gundulfus and Pichot benefactions to the church of Rochester. Oudm is of opinion, our Arnulph had no hand in this collection; but the whole was printed, in 1769, bj the late Mr. Thorpe, in his “Registrum Roffense.”

, a Frenchman, who was, unfortunately for him, sent to Rome as ambassador. At the commencement of the revolution, he was editor of the journal called the “Mercnre,” with Mallet-Dupan, and afterwards of the “Journal d'etat et du citoyen,” begun by Carra. Having made diplomatic affairs his particular study, he was sent to Rome, in 1792, as envoy extraordinary, but was so unpopular as to be insulted in that city whenever he made his appearance. At length, on Jan. 13, 1793, the populace, irritated at his wearing the French cockade, pelted him with stones until he reached the house of the banker, Monette, where he received a wound from one of the mob, which proved fatal in about twenty-four hours. Not content with this murder, the insurgents set fire to the French academy des eleves in Rome, and insulted many of the students. It is said that this insurrection was occasioned by the substitution of a new coat of arms, probably in the taste of the French revolutionists. Basseville was a member of several academies, and wrote 1. “Elemcns de Mythologie,” 8vo. 2. “Precis historique sur la vie du Genevois Lefort, principal ministre de Pierre-le-Grand, grand amiral de Russie,” 178G. 3.“Memoires historiques et politiques sur la Revolution de France,” 1790, 2 vols. 8vo.

His hopes of preferment expiring with the fall of queen Anne’s ministry, he some time after embraced an offer made him by Dr. St. George Ashe, bishop of Clogher, of accompanying his son in a tour through Europe. When he arrived at Paris, having more leisure than when he first passed through that city, Mr. Berkeley took care to pay his respects to his rival in metaphysical sagacity, the illustrious Pere Malebranche. He found this ingenious father in his cell, cooking in a small pipkin a medicine for a disorder with which he was then troubled, an inflammation on the lungs. The conversation naturally turned on our author’s system, of which the other had received some knowledge from a translation just published. But the issue of this debate proved tragical to poor Malebranche. In the heat of disputation he raised his voice so high, and. gave way so freely to the natural impetuosity of a man of parts and a Frenchman, that he brought on himself a violent increase of his disorder, which carried him off a few days after. In this excursion Mr. Berkeley employed four years and, besides those places which fall within, the grand tour, visited some that are less frequented. He travelled over Apulia (from which he wrote an account of the tarantula to Dr. Freind), Calabria, and the whole island of Sicily. This last country engaged his attention so strongly, that he had with great industry collected very considerable materials for a natural history of it, but unfortunately lost them in the passage to Naples. What injury the literary world has sustained by this mischance, may be collected from the specimen of his talents for observation and description, in a letter to Mr. Pope concerning the island of Inarime (now Ischia) dated October 22, 1717; and in another from the same city to Dr. Arbuthnot, giving an account of an eruption of Vesuvius. On his way homeward, he drew up at Lyons a curious tract “De Motu,” which was inserted in the memoirs of the royal academy of sciences at Paris, who had proposed the subject. He arrived at London in 1721; and, being much affected with the miseries of the nation, occasioned by the South Sea scheme in 1720, published the same year “An essay towards preventing the ruin of Great Britain;” reprinted in his miscellaneous tracts.

Bernini now began his operations on the Louvre, but he did not see, as has been reported, Perrault’s celebrated colonnade, the design of which was not presented to the king until after his departure, nor was it finished until live years after, so that the surprize with which it is said to have struck him, and the liberal praise he bestowed upon it, to which Voltaire has given currency in his poems, are founded on a mistake. During Bernini’s five months residence at Paris, he laid the foundation, from his own design, of the colonnade of the Louvre, which was to join it to the Tuileries by a gallery but as this could have been executed only by destroying all that had been already built, Perrault’s plan was afterwards^adopted: In the mean time, he made a bust of Louis XIV. who frequently sat to him, and took pleasure in his conversation, which sometimes appears to have been rather familiar. One day after his majesty had sat a whole hour, the artist, delighted with so great an honour, exclaimed “A miracle a great monarch, young, and a Frenchman, has sat quiet for an hour” Another time, wishing to see more of the king’s forehead, he put back the curis of hair which covered the place, and said, “Your majesty can shew your face to all the world;” and the courtiers, always intent upon some frivolous compliment, made a fashion of this disposition of the hair, which they called “la coeffure a la Bernin”

Beza did not return to Geneva when the conference ended: being a Frenchman, queen Catherine de Medicis would have him stay in his own country, where he preached frequently before the king of Navarre, and the prince of Conde, in Paris. The king of Navarre, though of the religion of the Protestants, declared himself against them, in order to preserve the title of viceroy; but the prince of Conde, the illustrious family of Coligny, and others, more zealous for the reformation, began to excite the Protestants to arm in their defence. Opposed to this party, was a league formed by the pope, the emperor, the king of Spain, and the catholic Swiss cantons. This soon brought on the civil war, in the course of which Beza attended the prince of Conde, and was at the battle of Dreux, in 1562, in which the generals of both armies were taken prisoners and during the imprisonment of the prince of Conde, Beza remained with admiral Coligny, and did not return to Geneva, until after the peace of 1563, when he Tesumed his place in the academy or college which Calvin bad founded. That celebrated reformer died in the following year, and Beza succeeded him in all his offices, and was now considered as the ostensible head and main support of the reformed party both in France and Geneva. In 1570 he returned again to France to be present at the synod of Kochelle. The queen of Navarre and the admiral Coligny had requested the council of Geneva to permit bim to take this journey, and when he arrived at Rochelle he was unanimously chosen president of the synod, which was a kind of general assembly of deputies from all the reformed churches in France. He was afterwards frequently interrupted in his academical business at Geneva, particularly in 1574, when sent on an important negociation to Germany, and he frequently assisted at conferences on religious points both in Germany and Swisserland.

, a French poet and miscellaneous writer, was born at Konigsberg, Nov. 24, 1732, of a family of French refugees, of the protestant religion. After completing his education, he became a clergyman of that communion, and appears to have formed his taste for oratory and poetry from a frequent perusal of the Bible, the style of the historical part of which he much admired. He was a no less warm admirer of Homer. Although a Prussian by birth, he was a Frenchman at heart, and having accustomed himself to the language of his family, he felt a strong desire to reside in what he considered as properly his native country, conceiving at the same time that the best way to procure his naturalization would be through the medium of literary merit. As early as 1762, he published at Berlin a translation of the Iliad, which he called a free translation, and was in fact an abridgment and this served to introduce him to D'Alembert, who recommended him so strongly to the king, Frederick II. that he was admitted into the Berlin academy, received a pension, and afterwards visited France in order to complete his translation of Homer. A first edition had been printed in 1764, 2 vols. 8vo, but the most complete did not appear until 1780, and was followed by the Odyssey in 1785. Such was the reputation of both among his countrymen, that the academy of inscriptions admitted his name on their list of foreign members. Modern French critics, however, have distinguished more correctly between the beauties and defects of this translation. They allow him to have been more successful in his “Joseph,” a poem published first in 1767, and with additions in 1786, and now become almost a classic in France. It was translated into English in 1783, 2 vols. 12mo, but is certainly not likely to become a classic in this country, or where a taste prevails for simplicity and elegance. His “Joseph” was followed by “Les Bataves,” a poem of which some detached parts had appeared in 1773, under the title of “Guillaume de Nassau,” Amsterdam. This was reprinted in 1775, and again in 1796. During the war in 1793, as he attached himself to the French interest, he was struck off the list of the academy of Berlin, and his pension withdrawn but on the peace of Bale, his honours and his pension were restored. If his sovereign punished him thus for acting the Frenchman, he was not more fortunate with his new friends, who imprisoned him because he was a Prussian. On the establishment of the institute, however, Bitaube was chosen of the class of literature and the fine arts but gave a very bad specimen of his taste in translating the “Herman and Dorothea” of Goethe, and comparing that author with Homer, whose works, from this opinion, we should suppose he had studied to very little purpose. Some time before his death, which happened Nov. 22, 1808, he was admitted a member of the legion of honour. His other works were 1. “Examen de la Confession de Foi du Vicaire Savoyard,” 1763, a very liberal expostulation with Rousseau on account of his scepticism. 2. “De l'influence cles Belles-lettres sur la Philosophic,” Berlin, 1767, 8vo; and 3. “Eloge de Corneille,” 1769, 8vo none of which are in the collection of his works published at Paris in 1804, 9 vols. 8vo. Bitaub cannot be ranked among writers eminent for genius, nor is his taste, even in the opinion of his countrymen, of the purest standard; but his works procured him a considerable name, and many of the papers he wrote in the memoirs of the Paris academy discover extensive reading and critical talents. His private character appears to have been irreproachable, and his amiable manners and temper procured him many friends during the revolutionary successions.

Her father, however, to whom all this appeared unnatural, considered her as a mere woman and, having found an agreeable match, promised her in marriage to a Frenchman. Easter-day, 1636, was fixed for the nuptials; but, to avoid the execution, the young lady fled, under the disguise of a hermit, hut was stopped at Blacon, a village of Hainault, on suspicion of her sex. It was an officer of horse quartered in the village who seized her; he had observed something extraordinary in her, and mentioning her to the archbishop of Cambray, that prelate came to examine her, and sent her home. But being pressed again with proposals of matrimony, she ran away once more: and, going to the archbishop, obtained his licence to set up a small society in the country, with some other maidens of her taste and temper. That licence, however, was soon retracted, and Antoinette obliged to withdraw into the country of Liege, whence she returned to Lisle, and passed many years there privately in devotion and great simplicity. When her patrimonial estate fell to her, she resolved at first to renounce it; but, changing her mind, she took possession of it; and as she was satisfied with a few conveniences, she lived at little expence: and bestowing no charities, her fortune increased apace. For thus taking possession of her estate, she gave three reasons: first, that it might not come into the hands of those who had no right to it; or secondly, of those who would have made an ill use of it; thirdly, God shewed her that she should have occasion for it to his glory. And as to charity, she says, the deserving poor are not to be met with in this world. This patrimony must have been something considerable, since she speaks of several maid servants in her house. What she reserved, however, for this purpose, became a temptation to one John de Saulieu, the son of a peasant, who resolved to make his court to her; and, getting admittance under the character of a prophet, insinuated himself into the lady’s favour by devout acts and discourses of the most refined spirituality. At length he declared his passion, modestly enough at first, and was easily checked; but finding her intractable, he grew so insolent as to threaten to murder her if she would not comply. Upon this she had recourse to the provost, who sent two men to guard her house; and in revenge Saulieu gave out, that she had promised him marriage, and even bedded with him. But, in conclusion, they were reconciled; he retracted his slanders, and addressed himself to a young devotee at Ghent, whom he found more tractable. This, however, did not free her from other applications of a similar nature. The parson’s nephew of St. Andrew’s parish near Lisle fell in love with her; and as her house stood in the neighbourhood, he frequency environed it, in order to force an entrance. Our recluse threatened to quit her post, if she was not delivered f*om this troublesome suitor, and the uncle drove himrom his house upon which he grew desperate, and someimes discharged & musquet through the nun’s chamber, giung out that she was his espoused wife. This made a nose in the city; the devotees were offended, and threatined to affront Bourignon, if they met her in the streets. At length she was relieved by the preachers, who publisied from their pulpits, that the report of the marriage wis a scandalous falsehood.

While he continued at home, he was taught to write a very fair hand, and to speak French and Latin by one of the earl’s chaplains, and a Frenchman that he kept in the house. In 1635, his father sent him over to England, in order to be educated at Eton school under sir Henry Wotton, who was the earl of Cork’s old friend and acquaintance. Here he soon discovered a force of understanding which promised great things, and a disposition to cultivate and improve it to the utmost. While he remained at Eton, there were several extraordinary accidents that befel him, of which he has given us an account; and three of which were very near proving fatal to him. The first was, the sudden fall of the chamber where he lodged, when himself was in bed; when, besides the hazard he ran of being crushed to pieces, he had certainly been choked with the dust during the time he lay under the rubbish, if he had not had presence of mind enough to have wrapped his head up in the sheet, which gave him an opportunity of breathing without hazard. A little after this, he had been crushed to pieces by a starting horse that rose up suddenly and threw himself backwards, if he had not happily disengaged his feet from the stirrups, and cast himself from his back before he fell. A third accident proceeded from the carelessness of an apothecary’s servant; who, mistaking the phials, brought him a strong emetic instead of a cooling julep.

At Cambridge, Broughton became one of the fellows of Christ’s college, and there laid the first foundation of his Hebrew studies, under a Frenchman, who read upon that tongue in the university. His parts and learning soon rendered him very conspicuous at Cambridge, and also attracted the notice of the earl of Huntingdon, who became a liberal patron to him, and greatly encouraged him in his studies. From the university he repaired to London, where he distinguished himself as a preacher, and increased the number of his friends, some of whom were of high rank. He still, however, continued to prosecute his studies with the most unremitting assiduity; so that he is said frequently to have spent sixteen hours out of the fourand-twenty at his books .

, a Frenchman, born at Bethune in Artois, was a renowned philosopher or schoolman of the fourteenth century. He discharged a professor’s place in the university of Paris with great reputation; and wrote commentaries on Aristotle’s logic, ethics, and metaphysics, which were much esteemed. Some say that he was rector of the university of Paris in 1320. Aventine relates, that he was a disciple of Ockam; and that, being expelled Paris by the power of the realists, which was superior to that of the nominalists, he went into Germany, where he founded the university of Vienna. “Buridan’s Ass,” has been a kind of proverb a long time in the schools; though nobody has ever pretended to explain it, or to determine with certainty what it meant. He supposed an ass, very hungry, standing betwixt two bushels of oats perfectly equal; or an ass, equally hungry and thirsty, placed betwixt a bushel of oats and a tub of water, both making an equal impression on his organs. After this supposition he used to ask, What will this ass do? If it was answered, He will remain there as he stands: Then, concluded he, he will die of hunger betwixt two bushels of oats; he will die of hunger and thirst with plenty of food and drink before him. This seemed absurd, and the laugh was wholly on his side: But, if it was answered, This ass will not be so stupid as to die of hunger and thirst with such good provision on each side of it: then, concluded he, this ass has free will, or of two weights in equilibre one may stir the other. Leibnitz, in his Theodicea, confutes this fable; he supposes the ass to be between two meadows, and equally inclining to both: concerning this he says, it is a fiction which, in the present course of nature, cannot subsist. Indeed, were the case possible, we must say, that the creature would suffer itself to die of hunger. But the question turns on an impossibility, unless God should purposely interfere to produce such a thing; for the universe cannot be so divided, by a plane drawn through the middle of the ass, cut vertically in its length, so that every thing on each side shall be alike and similar; for neither the parts of the universe, nor the animal’s viscera, are similar, nor in an equal situation on both sides of this vertical plane. Therefore will there always be many things, within and without the ass, which, though imperceptible to us, will determine it to take to one side more than the other. After all this, not very edifying discussion, the world must confess its obligations to Buridan for one of the most common proverbs, denoting hesitation in determining between two objects of equal or nearly equal value.

, a Latin poet, who flourished in the fourth century, under the emperor Theodosius and his sons Arcadius and Honorius, was born in the year 365. Many learned men imagine him to have been born at Alexandria, in Egypt; others, however, have made a Spaniard of him, others a Frenchman, and Plutarch and Politian suppose Florence to have been the place of his nativity. It is certain that he came to Rome in the year 395, and insinuated himself into Stilico’s favour, who, being a person of great abilities, both for civil and military affairs, though a Goth by birth, was now become so considerable under Honorius, that he may be said for many years to have governed the western empire. Stilico afterwards fell into disgrace, and was put to death; and it is more than probable, that the poet was involved in the misfortunes of his patron, whom he had egregiously flattered, and severely persecuted by Hadrian, who was captain of the guards to Honorius, and seems to have succeeded Stilico. There is a reason, however, to think that he rose afterwards to great favour, and obtained several honours both civil and military. Arcadius and Honorius are said to have granted him an honour, which seems to exceed any that had ever been bestowed upon a poet before, having at the senate’s request ordered a statue to be erected for him in Trajan’s forum, with a very honourable inscription; and this is said to be confirmed by the late discovery of a marble, supposed to be the pedestal of Claudiau’s statue in brass. The inscription runs thus: “To Claudius Claudianus, tribune and notary, and among other noble accomplishments, the most excellent of poets: though his own poems are sufficient to render his name immortal, yet [as] a testimony of their approbation, the most learned and [h]appy emperors Arcadius and Honorius have, at the request of the senate, ordered this statue to be erected and placed in the forum of Trajan.” Under the inscription was placed an epigram in Greek, signifying that he had united the perfections of Homer and Virgil. The princess Serena had a great esteem for Claudian, and recommended and married him to a lady of great quality and fortune in Libya, as he acknowledges very gratefully in an epistle which he addresses to Serena from thence, a little before his wedding day.

In reference to the dispute between his friends and those of Harriot, as to the priority of their discoveries, we shall here add an anecdote told by Dr. Pell, and recorded by Dr. Wallis in his “Algebra.” Sir Charles Cavendish, then resident at Paris, had a conversation with M. Roberval concerning Des Cartes’s geometry, then lately published, to this purport: “I admire,” says Uoberval, “that method of Des Cartes, of placing all the terms of the equation on one side, making the whole equal to nothing, and how it occurred to him:” The reason why you admire it,“said sir Charles,” is, because you are a Frenchman; for if you were an Englishman, you would not admire it.“”Why so?“asked Roberval.” Because,“replied sir Charles,” we in England know whence he had it; namely, from Harriot’s Algebra.“”What book is that?“says Roberval;” I never saw it.“”Next time you come to my chamber,“said sir Charles,” I will shew it to you;“which, some time after, he did; and, upon perusal of it, Roberval exclaimed with admiration, Il Tamil Il Va vu! I He had seen it! He had seen it! finding all that in Harriot which he had before admired in Des Cartes, and not doubting that Des Cartes had it from thence. Besides, as Harriot’s” Artis Analyticæ Praxis" was published in 1631, and Des Cartes was in England about this time, and as he follows the manner of Harriot, except in the method of noting the powers, it is highly probable that he was more indebted to the English algebraist than his partial advocates are willing to allow.

In the Easter term of this year he took his doctor’s degree, and was presented by lord Bath to the perpetual curacy of Kenley, in Shropshire. In 1759, he published “The Conduct of a late noble commander candidly considered,” as good a defence as the case would admit, of lord George Sackville. It was suggested solely by the attack so unfairly made on him by Ruff head, before it could possibly be known whether he deserved censure. No person was privy to Dr. Douglas’s being the author of this Defence, except his bookseller, Andrew Millar, to whom he made a present of the copy. In the same mouth he wrote and published, “A Letter to two great men on the approach of peace,” a pamphlet which excited great attention, and was generally attributed to lord Bath. In 1760 he wrote the preface to the translation of Hooke’s “Negociations in Scotland.” He was this year appointed one of his majesty’s chaplains. In 1761 he published his “Seasonable Hints from an honest man,” as an exposition of lord Bath’s sentiments. In November 1762, he was, through the interest of lord Bath, made canon of Windsor. In December of that year, on the day on which the preliminaries of peace were to be taken into consideration in parliament, he wrote a paper called “The Sentiments of a Frenchman,” which was printed on a sheet, pasted on the walls in every part of London, and distributed among the members of parliament, as they entered the house.

Mr. Eliott returned in his seventeenth year to his native country of Scotland, and was in the same year, 1735, introduced by his father, sir Gilbert, to lieutenant-colonel Peers of the 23d regiment of foot, or royal Welsh fuzileers, then lying in Edinburgh. Sir Gilbert presented him as a youth anxious to bear arms for his king and country. He was accordingly entered as a volunteer in that regiment, and continued for a twelvemonth or more. At this time he gave a promise of his future military talents, and shewed that he was at least a soldier in heart. From the 23d he went into the engineer corps at Woolwich, and made great progress in that study, until his uncle, colonel Eliott, introduced him as adjutant of the 2d troop of horsegrenadiers. In this situation he conducted himself with the most exemplary attention, and laid the foundation of that discipline which has rendered those two troops the finest corps of heavy cavalry in Europe. With these troops he went upon service to Germany, in the war before last, and was with them in a variety of actions, particulars’ at the battle of Dettingen, where he was wounded. In this regiment he first bought the rank of captain and major, and afterwards purchased the lieutenant-colonelcy from colonel Brewerton, who succeeded to his uncle. On arriving at this rank he resigned his commission as an engineer, which he had enjoyed along with his other rank, and in which service be had been actively employed very much to the advantage of his country. He bad received the instructions of the famous engineer Bellidor, and made himself completely master of the science of gunnery. Had he not so disinterestedly resigned his rank in the engineer department, he would now by regular progression have been at the head of that corps. Soon after this he was. appointed aid-de-camp to king George II. and was already distinguished for his military skill and discipline. In 1759 be quitted the second troop of horse grenadier guards, being selected to raise, form, and discipline the first regiment of light horse, called after him Eliott’s. As soon as they were raised and formed, he was appointed to the command of the cavalry, in the expedition on the coasts of France, with the rank of brigadier- general and after this he passed into Germany, where he was employed on the staff, and greatly distinguished himself in a variety of movements, while his regiment displayed a strictness of discipline, an activity, and enterprise, which gained them signal honour; and indeed they have been the pattern regiment, both in regard to discipline and appointment, to the many light dragoon troops that have been since raised in our service. From Germany he was recalled for the purpose of being employed as second in command in the memorable expedition against the Havannah. The circumstances of that conquest are well known. It seems as if our brave veteran had always in his eye the gallant Lewis de Velasco, who maintained his station to the last extremity, and, when his garrison were flying from his side, or falling at his feet, disdained to retire or call for quarter, but fell gloriously exercising his sword upon his conquerors. A circumstance which occurred immediately after the reduction shews, that in the very heat and outrages of war the general was not unmindful of the rights of humanity. He was particularly eminent among the conquerors of the Havannah, for his disinterested procedure, and for checking the horrors of indiscriminate plunder. To him, therefore, appeals were most frequently made. A Frenchman, who had suffered greatly by the depredations of the soldiery, made application to him, and begged, in bad English, that he would interfere to have his property restored. The petitioner’s wife, who was present, a woman of great spirit, was angry at the husband for the intercession, and said, “Comment pouvez vous demander de grace a uu homme qui vient vous de‘pouilliefr N’en esperez pas.” The husband persisting in his application, his wife grew more loud in the censure, and said, “Vous n'étes pas François!” The general, who was busy writing at the time, turned to the woman, and said smiling, “Madame, ne vous échauffez pas; ce que votre mari demande lui sera accordé!”—“Oh, faut-il pour surcroit de malheur,” exclaimed the woman, “que le barbare parle le François!” The general was so very much pleased with the woman’s spirit, that he not only procured them their property again, but also took pains to accommodate them in every respect; and such was through life the manly characteristic of the general: if he would not suffer his troops to extend, for the sake of plunder, the ravages of war, he never impoverished them by unjust exactions. He would never consent that his quarter-master’s place should be sold, “not only,” says he, “because I think it the reward of an honest veteran soldier; but also because I could not so directly exercise my authority in his dismission should he behave ill.”

, baron of Dun, the ancestor of the preceding, and one of the protestant reformers in Scotland, was born at the family-seat near Montrose, in 1508, or 1509. His father was John Erskiue, of Dun, a descendant of the earls of Marr, and his mother was a daughter of William, first lord Ruthven. He was educated most probably at the university of Aberdeen; and according to the ancient custom of the nobility of Scotland, pursued his studies for some time in one or other of the foreign universities. Buchanan styles him “a man of great learning:” and to this character he is amply entitled, as we are informed he was the first of his countrymen who patronized the study of the Greek language, which was first taught by his means at Montrose. In 1534, on returning from his travels, he brought with him a Frenchman skilled in the Greek tongue, whom he settled at Montrose, and upon his departure he liberally encouraged others to come from France and succeed to his place; and from this private seminary many Greek scholars proceeded, and the knowledge of the language was gradually diffused through the kingdom. After his father’s death, he was employed as the other barons or lairds then, were, in administering justice in the county of Angus, to which he belonged, and occasionally assisting in the meetings of parliament. He was besides almost constantly chosen provost, or chief magistrate of the neighbouring town of Montrose. At an early period of his life, he became a convert from popery, but the precise manner in which his conversion was accomplished, is not known. He was, however, a liberal encourager of those who became converts, and especially those who suffered for their rehgiou. The castte of Dun was always a sanctuary to protestant preachers a-.id professors, and here he appears to have associated with a number of persons, some of high rank, who strengthened each other in their principles, and by their power and influence contributed much to the reformation in that part of the kingdom.

is ranked among the Sicilian historians of the twelfth century, but his personal history is involved in obscurity. Muratori makes him a Sicilian, but Mongitori says he was only educated in Sicily, and that he was more of a Norman than a Sicilian, although he lived many years in the latter kingdom. The editors of the “L'Art de verifier les Dates” are of opinion that the true name of Falcandus is Fulcandus, or Fducanlt. According to them, Hugues Foucault, a Frenchman by birth, and at length abbot of St. Denys, had followed into Sicily his patron Stephen de la Perche, uncle to the mother of William II. archbishop of Palermo, and great chancellor of the kingdom. Yet Falcandus has all the feelings of a Sicilian and the title of alumnus which he bestows on himself, appears to indicate that he was born, or at least, according to Mongitori, was educated in that island. Falcandus has been styled the Tacitus of Sicily, and Gibbon seems unwilling to strip him of his title: “his narrative,” says that historian, “is rapid and perspicuous, his style bold and elegant, his observation keen; he had studied mankind, and feels like a man.” There are four editions of his history, one separate, Paris, 1550; a second in the Wechels’ collection of Sicilian histories, 1579, folio; a third in Carusio’s Sicilian library and a fourth in the seventh volume of Muratori’s collection. Falcandus appears to have been living about 1190. His history embraces the period from 1130 to 1169, a time of great calamity to Sicily, and of which he was an eye-witness.

, a celebrated French bishop, was born in 1595. He rose to be doctor and professor of the Sorboune, archdeacon of Dinan, prebendary of Chartres, syndic of the faculty of divinity at Paris, and, at length, bishop of Cavaillon in 1656. He travelled into Greece, Italy, and England. Urban VIII. had so great a value for him, that he twice nominated him to the bishopric of Toul; and wishing to create two cardinals, one of which should be a Frenchman, the other a Spaniard, proposed him, with father de Lugo, for that dignity; but a strong faction, and some reasons of state, placed the hat designed for M. Hallier on the head of the commander of Valencey. M. Hallier appeared with great distinction, as proctor, at the assembly of the French clergy, 1645, in which the rules concerning the regulars were revived, which he explained by a learned “Commentary.” On his second visit to Kome in 1652, he solicited, both by personal application and by writing, the condemnation of the five famous propositions of Jansenius, and obtained the bull “Cum occasione” against them. He died in 1659, worn out with sickness and infirmities, aged sixty -four. His principal works are, “Defence of a censure of the faculty of theology at Paris respecting the Bishops of England against the Jesuits;” “Treatise on the Hierarchy;” and a “Treatise on Elections and Ordinations,” 1636, folio; by which he acquired great reputation, both at Rome and in France. He wrote also various pieces against the five propositions of Jansenius, which, in the estimation of his church, discover profound learning, and abound with very strong and solid reasoning. They are all in Latin.

, or Jansonius, a celebrated printer and letter-founder of Venice, but by birth a Frenchman, flourished in the fifteenth century. He is said to have been originally an engraver of coins and medals at Paris. About 1453 the report of the invention of printing at Mentz being circulated, he was sent by the king, Charles VII. to gain private information on the subject of that art. He fulfilled the object of his mission, but, on his return to France, finding that the king was dead, or perhaps having heard of his death, he removed to Venice. Such is the purport of an account in two old French manuscripts on the coinage, except that one places the mission of Jenson under Louis XL which is less probable. Jenson excelled in all branches of the art, and more than are now united with it. He formed the punches, he cast the letters, and conducted the typography. He first determined the form and proportion of the present Roman character: and his editions are still sought on account of the neatness and beauty of his types. The first book that issued from his press is a scarce work in quarto, entitled “Decor Puellarum,” the date of which is 1471; and in the same year he published in Italian “Gloria Mulierum,” a proper sequel to the former. After these are found many editions of Latin classics and other books, for ten years subsequent; but, as no books from his press appear after 1481, it is conjectured that he died about that time.

, a German poet of the greatest renown, was born at Quedlinburg, July 2, 1724. He was the eldest of eleven children, and distinguished himself in his youth among his companions in bodily and mental exercises. At the age of sixteen he went to college, and being placed under Freitag, a very able tutor, he made himself familiar with the languages, and acquiring a taste for the beauties of the best classical authors, made attempts in composition both in prose and verse. In the latter he wrote some pastorals, but not contented with these humbler efforts, he formed at this early period the resolution of composing an epic poem, and fixed upon the “Messiah” as his subject. Such an effort was not known in the German language and the high opinion he had of Virgil, his favourite poet amongst the ancients the honour of being the first who should offer the Cerman public a work like the fiLneid; the warmth of patriotism that early animated him to raise the fame of German literature in this particular to a level with that of other European countries; the indignation he felt in reading the book of a Frenchman, who had denied the Germans every talent for poetry; all combined with the consciousness of his own superior powers, to spur him on to the execution of his exalted purpose. In 1745 he went to the university of Jena, where he commenced the study of theology; but in the midst of his academical pursuits he was planning his projected work, and sketched out his three first cantos, first in prose, but afterwards in hexameters, and was so pleased with having introduced a metre into German poetry, as ever afterwards to defend this mode of versification. In 1746, he removed from Jena to Leipsic, and became a member of a society of young men who had formed themselves into a literary club for mutual improvement. About this time he exercised his genius in lyric compositions. Several of his odes, together with the three first cantos of his Messiah, appeared in a periodical paper entitled “Bremen Contributions.” At length the publication of ten books of his Messiah made his name known throughout Germany, and raised his reputation very high. It found friends and enemies, admirers and critics, every where but its approbation was owing as much to the sacredness of the matter as the beauty of the poetry Christian readers loved it as a book that afforded them at length, amidst the themes of orthodoxy, some scope for devout feeling; young preachers quoted it in the pulpit, and coupled the name of Klopstock with that of the prophets. The stauncher class of divines, indeed, gave the poem the appellation of presumptuous fiction, contaminating the scripture-history with fables, and undermining the faith. The partisans of the German grammarian Gottsched raised the greatest clamour against the work, on the ground of the language, and sought by poor arguments and sorry wit to depreciate its merits. The Swiss critics, as opponents to the Saxons, on the other hand, extolled and defended it with all their might. Bodmer, in particular, the admirer and translator of Milton, embraced the cause of the German epic bard with enthusiastic ardour, and contributed very greatly, by his warm euloaium, to accelerate the universal celebrity of his poem. Klopstock heard and profited by the public disquisitions, but never engaged in any of the disputes.

His works, which contain some valuable facts and observations, not, however, unmixed with erroneous doctrines and superstitions, were published by Dr. Joseph Brown, at London, in 1701, fol. divided into two books. The first contains his “Consilia, epistolrc, & observationes” the second his “Pharmacopoeia, variteque medicamentorum formulae.” At the beginning of the book is placed the author’s portrait, such as it was in his 82d year, and under the print are words to this purpose: “Theo. Turquet. de Mayerne, knight, by birth a Frenchman, by religion a Protestant, and by dignity a baron; in his profession, a second Hippocrates: and, what has very seldom happened to any but himself, first physician to three kings; in erudition unequalled; in experience second to none; and, as the result of all these advantages, celebrated far and near.”

He married a daughter of a burgomaster of Wittemberg in 1520, who lived with him till 1557. He had two sons and two daughters by her; and his eldest daughter Anne, in 1536, became the wife of George Sabinus, one of the best poets of his time. His other daughter was married, in 1550, to Caspar Peucer, who was an able physician, and very much persecuted. Melancthop was a very affectionate father; and there is an anecdote preserved of him, which perfectly agrees with his character for humility. A Frenchman, it is said, found him one day, holding a book in one hand, and rocking a child with the other; and upon his expressing some surprise, Melancthon made such a pious discourse to him about the duty of a father, and the state of grace in which the children are with God, “that this stranger went away,” says Bayle, “much more edified than he came.” Melchior Adam relates a curious dialogue which passed between his son-in-law Sabinus, and cardinal Bembus, concerning Melancthon. When Sabinus went to see Italy, Melancthon wrote a letter to cardinal Bembus, to recommend him to his notice. The cardinal laid a great stress upon the recommendation; for he loved Melancthort for his abilities and learning, however he might think himself obliged to speak of his religion. He was very civil therefore to Sabinus, invited him to dine with him, and in the time of dinner asked him a great many questions, particularly these three “Wliat salary Melancthon had what number of hearers and what he thought concerning the resurrection and a future state” To the first question Sabinus replied, “that his salary was not above 30O florins a year. 1” Upon hearing this, the cardinal cried out, “Ungrateful Germany to value at so low a price so many labours of so great a man.” The answer to the second was, “that he had usually 1500 hearers.” “I cannot believe it,” says the cardinal: “I do not know an university in Europe, except that of Paris, in which one professor has so many scholars.” To the third, Sabinus replied, “that Melancthon’s works were a full and sufficient proof of his belief in those two articles.”— “I should think him a wiser man,” said the cardinal, “if he did not believe any thing about them.”

In 1596 he published a piece entitled “The just Procedures of those of the Reformed Religion;” in which he removes the imputation of the present troubles and dissentions from the protestants, and throws the blame on those who injuriously denied them that liberty, which their great services had deserved. In 1598 he published his treatise “upon the Eucharist;” which occasioned the conference at Fontainbleau in 1600, between Du Perron, then bishop of Evreux, afterwards cardinal, and M. du Plessis; and raised his reputation and credit among the protestants to so great a height, that he was called by man)* “the Protestant Pope.” In 1607 he published a work entitled “The Mystery of Iniquity, or the History of the Papacy;” which was written, as most of his other works were, first in French, and then translated into Latin. Here he shews by what gradual progress the popes have risen to that ecclesiastical tyranny, which was foretold by the apostles; and what opposition from time to time all nations have given them. This seems to have been a work of prodigious labour; yet it is said, that he was not above nine months in composing it. About this time, also, he published “An Exhortation to the Jews concerning the Messiah,” in which he applies a great deal of Hebrew learning very judiciously; and for this he was complimented by the elder Buxtorf. There are several other lesser pieces of his writing; but his capital work, and for which he has been most distinguished, is his book “Upon the Truth of the Christian Religion;” in which he employs the weapons of reason and learning with great force and skill against Atheists, Epicureans, Heathens, Jews, Mahometans, and other Infidels, as he tells us in his title. This book was dedicated to Henry IV. while he was king of Navarre only, in 1582; and, the year after, was translated by himself into Latin. “As a Frenchman,” says he, in his preface tp the reader, “I have endeavoured to serve my own country first; and, as a Christian, the universal kingdom of Christ next.” Baillet observes, with justness, that “the Protestants of France had great reason to be proud of having such a man as Mornay du Plessis of their party; a gentleman, who, besides the nobleness of his birth, was distinguished by many fine qualities both natural and acquired.”

This learned divine published, 1. “Harmonia Trigonometrica, or A short treatise on Trigonometry,” 1748, 8vo. 2. “The intent and propriety of the Scripture Miracles considered and explained,” 1755, 8vo. 3. “Observations on the Four Gospels, tending chiefly to ascertain the times of their publication, and to illustrate the form and manner of their composition,” 1764, 8vo. 4. “Short directions to young Students in Divinity, and Candidates for Holy Orders,” 1766, 8vo. 5. “An Enquiry into the present state of the Septuagint version of the Old Testament,” 1769, 8vo. 6. “Thevintent and propriety of the Scripture Miracles considered and explained, in a series of Sermons preached at Bow, in 1769, 1770, and 1771, at Boyle’s Lecture,” 1773, 2 vols. 8vo. 7. “Crjtica Saera, or a short introduction to Hebrew Criticism,” 177$, 8vo. This was criticised in a work entitled “Critica Sacra examined, or an attempt to shew that a new method may be found to reconcile the seemingly glaring variations in parallel passages of Scripture, and that such variations are no proofs of corruptions,” &c. 1775, 8vo. 8. “Supplement to Critica Sacra; in which the principles of that treatise are fully confirmed, and the objections of Mr. Raphael Baruh are clearly answered,” 1775, 8vo. 9. “Collatio Codicis Cottoniani Geneseos cum editione Romana a viro clarissimo Joanne Ernesto Grabe jam olim facta, nunc demum summa curaedita, 1778,” 8vo. This ancient and beautiful ms. was said to have been brought into England in the reign of Henry VIII. by two Greek bishops. Queen Elizabeth made a present of it to sir John Fortescue, from whom it descended to the Cotton Library. Walton says, that there were five volumes of this ms. containing the whole Pentateuch, but that the four last came into the hands of a Frenchman, who never returned them to the owner. This valuable ms. was nearly destroyed by the fire which so greatly damaged the Cotton Library in 1731. 10. “Critical Disquisitions; containing some remarks, 1. on Masius’s edition of the Book of Joshua, and, 2. on Origen’s celebrated Hexapla,” 1784, 8vo. 11. “A brief account, historical and critical, of the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament. To which is added, A Dissertation on the comparative excellency of the Hebrew and Samaritan Pentateuch,” &c. 1787, 8vo. 12. “The Modes of Quotation used by the Evangelical writers explained and vindicated,” 1789, 4to.

, one of the wits of Italy, the son of Jerome Pallavicino, was born at Placentia about 1615, or from that to 1620. Less from inclination, than from some family reasons, he entered the congregation of the regular canons of Latran, and took the habit, with the name of Mark Anthony, in their house at Milan. After commencing his studies here with much success, he went to Padua for further proficiency. He then settled at Venice, where he was chosen a member of the academy of the Incogniti. Here he became captivated by a courtezan, whoso charms proved irresistible; and, in order to have the lull enjoyment of them without restraint, he obtained leave from his general to make the tour of France, but in fact continued privately at Venice, while he had the art to impose upon his friends, by sending them frequently, in letters, feigned accounts of his travels through France. He afterwards went to Germany, about 1639, with duke Amalfi in the character of his chaplain. During this residence in Germany, which lasted about sixteen months, he addicted himself to every species of debauchery; and having a turn for satire, employed his pen in repeated attacks on the court of Rome in general, and on the Barbarini family in particular. The chief vehicle of his satire was a publication called “The Courier robbed of his mail,” and this as well as his other works contained so many just censures of the abuses of the court of Rome, that he might have been ranked among those honourable men who had contributed to enlighten his countrymen, had he not been as remarkable for his indecencies, which were so gross that many of his works were obliged to be published under concealed names. His personal attacks on the pope, and the Barbarini family, naturally roused their indignation; and after much search for him, one Charles Morfu, a Frenchman of a vile character, engaged to ensnare him, and having insinuated himself into his friendship, at length exhorted him to go with him to France. He flattered him with the extraordinary encouragement which was given to men of letters by cardinal Richelieu; and, to deceive him the more, even produced feigned letters from the cardinal, inviting our author to France, and expressing a desire he had to establish in Paris an academy for the Italian tongue, under the direction of Pallavicino. Pallavicino, young, thoughtless, and desperate, and now fascinated by the prospect of gain, left Venice much against the advice of his friends, and went first to Bergamo, where he spent a few days with some of his relations, who entertained his betrayer. They then set out for Geneva, to the great satisfaction of our author, who proposed to get some of his works printed there, which he had not been able to do in Italy. But Morfu, instead of conducting him to Paris, took the road to Avignon; where, crossing the bridge of Soraces, in the county of Venaissin (in the pope’s territories), they were seized by officers on pretence of carrying contraband goods, and confined. Morfu was soon discharged, and liberally rewarded; but Pallavicini, being carried to Avignon, was thrown into prison; and, after being kept there for some months, was brought to trial, and was beheaded in 1643 or 1644. Those who are desirous of farther information respecting this young man’s unfortunate history, may be amply gratified in the prolix: articles drawn up by Bayle, and particularly Marclmnd. His works were first published collectively at Venice, in 1655, 4 vols. 12mo. This edition, according to Marchand, contains only such of his works as had been permitted to beprinted in his life-time. Those which had been prohibited were afterwards printed in 2 vols. 12 mo, at Villafranca, a fictitious name for Geneva, 1660. Among these is a piece called “II divortio Celeste,” which some deny to be his. It is a very coarse satire on the abuses of the Romish church, and was translated and published in English in 1679, under the title of “Ciirist divorced from the church of Rome because of their lewdness,” Lond. 8vo.

, the assumed name of a very extraordinary person, was undoubtedly a Frenchman born; he had his education partly in a free-school, taught by two Franciscan monks, and afterwards in a college of Jesuits in an archiepiscopal city; the name of which, as also of his birth-place and of his parents, remain yet inviolable secrets. Upon leaving the college, he was recommended as a tutor to a young gentleman, but soon fell into a mean rambling kind of life, that led him into many disappointments and misfortunes. The first pretence he took up with was that of being a sufferer for religion and he procured a certificate that he was of Irish extraction, had left the country for the sake of the Roman Catholic religion, and was going on a pilgrimage to Rome. Not being in a condition to purchase a pilgrim’s garb, he had observed, in a chapel dedicated to a miraculous saint, that such a one had been set up, as a monument of gratitude to some wandering pilgrim and he contrived to take both staff and cloak away at noon-day. “Being thus accoutred,” says he, “and furnished with a pass, I began, at all proper places, to beg my way in a fluent Latin accosting only clergymen, or persons of figure, by whom I could be understood: and found them mostly so generous and credulous, that I might easily have saved money, and put myself into a much better dress, before I had gone through a score or two of miles. But so powerful was my vanity and extravagance, that as soon as I had got what I thought a sufficient viaticum, I begged no more; but viewed every thing worth seeing, and then retired to some inn, where I spent my money as freely as I had obtained it.”

, a Frenchman, famous for his travels, was born at Paris in 1605. His father, who was a native of Antwerp, settled at Paris, and traded very largely in geographical maps, so that the natural inclination which Tavernier had for travelling was greatly increased, by the conversations which daily passed in his father’s house, concerning foreign countries. He began to gratify his passion so early, that, at the age of two and twenty years, he had seen the finest countries of Europe, France, England, the Low Countries, Germany, Switzerland, Poland, Hungary, and Italy. During the space of forty years he travelled six times into Turkey, Persia, and the East Indies, and by all the different routes he could take. In the course of these peregrinations, he gained a great estate by trading in jewels; and, being ennobled by Louis XIV. purchased the barony of Aubonne, near the lake of Geneva, in 1668. He had collected a great number of observations, but he had not learned either to speak or write well in French; for which reason he was forced to employ others in drawing up his relations. M. Chappuseau, with whom he lodged at Geneva, lent him his pen for the two first volumes of his travels; and M. Chapelle for the third. They have frequently been printed, and contain several curious particulars; yet not without some fables, which were told him purely to impose upon his simplicity. He is charged also with stealing from others to fill up his own accounts: thus Dr. Hyde, having cited a very long passage from Tavernier, tells us that “he had taken it like a downright plagiary from a book printed at Lyons, 1671, in 8vo, and written by father Gabriel de Chinon, who had lived in Persia thirty years.”

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

, an artist, though better known as the biographer of his profession, was born at Arezzo, in 1512, and was taught the rudiments of drawing by his father, and the first principles of painting by William of Marseilles, a Frenchman, and a painter on glass; but being taken to Florence by cardinal da Cortona, he improved himself under Michael Angelo, Andrea del Sarto, and other eminent masters. By the cardinal he was introduced into the Medici family, but in 1527, when they were driven from Florence, he returned to his native city. Finding an epidemic disease prevailing there, he spent his time in the surrounding country, improving himself by painting subjects of devotion for the farmers. His father unfortunately died of the contagion, and left a young family unprovided for. Vasari, to contribute more effectually to their support, quitted the uncertain profession of a painter, and applied himself to the more lucrative trade of a goldsmith. In 1529, the civil war, which then existed at Florence, obliged the goldsmiths’ company to remove to Pisa: and there, receiving commissions to paint some pictures both in oil and in fresco, he was induced to resume his former profession, and afterwards through life met with encouragement, that left him neither motive nor desire to change. The dukes of Florence and other distinguished persons were his liberal patrons, and he was constantly employed in works both profitable and honourable to himself.

, a tailor, who, from an extraordinary love of study, became a professor of the Oriental languages, was born in the city of Norwich about 1684, where he was educated at a grammar-school till he was almost qualified for the university; but his friends, wanting fortune and interest to maintain him there, bound him apprentice to a tailor, with whom he served seven years, and afterwards worked seven years more as a journeyman. About the end of the last seven years, he was seized with a fever and ague, which continued with him two or three years, and at last reduced him so low as to disable him from working at his trade. In this situation he amused himself with some old books of controversial divinity, in which he found great stress laid on the Hebrew original of several texts of scripture; and, though he had almost lost the learning he had obtained at school, his strong desire of knowledge excited him to attempt to make himself master of that language. He was at first obliged to make use of an English Hebrew grammar and lexicon; but, by degrees, recovered the knowledge of the Latin tongue, which he had learned at school. On the recovery of his health, he divided his time between his business and his studies, xvhich last employed the greatest part of his nights. Thus, self-taught, and assisted only by his great genius, he, "by dint of continual application, added to the knowledge of the Hebrew that of all or most of the oriental Ianguages, but still laboured in obscurity, till at length he was accidentally discovered. The worthy Dr. Prideaux, dean of Norwich, being offered some Arabic manuscripts in parchment, by a bookseller of that city, thinking, perhaps, that the price demanded for them was too great, declined buying them; but, soon after, Mr. Wild hearing of them, purchased them; and the dean, on calling at the shop and inquiring for the manuscripts, was informed of their being sold. Chagrined at this disappointment, he asked of the bookseller the name and profession of the person who had bought them; and, being told he was a tailor, he bad him instantly to run and fetch them, if they were riot cut in pieces to make measures: but he was soon relieved from his fears by Mr. Wild’s appearance with the manuscripts, though, on the dean’s inquiring whether he would part with them, he answered in the negative. The dean then asked hastily what he did with them: he replied, that he read them. He was desired to read them, which he did. He was then bid to render a passage or two into English, which he readily performed, and with great exactness. Amazed at this, the dean, partly at his own expence, and partly by a subscription raised among persons whose inclinations led them to this kind of knowledge, sent him to Oxford; where, though he was never a member of the university, he was by the dean’s interest admitted into the Bodleian library, and employed for some, years in translating or making extracts out of Oriental manuscripts, and thus bad adieu to his needle. This appears to have been some time before 1718. At Oxford, he was known by the name of the Arabian tailor. He constantly attended the library all the hours it was open, and, when it was shut, employed most of his leisure-time in teaching the Oriental languages to young gentlemen, at the moderate price of half a guinea a lesson, except for the Arabic, for which he had a guinea, and his subscriptions for teaching amounted to no more than 20 or 30l. a year. Unhappily for him, the branch of learning in which he excelled was cultivated but by few; and the reverend Mr. Gagnier, a Frenchman, skilled in the Oriental tongues, was in possession of all the favours the university could Bestow in this way, being recommended by the heads of colleges to instruct young gentlemen, and employed by the professors of these languages to read public lectures in their absence.