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

, a learned English divine, was born Oct. 18, 1608, at Yeatenton in Devonshire. He was educated in classical learning at private schools, and, in 3626, sent to Exeter college in Oxford. He soon distinguished himself for uncommon parts and learning*; by means of which he grew highly in favour with Dr. John Prideaux, then rector of Exeter college, and king’s professor in divinity, who, accordingto the fashion of wit in those times, used to say of him, “Conanti nihil est difficile.” He took his degrees regularly; and, July 1633, was chosen fellow of his college, in which he became an eminent tutor. Upon the breaking out of the civil war, he judged it convenient to leave the university in 1642. He retired first to Lymington, a living of his uncle’s in Somersetshire; where, his uncle being fled, and he in orders, he officiated as long as he could continue there with safety. While he was at Lymington, he was constituted by the parliament one of the assembly of divines; bnt it is said that he never sat among them, or at least very seldom, since it is certain that he never took the covenant. He afterwards followed his uncle to London, and for some time assisted him in the church of St. Botolph Aldgate. He then became a domestic chaplain to lord Chandos, in whose family he lived at Harefield. He is said to have sought this situation, for the sake of keeping himself as clear from all engagements and difficulties as the nature and fickle condition of those times would permit. Upon the same motive he resigned his fellowship of Exeter college, Sept. 27, 1647; but, June 7, 1649, was unanimously chosen rector of it by the fellows, without any application of his own; and. Wood allows that under his care it flourished more than any other college.

, D. D. a dissenting divine, was born at Wimple, in Cambridgeshire, June 3, 1714, and educated in London under Dr. Ridgley, an eminent dissenting minister. He was ordained in 1738, and his first settlement was at Cambridge, where he had a considerable congregation for about sixteen years; but having written an essay on the importance of the ministerial character in the independent line, he was in 1755 placed at the head of the academy for preparing young men for the ministry, then situated at Mile End, but since removed to Hommertou. In 1759 he was chosen one of the preachers of the “Merchants’ lecture” at Pinner’s Hall, and in May 1760 assistant to Mr. Hall in the pastoral office in the meeting on the pavement near Moorfields, whom he succeeded in 1763, and where he continued to officiate till the time of his death, May 30, 1781, aged 67. Besides the essay above mentioned, he printed several sermons on public occasions, particularly funerals and ordinations.

, an eminent French philosopher and mathematician, was born at Ribemont in Pirardy, three leagues from Saint-Quintin and De la Fere, September 17, 1743, of a very ancient family. At the age of fifteen he was sent to study philosophy at the college of Navarre, under Giraud de Keroudon, who has since distinguished himself by several scientific works, and was an able teacher of mathematics. During the first year of his residence there, young Condorcet exhibited but little relish for the metaphysical questions relative to the nature of ideas, of sensations, and of memory, but in the course of the following year, mathematics and natural philosophy decided his future vocation; and although he had more than one hundred and twenty fellow-students, he acquired a greater portion of fame than any of them. At Easter he supported a public thesis, at which Clairaut, D'Alembert, and Fontaine, the first geometricians of France, assisted; and his conduct on this occasion obtained their approbation. After his course of philosophy was finished, he returned to his family, but still continued to cultjrate geometry; and his attachment to it carried him back to Paris in 1762, where he lived with his old professor, in order to have more frequent opportunities of indulging his ruling passion. He at the same time attended the chemical lectures of Macquer and Beaume, and soon distinguished himself among the geometricians.

, an eminent French architect, was born March 11, 1698, at Ivri sur Seine. He studied drawing under the celebrated Watteau, and having occasion afterwards to go into the office of M. Dulin, an architect, he made so great a progress in that art, as to be admitted a member of the academy at the age of twenty-eight. M. Contant had more business than any other architect of his time, if we may judge from the great number of buildings in which he was employed. Among these we may enumerate, the houses of M. Crozat de Tugny, and of M. Crozat de Thiers; the stables of Bissey, where he first tried those brick arches, which even to connoisseurs appear so bold and astonishing the church of Panthemont the royal palace the amphitheatre at St. Cloud; the church of Conde in Flanders La Gouvernance at Lisle the church de la Madelene, which he could not finish. He had a paralytic stroke on the right side, three years before his death; but during his illness, and unable to move his hand, he planned the church of St. Waast at Arras. This beautiful edifice has been as much admired as the church of St. Madelene. This celebrated artist died at Paris, October 1, 1777, aged 79. He left a folio volume of his system of architecture engraved.

, a learned divine and prelate of the church of England, was born at Pinhoe, near Exeter, on the 31st of January, 1691-2. His father was the rev. John Conybeare, vicar of Pinhoe; and his mother, Grace Wilcocks, was the daughter of a substantial gentleman farmer of that place. At a proper age, he was sent to the free-school of Exeter for grammatical education, where Hallet and Foster, afterwards two eminent dissenting divines, were his contemporaries. On the 23d of February, 1707-8, Mr. Conybeare was admitted a battler of Exeter college, Oxford, under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Kennel, afterwards Dr. Kennel, many years rector of Drew’s Teington, Pevon. Mr. Conybeare, on his coming to the university, was, according to the language of that place, chum with Mr. Richard Harding, who was elected fellow of Exeter college in 1709, and died rector of Marwood in Devonshire, in 1782, in the ninety-fifth year of his age. How early our young student obtained the esteem of the learned society with which he was connected, appears from his having been chosen on the 30th of June, 1710, and admitted on the 8th of July following, a probationary fellow of his college, upon sir William Petre’s foundation, in the room of Mr. Daniel Osborrie. When he was proposed as a candidate, it was only with the design of recommending him to future notice; but such was the sense entertained of his extraordinary merit, that he was made the object of immediate election. Mr. Harding used to say, that Mr. Conybeare had every way the advantage of him, excepting in seniority; and that he should have had no chance in a competition with him, if they had both been eligible at the same time. The patronage of Dr. Ilennel, Mr. Conybeare' s worthy tutor, concurred with his own desert, in bringing him forward thus early to academical advantages. On the 17th of July, 1713, he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts; and at the next election of college officers, upon the 30th of June, 1714, he was appointed praelector, or moderator, in philosophy. On the 19th of December following, he received deacon’s orders from the hanclaof Dr. William Talbot, bishop of Oxford; and on the 2rikof May, 1716, he was ordained priest by sir Jonathan Trelawny, bishop of Winchester. On the 16th of April, 1716, he proceeded to the degree of master of arts; soon after which he entered upon the curacy of Fetcham, in Surry, where he continued about a year. He was advised to this change of scene for the benefit of his health, which was always delicate, and had been greatly impaired by the intenseness of his application. Upon his return from Fetcham to Oxford, he became a tutor in his own college, and was much noticed in the university as a preacher. In the beginning of the year 1722, he published a sermon, which he had delivered before the university, on the 24th of December preceding, from Hebrews ii. 4, entitled “The nature, possibility, and certainty of Miracles, &c.” This discourse was so well received, that it went through four editions. Mr. Conybeare was hence encouraged to commit to the press a second sermon, from 1 Corinthians xiii. 12, which he had preached before the university, on the 21st of October, 1724, and the title of which was, “The Mysteries of the Christian Religion credible.” It is probable, that the reputation our author gained by these discourses, recommended him to the notice of the bishop of London (Dr. Gibson), who appointed him one of his majesty’s preachers at Whitehall, upon the first establishment of that institution. The esteem in which his abilities and character were held, procured him, also, the favour of the lord chancellor Macclesfield, who, in May 1724, presented him to the rectory of St. Clement’s in Oxford; a preferment of no great value, but which was convenient to iiim from his constant residence at that place, and from its being compatible with his fellowship. In 1725, he was chosen senior proctor of the university, which office he served in conjunction with Mr. Barnaby Smyth, fellow of Corpus-Christi college, and a scholar of eminence. In the same year, Mr. Conybeare was called upon to preach a visitation sermon before the bishop of Oxford, at whose request it was published, under the title of “The Case of Subscription to Articles of Religion considered,” and obtained no small degree of celebrity, being referred to in the controversy relating to subscription. The position of Mr. Conybeare is, that “every one who subscribes the articles of religion, does thereby engage, not only not to dispute or contradict them; but his subscription amounts to an approbation of, and an assent to, the truth of the doctrines therein contained, in the very sense in which the compilers are supposed to have understood them.” Mr. Conybeare’s next publication was an assize sermon, preached at St. Mary’s, Oxford, in 1727, from Ezra vii. 26, and entitled “The Penal sanctions of laws considered.” This discourse was dedicated by him to the honourable Charles Talbot, at that time solicitor-general, afterwards lord high chancellor of Great Britain, who had honoured our author with the care of his two eldest sons, Mr. Charles Talbot, celebrated by the poet Thomson, and the late earl Talbot, steward of his majesty’s household. On the llth of July, 1728, Mr. Conybeare was admitted to the degree of bachelor of divinity; and on the 24th of January following, he took his doctor’s degree. In the year 1729, he again appeared from the press, in a sermon that had been preached before the lord mayor and aldermen at St. Paul’s cathedral, and which was entitled ^The Expediency of a Divine Revelation represented.“It was accompanied with a dedication to bishop Talbot, father of the solicitor-general. From Dr. Conybeare’s introduction to this family, and the reputation he had acquired as a divine, it was expected that he would soon have been promoted to some dignity in the church. But the good bishop was taken off before he had a proper opportunity of carrying his benevolent intentions in our author’s favour into execution. In 1730, the headship of Exeter college becoming vacant, by the death of Dr. Hole, Dr. Conybeare was chosen to succeed him. His competitor, on this occasion, was the rev. Mr. Stephens, vicar of St. Andrew’s, Plymouth, a truly worthy clergyxpan, and the author of several ingenious discourses, Nevertheless, as he had retired early from the society, he could not be supposed to carry such weight with him as Dr. Conybeare, who had resided constantly in the college. In this year Dr. Tindal’s famous deistical book had appeared, entitled” Christianity as old as the Creation, or the Gospel a Republication of the Law of Nature.“This work excited the greatest attention, and drew forth the pens of some of the ablest divines of the kingdom, both in the church of PZngland, and among the protestant dissenters. Bishop Gibson, who had himself engaged in the controversy in his” Pastoral Letters,“encouraged Dr. Conybeare to undertake the task of giving a full and particular answer to Tindal’s production. Accordingly, he published in 1732, his” Defence of Revealed Religion,“Londoq, 8vo, by which he gained great credit to himself, and performed an eminent service to the cause of Christianity. In his dedication to the learned prelate now mentioned, he observes, that if he has not succeeded in his book according to his wishes, he may plead that it was drawn up amidst a variety of interruptions, and under a bad state of health.” This,“says he,” will in some sort excuse the author, though it may detract from the performance.“But Dr. Conybeare’s work did not stand in need of an apology. It is distinguished by the perspicuity of its method, and the strength of its reasoning; and is, indeed, one of the ablest vindications of revelation which England has produced. So well was the work received, that the third edition of it was published in 1733. Dr. Warburton justly styles it one of the best reasoned books in the world. It is likewise recommended by the temper and candour with which it is composed. Dr. Conybeare' s Defence will always maintain its rank, and perhaps be thought to sustain the first place among the four capital answers which Tindal received. The other three were, Foster’s” Usefulness, Truth, and Excellency of the Christian Revelation;“Leland’s” Answer to a late book, entitled Christianity as old as the Creation;“and Mr. Simon Browne’s” Defence of the Religion of Nature and the Christian Revelation."

, an eminent navigator, and justly thepride of his country in that character, was born at Marton in Cleveland, a village about four miles from Great Ayton, in the county of York, and was baptised there, as appears from the parish register, Nov. 3, 1728. His father, whose name was likewise James, was a day-labourer to Mr. Mewburn, a very respectable farmer, and lived in a small cottage, the walls chiefly of mud, as was generally the case at that time in the northern parts of the kingdom. In 1730, when our navigator was about two years old, his father removed with his family to Great Ayton, and was employed as a hind to the late Thomas Scottowe, esq. having the charge of a considerable farm in that neighbourhood known by the name of Airyholm.

, Mus.D. an eminent organist and contra-puntist, in the style of our best ecclesiastical composers, whom he had studied, from Tailis to Crofts, Weidon, and Green, a very correct harmonist and good organ player, but with limited powers of invention, was organist of Westminster abbey, and on the dealh of Kelway elected organist of St. Martin’s in the Fields. He long presided at the Crown and Anchor concert, which was originally established for the preservation of the best works of the most eminent masters of old times. It is a curious circumstance, that at this concert of ancient music Handel was regarded as an innovator, and Geminiani thought it an honour to be allowed to dedicate his last concertos to this society. Dr. Pepusch, who established and directed this concert to the time of his death, never allowed Handel any other merit than that of a good practical musician, The irreconcileable enmity between the lovers of old and new music became, from the time of this institution, as violent as the rage between the champions of ancient and modern learning. Dr, Cook, a steady votary of the old masters, died September 1793. He was the son of Benjamin Cook, who kept a music shop in New-street, Covent-garden, and who published by patent, among other things, six concertos for violins, tenor and bass, by Alexander Scarlatti; the chamber symphonies of Porpora, for three instruments; and the two books of lessons by Domenico Scarlatti, in long 4to, of which Rosingrave was the editor. After the decease of Cook, Johnson reprinted Scarlatti’s lessons, with the same title-page and the same errors as had escaped correction in the former edition.

, preceptor to Edward VI. was born at Giddy, or Gidding-hall, in Essex, about 1506, and descended from sir Thomas Cooke, mayor of London. He was educated probably at Cambridge, as Wood makes no mention of him. However, he was such an eminent master of the whole circle of arts, of such singular piety and goodness, of such uncommon prudence in the management of his own family, that those noble persons who had the charge of king Edward appointed him to instruct that prince in learning, and to form his manners. He lived in exile during the persecution of Mary, but after Elizabeth’s accession returned home, and spent the remainder of his days in peace and honour, at Giddy-hall, where he died in 1576. He was, if Lloyd may be credited, naturally of a reserved temper, and took more pleasure to breed up statesmen than to be one. “Contemplation was his soul, privacy his life, and discourse his element: business was his purgatory, and publicness his torment.” To which may be added what king Edward VI. used to say of his tutors, that Rodolph, the German, spake honestly, Sir John Cheke talked merrily, Dr. Cox solidly, and sir Anthony Cooke weighingly.

, the eldest of these daughters, we mentioned in the article of William Cecil, lord Burleigh, remarking that she was long the faithful wife of that great Statesman; that she was learned in the Greek tongue, and wrote a letter to the University of Cambridge in that language; that she was a patroness of literature; and that she was distinguished by her numerous charities. To this we may now add, that her preceptor was Mr. Lawrence, an eminent Grecian; and she fully answered the care and pains that were taken in her education: but her reading was not confined to the classic writers of Greece only, but extended, likewise, to the ancient Christian fathers, particularly Basil, Cyril, Chrysostom, and Gregory Nazianzen. A piece of Saint Chrysostom’s was translated by her, from the original, into the English language. It was on the 21st of December, 1546, and in the 20th year of her age, that she was married to sir William Cecil. Her death, as we have seen in her husband’s article, was on the 4th of April, 1589. She had an admirable understanding, and is said to have been a good politician. Nor is this at all surprising, considering her intellectual powers, and that, for more than forty and two years, she was the wife of such an illustrious statesman as Lord Burleigh. As an evidence of her political talents, Mr. Ballard has produced a letter written by her, on the 26th of October, 1573, to sir William Fitzwilliams, at that time lord deputy of Ireland. The letter contains some excellent advice; and shews, that she was not only a woman of great good sense, but well acquainted with the world. Five days after her decease, lord Burleigh wrote what he calls a meditation on the death of his lady, which contains several farther particulars concerning her, and is a striking testimony of his affection to her memory.

, earl of Shaftesbury, an eminent statesman of very dubious character, was son of sir John Cooper, of llockborn in the county of Southampton, bart. by Anne, daughter of sir Anthony Ashley of Winborne St. Giles in the county of Dorset, bart. where he was born July 22, 1621. Being a boy of uncommon parts, he was sent to Oxford at the age of fifteen, and admitted a gentleman commoner of Exeter college, under Dr. John Prideaux, the rector of it. He is said to have studied hard there for about two years; and then removed to Lincoln’s inn, where he applied himself with great vigour to the law, and especially that part of it which related to the constitution of the kingdom. He was elected for Tewksbury in Gloucestershire, in the parliament which met at Westminster, April 13, 1640, but was soon dissolved. He seems to have been well affected to the king’s service at the beginning of the civil war: for he repaired to the king at Oxford, offered his assistance, and projected a scheme, not for subduing or conquering his country, but for reducing such as had either deserted or mistaken their duty to his majesty’s obedience. He was afterwards invited to Oxford by a letter from his majesty; but, perceiving that he was not in confidence, that ins behaviour was disliked, and his person in danger, he retired into the parliament quarters, and soon after went up to London, where he was well received by that party “to which,” says Clarendon, “he gave himself up body and soul.” He accepted a commission from the parliament and, raising forces, took Wareham by storm, October 1644, and soon after reduced all the adjacent parts of Dorsetshire. This, and some other actions of the same nature, induced the above-mentioned historian to say that he “became an implacable enemy to the royal family.” The next year he was sheriff of Wiltshire, in 1651 he was of the committee of twenty, appointed to consider of ways and means for reforming the law. He was also one of the members of the convention that met after Cromwell had turned out the long parliament. He was again a member of parliament in 1654, and one of the principal persons who signed that famous protestation, charging the protector with tyranny and arbitrary government; and he always opposed the illegal measures of that usurper to the utmost. When the protector Richard was deposed, and the Rump came again into power, they nominated sir Anthony one of their council of state, and a commissioner for managing the army. He was at that very time engaged in a secret correspondence with the friends of Charles II. and greatiy instrumental in promoting his restoration; which brought him into peril of his life with the powers then in being. He was returned a member for Dorsetshire, in that which was called the healing parliament, which sat in April 1660; and a resolution being taken to restore the constitution, he was named one of the twelve members of the house of commons to carry their invitation to the king. It was in performing this service that he had the misfortune to be overturned in a carriage upon a Dutch road, by which he received a dangerous wound between the ribs, which ulcerated many years after, and was opened when he was chancellor.

, an eminent English painter, was born in London in 1609, and bred under the care and discipline of Mr. Hoskins, his uncle: but derived the most considerable advantages from his observations on the works of Van Dyck, insomuch that he was commonly styled the Van Dyck in miniature. His pencil was generally confined to ahead only; and indeed below that part he was not always so successful as could be wished. But for a face, and all the dependencies of it, namely the graceful and becoming air, the strength, relievo, and noble spirit, the softness and tender liveliness of flesh and blood, and the looseness and gentle management of the hair, his talent was so extraordinary, that, for the honour of our nation, it may without vanity be affirmed, he was at least equal to the most famous Italians; and that hardly any one of his predecessors has ever been able to shew so much perfection in so narrow a compass. The high prices of his works, and the great esteem in which they were held at Rome, Venice, and in France, were abundant proofs of their great worth, and extended the fame of this master throughout Europe. He so far exceeded his master and uncle Hoskins, that the latter became jealous of him; and finding that the court was better pleased with his nephew’s performances than with his, he took him into partnership with him, but his jealousy increasing, he dissolved it; leaving our artist to set up for himself, and to carry, as he did, most of the business of that time before him. He drew Charles II. and his queen, the duchess of Cleveland, the duke of York, and most of the court: but the two most famous pieces of his were those of Oliver Cromwell, and of one Swingfield. The French king offered Iso/, for the former, but was refused; and Cooper carrying the latter with him to France, it was much admired there, and introduced him into the favour of that court. *He likewise did several large limnings in an unusual size for the court of England; for which his widow received a pension during her life from the crown. This widow was sister to the mother of the celebrated Pope. Answerable to Cooper’s abilities in painting, was his skill in music; and he was reckoned one of the best lutenists, as well as the most excellent limner, of his time. He spent several years of his life abroad, was personally acquainted with the greatest men of France, Holland, and his own country, and by his works was universally known in all parts of Europe. He died at London May 5, 1612, aged 63, and was buried in Pancras church in the fields; where there is a fine marble monument set over him, with a Latin inscription.

, an eminent astronomer, was born at Thorn in Prussia, January 19, 1473. His father was a stranger, but from what part of Europe is unknown. He settled here as a merchant, and the archives of the city prove that he obtained the freedom of Thorn in 1462. It seems clear that he must have been in opulent circumstances, and of consideration, not only from the liberal education which he bestowed upon his son, but from the rank of his wife, the sister of Luca Watzelrode, bishop of Ermeland, a prelate descended from one of the most illustrious families of Polish Prussia. Nicholas was instructed in the Latin and Greek languages at home; and afterward sent to Cracow, where he studied philosophy, mathematics, and medicine: though his genius was naturally turned to mathematics, which he chiefly studied, and pursued through all its various branches. He set out for Italy at twenty-three years of age; stopping at Bologna, that he might converse with the celebrated astronomer of that place, Dominic Maria, whom he assisted for some time in making his observations. From hence he passed to Rome, where he was presently considered as not inferior to the famous Regiomontanus. Here he soon acquired so great a reputation, that he was chosen professor of mathematics, which he taught there for a long time with the greatest applause and here also he made some astronomical observations about the year 1500.

, an eminent philanthropist, was born about 1668, bred to the sea, and spent the first part of his life as master of a vessel trading to our colonies. While he resided in that part of the metropolis which is the common residence of sea-faring people, business often obliged him to come early into the city and return late; when he had frequent occasions of seeing young children exposed, through the indigence or cruelty of their parents. This excited his compassion so far, that he projected the Foundling Hospital; in which humane design he laboured seventeen years, and at last, by his sole application, obtained the royal charter for it. He was highly instrumental in promoting another good design, viz. the procuring a bounty upon naval stores imported from the colonies; and was eminently concerned in setting on foot the colonies of Georgia and Nova Scotia. His last charitable design, in which he lived to make some progress, but not to complete, was a scheme for uniting the Indians in North America more closely to the British interest, by an establishment for the education of Indian girls. Indeed he spent a great part of his life in serving the public, and with so total a disregard to his private interest, that towards the latter part of it he was himself supported by the voluntary subscriptions of public-spirited persons; at the head of whom was that truly amiable and benevolent prince Frederic, late prince of Wales. When Dr. Brocklesby applied to the good old man, to know whether his setting on foot a subscription for his benefit would not offend him, he received this noble answer: “I have not wasted the little wealth, of which I was formerly possessed, in self-indulgence or vain expences, and am not ashamed to confess that, in this my old age, I am poor.”

, in Latin Corderius, lived in the sixteenth century, and was an eminent teacher. He understood the Latin tongue critically, was a man of virtue, and performed his functions with the utmost diligence, mixing moral with literary instruction. He spent his long life in teaching children at Paris, Nevers, Bordeaux, Geneva, Neufchastel, Lausanne, and lastly again at Geneva, where he died September the 8th, 1564, at the age of eighty-five, having continued his labours until three or four days before his death. He studied divinity for some time at Paris in the college of Navarre, about the year 1528, after he had taught a form in the same college but he left off that study in order to apply himself to his former functions of a grammarian. He had taught at Nevers in 1534, 1535, and 1536. Calvin, who had been his scholar at Paris in the college de la Marche, dedicated his Commentary on the 1st Epistle to the Thessalonians to him. It is not exactly known of what province Mathurin Cordier was; some say he was born in Normandy; others pretend he was born in the earldom of Perche. He published several books for the use of schools, among which were, 1. “Epistres Chrestiennes,” Lyons, 1557, 16to. 2. “Sentences extraictes de la Saincte Escriture pour Tinstruction des Enfans,” Latin and French, 1551. 3. “Cantiques spirituels en nombre 26,” 1560. 4. “Le Miroir de la Jeunesse, pour la former a bonnes mceurs, et civilite de la vie,” Paris, 16to. 5. “L‘ Interpretation et construction en Francois des distiques Latins, qu’on attribue a Caton,” Lyons, 8vo, and since, perhaps, above an hundred times. His “Colloquia” have long been used in schools, and have been printed, says Bayle, a thousand times.

, sometimes called Laeti, an eminent historical painter, was born in 1490* or 1494. Being descended of poor parents, and educated in an obscure village, he enjoyed none of those advantages which contributed to form the other great painters of that illustrious age. He saw none of the statues of ancient Greece or Rome; nor any of the works of the established schools of Rome and Venice. But nature was his guide; and Corregio was one of her favourite pupils. To express the facility with which he painted, he used to say that he always had his thoughts ready at the end of his pencil.

, an eminent English antiquary, “whose name,” says Dr. Johnson, “must always be mentioned with honour, and whose memory cannot fail of exciting the warmest sentiments of gratitude, whilst the smallest regard for learning subsists among us,” was son of Thomas Cotton, esq. descended from a very ancient family, and born at Denton in Huntingdonshire, Jan. 22, 1570; admitted of Trinity college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. 1585; and went to London, where he soon made himself known, and was admitted into a society of antiquaries, who met at stated seasons for their own amusement. Here he indulged his taste in the prosecution of that study for which he afterwards became so famous; and in his 18th year began to collect ancient records, charters, and other Mss. In 1600 he accompanied Camden to Carlisle, who acknowledges himself not a little obliged to him for the assistance he received from him in carrying on and completing his “Britannia;” and the same year he wrote “A brief abstract of the question of Precedency between England and Spain.” This was occasioned by queen Elizabeth’s desiring the thoughts of the society of antiquaries upon that point, and is still extant in the Cotton library. Upon the accession of James I. he was created a knight; and during this reign was very much courted and esteemed by the great men of the nation, and consulted as an oracle by the privy counsellors and ministers of state, upon very difficult points relating to the constitution. In 1608 he was appointed one of the commissioners to inquire into the state of the navy, which had lain neglected ever since the death of queen Elizabeth; and drew up a memorial of their proceedings, to be presented to the king, which memorial is still in his library. In 1609 he wrote “A discourse of the lawfulness of Combats to be performed in the presence of the king, or the constable and marshal of England,” which was printed in 1651 and in 1672. He drew up also, the same year, “An answer to such motives as were offered by certain military men to prince Henry, to incite him to affect arms more than peace.” This was composed by order of that prince, and the original ms. remains in the Cotton library. New projects being contrived to repair the royal revenue, which had been prodigally squandered, none pleased the king so much as the creating a new. order of knights, called baronets; and sir Robert Cotton, who had been the principal suggester of this scheme, was in 1611 chosen to be one, being the thirty-sixth on the list. His principal residence was then at Great Connington, in Huntingdonshire; which he soon exchanged for Hatley St. George, in the county of Cambridge.

, an eminent French artist, and the earliest historical painter France produced, was born at Souci near Sens, in 1530, and studied the fine arts so strenuously in his youth, that he became profoundly learned, especially in the mathematics. Painting on glass being very much in vogue in those days, he applied himself more to that than to the drawing of pictures. Several fine performances of his are to be seen in the churches of the neighbourhood of Sens, and some in Paris; particularly in St. Gervase’s church, where, on the windows of the choir, he painted the martyrdom of St. Laurence, the history of the Samaritan woman, and that of the paralytic. There are several of his pictures in the city of Sens; as also some portraits. But the chief of his works, and that which is most esteemed, is his picture of the Last Judgment, in the sacristy of the Minims at Bois de Vincennes, which was graved by Peter de Tode, a Fleming, a good designer. This picture shews the fruitfulness of Cousin’s genius, by the numbers of the figures that enter into the composition; yet is somewhat wanting in elegance of design.

, an eminent English poet, was born in London, 1618. His father, who was a grocer, dying before his birth, he was left to the care of his mother, who, by the interest of friends, procured him to be admitted a king’s scholar in Westminster school. The occasion of his first inclination to poetry, was his casual meeting with Spenser’s Fairy Queen. “I believe,” says he, in his essay on himself, “I can tell the particular little chance that filled my head first with such chimes of verses as have never since left ringing there. For I remember, when I began to read, and to take some pleasure in it, there was wont to lie in my mother’s parlour—I know not by what accident, for she herself never in her life read any book but of devotion; but there was wont to lie—Spenser’s Works. This I happened to fall upon, and was infinitely delighted with the stones of the knights and giants, and monsters, and brave houses, which I found every-where, though my understanding had little to do with all this, and by degrees with the tinkling of the rhyme, and dance of the numbers; so that I think I had read him all over before I was twelve years old.”

, an ingenious and popular dramatic writer, the daughter of Mr. Philip Parkhouse, of Tiverton, in Devonshire, was born at that place in 1743. Her father was educated for holy orders, but a family loss depriving him of a certainty of provision in the church, he desisted from his first intention, and became a bookseller, as the nearest approach he could then prudently make to a life of some degree of literary enjoyment. He afterwards rose to be a member of the corporation of Tiverton, and was very highly respected as a man of talents and probity, and a good scholar. He was not very distantly related to the poet Gay, who recordshis visit to his relations in Devonshire in his “Journey to Exeter,” inscribed to the earl of Burlington. It was Mr. Parkhouse’s favourite aim to cultivate the promising talents of his daughter, and he lived to witness the reputation she acquired almost to the last period of her literary career. In her twenty -fifth year she was married to Mr. Cowley, a man of very considerable talents, who died in 1797, a captain in the East India company’s service. It was when he was with his regiment in India that she dedicated her comedy of “More Ways than One” to him, in the affectionate lines prefixed to it; and it was to this gentleman’s brother, an eminent merchant of London, now living, that “The Fate of Sparta” is dedicated with so much feeling.

, an eminent benefactor to the taste, elegance, and literature of his time, was the son of col. Mordaunt Cracherode, who sailed with lord Anson, and in 1753 was appointed lieut. governor of Fort St. Philip, in Minorca. His mother was Mary, the daughter of Thomas Morice, esq. paymaster of the British forces in Portugal in queen Anne’s time, and brother to William Morice, esq. who married bishop Atterbury’s daughter. The colonel died June 20, 1773, and his widow Dec. 27, 1784, at their house in Queen’s-square, Westminster, which was afterwards inhabited by their son, the subject of the present article. Mr. Cracherode was born in 1729, and educated at Westminster school, where his contemporary the late Mr. Cumberland says, he was “as grave, studious, and reserved as he was through life; but correct in morals and elegant in manners, not courting a promiscuous acquaintance, but pleasant to those who knew him, beloved by many, and esteemed by all.” He was admitted a scholar at Westminster in 1742, and in 1746 was elected to Christ-church, Oxford, where he took his degree of B. A. and M.A. at the usual periods: the latter, April 5, 1753. He entered into holy orders, and atone time held the curacy of Binsey, a donative, near Oxford, but accepted no preferment afterwards. At the same time, he maintained that simplicity and purity in his appearance, manners, and sentiments, which belong to the character he professed. The tenor of Mr. Cracherode’s life, after he came to reside in London, that of a man of literary taste and research, was even and uniform: his principal object was the collection of a library and museum, and while his thoughts were confined to it, his associations were necessarily with men of similar pursuits. He employed a considerable part of a large revenue in making collections of what was best and most curious in literature, and certain branches of the arts. His library soon became unrivalled in its kind; and his cabinet of prints, drawings, and medals, was considered as among the most select and valuable in a country that possesses so many of them. He was an exquisite judge of art, both ancient and modern, particularly of sculpture, painting, and music, and collected the choicest'of early printed books, drawings, coins, and gems. Many of hisarticles were unique for their beauty, their preservation, or the rarity of their occurrence: such, for instance, as his cameo of a lion on a sardonyx, and intaglio of the discobolos; his Tyndale’s New Testament on vellum, that formerly belonged to Anne Boleyn; his lord Finch, with wings on his head, by Marshal; his Olbiopolis, and his Dichalcos, the first and smallest coin, being the fourth part of an obolus. Of these, and every other curiosity in his possession, he was, at all times, most obligingly communicative. His books, which he used modestly to call a specimen collection, particularly books of the fifteenth century, form perhaps the most perfect series ever brought together by one man. His passion for collecting was strong in death, and while he was at the last extremity, his agents were buying prints for him. In his farewell visit to Payne’s shop he put an Edinburgh Terence in one pocket, and a large paper Cebes in another, and expressed an earnest desire to carry away “Triveti Annales,” and Henry Stephens’s “Pindar” in old binding, both beautiful copies, and, as he thought, finer than his own, but which Mr. Payne had destined for lord Spencer.

, an eminent writer among the nonconformists, was born in 1620, but where we do not find. He was educated at Emanuel college, Cambridge, of which he became a fellow, and was presented to the college living of North Cadbury in Somersetshire, worth 300l. a year. When he kept the bachelor of divinity’s act, at the public commencement in 1651, his performance was highly applauded. He was ejected for nonconformity in 1662, but his wants were soon supplied by the death of a relation, who left him a good estate at Wickham Brook in Suffolk, on which he resided for twenty-six years, occasionally preached, and kept an academy for teaching young nonconformists those branches of science usually taught at the universities. Dr. Calamy, who was one of his pupils, gives him a high character for learning and piety, and Granger remarks that he has never seen two different characters of Mr. Cradock. He was so good and inoffensive, that every body spoke well of him, when it was usual for men of all religions to speak ill of each other. Nothing was ever objected to him but his nonconformity. In the reign of Charles II. he drew up a vindication of himself and others who kept private academies, notwithstanding their having taken an oath to the contrary at the university; a copy of it may be seen in Calamy. In his 79th year he became pastor of a congregation at Bishop Stortford in Hertfordshire, where he died October 7, 1706, in his 86th year, and was buried at Wickham Brook. His works, which were recommended by bishop Reynolds and archbishop Tillotson, are still in high esteem with the orthodox dissenters. They consist of, 1. “Knowledge and Practice,” a system of divinity, folio. 2. “The Harmony of the Four Evangelists,” folio, revised by Dr. Tillotson, who preserved it from the flames in the fire of London. 3. “The Apostolical History, containing the Acts, &c. of the Apostles,” folio. 4. “A Catechism on the principles of the Christian Faith.” 5. “The Old Testament History methodized.” 6. “A plain and brief Exposition on the Revelation.” Most of these have been often reprinted.

Craig about this time married the daughter of Mr. Anderson, a considerable merchant in Glasgow. She lived with him sixteen years; and by her he had several children; two of whom, namely, William, an eminent lawyer at the Scottish bar, and John, a merchant in Glasgow, survived their father. But the excellent understanding and amiable dispositions of his wife, which rendered his married state happy, contributed, by their painful recollection, to embitter the sufferings of his declining age. She died in 1758 and though he afterwards formed a very happy marriage with the daughter of Gilbert Kennedy, esq. of Auchtifardel, he scarcely ever recovered the shock of his first separation. Several years before he died, his strength and health gradually declined; his spirits were overwhelmed with melancholy; he seemed to have lost the power of enjoying happiness-; no amusement could relieve his depressions; he lamented that he was become useless; and that he felt, not only his body, but the faculties of his soul impaired. His sufferings were heightened by many additional afflictions; particularly by the death of his son Alexander, a very agreeable young man, who had been bred a merchant, but who was strongly inclined to the study of polite literature: and soon after by the death of his second wife, whose affectionate assiduities had been invariably employed in endeavouring to solace and support his infirmities. In this state of feebleness and dejection, notwithstanding the unwearied attention of, his surviving sons, he continued to languish: and, at length, in 1784, in the seventy-fifth year of his age, he was released by an easy death. Great sensibility seems to have given the general and prevailing colour to his character. It rendered his piety devout, his benevolence tender, and his friendship affectionate. In the culture of his understanding it inclined him to those studies that please by their beautiful imagery, or touch the heart with agreeable feelings. He was therefore very early addicted to classical learning; and cherished those views of religion that represent both God and man in a favourable light. Such sentiments and propensities, though not altogether singular at the time that he commenced his studies, were, however, so rare among students of theology, that, speaking figuratively, we may call them singular. But singularity of disposition or opinion is usually disliked or opposed. The man of fortitude and strong nerves encounters the opposition; and either makes converts, or, by a bold authoritative tone, though he fails to conciliate affection, imposes respect. But the man of extreme sensibility, yielding to his native bias, is afraid of the struggle, declines the contest; and, excepting in the retirements of confidential friendship, not only appears, but really becomes shy and reserved. This disposition is nearly allied to modesty, and even humbleness of mind; yet the appearance of distance it so often assumes, is misrepresented by the undiscerning multitude; and, by a violent misapplication of terms, is misconstrued into pride. Effects almost of an opposite appearance are produced by the same principle, yet tend in their final issue to confirm this mistaken reserve. The man of sensibility, conscious of powers, exerts them; and, conscious of his own candour, expects suitable returns. He is disappointed. The observation of men is otherwise engaged: accidental circumstances, and other causes than such as arise from perversion of mind, carry away their attention from the merit that claims and deserves their notice. Of these the man of shy and retired sensibility is not aware; he becomes still more cautious in his intercourse with mankind; more shy, and more retired. But Craig, under the sacred shade, and in the retirements of intimate and confidential friendship, was unreserved, open, and even ardent. The spirit of real enjoyment, with which in his better days he engaged in familiar and literary conversation with his friends, displayed the most interesting view of his character. Conversations on the merits of elegant authors, both ancient and modern, but, above all, the liberal discussion of moral and religious topics, were the joy of his soul. On these occasions, his eyes, naturally animated, sparkled with additional lustre; his voice, naturally musical, became delightfully mellow; his features brightened, for his heart glowed. These were blessed intervals, anticipations, perhaps, of what he now enjoys. By degrees, this glowing mood became tinged with melancholy: at first it was amiable and interesting; but became at last distressful. The sensibility which gave him such moments of rapture, had not, perhaps, been duly managed; and contributed to or occasioned his sufferings. It had rendered him averse to indiscriminate society, and thus precluded him from many innocent means of relieving the lassitude, or alleviating the weight of declining age. It quickened his sense of misfortune, and rendered his affliction for the loss of friends too poignant. It overwhelmed him with too much sorrow, if at any time he apprehended that the affection of those in whose love he trusted had suffered change. His sense of deity was strong and lively. Even though the dejection and the despondency of affliction might at times have brought a gloomy cloud between him and the radiance of heaven, the cloud was transient: his religious opinions, founded not merely on feeling, but on conviction, were permanent: and even in the earlier periods of his life he often lamented that men of worth and integrity were not pious; and though they performed many charitable and disinterested actions from very laudable motives, yet that their conduct did not seem to be founded on any principles of religion. It might be friendship, it might be compassion, it might be beneficence; but it wanted those aids, those supports and comforts, which alone could arise from hope and trust in God. It is unnecessary to say of such a character, that he was just, charitable, and temperate. His virtues were those of a Christian, his failings were those incident to the weakness of human nature; and his sufferings were occasioned, or much aggravated by his feelings.

, an eminent mathematician, was born at Geneva, in 1704, and became a pupil of John Bernouilli, and a professor of mathematics at the age of nineteen. He was known all over Europe, and was of the academies of London, Berlin, Montpellier, Lyons, and Bologna. He died in 1752, worn out with study, at the baths of Languedoc, whither he had repaired for the recovery of his health. He made a most important and interesting collection of the works of James and John Bernouilli, which was published 1743, under his inspection, in 6 vols. 4to, and he had before bestowed no less pains on an edition of Christopher Wolf’s “Elementa universae matheseos,” Genev. 1732 1741, 5 vols. 4to. The only work he published of his own was an excellent “Introduction to the Theory of Curve lines,” 1750, 4to. L'Avocat says he was an universal genius, a living Encyclopedia, and a man of pious and exemplary conduct. His family appears to have been numerous and literary. There wap another Gabriel Cramer, probably his father, who was born at Geneva, 1641, rose to be senior of the faculty of medicine, died in 1724, and left a son, John Isaac, who took the degree of doctor in 1696, succeeded to his practice, and published an “Epitome of Anatomy,” and a “Dissertation on Diseases of the Liver,” left by his father. Also, “Thesaurus secretorum curiosorum, in quo curiosa, ad omnes corporis humani, turn internes turn externos, morbos curandos, &c. continentur,” 1709, 4to, He again was succeeded by his son, John Andrew Cramer, who rendered himself famed by his skill in mineralogy and chemistry; and published at Leyden, in 1739, 2 vols. 8vo, “Elementa Artis Docirnasticae.” It was reprinted in 1744, and again translated into French, in 1755. He wrote also a treatise on the management of forests and timber, and gave public lectures on Assaying, both in Holland and England. He died Dec. 6, 1777. Tn his person he was excessiyely slovenly, in his temper irritable, and when disputes occurred, not very delicate in his language.

minster, afterwards of Ely; George Paul’s; Dr. Thomas Robertson, archDay, bishop of Chichester; Dr. John deacon of Leicester, afterwards dean Taylor, dean, afterwards bishop of of Durham; Dr. Simon Heines, dean Lincoln; Dr. Richard Cox, chancellor of Exeter; and Dr. John Rednflayne, of Oxford, and dean of Christ-church master of Trinity-college, in Camand Westminster, afterwards bishop of bridge. Ely Dr. Willia'm May, dean of St. so much taken with his simplicity and learning, that he settled a pension on him, and retained him in his family. The misfortunes of the times drew Alasco also into England, where the archbishop became an early patron to him; and shewed on this occasion at least, the candour and liberality of his sentiments, by permitting a person who held many opinions very different from his own, to collect his brethren, and such as chose to communicate ttith him, into a church. At the head of this little assembly Alasco long presided, exhibiting an eminent example of piety and decency of manners. Among other learned foreigners, John Sleidan was under particular obligations to the archbishop. Sleidan was at that time engaged in writing the “History of the Reformation,” a work from which much was expected; and which the archbishop, by allowing him a pension, and opportunities of study, enabled him to prosecute with less difficulty than Jiad attended the beginning of his labours.

, an eminent artist, was born at Antwerp in 1585, and was a disciple of Raphael Coxis, the son of that Coxis who had studied under Raphael; but Crayer soon shewed such proofs of genius, that he far surpassed his master, and therefore quitted him. Afterwards he made judicious observations on the particular excellencies of the most renowned masters, and taking nature for his constant guide, formed for himself a manner that was extremely pleasing. The first work which established him in the favour of the court of Brussels, was a portrait of cardinal Ferdinand, brother to the king of Spain, a full length, as large as life, in which he succeeded so happily, that when it was viewed by the court at Madrid it laid the foundation of his fame and fortune. The king sent him a gold chain with a medal; and added, as a farther instance of his favour, a considerable pension. The testimony of Rubens was also highly in his favour, who went to Antwerp to visit Crayer, and after examining attentively a picture of his painting in the refectory of the abbey of Affleghem, he publicly declared that no painter could surpass Crayer. Nor was he less distinguished by Vandyck, who always expressed a friendship for him, and painted his portrait. It has been said that he had somewhat less fire in his compositions than Rubens; but that his design was frequently more correct. Yet, says Mr. Fuseli, let not this high strain of commendation seduce the reader to imagine that Crayer was a painter of the same rank with Rubens. If he was more equal, the reason lay in his inferiority. Rubens had the flights, the falls, and the neglects of genius. Crayer steered a middle course, and preserved dignity by caution. His composition generally consisted of a small number of figures; and he very judiciously avoi ded the encumbering his design with superfluous particulars, or loading his subject with any thing that seemed not to contribute to its elegance. He grouped his figures with skill, and his expressions have all the truth of nature. There is a remarkable variety in his draperies, and an equal degree of simplicity in their folds; and his colouring is admirable. Of all his contemporaries he was reckoned to approach nearest to Vandyck, not only in history, but in portrait. He principally painted religious subjects, and was continually at work; and although he lived to a great age, yet his temperance and regular habits preserved the full use of his faculties; and to the last month of his long life his pencil retained the same force and freedom which it possessed in his most vigorous days. He died in 1669, aged eighty-four. The subject of the picture which was so highly honoured by the approbation of Rubens, is the centurion alighting from his horse to prostrate himself at the feet of Christ. Yet sir Joshua Reynolds says of it, that though it cannot be said to be defective in drawing or colouring, it is far from being a striking picture. There is no union between his figures and the ground; the outline is every where seen, which takes away the softness and richness of effect; the men are insipid characters, and the women want beauty. The composition is something on the plan of the great picture of Rubens in the St. Augustins at Antwerp: that is, the subject is of the same kind, but there is a great difference indeed in their degree of merit.

Notwithstanding his repeated successes, he was unable in the most brilliant season of his reputation, to obtain a seat in the French academy, perhaps, for one reason, because he had written a severe satire against them. After, however, he had been long forgotten, he was elected into the academy, Sept. 27, 1731, and obtained favours from the court. He was also urged to finish the tragedy of “Cataline *,” which he had begun thirty years before, and which, from some passages he had read to his friends, was spoken of as a dramatic wonder. This piece had but a transient success, however, and even for this it was indebted to the interest inspired in the public by the advanced a;e of the author, and especially to the numerous and powerful cabal, whose object was to sacrifice his rival Voltaire f, who was now making an eminent figure in the drama. Crebillon himself was so little flattered by the

, a celebrated popish writer, descended from an ancient and honourable family, seated formerly in Nottinghamshire, but before his time it had removed into Yorkshire, in which county he was born, at Wakefield, in 1605. His father was Hugh Cressey, esq. barrister of Lincoln’s-inn; his mother’s name was Margery, the daughter of Dr. Thomas Doylie, an eminent physician in London. He was educated at a grammar-school at Wakefield, and about the age of fourteen, in Lent term 1619, he was removed to Oxford, where he studied with great vigour and diligence, and in the year 1626 was admitted fellow of Merton college, in that university. After taking the degrees of B. A. and M. A. he entered into holy orders, and became chaplain to Thomas lord Wentworth, then lord president of the north, with whom he lived some years. About 1638, he went over to Ireland with Lucius Carey, lord viscount Falkland, to whom he was likewise chaplain; and by him, when he was secretary of state, Cressey was, in 1642, promoted to a canonry in the collegiate church of Windsor, and to the dignity of dean of Laughlin, in the kingdom of Ireland, but through the disturbances of the times, he never attained the possession of either of these preferments. After the unfortunate death of his patron, who was killed in the battle of Newbury, he found himself destitute of subsistence, and therefore readily accepted a proposal that was made him, of travelling with Charles Bertie, esq. afterwards created earl of Falmouth, a great favourite of king Charles II. who was unhappily killed in a battle at sea in the first Dutch war after the restoration. Cressey quitted England in 1644, and making the tour of Italy with his pupil, moved by the declining state of the church of England, he began to listen to the persuasion of the Romish divines, and in 1646 made a public profession at Rome of his being reconciled to that church. He went from thence to Paris, where he thought fit to publish what he was pleased to style the motives of his conversion, which work of his, as might reasonably be expected, was highly applauded by the Romanists, and was long considered by them as a very extraordinary performance. It is entitled, “Exomologesis, or a faithfal narration of the occasions and motives of his conversion to Catholic Unity,” Paris, 1647, and 1653, 8vo. To the last edition is an appendix, “In which are cleared certain misconstructions of his Exomologesis, published by J. P. author of the preface to the lord Falkland’s discourse of Infallibility.” As soon as this was finished, he sent it over to his friend Dr. Henry Hammond, as to one whose sincerity he had experienced, and for whose judgment he had a high esteem. That learned person wrote him a kind letter of thanks for his book, but at the same time told him there was a vein of fallacy ran through the whole contexture of it; adding, “we are friends, and I do not propose to be your antagonist.” At the close of this epistle, he invited him into England, assuring him that he should be provided with a convenient place to dwell in, and a sufficient subsistence to live comfortably, without being molested by any about his religion and conscience. This offer, though our author did not accept, yet he returned, as became him, an answer full of respect and gratitude to the kind friend who had made it.

, an eminent and loyal citizen in the reigns of king Charles the First, and king Charles the Second, the son of a very eminent merchant of London, was born in 1598, and bred, according to the custom of those times, in a thorough knowledge of business, though heir to a great estate. He made a considerable addition to this by marriage; and being a man of an enterprizing genius, ever active and solicitous about new inventions and discoveries, was soon taken notice of at court, was knighted, and became one of the farmers of the king’s customs. When the trade to Guinea was under great difficulties and discouragements, he framed a project for retrieving it, which required a large capital, but his reputation was so great, that many rich merchants willingly engaged with him in the prosecution of the design; and to give a good example, as well as to shew that he meant to adhere to the work that he had once taken in hand, he caused the castle of Cormantyn upon the Gold Coast, to be erected at his own expence. By this judicious precaution, and by his wise and wary management afterwards, himself and his associates carried their trade so successfully, as to divide amongst them fifty thousand pounds a year. When the rebellion began, and the king was in want of money, sir Nicholas Crispe, and his partners in the farming of the customs, upon very short warning, and when their refusing it would have been esteemed a merit with the parliament, raised him one hundred thousand pounds at once. After the war broke out, and in the midst of all the distractions with which it was attended, he continued to carry on a trade to Holland, France, Spain, Italy, Norwaj', Moscovy, and Turkey, which produced to the king nearly one hundred thousand pounds a year, besides keeping most of the ports open and ships in them constantly ready for his service. All the correspondence and supplies of arms which were procured by the queen in Holland, and by the king’s agents in Denmark, were consigned to his care, and by his prudence and vigilance safely landed in the north, and put into the hands of those for whom they were intended. In the management of so many nice and difficult affairs, he was obliged to keep up a very extensive correspondence, for which he hardly ever made use of cypher, but penned his letters in such a peculiar style, as removed entirely his intentions from the apprehension of his enemies, and yet left them very intelligible unto those with whom he transacted. He had also great address in bringing any thing to bear that he had once contrived, to which it contributed not a little, that in matters of secrecy and danger he seldom trusted to any hands but his own, and made use of all kinds of disguises. Sometimes, when he was believed to be in one place, he was actually at another; letters of consequence he carried in the disguise of a porter; when he wanted intelligence he would be at the water side, with a basket of flounders upon his head, and often passed between London and Oxford in the dress of a butter-woman on horseback, between a pair of panniers. He was the principal author of a well-laid design for publishing the king’s commission of array at London, in which there was nothing dishonourable, so far as sir Nicholas Crispe was concerned, which, however, Clarendon inadvertently confounds with another design, superinduced by Mr. Waller, of surprizing the parliament, in bringing which to bear he proceeded very vigorously at first, till, finding that he had engaged in a matter too big for his management, he suddenly lost his spirits, and some of the chief men in the house of commons gaining intelligence that something was in agitation to their prejudice, May 31st, 1643, they presently seized Mr. Waller, and drew from him a complete discovery, which, from the account they published, plainly distinguished these two projects. By the discovery of this business, sir Nicholas Crispe found himself obliged to declare openly the course he meant to take; and having at his own expence raised a regiment of horse for the king’s service, he distinguished himself at the head of it as remarkably in his military, as he had ever done in his civil capacity. When the siege of Gloucester was resolved on, sir Nicholas Crispe was charged with his regiment of horse to escort the king’s train of artillery from Oxford, which important service he very gallantly performed; but in the month of September following, a very unlucky accident occurred, and though the circumstances attending it clearly justified his conduct to the world, yet the concern it gave him was such as he could not shake off so long as he lived. He happened to be quartered at Rouslidge, in Gloucestershire, where one sir James Ennyon, bart. of Northamptonshire, and some friends of his took up a great part of the house, though none of them had any commands in the army, which, however, sir Nicholas bore with the utmost patience, notwithstanding he was much incommoded by it. Some time after, certain horses belonging to those gentlemen were missing, and sir James Ennyon, though he had lost none himself, insinuating that some of sir Nicholas’s troopers must have taken them, insisted that he should immediately draw out his regiment, that search might be made for them. Sir Nicholas answered him with mildness, and offered him as full satisfaction as it was in his power to give, but excused himself from drawing out his regiment, as a thing improper and inconvenient at that juncture, for reasons which he assigned. Not content, however, sir James left him abruptly, and presently after sent him a challenge, accompanied with a message to this effect, that if he did not comply with it, he would pistol him against the wall. Upon this, sir Nicholas Crispe taking a friend of his with him, went to the place appointed, and finding sir James Ennyon and the person who brought him the challenge, sir Nicholas used his utmost endeavours to pacify him; but he being determined to receive no satisfaction, unless by the sword, they engaged, and sir James received a wound in the rim of the belly, of which he died in two days. Before this, however, he sent for sir Nicholas Crispe, and was sincerely reconciled to him. Upon the 2d of October following, sir Nicholas was brought to a court-martial for this unfortunate affair, and upon a full examination of every thing relating to it, was most honourably acquitted. He continued to serve with the same zeal and fidelity during 1644, and in the spring following; but when the treaty of Uxbridge commenced, the parliament thought fit to mark him, as they afterwards did in the Isle of Wight treaty, by insisting that he should be removed from his majesty’s presence; and a few months after, on April 16th, 1645, they ordered his large house in Breadstreet to be sold, which for many years belonged to his family. Neither was this stroke of their vengeance judged a sufficient punishment for his offences, since having resolved to grant the elector palatine a pension of eight thousand pounds a year, they directed that two thousand should be applied out of the king’s revenue, and the remainder made up out of the estates of lord Culpeper and sir Nicholas Crispe, Sir Nicholas finding himself no lon^ev in a capacity to render his majesty any service, thought it expedient to preserve himself; and in April 1646 embarked with lord Culpeper and colonel Monk for France, but as he had many rich relations who had interest with those in power, they interposed in his favour; and as sir Nicholas perceived that he could be of no service to the royal cause abroad, h did not look upon it as any deviation from his duty, to return and live quietly at home. Accordingly, having submitted to a composition, he came back to London, to retrieve his shattered fortunes, and very soon engaged again in business, with the same spirit and success as before. In this season of prosperity he was not unmindful of the wants of Charles II. but contributed cheerfully to his relief, when his affairs seemed to be in the most desperate condition. After the death of Oliver Cromwell, he was instrumental in reconciling many to their duty, and so well were his principles known, and so much his influence apprehended, that when it was proposed that the royalists in and about London should sign an instrument signifying their inclination to preserve the public tranquillity, he was called upon, and very readily subscribed it. He was also principally concerned in bringing the city of London, in her corporate capacity, to give the encouragement that was requisite to leave general Monk without any difficulties or suspicion as to the sincerity and unanimity of their inclinations. It was therefore very natural, after reading the king’s letter and declaration in common-council, May 3d, 1660, to think of sending some members of their own body to preSent their duty to his majesty; and having appointed nine aldermen and their recorder, they added sir Nicholas Crispe, with several other worthy persons, to the committee, that the king might receive the more satisfaction from their sentiments being delivered by several of those who had suffered deeply in his own and in his father’s cause. His majesty accordingly received these gentlemen very graciously, as a committee, and afterwards testified to them separately the sense he had of their past services, and upon his return, sir Nicholas Crispe and sir John Wolstenholme, were re-instated as farmers of the customs. Sir Nicholas was now in years, and somewhat infirm, spent a great part of his time at his noble country seat near Hammersmith, where he was in some measure the founder of the chapel, and having an opportunity of returning the tbligation he had received from some of his relations, he procured for them that indemnity from the king, gratis, for which he had so dearly paid during the rebellion. The last testimony he received of his royal master’s favour, was his being created a baronet, April 16th, 1665, which he did not long survive, dying February 26th, the next year, in the sixty-seventh year of his age, leaving a very large estate to his grandson, sir Nicholas Crispe. His corpse was interred with his ancestors, in the parish church of St. Mildred, in Bread-street, and his funeral sermon was preached by his reverend and learned kinsman Mr. Crispe, of Christ-church, Oxford. But his heart was sent to the chapel at Hammersmith, where there is a short and plain inscription upon a cenotaph erected to his memory; or rather upon that monument which himself erected in grateful commemoration of king Charles I. as the inscription placed there in sir Nicholas’s life-time tells us, under which, after his decease, was placed a small white marble urn, upon a black pedestal, containing his heart.

, an eminent prelate, and third son of the preceding, was born Oct. 18, 1603, at Great Milton near Thame, in Oxfordshire, in the house of sir William Green, his mother being then on a journey to London. In his thirteenth year he was sent to Oxford; but upon his father’s embracing the popish religion, and removing to Doway, he -was taken there, and after some time sent to the English college of Jesuits at St. Omer’s; where he was not only reconciled to the church of Rome, but persuaded also to enter into the order. Some time before his father’s death in 1622, he was sent back into England, to transact some family affairs; and becoming acquainted with Morton, bishop of Durham, he was by him brought back to the church of England. At the desire of Dr. Laud, he went a second time to Oxford, and was admitted a student of Christ-church; and the university generously allowing the time he had spent abroad to be included in his residence, he soon after took the degree of 13. D. entered into orders, and became minister of a church in Gloucestershire, and rector of Harding in Oxfordshire. August 1639 he was collated to a prebend in the church of Salisbury; and the year after took the degree of D. D. being then chaplain in ordinary to the king. The same year he was made a prebendary of Worcester, and the year after a canon of Windsor. In 1644 he was nominated dean of Hereford, where he married Mrs. Anne Brown, the daughter of his predecessor, though in constant peril of his then small fortune, and sometimes of his life. He suffered extremely for his loyalty to Charles I; but at length, in 1659, by the successive deaths of his two elder brothers, became possessed of the family-estate. At the restoration he was reinstated in his preferments; and Dec. 2, 1661, promoted to the see of Hereford, which he never would quit, though he was offered a better see more than once. He became afterward^, about 1667, dean of the royal chapel, which he held to 1669, and then resigned it; being weary of a court life, and finding but small effects from his pious endeavours. He then retired to his diocese, where he lived an example of that discipline he was strict in recommending to others; and was much beloved for his constant preaching, hospitable temper, and extensive charity. He was very intent upon reforming some things in the church, which he thought abuses, and not tending to edification. He was very scrupulous in his manner of admitting persons into orders, and more especially to the priesthood; and he refused to admit any prebendaries into his cathedral church, except such as lived within his diocese, that the duty of the church might not be neglected, and that the addition of a prebend might be a comfortable addition to a small living. In all these resolutions, it is said, he continued inflexible.

, earl of Essex, an eminent statesman in the sixteenth century, was the son of Walter Cromwell, a blacksmith, at Putney, near London, and in his latter days a brewer; after whose decease, his mother was married to a sheerman in London. What education he had, was In a private school: and all the learning he attained to, was (according to the standard of those times), only reading and writing, and a little Latin. When he grew up, having a very great inclination for travelling, he went into foreign countries, though at whose expence is not known; and by that means he had an opportunity of seeing the world, of gaining experience, and of learning several languages, which proved of great service to him afterwards. Coming to Antwerp, where was then a very considerable English factory, he was by them retained to be their clerk, or secretary. But that office being too great a confinement, he embraced an opportunity that offered in 1510, of taking a journey to Rome. Whilst he remained in Italy he served for some time as a soldier under the duke of Bourbon, and was at the sacking of Rome: and at Bologna he assisted John Russel, esq. afterwards earl of Bedford, in making his escape, when he had like to be betrayed into the hands of the French, being secretly in those parts about our king’s affairs. It is also much to his credit, as an early convert to the reformation, that, in his journey to and from Rome, he learned by heart Erasmus’s translation of the New Testament. After his return from his travels he was taken into the family and service of cardinal Wolsey, who is said to have first discovered him in France, and who made him his solicitor, and often employed him in business of great importance. Among other things, he had the chief hand in the foundation of the two colleges begun at Oxford and Ipswich by that magnificent prelate; and upon the cardinal’s disgrace in 1529, he used his utmost endeavours and interest to have him restored to the king’s favour: even when articles of high-treason against him were sent down to the house of commons, of which Cromwell was then a member, he defended his master with so much wit and eloquence, that no treason cauld be laid to his charge: which honest beginning procured Cromwell great reputation, and made his parts and abilities to be much taken notice of. After the cardinal’s household was dissolved, Cromwell was taken into the king’s service (upon the recommendation of sir Christopher Hales, afterwards master of the rolls, and sir John Russel, knt. above-mentioned) as the fittest person to manage the disputes the king then had with the pope; though some endeavoured to hinder his promotion, and to prejudice his majesty against him, on account of his defacing the small monasteries that were dissolved for endowing Wolsey’s colleges. But he discovering to the king some particulars that were very acceptable to him respecting the submission of the clergy to the pope, in derogation of his majesty’s authority, he took him into the highest degree of favour, and soon after he was sent to the convocation, then sitting, to acquaint the clergy, that they were all fallen into a praemunire on the above account, and the provinces of Canterbury and York were glad to compromise by a present to the king of above 100,000l. In 1531 he was knighted; made master of the king’s jewel-house, with a salary of 50l. per annum; and constituted a privy-counsellor. The next year he was made clerk of the Hanaper, an office of profit and repute in chancery; and, before the end of the same year, chancellor of the exchequer, and in 1534, principal secretary of state, and master of the rolls. About the same time he was chosen chancellor of the university of Cambridge; soon after which followed a general visitation of that university, when the several colleges delivered up their charters, and other instruments, to sir Thomas Cromwell. The year before, he assessed the fines laid upon those who having 40l. per annum estate, refused to take the order of knighthood. In 1535 he was appointed visitor-general of the monasteries throughout England, in order for their suppression; and in that office is accused of having acted with much violence, although in other cases promises and pensions were employed to obtain the compliance of the monks and nuns. But the mode, whatever it might be, gave satisfaction to the king and his courtiers, and Cromwell was, on July 2, 1536, constituted lord keeper of the privy seal, when he resigned his mastership of the rolls . On the 9th of the same month he was advanced to the dignity of a baron of this realm, by the title of lord Cromwell of Okeham in Rutlandshire; and, six days after, took his place in the house of lords. The pope’s supremacy being now abolished in England, lord Cromwell was made, on the 18th of July, vicar-general, and vicegerent, over all the spirituality, under the king, who was declared supreme head of the church. In that quality his lordship satin the convocation holden this year, above the archbishops, as the king’s representative. Being-invested with such extensive power, he employed it in discouraging popery, and promoting the reformation. For that purpose he caused certain articles to be enjoined by the king’s authority, differing in many essential points from the established system of the Roman-catholic religion; and in September, this same year, he published some injunctions to the clergy, in which they were ordered to preach up the king’s supremacy; not to lay out their rhetoric in extolling images, relics, miracle*, or pilgrimages, but rather to exhort their people to serve God, and make provision for their families: to put parents and other directors of youth in mind to teach their children the Lord’s-prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments in their mother-tongue, and to provide a Bible in Latin and English, to be laid in the churches for every one to read at their pleasure. He likewise encouraged the translation of the Bible into English; and, when finished, enjoined that one of the largest volume should be provided for every parish church, at the joint charge of the parson and parishioners. These alterations, with the dissolution of the monasteries, and (notwithstanding the immense riches gotten from thence) his demanding at the same time for the king subsidies both from the clergy and laity, occasioned very great murmurs against him, and indeed with some reason. All this, however, rather served to establish him in the king’s esteem, who was as prodigal of money as he was rapacious and in 1537 his majesty constituted him chief justice itinerant of all the forests beyond Trent and on the 26th of August, the same year, he was elected knight of the garter, and dean of the cathedral church of Weils. The year following he obtained a grant of the castle and lordship of Okeham in the county of Rutland; and was also made constable of Carisbrook-castle in the Isle of Wight. In September he published new injunctions, directed to all bishops and curates, in which he ordered that a Bible, in English, should be set up in some convenient place in every church, where the parishioners might most commodiously resort to read the same: that the clergy should, every Sunday and holiday, openly and plainly recite to their parishioners, twice or thrice together, one article of the Lord’s Prayer, or Creed, in English, that they might learn the same by heart: that they should make, or cause to be made, in their churches, one sermon every quarter of a year at least, in which they should purely and sincerely declare the very gospel of Christ, and exhort their hearers to the works of charity, mercy, and faith not to pilgrimages, images, &c. that they should forthwith take clown all images to which pilgrimages or offerings were wont to be made: that in all such benefices upon which they were not themselves resident, they should appoint able curates: that they, and every parson, vicar, or curate, should for every church keep one book of register, wherein they should write the day and year of every wedding, christening, and burying, within their parish; and therein set every person’s name that shall be so wedded, christened, or buried, &c. Having been thus highly instrumental in promoting the reformation, and in dissolving the monasteries, he was amply rewarded by the king in 1539, with many noble manors and large estates that had belonged to those dissolved houses. On the 17th of April, the same year, he was advanced to the dignity of earl of Essex; and soon after constituted lord high chamberlain of England. The same day he was created earl of Essex he procured Gregory his son to be made baron Cromwell of Okeham. On the 12th of March 1540, he was put in commission, with others, to sell the abbey-lands, at twenty years’ purchase: which was a thing he had advised the king to do, in order to stop the clamours of the people, to attach them to his interest, and to reconcile them to the dissolution of the monasteries. But as, like his old master Wolsey, he had risen rapidly, he was now doomed, like him, to exhibit as striking an example of the instability of human grandeur; and au unhappy precaution to secure (as he imagined) his greatness, proved his ruin. Observing that some of his most inveterate enemies, particularly Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, began to be more in favour at court than himself, he used his utmost endeavours to procure a marriage between king Henry and Anne of Cleves, expecting great support from a queen of his own making; and as her friends were Lutherans, he imagined it would bring down the popish party at court, and again recover the ground he and Cranmer had now lost. But this led immodiaieiy to his destruction; for the king, not liking the queen, began to hate Cromwell, the great promoter of the marriage, and soon found an opportunity to sacrifice him; nor was this difficult. Cromwell was odious to all the nobility by reason of his low binh: hated particularly by Gardiner, and the Roman catholics, for having been so busy in the dissolution of the abbies: the reformers themselves found he could not protect them from persecution; and the nation in general was highly incensed against him for his having lately obtained a subsidy of four shillings in the pound from the clergy, and one tenth and one fifteenth from the laity; notwithstanding the immense sums that had flowed into the treasury out of the monasteries. Henry, with his usual caprice, and without ever considering that Cromwell’s faults were his own, and committed, if we may use the expression, for his own gratification, caused him to be arrested at the council table, by the duke of Norfolk, on the 10th of June, when he least suspected it. Being committed to the Tower, he wrote a letter to the king, to vindicate himself from the guilt of treason; and another concerning his majesty’s marriage with Anne of Cleves; but we do not find that any notice was taken of these: yet, as his enemies knew if he were brought to the bar he would justify himself by producing the king’s orders and warrants for what he had done, they resolved to prosecute him by attainder; and the bill being brought into the house of lords the 17th of June, and read the first time, on the 19th was read the second and third times, and sent down to the commons. Here, however, it stuck ten days, and at last a new bill of attainder was sent up to the lords, framed in the house of commons: and they sent back at the same time the bill the lords had sent to them. The grounds of his condemnation were chieHy treason and heresy; the former very confusedly expressed. Like other falling favourites, he was deserted by most of his friends, except archbishop Cranmer, who wrote to the king in his behalf with great boldness and spirit. But the duke of Norfolk, and the rest of the popish party, prevailed; and, accordingly, in pursuance of his attainder, the lord Cromwell was brought to a scaffold erected on Tower-hill, where, after having made a speech, and prayed, he was beheaded, July 28, 1540. His death is solely to be attributed to the ingratitude and caprice of Henry, whom he had served with great faithfulness, courage, and resolution, in the most hazardous, difficult, and important undertakings. As for the lord Cromwell’s character, he is represented by popish historians as a crafty, cruel, ambitious, and covetous man, and a heretic; but their opponents, on better grounds, assert that he was a person of great wit, and excellent parts, joined to extraordinary diligence and industry; that his apprehension was quick and clear; his judgment methodical and solid; his memory strong and rational; his tongue fluent and pertinent; his presence stately and obliging; his heart large and noble; his temper patient and cautious; his correspondence well laid and constant; his conversation insinuating and close: none more dextrous in finding out the designs of men and courts; and none more reserved in keeping a secret. Though he was raised from the meanest condition to a high pitch of honour, he carried his greatness with wonderful temper; being noted in the exercise of his places of judicature, to have used much moderation, and in his greatest pomp to have taken notice of, and been thankful to mean persons of his old acquaintance. In his whole behaviour he was courteous and affable to all; a favourer in particular of the poor in their suits; and ready to relieve such as were in danger of being oppressed by powerful adversaries; and so very hospitable and bountiful, that about two hundred persons were served at the gate of his house in Throgmorton-strcet, London, twice every day, with bread, meat, and drink sufficient. He must be regarded as one of the chief instruments in the reformation; and though he could not prevent the promulgation, he stopped the execution, as far as he could, of the bloody act of the six articles. But when the king’s command pressed him close, he was not firm enough to refuse his concurrence to the condemnation and burning of John Lambert. In his domestic concerns he was very regular; calling upon his servants yearly, to give him an account of what they had got under him, and what they desired of him; warning them to improve their opportunities, because, he said, he was too great to stand long; providing for them as carefully, as for his own son, by his purse and credit, that they might live as handsomely when he was dead, as they did when he was alive. In a word, we are assured, that for piety towards God, fidelity to his king, prudence in the management of affairs, gratitude to his benefactors, dutifulness, charity, and benevolence, there was not any one then superior to him in England.

, an eminent physician and benefactor to the science, was born in London, and educated at Emanuel college, Cambridge, where he was admitted a pensioner May 13, 1647, and took the degree of B. A. in 1650. In 1651 he was elected a fellow, and commenced M. A. in 1654. In 1659, being now settled as a physician in London, he was chosen rhetoric professor in Gresham college, and at the first meeting of the royal society, Nov. 28, 1660, was (though absent) appointed their register, whose business was to make minutes of what passed at their meetings. In this office he remained till the grant of their charter, when Dr. Wilkins and Mr. Oldenburg were nominated joint secretaries. On Oct. 7, 162, he was created M. D. at Cambridge, by royal mandate; and in May 1663 was chosen one of the first fellows of the royal society, and frequently afterwards was one of the council. The same year he was admitted a candidate of the college of physicians. In 1665 he travelled into France, and became acquainted with several eminent and learned men of that nation. In August 1670, he was chosen by the company of surgeons their lecturer on anatomy, which he held to his death; but this year he resigned his Gresham professorship, which could be held only by a bachelor, and soon after married Mary, daughter of John Lorimer, of London, esq. In 1674 and 1675 he read his “Theory of Muscular Motion,” in the theatre of Surgeous’-hall, an abstract of which was afterwards published by Mr. Hooke in his “Philosophical Collections.” In July 1675, he was admitted a fellow of the college of physicians, after he had waited for a vacancy upwards of twelve years. He was much esteemed as a physician, and came into great practice in the latter part of his life, on which account the loss of him was much regretted by the citizens of London. He died of a fever Oct. 12, 1684, and was buried in St. Mildred’s church in the Poultry, in a vault belonging to the Lorimer family, with an inscription on black marble, on the pavement in the chancel. His funeral sermon was preached by Dr. John Scott, rector of St. Peter-le-Poor, Broad-street, in which he gives him. a very high character, not only for learning, but those more amiable attributes of a physician, tenderness and kindness to the poor. He tiled rich, and besides many benevolent legacies, left his medical books to the college of physicians, and his mathematical collection to Emanuel college. His printed works are in the Philosophical Transactions; and many of his Mss. are in the British Museum (see Ayscough’s Cat. under the articles Crone, Croon, and Croun). He printed separately only one tract, “De ratione motus musculorum,” Lond. 1664, 4to Amst. 1667, 12mo, without his name in either edition. He left to Emanuel and six other colleges at Cambridge, a sum of money to found algebra lectures, which took place in 1710. This legacy, although a contingent on the death of his wife, was liberally settled by her in her life-time. He also left a plan of an annual lecture on museular motion before the royal society, which was also carried into execution by Mrs. Croun. The first lecture was read in 1738, by Dr. Alexander Stuart, physician to the queen, and has been continued ever since. These lectures, for a considerable number of years, have been regularly published in the Philosophical Transactions, and have been drawn up by the most eminent physiologists, who were members of the society, and contain a great collection of very curious and important facts, respecting the muscles and their motions. The Crounian lecture is endowed with the protits of a house in Old Fish-street.

, an eminent philosopher and mathematician, descended from a noble family, was born at Lausanne, April 13, 1663. His father was Abraham de Crousaz, colonel of a regiment of fusileers: in his youth being of a very delicate habit, he was not too closely confined to his studies, yet left school at the age of thirteen with the reputation of a good scholar. His father, who intended him for the army, had him educated in the branches of knowledge necessary for that profession; but finding him averse to any pursuit unless that of literature, he allowed him to follow his inclination. In his fifteenth year he completed his course of philosophy, and distinguished himself by his theses, but being dissatisfied with the philosophy then taught, he had recourse to the writings of Des Cartes, which he studied with avidity, and applied at the same time to mathematics, but scholastic theology had no more charms for him than the philosophy he had been taught. In his sixteenth year, however, he entered as a student of divinity, attended the best professors, both at Geneva and Lausanne, and read the opinions of other eminent divines on the subjects most involved in controversy. In March 1682 he went to Lcyden, made himself acquainted with the theological disputes, and endeavoured to investigate how far they could be determined by the sacred scriptures. Leaving Holland, he entered France, became acquainted with those celebrated protestant divines Claude and Menard, at Charenton, and fathers Malebranche and le Vassor at Paris, who in vain endeavoured to bring him over to the Roman catholic church, which Vassor himself forsook some years after. On his return to his native country, in J 684, Crousaz married the daughter of John Lewis Loys, comptroller-general, and soon after was ordained, and made honorary professor. He officiated as pastor in the church of Lausanne for fourteen years. During this time, in 1691, he was appointed to dispute for the professorship of Hebrew at Berne, which he performed with great credit. In 1699 he was made professor of Greek and philosophy, and although also nominated to the chair of divinity in 1700, he preferred that of philosophy. In 1706 he was appointed rector of the college, which office he held three years, and was again appointed in 1722, but held it then only two years, as it interfered too much with his literary engagements. It was during this second rectorate, that contests arose at Lausanne respecting the obligation of signing the Consensus, a formulary of faith and doctrine maintained in the protestant churches of Swisserland, an account of which may be seen in “Memoires pour servir a l‘histoire des troubles arrives en Suisse a I’occasion du Consensus,” Amst. 1726; and more briefly in Mosheim’s History. In 1705, from his own theses, and those published at the expence of the lords of Berne, he compiled a system of logic, in twenty ­two theses, 4to, and in the same and two following years published an abridgment of this. In 1712 he published in French, a system of logic, entitled “Systeme de reflexions qui peuvent coutribuer a la netteté et a Petude de nos connoissances,” Amst. 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted there in 1720, 3 vols. 12mo; in 1725, in 4 vols. and in 1741, in 6 vols. In 1724 he published an abridgment of it in Latin, at Geneva, “Systema Logicæ, juxta principia ab autore in Gallico opere posita.” Some conversations on the subject of beauty in art, led him to an investigation of the subject, and produced in 1715, his “Traité du Beau, ou Ton montre en quoi consiste ce que l'on nomnie ainsi, par des examples tirés de la plupart des arts et des sciences,” reprinted at Amst. 2 vols. 12mo. In 1718, he published an ironical work, “Nouvelles maximes sur l'Education des enfans,” Amst. 8vo; but in 1722, his more serious and better known work on Education, Hague, 1722, 2 vols. 12mo. In 1718 he answered the deistical Collins’s discourse of Freethinking, in “Examen du traite de la Hberté de penser,” Amst. 8vo. In the same year he published his first mathematical work, “Geometric des lignes et des surfaces rectilignes et circulaires,” Arnst. 2 vols. 8vo.

, a divine and poet, was born either in Gloucestershire, or, according to Bale, in Northamptonshire, and entered a student of Magdalen college, Oxford, about the year 1534; and after taking the degree of B. A. was elected probationer fellow in 1542. In the beginning of the reign of Edward VI. he settled in London, took a house in Ely-rents, Holborn, and there exercised the trade of printer and bookseller, and being, we suppose, in orders, occasionally preached but being at the same time a zealous friend to the reformation, on the accession of queen Mary he went with the other exiles to Francfort, where he remained until the queen’s death. After his return to England he had several benefices bestowed on him, among which were the archdeaconry, and a prebend in Hereford, both which he resigned in 1567; a prebend of St. Paul’s, the rectory of St. Peter le Poor, and the vicarage of St. Giles’s Cripplegate; but he was deprived of the latter, the only promotion which he appears to have held at that time (1566), for a riot in the church, because the choristers wore surplices. In 1576, however, it appears that he was collated to the living of St. Lawrence Jewry, and probably was now more reconciled to the ceremonies and habits of the church. In 1578 he was presented with the freedom of the Stationers’ company, and soon after is found with the wardens, licensing copies. He died June 18, 1588, and was buried in his former church of St. Giles’s. He was, according to Tanner, a person of a happy genius, an eminent preacher, and a zealous advocate for reformation. His works, both in prose and verse, enumerated by Wood and Tanner, are now merely objects of curiosity. In 1550 he printed the first edition of “Pierce Plowman’s Vision,” with the view of helping forward the reformation by the revival of a book which exposed the absurdities of popery. He translated into popular rhyme, not only the Psalter, but the Litany, with hymns, all which he printed together in 1549. In the same year, and in the same measure, he published “The Voice of the Last Trumpet blown by the seventh angel,” a piece containing twelve several lessons for the instruction of all classes. He also attacked the abuses of his age in thirty-one “Epigrams,” 1550, and twice reprinted. In the same year he published a kind of metrical sermon on “Pleasure and Pain, Heaven and Hell Remember these four, and all shall be well.” In his “Dialogue between Lent and Liberty,” written to prove that Lent is a superstitious institution, Mr. Warton thinks that the personification of Lent is a bold and a perfectly new prosopopeia. Crowley likewise wrote and printed in 1588, a rhyming manual, “The School of Virtue and Book of Good Nature,” a translation, into metre, of many of the less exceptionable Latin hymns anciently used by the catholics. Among his prose works are “An Apology of those English preachers and writers which Cerberus, the three-headed dog of hell, chargeth with false doctrine under the name of Predestination,” 1566, 4to, and “Brief Discourse concerning those four usual notes whereby Christ’s Catholic Church is known,” 1581, 4 to, &c. In controversy he was usually warm, and not nice in his language; and in his poetry he consulted usefulness rather than taste.

, an eminent surgeon and anatomist, was born in 1745 at Edinburgh, where his father was examiner in the Excise-office, and had him christened William Cumberland in compliment to the hero of Culloden, but the latter name our anatomist seldom used. The earlier part of his life was spent in Scotland, and at the age of fourteen he went to the university of Edinburgh, with a view of studying divinity. Feeling, however, a strong propensity for anatomy and physic, he studied those sciences, with great assiduity, for eight years at the university of Glasgow. In 1771 he came to London, and by the recommendation of Dr. D. Pitcairn he became librarian to the late Dr. Hunter, who had applied to the professors of Glasgow for a young man of talents to succeed Mr. Hewson; and this connection was the principal means of raising Mr. Cruikshank to that conspicuous situation which he afterwards so well merited. During the life of Dr. Hunter, Mr. Cruikshank became successively his pupil, anatomical assistant, and partner in anatomy; and on the death of that celebrated man, Mr. Cruikshank and Dr. Baillie received an address from a large proportion of Dr. Hunter’s students, full of affection and esteem; which induced them to continue in Windmill-street the superintendance of that anatomical school which has produced so many excellent scholars. Mr. Cruikshank, besides supporting with great reputation his share in this undertaking, made himself known to the world by some excellent publications, which have insured to him a high character as a perfect anatomist, and a very acute and ingenious physiologist. In 1780 he published his principal work, the “Anatomy of the Absorbent Vessels in the Human Body,” in which he not only demonstrated, in the clearest manner, the structure and situation of these vessels, but collected, under one point of view, and enriched with many valuable observations, all that was known concerning this important system in the human body. Besides this work, the merit of which has been fully acknowledged by translations into foreign languages, he wrote a paper, which was presented to the royal society several years ago, entitled, “Experiments on the Nerves of Living Animals,” in which is shewn the important fact of the regeneration of nerves, after portions of them have been cut out; illustrated by actual experiments on animals. This paper was read before the society, but not then printed, owing, as was said, to the interference of the late sir John Pringle, who conceived that it controverted some of the opinions of Haller, his intimate friend. It appeared, however, in the Society’s Transactions for 1794. In 1779 he made several experiments on the subject of “Insensible Perspiration,” which were added to the first editions of his work on the “Absorbent Vessels;” and were collected and published in a separate pamphlet in 1795. In 1797, the year in which he was elected F. R. S. he published an account of appearances in the ovaria of rabbits, in different stages of pregnancy; but his fame rests upon, and is best supported by, his “Anatomy of the Absorbents,” which continues to be considered as the most correct and valuable work on the subject now extant.

, professor of eloquence at Wittemberg, and an eminent philologer, was born at Wolbech, where his father was a clergyman, in 1715. He was first educated at Hall, whence he removed to Leipsic, and studied polite literature under Mascovius. His principal attachment was to the classics, which he read with the eye of a critic and antiquary. While at Leipsic, he contributed some of his first remarks on classical history and antiquities to the “Acta Eruditorum.” In 1738 he left Leipsic for Dresden, where he became acquainted with Juncker, and by his persuasion went to St. Petersburg, and became a member of the academy of history founded by Peter the Great, and afterwards succeeded Beyer in the same academy. His situation here was for some time agreeable, and his fame spread; but the stipend affixed to his place in the academy being irregularly paid, and Crusius being little attentive to pecuniary matters, his studies became interrupted, and his mind harassed, and his object now was to procure some place in Saxony where he could pursue his studies in comfort. For this purpose he consulted Gesner, who promised him every assistance; and in 1751, on the death of Berger, he was elected professor of eloquence at Wittemberg. Here for some time he fulfilled the utmost hopes of the friends by whose interest he had been elected; but having while at St. Petersburgh contracted habits too social for a man of learning, he now indulged them to such a degree as to obstruct his usefulness, expose himself to ridicule, and lessen his authority. He died Feb. 1767, according to Klotz his biographer, regretting his past imprudence, and with pious resignation. The failings of this accurate critic are much to be lamented, as but for them be would have probably attained the highest class in philology. His writings are: 1. “Commentarius de originibus pecunise a pecore ante nummum signatum: accedit ejusdem oratio habita in conventu Academico, cum auspicaret munus Professoris,” Petrop. 1748, 8vo. 2. “Probabilia critica, in quibus veteres Graeci et Latini scriptores emendantur & declarantur,” Leipsic, 1753, 8vo. This collection of criticisms and emendations on the classics, chiefly contributed to our author’s fame. 3. “Opuscula ad historiam et humanitatis literas spectantia,” Altenburgh, 1767, with a biographical preface by Klotz, to which we are indebted for this sketch of the life of Crusius. Besides these, Crusius contributed various dissertations to the German journals, a list of which may be seen in Harles.

, a learned English divine and philosopher, was son of Dr. Ralph Cudworth, and born at Alley, in Somersetshire, of which place his father was rector. His mother was of the family of Machell, and had been nurse to prince Henry, eldest son of James I. His father dying when he was only seven yeaVs of age, and his mother marrying again, his education was superintended by his father-in-law, Dr. Stoughton, who was very attentive to the promising genius of his scholar. In 1630, he was admitted pensioner of Emanuel college, Cambridge; of which, after taking the degrees of B. A. and M. A. he was chosen fellow, and became an eminent tutor. Among his pupils, who were numerous, was Mr. William Temple, afterwards the celebrated baronet, statesman, and writer. About 1641 he was presented to the rectory of North Cadbury, in Somersetshire. In 1642 he published “A discourse concerning the true notion of the Lord’s Supper,” printed at London, in 4to, with only the initial letters of his name. In this he contends that the Lord’s supper is not a sacrifice, but a feast upon a sacrifice; and endeavours to demonstrate, that “the Lord’s supper in the Christian church, in reference to the true sacrifice of Christ, is a parallel to the feasts upon sacrifices, both in the Jewish religion and heathenish superstition.” Bochart, Spencer, Selden, and other eminent writers, quote this discourse with great commendations, but his opinions have been controverted by the majority of divines. The same year likewise appeared his treatise entitled “The Union of Christ and the Church, in a shadow, by R. C.” printed at London, in 4to.

, a very learned divine, and bishop of Peterborough, the son of an honest citizen of London, who by his industry acquired a competent, though not a great fortune, was born in the parish of St. Anne, near Aldersgate, July 15th, 1632. He was educated at St. Paul’s school, under the care of Mr. John Langley, and was moved from thence to Magdalen-college, in Cambridge, probably in 1649, where he was contemporary with some very worthy and learned persons; such as Dr. Hezekiah Burton, his intimate friend and acquaintance, a very learned and pious divine; Dr. Hollings, an eminent physician at Shrewsbury; sir Samuel Moreland, admired for his skill in the mathematics; the celebrated Mr. Pepys, secretary to the admiralty; and the lord keeper Bridgeman, to whom himself, and his friend Dr. Burton, were chaplains at the same time. He was very remarkable, while fellow of his college, for his diligent application to his studies, as well as for the unaffected piety and unblemished probity of his life. He took his degree of B. A. in 1653, and in 1656 he became M. A. at which time he had thoughts of applying himself to physic, which he actually studied for some time. He was incorporated M. A. in the university of Oxford, July 14th, 1657, and went out B. D. at a public commencement at his own university, A. D. 1663, with universal applause. His first preferment was the rectory of Brampton, in the deanery of Haddon, in the archdeaconry and county of Northampton, which was given him by sir John Norwich, a gentleman who descended of a most ancient and noble family, and was advanced to the dignity of a baronet by king Charles the First. Mr. Cumberland was admitted December 3d, 1658, upon the demise of the reverend Mr. John Ward; and after the restoration, having never had the least scruple to the authority of the church, he had a legal institution, and read the Thirty-nine Articles, as directed by law, November 24th, 1661, and was the same year appointed one of the twelve preachers in the university of Cambridge. This, however, was a temporary avocation only, owing to the high character he had raised by the masterly manner in which he had performed all academical exercises, and from which he quickly returned to the duties of his parochial charge. In this rural retirement he minded little else than the duties of his function, and his studies. His relaxations from these were very few, besides his journies to Cambridge, which he made frequently, to preserve a correspondence with his learned acquaintance in that place. Here he might probably have remained during the course of his whole life, if his intimate friend and kind benefactor, sir Orlando Bridgeman, upon his receiving the seals in 1667, had not sent for him up to London, made him his chaplain, and soon after bestowed upon him the living of Alhallows, in Stamford. He discharged the functions of his ministry in that great town with indefatigable diligence; for, besides the duties incumbent upon him by his parochial charge, he accepted of the weekly lecture, and then preached three times every week in the same church, and at the same time cultivated his philosophical, mathematical, and philological studies. He gave a noble proof of this, and one which equally demonstrated the soundness of his morals and the solidity of his parts, in publishing his work “De Legibus Naturae Disquisitio philosophica,” Lond. 1672, 4to, written while he was chaplain to sir Orlando Bridgeman, to whom it was dedicated, and there is prefixed to it a short preface to the reader, by the author’s friend and fellow chaplain to the lord-keeper, Dr. Hezekiah Burton. Dr. Cumberland being at a distance from the press when this book was published, it came into the world very incorrectly printed, and in subsequent editions these faults were multiplied in a very surprizing manner. We may hence form an idea of the excellency of a work that could, notwithstanding, support its author’s reputation both at home and abroad, and be constantly esteemed one of the best performances that ever appeared, and that too upon one of the nicest and most important subjects. Mr. Payne says very justly, that it was one of the first pieces written in a demonstrative way on a moral subject, and at the same time the most perfect. It is indeed on all hands admitted, that Hobbes was never so closely handled, or his notions so thoroughly sifted, as by Dr. Cumberland. He has, however, taken a new road, very different from Grotius, Puffendorff, and other writers, more difficult, and less entertaining indeed, but at the same time much more convincing. It was desired that a piece of such general utility should be made better known by being put into an easier method, and translated into the English language. This the author would not oppose, though he did not undertake it; being very sensible that the obscurity complained of by some, was really in the subject itself, and would be found so by those who meddled with it. The project, however, was pursued by James Tyrrel, esq. grandson to the famous archbishop Usher, who published his performance under the following title: “A brief Disquisition of the Law of Nature, according to the principles and method laid down in the reverend Dr. Cumberland’s (now lord bishop of Peterburgh’s) Latin treatise on that subject, &c.” London, 1692, 8vo. Mr. Payne had also an intention to have translated it, but was anticipated by the rev. John Maxwell, in a translation published at London, 1727, 4to; and in 1750 appeared a third translation by the rev. John Towers, D. D. prebendary of St. Patrick’s, Dublin, 4to, Dublin, with large explanatory notes, &c. In 1744, Barbeyrac published a French translation.

, born Sept. 30, 1714, was the son of Mr. James Cuming, an eminent merchant in Edinburgh. Alter a suitable education in the high-school of that city, and under the particular tuition of Mr. Alexander Muir, formerly professor of philosophy at Aberdeen, he applied himself to the study of physic four years in the university of Edinburgh, and became connected with some of the most eminent students in that science. In 1735 he spent nine months at Paris, improving himself in anatomy and the French language: and he passed some time at Leyden the following year; but returned immediately before the death of his father. In 1738 he quitted Edinburgh for London: and while his friends were meditating a settlement for him at Lynne in the room of the late sir William Browne, his friend Dr, Fothergill found out a more promising situation at Dorchester; where he remained to the last, notwithstanding the most pressing invitations from Dr. Fothergill to succeed Dr. Russel in London. In the space of a few years after his establishment at Dorchester, he came to be employed in many, and in process of time, with an exception of three or four at most, in all the families of distinction within the county, and frequently in the adjacent ones. At length his chaste manners, his learning, and his probity, as they were more generally known, rendered him not only the physician, but the confidential friend of some of the best families into which he was introduced. His warm and friendly attention to the interests of the late Mr. Hutchins, author of the History of Dorset, in advancing the publication of that well written and well arranged work, cannot better be expressed than in the grateful language of its author: “One of the gentlemen to whom my acknowledgments are eminently due, permitted part of that time which is so beneficially employed to far better purposes, and is so precious to a gentleman of his extensive practice, to be diverted to the work in hand; the publication of which he patronised and promoted with great zeal and assiduity: nor did his success fall short of his zeal. Without his friendly assistance my papers might yet have remained undelivered to the press; or, if they had been committed to the public, would have wanted several advantages and embellishments with which they now appear.” The doctor bequeathed his interleaved copy of this work to Mr.Gough, his friend and coadjutor in its publication. In 1752 he received a diploma from the university of Edinburgh; and was soon after elected a fellow of the royal college of physicians there, of which he died senior fellow. He was elected in 1769 fellow of the society of antiquaries of London; and in 1781 of that of Scotland. The tenderness of his eyes was, through life, the greatest misfortune he had to struggle with; and, considering the many obstacles which the complaints in those organs have occasioned in the pursuit of knowledge, it is wonderful how he attained the degree of erudition which he was well known to possess. In his retreat from the more busy pursuits of this world, the surviving companions of his youth continued the friends and correspondents of his advanced years; and he enjoyed to the last the singular satisfaction of being visited by the most respectable persons in the county for probity, rank, and fortune. We cannot but regret that the doctor, who lias been the means of so many valuable performances being laid before the public, and some of them improved by his pen, had not himself stood forth, to give that information for which he was so well qualified, both in point of classical learning and elegant composition. He died of a dropsy, in the 7 kh year of his age, March 25, 1788.

A question has, no doubt, been anticipated by the reader of these memorials of Mr. Cunningham, whether he was not the celebrated critic on Horace, and the author of the posthumous criticisms in an edition of Virgil published by Hamilton and Balfour of Edinburgh in 1742. On this question, which is, no doubt, not a little interesting to philologists, but not perhaps so interesting as it would have been 50 or 60 years ago, his editor Dr. Thomson has exhausted not a little reading, inquiry, and probable conjecture, and bestows perhaps more consideration on it than the importance of the question deserves. It must be owned, at the same time, that the circumstances tending to prove the identity of the critic and the historian, and those tending to prove their diversity, are so many, and the evidence for and against each so nicely balanced, that it becomes a question of infinite curiosity on this account, and of importance too as illustrating the uncertainty of both direct and circumstantial evidence. The historian Alexander Cunningham was born in Scotland in the time of Cromwell’s usurpation; was educated in Holland, where he was intimately acquainted with many of the Scotch and English refugees at the Hague, and particularly with the earls of Argyle and Sunderland: he enjoyed, in an eminent degree, the favour and familiarity of the great: he travelled with the duke of Argyle: he was distinguished by his skill in the game of chess: he was in politics a whig; and he lived to extreme old age. Now there is very strong evidence that all these circumstances belong to the life, and point to Alexander Cunningham, the editor and commentator of Horace. It would seem strange indeed, if two Alexander Cunninghams, countrymen, contemporaries, so distinguished for erudition and the familiarity and favour of men of rank and power, and the same men too, should have flourished at the same sera, in modes of life, in places of residence, in peculiarities of character, and other circumstances so nearly parallel. And yet, notwithstanding these accumulated coincidences, there are circumstances too of diversity and opposition that seem incompatible with their identity; and therefore Dr. Thomson, after all his inquiries cdncerning the identity or the diversity of the historian and the critic, on that subject remains sceptical; and from those curious points of coincidence and opposition draws the following pertinent inference: “If the writings of our author have increased the stores of history, the incidents of his life, by shewing the uncertainty of oral tradition, have illustrated its importance.”

, M. D. an eminent physician of Liverpool, was born at Kirkpatrick-Flemming, in Dumfriesshire, on May 31st, 1756, where his father was the established minister, but afterwards removed to that of Middlebie. He received the rudiments of learning at the parish school of his native place, whence he was removed to the grammar-school of Dumfries. His original destination was for a commercial life, and he passed some years of his youth in Virginia, in a mercantile station. Disliking this profession, and unwilling to be a witness of the impending troubles in the American colonies, he quitted that country in 1776, and in the following year commenced a course of medical study at the university of Edinburgh, which occupied him almost without interruption for three years. A prospect of an appointment in the medical staff of the army, which would not admit of the usual delay of an Edinburgh graduation, induced him to take the degree of doctor of physic at Glasgow. He arrived, however, in London, too late for the expected place; but still determining to go abroad, he had taken his passage in a ship for Jamaica, when a severe indisposition prevented his sailing, and entirely changed his lot in life. He renounced his first intention; and, after some consideration respecting an eligible settlement, he fixed upon the commercial and rapidly-increasing town of Liverpool, which became his residence from 1781, and where he soon rose into general esteem. Indeed, it was not possible, even upon a casual acquaintance, for a judge of mankind to fail of being struck by his manly urbanity of behaviour, by the elegance and variety of his conversation, by the solid sense and sagacity of his remarks, and by the tokens of a feeling heart, which graced and dignified the qualities of his understanding. No man was ever more highly regarded by his friends; no physician ever inspired more confidence and attachment in his patients.

His first appearance from the press was on occasion of the lamented death of his intimate friend Dr. Bell, a young physician of great hopes, settled at Manchester. His elegant and interesting tribute to the memory of this person was published in 1785, in the first volume of the Transactions of the Manchester Philosophical and Literary Society, of which they were both members. He was elected a member of the London Medical Society in 1790, and communicated to it a paper “On Tetanus and Convulsive Disorders,” published in the third volume of its memoirs. In 1792 he became a fellow of the Royal Society. A very curious and instructive “Account of the remarkable effects of a shipwreck,” communicated by him to that body, was published in the Philosophical Transactions of that year. Soon after this, having with many other men of political study, viewed the war with France consequent to its great revolutionary struggle with disapprobation, with respect as well to its principles, as to its probable effect on the happiness of both countries, he wrote a pamphlet. This appeared in 1793, under the title of “A Letter Commercial and Political, addressed to the right hon. William Pitt; by Jasper Wilson, esq.;” it soon attained a second edition, and various answers attested the degree of importance attached to it in the public estimation. In the mean time, he was far from being neglectful of the duties of his profession. To those who employed him he was abundantly known as a skilful and sedulous practitioner; and the medical papers he had already published gave him reputation among his brethren. This reputation was widely extended and raised to an eminent degree by a publication which first appeared in October 1797, entitled “Medical Reports on the Effects of Water Cold and Warm, as a Remedy in Febrile Diseases; with observations on the nature of Fever, and on the effects of opium, alcohol, and inanition.” The practice of affusion of cold water in fevers, which is the leading topic in this work, was suggested to the author by Dr. Wright’s narrative, in the London Medical Journal, of his successful treatment of a fever in a homeward-bound ship from Jamaica. Dr. Carrie copied and greatly extended it, and investigated the principles by which its use should be directed and regulated. He discovered that the safety and advantage of the application of cold was proportionate to the existing augmentation of the animal heat; and he found the thermometer a very valuable instrument to direct the practitioner’s judgment in febrile cases. He may therefore be considered as the principal author of a practice which has already been attended with extraordinary success in numerous instances, and bids fair to prove one of the greatest medical improvements in modern times. The work, which contained many ingenious speculations and valuable observations, was generally read and admired. A new volume was added to it in 1804, consisting of much interesting matter on different topics, especially in confirmation of the doctrine and practice of the former volume respecting cold arYusion. The free and successful employment of this remedy in the scarlatina, was one of its most important articles. The author had the satisfaction of receiving numerous acknowledgments of the benefit derived from his instructions, both in private and in naval and military practice. He himself was so much convinced of the utility of the methods he recommended, lhat a revision of the whole work for a new edition, was one of the latest labours of his life.

, an eminent botanist, was born at Alton, in Hampshire, in 1746. At the age of fourteen he was bound apprentice to his grandfather, an apothecary at Alton, and appears to have first acquired a particular taste for botany, from an acquaintance in humble life, the ostler of an adjoining inn, who had studied some of the popular Herbals. Some more systematic works falling in his way soon after, instilled into his apt and ardent mind, principles of method, and of Linnaean philosophy, which neither his original preceptor, nor the books he studied, could ever have taught. At the age of twenty, Mr. Curtis came to London, in order to finish his medical education, and to seek an establishment in the profession to which he was destined. He was associated with a Mr. Talwin of Gracechurch-street, to whose business he at length succeeded; but not without having from time to time received many reproofs and warnings, respecting the interference of his botanical pursuits with the more obviously advantageous ones of his profession. Nor were these warnings without cause. The street-walking duties of a city practitioner but ill accorded with the wild excursions of a naturalist; the apothecary was soon swallowed up in the botanist, and the shop exchanged for a garden. Mr. Curtis, therefore, became a lecturer on the principles of natural science, and a Demonstrator of practical botany. His pupils frequented his garden, studied in his library, and followed him into the fields in his herborizing excursions. His first garden was situated at Bermondsey; afterwards he occupied a more extensive one at Lambeth Marsh, which he finally exchanged for a more salubrious and commodious spot at Brompton. This last garden he continued to cultivate till his death.

, whose German name was Speishammer, an eminent historian, was born in 1473, at Sweinfurt, in Franconia, and became distinguished as a philosopher, historian, orator, poet, and physician, although his historical works only have survived. He was educated at Vienna, where his studies were confined to medicine and poetry, and soon became in high favour with the emperor Maximilian I. who made him his librarian, and afterwards employed him in various important negociations in Hungary, Bohemia, and Poland, and for many years admitted him to his presence as a confidential adviser, and placed him at the head of the senate of Vienna. When Cuspinian meditated his historical writings, the emperor ordered the libraries and archives to be thrown open to him. He died in 1529. His biographer, Gerbelius, describes him as a man of elegant person, address, and manners; and his works attest his learning and diligence in historical research. In this branch he wrote: 1. “De Cicsaribus et Imperatoribus Romanorum,” 1519, fol.; reprinted at Strasburgh, 1540; Basil, by Oporinus, 1561, and Francfort, 1601. 2. “Austria, sive Commentarius de rebus Austrice Marchionum, Ducum, &c.” Basil, 1553, fol. Franc fort, 1601. 3. “Commonefactio ad Leonem X. papam, ad Carolum V. imperatorem, &c. de Constantinopoli capta a Turcis, &c.” Leipsic, 1596, 4to. 4. “Commentarius in Sexti Rufi libellum de regia, consulari, imperialique dignitate, &c.” Basil, 1553, fol. with his life by Gerbelius, reprinted at Francfort, 1601, fol. 5. “De origine Turcorum,” Antwerp, 1541, 8vo. 6. “Panegyric! variorum Auctorum,” Vienna, 1513.

, an eminent engraver, who flourished about the year 1640, was a native of Holland; but under what master he learnt the art of engraving, is uncertain. It is difficult to form a proper judgment of his merit; for sometimes his prints resemble those of Cornelius Vischer; of Lucas Vosterman; of P. Pontius; of Bolswert; and other masters. A set of antique statues engraved by him, are in a bold, freestyle, as if founded upon that of Goltzius; others again seem imitations of that of Francis Poilly. In all these different manners he has succeeded; and they plainly manifest the great command he had with his graver, for he worked with that instrument only. He engraved a great variety of portraits, some of which are very valuable, and form the best as well as the largest part of his works.

, an eminent hydrographer, F. R. S. and F. S. A. was born July 24, 1737, at New Hailes, near Edinburgh, the seat of his fattier sir James Dalrymple, bait, of Hailes. His mother, lady Christian, daughter of the earl of Haddington, a very amiable and accomplished woman, bore sixteen children, all of whom Alexander, who was the seventh son, survived. He was educated at the school of Haddington, under Mr. David Young; but as he left school before he was fourteen years of age, and never was at the university, his scholastic endowments were very limited. At school he had the credit of being a good scholar; and, after he left school, his eldest hrother was wont to make him translate, off hand, some of the odes of Horace; so that he was, for his years, a tolerable proficient in Latin: but going abroad, entirely his own master, before he was sixteen years of age, he neglected his Latin; and, as he says, never found so much use for it as to induce him to take any pains to recover it.

, an eminent Scotch lawyer and antiquary, and brother to the preceding, was born in Edinburgh on the 28th of October 1726, and was educated at Eton school, where he was distinguished no less for his acquisitions in literature-than for the regularity of his manners. From Eton he was removed, to complete his studies at Utrecht, where he remained till 1746. In 1748 he was called to the Scotch bar, where, notwithstanding the elegant propriety of the cases which he drew, his success did not answer the expectations which had been formed of him. This was not owing either to wajjt of science or to want of industry, but to certain peculiarities, which, if not inherent in his nature, were the result of early and deep-rooted habits. He possessed on all occasions a sovereign contempt, not only for verbal antithesis, but for well-rounded periods, and every thing which had the semblance of declamation; and indeed he was wholly unfitted, by an ill-toned voice, and ungraceful elocution, for shining as an orator. It is not surprizing, therefore, that his pleadings, which were never addressed to the passions, did not rival those of some of his opponents, who, possessed of great rhetorical powers, did not, like him, employ strokes of irony too fine to be perceived by the bulk of any audience, but expressed themselves in full, clear, and harmonious periods. Even his memorials, though classically written, and often replete with valuable matter, did not on every occasion please the court; for they were always brief, and sometimes, it was said, indicated more attention to the minutiye of forms than to the merits of the cause. Yet on points which touched his own feelings, or the interests of truth and virtue, his language was animated, his arguments forcible, and his scrupulous regard to form thrown aside. He was on all occasions incapable of misleading the judge by a false statement of facts, or his clients, by holding out to them fallacious grounds of hope. The character indeed which he had obtained for knowledge and integrity in the Scotch law, soon raised him to an eminence in his profession. Accordingly, in March 1766, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of session with the wannest approbation of his countrymen; and in May 1776 he succeeded to the place of a lord commissioner of the justiciary on the resignation of lord Coalston, his wife’s father. Upon taking his seat on the bench he assumed the title of lord Hailes, in compliance with the usage established in the court of session: this is the name by which he is generally known among the learned of Europe.

, an eminent cardinal, was born at Ravenna in the beginning of the eleventh century, became a Benedictine, and, it is thought, would always have preferred solitude to the dignities of the church, if he had not been in some measure forced to accept them. In 1057 he was created cardinal by pope Stephen IX. and under pope Nicolas II. was sent as papal legate to Milan, to reform certain clerical abuses, which he successfully accomplished, and even turned his arguments against his superiors, whom he found licentious, without any respect for their rank or power. Among other proofs of his zeal, he publicly condemned the liberty which the popes took of opposing the emperors in cases of war; affirming, that the offices of emperor and pope are distinct, and that the emperors ought not to meddle with what belongs to the popes, nor the popes with what belongs to the emperors. “As the son of God,” says he, “surmounted all the obstacles of worldly power, not by the severity of vengeance, but by the lively majesty of an invincible patience, so has he taught us rather to bear the fury of the world with constancy, than to take up arms against those who offend us; especially since between the royalty and the priesthood there is such a distinction of offices, that it belongs to the king to use secular arms, and to the priest to gird on the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God,” &c. Damian described also in a very lively manner the enormous vices of his age, in several of his works;, in his Gomorrhaetis particularly, which, though pope Alexander II. thought fit to suppress it, has nevertheless been preserved. Disappointed, however, in his hopes of producing any favourable change, he resigned all his preferments in the church in 1061, although he appears afterwards to have been employed on missions as legate. He died in 1073, and his writings, while in ms. must have been frequently read and admired, as we find that between five and six centuries after his deaih they were ordered to be printed by Clement VIII. who employed Constantino Cajetan as editor. This first edition was published at Home in 3 vols. fol. 160b, 1608, 1615, and reprinted at Leyden, 1623, fol. In 1640 Cajeta 1 added a fourth volume. The whole were afterwards reprinted at Paris in 1642 and 1663, in a thick folio. These works consist of

, an eminent painter, nephew to the preceding, was born at Florence in 1646, and received his first instruction in the art of painting from Valerio Spada, who excelled in small drawings with a pen. Whilst he was under the tuition of thrt artist he gave such evident proofs of genius, that he was then placed as a disciple with his uncle Vincent. He afterwards travelled through most of the cities of Italy, studying the works of those who were most distinguished; and resided for a long time at Venice, where he copied the paintings of Titian, Tintoretto, and Paolo Veronese. He next visited Parma and Modena, to study the works of Correggio; omitting no opportunity that might contribute to improve his hand or his judgment. When he returned to Florence, the grand duke Cosmo III. the grand duchess Victoria, and the prince Ferdinand, kept him perpetually employed, in fresco painting as well as in oil; his subjects being taken not only from sacred or fabulous history, but from his own invention and fancy, which frequently furnished him with such as were odd and singular, and especially with whimsical caricatures. He died in 1712. — This master had an extraordinary talent for imitating the style of even the most celebrated ancient painters of every school, particularly Titian, Veronese, and Tintoretto; and with a force and elegance, equal to his subjects of history, he painted portraits, landscapes, architecture, flowers, fruit, battles, animals of all kinds, and likewise sea-pieces; proving himself an universal artist, and excellent in even thing he undertook. Mr. Fuseli, however, says that the avidity of gain led him to dispatch and a general mediocrity, compensated by little more than the admirable freedom of his pencil. He exerted his powers according to the price he received for his work: they are seen to advantage in the cupolas of S. Maria Maddalena, in various frescos of the ducal palace and villas, and in the public hall of Pisa, where he represented the taking of Jerusalem. There are likewise altar-pieces which shew his merit: that of St. Francis in S. Maria Maggiore, and another of S. Piccolomini saying mass in the church a'Servi, a pleasing animated performance. He had a son, Octavio, who proved not inferior to him in any branch of his profession, and was an honour to his family and his country.

, an eminent French protestant divine, was born at Orleans about the year 1530. Having at first an inclination for the law, he studied that science in his native city for four years under Aune du Bourg, then a teacher of high reputation, and who, after holding the office of clerk of the parliament of Paris for two years, was strangled and burnt, Dec. 20, 1559, for his adherence to the protestant faith. Affected by the constancy with which his master suffered, and of which he appears to have been an eye-witness, and referring such constancy to its proper source, Daneau embraced the principles of the deceased martyr, and the following year retired to Geneva, where he could enjoy his religion unmolested. From this time he gave over all thoughts of the law, and began the study of divinity, in which he made such progress as to be acknowledged one of the ablest divines of the protestant persuasion. At Geneva he became one of their preachers, and professor of divinity. In 15S1 he was invited to Leyden in the same character, and taught there about a year. He at length returned to France, and after residing some time atOrthcs, finally took up his abode at Castres, where he exercised the functions of the ministry until the year 1596, vvheu he died. His works are very numerous. A considerable collection of them was published by himself at Geneva in 1583, in a large folio volume, divided into three classes, didactic, exegetic, and polemic. But, besides these, Niceron and other authors give a very large catalogue of separate publications, commentaries on the Holy Scriptures; and moral, historical, and geographical treatises. One of these, “Primi mundi antiquitatum sectiones quatuor,” was published in English by Thomas Twine, under the title of “The wonderful workmanship of the World,” 1578, 4to. His “Les Sorciers” was also published here in 1564-, under the title, “A Dialogue of Witches.”

Eloquence was one of the many talents which Dante possessed in an eminent degree; on this account he is said to have been employed in fourteen different embassies during the course of his life, and to have succeeded in most of them. His patron Guido had occasion to try his abilities in a service of this nature, and dispatched him as his ambassador, to negociate a peace with the Venetians, who were preparing for hostilities against Ravenna. Manetti asserts that he was unable to procure a public audience at Venice, and returned to Ravenna by land, from his apprehension of the Venetian fleet. But the fatigue of his journey, and the mortification of having failed in his attempt to preserve his generous patron from the impending danger, threw him into a fever, which terminated in death. He died Sept. 14, 1321, in the palace of Guido, who paid the most tender regard to his memory. This magnificent patron, says Boccaccio, commanded the body to be adorned with poetical ornaments; and alter being carried on a bier through the principal streets of Ravenna, by the most illustrious citizens, to be deposited in a marble coffin. He pronounced himself the funeral oration, and expressed his design of erecting a most splendid monument, in honour of the deceased; a design, which his subsequent misfortunes rendered him unable to accomplish. At his request, however, many epitaphs were written on the poet. The best of them, says Boccaccio, was by Giovanni di Virgilio, of Bologna, a famous author of the time, and the intimate friend of Dante. Bernardo Bembc, the father of the celebrated cardinal, raised a handsome monument over the neglected ashes of the poet, with a Latin inscription; but before this, the Florentines had vainly endeavoured to gain the bones of their great poet from the city of Ravenna. In the age of Leo X. they made a second attempt, by a solemn application to the pope for that purpose; and Michael AngeJo, an enthusiastic admirer of Dante, very liberally offered to execute a magnificent monument to the poet, but the hopes of the Florentines were again unsuccessful.

, a French military surgeon, who acquired much celebrity for his skill in treating disorders in the urethra, particularly for his improved method of making bougies, was born at St. Frajon in Gascony March 6, 1701, and after studying the art, became surgeon-major of the imperial troops, and afterwards practised at Milan, and at Turin, where the king Victor Amadeus promised him great encouragement if tie would remain; but at that time he wished to travel for improvement, and after visiting Rome and Vienna, continued some time at Messina, where he exerted his skill and humanity with great success. Having devoted much of his attention to the disorders of the bladder, he published in 1745, “Recueil d‘Observations Chirurgicales sur les Maladies de l’Urethra,” which has been several times reprinted, and in 1750, was translated into English by Mr. Tomkyns, an eminent surgeon of London, who was able, he says, from his own experience, to attest the superior utility of Daran’s bougies over those that had been commonly used. In the fifth volume of the “Journeaux de Medicine,” there is a communication by Daran, in which he makes mention of a tube he had invented for drawing off the urine. This he describes more particularly in his “Treatise on the Gonorrhoea Virulenta,” first published in 1756. It is a flexible catheter, formed of a spiral wire, covered with the same composition as that used in making the bougies, and was capable of being introduced into the bladder, in many cases, where it would have been dangerous, often impossible, to use the common catheter. Considerable improvements have been since made of this instrument, but the merit of the invention still remains with Daran. The fame he acquired, during his residence at Paris, brought a nun her of strangers to visit him, and the profits of his practice were very great; but his charity to the indigent, and an easiness of temper, which led him into speculations, reduced him at last to very low circumstances, and he was comparatively poor when he died, in 1784. It is much to his honour that when thus reduced, and when the infirmities of age were approaching, he divulged, in 1779, the secret of the composition of his bougies in a work entitled “Composition du remede de Daran, &c.” 12mo, when he could derive no benefit except from the sale of his book. His other publications were, 1. “Reponse a la Brochure de Bayet sur la defense et la conservation des parties les plus essentielles de l'homme,” 1750, 12mo; and 2. “Lettre sur ua article des Tumeurs.”

. See Darcy. D‘Arcon (John Claudius Eleonore Limiceaud), an eminent French engineer, and memorable in history as the contriver of a mode of besieging Gibraltar which proved so fatal to his countrymen, was born at Pontarlier in 1733. His father, an advocate, intended to bring him up for the church, and had provided him with a benefice, but Dar5011 from his infancy had a turn for the military life; and when at school, instead of learning Latin, was copying drawings and sketches of fortifications. On one occasion he took a singular mode of acquainting his parents with the error they had committed, in seeking a profession for him. Having by their desire sat for his portrait, he substituted, with his own hand, the uniform of an engineer, instead of the dress of an abbe, in which the artist had clothed him. His father, struck with this silent hint, no longer opposed his inclinations. In 1754 he was admitted into the school of Mezieres, and the following year was received as an ordinary engineer. He served afterwards with distinguished honour in the seven years’ war, and particularly in 1761, at the defence of Cassel. He atterwar is devoted himself to improvements in the military art, and even in the making of drawings and charts; and having great ambition, with a warmth of imagination that presented every thing as practicable, he at length in 1780 conceived the memorable plan of the siege of Gibraltar. This, say his countrymen, which has made so much noise in Europe, has not been fairly estimated, because everyone has judged from the event. Without entering, however, in this place, on its merits, all our historians have attributed to Darcon’s ideas a grandeur and even sublimity of conception vviiich did him much honour, and it is yet remembered that almost all Europe was so perfectly convinced of the success of the plan as to admit of no doubt or objection. Nothing of the kind, however, was ever attended with a discomfiture more complete, and D’Arcou wrote and printed a species of justification, which at least shows the bitterness of his disappointment. On the commencement of the revolutionary war, he engaged on the popular side; but, except some concern he had in the invasion of Holland, does not appear to have greatly distinguished himself. He was twice denounced by Hnctuating governments; and being treated in the same manner after his Dutch campaign, he retired from the service, and wrote his last work on fortifications. In 179y the first consul introduced him into the senate, but he did not enjoy this honour long, as he died July 1, 1800. He was at that time a member of the Institute. His works, still in high estimation in France, are: 1. “Reflexions d'un ingenieur, en reponse a un tacticien,” Amst. 1773, 12mo. 2. “Correspondanee sur Part de la Guerre entre un colonel de dragons et un capitaine d'infanterie,” Bouillon, 1774, 8vo. 3. “Defense d‘une systeme de Guerre Nationale, ou analyse raisonne d’un ouvrage, intitule * Refutation complete du systeme, 1 &c.” This is a defence of M. Menil Durand’s system, which had been attacked by Guibert and the preceding pamphlet has a respect to the same dispute concerning what the French call the ordre projond and the ordre mince. 4. “Conseil de Guerre prive, sur revenement de Gibraltar en 1782,” 1785, 8vo. 5. “Memoires pour serrir a l‘histoire du siege de Gibraltar, par l’auteur des batteries flottantes,” 1783, 8vo. 6. “Considerations sur l'influence du genie de Vauban dans la balance des forces de Petat,” 1786, 8vo. 7. “Examen detaillté de l'importante question de Putilite des places fortes et retranchments,” Strasburgh, 1789, 8vo. 8. “De la force militaire considered dans ses rapports conservateurs,” Strasburgh, 1789, 8vo, with a continuation, 1790. 9. “Reponse aux Memoires de M. de Montalembert, sur la fortification dite perpendiculaire,” 1790, 8vo. 10. “Considerations militaires et politiques sur les Fortifications,” Paris, 1795, 8vo. This, which is the most important of all his works, and was printed at the expence of the government, contains the essence of all his other productions, and the result of his experience on an art which he had studied during the whole of his life.

, a learned Italian writer, the son of a lawyer at Sienna, was born at that place in 1420, and after acquiring some knowledge of the Latin language, was put under the care of Francis Philelphus, an eminent teacher at Sienna, who at the end of two years declared he was his best scholar. Dati, however, at this time suffered not a little from the ridicule of his schoolfellows, owing to a hesitation in his speech, which he is said to have cured by the means which Demosthenes adopted, that of speaking with small pebbles in his mouth. After finishing his classical studies, he learned Hebrew of some Jews, and then entered on a course of philosophy, jurisprudence, and theology. During his application to these branches, Odo Anthony, duke of Urbino, from the very favourable account he had of him, invited him to Urbino to teach the belles lettres. Dati accordingly set out for that city in April 1442, where he was received with every mark of honour and friendship by the duke, but this prosperity was not of long duration. He had not enjoyed it above a year and a half, when the duke, whose excesses and tyranny had rendered him odious, was assassinated in a public tumult, with two of his favourites; and Dati, who was hated by the populace merely because he was respected by the duke, was obliged to take refuge for his life in a church, while the mob pillaged his house. The successor of Odo, prince Frederick, endeavoured to console Dati for this misfortune, and offered him a pension, besides recompense for all he had lost; but Dati could not be reconciled to a residence so liable to interruption, and in 1444 returned to Sienna. Here, after refusing the place of secretary of the briefs, offered to him by pope Nicholas V. he opened a school for rhetoric and the classics, and acquired so much reputation, that the cardinal of Sienna, Francis Piccolomini, formally granted him permission to lecture on the Holy Scriptures, although he was a married man; and at the same time gave him a similar licence to teach and lecture on any subject, not only in his college, but in all public places, and even in the church, where, his son informs us, he once preached during Lent. He was also much employed in pronouncing harangues on public occasions in Latin, many of which are among his works. Nor were his talents confined to literature, but were the means of advancing him to the first offices of the magistracy, and the republic of Sienna entrusted him with the negociation of various affairs of importance at Rome and elsewhere. In 1 J-57 he was appointed secretary to the republic, which he held for two years. Towards the close of his life he laid aside the study of profane authors for that of the Scriptures and ecclesiastical historians. He died of the plague at Sienna, April 6, 1478. His son Nicolas collected his works for publication, “Augustini Dathi, Senensis, opera,” of which there are two editions, that printed at Sienna, 1503, fol. and an inferior in correctness, printed at Venice, 1516. They consist of treatises on the immortality of the soul letters; three books on the history of Sienna; a history of Piombinoj on grammar, &c. &c.

, bishop of Salisbury in the seventeenth century, was born in Watling-street, London, where his father was an eminent merchant, but originally descended from the ancient family of the Davenants of Sible-Heningham, in Essex. What school he was educated in, we cannot find. But, on the 4th of July, 1587, he was admitted pensioner of Queen’s college, in Cambridge. He regularly took his degrees in arts; that of master in 1594. A fellowship was offered him about the same time; but his father would not permit him to accept of it, on account of his plentiful fortune: however, after his father’s decease he accepted of one, into which he was admitted September 2, 1597. Being thus settled in the college, he distinguished himself, as before, by his learning and other excellent qualifications. Tn 1601-he took his degree of B. D. and that of D. D. in 1609. This same year last-mentioned he was elected lady Margaret’s professor, which place he enjoyed till 1621. He was also one of her preachers in 1609 and 1612. On the 20th of October 1614, he was admitted master of his college, and continued in that station till April 20, 1622. And so considerable did he become, that he was one of those eminent English divines sent by king James I. to the synod of Dovt, in 1618. He returned to England in May 1619, after having visited the principal cities in the Low Countries. Upon the death of his brother-in-law, Dr. Robert Townson, he was nominated bishop of Salisbury; and was elected June 11, 1621, confirmed November 17 following, and consecrated the 18th of the same month. He continued in favour during the remainder of king James the First’s reign; but in Lent 1630-1, he incurred the displeasure of the court Cor meddling (in a sermon preached before the king at Whitehall) with the predestinarian controversy “all curious search” into which his majesty had strictly enjoined “to be laid aside.” In a letter to Dr. Ward, bishop Davenant gives the following account of this unpleasant affair. As soon as his sermon was ended, it was signified to him that his majesty was much displeased that he had stirred this question, which his majesty had forbidden to be meddled withal, one way or other: the bishop’s answer was, that he had delivered nothing but the received doctrine of our church, established in the 17th article, and that he was ready to justify the truth of what he had then taught. He was told, the doctrine was not gainsaid, but his majesty had given command these questions should not be debated, and therefore he took it more offensively that any should be so bold as in his own hearing to break his royal commands. To this he replied, that he never understood his majesty had forbidden the handling of any doctrine comprised in the articles of our church, but only raising of new questions, or adding of new sense thereunto, which he had not done, nor ever should do. Two days after, when he appeared before the privy-council, Dr. Sam. Harsnet, archbishop of York, made a speech nearly half an hour long, aggravating the boldness of bishop Davenant’s offence, and shewing many inconveniencies that it was likely to draw after it. When the archbishop had finished his speech, the bishop desired, that since he was called thither as an offender, he might not be put to answer a long speech upon the sudden; but that his grace would be pleased to charge him point by point, and so to receive his answer; for he did not yet understand wherein he had broken any commandment of his majesty’s, which was taken for granted. After some pause, the archbishop told him he knew well enough the point which was urged against him, namely, the breach of the king’s declaration. Then he stood upon this defence, that the doctrine of predestination, which he taught, was not forbidden by the declaration; 1st, Because in the declaration all the articles are established, amongst which, the article of predestination is one. 2. Because all ministers are urged to subscribe unto the truth of the article, and all subjects to continue in the profession of that as well as of the rest. Upon these and such like grounds, he gathered that it could not be esteemed amongst forbidden, curious, or needless doctrines; and here he desired that out of any clause in the declaration it might be shewed him, that keeping himself within the bounds of the article, he had transgressed his majesty’s command; but the declaration was not produced, nor any particular words in it; only this was urged, that the king’s will was, that for the peace of the church these high questions should be forborne. He added, that he was sorry he understood not his majesty’s intention; which if he had done before, he should have made choice of some other matter to treat of, which might have given no offence; and that for the time to come, he should conform himself as readily as any other to his majesty’s command; whereupon he was dismissed. At his departure he entreated the lords of the council to let his majesty understand that he had not boldly, or wilfully and wittingly, against his declaration, meddled with the fore-named point; and that now, understanding fully his majesty’s mind and intention, he should humbly yield obedience thereunto. But although he was dismissed without farther censure, and was even admitted to kiss the king’s hand, yet he was never afterwards in favour at court. He died of a consumption April 20, 1641, to which a sense of the melancholy event approaching did not a little contribute. Among other benefactions, he gave to Queen’scollege, in Cambridge, the perpetual advowsons of the rectories of Cheverel Magna, and Newton Tony, in Wiltshire, and a rent-charge of 3 1l. 10s. per annum, for the founding of two Bible-clerks, and buying books for the library in the same college. His character was that of a man humble and hospitable; painful in preaching and writing; and behaving in every station with exemplary gravity and moderation. He was a man of great learning, and an eminent divine; but strictly attached to Calvinism in the article of unconditionate predestination, &c. Whilst he was at the synod of Dort, he inclined to the doctrine of universal redemption; and was for a middle way between the two extremes, maintaining the certainty of the salvation of a certain number of the elect; and that offers of pardon were sent not only to all that should believe and repent, but to all that heard the Gospel; that grace sufficient to convince and persuade the impenitent (so as to lay the blame of their condemnation upon themselves) went along with these offers; that the redemption of Christ and his merits were applicable to these; and consequently there was a possibility of their salvation. He was buried in Salisbury cathedral.

, D. D. an eminent writer and antiquary, was born in the latter part of the sixteenth century in Denbighshire, and educated by William Morgan, afterwards bishop of St. Asaph. He was admitted a student of Jesus-college, Oxford, in 1589, where he took one degree in arts, and afterwards became a member of Lincoln-college in the same university. He was rector ol Malloyd, or Maynlloyd in Merionethshire, and afterwards a canon of St. Asaph, to which dignity he was promoted by Dr. Parry, then bishop, whose chaplain he was. He commenced doctor in 1616, and was highly esteemed by the university, says Wood, as well versed in the history and antiquities of his own nation, and in the Greek and Hebrew languages; a most exact critic, and indefatigable searcher into ancient writings, and well acquainted with curious and rare authors. The time of his death is not known. His works are, 1. “Antiques Linguae Britannicse nunc communiter dictae Cambro-Britannicoe, a suis Cymrascae vel Cambricee, ab aliis Wallicoe rudimenta,” &c. 1621, 8vo. 2. “Dietionarium Latino-Britannicum,” 1631, folio. With this is printed, “Dictionarium Latino-Britannicum,” which was begun and greatly advanced by Thomas Williams, physician, before 1600. It was afterwards completed and published by Dr. Davies. 3. “Aclagia Britannica, authorum Britannicorum nomina, & quando floruerunt,” 1632, printed at the end of the dictionary before mentioned. 4. “Adagiorum Britannicorum specimen,” ms. Bibl. Bodl. He also assisted W. Morgan, bishop of Landaff, and Richard Parry, bishop of St. Asaph, in translating the Bible into Welsh, in that correct edition which came out in 1620. He also translated into the same language (which he had studied at vacant hours for 30 years) the book of “Resolution,” written by Robert Parsons, a Jesuit.

, an eminent and learned critic, was the son of a merchant in London, and born there April 22, 1679. After being educated in classical learning at the Charterhouse-school, he was, June 8, 1695, admitted of Queen’s-college in Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1698. On July 7, 1701, he was chosen fellow of his college and the year following took the degree of M. A. and was proctor in 1709. In 1711, having distinguished himself by several learned publications hereafter mentioned, he was collated by Moore, bishop of Ely, to the rectory of Fen-Ditton near Cambridge, and to a prebend in the church of Ely; taking the same year the degree of LL. D. Upon the death of Dr. James, or, as Bentham says, Dr. Humphrey Gower, he was, on March 23, 1716-17, chosen master of Queen’s-college; and created D. D. the same year, when George I. was at Cambridge. He died March 7, 1731-2, aged 53, and was buried in the chapel of his college, where a flat marble stone was laid over his grave, with a plain inscription at his own desire. His mother, who was daughter of sir John Turton, knt. is said to have been living in 1743.

, an eminent navigator, of the sixteenth century, was born at Sandridge, in the parish of StokeGabriel, near Dartmouth in Devonshire. His birth near that eminent sea-port, having given him a fair opportunity, to which probably was added a strong natural disposition, he put himself early to sea; where, by the help of a good master, and his subsequent industry, knowledge, and experience, he became the most expert pilot, and one of the ablest navigators of his time. The first public employment he had was in 1585, when he undertook to discover a new passage, by the north-west parts of America, to the East-Indies. For that purpose, he sailed from Dartmouth, on the seventh of June, with two barks, one of fifty and the other of thirty-five tons, which were fitted out at the charge of some noblemen and gentlemen; and met, July 19, many islands of ice floating, in 60 degrees northern latitude. They were soon encompassed with them; and going upon some, perceived, that the roaring noise they heard, at which they were greatly astonished, was caused only by the rolling of the ice together. The next day, they discovered the southern coast of Greenland, five hundred leagues distant from the Durseys, or Missenhead, in Ireland; and observed it to be extremely rocky and mountainous, and covered with snow, without any signs of wood, grass, or earth to be seen. The shore, likewise, was so full of ice, that no ship could come near it by two leagues: and so shocking was the appearance of it, and the cracking of the ice so hideous, that they imagined it to be a quite desolate country, without a living creature, or even any vegetable substance; for which reason captain Davis named it, “The Land of Desolation.” Perceiving that they were run into a very deep bay, wherein they were almost surrounded with ice, they kept coasting along the edge of it, south-south-west, till the 25th of July; when, after having gone fifty or sixty leagues, they found that the shore lay directly north. This made them alter their course to the north-west, in hopes of finding their desired passage: but on the 29th they discovered land to the north-east, in 64 degr. 15 min. latitude. Making towards it, they perceived that they were passed the ice, and were among many green, temperate, and pleasant islands, bordering upon the shore; though the hills of the continent were still covered with great quantities of snow. Among these islands were many fine bays, and good roads for shipping: they landed in some, and the people of the country came down and conversed with them by signs, making Mr. Davis understand, that there was a great sea towards the north west. He staid in this place till the first of August, and then proceeded in his discovery. The sixth of that month, they found land in 66 degr. 40 min. latitude, quite free from ice; and anchored in a safe road, under a great mountain, the cliffs whereof glistered like gold. This mountain he named, Mount Raleigh: the road where their ships lay at anchor, Totness Road: the bay which encompassed the mountain, Exeter Sound: the foreland towards the north, Dier’s Cape: and the foreland towards the south, Cape Walsingham. He departed from hence the eighth of August, coasting along the shore, which lay south-south-west, and east-north-east; and on the eleventh came to the most southerly cape of that land, which he named, “The Cape of God’s Mercy,” as being the place of their first entrance for the discovery. Going forward, they came into a very fine straight, or passage, in some places twenty leagues broad, in others thirty, quite free from ice, the weather in it very tolerable, and the water of the same colour and nature as the main ocean. This passage still retains the name of its first discoverer, being called to this day Fretum Davis, or Davis’s Straights. Having sailed, north-west, sixty leagues in this passage, they discovered several islands in the midst of it; on some of which they landed. The coast was very barren, without wood or grass; and the rocks were like fine marble, full of veins of divers colours. Some days after they continued searching for the north-west passage, but found only a great number of islands. And, on the 2oth, the wind coming contrary, they altered their course and design, and returning for England, arrived at Dartmouth the 29th of September. The next year Mr. Davis undertook a second voyage, for the farther discovery of the north-west passage, being supported and encouraged again by secretary Walsingham, and other adventurers. With' a view therefore of searching the bottom of the Straights he had been in the year before, he sailed from Dartmouth, May the 7th, 1586, with four ships, and the 15th of June discovered land in 60 degrees latitude, and 47 degrees longitude west from London. The ice along the coast reached in some places ten, in some twenty, and in others fifty leagues into the sea; so that, to avoid it, they were forced to bear into 57 degrees latitude. After many tempestuous storms, they made the land again, June the 29th, in 64 degrees of latitude, and 58 of longitude; and ran among the temperate islands they had been at the year before. But the water was so deep, they could not easily come to an anchor; yet they found means to go ashore, on some of the islands, where they were much caressed and welcomed by the natives, who knew them again. Having finished a pinnace, which was to serve them for a front in their discoveries, they landed, not only in that, but also in their boats, in several places: and, upon the strictest search, found the land not to be a continent, as they imagined, but a collection of huge, waste, and desert isles, with great sounds and inlets passing between sea and sea. They pursued their voyage the 11th of July, and on the 17th, in 63 degrees 8 minutes latitude, met with a prodigious mass of ice, which they coasted till the 30th. This was a great obstacle and discouragement to them, not having the like there the year before; and, besides, the men beginning to grow sickly, the crew of one of the ships, on which he chiefly depended, forsook him, and resolved to proceed no farther. However, not to disappoint Mr. W. Sanderson, who was the chief adventurer in this voyage, and for fear of losing the favour of secretary Walsingham, who had this discovery much at heart, Mr. Davis undertook to proceed alone in his small bark of thirty tons. Having therefore fitted, and well-victualled it, in a harbour lying in 66 degrees 33 minutes latitude, and 70 degrees longitude, which he found to be a very hot place, and full of muscatoes, he set sail the 12th of August, and coming into a straight followed the course of it for eighty leagues, till he came among many islands, where the water ebbed and flowed six fathom deep. He had hopes of finding a passage there, but upon searching farther in his boat, he perceived there was none. He then returned again into the open sea, and kept coasting southward as far as 54 degrees and a half of latitude: in which time he found another great inlet near forty leagues broad, between two lands, west, where the water ran in with great violence. This, he imagined, was the passage so long sought for; but the wind being then contrary, and two furious storms happening soon after, he neither thought it safe nor wise to proceed farther, especially in one small bark, and when the season was so far advanced. He, therefore, sailed for England the 11th of September; and arrived there in the beginning of October. By the observations which he made, he concluded, that the north parts of America are all islands. He made a third voyage to these parts again the year following, 1587. All the western merchants, and most of those of London, refused to be engaged farther in the undertaking; but it was encouraged by the lord treasurer Burleigh and secretary Walsinghain. Mr. Davis having, in his last voyage, discovered prodigious quantities of excellent cud-tish, in 56 degrees of latitude, two ships were sent along with him for fishing, and one only for the discovery of the North west passage. They sailed from Dartmouth the 19tii of May, and discovered land the 14th of June, at sixteen leagues distance, but very mountainous, and covered with snow. On the 21st of June the two barks left him, and went upon the fishing, after having promised him, not to depart till his return to them about the end of August, yet having finished their voyage in about sixteen days after, they set sail for England without any regard to their promise. Captain Davis, in the mean time, pursued his intended discovery, in the sea between America and Greenland, from 64 to 73 degrees of latitude. Having entered the Straights which bear his name, he went on northward, from the 21st to the 30th of June; naming one part Merchants Coast; another, the London Coast; another, Hope Sanderson in 73 degrees latitude, being the farthest he went that day. The wind coming northerly, he altered his course, and ran forty leagues west, without seeing any laud. On the 2d of July, he fell in with a great bank of ice, which he coasted southward till the 1 9th of July, when he came within sight of Mount Raleigh on the American coast, in about 67 degrees of latitude. Having sailed sixty leagues north-west into the gulf that lies beyond it, he anchored, July 23, at the bottom of that gulf, among many islands, which he named “The Earl of Cumberland’s Isles” He quitted that place again the same day, and sailed back south-east, in order to recover the sea; which he did the 29th in 62 degrees of latitude. The 30th he passed by a great bank, or inlet, to which he gave the name of Lumley’s Inlet; and the next day by a head land, which he called “The Earl of Warwick’s Foreland.” On the first of August he fell in with the southermost cape, named by him Chudley’s Cape: and, the 12th, passed by an island which he named Darcy’s Island. When he came in 52 degrees of latitude, not finding the two ships that had promised to stay for him, he was in great distress, having but little wood, and only half a hogshead of water left; yet, taking courage, he made the best of his way home, and arrived at Dartmouth September the 15th, very sanguine, that the north-west passage was most probable, and the execution easy; but secretary Walsinghaw dying not long after, all farther search was laid aside. Mr. Davis, notwithstanding, did not remain idle. For, August 26, 1591, he was captain of the Desire, rear admiral to Mr. Thomas Cavendish, in his second unfortunate expedition to the South -Sea; and is highly blamed by Mr. Cavendish, for having deserted him, and thereby being the cause of his overthrow. After many disasters, Mr. Davis arrived again at Bear-haven in Ireland, June 11, 1593. He performed afterwards no less than five voyages to the East-Indies, in the station of a pilot. One was in a Dutch ship, in which he set out, March 15, 1597-8, from Flushing, and returned to Middleburgh, July 23, 1600. Of the rest we have no account, except of that which he performed with sir Edward Michelbourne, in which were spent nineteen months, from December 5, 1604, to July 9, 1606. During this voyage Mr. Davis was killed, on the 27th of December, 1605, in a desperate fight with some Japonese near the coast of Malacca. He married Faith, daughter of sir John Fulford, of Fulford in Devonshire, knight, by Dorothy his wife, daughter of John lord Bouchier, earl of Bath, by whom probably he had issue: for some of his posterity are said to have been living about the middle of the last century, at or near Deptford.

, an Irish divine, was born near Cork, in 1649, and educated at Trinity-college, Dublin, where he took his degree of LL. D. and was accounted an eminent civilian. Having entered into holy orders, he was promoted to be dean of Cork, and was afterwards vicargeneral of the diocese, both which preferments he retained until his death in 1721. He wrote, “A Letter to a friend concerning his changing his religion,” Lond. 1694, 4to. This friend was a Mr. Turner, recorder of Limerick, who had become a Roman catholic. Dr. Davis published also, “The truly Catholick and Old Religion, shewing that the established church in Ireland is more truly a member of the catholic church, than the church of Rome, and that all the ancient Christians, especially in Great Britain and Ireland, were of her communion,” Dublin, 1716, 4to. This was answered the same year by Timothy O'Brien, D. D. of Toulouse, a native of Cork, and then parish priest of Castlelions, in a pamphlet printed at Cork, anonymously, to which Dr. Davis replied in “A Letter to the pretended Answer, &c.” O'Brien returned to the charge with “Goliath beheaded with his own sword,” 4to, to which Dr. Davis replied in “Remarks on a pamphlet entitled Goliath, &c.” He also published two occasional sermons, one on the 30th of January, entitled “Christian Loyalty,” 1716, 4to; the other a charity sermon, Dublin, 1717, 8vo.

, an eminent French naturalist, was born at Montbar in the department of tlio Cote D'Or, May 29, 1716. His father, John Daubenton, was a notary in that place, and his mother’s name was Mary Pichenot. In his youth he distinguished himself by the sweetness of his temper, and by a diligent application to his Studies. The Jesuits of Dijon, under whose tuition he was first placed, noticed him in a peculiar manner. Having gone through the philosophical course taught by the Dominicans of Dijon, his father, who destined him for the church, and who had made him assume the ecclesiastical dress at the age of twelve, sent him to Paris to study theology, but his predilection for natural history induced him privately to study medicine. Accordingly he attended the lectures of Baron, Martiney, and Col de Villars, and likewise those of Winslow, Hunault, and Anthony Jussieu, in the botanic garden. The death of his father, which happened in 1736, leaving him at liberty to pursue the bent of his own inclinations, he took his degrees at Rheims in 1740 and 1741, after which he returned to his native province, where, doubtless, his ambition would have been for ever confined to the practice of medicine, had not a happy accident brought him upon a more brilliant theatre.

, an eminent classical and philological scholar, was born March 29, 1612, at Zwickau, became regent of the college in that place 1642, and rector of the same 1662, which office he discharged with great credit till his death, December 26, 1687. He was one of the most learned men of his age he understood Latin, Greek, Hebrew, the Turkish, French, Italian, Spanish, and Bohemian languages, and had a complete knowledge of Arabic. Besides editions of several works, which afford a testimony of his industry and superior talents, he left “Letters,” Jena, 1670, 4to; Dresden, 1697, 8vo; Chemnits, 1709, 8vo, all different: some poems and dissertations, as, “Tractatus de causis amissarum Linguae Latince radicum,” 1642, 8vo and in the “Systema Dissert, rar.” of Grævius, Utrecht, 1701, 4to.

, an. eminent French poet, was born near the head of the Vienne, in the Limousin, about 1507. Removing to the capital of the kingdom to finish his studies, he distinguished himself in such a manner by his skill in Greek, and his talent at poetry, that he became one of the professors of the university of Paris. In 1560 he succeeded John Stracellus in the post of king’s reader and professor of Greek; but before this he had been principal of the college of Coqueret, and tutor to John Antony de Baif, in the house of his father Lazarus de Baif, who was master of the requests. He continued to instruct this young pupil in the college of Coqueret; and he had also the famous Ronsard for his scholar there, during the space of seven years. His highest praise is, that his school produced a great number of able men; but imprudent generosity and want of management reduced him to poverty, and procured him a place in the list of those learned men, whose talents have been of little benefit to themselves. In the reign of Henry II. he had been preceptor to the king’s pages and Charles IX. honoured him with the title of his poet, took great delight in conversing with him, and endeavoured to support him in his old age. It will not now be thought much in his favour that Daurat had an uncommon partiality for anagrams, of which he was the first restorer. It is pretended, that he found the model of them in Lycophron, and brought them so much into vogue, that several illustrious persons gave him their names to anagrammatise. He undertook also to explain the centuries of Nostradamus, and with such imposing plausibility as to be considered in the light of his interpreter or subprophet. When he was near 80, having lost his first wife, he married a young girl; and by her had a son, for whom he shewed his fondness by a thousand ridiculous actions. In excuse for this marriage, he said that he would rather die by a bright sword than a rusty one. He had by his first wife, among other children, a son, who was the author of some French verses, printed in a collection of his own poems; and a daughter, whom he married to a learned man, named Nicolas Goulu, in whose favour he resigned his place of regius professor of Greek. He wrote a great many verses in Latin, Greek, and French, in some of which he attacked the protestants; and no book was printed, nor did any person of consequence die, without his producing some verses on the subject; as if he had been poet in ordinary to the kingdom, or his muse had been a general mourner. The odes, epigrams, hymns, and other poems in Greek and Latin, composed by Daurat, have been estimated at the gross sum of 50,000 verses; Scaliger had such an opinion of him as a critic, that he said he knew none but him and Cujacius, who had abilities sufficient to restore ancient authors; but he has presented the public with no specimen of that talent, except some remarks on the Sybilline verses in Opsopseus’s edition. Scaliger tells us, with some ridicule, however, that he spent the latter part of his life in endeavouring to find all the Bible in Homer. He died at Paris, Nov. 1, 1588, aged Si. His principal collection of verses is entitled “Joannis Aurati, Lemovicis, Poetse et interprets regii, Poematia, hoc est, Poematum libri quinque; Epigrammatum libri tres; Anagrammatum liber unus; Funerum liber unus; Odarum libri duo; Epithalamiorum liber unus; Eclogarum libri duo; Variarum rerum liber unus,” Paris, 1586, 8vo, a very singular collection, although of no great merit as to taste or versification. He deserves more praise as one of the revivers of Greek literature in France, and in that character his memory was honoured, in 1775, hy an eloge, written by the abbe Vitrac, professor of humanity at Limoges.

, the second wife of the preceding, and a lady of distinguished ingenuity and merit, was born at a small country house of her father’s at Coulton in Wiltshire, May, 14, 1700. She was the daughter of Bernard Granville, esq. afterward lord Lansdowne, a nobleraan whose abilities and virtues, whose character as a poet, whose friendship with Pope, Swift, and other eminent writers of the time, and whose general patronage of men eyf genius and literature, have often been recorded in biographical productions. As the child of such a family, sh^ could not fail of receiving the best education. It was at Long-Leat, the seat of the Weymouth family, which was occupied by lord Lansdowne during the minority of the heir of that family, that Miss Granville first saw Alexander Pendarves, esq. a gentleman of large property at Roscrow in Cornwall, and who immediately paid his addresses to her; which were so strenuously supported by her uncle, whom she had not the courage to deny, that she gave a reluctant consent to the match; and accordingly it took place in the compass of two or three weeks, she being then in the seventeenth year of her age. From a great disparity of years, and other causes, she was very unhappy during the time which this connexion lasted, but endeavoured to make the best of her situation. The retirement to which she was confined was wisely employed in the farther cultivation of a naturally vigorous understanding: and the good use she made of her leisure hours, was eminently evinced in the charms of her conversation, and in her letters to her friends. That quick feeling of the elegant and beautiful which constitutes taste, she possessed in an eminent degree, and was therefore peculiarly fitted for succeeding in the fine arts. At the period we are speaking of, she made a great proficiency in music, but painting, which afterwards she most loved, and in which she principally excelled, had not yet engaged her practical attention. in 1724 Mrs. Pendarves became a widow; upon which occasion she quitted Cornwall, and fixed her principal residence in London. For several years, between 1730 and 1736, she maintained a correspondence with Dr. Swift. In 1743, as we have seen in the former article, Mrs. Pendarves was married to Dr. Delany, with whom it appears that she had long been acquainted; and for whom he had many years entertained a very high esteem. She had been a widow nineteen years when this connexion, which was a very happy one, took place, and her husband is said to fcave regarded her almost to adoration. Upon his decease in ftiay 1768, she intended to fix herself at Bath, and was in quest of a house for that purpose. But the duchess dowager of Portland, hearing of her design, went down to the place; and, having in her earl v years formed an intimacy with Mrs. Delany, wished to have near her a lady from whom she had necessarily, for several years, been much separated, and whose heart and talents she knew would in the highest degree add to thejiappiness of her own life. Her <*race succeeded in her solicitalions, and Mrs. Delany now passed her time between London and Bulstrode. On the death of the duchess-dowager of Portland, his present majesty, who had frequently seen and honoured Mrs Delany with his notice at Bulstrode, assigned her for her summer residence the use of a house completely furnished, in St. Alhan’s-street, Windsor, adjoining to the entrance of the castle: and, that the having two houses on her hands might not produce any inconvenience with regard to the expence of her living, his majesty, as a farther mark of his royal favour, conferred on her a pension of three hundred pounds a year. On the 15th of April, 1788, after a short indisposition, she departed this life, at her house in St. James’s-place, having nearly completed the 88th year of her age. The circumstance that has principally entitled Mrs. Delany to a place in this work is her skill in painting, and in other ingenious arts, one of which was entirely her own. With respect to painting, she was late in her application to it. She did not learn to draw till she was more than thirty years of age, when she put herself under the instruction of Goupy, a fashionable master of that time, and much employed by Frederic prince of Wales. To oil-painting she did not take till she was past forty. So strong was her passion for this art, that she has frequently been known to employ herself in it, day after day, from six o'clock in the morning till dinner time, allowing only a short interval for breakfast. She was principally a copyist; but a very fine one. The only considerable original work of hers in oil was the Kaising of Lazarus, in the possession of her friend lady JBute. The number of pictures painted by her, considering how late it was in life before she applied to the art, was very great. Her own house was full of them; and others are among the chief ornaments of Calswich, Welsborn, and Ham, the respective residences of her nephews, Mr. Granville and Mr. Dewes, and of her niece Mrs. Port. Mrs. Delany, among her other accomplishments, excelled in embroidery and shell-work; and, in the course of her life, produced many elegant specimens of her skill in these respects. But, what is more remarkable, at the age of 74 she invented a new and beautiful mode of exercising her ingenuity. This was by the construction of a Flora, of a most singular kind, formed by applying coloured papers together, and which might, not improperly, be called a species of mosaic work. Being perfectly mistress of her scissars, the plant or flower which she purposed to imitate she cut out; that is, she cut out its various leaves and parts in such coloured Chinese paper as suited her subject; and, when she could not meet with a colour to correspond with the one she wanted, she dyed her own paper to answer her wishes. She used a black ground, as best calculated to throw out her flower; and not the least astonishing part of her art was, that though she never employed her pencil to trace out the form or shape of her plant, yet when she had applied all the p eces which composed it, it hung so loosely and gracefully, that every one was persuaded that it must previously have been drawn out, and repeatedly corrected by a most judicious hand, before it could have attained the ease and air of truth which, without any impeachment of the honour of this accomplished lady, might justly be called a forgery of nature’s works. The effect was superior to what painting could have produced; and so imposing was her art, that she would sometimes put a real leaf of a plant by the side of one of her own creation, which the eye could not detect, even when she herself pointed it out. Mrs. Delany continued in the prosecution of her design till the 83d year of her age, when the dimness of her sight obliged her to lay it aside. However, by her unwearied perseverance, she became authoress of far the completest Flora that ever was executed by the same hand. The number of plants finished bv her amounted to nine hundred and eighty. This invaluable Flora was bequeathed by her to her nephew Court Dewes, esq. and is now in the possession of Barnard Dewes, esq. of Welsborn in Warwickshire. The liberality of Mrs. Delany’s mind rendered her at all times ready to communicate her art. She frequently pursued her work in company; was desirous of shewing to her friends how easy it was to execute; and was often heard to lament that so few would attempt it. It required, however, great patience and great knowledge in botanical drawing. She began to write poetry at 80 years of age, and her verses shew at least a pious disposition. Her private character is thus given by her friend, Mr. Keate. “She had every virtue that could adorn the human heart, with a mind so pure, and so uncontaminated by the world, that it was matter of astonishment how she could have lived in its more splendid scenes without being tainted with one single atom of its folly or indiscretion. The strength of her understanding received, in the fullest degree, its polish, but its weakness never reached her. Her life was conducted by the sentiments of true piety; her way of thinking, on every occasion, was upright and just; her conversation was lively, pleasant, and instructive. She was warm, delicate, and sincere in her friendships; full of philanthropy and benevolence, and loved and respected by every person who had the happiness to know her. That sun-shine and serenity of mind which the good can only enjoy, and which had thrown so much attraction on her life, remained without a shadow to the last; not less bright in its setting, than in its meridian lustre. That form which in youth had claimed admiration, in age challenged respect. It presented a noble ruin, become venerable by the decay of time. Her faculties remained unimpaired to the last; and she quitted this mortal state to receive in a better world the crown of a well-spent life.”

It is said, that, from this time, Democritus ppent his days and nights in caverns and sepulchres; and that in one of these gloomy retreats, whilst he sat by his midnight lamp busily engaged in writing, he was on a sudden visited by several young men, who, in order to terrify him, had clothed themselves in black garments, and put on masks, pretending to be ghosts; but that, upon their appearance, he coolly requested them not to play the fool, and went on with the studies in which they found him employed. Others relate, that Democritus, in order to be more perfectly master of his intellectual faculties, by means of a burning glass deprived himself of the organs of sight. But the former of these stories has the air of fable; and the latter is wholly incredible, since the writers who relate it affirm, that Democritus employed his leisure in writing books, and in dissecting the bodies of animals, neither of which could very well have been effected without eyes. Cicero, who was not destitute of credulity, mentions the story, but at the same time intimates his own doubts concerning its truth. Nor is greater credit due to the tale, that Democritus spent his leisure hours in chemical researches after the philosopher’s stone, the dream of a later age; or to the story of his conversation witli Hippocrates, grounded upon letters, which are said to have passed between that father of medicine and the people of Abdera, on the supposed madness of Democritus, but which are so evidently spurious, that it would require the credulity of the Abderites themselves to suppose them genuine. All that is probable concerning this conversation, so circumstantially and eloquently related in the epistles ascribed to Hippocrates, is, that Hippocrates, who was contemporary with Democritus, admired his extensive knowledge of nature, and reprobated the stupidity of the Abderites, who imputed his wonderful operations to a supernatural intercourse with daemons, or to madness. The only reasonable conclusion which can be drawn from these marvellous tales, is that Democritus was, what he is commonly represented to have been, a man of sublime genius and penetrating judgment, who, by a long course of study and observation, became an eminent master of speculative and physical science; the natural consequence of which was, that, like Roger Bacon in a later period, he astonished and imposed upon his ignorant and credulous countrymen. Petronius relates, that he was perfectly acquainted with the virtues of herbs, plants, and stones, and that he spent his life in making experiments upon natural bodies.

, an eminent English poet, the only son of sir John Denham, knt. of Little Horseley in Essex, by Eleanor, daughter of sir Garret More, knt. baron of Mellefont in Ireland, was born at Dublin in 1615, his father having been some time before chief baron of the exchequer in Ireland, and one of the lords commissioners of that kingdom; but, upon his being made, in 1617, one of the barons of the exchequer in England, he was brought by him to London, and educated there in school-learning. In 1631 he was entered a gentleman-commoner of Trinitycollege in Oxford “but being looked upon,” says Wood, “as a slow and dreaming young man by his seniors and contemporaries, and given more to cards and dice than his study, they could never then in the least imagine that he could ever enrich the world with his fancy, or issue of his brain, as he afterwards did.” When he had continued there three years, and undergone a public examination for his degree of B. A. he went to Lincoln’s Inn with a view of studying the law; but his love of gaming continuing, he squandered away all the money he could get. His father being informed of this, and threatening to disinherit him if he did not reform, he wrote a little “Essay upon Gaming,” which he presented to his father, in order to shew him what an abhorrence he had conceived towards it: this gentleman’s death, however, no sooner happened, in 1638, than he returned to his former habits, and presently lost several thousand pounds.

, an eminent German bibliographer, and principal librarian of the imperial library of Vienna, was born at Sclarden, in Bavaria, in 1729, and died at Vienna in 1800, in the seventy -first year of his age. He published several works on subjects of philology, bibliography, literary, and even natural history, and poetry. The principal of these are, 1. A translation into German of “Ossian’s poems,” Vienna, 1768—1772, 3 vols. 4to, and 8vo. This translation is truly poetical; but the author appears to have committed an error in judgment, in giving the preference to hexameters, by which he has given a refinement and a connection to the whole, which does not correspond with the original. 2. “The Songs of the Bard Sined,” (Denis) with a preliminary dissertation on the ancient poetry of the North, Vienna, 1772, 8vo. 3. “A systematic catalogue of Butterflies in the environs of Vienna,” ibid. 1776, 4to, with plates. 4. “An Introduction to the knowledge of Books,” 2 vols. 4to, 1777 — 1778. This, which like most of his works, is written in German, contains a division of Bibliography into three periods. The first relates to the state of book-writing, previous to Christianity; the second comprehends the state of Bibliography from the introduction of Christianity to the restoration of letters, or the invention of printing; and the third extends from this latter period to the present times. Each of these periods contains an historical and mechanical account of book-making. The historical account of the first period exhibits the origin, progress, and decline of the art of writing and preserving books in different nations; and the other part of this same period contains a description of the alphabets, paper, and instruments employed in writing, and the form of books in these early times. In the second period is the history of printing; and in the third, an account of the most celebrated libraries of that time in Italy, England, France, Holland, Spain, Sweden, Poland, Russia, Germany, and Vienna, comprehending printed books and manuscripts. In this exhibition, the books are reduced, like the sciences, under the distinct classes of theology, law, philosophy, physic, mathematics, history, and philology, and are considered with respect to their number, their qualities, their rarity, &c. and the manuscripts, whether Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Gothic, Lombard, French, or Anglo-Saxon, are enumerated, though without many critical illustrations. 5. “A Typographical History of Vienna from the year 1482 to 1560,” ibid. 1782, 4to. 6. A publication in Latin, “8. Augustini Sermones inediti, admixtis quibusdarn dubiis,” ibid. 1792, fol. These were copied from a manuscript of the twelfth century in the imperial library. 7. “Codices manuscripti theologici Latiui aliarumque occidentis linguarum bibliothecae Palatinse Vindobon.” vol. I. 1793, fol. vol. II. 1801, intended as a continuation of Lambecius’s very elaborate catalogue. The two together form a complete catalogue of every article in the imperial library of the theological kind, except ecclesiastical history, and the canon-law. 9. “Carmina qusedam,” Vienna, 1794, 4to, a collection of Latin poems.

, D. D. an eminent divine and antiquary, descended from a family of good note in the county of Kent, was the eldest son of John Denne, gent, who had the place of woodreve to the see of Canterbury, by a patent for life from archbishop Tenison. He was born at Littlebourne, May 25, 1693, and brought up in the freeschools of Sandwich and Canterbury. He went thence to Cambridge, and was admitted of Corpus Christi college, under the tuition of Mr. Robert Dannye, Feb. 25, 1708; and was afterwards a scholar of the house upon archbishop Parker’s foundation. He proceeded B. A. in 1712; M. A. in 1716; and was elected fellow April 20, in the same year. Soon after, he took upon him the office of tutor, jointly with Mr. Thomas Herring, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury; and was ordained deacon on Trinity Sunday 1716, by bishop Trimnell; and priest Sept. 21, 1718. Not long afterwards he was nominated by the college to the perpetual cure of St. Benedict’s church, in Cambridge; whence he was preferred in 1721, to the rectory of Norton-Davy, alias Green’s Norton, in Northamptonshire, upon a presentation from the king; but this he exchanged, Sept. 30, 1723, for the vicarage of St. Leonard, Shoreditch, in London. In 1725 he was appointed preacher of Mr. Boyle’s lecture, and continued so for three years. His next promotion, immediately after taking the degree of D. D. was to the archdeaconry of Rochester, with the prebend annexed, being collated thereto July 22, 1728, by bishop Bradford, to whom he had been domestic chaplain for many years, and whose youngest daughter Susanna he married in 1724. He was instituted July 24, 1729, to the vicarage of St. Margaret’s, Rochester, but this he resigned, on taking possession of the rectory of Lambeth, Nov. 27, 1731, through the patronage of archbishop Wake. He died August 5, 1767, and was buried in the south transept of Rochester cathedral. His widow survived him upwards of thirteen years, dying on the 3d of December, 1780.

, an eminent experimental philosopher, was born at Rochelle, in France, on the 12th of March 1683. He was brought to England when about two years of age, by his father, the rev. Mr. John Desaguliers, who, being a French protestant, was obliged to quit his native country in consequence of the persecution which followed upon the revocation of the edict of Nantes, which took place in 1685. He was instructed in grammar learning by his father, and read the classics under him; after which he was sent to Christ Church college, Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. and entered into deacon’s orders in 1710. The same year he read lectures in experimental philosophy at Hart-hall, whither he had removed from Christ Church, in the room of Mr. Keill (afterwards Dr. Keill) who at this time accompanied the Palatines to New England, in consequence of his being appointed their treasurer. In 1712 he married Miss Joanna Pudsey, daughter of William Pudsey, esq. and, on the third of May the same year, took the degree of M. A. The following year he removed to the metropolis, and settled in Channel-row, Westminster, where he continued his courses of experimental philosophy several years.

In his seventeenth year, his father sent him to Paris, leaving him to his own discretion, which, however, was not at first to be trusted, as youthful vanity and the love of pleasure betrayed him into excesses that might have been fatal to his literary progress, had not some learned friends, to whom he was introduced, recalled his attention to mathematical studies, which he again prosecuted in a solitary retirement of two years. Still, however, dissatisfied with the result of his speculations, he entered as a volunteer in the Dutch army, in which he thought he would have opportunities of conversing with the world; but even here his natural propensity to study returned; and he engaged in mathematical disquisitions with an eminent master of that science at Breda, and wrote a philosophical dissertation, in which he attempted to prove that brutes are automata, or mere machines. From the Dutch army he went into the Bavarian service, and while in winter-quarters, being informed of the high pretensions of the Rosicrucians, he endeavoured to discover their mysteries; but finding this impossible, or rather that there was nothing to be discovered, he returned to the humble path of rational inquiry. Wherever he went he conversed with learned men, and rather appeared in the character of a philosopher than a soldier. At last he quitted the military profession, and after a tour through the northern parts of Germany, returned to his own country in 1622, with no other profit from his travels, as he himself confesses, than that they had freed him from many prejudices, and rendered his mind more fit for the reception of truth, an advantage of no small importance, if he could have availed himself of it.

, an eminent French lawyer, and a protestant, was born at Montpelier, in 1594. Being admitted to the bar, he pleaded in the parliament of Paris. Having communicated his ideas on the subject to his friend and countryman Charles de Bouques, they resolved to labour conjointly in the explanation and illustration of the civil law, and the first fruits of their labours was a “Traittdes successions testamentaires et ab intestat,” Paris, 1G23, fol. dedicated to the son of the chancellor de Sillery, who patronized both authors, and encouraged them in the prosecution of their work. De Bouques was removed by death, and the undertaking would have been discontinued, had not Despeisses taken the whole upon himself, and made it the employment of nearly forty years of his life. He was about to have sent it to press, when he died almost suddenly, in 1658. The work, however, appeared under the title, “Les OEuvres d‘Antoine Despeisses, ou toutes les matieres les plus importantes du clroit Remain sont expliquees et accommode’es au droit Francois,” 4 vols. fol. The last edition was printed in 1750, 3 vols. fol. It is a work of vast labour, but according to Bretonnier, not exact in the quotations. It is recorded of Despeisses, that at one time of his life he returned to Montpellier, with a view to practice at the bar, but was diverted from it by an incident very trifling in itself. As he was addressing the court, with many digressions from the main subject, which was then the fashion, he happened to say something of Ethiopia, on which an attorney, loud enough to be heard, said, “He is now got to Ethiopia, and he will never come back.” Despeisses was so much hurt at this, and probably at the laugh which it occasioned, as to confine himself afterwards to chamber-practice, and the compilation of his great work.

, an eminent painter, was born at the village of Champigneul, in Champagne, in 1661; and being a disciple of Nicasius, a Flemish painter, imitated his manner of painting. The subjects he selected were flowers, insects, animals, and representations of the chace, which he designed and coloured with much truth; his local colours being very good, and the aerial perspective well managed. He was chiefly employed in the service of Lewis XIV.; and accompanied the French ambassader, the duke d'Aumont, to London, where he was much encouraged, particularly by the duke of Richmond and lord Bolingbroke. The hotels of Paris, and the palaces of Versailles, Marli, &c. contain many specimens by this artist, who died at a very advanced age, in 1743. The present Imperial Museum has his portrait, which was engraved by Poullain, and three pictures by him, of great merit.

, an eminent physician, born at Amsterdam in 1510, was sent first to Lou vain, where he soon distinguished himself by his acquirements in classical literature. Declaring at length for the practice of medicine, he went to Bologna, in Italy, and in 1538 he took his degree of doctor in that faculty. A vacancy happening soon after at Groningen, he accepted the office of professor of the practice of medicine, which he taught with reputation for nine years. From thence, invited by Echtius, professor in medicine there, he went to Cologne, where he was admitted member of the college of physicians, and received a considerable pension from the government. This he retained to the time of his death, in 1574. He was author of several useful works. His “De Compositione Medicamentorum,” 1555, fol. contains many valuable observations and improvements on the formulae used in his time. “De Peste, commentarius, preservatio, et curatio,” Col. 1564, 4to. He speaks of a leathern, jacket, which had passed into the hands of twenty-five persons, who had received the infection from it, and been destroyed, before the cause was discovered. He wrote also in defence of the ancient medicine, and against the practice introduced by Paracelsus.

, an eminent French dramatic writer, was born at Tours, in 1680, of a reputable family, which he left early in life, apparently from being thwarted in his youthful pursuits. This, however, has been contradicted; and it is said that after having passed through the rudiments of a literary education at Tours, he went, with the full concurrence of his father, to Paris, in order to complete his studies; that being lodged with a bookseller in the capital, he fell in love at sixteen with a young person, the relation of his landlord, the consequences of which amour were such, that young Destouches, afraid to face them, enlisted as a common soldier in a regiment under orders for Spain; that he was present at the siege of Barcelona, where he narrowly escaped the fate of almost the whole company to which he belonged, who were buried under a mine sprung by the besieged. What became of him afterwards, to the time of his being noticed by the marquis de Puysieulx, is not certainly known, but the common opinion was, that he had appeared as a player on the stage; and having for a long time dragged his wretchedness from town to town, was at length manager of a company of comedians at Soleure, when the marquis de Puysieulx, ambassador from France to Switzerland, obtained some knowledge of him by means of an harangue which the young actor made him at the head of his comrades. The marquis, habituated by his diplomatic function to discern and appreciate characters, judged that one who could speak so well, was destined by nature to something better than the representation of French comedies in the centre of Switzerland. He requested a conference with Destouches, sounded him on various topics, and attached him to his person. It was in Switzerland that his talent for theatrical productions first displayed itself; and his “Curieux Impertinent” was exhibited there with applause. His dramatic productions made him known to the regent, who sent him to London in 1717, to assist, in his political capacity, at the negotiations then on foot, and while resident here, he had a singular negociation to manage for cardinal Dubois, to whom, indeed, he was indebted for his post. That minister directed him to engage king George I. to ask for him the archbishopric of Cambray, from the regent duke of Orleans. The king, who was treating with the regent on affairs of great consequence, and whom it was the interest of the latter to oblige, could not help viewing this request in a ridiculous light. “How!” said he to Destouches, “would you have a protestant prince interfere in making a French archbishop? The regent will only laugh at it, and certainly will pay no regard to such an application.” “Pardon me, sire,” replied Destouches, “he will laugh, indeed, but he will do what you desire.” He then presented to the king a very pressing letter, ready for signature. “With all my heart, then,” said the king, and signed the letter; and Dubois became archbishop of Cambray. He spent seven years in London, married there, and returned to his country; where the dramatist and negociator were well received. The regent had a just sense of his services, and promised him great things; but dying soon after, left Destouches the meagre comfort of reflecting how well he should have been provided for if the regent had lived. Having lost his patron, he retired to Fortoiseau, near Melun, as the properest situation to make him forget the caprices of fortune. He purchased the place; and cultivating agriculture, philosophy, and the muses, abode there as long as he lived. Cardinal Fleury would fain have sent him ambassador to Petersburg; but Destouches chose rather to attend his lands and his woods, to correct with his pen the manners of his own countrymen; and to write, which he did with considerable effect, against the infidels of France. He died in 1754, leaving a daughter and a son; the latter, by order of Lewis XV. published at the Louvre an edition of his father’s works, in 4 vols. 4to. Destouch.es had not the gaiety of Regnard, nor the strong warm colouring of Moliere; but he is always polite, tender, and natural, and has been thought worthy of ranking next to these authors. He deserves more praise by surpassing them in the morality and decorum of his pieces, and he had also the art of attaining the pathetic without losing the vis comica, which is the essential character of this species of composition. In the various connections of domestic life, he maintained a truly respectable character, and in early life he gave evidence of his filial duty, by sending 40,000 livres out of his savings to his father, who was burthened with a large family.

, an eminent surgeon of Paris, in which city he was born January 27, 1649, was the son of John Devaux, a man of eminence in the same profession. He became provost and warden of the surgeons’ company, and was universally esteemed for his skill and his writings. He died May 2, 1729, at Paris. His works are, “Le Medecin de soi meme,” 12mo.; “L'art de faire des rapports en Chirurgie,” 12mo; “Index funereus Chirurgorum Parisiensium, ab anno 1315 ad annum 1714,” 12mo, with several others; and translations of many excellent works on physic and surgery, particularly Allen’s “Synopsis Medicinae practices,” Harris’s “De morbis infantum,” Cockburne “De Gonorrhasa;” Freind’s “Emmenologia,” &c. &c.

, an eminent French architect, was born at Paris, Nov. 9, 1729. He was educated by one of his uncles, and from his earliest infancy discovered an. unconquerable partiality for the study and practice of architecture, in which he afterwards became a great proficient. His chief master was Lejay, who at this period had just established a new school of the profession, and recovered it from the contempt in which it had been held from the age of Lewis XIV. In 1752 Dewailly obtained the chief architectural prize, and the privilege of studying at Rome for three years, at the expence of the nation. Upon this success, his biographer notices an action truly generous and laudable in the mind of an emulous young man. The student to whom the second prize was decreed, and whose name was Moreau, appeared extremely sorrowful. Dewailly interrogated him upon the subject of his chagrin; and learning that it proceeded from his having lost the opportunity of prosecuting his profession in Italy, he flew to the president of the architectural committee, and earnestly solicited permission that his unfortunate rival might be allowed to travel to Rome as well as himself. On an objection being adduced from the established rules “Well, well,” replied he, “I yet know a mode of reconciling every thing. I am myself allotted three years; of these I can dispose as I like; I give eighteen months of them to Moreau.” This generous sacrifice was accepted; and Dewailly was amply rewarded by the public esteem which accompanied the transaction. In most of the modern buildings of taste and magnificence in his own country, Dewailly was a party employed, and many of his designs are engraven in the Encyclopedic and in Laborde’s Description of France. He was a member of the academy of painting, as well as that of architecture; in the latter of which he was at once admitted into the higher class, without having, as is customary, passed through the inferior. Of the national institute he was a member from its establishment. He died in 1799, having been spared the affliction of beholding one of his most exquisite pieces of workmanship, the magnificent hall of the Odeon, destroyed by fire, a catastrophe which occurred but a short time after his demise.

, bart. of Prestonfield, an eminent physician, the third son of sir William Cunningham, of Caprington, by dame Janet Dick, the only child and heiress of sir James Dick, of Prestonfield, near Edinburgh, was born Oct. 23, 1703. While his two elder brothers succeeded to ample fortunes, the one as heir to his father, and the other to his mother, the provision made for a younger son was not sufficient to enable him to live in a manner agreeable to his wishes without the aid of his own exertions. After, therefore, receiving a classical education at Edinburgh, he studied medicine at Leyden under the celebrated Boerhaave, and obtained the degree of M. D. from that univer c; Aug. 31, 1725. On this occasion he published an i“, > -,gural dissertation,” De Epilepsia," which did him much credit. Not long after this he returned to Scotland, and had the honour of receiving a second diploma for the degree of M. D. conferred upon him by the university of St. Andrew’s, Jan. 23, 1727, and Nov. 7 of the same year, was admitted a fellow of the royal college of physicians of Edinburgh. But after Dr. Cunningham (for at that time he bore the name of his father) had received these distinguishing marks of attention at home, he was still anxious to obtain farther knowledge of his profession by the prosecution of hi-, studies abroad. With this intention he made the tour of Europe; and although medicine was uniformly his first and principal object, yet other arts and sciences were not neglected.

, an eminent divine of the church of Scotland, the son of John Dickson, a merchant in Glasgow, was born about 1583, and educated at the university of his native city. After taking the degree of M. A. he was admitted regent, or professor of philosophy, an office which, at that time, somewhat after the manner of the foreign universities, was held only for a term of years (in this case, of eight years) after which these regents received ordination. Accordingly, in 1618, Mr. Dickson was ordained minister of the town of Irvine, which preferment he held about twenty-three years, and became a very popular preacher. Although always inclined to the presbyterian form of church-government, he had shewn no great reluctance to the episcopal forms until the passing of what are known, in the ecclesiastical history of Scotland, by the name of the Perth articles; five articles, which enjoined kneeling at the sacrament; private adtninistratioa of it in extreme sickness; private baptism, if necessary; episcopal confirmation; and the observation of Epiphany, Christmas, &c. These, however harmless they may appear to an English reader, were matters not only of objection, but abhorrence to a great proportion of the Scotch clergy; and Mr. Dickson having expressed his dislike in strong terms, and probably in the pulpit, was suspended from his pastoral charge, and ordered to remove to Turriff, in the north of Scotland, within twenty days. After much interest, however, had been employed, for he had many friends among persons of rank, who respected his talents and piety, he was allowed in 1623 to return to Irvine. As during the progress of the rebellion in England, the power of the established church decayed also in Scotland, Dickson exerted himself with considerable effect in the restoration of the presbyterian form of church-government, and there being a reluctance to this change on the part of the learned divines of Aberdeen, he went thither in 1637, and held solemn disputations with Doctors Forbes, Barron, Sibbald, &c. of that city, which were afterwards published. In 1641 he was removed from Irvine to be professor of divinity in the university of Glasgow; and in 1643 he assisted in drawing up some of those formularies which are contained in the “Confession of Faith,” a book which is still subscribed by the clergy of Scotland. The “Directory for public worship,” and “The sum of saving knowledge,” were from his pen, assisted, in the former, by Henderson and Calderwood and in the latter, by Durham. Some years after, probably about 1645, he was invited to the elmir of professor of divinity at Edinburgh, which he held until the restoration, when he was ejected for refusing the oath of supremacy. He did not survive this long, dying in 1662. He was esteemed one of the ablest and most useful men of his time, in the promotion of the church of Scotland as now established, and his writings have been accounted standard books with those who adhere to her principles as originally laid down. His principal works are, I. “A Commentary on the Hebrews,” 8vo. 2. “On Matthew,” 4to. 3. “On the Psalms,” 1655, 3 vols. 12mo. 4. “On the Epistles,” Latin and English, folio and 4to. 5. “Therapeutica Sacra, or Cases of Conscience resolved,” Latin 4to, English 8vo. 6. “A treatise on the Promises,” Dublin, 1630, 12mo. Besides these he wrote some pieces of religious poetry for the common people, and left several Mss. As he had had a considerable hand in the “Confession of Faith,” he lectured, when professor of divinity, on that book, the heads of which lectures were afterwards published, as he had delivered them, in Latin, under the title “Prelectiones in Confessionem Fidei,” folio but they have been since translated and often reprinted, under the title of “Truth’s Victory over Error,” one of the most useful, and now, we believe, the only one of his works which continues still popular in Scotland. Prefixed is a life of the author by Woodrow, the ecclesiastical historian, from which we have extracted the above particulars.

, of the academy of Berlin, an eminent French writer, was the son of a cutler, and was bora at Langres, in 1713. The Jesuits, with whom he went through a course of study, were desirous of having him in their order, and one of his uncles designing him for a canonry which he had in his gift, made him take the tonsure. But his father, seeing that he was not inclined to be either a Jesuit or a canon, sent him to Paris to prosegute his studies. He then placed him with a lawyer, to whose instructions young Diderot paid little attention, but employed himself in general literature, which not coinciding with the views of his father, he stopped the remittance of his pecuniary allowance, and seemed for some time to have abandoned him. The talents of the young man, however, supplied him with a maintenance, and gradually made him known. He had employed his mind on physics, geometry, metaphysics, ethics, belles-lettres, from the time he began to read with reflection, and although a bold and elevated imagination seemed to give him a turn for poetry, he neglected it for the more serious sciences. He settled at an early period at Paris, where the natural eloquence which animated his conversation procured him friends and patrons. What first gave him reputation among a certain class of readers, unfortunately for France, too numerous in that country, was a little collection of “Pensees philosophiques,” reprinted afterwards under the title of “Etrennes aux esprits-forts.” This book appeared in 1746, 12mo. The adepts of the new philosophy compared it, for perspicuity, elegance, and force of diction, to the “Pensees de Pascal.” But the aim of the two authors was widely different. Pascal employed his talents, and erudition, which was profound and various, in support of the truths of religion, which Diderot attacked by all the arts of an unprincipled sophist. The “Pensées philosophiques,” however, became a toiletbook. The author was thought to be always in the right, because he always dealt in assertions. Diderot was more usefully employed in 1746, in publishing a “Dictionnaire universelle de Medecine,” with Messrs. Eidous and Toussaint, in G vols. folio. Not that this compilation, says his biographer, is without its defects in many points of view, or that it contains no superficial and inaccurate articles; but it is not without examples of deep investigation; and the work was well received. A more recent account, however, informs us that this was merely a translation of Dr. James’s Medical Dictionary, published in this country in 1743; and that Diderot was next advised to translate Chambers’ s Dictionary; but instead of acting so inferior a part, he conceived the project of a more extensive undertaking, the “Dictionnaire Encyclopedique.” So great a monument not being to be raised by a single architect, D'Alembert, the friend of Diderot, shared with him the honours and the dangers of the enterprise, in which they were promised the assistance of several literati, and a variety of artists. Diderot took upon himself alone the description of arts and trades, one of the most important parts, and most acceptable to the public. To the particulars of the several processes of the workmen, he sometimes added reflections, speculations, and principles adapted to their elucidation. Independently of the part of arts and trades, this chief of the encyclopedists furnished in the different sciences a considerable number of articles that were wanting; but even his countrymen are inclined to wish that in a work of such a vast extent, and of such general use, he had learned to compress his matter, and had been less verbose, less of the dissertator, and less inclined to digressions. He has also been censured for employing needlessly a scientific language, and for having recourse to metaphysical doctrines, frequently unintelligible, which occasioned him to be called the Lycophron. of philosophy; for having introduced a number of definitions incapable of enlightening the ignorant, and which he seems to have invented for no other purpose than to have it thought that he had great ideas, while in fact, he had not the art of expressing perspicuously and simply the ideas of others. As to the body of the work, Diderot himself agreed that the edifice wanted an entire reparation; and when two booksellers intended to give a new edition of the Encyclopedic, he thus addressed them on the subject of the faults with which it abounds: “The imperfection of this work originated in a great variety of causes. We had not time to be very scrupulous in the choice of the coadjutors. Among some excellent persons, there were others weak, indifferent, and altogether bad. Hence that motley appearance of the work, where we see the rude attempt of a school-boy by the side of a piece from the hand of a master; and a piece of nonsense next neighbour to a sublime performance. Some working for no pay, soon lost their first fervour; others badly recompensed, served us accordingly. The Encyclopedic was a gulf into which all kinds of scribblers promiscuously threw their contributions: their pieces were ill-conceived, and worse digested; good, bad, contemptible, true, false, uncertain, and always incoherent and unequal; the references that belonged to the very parts assigned to a person, were never filled up by him. A refutation is often found where we should naturally expect a proof; and there was no exact correspondence between the letter-press and the plates. To remedy this defect, recourse was had to long explications. But how many unintelligible machines, for want of letters to denote the parts!” To this sincere confession Diderot added particular details on various parts; such as proved that there were in the Encyclopedic subjects to be not only re-touched, but to be composed afresh; and this was what a new company of literati and artists undertook, but have not yet completed. The first edition, however, which had been delivering to the public from 1751 to 1767, was soon sold off, because its defects were compensated in part by many well-executed articles, and because uncommon pains were taken to recommend it to the public.

, an eminent French printer, who deserves a more satisfactory article than the French biographers have as yet enabled us to give him, was born at Paris in 1730, and was the son of a printer and bookseller, who provided him with an excellent classical education before he introduced him into business. Full of enthusiasm for the advancement of the art of printing, young Didot determined to rival those celebrated printers, Joachim Ibarra of Spain, and Baskerville of England, and lived to surpass both. He soon brought his press to a state of excellence unattained by any of his contemporaries; and extended his skill to every branch connected with it. Among the number of improvements perfected by his exertions, is the construction of mills for making fine paper, which he assisted not only by his zeal and activity, but by pecuniary contribution. He also invented a press by which the workman is enabled to print, equally and at once the whole extent of a sheet; and he was the inventor of many other machines and instruments now commonly used in printing offices, all which have powerfully contributed to the modern advancement of the typographical art. The elegant editions of the classics published by order of Louis XIV. for the education of the Dauphin, were the production of the Didots 1 press, as well as the collection of romances called the D'Artois, in 64 vols. 18mo; the Theatrical Selections by Corneille, the works of Racine, Telemachus, Tasso’s Jerusalem, two superb Bibles, and a multiplicity of other inestimable works, each of which, on its publication, seemed to make nearer approaches to perfection. Didot sedulously endeavoured to unite in his family every talent auxiliary to the printing art; one of his sons became a celebrated type-founder; and the voice of fame announces the superior rank which they both deservedly hold among the printers of the age. The fond father delighted to observe that he was excelled by his children; while they dutifully ascribed their success to the force of his instruction, and the benefit of his example. The life of JDidot was the life of honour; his abilities were universally known and respected; and the following anecdote will prove the goodness of his heart: in one of his journeys to the paper mills of Anonay, he met an artist who had introduced in France an improvement in the application of cylinders, &c. and believing that his ingenuity merited reward, exerted all his interest with government; but unfortunately, when he was on the point of succeeding, the artist died, leaving two girls in the helpless state of infancy. Didot took the orphans in his arms, proclaimed himself their father, and kept his word. At the age of seventy-three, Didot read over five times, and carefully corrected, before it was sent to the press, every sheet of the stereotype edition of Montague, printed by his sons. At four o'clock in the morning he was pursuing this fatiguing occupation. The correctness of the text will therefore render this work particularly valuable among the productions of the modern press. About eighteen months previous to his death, he projected an alphabetical index of every subject treated upon in Montague’s Essays. He had collected all his materials, at which he laboured unceasingly; and perhaps too strict an application to this favourite study accelerated the death of this eminent artist and benevolent man, which took place July 10, 1804. His business is still successfully carried on by his sons, Peter and Firmia Didot. The reputation of the elder Didot was much assisted by the labours of his brother, Peter Francis, who died in 1795, and to whom we owe the beautiful editions of Thomas a Kempis, fol. of Telemachus, 4to the “Tableau de l'empire Ottoman,” &c.

, another of the name, was an eminent musician of Alexandria, and, according to Suidas, cotemporary in the first century with the emperor Nero, by whom he was much honoured and esteemed. This proves him to have been younger than Aristoxenus, and more ancient than Ptolemy, though some have imagined him to have preceded Aristoxenus. He wrote upon grammar and medicine, as well as music; but his works are all lost, and every thing we know at present of his barmonical doctrines is from Ptolemy, who, by disputing, preserved them. However, this author confesses him to have been well versed in the canon and harmonic divisions; and if we may judge from the testimony, even of his antagonist, he must have been not only an able theorist in music, but a man of considerable learning. As this musician preceded Ptolemy, and was the first who introduced the minor tone into the scale, and, consequently, the practical major 3d -f, which harmonized the whole system, and pointed out the road to counterpoint; an honour that most critics have bestowed on Ptolemy, he seems to have a better title to the invention of modern harmony, or music in parts, than Guido, who appears to have adhered, both in theory and practice, to the old division of the scale into major tones and limmas. “The best species of diapason,” says Doni, “and that which is the most replete with fine harmony, and chiefly in use at present, was invented by Didymus. His method was this: after the major semitone E F T-f, he placed the minor tone in the ratio of V, between F G, and afterwards the major tone between G A; but Ptolemy, for the sake of innovation, placed the major tone where Didymus placed the minor.” Ptolemy, however, in speaking of Didymus and his arrangement, objects to it as contrary to the judgment of the ear, which requires the major tone below the minor. The ear certainly determines so with us, and it is therefore probable, that in Ptolemy’s time the major key was gaining ground. Upon the whole, however, it appears that these authors only differ in the order, not the quality of intervals.

, an eminent botanist, who settled in England, was born at Darmstadt, in Germany, in 1681. He was early intended for the study of physic, and had the principal part of his education at the university of Giessen, a city of Upper Hesse. Of all the parts of science connected with the medical profession, he was most attached to the cultivation of botany; by which he soon obtained so much reputation, that early in life he was chosen a member of the Academia Curiosorum Germanise. How well he deserved this honour, was apparent in his papers published in the “Miscellanea Curiosa.” The first of his communications that we are acquainted with, and which could not have been written later than 1715, was a dissertation concerning the plants of America that are naturalized in Europe. The subject is curious, and is still capable of much farther illustration. A diligent inquiry into it would unquestionably prove that a far greater number of plants than is usually imagined, and which are now thought to be indigenous in Europe, were of foreign origin. Besides the most obvious increase of them, owing to their passage from the garden to the dunghill, and thence to the field, they have been augmented in consequence of various other causes, no small number of them having been introduced and dispersed by the importation of grain, the package of merchandise, and the clearing out of ships. The English Flora of this kind, in its present state, cannot perhaps contain fewer than sixty acknowledged species; and a critical examination would probably add greatly to the catalogue. Another paper of Diiienius’s, published in the “Miscellanea Curiosa,” was a critical dissertation on the coffee of the Arabians, and on European coffee, or such as may be prepared from grain or pulse. In this dissertation he gives the result of his own preparations made with pease, beans, and kidneybeans; but says, that from rye is produced what comes the nearest to true coffee. In another paper he relates the experiment which he made concerning some opium which he had prepared himself from the poppy of Europe growth. In the same collection he shews himself as a / logist, in a paper on leeches, and in a description of t species of the Papilio genus. In 1719, Dillenius excited the notice of naturalists by the publication of his Catalogue of plants growing in the neighbourhood of Giesseu. Nothing can more strongly display the early skill and indefatigable industry of Dillenius, than his being able to produce so great a number of plants in so small a time He enumerates not fewer than 980 species of what were then called the more perfect plants; that is, exclusive of the mushroom class, and all the mosses. By the [news] of this performance, the character of Dillenius, as a truly scientific botanist, was fixed; and henceforward he attracted the notice of all the eminent professors and admirers of the science. To this science no one was more ardently devoted at that time in England, than William Sherard, esq. who had been British consul at Smyrna, from which place he had returned to his own country in 1718; and who, soon after, had the honorary degree of LL. D. conferred on him by the university of Oxford. Being particularly enamoured with Dillenius’s discoveries in the cryptogamia class, he entered into a correspondence with him, which ripened into a close friendship. In 1721, Dr. Sherard, in the pursuit of his botanical researches, made the tour of Holland, France, and Italy, much to the advantage of the science; but what in an especial manner rendered his travels of consequence to the study of nature in our own country, was, that on his return he brought Dillenius with him to England. It was in the month of August in the same year that this event took place; and Dillenius had not long resided in England before he undertook a work that was much desired, a new edition of the “Synopsis stirpium Britannicarum” of Ray, which was become scarce. This edition of the “Synopsis” seems to have been the most popular of all his publications.

, a celebrated inoculator for the small pox, was the son of John Dimsdale of Theydon Gernon, near Epping in Essex, a surgeon and apothecary, by Susan, daughter of Thomas Bowyer of Alburyhall, in the parish of Albury, near Hertford. He was born in 1712, and received his first medical knowledge from his father, and at St. Thomas’s hospital. He commenced practice at Hertford about 1734, where he married the only daughter of Nathaniel Brassey, esq. of Roxford, an eminent banker in London. This lady died in 1744, leaving no children and to relieve his mind under this loss, Mr. Dimsdale joined the medical staff of the duke of Cumberland’s army, then on its way to suppress the rebellion in Scotland. In this situation he remained until the surrender of Carlisle to the king’s forces, when he received the duke’s thanks, and returned to Hertford. In 1746 he married Anne lies, a relation of his first wife, and by her fortune, and that which he acquired by the death of the widow of sir John Dimsdale of Hertford, he was enabled to retire from practice; but his family becoming numerous, he resumed it, and took the degree of M. D. in 1761.

, an eminent French surgeon and writer, was born at Paris, and became surgeon in ordinary to Maria Teresa of Austria, queen of France, and to the dauphinesses and the royal family. These honours were bestowed in consequence of the fame which he acquired as lecturer in surgery and anatomy in the royal gardens at Paris, an office founded by Louis XIV. He retained this and his other offices with increasing reputation, until his death, Dec. 11, 1718. His first publication was “Histoire anatomique d'une matrice extraordinaire,” 1683. In 1690, he published “Anatomic de l'homme suivant la circulation du sang, et les nouvelles decouvertes,” 8vo, an useful epitome, containing all that was then known on the subject. It was well received, frequently reprinted, and was translated in 1718, into the Tartar language, by order of Cam-hi, the emperor of China, for the benefit of his subjects. His next work, which first appeared in 1707, was “Cours d'Operations de Chirurgie demontree, au Jardin Royal de Paris,” 8vo. This has been reprinted still more frequently than the former work, and has been translated into nearly all the modern languages. Heister gave an edition of it in Latin, with notes, and it still retains a certain degree of credit. In 1709, he gave “Dissertation sur la mort subite, avec l‘histoire d’une fille cataleptique,” 12mo; and in 1718, “Traite general des Accouchmens,” 8vo. This also has been translated into most modern languages, though it contains little more than an abridgment of the practice of Mauriceau, and is now almost entirely unnoticed.

, an eminent physician of Anaxarba, since called Ceesarea, in Cilicia, flourished in the reign of Nero, in the first century, and composed five books of the Materia Medica. Fabricius is certain, that he composed these books before Pliny wrote his Natural History, although he supposes Pliny might reach the age of Dioscorides. Pliny has indeed made no mention of him, and yet relates many things of a very similar nature; which circumstances Fabricius imputes to their both having collected their materials from the same store-house, and to Pliny’s not having seen the books of Dioscorides. This physician tells us, in the preface of his first book, that he had consulted all who had written upon the Materia Medica before him; that to the information he had received from others, he had joined great application of his own; that he had travelled over many countries, for the sake of confirming by observation what he had learned from books; that he had corrected many errors of others, added many new things of his own, and digested the whole into a regular order. Salmasius considers all this as so much boasting, and treats Dioscorides as merely a laborious compiler, or pillager of others; but Galen has pronounced these books of Dioscorides to be the best that had been written upon the subject, and it is evident that in the early stages of botanical science he was looked up to with a reverence which is no longer paid. His object being solely the Materia Medica, he discusses each subject specifically, and in a separate chapter, dividing the whole into five books; in which, as far as any order takes place, they arrange into aromatic, alimentary, and medicinal plants. His descriptions are chiefly taken from colour, size, mode of growing, comparison of the leaves and roots, with other plants well known, and therefore left undescribed. In general they are short, and frequently insufficient to determine the species; and hence arise the endless and irreconcileable contentions among his commentators. In this manner, however, he has described near 700 plants; to which he subjoins the virtues and uses; and to him all posterity have appealed as decisive on the subject.

His works were published together in 1747, 5 vols. 4to, and, notwithstanding his many extravagancies and absurdities, many have considered him as an eminent teacher of true piety and wisdom. He probably deserved more praise as a physician and chemist. He is said to have invented Prussian blue; and there is still an oil called DippePs oil, which he first discovered, a powerful-sudorific, and deserving of more notice than it now receives.

, an eminent mathematician, was born at Salisbury, on the 29th of May, 1675, being the fourteenth of that name in a direct line. His father was a gentleman possessed of a small estate in the county of Wilts. His mother was of the family of the Luttrells of Dunstercastle, near Taunton, in Somersetshire, whose fortune made a considerable increase to the family income. Mr. Ditton’s father being of the sect of nonconformists, and extremely tenacious of his opinions, entered much into the religious controversifs of those times, and in supporting such contentions impaired his fortune, almost to the ruin of his family. Mr. Humphrey Ditton was the only son; and his father, observing in him an extraordinary good capacity, was desirous that he should not want the advantage of a good education. Accordingly, he placed him in a private academy, under the direction of Dr. Olive, a clergyman of the established church, who, notwithstanding his religious sentiments were different from those of Mr. Ditton’s family, was much esteemed by them for his candour and moderation in those troublesome times. When Mr. Ditton had finished his studies under Dr. Olive, he at the desire of his father, although contrary to his own inclination, engaged in the professioa of divinity, and began to exercise his function at Tunbridge, in Kent, where he continued to preach some years during which time he married Miss Ball, a lady at that place.

, an eminent English lawyer, the son of Richard Doddridge, of a Devonshire family, was born at Barnstaple in 1555. In 1572 he was entered of Exeter college, Oxford, where he studied four years; after which he was removed to the Middle Temple, London, where he became a great proficient in the law, and a noted counsellor. In the forty-fifth year of the reign of queen Elizabeth he was Lent reader of that house; and on the 20th of January, 1603-4, he was called to the degree of serjeant-at-law, at which time he had the honour of being appointed serjeant to Henry prince of Wales. From this employment he was raised, in the succeeding year, to be solicitor-general to the king, and on the 25th of June 1607, he was constituted his majesty’s principal serjeantat-law, and was knighted on the fifth of July following. In February 1612-13, he was created M. A. at his chambers in Serjeants Inn by the vice-chancellor, the two proctors, and five other members of the university of Oxford. This peculiar honour was conferred upon him in gratitude for the great service he had done to the university in several law-suits depending between the city of Oxford and the university. On the 22d of April 1013, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of king’s bench, in which, office he continued till his death. In this station he appears to have conducted himself with great integrity as well as ability. However, in April, 162, he and the other judges of the court were called upon to assign their reasons in the house of lords, for having given judgment against admitting five gentlemen to bail, who had been imprisoned for refusing the loan which had lately been demanded by the crown. Sir Nicholas Hyde, lord chief justice, sir John Doddridge, Mr. Justice Jones, and Mr. Justice Whitlocke, each of them spoke upon the occasion, and made the best defence which the nature of the case would admit. If they were guilty of a mistake, which cannot now reasonably be doubted, they seem to have been led into it in the sincerity of their hearts, from the notions they entertained of regal power, and probably from their perceiving the drift of parliament in these proceedings. Sir John Doddridge, in his speech, asserts the,

, an eminent dissenting divine, great-grand-nephew to the preceding, was the son of the nonconformist rector of Shepperton in Middlesex, and was born in London, June 26th, 1702. At his birth he was so weakly that he was regarded as dead; but by attention and care he recovered some degree of strength. His constitution, however, was always feeble, and probably rendered more so by the assiduity with which he prosecuted his studies and public services. To his pious parents he was indebted for early instruction in religion, and for those salutary impressions which were never erased from his mind. His classical education commenced in London, but being left an orphan in his thirteenth year, he was removed to a private school at St. Alban’s, where he had the happiness of commencing an acquaintance with Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Samuel Clark, the dissenting minister of the place; and having lost his whole patrimony after his father’s death, the protection of this friend enabled him to pursue the course of his studies. In 1715 he left St. Alban’s, and retired to the house of his sister, the wife of Mr. John Nettleton, a dissenting minister at Ongar, in Essex, and while deliberating on the course of life which he should pursue, he received offers of encouragement and support from the duchess of Bedford, if he chose to be educated in one of the universities for the church of England; but could not conscientiously comply with the terms of conformity. Others advised him to devote himself to the profession of the law; but before he had finally determined, he received a letter from Mr. Clark, with generous offers of assistance, if he chose the ministry among the dissenters. These offers he thankfully accepted; and after continuing for some months at St. Alban’s in the house of his benefactor, he was placed, in October 1719, under the tuition of the reverend John Jennings, who kept an academy for the education of nonconformist ministers at Kibworth in Leicestershire. Here he paid particular attention to classical literature, and cultivated an acquaintance with the Greek writers, and also with the best authors of his own country. In 1722, having obtained an ample testimonial from a committee of ministers, by whom he was examined, he became a preacher at Kibworth, which he preferred, because it was an obscure village, and the congregation was small, so that he could pursue his studies with little interruption. During his residence at this place, from June 1723 to October 1725, he is said to have excelled as a preacher. At first he paid particular attention to his compositions, and thus acquired a habit of delivering his sentiments usually with judgment, and always with ease and freedom of language, when he was afterwards, by a multiplicity of engagements, reduced to the necessity of extempore speaking. In 1725, he removed to Market-Harborough, to enjoy the conversation and advice of Mr. Some, the pastor of the congregation in that place and after the year 1727, when he was chosen assistant to Mr. Some, he preached alternately at Kibworth and MarketHarborough. He received several invitations from congregations much more numerous than these; but he determined to adhere to the plan, which he had adopted, of pursuing his schemes of improvement in a more private residence. When he left the academy, his tutor, Mr. Jennings, not long before his death, which happened in 1723, advised him to keep in view the improvement of the course of lectures on which he had attended; and this advice he assiduously regarded during his retirement at Kibworth. Mr. Jennings foresaw, that, in case of his own death, Mr. Doddridge was the most likely of any of his pupils to complete the schemes which he had formed, and to undertake the conduct of a theological academy. Mr. Doddridge’s qualifications for the office of tutor were generally known and approved, in consequence of a plan for conducting the preparatory studies of young persons intended for the ministry, which he had drawn up at the desire of a friend, whose death prevented his carrying it into effect. This plan was shewn to Dr. Watts, who had then no personal acquaintance with the author; but he was so much pleased with it, that he concurred with others in the opinion, that the person who had drawn it up was best qualified for executing it. Accordingly he was unanimously solicited to undertake the arduous office; and after some hesitation, and with a very great degree of diffidence, he consented to undertake it. Availing himself of all the information and assistance which he could obtain from conversation and correspondence with his numerous friends, he opened his academy at Midsummer, in 1729, at Market- Harborongh. Having continued in this situation for a few months, he was invited by a congregation at Northampton; and he removed thither in December 1729; and in March of the following year, he was ordained according to the mode usually practised among dissenters. In this place he engaged, in a very high degree, the love and attachment of his congregation; and he observes, in his last will, “that he had spent the most delightful hours of his life in assisting the devotions of as seuious, as grateful, and as deserving a people, as perhaps any minister had ever the happiness to serve.”

His reputation was such, and the respect of persons of all parties and denominations for his various excellent qualities was so great, that in the close of his life, and in the scene of his last decline, all seemed to vie in testifying their solicitude for his recovery, and their wishes for his obtaining every accommodation that would render his mind and his circumstances easy. During his stay at Bristol, previously to his voyage to Lisbon, he received very particular expressions of regard from a clergyman of the established church. When Dr. Doddridge undesignedly threw out a hint of the principal reason which caused him to demur about the voyage, and that was the expence of it, this gentleman was both generous and active in promoting a subscription to defray the charges of his voyage. Nathaniel Neal, esq. an eminent Solicitor in London, was also very zealous in the management of this business, which he conducted with such success as to be able to inform the doctor, that instead of selling what our author had in the funds, he should be able through the benevolence of friends, to add something to it, after the expence of the voyage was defrayed. As Mrs. Doddridge forfeited a considerable annuity, to which as a widow she would have been entitled, by her husband’s dying abroad, a subscription was opened for her, chiefly in London, and in a great measure under the direction of Mr. Neal, by means of which a sum was raised, which was more than equal to the annuity that had been forfeited.

, an eminent antiquary, the son of Matthew Dodsworth, registrar of York cathedral, and chancellor to archbishop Matthews, was born July 24, 1585, at Newton Grange, in the parish of St. Oswald, in Rydale, Yorkshire. He died in August 1654; and was buried at Rufrord, Lancashire. He was a man “of wonderful industry, but less judgment; always collecting and transcribing, but never published any thing.” Such is the report of him by Wood; who in the first part of it, Mr. Gough observes, drew his own character. “One cannot approach the borders of this county,” adds this topographer, in his account of Yorkshire, “without paying tribute to the memory of that indefatigable collector of its antiquities, Roger Dodsworth, who undertook and executed a work, which, to the antiquaries of the present age, would have been the stone of Tydides.” One hundred and twenty-two volumes of his own writing, besides original Mss. which he had obtained from several hands, making all together 162 volumes folio, now lodged in the Bodleian library, are lasting memorials what this county owes to him, as the two volumes of the Monasticon (which, though published under his and Dugdale’s names conjointly, were both collected and written totally by him) will immortalize that extensive industry which has laid the whole kingdom under obligation. The patronage of general Fairfax (whose regard to our antiquities, which the rage of his party was so bitter against, should cover his faults from the eyes of antiquaries) preserved this treasure, and bequeathed it to the library where it is now lodged. Fairfax preserved also the fine windows of York cathedral; and when St. Mary’s tower, in which were lodged innumerable records, both public and private, relating to the northern parts, was blown up during the siege of York, he gave money to the soldiers who could save any scattered papers, many of which are now at Oxford; though Dodsworth had transcribed and abridged the greatest part before. Thomas Tomson, at the hazard of his life, saved out of the rubbish such as were legible; which, after passing through several hands, became the property of Dr. John Burton, of York, being 1868, in thirty bundles. Wallis says they are in the cathedral library. Fairfax allowed Dodsworth a yearly salary to preserve the inscriptions in churches.

, an eminent special pleader and law writer, was born in Ireland, and educated at a country school. He came to England early in life, with an able capacity and habits of industry, but without any direct prospect of employment, or choice of profession. He became, however, clerk to the late Mr. Bower, a very profound lawyer, where, with assiduous study, he acquired a knowledge of special pleading, and the law connected with that abstruse science; and such was his diligence, that in a comparatively short time, he accumulated a collection of precedents and notes that appeared to his employer an effort of great labour and ingenuity. After having been many years with Mr. Bower, the latter advised him to commence special pleader, and in this branch of the profession he soon acquired great reputation; his drafts, which were generally the work of his own hand, being admired as models of accuracy. They were formed according to the neat and concise system of Mr. Bower, and his great friend and patron sir Joseph Yates, many of whose books, notes, and precedents, as well as those of sir Thomas Davenport, Mr. Dogherty possessed. This intense application, however, greatly impaired his health, which was visibly on the decline for many months before his decease. This event took place at his chambers in Clifford’s-inn, Sept. 29, 1805, and deprived the profession of a man of great private worth, modest and unassuming manners, independent mind, and strict honour and probity. Mr. Dogherty was the author and editor of some valuable works on criminal law. He published a new edition of the “Crown Circuit Companion;” and an original composition, in 1786, “The Crown Circuit Assistant,” which is a most useful supplement to the former. In 1800 he edited a new edition of Hale’s “Historia Placitorum Coronae,” in 2 vols. 8vo, with an abridgment of the statutes relating to felonies, continued to that date, and with notes and references. His common-place and office-books, still in manuscript, are said to be highly valuable.

, an eminent optician, and the inventor of the achromatic telescope, was born in Spitalfields, June 10, 1706. His parents were French protestants, and at the time of the revocation of the edict of Nantz, in 1685, resided in Normandy, but in what particular part cannot now be ascertained. M. de Lalande does not believe the name to be of French origin; but, however this may be, the family were compelled soon after this period to seek refuge in England, in order to avoid persecution, and to preserve their religion. The fate of this family was not a solitary case; fifty thousand persons pursued the same measures, and we may date from this period the rise of several arts and manufactures, which have become highly beneficial to this country. An establishment was given to these refugees, by the wise policy of our government, in Spitalfields, and particular encouragement granted to the silk manufactory.

, an eminent French botanist and traveller, was born at Macon, Feb. 22, 1742. He was brought up to the study of medicine, and took the degree of doctor of physic in the university of Montpellier. He there imbibed, under the celebrated professor Gouan, a taste for natural history, more especially for botany. To this taste he sacrificed his profession, and all prospect of emolument from that source, and cultivated no studies but such as favoured his darling propensity. Whatever time was not devoted to that, was given to the pleasures and dissipation incident to his time of life, his gay and agreeable character, and the society with which he was surrounded. To this dissipation he perhaps sacrificed more than prudence could justify; and it was fortunate for his moral character and worldly interest, probably also for his scientific success, that he removed to Paris in 1772, to improve his botanical knowledge. In 1775, while returning from a visit to Haller at Berne, he was informed that M. Turgot, the French minister, had chosen him to go to Peru, in search of plants that might be naturalized in Europe. On this he immediately returned to Paris, was presented to the minister, and received his appointment, with a salary of 3000 livres. Part of this was obliged to be mortgaged to pay his debts, and he was detained until the Spanish court had consented to the undertaking, which was not until next year. On arriving at Madrid, in November 1776, he found that the Spanish court had encumbered his expedition with futile instructions, and had added four companions, who, although of very little use, had each a salary of 10,000 livres. He accomplished his voyage, however, in six months, arriving at Lima April 8, 1778, where he obtained a favourable reception from the viceroy of Peru, Don Emanuel de Guirrior, and from M. de Bordenave, one of the canons of Lima.

, an eminent botanist, was born at Padua in 1717, of a noble family, but addicted himself to science, and under the ablest professors of the university of his native city, studied medicine, natural history, botany, and mathematics. After taking his doctor’s degree in medicine, he more particularly cultivated natural history, and frequently went to Dalmatia in pursuit of curious specimens. In 1750 he published a small folio, with plates, entitled “Delia Storia Naturale Marina dell' Adriatico,” to which his friend Sesler subjoined the botanical history of a plant named after him Vitaliana. This work was afterwards translated into several languages. The same year, he was appointed professor of natural history and botany at Turin. After having travelled several times over the maritime Alps, he undertook, by order of the king, an expedition to the East Indies. Arriving at Alexandria, he went thence to Cairo, and after visiting a considerable part of Egypt, penetrated into those countries that were then unknown to European travellers. On his return he died at Bassora, of a putrid fever, in 1763. He had previously packed up two cases of collections of natural history, and two large volumes of observations made during his travels, which were to be conveyed to Turin by the way of Lisbon; but at the latter place, it is said, they were kept a long time, not without some suspicion of their having been opened, &c. It is certain, however, that both the collections and the manuscripts were lost by some means or other. Ferber, who gives some account of Donati in his “Letters on Mineralogy,” thinks he was not very remarkable for his botanical knowledge, but a first-rate connoisseur in petrifactions, corals, zoophytes, and, in general, in the knowledge of all marine bodies. He adds that his enemies were zealous in their endeavours to injure his reputation; affirming that he was still alive in Persia, where he resided in disguise, and appropriated to his own use the remittances that had been granted for the purposes of his voyage, all which Ferber considers as a ridiculous fable. After his death, was published his “Dissertation sur le corail noir.”

, an eminent English divine and poet, was born in the city of London in 1573. His father was descended from a very ancient family in Wales, and his mother was distantly related to sir Thomas More the celebrated and unfortunate lord chancellor, and to judge Rastall, whose father, one of the earliest English printers, married Elizabeth, the chancellor’s sister. Ben Jonsoa seems to think that he inherited a poetical turn from Haywood, the epigrammatist, who was also a distant relation, by the mother’s side. Of his father’s station in life we have no account, but he must have been a man of considerable opulence, as he bequeathed to him three thousand pounds, a large sum in those days. Young Donne received the rudiments of education at home under a private tutor, and his proficiency was such, that he was sent to the university at the early, and perhaps unprecedented age of eleven years, or according to Walton, at ten. At this time, we are told, he understood the French and Latin languages, and had in other respects so far exceeded the usual attainments of boyhood, as to be compared to Picus Mirandula, one that was “rather born, than made wise by study.” He was entered of Hart-hall, now Hertford college, where at the usual time he might have taken his first degree with honour, but having been educated in the Roman catholic persuasion, he submitted to the advice of his friends who were averse to the oath usually administered on that occasion. About his fourteenth year, he was removed to Trinity college, Cambridge, where he prosecuted his studies for three years with uncommon perseverance and applause: but here likewise his religious scruples prevented his taking any degree.

, an eminent nonconformist, was born at Kidderminster in Worcestershire, in 1730. Having discovered an early inclination to learning, he was sent to Cambridge, and admitted of Pembroke-hall, where he studied with a view to the church, or rather to the meeting, as the church was then under the controul of the republican party. His first destination, however, was to the law, and he wont for some time to receive instructions in an attorney’s office; but his master having employed him to copy some writings on a Sunday, he relinquished the business. It appears to have been after this that he went to the university, and having taken his degrees in arts, became a preacher. His first settlement was at St. Alphage, London-wall. This living being then vacant, Mr. Doolittle appeared as a candidate, with several others, and the parishioners preferring him, he became their pastor in 1654, and remained a very popular preacher, until 1662, when he was ejected for nonconformity. From this he removed to Moorfields, and opened a kind of boarding-school, in which he was so successful as to be obliged to hire a larger house in Bunhillfields, where he continued until the great plague, and then he removed to Woodford. After the plague abated, he returned to London, and saw it laid in ashes by the great fire. On this occasion he and some other nonconformists resumed their preaching, and were for some time unmolested. Mr. Doolittle has the credit of projecting the first meeting-house, which was a hired place in Bunhillfields, but that proving toe small, when the city began to be rebuilt, he erected a more commodious place of worship in Mugwell, or Monkwell-street, Cripplegate, which remains until this day. Here, however, he was occasionally interrupted by the magistrates, who put the laws in execution; but in 1672 he obtained a licence from Charles II. which is still suspended in the vestry-room of the meeting, and for some time continued to preach, and likewise kept an academy at Islington for the education of young men intended for the ministry among the nonconformists. On the corporation-act being passed, when his licence became useless, he was again obliged to leave London, and resided partly at Wimbledon, and partly at Battersea, where, although his house was rifled, he escaped imprisonment. At the revolution he was enabled to resume his ministry in Monkwell-street, and here he closed the public labours of fifty-three years, on May 24, 1707^ the seventyseventh year of his age. Much of this time was spent in writing his various works, many of which attained a high degree of popularity; as, 1. “A Treatise concerning the Lord’s Supper,” 1665, 12mo, which has perhaps been oftener prii ted than almost any book on that subject. 2. “Directions how to live after a wasting plague” (that of London), 1666, 8vo. 3. “A Rebuke for Sin, by God’s burning anger” (alluding to the great Fire). 4. “The Young Man’s Instructor, and the Old Man’s Remembrancer,” 1673, 8vo. 5. “A Call to delaying Sinners,” 1683, 12mo, of which there have been many editions. 6. “A Complete Body of Practical Divinity,” fol. 1723, &c. &c. His son, Samuel, was settled as a dissenting minister at Reading, where-he died in 1717.

, an eminent engraver, the brother of the preceding, was born in France in 1G57. His father dying when he was very young, he was brought up to the study of the law, which he pursued till about thirty years of age: when being examined, in order to being admitted to plead, the judge, finding him very deaf, advised him to relinquish a profession to which one of his senses was so ill adapted. He took the advice, and shut himself up for a year to practise drawing, for which he had probably better talents than for the law, sinee he could sufficiently ground himself in the former in a twelvemonth. Repairing to Rome, and receiving instructions from his brother Lewis, he followed painting for some years, and having acquired great freedom of hand, he was advised to try etching. Being of a flexile disposition, or uncommonly observant of advice, he accordingly turned to etching, and practised that for some more years; but happening to look into the works of Audran, he found he had been in a wrong method, and took up Audran’s manner, which he pursued for ten years. He was now about fifty years of age, had done many plates, and lastly the gallery of Cupid and Psyche, after Raphael, when a new difficulty struck him. Not having learned the handling and ri-rht use of the graver, he despaired of attaining the harmony and perfection at whicn he aimed, and at once abandoning engraving, he returned to his pencil a word from a friend, says lord Orford, would have thrown him back to the law. However, after two months, he was persuaded to apply to the graver; and receiving some hints from one that used to engrave the writing under his plates, he conquered that difficulty too, and began the seven planets from Raphael. Mercury, his first, succeeded so well, that he engraved four large pictures with oval tops, and from thence proceeded to Raphael’s “Transfiguration,” which raised his reputation above all the masters of that time. At Rome he became known to several Englishmen of rank, who persuaded him to come to England and engrave the Cartoons, then at Hampton Court. He arrived in June 1711, but did not begin his drawings till Easter following, the intervening time being spent in raising a fund for his work. At first it was proposed that the plates should be engraved at the queen’s expence, and to be given as presents tothe nobility, foreign princes, and ministers. Lord-treasurer Oxford was much his friend but Dorigny demanding 4000l. or 5000l. put a stop to that plan; yet the queen gave him an apartment at Hampton Court, with necessary perquisites. The work, however, was undertaken by subscription , at four guineas a set, and Dorigny sent for Dupuis and Dubosc from Paris to assist him; but from some disagreement that occurred, they left him before the work was half completed. In 1719 he presented two complete sets to king George I. and a set a-piece to the prince and princess; for which the king gave him 100 guineas, and the prince a gold medal. The duke of Devonshire, who had assisted him, procured for him, in 1720, the honour of knighthood. His eyes afterwards failing him, he returned to Paris, where, in 1725, he was made a member of the royal academy of painting, and died in 1746, aged eighty-nine.

, an eminent physician, and reader of anatomy to the company of surgeons, was born in Scotland, in 1675. After completing his education he came to London, and applied himself diligently to the study of anatomy and surgery, which he both taught and practised several years with success. Haller, who visited him when he was in England, speaks of him in high terms of approbation. He saw, he says, several of his anatomical preparations made with great art and ingenuity, to shew the motion of the joints, and the internal structure of the bones. He was then meditating an extensive anatomical work, which, however, he did not live to finish, and has rot been since published. When Mr. (afterwards Dr.) William Hunter, came to London, he consulted with Dr. Douglas on the method of improving himself in anatomy, and Dr. Douglas took him into his house, to assist him in his dissections; at the same time he gave him an opportunity of attending St. George’s hospital. The year following, 1742, Dr. Douglas died. Besides several communications to the royal society, which are published in their Transactions, containing the anatomy of the uterus, with the neighbouring vessels, and some cases in surgery, the doctor published in 1707, “Myographix comparator specimen,” or a comparative description of all the muscles in a man, and in a quadruped (a dog), 12mo; containing the most correct description of the muscles that had been seen to that time. “Bibliographic anatomicoe specimen, seu catalogus pene omnium auctorum qui ab Hippocrate ad Harveium rem anatomicam illustrarunt,” London, 1715, 8vo reprinted with improvements at Leyderi, in 1731. “A description of the peritoneum, and of that part of the membrana cellularis which lies on its outside,” &c. London, 1730, 4to, a very accurate and valuable work. “A history of the lateral operation for the stone,” 1726, 8vo; republished with an appendix, in 1733, comprising a comparison of the methods used by different lithotomists, particularly of that practised by Cheselden.

, the late learned bishop of Salisbury, was born in Scotland, in 1721, the son of Mr. Archibald Douglas, a merchant of Fittenween, in Fifeshire. His grandfather (who was a younger brother of the family of Douglas of Tulliquilly, one of the oldest branches of the house of Douglas now in existence), was an eminent clergyman of the episcopal church of Scotland, and the immediate successor of bishop Burnet in the living of Salten, in East Lothian, from which preferment he was ejected at the revolution, when presbyterianism was established in Scotland. The subject of this memoir was educated for some years at the school of Dunbar, but in 1736 was entered a commoner of St. Mary hall, Oxford, where he remained till 1738, and then removed to Baliolcollege, on being elected an exhibitioner on bishop Warner’s foundation. In 1741 he took his bachelor’s degree; and in 1742, in order to acquire a facility of speaking French, he went abroad, and remained for some time at Montreal, in Picardy, and afterwards at Ghent, in Flanders. On his return to college, in 1743, he took his master’s degree, and having been ordained deacon, in 1744, he was appointed to officiate as chaplain to the third regiment of foot-guards, which he joined when serving with the combined army in Flanders. During the time he tilled this situation, he employed himself chiefly in the study of modern languages. He was not an inactive spectator of the battle of Fontenoy, April 29, 1745, on which occasion he was employed in carrying orders from general Campbell to the English who guarded the village in which he and the other generals were stationed.

, an eminent artist, was born at Leyden in 1613, and after receiving some instructions from Dolendo, an engraver, and Kouwhoorn, a glasspainter, at the age of fifteen became a disciple of Rembrandt, with whom he continued three years. Rembrandt taught him the principles of colouring, and the chiaroscuro, to which knowledge Douw added a delicacy of pencil, and a patience in working up his colours to the highest degree of neatness, superior to any other master. His pictures are usually of a small size, with figures exquisitely touched, transparent and delicate. Every object is a minute copy of nature, and appears perfectly natural in colour, freshness, and force. In painting portraits he used a concave mirror, and sometimes looked at his original through a frame with many exact squares of fine silk; practices now disused, except by some miniature painters who still use the mirror.

, better known by the name of Bernard of Bibiena, an eminent cardinal, was born of a reputable family at Bibiena in 1470, and was sent at nine years of age to pursue his studies at Florence. His family connexions introduced him into the house of the Medici, and such was the assiduity with which he availed himself of the opportunities of instruction there afforded him, that at the age of seventeen, he had attained a great facility of Latin composition, and was soon afterwards selected by Lorenzo de Medici, as one of his private secretaries. He was also the principal director of the studies of John de Medici, afterwards Leo X. and when the honours of the church were bestowed on his pupil, the principal care of his pecuniary concerns was intrusted to Dovizi; in the execution of which he rendered his patron such important services, and conducted himself with so much vigilance and integrity, that some have not hesitated to ascribe to him, in a considerable degree, the future eminence of his pupil, who, when made pope, gave his tutor a cardinal’s cap. He also employed himself in several negociations. He sent him as legate to the army raised against the duke of Urbino; and also to the emperor Maximilian. In 1518 he was sent as legate to France to persuade the king to join in the crusade against the Turks, in which he would have succeeded, had not the pope discouraged the enterprize by his unreasonable distrust and caballing against France. Bibiena remonstrated against this conduct with great freedom in his letters to Rome, which is supposed to have hastened his death in Nov. 1520. Some have asserted that he was poisoned by the order or contrivance of Leo X. which is positively denied by the historian of that pontiff, as utterly destitute of proof.

, bishop of Derry in Ireland, the son of William Downham, bishop of Chester, was born there. He was educated at Cambridge, was elected a fellow of Christ college in 1585, and was afterwards professor of logic. Fuller says that no man was better skilled in Aristotle and Ramus, and terms him “the top-twig of that branch.” He was esteemed a man of learning, and was chaplain to James I. by whom he was advanced to the see of Derry, by letters dated Sept. 6, 1616, and was consecrated Oct. 6, of the same year. During the government of the lord chancellor Loftus, and the earl of Cork, he obtained a commission, by an immediate warrant from himself to arrest, apprehend, and attach the bodies of all people within his jurisdiction, who should decline the same, or should refuse to appear upon lawful citation, or appearing should refuse to obey the sentence given against them, and authority to bind them in recognizances, with sureties or without, to appear at the council-table to answer such contempts. The like commission was renewed to him by the lord deputy Wentworth, Oct. 3, 1633. Both were obtained upon his information, that his diocese abounded with all manner of delinquents, who refused obedience to all spiritual processes. He died at Londonderry April 17, 1634, and was buried there in the cathedral. He had a brother named John, who was an eminent divine and a writer. His own works are very numerous, and evince his theological abilities and piety. 1. “A treatise concerning Antichrist, in two books,” Lond. 1603, 4to. 2. “The Christian’s Sanctuary,” ibid. 1604, 4to. 3. “Lectures upon the Fifteenth Psalm,” ibid. 1604, -4to. 4. “Sermon at the consecration of the Bishop of Bath and Wells, upon Apocalypse i. 20,” ibid. 160S, 4to. 5. “Defence of the same Sermon against a nameless author,” ibid. 1611,4to. 6. “Two Sermons, the one commending the ministry in general, the other, the office of bishops in particular,” ibid. 1608. The latter of these, but enlarged, is the consecration sermon above mentioned. 7. “Papa Antichristus, sen Diatriba de Antichristo,” ibid. 1620, a different treatise from the former against Antichrist. 8. “The Covenant of Grace, or an Exposition upon Luke i. 73, 74, 75,” Dublin, 1631, 8vo. 9. “A treatise on Justification,” Lond. 1633, folio. 10. “The Christian’s Freedom, or the doctrine of Christian Liberty,” Oxford, 1635, 8vo. 11. “An Abstract of the Duties commanded, and sins forbidden in the Law of God,” Lond. 1635, 8vo. 12. “A godly and learned Treatise of Prayer,” Lond. 1640, 4to. These three last were posthumous. His brother John, above mentioned, was likewise educated at Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. D. He exercised his ministry in different parts of London, and was the first who preached the Tuesday’s lecture in St. Bartholomew Exchange, which he did with great reputation. His principal work is entitled “The Christian Warfare.” He died in 1644.

, an ingenious physician and poet, the son of a country gentleman of both his names, was born at Newton House, in the village of Newton St. Cyrus, near Exeter, in 1740, and educated at the grammar-school of Exeter. About 1758 he was entered of Baliol college, Oxford, where he remained until he took his bachelor’s degree, and in 1762 was ordained by bishop Lavington in the cathedral of Exeter, but he had little attachment to the church, nor were his prospects very alluring. In 1765 he repaired to Edinburgh, with a view to study medicine, and took up his abode in the house of Dr. Blacklock, who, having read his first poetical production, “The Land of the Muses,” bestowed encouraging praise. This poem was published at Edinburgh in 1768, but has never since been reprinted. To it were added “Poems on several occasions,” of various merit, but all indicating a considerable share of poetical taste. In 1769, Mr. Downman came to London, where he attended the hospitals and lectures for one winter. He then received his master’s degree at Cambridge, and soon after settled as a practitioner at Exeter, and married the daughter of Dr. Andrew, an eminent physician in that city. Here his practice was rapidly increasing, when, in 1778, the severity of a chronic complaint, contracted in his earlier years, obliged him to consult his health by change of air, and retirement, during- which he amused himself by literary efforts. The first was his tragedy of “Lucius’unius Brutus,” published in 1779, in which there are some poetical beauties, but not enough of the dramatic form to suit the stage. “Belisarius,” his second dramatic attempt, was performed at the Exeter theatre, but with little success; but his third, “Editha,” brought out at that theatre in 1781, was performed for seventeen nights. This, however, must be imputed to its being founded on a local event peculiarly interesting to an Exeter audience; in other respects all his tragedies must be allowed to be better adapted to the closet than the stage.

, an eminent legislator of Athens, succeeded Triptolemus in the 39th olympiad, 324 years B.C. When the laws of Triptolemus were found insufficient for the regulation of the state, Draco instituted a new code, which was so extremely rigorous, that his Jaws were said to be written in blood. Under his system of legislation, death was the penalty for every kind of offence, in vindication of which he alleged, that as small faults seemed to him worthy of death, he could find no severer punishment for the greatest crimes. Such, however, was his abhorrence of the crime of taking away life, that he directed a prosecution to be instituted even against inanimate things which had been instrumental to this purpose, and sentenced a statue, which had fallen upon a man and killed him, to be banished an absurdity which shews the rude state of le-? gislation in his time. Some of his laws were the result of age and experience, and owed their effect to the opinion that was entertained of his virtue and patriotism, but the Athenians could not endure the rigour of others, and the legislator himself was obliged to withdraw to the island of Ægina, where he suffered as severely from his friends, as he could from his enemies, being, as we are told, suffocated at the public theatre, amidst the applauses of the people. The rigour of his discipline was in some measure relaxed by Solon, in the 46th olympiad.

, a surgeon at York, and an eminent antiquary, was much esteemed by Dr. Mead, Mr. Folkes, the two Mr. Gales, and all the principal members of the Royal and Antiquarian Societies. He published, in 1736, “Eboracum or the History and Antiquities of the City of York,” a splendid folio. A copy of it with large manuscript additions was in the hands of his son, the late rev. William Drake, vicar of Isleworth, who died in 1801, and was himself an able antiquary, as appears by his articles in the Archseologia, and would have republisbed his father’s work, if the plates could have been recovered. Mr. Drake was elected F. S. A. in 1735, and F. R. S. in 1736. From this latter society, for whatever reason, he withdrew in 1769, and died the following year. Mr. Cole, who has a few memorandums concerning him, informs us that when the oaths to government were tendered to him in 1745, he refused to take them. He describes him as a middle-aged man (in 1749) tall and thin, a surgeon of good skill, but whose pursuits as an antiquary had made him negligent of his profession. Mr. Cole also says, that Mr. Drake and Csesar Ward, the printer at York, were the authors of the “Parliamentary or Constitutional History of England,” printed in twenty-four volumes, 1751, &c. 8vo. This work extends from the earliest times to the restoration.

, an eminent classical editor, was born at Utrecht, Jan. 1, 1684, where, and at Leyden, he was educated. In 171-6 he was appointed professor of rhetoric and history at Utrecht, an office which he filled with great reputation. The first publication which evinced his talents appeared in 1704, while a student under Barman, entitled “Dissertatio Philologico-Historica de prrefecto urbis,” of which a new edition was printed at Francfort in 1752; and three years after, in 1707, he published another dissertation on taking his degree of doctor of laws, “De officio prsefectorum Prsetorio,” Utrecht, 4to. He died at Utrecht in 1748. As an editor he is principally known by his edition of “Silius Italicus,” 1717, 4to, a very valuable work, not only containing every thing worthy of perusal in the preceding editions, but enriched with the notes and emendations of Heinsius, and excerpta from an Oxford ms. and one belonging to Puteanus and by his “Livy,” printed at Amsterdam, 1738, 7 vols. 4to, superior to all which went before it, although not immaculate, and the commentaries, it is generally allowed, are tediously prolix.

, an eminent French writer and critic, secretary, and one of the forty members of the French academy, censor-royal, &c. was born at Beauvais, in December, 1670. After some elementary education at home, he came to Paris in 1686, and pursuing his studies, took his bachelor’s degree in divinity in 1691. One of his uncles, a canon of the cathedral of Beauvais, being attacked by a dangerous illness, resigned his canonry to him in 1695, but on his recovery chose to revoke his resignation. The nephew appears to have felt this and other disappointments in his view of promotion so keenly, as to determine to change his profession. He accordingly left Beauvais in the last-mentioned year, returned to Paris, and soon was distinguished as a man of abilities. The same year he acquired a situation in the office for foreign affairs, and became patronized by M. de Torcy, by whose means he accompanied the French plenipotentiaries to Ryswick, in 1696, where peace was concluded. After his return to France, he was sent to Italy in 1699, although without an ostensible character, to negociate some affairs of importance in the Italian courts, which occupied him until 1702. Some time after, he went to England, as charge d'affaires, and while the war occasioned by the contest about the crown of Spain was at its height, and had involved all Europe, he was the only minister France had at the court of St. James’s, where he resided without rank or character. He then went to the Hague, and to Brussels, and at this latter place wrote the manifesto of the elector of Bavaria, which did him so much credit. In 1707 we find him at Neufchatel, and in 1710 at Gertruydenburgh, and he appears to have had a considerable hand in the treaties of peace concluded at Utrecht, Baden, and Rastadt. All these services were recompensed in 1705, by the priory of Veneroles, and in 1714 by a canonry of the church of Beauvais. Having been employed in other state affairs by the regent and by cardinal Dubois, he was rewarded in 1716 by a pension of 2000 livres, and in 1723 was promoted to the abbey of Notre-Dame de Ressons, near Beauvais. As it was now his intention to execute the duties of these preferments, he received in 1724 the orders of subdeacon and deacon, and was about to have taken possession of his canonry, when he was seized with a disorder at Paris, which proved fatal March 23, 1742. In 1720 he was elected into the French academy, and in 1723 was appointed their secretary.

, an eminent antiquary and medailist, was born in 1721 at Housseau, in the canton of Soleure in Switzerland, whence, at nine years of age, he was sent to Denmark, and entered soon after as a student in the university of Copenhagen. Having completed his stud'es in that seminary, he repaired to France, which he considered from that moment as his adopted country, and entered into a Swiss regiment, in the service of it. In his military capacity his conduct was such as to merit and receive the esteem of his superior officers. At the battle of Fontenoy, he received two musket-shots, but still remained in his station, and could not be prevailed upon to leave the field of action, until his leg and part of his thigh had been carried off by a cannon-ball. Being thus rendered unfit for service, he was obliged to take refuge in the hospital for invalids, where he first resolved to extend his knowledge by cultivating foreign languages. After an obstinate pursuit of his object, which occupied all his thoughts, and occasioned several journies among the northern nations, expressly for the purpose of acquiring proficiency in this favourite study, he arrived at such a degree of eminence, as justly to merit the office of interpreter to the royal library for the English, Dutch, German, and Flemish, as well as the Swedish, Danish, and Russian languages. He fulfilled the duties of this important station with so much probity and exactness, that the council of the admiralty appointed him to occupy the same functions in the maritime department; and, during the thirtytwo years in which he filled this office, he gave repeated proofs of his integrity and disinterestedness. Possessing a mind equally unclouded by ambition and the love of pleasure, he employed all his leisure hours in the study of coins and medals, in which he acquired great proficiency. He began with considering and collecting such as had been struck during sieges, and in times of necessity; a pursuit analogous to his taste, and to the profession to which his early life had been devoted. Having completed this task, he undertook to form and to publish a more complete collection of the different species of money struck by the barons of France, than any that had hitherto appeared. In this, which may be called a national work, not content with consulting all the authors who had treated on the subject, he also searched a number of different cabinets, on purpose to verify the original pieces, and to satisfy himself as to their existence and authenticity. But while occupied in drawing up an account of the coins of the first, second, and third race of the kings of France, he was snatched from his favourite avocations by the hand of death, Nov. 19, 1782, when his family were left to mourn the loss of a good husband and father, society to regret an estimable and a modest man, and the sciences to lament an able and an indefatigable investigator. In 1790, the works he had finished were published in a splendid form in 3 vols, imperial 4to, with many plates, at Paris, under the title, “The Works of the late Mr. P. A. T. Duby, &c.” containing in vol. I. a general collection of pieces struck during sieges, or in times of necessity; and in vols. II. and III. a treatise on the money coined by the peers, bishops, abbots, &c. of France. The coins in these volumes are admirably executed, and the whole is a strong proof of the author’s skill in antiquities and general knowledge of every branch connected with his subject.

, an eminent English civilian and antiquary, was born in 1713 in Normandy; whence his father, who was descended from an ancient family at Caen in that province, came to England, soon after the birth of his second son James, and resided at Greenwich. The early rudiments of instruction he probably received in his own country. In 1729, being at that time a scholar at Eton, he was three months under the care of sir Hans Sloane, on account of an accident which deprived him of the sight of one eye. In 1731, he was admitted a gentleman-commoner of St. John’s college, Oxford; proceeded LL. B. June 1, 1738, and LL. D. Oct. 21, 1742; became a member of the college of Doctors Commons in November, 1743; and married, in 1749, Susanna a worthy woman, who had been his servant; and who survived him till Oct. 6, 1791, when she died in an advanced age.

, an eminent prelate, was born Feb. 6, 1533, at Buda, and educated by his uncle, who was bishop of Vaccia, or Veitzen, and out of respect to him he took the name of Shardellet. In 1560 the emperor Ferdinand II. admitted Dudith into his council, and appointed him bishop of Tina. He was sent soon after to the council of Trent, in the name of the emperor, and all the Hungarian clergy; and there made a very eloquent speech, April 9, 1568, which was heard with great pleasure. But this was not the case with another speech which he delivered in that place on July 6; for, though he shewed great zeal for the pope, and exclaimed strongly against Luther, yet he expressed himself so freely, both there and in his common conversation, on the necessity of episcopal residence, and in favour of marriage among the clergy, and administering the cup in the sacrament, that the legates, apprehensive of his drawing many prelates to his opinion, wrote to the pope, informing him, that Dudith was a dangerous man, and that it was necessary he should leave Trent. Upon tnis the pope solicited the emperor to recall him, which he accordingly did: but Ferdinand, far from blaming his conduct, rewarded it with the bishopric of Chonat, and soon after gave him that of five churches. This prince dying 1564, Dudith was sent by Maximilian II. into Poland, whither he nad been sent before by Ferdinand, and privately married lleyna Strazzi, maid of honour to the queen, resigning his bishopric. Rome cited him, excommunicated him, and even condemned him to the flames as an heretic, yet he despised her threats, and remained in security. After the death of his first wife, by whomhehadthreechildren, he married in 1579, a lady descended from an illustrious Polish family, widow of count John Zarnow, and sister of the famous Sborowits, by whom also he had children. Dudith, at length, openly professed the reformed religion, and even became a Socinian, according to most authors, particularly of the modern school^ who seem proud of their convert; but the fact is denied by the writer of his life, who, on the contrary, asserts, he disputed strongly against Socinus. He then settled at Breslaw in Silesia, where he died February 23, 1589, aged 56. Dudith, according to the representations both of his friends and enemies, was a handsome well-made man, of a peaceable disposition; civil, affable, regular in his conduct, very charitable to the poor, and benevolent towards all mankind. He had a taste for the classics, and so great a veneration for Cicero, that he wrote all that orator’s works, three times over, with his own hand. He likewise understood several languages, and was well acquainted with history, philosophy, mathematics, physic, law, and divinity. He left a great number of works: the principal are, “Dissertationes de Cometis,” Utrecht, 1665, 4to; two discourses, delivered at the council of Trent; an apology for the emperor Maximilian II. &c. published with other tracts, and his Life by Reuter, 1610, 4to. He published also, the Life of cardinal Pole, translated from the Italian of Beccatelli. Several of Dudith’s letters and poems occur in the collections.

, an eminent school-master and learned man, was the son of Henry Dugard, a clergyman, and born at Bromsgrove in Worcestershire, Jan. 9, 1605. He was instructed in classical learning at a school in Worcester; and from thence sent, in 162'J, to Sidney college, Cambridge. In 1626 he took the degree of B. A. and that of M. A. in 1630. Soon after he was appointed master of Stamford school in Lincolnshire; from whence, in 1637, he was elected master of the free-school in Colchester. He resigned the care of this school Jan. 1642-3, in consequence of the ill-treatment he received at the hands of a party in that town, to which, us well as to the school, he had been of great service; and May 1644 was chosen head master of Merchant Taylors’ school in London. This school flourished exceedingly under his influence and management but for shewing, as was thought, too great an affection to the royal cause, and especially for printing Salmasius’s defence of Charles I. at a press in his own house, he was deprived of it February 1650, and imprisoned in Newgate his wife and six children turned out of doors and a printing-office, which he valued at a thousand pounds, seized . Being soon released from this confinement, he opened, April 1650, a private school on Peter’s Hill, London; but, in September was restored to his former station, by means of the same council of state who had caused him to be removed, and who, with Milton, took advantage of his distresses to force him into their service, and among other things to print Milton’s answer to Sahaasius. There, however, he continued with great success and credit, till about 1662, when he was dismissed for breaking some orders of the merchant tailors, though he had been publicly warned and admonished of it before. He presented a remonstrance to them upon that occasion, but to no purpose: on. which he opened a private school in Coleman-street, July 1661, and, by March following, had gathered a hundred and ninety-three scholars: so great was his reputation, and the fame of his abilities. He lived a very little while after, dying in 1662. He gave by will several books to Sion college library. He published some few pieces for the use of his schools as, 1. “Lexicon Grajci Testament! alphabetieum; una cum explicaiione gramimitica vocum singularum, in usum tironum. Necnon Concordantiil singulis dictionibus apposita, in usurn theologian candidatorum,” 1660. 2. “Rhetorices compendium,” Hvo. 3. “Luciani SamosatenMS dialogorum seiectorum libri duo, cum interpretatione Latina, multis in locis emendata, et ad calcem adjecta,” 8vo. 4. “A Greek grammar.”

, an eminent English antiquary and historian, was the only son of John Dngdale, of Shustoke, near Coleshill, in Warwickshire, gent, and born there Sept. 12, 1605. He was placed at the freeschool in Coventry, where he continued till he was fifteen; and then returning home to his father, who had been edueatrd in St. John’s college, Oxford, and had applied himself particularly to civil law and history, was instructed by him in those branches of literature. At the desire of his father, he married, March 1623, a daughter of Mr. Huntbach, of Seawall, in Staffordshire, and boarded with his wife’s father till the death of his own, which happened July 1624 but soon after went and kept house at Fillongley, in Warwickshire, where he had an estate formerly purchased by his father. In 1625 he bought the manor of Blythe, in Shvstoke, above-mentioned; and the year following, selling his estate at Fillongley, he came and resided at Blythehall. His natimil inclination leading him to the study of antiquities, he soon became acquainted with all the noted antiquaries with Burton particularly, whose “Description of Leicestershire” he had read, and who lived but eight miles from him, at Lindley, in that county. In 1638 he went to London, and was introduced to sir Christopher Hatton, and to sir Henry Spelman by whose interest he was created a pursuivant at arms extraordinary, by the name of Blanch Lyon, having obtained the king’s warrant for that purpose. Afterwards he was made RougeCroix-pursuivant in ordinary, by virtue of the king’s letters patent, dated March 18, 1640; by which means having a lodging in the Heralds’ office, and convenient opportunities, he spent that and part of the year following, in augmenting his collections out of the records in the Tower and other places. In 1641, through sir Christopher Hatton’s encouragement, he employed himself in raking exact draughts of all the monuments in Westminster-abbey, St. Paul’s cathedral, and in many other cathedral and parochial churches of England particularly those at Peterborough, Ely, Norwich, Lincoln, Newarkupon-Trent, Beverley, Southwell, York, Chester, Lichfield, Tamworth, Warwick, &c. The draughts were taken by Mr. Sedgwick, a skilful arms-painter, then servant to sir Christopher Hatton; but the inscriptions were probably copied by Dugdale. They were deposited in sir Christopher’s library, to the end that the memory of them might be preserved from the destruction that then appeared imminent, for future and better times. June 1642 he was ordered by the king to repair to York; and in July was commanded to attend the earl of Northampton, who was marching into Worcestershire, and the places adjacent, in order to oppose the forces raised by lord Brook for the service of the parliament He waited upon the king at the battle of Edge-hill, and afterwards at Oxford, where he continued with his majesty till the surrender of that garrison to the parliament June 22, 1646. He was created M. A. October 25, 1642, and April 16, 1644, Chester-heraid. During his long residence at Oxford, he applied himself to the search of such antiquities, in the Bodleian and other libraries, as he thought might conduce towards the furtherance of the “Monp.sticon,” then designed by Roger Dodsworth and himself; as also whatever might relate to the history of the ancient nobility of this realm, of which he made much use in his Baronage.

, an eminent classical editor, was born in 1670, at Unna, in Westphalia, and after receiving the elements of education at home, was sent to a school at Ham, and afterwards, about 1690, to the university of Franeker, where he studied under Perizonius, to whom he used to attribute the proficiency he was afterwards enabled to make, and the fame he acquired by his critical knowledge of Greek and Latin. In 1701- he came to the Hague, and was afterwards appointed professor of ancient history at Utrecht, where he acquired vast reputation for his general erudition, and particularly his philological knowledge. He died at Meyderick, near Duisbourg, in Nov. 1752. His first work was entitled “Sylloge opusculornm variorum de Latinitate Jurisconsultorum veterum,” Leyden, 1711, 8vo, containing some curious and rare pieces. In the same year he delivered at Utrecht his “Oratio de difficultatibus quibusdam interpretationis Grammatics veterum Scriptorum Graecorum et Latinorurn,” which was published there in 1716, 4to. This was followed, l.by his “.Tlorus,” Leaden, 1722, 2 vols. 8vo, of which all bibliographers have spoken with great praise. 2. “Thucydides,” Amst. 1731, 2 vols. fol. which he undertook at the express wish of the publishers, the Wetsteins and Smith. This has long been considered as the best edition, as it is the most valuable in price. He contributed also notes and remarks to Drakenborch’s Livy, Petit’s “Leges Attica;,” Ouclendorp’s Suetonius, &c.

, an eminent Scotch poet, was born about the year 1465, and, as it is generally supposed, although without much foundation, at Salton, a village on the delightful coast of the Forth in East Lothian. This is collected from what Kennedy, a contemporary poet, says in one of his satires; who mentions likewise his own wealth, and Dunbar’s poverty. If we are to credit the same author, Dunbar was related to the earls of March; but of this there is no satisfactory evidence. In his youth he seems to have been a travelling noviciate of the Franciscan order; but this mode of life not being agreeable to his inclination, he resigned it, and returned to Scotland, as is supposed, about 1490, when he might be 25 years of age. In his “Thistle and Rose,” which was certainly written in 1503, he speaks of himself as a poet that had already made many songs: and that poem is the composition rather of an experienced writer, than of a novice in the art. It is indeed probable that his tales, “The twa marrit wemen and the wedo;” and, “The freirs of Bervvik,” (if the last be his) were written before his “Thistle and Rose.” However tin’s may have been, Dunbar, after being the author of “The gold in Terge,” a poem rich in description, and of many small pieces of the highest merit, died in old age about 1530. In his younger years, our poet seems to have had great expectations that his abilities would have recommended him to an ecclesiastical benetice; and in his smaller poems he frequently addresses the king lor that purpose: but there is no reason to believe that he was successful, although it may be thought that the “Thistle and Rose,” which was occasioned by the marriage of James IV. king of Scotland, with Margaret Tudor, eldest daughter of Henry VII. king of England, deserved better treatment at the hands of the young royal pair. Mr. Pinkerton, in his list of Scottish poets, tells us, he has looked in vain over many calendars of the characters, &c. of this period, to find Dunbar’s name; but suspects that it was never written by a lawyer. Mr. Warton, in characterising the Scottish poets of this time, observes that the writers of that nation have adorned the period with a degree of sentiment and spirit, a command of phraseology, and a fertility of imagination, not to be found in any English poet since Chaucer and Lydgate. “He might safely have added,” says Mr. Pinkerton, “not even in Chaucer or Lydgate.” Concerning Dunbar, Mr. Warton says, that the natural complexion of his genius is of the moral and didactic cast. This remark, however, Mr. Pinkerton thinks, must not be taken too strictly. “The goldin Terge,” he adds, “is moral; and so are many of his small pieces: but humour, description, allegory, great poetical genius, and a vast wealth of words, all unite to form the complexion of Dunbar’s poetry. He unites, in himself, and generally surpasses the qualities of the chief old English poets; the morals and satire of Langland; Chaucer’s humour, poetry, and knowledge of life; the allegory of Gower; the description of Lydgate.” This is a very high character, but surely the morality of his poems may be questioned. Several of his compositions contain expressions which appear to us grossly profane and indecent; and one of his addresses to the queen would not now be addressed to a modern courtezan. Even the most sacred observances of the church are converted into topics of ridicule; and its litanies are burlesqued in a parody, the profaneness of which is almost unparalleled. The notes added to the collection published by sir David Daly rm pie in 1770 are peculiarly valuable; for they not only explain and illustrate the particular expressions and phrases of the pieces in question, but contain several curious anecdotes, and throw considerable light on the manners of the times.

, an eminent physician, born at Montauban in Lano-uedoc in 1649, was the son of Dr. Peter Duncan, professor of physic in that city, and grandson to William Duncan, an English gentleman, of Scottish original, who removed from London to the south of France about the beginning of the last century. Having lost both his parents while yet in his cradle, he was indebted, for the care of his infancy and education, to the guardianship of his mother’s brother, Mr. Daniel Paul, a leading counsellor of the parliament of Toulouse, though a firm and professed protestant. Mr. Duncan received the first elements of grammar, polite literature, and philosophy, at Puy Laurens, whither the magistracy of Montauban had transferred their university for a time, to put an end to some disputes between the students and the citizens. The masters newly established there, finding their credit much raised by his uncommon proficiency, redoubled their attention to him; so that he went from that academy with a distinguished character to Montpellier, when removed thither by his guardian, with a view to qualify him for a profession which had been for three generations hereditary in his family . His ingenuity and application recommended him to the esteem and friendship of his principal instructor there, the celebrated Dr. Charles Barbeyrac (uncle to John Barbeyrac the famous civilian), whose medical lectures and practice were in high reputation. Having taken his favourite pupil into his own house, the professor impressed and turned to use his public and private instruction by an efficacious method, admitting him, at every visit he paid to his patients, to consult and reason with him, upon ocular inspection, concerning the effect of his prescriptions. When he had studied eight years under the friendly care of so excellent a master, and had just attained the age of twenty-four, he was admitted to the degree of M. D. in that university. From Montpellier he went to Paris, where he resided nearly seven years. Here he published his first work, upon the principle of motion in the constituent parts of animal bodies, entitled: “Explication nouvelle & mechanique des actions an i males, Paris, 1678.” It was in the year following that he went for the first time to London, to dispose of some houses there, which had descended to him from his ancestors. He had, besides, some other motives to the journey; and among the rest, to get information relative to the effects of the plague in London in 1665. Having dispatched his other business, he printed in London a Latin edition of his “Theory of the principle of motion in animal bodies.” His stay in London, at this time, was little more than two years; and he was much disposed to settle there entirely. But in 1681 he was recalled to Paris to attend a consultation on the health of his patron Colbert, which was then beginning to decline. Soon after his return he produced the first part of a new work, entitled, “La chymie naturelle, ou explication chymique & mechanique de la Tiourriture de Tanimal,” which was much read, but rather raised than satisfied the curiosity of the learned; to answer which he added afterwards two other parts, which were received with a general applause. A second edition of the whole was published at Paris in 1687. In that year likewise came out his “Histoire de l'animal, ou la connoissance du corps animé par la méchanique & par la chymie.” He left Paris in 1683, upon the much-lamented death of Colbert, the kind effect of whose esteem he gratefully acknowledged, though in a much smaller degree than he might have enjoyed, if he had been less bold in avowing his zeal for protestantism, and his abhorrence of popery. He had some property in land adjoining to the city of Montauban, with a handsome house upon it, pleasantly situated near the skirts of the town. It was with the purpose of selling these, and settling finally in England, that he went thither from Paris. But the honourable and friendly reception he met with there determined his stay some years in his native city. In 1690, the persecution which began to rage with great fury against protestants made him suddenly relinquish all thoughts of a longer abode in France. Having disposed of his house and land for less than half their value, he retired first to Geneva, intending to return to England through Germany; an intention generally kept in petto, but for many years unexpectedly thwarted by a variety of events. Great numbers of his persuasion, encouraged by his liberality in defraying their expences on the road to Geneva, had followed him thither. Unwilling to abandon them in distress, he spent several months in that city and Berne, whither great numbers had likewise taken refuge, in doing them all the service in his power. The harsh and gloomy aspect which reformation at that time wore in Geneva, ill agreeing with a temper naturally mild and cheerful, and the sullen treatment he met with from those of his profession, whose ignorance and selfishness his conduct and method of practice tended to bring into disrepute, occasioned his stay there to be very short. He listened therefore with pleasure to the persuasion of a chief magistrate of Berne, who invited him to a residence more suited to his mind. He passed about 8 or 9 years at Berne, where to his constant practice of physic was added the charge of a professorship of anatomy and chemistry. In 1699, Philip landgave of Hesse sent for him to Cassel. The princess, who lay dangerously ill, was restored to life, but recovered strength very slowly. Dr. Duncan was entertained for three years with great respect, in the palace of the landgrave, as his domestic physician. During his stay at that court, he wrote his treatise upon the abuse of hot liquors. The use of tea, which had not long been introduced into Germany, and in the houses of only the most opulent, was already at the landgrave’s become improper and immoderate, as well as that of coffee and chocolate. The princess of Hesse, with a weak habit of body inclining to a consumption, had been accustomed to drink these liquors to excess, and extremely hot. He thought fit, therefore, to write something against the abuse of them, especially the most common one last mentioned. Their prudent use, to persons chiefly of a phlegmatic constitution, he allowed. He even recommended them, in that case, by his own example, to be taken moderately warm early in the morning, and soon after dinner; but never late in the evening, their natural tendency not agreeing with the posture of a body at rest. He wrote this treatise in a popular style, as intended for the benefit of all ranks of people; the abuse he condemned growing daily more and more epidemical. Though he deemed it too superficial for publication, he permitted it to be much circulated in manuscript. It was not till five years after that he was persuaded by his friend Dr. Boerhaave to print it, first in French, under the title of “Avis salutaire a tout le monde, contre Tabus cles liqueurs chaudes, & particulierement du caffe, du chocolat, & du the.” Rotterdam, J 705. He printed it the year following in English.

, of Arniston, lord-president of the court of session, was the second son of Robert Dundas, esq. an eminent Scotch lawyer, and was born Dec. 9, 1685. Though in no period of his life distinguished for laborious application to study, he had in his earlier years improved his mind by an acquaintance with general literature; and he gained by practice, aided by uncommon acuteness of talents, a profound knowledge of the law. He had been but eight years at the bar, when his reputation pointed him out as the fittest person to hold the office of solicitor general, to which he was appointed by king George I. in 1717, and which was preparatory to that of lord advocate for Scotland, to which he was appointed in 1720. In 1722 he was elected member of parliament for the county of Edinburgh; and in that situation, he distinguished himself by a most vigilant attention to all public measures, in which the welfare of his country was concerned, and by a steady and patriotic regard for its interests. On the change of ministry, which took place in 1725, when sir Robert Walpole and the Argyle party came into power, Mr. Dundas was removed from his office of king’s advocate, and resumed his station without the bar, distinguished only by the honourable title of dean of the faculty of advocates, till he was raised to the bench, in 1737. For nine years he filled the seat of an ordinary judge of the court of session, by the title of lord Arniston, till 1748, when, on the death of Mr. Duncan Forbes, of Culloden, he was appointed to succeed him in the honourable and important office of president of the court.

, Lord Ashburton, an eminent lawyer, was the second son of Mr. John Dunning, of Ashburton, Co. Devon, attorney at law, by Agnes, daughter of Henry Judsham, of Old Port, in the parish of Modbury, in the same county. He was born at Ashburton, Oct. 18, 1731. At the age of seven he was sent to the free grammar-school of his native place, where, during five years, he made an astonishing progress in the classic languages. A book in Homer, or in the Æneid of Virgil, he would get by heart in the course of two hours, and on the top of the school-room, which was wainscotted, he drew out the diagrams of the first book of Euclid, and solved them at the age of ten. He has often been heard to say that he owed all his future fortune to Euclid and sir Isaac Newton. When he left school he was taken into his father’s office, where he remained until his attaining the age of nineteen, at which time sir Thomas Clarke, master of the rolls, (to whom his father had been many years steward) took him under his protection, and sent him to the Temple.

, surnamed Sgotus, an eminent scholastic divine, who flourished in the latter end of the thirteenth and the beginning of the fourteenth century, was born at Dunstance, in the parish of Emildun or Embleton, near Alnwick in Northumberland. Some writers have contended that he was a Scotsman, and that the place of his birth was Duns, a village eight miles from England, and others have asserted that he was an Irishman. He is, however, treated as an Englishman by all the early authors who speak of him; and the conclusion of the ms copy of his works in Merton college, gives his name, country, and the place where he was born, as stated above. When a youth, he joined himself to the minorite friars of Newcastle; and, being sent by them to Oxford, he was admitted into Merton college, of which, in due time, he became fellow. Here, besides the character he attained in scholastic theology, he is said to have been very eminent for his knowledge in the civil and canon law, in logic, natural philosophy, metaphysics, mathematics, and astronomy. Upon the removal of William Varron from Oxford to Paris, in 1301, Duns Scotus was chosen to supply his place in the theological chair; which office he sustained with such reputation, that more than thirty-thousand scholars came to the university to be his hearers, a number which, though confidently asserted by several writers, we admit with great hesitation. After John Duns had lectured three years at Oxford, he was called, in 1304, to Paris, where he was honoured with the degrees, first of bachelor, and then of doctor in divinity. At a meeting of the monks of his order at Tholouse, in 1307, he was created regent; and about the same time he was placed at the head of the theological schools at Paris. Here he is affirmed to have first broached the doctrine of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, and to have supported his position by two hundred arguments, which appeared so conclusive, that the members of the university of Paris embraced the opinion; instituted the feast of the immaculate conception; and issued an edict, that no one, who did not embrace the same opinion, should be admitted to academical degrees. In 1308, Duns Scotus was ordered by Gonsalvo, the general of the Minorites, to remove to Cologn, on the road to which he was met in solemn pomp, and conducted thither by the whole body of the citizens. Not long after his arrival in this city, he was seized with an apoplexy, which carried him off, on the eighth of November, 1308, in the forty-third, or, as others say, in the thirty-fourth, year of his age. Paul Jovius’s account of the mode of his death is, that when he fell down of his apoplexy he was immediately interred as dead; but that, afterwards coming to his senses, he languished in a most miserable manner in his coffin, beating his head and hands against its sides, till he died. This story, though generally treated as a fable, is hinted at by Mr. Whavton, who says, “Apoplexia correptus, et festinato nimis, ut volunt, funere elatus,” and whether true or not, gave occasion to the following epitaph:

, “an English musician of the fifteenth century, at an early stage of counterpoint, acquired on the continent the reputation of being its inventor, which, however, Dr. Burney has proved could not belong to him. He was the musician whom the Germans, from a similarity of name, have mistaken for saint Dunstan, and to whom, as erroneously, they have ascribed with others the invention of counterpoint in four parts. He was author of the musical treatise” De Mensurabili Musica,“which is cited by Franchinus, Morley, and Ravenscroft. But though this work is lost, there is still extant in the Bodleian library, a Geographical Tract by this author and, if we may believe his epitaph, which is preserved by Weever, he was not only a musician, but a mathematician, and an eminent astrologer. Of his musical compositions nothing remains but two or three fragments in Franchinus, and Morley. He is very unjustly accused by this last writer of separating the syllables of the same words by rests. Stow calls him” a master of astronomy and music," and says he w;;s buried in the church of St. Stephen, Walbrook, in 1458.

, an eminent ecclesiastical historian of the last century, was the son of a father of the same names, descended of a noble family in Normandy, by Mary Vitart, of a family in Champagne. He was born at Paris, June 17, 1657, and after being instructed in the rudiments of grammar by his father, and private tutors, was entered, at the age of ten, of the college of Harcourt, where, under professor Lair, he imbibed that thirst for general knowledge which he indulged during the whole of his studious life. In 1672 he was admitted to the degree of master of arts. Having made choice of the church as a profession, he went through the usual course of studies at the Soi bonne, and employed much of his time in perusing the fathers and ecclesiastical historians, but had no other view in this than to gratify his curiosity, while preparing himself for his licentiateship in divinity, which he was then too young to obtain. In 1680, he took the degree of bachelor of divinity, and in July 16S4, that of doctor. He soon after undertook to publish the work which has made him most known, his Universal Library of Ecclesiastical Writers, containing their lives, and a catalogue, critical account, and analysis of their works: a design of vast extent, which might have done credit to the labours of a society, yet was successfully accomplished by an individual, who was not only interrupted by professional duties, but wrote and published a great many other works. The first volume of his “Bibliotheque” was printed at Paris, 1686, 8vo, and the others in succession as far as live volumes, which contained an account of the first eight centuries. The freedom, however, which he had used in criticising the style, character, and doctrines of some of the ecclesiastical writers, roused the prejudices of the celebrated Bossuet, who exhibited a complaint against Dupin to Harlay, archbishop of Paris. The archbishop accordingly, in 1693, published a decree against the work, yet with more deliberation than might have been expected. His grace first ordered the work to be read by four doctors of divinity of the faculty of Paris, who perused it separately, and then combining their remarks, drew up a report which they presented to the archbishop, who, in his decree, says that he also examined the work, and found that it would be very prejudicial to the church, if it were suffered to be dispersed. Dupin was then summoned before the archbishop andthe doctors, and after several meetings, gave in a paper, in which he delivered his opinion on the objections made to his hook in such a manner as to satisfy them that, however liberal his expressions, he was himself sound; but the work itself they nevertheless thought must be condemned, as “containing several propositions that are false, rash, scandalous, capable of offending pious ears, tending to weaken the arguments, xvhich are brought from tradition to prove the authority of the canonical books of holy scripture, and of several other articles of faith, injurious to general councils, to the holy apostolic see, and to the fathers of the church; erroneous, and leading to heresy.” This sentence upon the work, however, will prove its highest recommendation to the protestant reader, who will probably, as he may very justly infer, that it means no more than that Dupin was too impartial and candid for his judges. With the above decree was published Dupin’s retractation, both of which were translated and printed at London in 1703, folio, by William Wotton, B. D. who observes that in Dupin’s retractation, “dread of farther mischief seems to be far more visible, in almost every article, than real conviction arising from an inward sense of the author’s having been in an error; at least, that it is so written, as to have that appearance.” Dupin, however, went on with his work, and by some means obtained a permission to print, with some small alteration in the title, from “Bibliotheque universelle” to “Bibliotheque nouvelle,” and the addition of the ecclesiastical history to the ecclesiastical biography. He thus went on, concluding with the beginning of the eighteenth century, the whole making 47 vols. 8vo, which were reprinted at Amsterdam, in 19 vols. 4to; but as most of these volumes were printed from the first editions, this edition is imperfect. It was also begun to be translated into Lathy, and the first three volumes printed at Amsterdam; but no farther progress was made. Monsieur Dupin was engaged at his death in a Latin translation, to which he intended to make considerable additions. This Bibliotheque was likewise translated into English, and printed at London in several volumes in folio, usually bound in seven. A much finer edition was printed in 3 vols. folio, by Grierson of Dublin. The translation appears to have been executed partly by Digby Cotes, and revised by Wotton. Dupin’s Bibliotheque was attacked by M.Simon in a book printed at Paris in 1730, in four volumes 8vo, under the following title “Critique cle la Bibliotheque des Auteurs Ecclesiastiques & de Prolegomenes de la Bible publiez par M. Elies Dupin. Avec des eclaircissemens & des supplemens aux endroits, ou on les a juge necessaires, par feu M. Richard Simon, avec des remarques.” Simon has pointed out a considerable number of errors in Dupin, but when all deductions of this kind are made, it must be allowed that we have no book more generally valuable as a repository of ecclesiastical history and biography, making allowance for the author’s attachment to the principles of his church.

, not Durand (GiLLEs), Sieur de la Bergerie, an eminent advocate to the parliament of Paris, is supposed, according to Pasquier, book xix. letter 15, to be the same who was one of the nine advocates commissioned by the court to reform the custom of Paris. He was also among the best poets before Malherbe, wrote odes, sonnets, elegies, &c. and translated, or imitated part of the Latin pieces written by his friend John Bounefons the father; under the title of, “Imitations tirees du Latin de Jean Bonnefons, avec autres amours et melanges poetiques,” 1727, 12mo. This work has gone through several editions. “The verses to his godmother on the decease of her ass, who died in the flower of his age during the siege of Paris, Tuesday, Aug. 28, 1590,” are esteemed a masterpiece in the ironical and sportive style. They may be found in the ingenious work, entitled, " Satyre MenipeeY* and in the works of Durant, 1594, 12mo. He was broken on the wheel, July 16, 1618, with two Florentine brothers of the house des patrices, for a libel against the king. Some, however, doubt if this is the same.

, an eminent engraver and painter, descended from an Hongarian family, was born at Nuremberg May 20, 1471. Having made a slight beginning with a pencil in the shop of his father, who was a goldsmith, one Martin Hupse taught him a little of colouring and engraving. He was also instructed in arithmetic, perspective, and geometry and then undertook, at twenty-six years of age, to exhibit some of his works to the public. His first work was the three Graces, represented by three naked women, having over their heads a globe, in which was engraved the date of the year 1497. He engraved on wood the whole life and passion of Christ in thirty-six pieces, which were so highly esteemed, that Marc Antonio Franci copied them on copper, and so exactly, that they were thought to be Albert’s, and sold as such. Albert hearing of this, and receiving at the same time one of the counterfeit cuts, was so enraged, that he immediately went to Venice, and complained of Marc Antonio to the government; but obtained no other satisfaction, than that Marc Antonio should not for the future put Albert’s name and mark to his works.

, an eminent Scotch divine of the seventeenth century, the eldest son of John Durham of Easter-Powrie, esq. and descended from the ancient family of Grange Durham in the county of Angus, was born about 1622, and educated at the university of St. Andrew’s, which he left without taking a degree, as he had then no design of following any of the learned professions. When the civil wars broke out, he served in the army, with the rank of captain, but was so much affected by his narrow escape from being killed in an engagement with the English, that, encouraged by Dr. David Dickson, professor of divinity at Glasgow, he determined to devote himself to the church. With this view he went to Glasgow, studied divinity under Dr. Dickson, and in 1646 was licensed by the presbytery of Irvine to preach. In the following year he was ordained minister of the Black-friars 7 church in Glasgow, where he became one of the most popular preachers of his time. In 1650 he was chosen to succeed Dr. Dickson as professor, and about the same time attended Charles II. when in Scotland, as one of his chaplains. In 1651, when Cromwell and his army were at Glasgow, Durham preached before the usurper, and upbraided him to his face for having invaded the country. Next day Cromwell sent for him, and told him he thought he had been a wiser man than to meddle with public affairs in his sermons. Durham answered that it was not his common practice, but that he could not help laying hold of such an opportunity of expressing his sentiments in his presence. Cromwell dismissed him with a caution, but met with so many other instances of similar rebuffs from the Scotch clergy, that he thought it unadvisable to pursue any more severe course. Durham was a man of such moderation of temper and sentiment, as to be able to conduct himself without giving much offence in those troublesome times, and gained the favour of all parties by the conscientious discharge of his pastoral duties. This character gave him unusual authority in the country where he lived; but his incessant labours both as a preacher and writer brought on a consumptive disorder, of which he died June 25, 1658, in the prime of life. He wrote, 1. “A Commentary on the Revelations.” 2. “Sermons on the liii. of Isaiah.” 3. “Sermons on the Song of Solomon.” 4. “A treatise on Scandal.” 5. “An Exposition of the Commandments:” the two latter posthumous; with some single sermons and pious tracts, which have been often reprinted.

, an eminent English lawyer, was descended from an ancient and honourable family in Somersetshire, of the same family with sir Edward Dyer, the poet, who was fourth in descent from sir James Dyer’s great-grandfather. Sir James was the second son of Richard Dyer, esq. of Wincalton and Roundhill in Somersetshire, at the latter of which places he was born about the year 1512. Wood says he was a commoner of Broadgate-hall (now Pembroke college), Oxford, and that he left it, without taking a degree, probably about 1530, when he went to the Middle Temple. Here he appears to have rendered himself conspicuous for learning anil talents, as in 1552 he performed the office of autumnal reader to that society; a distinction which was at that time conferred only upon such as were eminent in their profession. He had, on May 10 preceding, been called to the degree of serjeant at law, and in the following November his abilities were rewarded with the post of king’s Serjeant. On the meeting of the last parliament of Edward VI. 1552-3, Dyer was chosen speaker of the house of commons (that office being considered in those days as peculiarly appropriated to lawyers of eminence), and in this capacity, on Saturday afternoon, March 4, made “an ornate oration before the king.” This is the only particular concerning the speaker which occurs in the Journals of that short parliament, which sat only for one month; and the dissolution of which was quickly followed by the death of that excellent young prince; whose successor, though in most respects she pursued measures totally opposite to those of his reign, continued the royal favour to Dyer, whom, Oct. 19, 1553, she appointed one of her serjeants, In this office his name appears as one of the commissioners. on the singular trial of sir Nicholas Throckmorton; when his jury, with a freedom rarely exercised in that unhappy period, ventured to acquit the prisoner. Our author’s behaviour on that occasion is not disgraced by any servile compliances with the views of the court; yet his regard for his own character was tempered with so much discretion, as not to occasion any diminution of her majesty’s protection; for on May 20, 1557, being at that time recorder of Cambridge, and a knight, he was appointed a judge of the common pleas, whence on April 23 of the next year, he was promoted to the queen’s bench, where he sat (though of the reformed religion) during the remainder of this reign as a puisne judge.

, a man of great learning, and the friend and associate of the literati of the last age, was born about 1725, and educated at Northampton, under Dr. Doddridge, and for some time had the additional benefit of being instructed by the learned Dr. John Ward, professor of rhetoric in Gresham -college. He afterwards studied under professor Hutcheson at Glasgow, and to complete his education, his father, an eminent jeweller in London, sent him, by the advice of Dr. Chandler, to Leyden, where he remained two years. He became an excellent classical scholar, a great mathematician and natural philosopher, was well versed iti the Hebrew, and a master of the Latin, Italian, and French languages. Added to these endowments, he was of a temper so mild, and in his conversation so modest and unassuming, that he gained the attention and affection of all around him. In all questions of science, Dr. Johnson looked up to him; and in his life of Dr. Watts (where he calls him “the late learned Mr. Dyer”) has cited an observation of his, that Watts had confounded the idea of space with that of empty space, and did not consider, that though space might be without matter, yet matter, being extended, could not be without space.

was the son of the preceding, and from the instructions of his father became an eminent and popular composer for the theatre, furnishing it with act tunes, dance tunes, and incidental songs, in most of the new comedies, after the death of Purcell. The air which he set to “A Soldier and a Sailor,” sung by Ben, in Congreve’s comedy of “Love for Love,” is so truly original and characteristic, that it can never be superseded for any other air. He set an ode> written by Congreve for St. Cecilia’s day in 1701. He likewise set Congreve’s “Judgment of Paris,” when there was a contention for prizes, and gained the second, of 50 guineas. Several of his single songs were the best of the time, and have still the merit of originality. In his slightest compositions, whether catch, ballad, or rope-dancing tune, there is some mark of genius. Upon the death of Dr. Staggins, about 1698, Eccles, at a very early period of his professional life, was appointed master of queen Amir’s band; and after the decease of Dr. Crofts, in 1727, he seems only to have set the odes, and to have retired from all other professional employments to Kingston, for the convenience of angling, in which amusement he appears to have been as much delighted as Walton. He died in 1735, and was succeeded as master of the king’s band, and composer to his majesty, by Dr. Green.

, an eminent antiquary and medallist, was born at Entzesfield in Austria, Jan. 13, 1737, and in 1751 entered the order of the Jesuits at Vienna, with whom he studied philosophy, mathematics, divinity, and the learned languages. His skill in medals, which appeared very early, induced his superiors to give him the place of keeper of their cabinet of medals and coins. In 1772, he was sent to Rome, where Leopold II. grand duke of Florence, employed him to arrange his collection, and on his return in 1774, he was appointed director of the imperial cabinet of medals at Vienna, and professor of antiquities. In 1775 he published his first valuable work, under the title of “Nummi veteres anecdoti ex museis Csesareo Vindobonensi, Florentine magni Ducis Etruriw, Granelliaho nunc Ceesareo, aliisque,” Vienna, 4to, in which he arranges the various articles according to the new system which he had formed, and which promises to be advantageous from its simplicity, although it has some trifling inconveniencies. This was followed by his “Catalogus Musei Caesarei Vindobonensis Nummorum veterum,” Vienna, 1779, 2 vols. fol. This has only eight plates, containing such articles as had never been published, or were not noticed in his preceding work. In 1786 he published “Sylloge nnmmorum veterum anecdotorum thesauri Cbb­sarei,” Vienna, 4to, and “Descriptip nuinmorum Antiochae Syriae, sive specimen artis criticse numerariff,” ibid. In 1787 he published, in German, a small elementary work on coins for the use of schools, but which has been thought better adapted to give young persons a taste for the science than to initiate them in it. This was followed, in 1788, by his “Explanation of the Gems” in the Imperial collection, a very magnificent book. In 1792 he published the first volume of his great work on numismati­<:al history, entitled “Doctrina munmorum veterum,” and the eighth and last volume in 1798; the excellent method and style of this work, and the vast erudition displayed, place aim at the head of modern writers on this subject, and have occasioned the remark that he is the Linnæus of his science. This very eminent antiquary died May 16, 1798.

, in Latin Clusius, an eminent botanist, was born at Arras, in French Flanders, on Feb. 19, 1526, and was educated at Ghent and Louvain, in the languages, jurisprudence, and medicine, in which last faculty he took a degree, but without any view to practice. At the age of twenty-three he began his travels, and pursued in them all the study of botany, to which he was extremely partial. He visited England three times, and in all his journeys cultivated the acquaintance of the learned in his favourite science. He also not only collected and described a number of uew plants, but made drawings of several with his own hand. In 1573 he was invited to Vienna, by the emperor Maximilian II. with whom, as well as with his son, afterwards the emperor Rodolphus II. he was in great favour, and was honoured by the former with the rank of nobility. In 1593, the sixty-eighth year of his age, he was chosen professor of botany at Leyden, where he resided in great reputation till his death, April 4, 1609. At his funeral, in St. Mary’s church, Leyden, a Latin oration in his praise was delivered by the rector of the university. With respect to hodily health, Ecluse was unfortunate beyond the usual lot of humanity. In his youth he was afflicted with dangerous fevers, and afterwards with a dropsy. He broke his right arm and leg by a fall from his horse in Spain, and dislocated, as well as fractured his left ankle at Vienna/ In his sixty-third year he dislocated his right thigh, which, being at first neglected, could never afterwards be reduced, and he became totally unable to walk. Calculous disorders, in consequence of his sedentary life, accompanied with colic and a hernia, close the catalogue of his afflictions. Yet his cheerful temper and ardour for science never forsook him, nor did any man ever enjoy more respect and esteem from those who knew him.

, an eminent engraver, was born at Antwerp in 1641, and there learnt the first elements of drawing and engraving; but it was in France that he made the full display of his talents, being invited thither by the munificence of Louis XIV. about 1665. He was made choice of to engrave two pieces of the highest reputation; the picture of the Holy Family, by Raphael, and that of Alexander in the Tent of Darius, by Le Brim. Edelinck surpassed expectation in the execution of these masterpieces; and the copies were as much applauded as the originals. It is impossible not to a.-lmire in them, as in all his other productions, a neatness of touch, a plumpness, and a shade that are inimitable. The ease and assiduity with which he worked procured the public a great number of estimable pieces. He succeeded equally well in the portraits of the most famous personages of his time, among whom he might reckon himself. This excellent artist died in 1707, at the age of sixty-six, in the hotel royal of the Gobelins, where he had apartments, with the title of engraver in ordinary to the king, and counsellor in the royal academy of painting. In the list of his plates may be noticed that of Mary Magdalen renouncing the vanities of the world, from a painting by Le Brun, remarkable for the beauty of the work, and the delicacy of the expression. He had a son and a brother, both engravers, briefly noticed by Mr. Strutt, but inferior in reputation.

, an eminent English naturalist, was born April 3, 1693, at Stratford, a hamlet. belonging to West- Ham, in Essex. Some of his early years were passed under the tuition of two clergymen, one of whom kept a school at Laytonstone, and the other at Brentwood, after which, being designed by his parents for business, he was put apprentice to a tradesman in Fenchurch-street. He was particularly happy in his master, who treated him with great kindness and civility; and who, besides his being a man of a strict regard to religion, had the uncommon qualification of being well skilled in the learned languages. About the middle of the term of Mr. Edwards’s apprenticeship, an event happened, which gave a direction to his future studies. Upon the death of Dr. Nicholas, a person of eminence in the physical world, and a relation of Edwards’s master, the doctor’s books, which were very numerous, were removed to our apprentice’s apartment. So unexpected an opportunity of acquiring knowledge he embraced with eagerness, and passed all the leisure of the day, and not onfrequently a considerable part of the night, in turning over Dr. Nicholas’ collections of natural history, sculpture, painting, astronomy, and antiquities. From this time, he lost what little relish he had for trade, and on the expiration of his servitude, formed the design of travelling into foreign countries for the purpose of improving his taste, and enlarging his mind. His first voyage was to Holland in 1716, when he visited most of the principal towns of the United Provinces. He then returned to England, and continued two years unemployed in London and its neighbourhood, though not without increasing his acquaintance with natural history. His next voyage was to Norway, where an active and philosophic mind, like his, could not fail to be highly gratified both with the stupendous scenery of nature, and with the manners of the inhabitants. In an excursion to Frederickstadt, he was not far distant from the cannon of Charles XII. of Sweden, who was then engaged in the siege of that place, before which he lost his life. By this circumstance Mr. Edwards was prevented from visiting Sweden, the Swedish army being particularly watchful against strangers. Notwithstanding all his precaution, and his solicitude to give no offence on either side, he was onqe confined by the Danish guard, who supposed him to be a spy employed by the enemy to procure intelligence of their designs. Upon obtaining testimonials, however, of his innocence, a release was granted.

, an eminent English divine and voluminous writer, the son of the preceding Thomas Edwards, was born at Hertford, February 26, 1637. His father, as we have already noticed, died in 1647, and by his wife, who was an heiress of a very considerable fortune, he left one daughter and four sons, the second of whom was John, the subject of the present narrative. After having received his grammatical education at Merchanttaylors’ school, in London, he was removed in 1653 to the university of Cambridge, and was admitted of St. John’s college, then under the government of Dr. Anthony Tuckney, a presbyterian divine of acknowledged character and learning, and particularly distinguished for the wise and exact discipline of his college. Mr. Edwards, soon after his admission, was chosen scholar of the house, and was quickly taken notice of for his exercises, both in his tutor’s chamber, and in his college-hall. Towards the close of his undergraduateship, the senior proctor being then of the college, he was appointed one of the moderators for the year. Whe: he was middle bachelor, he was elected a fellow of his college, for which he was principally indebted to the exertions of Dr. Tuckney in his behalf. During the time of his senior bachelorship he was again chosen moderator in the schools, and his performances were long remembered with esteem and praise. In 1661 he was admitted to the degree of M. A.; and soon after sir Robert Carr presented him to Dr. Sanderson, bishop cf Lincoln, who conferred upon him the order of deacon. That learned prelate engaged him, at the same time, to preach a sermon at the next ordination, when with the other candidates, he was ordained priest. In 1664, he undertook the duty of Trinity-church, in Cambridge, and went through the whole both parts of the day. In his preaching, without affecting eloquence, he studied to be plain, intelligible, and practical; and his church was much frequented by the gown, and by persons of considerable standing in the university. Dr. Sparrow, master of Queen’s, Dr. Beaumont, master of Peterhouse, and Dr. Pearson, master of Trinity-college, were often heard to applaud his pulpit performances. In 1665, during the time of the plague, he quitted his residence in the college, and dwelt all that year, and part of the next, in the town, that he might devote himself entirely to the edification and comfort of the parishioners of Trinity church, in that season of calamity. A little after this, sir Edward Atkins offered him a good living near Cirencester, in Gloucestershire, but he chose to continue in his station at Cambridge. In 1668 he was admitted to the degree of B. D. About the same time, through the interest of sir Robert Carr with sir Thomas Harvey, Mr. Edwards was unanimously chosen lecturer at St. Edmund’s Bury, with a salary of loo/, a year. This office he discharged with great reputation and acceptance, notwithstanding which, after a period of twelve months, he resigned it, and returned to his college, where, however, his situation was uneasy to him. He had not been upon the best terms with Dr. Peter Gunning, the former master of St. John’s, and being still more dissatisfied with Dr. Francis Turner, Gunning’s successor, who had somehow offended him, he determined to resign his fellowship. On quitting his college, he was presented by the fellows with a testimonial of his worthy and laudable behaviour among them. From St. John’s he removed to Trinity-hall, where he entered himself as a fellow-commoner, and performed the regular exercises in the civil Jaw. Being willing to be employed in the offices of jits clerical function, he accepted of the invitation of the parishioners of St. Sepulchre, in Cambridge, to be their minister; and his sermons there were as much attended by persons of consequence in the university as they had formerly been at Trinity church. In 1676 Mr. Edwards married Mrs. Lane, the widow of Mr. Lane, who had been ati alderman, a justice of peace, and an eminent attomey in the town. “This gentlewoman,” says his biographer, “was an extraordinary person, of unusual accomplishments and singular graces but had the unhappiness (as some others of that sex) to be misrepresented to the world. She being naturally of a high and generous spirit, and not framed to low observances and vulgar compliances, incurred thereby the imputation of pride and superciliousness among vulgar minds. But those who were no strangers to good breeding, and knew how to make distinction of persons, admired the agreeableness of her conversation, and saw those excellent and worthy things in her deportment which they could find but in very few of her sex. She understood herself and her duty, and all the rules of civil and religious behaviour.”

, lord Ellesmere, an eminent English statesman and lawyer, the son of Richard Egerton, of Ridley, in Cheshire, was born in Cheshire, about the year 1540. In 1556 he was admitted a commoner of Brasencse college, in Oxford, where he continued about three years; and having laid a good foundation of classical and logical learning, he removed thence to Lincoln’s-inn, and applied himself with such success to the study of the law, that he soon became a noted counsellor. The superior abilities he displayed in the line of his profession, and his distinguished eminence at the bar, attracted the notice of queen Elizabeth, and on June 28, 1581, she appointed him her solicitor-general: the year after he was chosen Lent reader of the society of Lincoln’s-inn, and was made also one of the governors of that society, in which office he continued for twelve years successively. His conduct and proficiency in the law, promoted him on June 2, 1594, to the office of attorney-general, and he was knighted soon after. On the 10th of April, 1593, he was appointed master of the rolls, when he shewed his great friendship to Mr. Francis Bacon, afterwards lord Verulam, by assisting him with his own observations in regard to the office of solicitor-general, then likely to become vacant by the advancement of Mr. Edward Coke to that of attorneygeneral, which was acknowledged by sir Robert Cecil as a favour done personally to himself. Upon the death of sir John Puckering, he had the great eal of England delivered to him at Greenwich on the 6th of May, 1596, with the title of lord keeper, by the special choice and favour of the queen, without any mediator or competitor, and even against the interest of the prime minister and his son; and at the same time he was sworn of her majesty’s privycouncil. He was permitted to hold the mastership of the rolls till May 15, 1603, when James I. conferred it on Edward Bruce, afterwards baron of Kmloss.

, an eminent painter, was born in the village of Peene, near Cassel, in 1658, of parents extremely poor, and seemed destined to rise in the world by slow degrees. His mother, who was a widow, lived in the country on what she earned by washing linen; her whole wealth consisted in a cow, which her little boy used to lead to pick up its pasture by the side of the ditches. One day Corben, a famous painter of landscapes and history, going to put up some pictures which he had made for Cassel, as he went along the road, took notice of this lad, who had made a fortification of mud, and little clay" figures that were attacking it. Corbéen was immediately struck with the regularity and taste that was evident in the work. He stopped his chaise, and put several questions to the lad, whose answers increased his astonishment. His figure and countenance added to the impression; and the painter asked him whether he would go and live with him, and he would endeavour to put him in a way of getting his bread; the boy said he would willingly accept of his offer, if his mother would but agree to it. Elias failed not to be at the same place on the day appointed, accompanied by his mother; he ran before the chaise, and Corbéen told the woman to bring her son to him at Dunkirk, where he lived. The boy was received, and the master put him to school, where he was taught the languages, and he himself taught him to draw and to paint. The scholar surpassed his fellow-students: he acquired the esteem of the public, and gained the favour of his master to such a degree, that he sent him to Paris at the age of twenty; whence Elias transmitted his works to his master and benefactor. With great gentleness of character, he possessed the good quality of being always grateful; he thus repaid his master for his kindness to him, as Corbéen frequently confessed. Elias, after having been some while at Paris, married. He made a journey to Dunkirk for the purpose of visiting his master, and it was while there that he painted a picture for the altar of St. Barbara’s chapel, in which he represented the martyrdom of that saint; a fine composition. On his return to Paris, he was appointed professor at St. Luke, and successively obtained several other posts. He was much employed, and composed several subjects taken from the life of St. John Baptist de la Barriere, author of the reform of the Feuillants. All these subjects were painted on glass, by Simpi and Michu, and are in the windows of the cloister. Elias, now become a widower, took a journey to Flanders, in hopes of dispelling his grief. Being arrived at Dunkirk, the brotherhood of St. Sebastian engaged him to paint their principal brethren in one piece; he executed this great picture, with a number of figures as large as life, and some in smaller dimensions. The company of taylors having built a chapel in the principal church, Elias was employed to paint the picture for the altar, in which he represented the baptism of Christ; in the fore-ground is St. Lewis at prayers, for obtaining the cure of the sick. Being now on the point of returning to Paris, he was so earnestly solicited to remain in his native country, that at length he yielded to the entreaties of his numerous friends. He now executed a grand picture for the high altar of the Carmelites; it was a votive piece of the city to the Virgin Mary. This picture is a fine composition, and of a style of colouring: more true and warm than was usual with him the artist, as is often the practice, has introduced his own portrait. Elias was complimented on this alteration in his colouring; by which he was encouraged to redouble his care. He executed for the parish church of Dunkirk art altar-piece of the chapel of St. Croix; a Transfiguration for the altar of the parish church of Bailleul, and in that of the Jesuits at Cassel, a miracle of St. Francis Xavier, &c. The abbot of Bergues, St. Winox, employed our artist a long time in ornamenting the refectory of his house. Among his great works he made some portraits in a capital manner. In his greatest successes, Elias never made any change in his conduct, but always continued to lead the same regular life; he was seen no where but at church and in his work-room, into which he rarely admitted visitors. He was much esteemed for the mildness of his disposition. Detesting those malicious reports which are but too common among rival artists, he minded only his business. Not desirous of having pupils, he rather dissuaded young men from cultivating an art that was attended with so much trouble, than encouraged them to enter upon it; those that knew him best, always spoke of this artist as a model of good conduct. He continued working to the end of his days, which happened at Dunkirk the 22d of April 1741, in the eighty -second year of his age. He had but one son, who died at Paris, doctor of the Sorbonne. Neither had he more than one pupil, Carlier, who was living at Paris in 1760.

, F. R. S. an eminent naturalist, is thought to have been born in London, about 1710, but of his early life and occupations no certain information has been obtained, except that he was engaged in mercantile pursuits. He imbibed a taste for natural history, probably when young, made collections of natural curiosities, and by attentive observation and depth of thought soon rose superior to the merit of a mere collector. It is to him we owe the discovery of the animal nature of corals and corallines, which is justly said to form an epocha in natural science. The first collection he made of these new-discovered animals, after being presented to, and examined by the royal society, was deposited in the British museum, where it till remains. His mind was originally turned to the subject by a collection of corallines sent him from Anglesey, which he arranged upon paper so as to form a kind of natural landscape. But although the opinion he formed of their being animals was confirmed by some members of the royal society, as soon as he had explained his reasons, he determined to make farther observations, and enlarge his knowledge of corallines on the spot. For this purpose he went, in August 1752, to the isle of Sheppy, accompanied by Mr. Brooking, a painter, and the observations which he made still further confirmed him in his opinions. In 1754, he prevailed on Ehret, the celebrated botanist and artist, to accompany him to Brighthelmstone, where they made drawings, and formed a collection of zoophites. In 1755, he published the result of all his investigations, under the title of an “Essay to wards a Natural History of Corallines,” 4to, one of the most accurate books ever published, whether we consider the plates, the descriptions, or the observations which demonstrate the animal nature of the zoophites. His opinions on this subject were opposed by Job Easier, a Dutch physician and naturalist, who published various dissertations in the Philosophical Transactions in order to prove that corallines were of a vegetable nature. But his arguments were victoriously refuted by Ellis, whose opinions on the subject were almost immediately assented to by naturalists in general, and have been further confirmed by every subsequent examination of the subject.

, a miscellaneous writer of some reputation in the last age, and well known to the scholars of that period, was the son of Mr. James Ellis, and was born in the parish of St. Clement Danes, March 22, 1698. His father was a man of an eccentric character, roving, and unsettled. At one time he was clerk to his uncle and guardian, serjeant Denn, recorder of Canterbury, and kept his chambers in Gray’s-inn, on a starving allowance, as Mr. Ellis used to declare, for board-wages. Leaving his penurious relation, who spent what his father left him in a litigious process, he obtained a place in the post-office at Deal in Kent, from whence he was advanced, to be searcher of the customs in the Downs, with a boat; but being imposed upon, as he thought, in some way by his patron, he quitted his employment and came to London. He was represented by his son as particularly skilful in the use of the sword, to which qualification he was indebted, through the means of a nobleman, for one of his places. He was also much famed for his agility, and could at one time jump the wall of Greenwich park, with the assistance of a staff. At the trial of Dr. Sacheverel he was employed to take down the evidence for the doctor’s use. His wife, Susannah Philpot, our author’s mother, was so strict a dissenter, that when Dr. Sacheverel presented her husband with his print, framed and glazed, she dashed it on the ground, and broke it to pieces, calling him at the same time a priest of Baal; and at a late period of our author’s life, it was remembered by him, that she caused him to undergo the discipline of the school, for only presuming to look at a top on a Sunday which had been given to him the day preceding. The qualifications which Mr. Ellis’s father possessed, it will be perceived, were not those which lead to riches; and indeed so narrow were his circumstances, that he was unable to give his son the advantages of a liberal education. He was first sent to a wretched day-school in Dogwell-court, White Fryars, with a brother and two sisters; and afterwards was removed to another, not much superior, in Wine-office-court, Fleet-street, where he learned the rudiments of grammar, more by his own application than by any assistance of his master. He used, however, to acknowledge the courtesy of the usher, who behaved well to him. While at this school he translated “Mars ton Moore; sive, de obsidione praelioque Eboracensi carmen. Lib. 6. 1650, 4to. Written by Payne Fisher;” which, as it has not been found among his papers, we suppose was afterwards destroyed. At what period, or in what capacity he was originally placed with Mr. John Taverner, an eminent scrivener in Threadneedlestreet, we have not learned; but in whatever manner the connexion began, he in due time became clerk or apprentice to him; and during his residence had an opportunity of improving himself in the Latin tongue, which he availed himself of with the utmost diligence. The son of his master, then at Merchant Taylors’ school, was assisted by his father in his daily school-exercises; which being conducted in the presence of the clerk, it was soon found that the advantage derived from the instructions, though missed by the person for whom it was intended, was not wholly lost. Mr. Ellis eagerly attended, and young Taverner being of an indolent disposition, frequently asked his assistance privately; which at length being discovered by the elder Taverner, was probably the means of his first introduction to the world, though it cannot be said much to his advantage, as old Taverner had the address to retain him in the capacity of his clerk during his life-time, and at his death incumbered him with his son as a partner, by whose imprudence Mr. Ellis was a considerable sufferer both in his peace of mind and his purse, and became involved in difficulties which hung over him a considerable number of years. His literary acquisitions soon, as it might be expected, introduced him to the acquaintance of those who had similar pursuits. In 1721, the rev. Mr. Fayting, afterwards of Merchant Taylors’ school, rector of St. Martin Outwich, and prebendary of Lincoln, being then about to go to Cambridge, solicited and obtained his correspondence, part of which was carried on in verse. With this gentleman, who died 22d Feb. 1789, in his eighty-sixth year, Mr. Ellis lived on terms of the most unreserved friendship, and on his death received a legacy of 100l. bequeathed to him by his will. At a period rather later, he became also known to the late Dr. King of Oxford. Young Taverner, who probably was not at first intended for a scrivener, was elected from Merchant Taylors’ school to St. John’s college, Oxford, and by his means Mr. Ellis was made acquainted with the tory orator. By Dr. King he was introduced to his pupil lord Orrery; and Mr. Ellis atone time spent fourteen days in their company at college, so much to the satisfaction of all parties, that neither the nobleman nor his tutor ever afterwards came to London without visiting, and inviting Mr. Ellis to visit them. In, the years 1742 and 1713, Dr. King published “Templum Libertatis,” in two books, which Mr. Ellis translated into verse with the entire approbation of the original author. This translation still remains in ms. Of his poetical friends, however, the late Moses Mendez, esq. appears to have been the most intimate with him. Several marks of that gentleman’s friendship are to be found scattered through his printed works; and about 1749 he addressed a beautiful epistle to him from Ham, never yet published. In 1744 Mr. Mendez went to Ireland, and on July 5 sent a poetical account of his journey to Mr. Ellis. This epistle was afterwards printed in 1767, in -a collection of poems, and in the same miscellany Mr. Ellis’s answer appeared. Soon after Mr. Mendez addressed a poetical epistle to his friend, Mr. S. Tucker, at Dulwich, printed in the sam collection.

, an eminent Scotch prelate, descended from a noble family in Germany, the counts of Helphinstein, was the son of John, or as some say, William Elphinston and Margaret Douglas, daughter of Douglas of Drumlanrig, and was horn at Glasgow in 1431, or, according to another account, in 1437. He was educated in the newly-erected university of Glasgow, and in the twentieth year of his age became M. A. He then applied himself to the study of divinity, and was made rector of Kirkmichael. After continuing four years in this situation, he went to Paris, where he acquired such reputation in the study of the civil and canon law, as to attract the attention of the university; and he was advanced to the professorship of civil and canon law, first at Park, and afterwards at Orleans, where his lectures were attended by a great concourse of students. The improvement of his own mind, however, being the particular object of his solicitude, he canvassed the most abstruse and difficult parts of his profession with the most eminent and learned doctors of the age. After nine years’ intense study in France, he returned home at the earnest solicitations of his friends, particularly bishop Muirhead, who made him parson of Glasgow, and official of his diocese; and as a mark of respect he was chosen rector of that university in which he had been educated. After the death of his friend and patron, Ivluirbead, he was made official of Lolhian, by archbishop Schevez, of St. Andrew’s; and at the same time was called to parliament, and to a seat in the privycouncil. As his talents were of the most acute and discerning kind, he embraced subjects remote from his religious studies, and became conspicuous as an able politician and skilful negociator. In this capacity he was employed by James III. on an embassy to France, in conjunction with Livingstone, bishop of Dunkeld, and the earl of fiuchan. It is said that he managed so dextrously, that the old league and amity were renewed, and all cause of discord between the two kingdoms removed. The French monarch was so charmed with his conduct and conversation, that he loaded him with valuable presents. When he returned home, he was made archdeacon of Argyle, in 1479, and soon after bishop of Ross; and in 1484, he was translated to the see of Aberdeen. His address in negociation induced the king to send him as one of the commissioners from Scotland to treat of a truce with England, and a marriage between his son and the lady Anne, the niece of Richard III.

, an eminent Prussian botanist, was born in 1623 at Francfort on the Oder, and began his studies at the college of that city under John Moller, then rector. Having an incliiation for the study of medicine, he went to Wirtemberg, attended the lectures of Sperling, Schneider, Banzer, &c. and then pursued his course at Konigsberg, Holland, France, and Italy, and took his doctor’s degree at Padua. On his return home, Frederick-William, elector of Brandenburgh, appointed him, in 1656, court-physician and botanist, offices which he filled with great reputation until his death, at Berlin, Feb. 19, 1688. His works are, 1. “Flora Marchica,” or a catalogue of plants cultivated in the principal gardens of Brandenburgh, Berlin, 1663, 8vo, and 1665. 2. “Anthropometria, sive de mutua membrorum proportione, &c.” Stadt, 1672, 8vo, probably the third edition. 3. “Distillatoria curiosa,” Berlin, 1674, 4to. 4. “Ciysniatica nova,” ibid. 1665, 8vo. 5. “De Horti cultura,” 4to. 6. “De Phosphoris,” translated into English by Sherley, Lond. 1677, 12mo, VVildenow, who has named a plant the Elscholtzia, in honour of this botanist, mentions a manuscript work of his on horticulture, written in German, and preserved in the royal library of Berlin.

When James II. bad fled from Ireland to France, and affairs were tending to a settlement in the former kingdom, the protestant congregations began to re-assemble in large numbers. Upon this occasion, Mr. Boyse again pressed Mr. Emlyn to accept the pastoral care, jointly with himself, of the dissenting society in Wood-street, Dublin. The invitation being earnestly recommc'nded by Mr. Nathanael Taylor, an eminent minister in London, Mr. Emlyn thought proper to comply with it, after having taken a considerable time for deliberation. Accordingly, in May 1691, he removed to Dublin. Here he soon came into great reputation as a preacher. He had not only a portly presence, a strong clear voice, and a graceful delivery, but his discourses were for the most part rational and persuasive, and always accompanied with something serious and pathetic. Controversial points he scarcely ever introduced into the pulpit. Few excelled him in prayer; and he was exemplary in the private duties which were incumbent upon him as a Christian minister. Mr. Emlyn being thus settled in Dublin, contracted an acquaintance there with Mrs. Esther Bury, who, though an usual attendant on the church-service, had been induced, by the fame of his preaching, to become his hearer. She was one of the daughters and coheiresses of Mr. David Sollom, a gentleman of good estate in the county of Meath. At this time she was the wife of Richard Cromleholme Bury, esq. who was possessed of a large estate near Limerick, and who, dying on the 23d of November, 1691, left her a widow, with a handsome jointure. In this state, though she had many admirers, Mrs. Bury continued till 1694, when she was married to Mr. Emlyn. He was now arrived to the utmost height of his desires. Being possessed of an easy fortune, he lived in affluence, was highly beloved by his people, and well respected by all who knew him. In 1697 he had some thoughts of openly declaring his sentiments in relation to the Trinity, and of breaking off from the congregation; but, on mature deliberation, he determined not to proceed abruptly in so important an affair, but embrace the first fair occasion of declaring his opinion. Towards the end of 1701 he began to experience a very afflictive change in his condition. His first calamity was of a domestic nature; for, on the 13th of October, he lost his wife, which event was succeeded, in a very few weeks, by the decease of his mother; and he had a little before been deprived of a young son. The death of his wife, in. particular, inflicted a deep and tender wound upon his heart, as may be perceived in the sermon which he preached upon the occasion; and which was printed at Dublin, in 1703, under the title of “Funeral Consolations,” and from its popularity, several times reprinted. In it Mr. Emlyn never once mentions his wife, but, towards the conclusion of the discourse, has covertly and delicately delineated her character.

After about ten weeks’ absence, though Mr. Emlyn received discouraging accounts of the rage that prevailed against him in Dublin, he thought it necessary to return, to his family. Finding that both his opinions and his person lay under a great odium among many who knew little of the subject in dispute, he wrote his “Humble Inquiry into the Scripture account of Jesus Christ: or, a short argument concerning his Deity and Glory, according to the Gospel.” A few days after this work was prinjted, our author intended to return to England; but some zealous dissenters, getting notice of his design, resolved to have him prosecuted. Two of them, one of whom was a presbyterian, and the other a baptist-church officer, were for presenting Mr. Emlyn; but, upon reflection, this method was judged to be too slow, and too uncertain in its operation. Mr. Caleb Thomas, therefore, the latter of the two dissenters, immediately obtained a special warrant from the lord chief justice (sir Richard Pyne) to seize our author and his books. Our author, with part of the impression of his work, being thus seized, was carried before the lord chief justice, who at first refused bail, but afterwards said that it might be allowed with the attorney-general’s consent; which being obtained, two sufficient persons were bound in a recognizance of eight hundred pounds for Mr. Emlyn’s appearance. This was in Hilary term, February 1703, at the end of which he was bound over to Easter term, when the grand jury found the bill, wherein he was indicted of blasphemy. To such a charge he chose to traverse. The indictment was altered three times before it was finally settled, which occasioned the trial to be deferred till June 14, 1703. On that day, Mr. Emlyn was informed, by an eminent gentleman of the long robe, sir Richard Levins, afterwards lord chief justice of the common pleas, that he would not be permitted to speak freely, but that it was designed to run him down like a wolf, without law or game; and he was soon convinced that this was not a groundless assertion. The indictment was for writing and publishing a book, wherein he had blasphemously and maliciously asserted, that Jesus Christ was not equal to God the father, to whom he was subject; and this with a seditious intention. As Mr. Emlyn knew that it would be difficult to convict him of being the author of the work, he did not think himself bound to be his own accuser, and the prosecutor not being able to produce sufficient evidence of the fact, at length sent for Mr. Boyse. This gentleman, being examined as to what Mr. K.mlyn had preached of the matters contained in the book, acknowledged that he had said nothing of tlu-tn in the pulpit directly, but only some things that gave ground of suspicion. Mr. Boyse being farther asked, what our author had said in private conference with the ministers, answered, “that what he had declared there was judged by his brethren to be near to Arianism.” Though this only proved the agreement of the book with Mr. Emlyn’s sentiment, it yet had a great effect upon the minds of the jury, and tended more than any other consideration to produce a verdict against him. The queen’s counsel, having thus only presumption to allege, contended,that strong presumption was as good as evidence; which doctrine was seconded by the lord chief justice, who repeated it to the jury, who brought him in guilty, without considering the contents of the book whether blasphemy or not, confining themselves, as it would appear, to the fact of publishing: for which some of them afterwards expressed their concern. The verdict being pronounced, the passing of the sentence was deferred to June 16, being the last day of the term. In the mean time Mr. Emlyn was committed to the common jail. During this interval, Mr. Boyse shewed great concern for our author, and used all his interest to prevent the rigorous sentence for which the attorney-general (Robert Kochford, esq.) had moved, viz. the pillory. It being thought proper that Mr. Emlyn should write to the lord chief justice, he accordingly did so; but with what effect we are not told. When he appeared to have judgment given against him, it was moved by one of the queen’s counsel (Mr. Brodrick) that he should retract: but to this our author could not consent. The lord chief justice, therefore, proceeded to pass sentence on him; which was, that he should suffer a year’s imprisonment, pay a thousand pounds fine to the queen, and lie in prison till paid; and that he should find security for good behaviour during life. The pillory, he was told, was the punishment due; but, on account of his being a man of letters, it was not inflicted. Then, with a paper on his breast, he was led round the four courts to l>e exposed. After judgment had been passed, Mr. Emlyn was committed to the sheriffs of Dublin, and was a close prisoner, for something more than a quarter of a year, in the house of the under-sheriff. On the 6th of October he was hastily hurried away to the common jail, where he lay among the prisoners in a close room filled with six beds, for about five or six weeks; and then, by an habeas corpus, he was upon his petition removed into the Marshalsea for his health. Having here greater conveniences, he wrote, in 1704, a tract, entitled “General Remarks on Mr. Boyse’s Vindication of the true Deity of our blessed Saviour.” In the Marshalsea our author remained till July 21, 1705, during the whole of which time his former acquaintances were estranged from him, and all offices of friendship or.civility in a manner ceased; especially among persons of a superior rank. A few, indeed, of the plainer tradesmen belonging to his late congregation were more compassionate; but not one of the dissenting ministers of Dublin, Mr. Boyse excepted, paid him any visit or attention. At length, through the zealous and repeated solicitations of Mr. Boyse, the generous interference of Thomas Medlicote, esq. the humane interposition of the duke of Ormond, and the favourable report of the lord chancellor (sir Richard Cox, to whom a petition of Mr. Emlyn had been preferred), and whose report was, that such exorbitant fines were against law, the fine was reduced to seventy pounds, and it was accordingly paid into her majesty’s exchequer. Twenty pounds more were paid, by way of composition, to Dr. Narcissus March, archbishop of Armagh, who, as queen’s almoner, had a claim of one shilling a pound upon the whole fine. During Mr. Emlyn’s confinement in the Marshalsea, he regularly preached there. He had hired a pretty large room to himself; whither, on the Sundays, some of the imprisoned debtors resorted; and from without doors there came several of the lower sort of his former people and usual hearers. Soon after his release Mr. Emlyn returned to London, where a small congregation was found for him, consisting of a few friends, to whom he preached once every Sunday. This he did without salary or stipend; although, in consequence of his wife’s jointure having devolved to her children, his fortune was reduced to a narrow income. The liberty of preaching which our author enjoyed, gave great offence to several persons, and especially to Mr. Charles Leslie, the famous nonjuror, and Mr. Francis Higgins, the rector of Balruddery, in the county of Dublin. Complaint was made upon the subject to Dr. Teniaon, archbishop of Canterbury, who was not inclined to molest him. Nevertheless, in the representation of the lower house of convocation to the queen in 1711, it was asserted, that weekly sermons were preached in defence of the Unitarian principles, an assertion which Mr. Emlyn thought proper to deny in a paper containing some observations upon it. After a few years, his congregation was dissolved by the death of the principal persons who had attended upon his ministry, and he retired into silent obscurity, but not into idleness; for the greater part of his life was diligently spent in endeavouring to support, by various works, the principles he had embraced, and the cause for which he had suffered. The first performance published by him, after his release from prison, was “A Letter to the Rev. Dr. Willis, 'dean of Lincoln; being some friendly remarks on his sermon before the honourable house of commons, Nov. 5, 1705.” The intention of this letter was to shew that the punishment even of papists for religion was not warranted by the Jewish laws; and that Christians had been more cruel persecutors than Jews. In 1706 Mr. Emlyn published what his party considered as one of his most elaborate productions, “A Vindication of the worship of the Lord Jesus Christ, on Unitarian principles. In anMver to what is said, on that head, by Mr. Joseph Boyse, in his Vindication of” the Deity of Jesus Christ. To which is annexed, an answer to Dr. Walerland on the same head.“Two publications came from our author in 1707, the first of which was entitled” The supreme Deity of God the Father demonstrated. In answer to Dr. Sherlock’s arguments fur the supreme Divinity of Jesus Christ, or whatever can be urged against the supremacy of the first person of the Holy Trinity.“The other was” A brief Vindication of the Bishop of Gloucester’s (Dr. Fowler) Discourses concerning the descent of the man Christ Jesus from Heaven, from Dr. Sherlock the dean of St. Paul’s charge of heresy. With a confutation of his new notion in his late book of The Scripture proofs of our Saviour’s divinity.“In 1708 Mr. Emlyn printed three tracts, all of them directed against Mr. Leslie. The titles of them are as follow: 1. Remarks on Mr. Charles Leslie’s first Dialogue on the Socinian controversy. 2. A Vindication of the Remarks on Mr. Charles Leslie’s first Dialogue on the Socinian controversy. 3. An Examination of Mr. Leslie’s last Dialogue relating to the satisfaction of Jesus Christ. Together with some remarks on Dr. Stillingfleet’s True reasons of Christ’s Sufferings. In the year 1710 he published” The previous question to the several questions about valid and invalid Baptism, Lay-baptism, &c. considered viz. whether there be any necessity (upon the principles of Mr. Wall’s History of infant baptism) for the continual use of baptism among the posterity of baptised Christians.“But this hypothesis, though supported with ingenuity and learning, has not obtained many converts. Our author did not again appear from the press till 1715, when he published” A full Inquiry into the original authority of that text, 1 John v. 7. There are three that bear record in heaven, &c. containing an account of Dr. Mill’s evidence, from antiquity, for and against its being genuine; with an examination of his judgment thereupon.“This piece was addressed to Dr. William Wake, lord archbishop of Canterbury, president, to the bishops of the same province, his grace’s suffragans, and to the clergy of the lower house of convocation, then assembled. The disputed text found an advocate in Mr. Martin, pastor of the French church at the Hague, who published a critical dissertation on the subject, in opposition to Mr. Emlyn’s Inquiry. In 1718 our author again considered the question, in” An Answer to Mr. Martin’s critical dissertation on 1 John v. 7; shewing the insufficiency of his proofs, and the errors of his suppositions, by which he attempts to establish the authority of that text from supposed manuscripts." Mr. Martin having published an examination of this answer, Mr. Emlyn printed a reply to it in 1720, which produced a third tract upon the subject by Mr. Martin, and there the controversy ended; nor, we believe, was it revived in a separate form, until within these few years by Mr. archdeacon Travis and professor Person.

Although Mr. Emlyn flattered himself that his doctrine gradually gained ground both in England and Ireland, he still continued to be so obnoxious, that none of the divines among the dissenters in London dared to ask him to preach for them, excepting the ministers of the baptist congregation at Barbican, Mr. Burroughs and Mr. (afterwards Dr.) James Foster, who invited him more than once to that office. About 1726, upon the decease of Mr. James Pierce, of Exeter, several of the people wished to invite Mr. Emlyn thither; but, as soon as he was acquainted with it, be requested them to desist, thanking them for their respectful attention to him, and excusing his acceptance of an invitation, on account of his declining years, and the feebleness of his limbs. Though our author lived in private retirement, he was honoured with the esteem and friendship of divers persons of distinguishe4 learning and in eminent stations. He was particularly intimate with Dr. Samuel Clarke, who, though at first he was upon the reserve with Mr. Emlyn, when he came to be farther acquainted with him, expressed a high value and regard for him, generally advised with him in matters of importance, and opened his mind to him with the utmost freedom. The doctor’s language to our author was, “I can say any thing to you.” Mr. Whiston also, in his account of his own life, has spoken of Emtyn several times in terms of great respect. In 1731 our author wrote “Observations on Dr. Waterland’s notions in relation to Polytheism, Ditheism, the Son’s consubstantiality with, and inferiority to, the Father;” and in the same year he drew up some “Memoirs of the Life and Sentiments of the reverend Dr. Samuel Clarke,” neither separately published, but inserted in his works. Mr. Einlyn, who was naturally of a very cheerful and lively temper, enjoyed, in all respects, a large share of health, the gout excepted; which, by degrees, impaired his health, and by its annual returns greatly disabled him in his limbs. For the last two or three years of his life he grew much feebler; and about a year before his death he received a violent shock, which it was feared would have carried him off. However, he so well recovered from it, that he weathered the next winter, though a severe one, without any farther breach upon his health. On Friday, July 17, 1743, he was suddenly taken ill in the night, but grew so far better as to be able, for some days, to converse with his friends, and to testify the great satisfaction he enjoyed in the consciousness of his integrity. His disorder returning, he departed this life on Tuesday, the 30th day of the month, in the seventy-ninth year of his age. On the 16th of August following, his funeral sermon was preached at Barbican, by Mr. Foster, who has given him an excellent character. His character is likewise displayed at large in the Memoirs of his life, in which we are told that he was one of the brightest examples of substantial unaffected piety, of serious rational devotion, of a steady unshaken integrity, and an undaunted Christian courage. He was buried in Bunhill-Fields, where there is an inscription to his memory. The Memoirs of his life were written by his son, Sollom Emlyn, esq. and separately published in 1746. In the same year they were prefixed to a collection of his works, in two volumes, octavo. An appendix is added, containing several short papers, drawn up by our author, on various subjects. Mr. Sollom Emlyn, who was bred to the law, and became an eminent counsellor, was employed to publish lord chief justice Hale’s “History of the Pleas of the Crown,” which he did in 1736, in two volumes, folio, together with a preface and large notes, many, of which were contributed by Mr. William Whiston, a son of the celebrated Whiston, who also examined many of the records for the purpose of accuracy. Mr. Sollom Emlyn died in 1756, and left one son, Thomas Emlyn, esq. barrister at law, a bencher of Lincoln’s Inn, and fellow of the royal society, who died in 1797.

, an eminent philosopher, poet, orator, historian, and physician, was of Agrigentum, in Sicily, and flourished about the eighty-fourth olympiad, or B. C. 44-4. He appears from his doctrine to have been of the Italic school; but under what master he studied philosophy is uncertain. After the death of his father Meto, who was a wealthy citizen of Agrigentum, he acquired great weight among his fellow-citizens, by espousing the popular party, and favouring democratic measures. He employed a large share of his paternal estate in giving dowries to young women, and marrying them to men of superior rank. His consequence in the state became at length so great, that he ventured to assume several of the distinctions of royalty, particularly a purple robe, a golden girdle, a Delphic crown, and a train of attendants; always retaining a grave and commanding aspect. He was a determined enemy to tyranny, and is said to have employed his influence in establishing and defending the rights of his countrymen.

The skill which Empedocles possessed in medicine and natural philosophy enabled him to perform many wonders, which he passed upon the superstitious and credulous multitude for miracles. He pretended to drive away noxious winds from his country, and hereby put a stop to epidemical diseases. He is said to have checked, by the power of music, the madness of a young man, who was threatening his enemy with instant death; to have cured Pantha, a woman of Agrigentum, whom all the physicians had declared incurable; to have restored a woman to life, who had lain breathless for thirty days; and to have done many other things equally astonishing, after the manner of Pythagoras: on account of which he was an object of universal admiration, so that when he came to the Olympic games, the eyes of all the people were fixed upon him. Besides medical skill, Empedocles possessed poetical talents. The fragments of his verses, which are dispersed through various ancient writers, have been in part collected by Henry Stephens, in the “Poesis philosophica,” 1574, 8vo. This circumstance affords some ground for the opinion of Fabricius, that Empedocles was the real author of that ancient fragment which bears the name of “The Golden Verses of Pythagoras.” He is said also to have been a dramatic poet; but Empedocles the tragedian was another person; Suidas, upon some unknown authority, calls him the grandson of the philosopher. Georgias Leontinus, a celebrated orator, was his pupil; whence it may seem reasonable to infer, that he was an eminent master of the art of eloquence. The particulars of his death are variously related. Some report, that during the night, after a sacred festival, he was conveyed away towards the heavens, amidst the splendour of celestial light; others that he threw himself into the burning crater of Mount Etna. Much reliance cannot be placed on either of these stories. There is more probability that towards the close of his life he went into Greece, and died there, at what time is uncertain. Aristotle says he died at sixty years of age. The substance of his philosophy, according to Brucker, is this: It is impossible to judge of truth by the senses without the assistance of reason; which is. led, by the intervention of the senses, to the contemplation of the real nature, and immutable essences, of things. The first principles of nature are of two kinds, active and passive the active is unity, or God the passive, matter. The active principle is a subtle, ethereal fire, intelligent and divine, which gives being to all things, and animates all things, and into which all things will be at last resolved. Many daemons, portions of the divine nature, wander through the region of the air, and administer human affairs. Man, and also all brute animals, are allied to the divinity; and it is therefore unlawful to kill or eat animals. The world is one whole, circumscribed by the revolution of the sun, and surrounded, not by a vacuum, but by a. mass of inactive matter. The first material principles of the four elements are similar atoms, indefinitely small, and of a round form. Matter, thus divided into corpuscles, possessed the primary qualities of friendship and discord, by means of which, upon the first agitation of the original chaotic mass, homogeneous parts were united, and heterogeneous separated, and the four elements composed, of which all bodies are generated. The motion of the corpuscles, which excites the qualities of friendship and discord, is produced by the energy of intellectual fire, or divine mind; all motion, and consequently all life and being, must therefore be ascribed to God. The first principles of the elements are eternal nothing can begin to exist, or be annihilated but all the varieties of nature are produced by combination or separation. In the formation of the world, ether was first secreted from chaos, then fire, then earth; by the agitation of which were produced water and air. The heavens are a solid body of air, crystallized by fire. The stars are bodies composed of fire, they are fixed in the crystal of heaven; but the planets wander freely beneath it. The sun is a fiery mass, larger than the moon, which is in the form of a hollow plate, and twice as far from the sun as from the earth. The soul of man consists of two parts, the sensitive, produced from the same principles with the elements; and the rational, which is a daemon sprung from the divine soul of the world, and sent down into the body as a punishment for its crimes in a former state, where it transmigrates till it is sufficiently purified to return to God.

, bishop of Pavia in Italy, and an eminent writer, was descended from an illustrious family in Gaul, and horn in Italy about the year 473. Losing an aunt, who had brought him up, at sixteen years of age, he was reduced to very necessitous circumstances, but retrieved his affairs by marrying a young lady of great fortune and quality. He enjoyed for some time all the pleasures and advantages which his wealth could procure him; but afterwards resolved upon a more strict course of life. He entered into orders, with the consent of his lady, who likewise betook herself to a religious life. He was ordained deacon by Epiphanius, bishop of Pavia, with whom he lived in the most inviolable friendship. His application to divinity did not divert him from prosecuting, at his leisure hours, poetry and oratory, in which he had distinguished himself from his youth; and his writings gained him very great reputation. Upon the death of Epiphanius, he appears to have been elected one of the deacons of the Roman church; and in the year 603, having presented to the synod of Rome an apology for the council there, which had absolved pope Symmachus the year before, it was ordered to be inserted among the acts of the synod. He was advanced to the bishopric of Pavia about the year 511, and appointed to negociate an union between the eastern and western churches; for which purpose he took two journeys into the east, the former in the year 515, with Fortunatus, bishop of Catanaea; the latter in the year 517, with Peregrinus, bishop of Misenum. Though he did not succeed in these negotiations, he shewed his prudence and resolution in the management of them. For the emperor Anastasius, having in vain used his utmost efforts to deceive or corrupt him, after other instances of ill treatment, ordered him to be put on board an old ship; and, forbidding him to land in any part of Greece, exposed him to manifest danger, yet he arrived safe in Italy; and, returning to Padua, died there, not long after, in the year 521. His works consist of, 1. “Epistolarum ad diversos libri IX.” 2. “Panegyricus Theodorico regi Ostrogothorum dictus.” 3. “Libellus apologeticus pro Synodo Palmari.” 4. “Vita B. Epiphanii episcopi Ticinensis.” 5. “Vita B. Antonii monachi Lirinensis” 6. “Eucharisticon de Vita sua ad Elpidium.” 7. “Parasnesis didascalica ad Ambrosium & Beatum.” 8. “Proeceptum de Cellulanis Episcoporum.” 9. “Petitorium, quo absolutus est Gerontius.” 10. “Benedictio Cerei Paschalis I.” 11. “Benedictio Cerei Paschalis II.” 12. “Dietiones sacrae VI.” 13. “Dictiones scholastics VII.” 14. “Controversioe X.” 15. “Dictiones Ethicae V.” 16. “Poeinata, seu Carminum Liber I.” 17. “Epigrammata, seu Carminum Liber II.” They" were all published by Andrew Scottus at Tournay, 1610, 8vo; and by James Sirrnond at Paris, 1611, 8vo, with notes, explaining the names and titles of the persons mentioned by Ennodius, and containing a great many observations very useful tot illustrating the history of that age. Ennodius’s works are likewise printed with emendations and illustrations, at the end of the first volume of father Sirmond’s works, published at Paris in 1626[?]; and, from that edition, at Venice, 1729, folio. Dupiu observes, that there is a considerable warmth and liveliness of imagination in the writings of Ennodius but that his style is obscure, and his manner of reasoning far from exact.

, named the Scholastic, a native of Italy, and an eminent Greek and Latin scholar, was born about the year 510. At the request of Cassiodorus he translated into the Latin language the ecclesiastical histories of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodcret, a version more entitled to commendation for its fidelity than its elegance. Cassiodorus was also indebted to Epiphanius for the improved version of the “Codex encyclicus,” or collection of synodal letters of the year 458, addressed to the emperor Leo, in defence of the council of Chalcedon. His histories of Socrates were first printed at Angsburgh, 1472, fol. and were often reprinted afterwards at Basil and Paris, 1523, 1528, 1533, &c. &c.

It would be endless to collect the extraordinary eulogiums which great and learned men have bestowed upon Episcopius; one of which may be quoted as coming from an unexpected quarter, from Mabillon, an eminent member and ornament of the church of Rome: “I cannot forbear observing in this place,” says he, in his treatise of studies proper for them that live in monasteries, “that, if some passages had been left out of Episcopius’s theological institutions, which Grotius esteemed so much that he carried them with him wherever he went, they might have been very useful in the study of divinity. This work is divided into four books; the method of which is quite difr ferent from that which is generally followed. His style is beautiful, and his manner of treating his subjects answers his style perfectly well; nor would the time spent in reading of it be lost, if it was corrected with regard to some passages, in which the author speaks against the Roman catholics, and in favour of his own sect.” The Arminians have had very naturally the highest regard for Episcopius, and been careful to preserve his reputation from the attacks that have been made upon it: so careful, that, in 1690, they engaged Le Clerc, one of their professors, publicly to accuse Jurieu of calumny, because he had spoken evil of Episcopius. Le Cle.rc published a letter directed to Jurieu; in which he observes, that “they who have dipped into Episcopius’s works, and are acquainted, with the society of the remonstrants, have no occasion to see them vindicated. And as for those who have not read that author, and never conversed with any of the remonstrants, if they were so unjust as to judge only by Mr. Jurieu’s accusations, they would not deserve the least trouble to undeceive them; for it would show that they had no notion of common equity, and were too stupid to hearken to any vindication. But then we are persuaded,” adds he, “that there is not one person in the United Provinces, or any where else, that is disposed to believe this accuser upon his bare word.” After this preamble, Le Clerc says, “You charge Episcopius with two crimes: the first is, his being a Socinian; the second, his being an enemy to the Christian religion.” Le Clerc confutes the first of these accusations, by referring to several parts of Episcopius’s works, where he explodes the doctrine of the Socinians; and afterwards finds it no difficult task to answer the second, because Episcopius’s life and writings evidently shew, that he was a virtuous and conscientious man, and very zealous for the Christian religion. Le Clerc refers to a-passage in Episcopius’s Institutions, in which the truth of the Christian religion “is proved,” says he, “in so clear and strong a manner, that we might hope there would not remain any infidels in the world, if they would all duly weigh and consider his arguments. And yet you style him, sir, an enemy of Christianity; though it does not in the least appear, that you have either read his works, or examined his life. There is indeed nothing but the disorder of your mind, occasioned by your blind zeal, for which you have been long noted, that can make me say, O Lord, Forgive Him; for, in reality, you Know Not What You Do. You could not choose a better method to pass in the world for a man little acquainted with the duties of Christianity, and even of civil society, than by writing as you have done,” &c. With respect to his opinions on this subject, Episcopius acknowledges that Jesus Christ is called in Scripture the Son of God, not merely on account either of his miraculous conception, or of his mediation, or of his resurrection, or of his ascension, but on a fifth account, which, in his opinion, clearly implies his pre-existence; yet he contends, that it is not necessary to salvation, either to know or believe this fifth mode of filiation because it is not any wherfc said in Scripture to be necessary because we may have faith in Christ without it and because for the three first centuries the Christian church did not esteem a profession of belief in this mode to be necessary to salvation. Bishop Bull attacked with great learning this third reason of Episcopius, which has likewise been attacked with equal force of reasoning by more recent defenders of the Trinitarian doctrine. Of our English divines, Hammond is said to have borrowed largely of Episcopius, and Tillotson has been accounted one of his disciples.

He had now spent three years in close application to the Greek tongue, which -he looked upon as so necessary, that he could not fancy himself a tolerable divine without it. Having rather neglected it when he was young, he after wards studied it at Oxford, under Grocyn and Linacer, but did not stay long enough there to reap any considerable benefit from their assistance; so that, though he attained a perfect knowledge of it, it was in a great measure owing to his own application; and he might truly be called, in respect to Greek, what indeed he calls himself, “prorsus autodidactus;” altogether self-taught. His way of acquiring this language was by translating; and hence it is that we come to have in his works such a number of pieces translated from Lucian, Plutarch, and others. These translations likewise furnished him with opportunities of writing dedications to his patrons. Thus he dedicated to our king Henry VIII. a piece of Plutarch, entitled “How to distinguish a friend from a flatterer;” a dialogue of Lucian, called “Somnium, sive Gallus,” to Dr. Christopher Ursewick, an eminent scholar and statesman; the Hecuba of Euripides, to Warham, archhishop of Canterbury, which he presented to him at Lambeth, after he had been introduced by his friend Grocyn; another dialogue of Lucian, called “Toxaris, sive de arnicitia,” to Dr. Richard Fox, bishop of Winchester; and a great number of other pieces from different authors to as many different patrons, both in England and upon the continent. The example which Erasmus had set in studying the Greek tongue was eagerly and successfully followed; and he had the pleasure of seeing in a very short time Grecian learning cultivated by the greater part of Europe.

, an eminent German physician, but perhaps more celebrated as a divine, from being, the reputed founder of the Erastians, or of the opinions so called, for they are not a distinct sect, was born in 1523, or 1524, at Auggenen, a village in the lordship of Badenweiller, which is in the marquisate of Baden Dourlach. His family name was Leiber, or beloved, to which he gave, according to the custom of the times, a Greek turn, and called himself Erastus. In 1540, he was sent to the university of Basil, where he had some difficulties to struggle with, owing to the poverty of his parents; but, according to Melchior Adam, Providence raised him up a patron, who provided for him liberally, and after his studies at Basil, enabled him to travel to Italy for farther improvement. At Bologna he studied both philosophy and physic, the latter for nine years under the ablest masters. Returning, with a doctor’s degree, to his own country, he lived for some time at the court of the princes of Henneberg, where he practised physic with great reputation, until the elector palatine Frederick III. invited him to his court, and made him first physician and counsellor. This prince appointed him also professor of physic in the university 'of Heidelberg. In 1581 be returned to Basil, where he was also chosen professor of physic, and where he made a liberal foundation for the provision and education of poor students in medicine, and after superintending and establishing this, which was long called the Erastian foundation, he died Dec. 31, 1583, or, according to some, Jan. 1, 1584. His medical works were principally, 1. “Disputationum de Medicina nova Philippi Paracelsi,” p. i. Basil, 1572, p. ii. ibid. 1572, p. iii. ibid. 1572, p. iv. et ultima, ibid. 1573, all in 4to. In these volumes he refutes the doctrines which Paracelsus had previously taught at Basil, and had committed to writing, particularly^) astrology and medicine. 2. “Theses de~Contagio,” Heidelberg, 1574, 4to. 3. “De Occult. Pharmacor. Potestatibus,” ibid. 1574, 4to; Francfort, 1611. 4. “Disputat, de Auro Potabili,” Basil, 1578, 1594, 4to. 5. “De Putredine Lu ber,” ibid. 1580, 4to; Lipsiae, 1590. 6. “Epistola de Astrologia Divinatrice,” Basil, 1580, 4to. 7. “De Pinguedinis in Anhnalibus Generatione et Concretione,” Heidelbergae, 1580, 4to. 8. “Com ids Montani, Vicentini, novi Medicorum censoris, quinque Librorum de Morbis nuper Editorum viva Anatome,” Basil, 1581, 4to. 9. “Ad Archangeli Mercenarii Disputationem de Putredine responsioj” ibid. 152, 4to. 10, “Varia Opuscula Medica,” Franc. 1590, folio.

, an eminent scholar of the middle age, was born in an early part of the ninth century. The most common account of him is, that he was a native of Ayr, in Scotland, though some writers have said that the place of his birth was Ergene, on the borders of Wales, and others have contended that he was an Irishman. It is, we apprehend, most probable that he was a Scotchman. However this may have been, he was animated, in a very dark period, with a most uncommon desire of literature. Seeing his country involved in great confusion and ignorance, and that it afforded no means of acquiring the knowledge after which he thirsted, he travelled into foreign, parts; and it is even asserted, by several authors, that he went to Athens, and spent some years in studying the Greek, Chaldaic, and Arabic languages. In whatever place he obtained his learning, it is certain that in philosophy he had no superior, and in languages no equal, in. the age during which he flourished. These extraordinary accomplishments, together with his wit and pleasantry, which rendered his conversation as agreeable as it was instructive, procured him an invitation from Charles the Bald, king of France, the greatest patron of literature in that period, to reside with him. Of this invitation Erigena accepted, and Jived a number of years in the court of that prince, on a footing of the most intimate acquaintance and familiarity. He slept often in the royal apartments, and dined daily at the royal table. From the following repartee, which is preserved by one of our ancient historians, we may judge of the freedom which Scotus used with the monarch. As they were sitting one day at table opposite to each other, after dinner, the philosopher having said something that was not quite agreeable to the rules of politeness, the king, in a merry humour, asked him, “Pray what is between a Scot and a sot” To which he answered, “Nothing but the table.” Charles, says the historian, laughed heartily, and was not in the least offended, as he made it- a rule never to be angry with his master, as he always called Erigena; yet, in order to assist our belief in the above joke, it has been observed, that we ought to know in what language Charles and Scotus conversed. Charles, however, valued this great man for his wisdom and learning, still more than for his wit, and retained him about his person, not merely as an agreeable companion, but as his preceptor in the sciences, and his best counsellor in the most arduous affairs of governnfenf. While Scotus resided in the court of France, he composed, at the desire of his royal patron, a number of works, which procured him many admirers on the one hand, and many adversaries on the other. The clergy, in particular, were dissatisfied with some of his notions, as not being perfectly orthodox. One of the subjects which employed his pen was the doctrine of predestination. In his treatise on this subject, which was addressed to Hincmar, archbishop of Rheims, and Pardulus, bishop of Laon, the position he begins with is, that every question may be resolved by four general rules of philosophy, viz. division, definition, demonstration, and analysis. By these rules he endeavours to prove, that there cannot be a double predestination, of one to glory, and another to damnation; and that predestination does not impose any necessity, but that man is absolutely free; and that, although he cannot do good without the grace of Jesus Christ, yet he does it, without being constrained or forced to do it by the will of God, by his own free choice. Sin, and the consequences of it, and the punishments with which it is attended, are, says Erigena, mere privations, that are neither foreseen nor predestinated by God; and predestination hath no place but in those things which God hath pre-ordained in order to eternal happiness; for our predestination arises from the foresight of the good use of our free-will. Sentiments so bold, and delivered in such an age, could not fail of exciting great indignation. Wemlo, or Ganelo, archbishop of Sens, having read the work, collected out of it several propositions, which he arranged under nineteen heads, according to the number and order of the chapters of Scotus’s treatise, and sent them to Prudentius, bishop of Troyes. This prelate, having examined them, found in them, as he thought, not only the errors of Pelagius, but the impiety of the Collyridians. He employed himself, therefore, in answering Erigena and another answer to him was written by Florus, a deacon of the church of Lyons. It does not appear that Scotus engaged any farther in the controversy.

, lord Dun, an eminent Scotch lawyer, was born at Dun, co. Angus, 1670, and brought up to the law, partly in the university of St. Andrew’s, and partly in that of Paris. In 1696 he was called to the bar in the court of session, and became a famous pleader. He opposed the union in the Scottish parliament, and was a munificent benefactor to the persecuted episcopal clergy. In 1711 he took his seat on the bench in the court of session, under the title of lord Dun. In 1713 he was appointed one of the commissioners of the court of justiciary, which he held till 1750, when he retired; and in 1752, published a most excellent volume in 12mo, under the title of “Lord Dun’s Advices.” He died at Dun, 1755, aged eighty-five.

, D. D. an eminent divine of the church of Scotland, was born June 2, 1721. He was the eldest son of John Krskiue, esq. of Carnock, afterwards of Cardross, advocate, and professor of Scotch law in the university of Edinburgh, who is well known by his “Institutes of the Law of Scotland,” a work of the highest authority and reputation. His grandfather, colonel John Erskine, third son of Heury lord Cardross, was a man of eminent piety, and distinguished by his services in support of the revolution in 1688. Mr. Erskine, the subject of this article, was originally intended by his relations for the profession of the law, and received a suitable education. He appears, however, from his earliest years, to have been of a serious turn of mind, and to have preferred the study of theology, and the employment of the ministry. He entered the university of Edinburgh in 1734, where he acquired much useful knowledge, and formed an intimate connection with some fellow-students, who afterwards rose to great eminence both in the political and literary world. At this time it was the practice to prescribe discourses to the students, on subjects connected with the lectures which they heard. A volume of essays of this description is preserved in the college library, and in it are two theses delivered April 30, 1737, one by the late eminent historian, Dr. Robertson, afterwards Dr. Erskine’s colleague in the ministry, and at that time his fellow-studeiU, under the title “De probabilitate historiea, sive de evidentia morali,” the other by Dr. Erskine, entitled “De rectae rationis usu Icgitimo, sive de libertate cogitandi.” They are both written in very pure Latin, and discover a considerable acquaintance with philosophical discussions.

, an eminent naturalist, was born at Quedlinburgh, June 22, 1744, and became professor of philosophy at Gottingen, where he had studied, and where he died, too soon for the sciences, August 15, 1777, aged only thirty-three years, during the latter part of which his merit had procured him admission into most of the learned societies of Europe. In 177 1 he published “Practical Observations on the Veterinary Art,” in which he had attained great knowledge, This work relates to the diseases of domestic animals, and particularly that among the horned cattle, for which a method of inoculation was attempted, the result of which was that out of nine only four died from inoculation, whereas in the natural way seven out of nine perished: but the chief advantage of the experiment was, that the inoculated cattle were never subject to a fresh attack of the disease. His other works are, “Dissertations relative to Natural Philosophy and Chemistry,” 1776;“” Elements of Natural History,“2 vols. 8vo, Gottingen, fourth edition, improved by Gmelin” Elements of Physic,“Francfort, 1794, 8vo, sixth edition, with additions by Lichtenberg” Elements of Chemistry," Gottingen, 1790, 8vo, the third edition, &c.

, an eminent canonist, was born at Louvain in 1646, “and after taking his degree of doctor of laws in 1675, filled a chair in the college of pope Adrian VI. with great success. Being fond of retirement and study, he is only known to the world by his writings. Having lost his sight in the sixty-fifth year of his age, by a cataract, which was removed two years afterwards, he neither lost any thing of his vivacity nor his application. His sentiments on the Formulary, and on the frull Unigenitus, and the kind of approbation which he gave to the consecration of Steenoven, archbishop of Utrecht, brought on him much unmerited persecution, chiefly from the envy of individuals. What they made him suffer, however, forced him to retire to Maestricht, and then to Amersfort, where he died, Oct. 2, 1728, at the age of eighty-three. Van Espen is doubtless one of the most learned canonists of his times. His principal work, still consulted, is his” Jus ecclesiasticum universum,“in which the most important points of ecclesiastical discipline are circumstantially discussed with profound knowledge of. the subject. At Paris, under the imprint of Louvain, was published, in 1753, a collection of all the works of Van Espen, in 4 vols. folio. This edition, which is enriched with the observations of Gibert on the” Jus ecclesiasticum," and the notes of father Barre, a canoiv-regular of St. Genevieve, contains every particular of importance in ethics, the canon, and even the civil law, and since that time a supplementary volume was published by Gabriel de Bellegarde.

, an eminent Italian historian, was born at San Geminiano, a village of Tuscany, in 1437. He was of the illustrious family of the Buonaccorsi, which name he changed to that of Callimaco or Callimachus, when he had, along with Pomponius Laetus, and other men of learning, established an academy, the members of which adopted Latin or Greek names. The surname of Esperiente, or Experiens, he is supposed to have assumed in allusion to the vicissitudes of his life, but in that case he must have assumed it after he had met with these vicissitudes. It is therefore more reasonable to suppose that he merely meant to infer that all true knowledge is founded on experience. Paul II. having succeeded Pius II. in 1464, did not view Esperiente’s academy, and his change of name, in the same favourable light as his predecessor, but fancied he discovered something mysterious and alarming in such a society, and even persecuted the members of it with some severity. Esperiente was therefore obliged to make his escape, and after travelling in various countries, came to Poland in 1473, where he was kindly received by the archbishop of Leopol or Lemberg, and acquired the esteem of Casimir III. king of Poland, who appointed him preceptor to his children, and some time afterwards employed him as his secretary. Acquiring the confidence of the king, who perceived his talents for business, he was entrusted with several important negociations at Constantinople in 1475, and at Vienna and Venice in 1486. In 1488 he had the misfortune to lose his library by an accidental fire. The death of Casimir in 1491, made no difference in his situation, John Albert the successor to the crown, who had been his pupil, admitting him to his confidence, and even to a share of power, which excited the resentment of the natives, who were jealous of the interference of a foreigner and a fugitive; but the virtue and good conduct of Esperiente were superior to the attacks of his adversaries, and he retained his station and favour, with undiminished honour, to the close of his days. He died at Cracow Nov. 1, 1496, and his remains were deposited in a tomb of bronze, with the following inscription: “Philippus Callimachus Experieus, natione Thuscus, vir doctissimus, utriusque fortunse exemplum imitandutn, atque oninis virtutis ctiltor pra?cipuus, ciivi oliin Casimiri et Joaunis Alberti, Poloniae regum, secretarius acceptissimus, relictis ingenii, ac reruin a se gestarum, plnribus tnonu mentis, cum summo omnium honor u in muToro, et regiffi domus, atque hujus reipublicae incoinmodo, anno sal mis nostne 1496, calendis Novembris, vita decedens, hie sepultus est,”

, an eminent Dutch divine of the popish persuasion, was born at Gorcum, in Holland, about 1542, and was a descendant of an illustrious family of the lords of the castle of Est, from whom he took his name. He finished his classical studies under Macropedius, at Utrecht) studied divinity and philosophy at Louvain, and taught these two sciences for ten years at that place. In 1580 he was admitted to his degree of D. D. and some time after was appointed to lecture on divinity at Doway, and was made superior of the seminary of that city, and provost of the church of St. Peter. He was also elected chancellor of the university of Doway, and employed all his time in teaching or writing. Although esteemed highlylearned, he was no less distinguished for his modesty and benevolence. He died at Doway Sept. 20, 1613, and was buried in the church of St. Peter. His works are, 1. “Martyrium Edmundi Campiani, societatis Jesu,” translated from the French; Louvain, 1582, 8vo; (see Campian). 2. “Historia martyrum Gorcomensium majori numero fratrum minorum,” Doway, 1603, 8vo. 3. “Orationes Theologies,” Doway, 1614, 8vo. 4. “Commentarii in quatuor lihros Sententiarum,” Doway, 1615, 4 vols. fol. reprinted at Paris, 1638, 3 vols. fol. Dupin says this is one of the best theological works the Roman church can boast, and recommends it to students in divinity. 5. “Annotationes in praecipua difficiiiora S. Scriptura; loca,' 1 Antwerp, 1621, fol. a work on which a high value appears to have been placed, as it passed through several editions. It resulted from the conferences he held in the seminary of Doway, but, according to Dupin, his observations ar rather practical than critical. 6.” In omnes B. Pauli et aliorum apostolorumepistolas Commentaria,“Doway, 1614, 2 vols. fol. Dupin praises this as one of the best works of the kind, but it appears that Estius was prevented by death from proceeding farther than 1 John v. and that the rest of the commentary was supplied by Barth. de la Pierre. He wrote also some Latin verses, and an essay” Contra avaritiam scientiae,“censuring the selfishness of learned men who keep their improvements and discoveries to themselves. This is inserted in a work by Francis Vianen of Brussels, entitled” Tractatus triplex de ordine amoris," Louvain, 1685, 8vo.

, an eminent philosopher, who flourished irv the 97th olympiad, about 390 B. C. was the founder of the Megaric sect, which was so called from Megara, where he was bora. He was endued by nature with a subtle and penetrating genius, and applied himself early to the study of philosophy. The writings of Parmenides first taught him the art of disputation. Hearing of the fame of Socrates, Euclid removed from Megara to Athens, where he long remained a constant hearer, and zealous disciple, of that philosopher; and such was his regard for him, that, when, in consequence of the enmity which subsisted between the Athenians and Megarians, a decree was passed by the forner, that any inhabitant of Megara, who should be seen in Athens should forfeit his life, he frequently came to Athens by night, from the distance of about twenty miles, concealed in a long female cloak and veil, to visit his master. But as his natural propensity to disputation was not sufficiently gratified in the tranquil method of philosophising adopted by Socrates, he frequently engaged in the business and disputes of the civil courts, at which Socrates, who despised forensic contests, expressed some dissatisfaction. This probably was the occasion of a separation between Euclid and his master; for we find him, after this time, at the head of a school in Megara, in which his chief employment was, to teach the art of disputation, which he did with so much vehemence, that Timon said, Euclid had carried the madness of contention from Athens to Megara. He was, however, at times sufficiently master of his temper, as appears from his reply to his brother, who in a quarrel had said, “Let me perish if I be not revenged on you:” “and let me perish,” returned Euclid, “if I do not subdue your, resentment by forbearance, and make you love me as much as ever.” In disputation, Euclid was averse to the analogical method of reasoning, and judged, that legitimate argumentation consists in deducing fair conclusions from acknowledged premises. He held, that there is one supreme good, which he called by the different names of Intelligence, Providence, God; and that evil, considered as an opposite principle to the sovereign good, has no physical existence. The supreme good he defined to be that which is always the same. Good he therefore considered abstractedly, as residing in the Deity, and he seems to have maintained, that all things which exist are good by their participation of the first good, and that in the nature of things there is no real evil. When Euclid was asked his opinion concerning the gods, he replied, “I know nothing more of them than this: that they hate inquisitive persons,” an answer which at that time, and remembering the fate of Socrates, shows his prudence at least.

, an eminent ecclesiastical historian, surnamed Pamphilus, from his friendship with Pamphilus the Martyr, was born in Palestine, about A. D. 267. Cave thinks it probable, that he was born at Coesarea; but we have no account of his parents, or his masters. He tells us himself, that he was educated in Palestine, and saw Constantine there, while he travelled through that country in the retinue of Diocletian. He was ordained priest by Agapius, bishop of Caesarea, where he contracted an intimacy with Pamphilus, an eminent presbyter of that church. During the persecution under Diocletian, he exhorted the Christians to suffer resolutely for the faith of Christ; and particularly assisted his friend Pamphilus, who suffered martyrdom in the year 309, after two years imprisonment. In the time of the same persecution he went to Tyre, where he was ah eye-witness of the glorious combats of the five Egyptian martyrs. He was likewise in Egypt and at Thebais, where he saw the admirable constancy of many martyrs of both sexes, and was himself imprisoned. He has been reproached with having offered incense to idols in this persecution, in order to free himself from prison. This imputation was fixed upon him by Potomon, bishop of Heraclea, at the council of Tyre. Epiphanius informs us that Potomon, seeing Eusebius sitting in the council, cried out, “Is it fit, Eusebius, that you should sit, and that the innocent Athanasius should stand to be judged by you Who can bear such things as these Tell me, were not you in prison with me during the time of the persecution I lost an eye in defence of the truth but you are maimed in no part of your body, nor did you suffer martyrdom, but are whole and alive. By what means did you escape out of prison, unless you promised our persecutors that you would do the detestable thing, and perhaps have done it” Epiphanius adds, that Eusebius, hearing this, rose and broke the assembly, saying, “If, when you are out of your own country, you say such things against us, it is certain that your accusers must be in the right: for, if you exercise your tyranny here, you will do it with much more assurance in your own country.” Valesius observes, from the above-cited passage of Epiphanius, that those persons are mistaken, who relate that Eusebius had sacrificed to idols, and that it was openly objected to him in the council of Tyre; since Potomon did not charge him with it, but only grounded a suspicion on his being dismissed safe and whole. Besides, as Cave very properly remarks, had he really sacrificed, the discipline of the church was then so rigid, that he would have been degraded from his orders; at least, would never have been advanced to the episcopal dignity. Dr. Lardner has also brought various authorities to prove this accusation unfounded.

Eusebius did not long survive Constantine, for he. died about the year 33 o, according to Dupin; or the year 340, according to Valesius. He wrote several great and important works, of which among those that are extant we have, 1. “Chronicon” divided into two parts, and carried down to A. D. 325 in which, not long before the council of Nice, Cave supposes this work to have been finished. The first part, which is at present extremely mutilated, contains an history of the Chaldeans, Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Lydians, Jews, Egyptians, &c. from the creation of the world. In the second part, which is called “Canon Chronicus,” he digests the history of the several nations according to the order of time. St. Jerom translated both parts into Latin: but we have remaining of the version of the first part, only some extracts, containing the names of the kings, printed with the translation of the second part. It was printed at Basil, and afterwards published more accurately by Arnauld de Pontac, bishop of Baras, at Bourdeaux in 1604. But no person ever undertook to collect the Greek fragments of the original, till Joseph Scaliger published them at Leyden, 1606, in folio, under the following title: “Thesaurus temporum, complectens Eusebii Pamphili chronicon Latine, S. Hieronymo interprete, cum ipsius chronici fragmentis Graecis antehac non editis, et auctores omnes derelicta ab Eusebio continuantes. Edente Josepho Justo Scaligero, qui notas et castigationes in Eusebium, nee non Isagogicorum Chronologix canonum libros tres adjecit.” There, was another edition, much enlarged, printed at Amsterdam in 1658, in 2 vols. fol. under the care of Alexander Morus. Dupin says, that “this work of Eusebius displays a prodigious extent of reading, and consummate erudition. It is necessary to have read an infinite number of books and ancient monuments, in order to compile an universal history; and to have been master of a very clear understanding at the same time, in order to collect such a multitude of facts, and dispose them in their proper order. This is an immense labour, which is a strong proof of the vast reading and prodigious memory of Eusebius. It must be owned, indeed, that Africanus’s Chronicle was of great service to him, and that he has copied that author throughout his work. However, he has corrected several of Africanus’s mistakes, though he has fallen into others himself. But it is almost impossible not to err in a work of such vast extent and difficulty as an universal chronicle. Mistakes are excusable in a performance of this kind; nor can they hinder it from being deservedly considered as one of the molt useful works of antiquity.” His next work is, 2. “Prseparationis Evangelicae, Hbri XV.” Valesius tells us that this book, as well as his treatise “De Demonstratione Evangelica,” was written before the Nicene council, since they are expressly cited in his “Ecclesiastical History,” which Valesius affirms to have been written also before it; but Cave is of opinion that the book “De Prseparatione Evangelica” was written after that council, undoubtedly after his “Chrdnicon,” since his “Canones Chronici” are expressly cited in it. 3. “De Demonstratione Evangelical” We have of this work only ten books extant, though Eusebius wrote twenty. A beautiful edition of this and the former book was printed in Greek by Robert Stephens in 1544 and 1545, in 2 vols. fol. They were reprinted at Paris, 1628, in 2 vols. fol. with a new version of the book “De Praeparatione,” by the Jesuit Francis Vigerus, and with Donatus’s translation! of the book “De Demonstratione.” 4. “Historic Ecclesiasticae, libri V.” containing the history of the church from the beginning to the death of Licinius the elder, which includes a period of 324 years. Valesius observes, that he wrote this after almost all his other works; and Cave says, that it was written after the Nicene council, since he mentions in it not only his “Chronicon,” but likewise his treatise “De Demonstratione.” At the end of the eighth book we find a small treatise “Of the Martyrs of Palestine;” in which he describes the martyrdom of those who suffered for the faith of Christ iri that province. This has been erroneously confounded with the 8th book of the history; whereas it is a separate tract, which serves for a supplement to that book. The Ecclesiastical History has been often translated and printed: but the best edition is that of Henry Valesius^ who, having remarked the defects of all the former translations, undertook a new one, which he has joined to the Greek text revised by four manuscripts, and has added notes full of erudition. Valesius’s edition was printed at Paris in 1659 and 1671, and at Francfort in 1672, with the rest of the ecclesiastical historians. It was printed again at Cambridge in 1720, in three vols. folio, by William Reading, who has joined to the notes of Valesius such observations of modern authors as he could collect; but, in Le Clerc’s opinion, somewhat too harsh, “they might as well have been placed at the end of the book, since they are much interior to those of Valesius, both for style and matter; and appear with the same disadvantage as an ordinary painting placed by the work of an eminent master.”

, an eminent lawyer, descended from an ancient and noble family in East Friesland, was bora at Norden, Nov. 20, 1629. He had the misfortune to lose his father, when he was in his sixth year, but by the care of his mother and relations, he was sent to college, where he made great progress in the earlier classical studies. He then went to Rintelin, and began a course of law. In 1651 he removed to Marpurg, about the time when the academy in that city was restored, and here he recounts among the most fortunate circumstances of his life that he had au opportunity of studying under Justus Siriold, or Schutz, and John Helvicus his son, the former of whom was chancellor of the academy, and the latter was counsellor to the landgrave of Hesse, and afterwards a member of the imperial aulic council. Under their instructions he acquired a perfect knowledge of the state of the empire, and took his doctor’s degree in 1655. Soon after he was appointed by George II. landgrave of Hesse, to be professor of law, and his lectures were attended by a great concourse of students from every part of Germany. In 1669 he was invited by the dukes of Brunswick and Lunenburgh to Helmstadt, where he filled the offices of counsellor and assessor with great reputation. He was also appointed by the circle of Lower Saxony a judge of the imperial chamber of Spire, and in 1678 was received among the number of its assessors. The emperor Leopold, hearing of his eminent character and talents, engaged him to come to his court in the rank of aulic counsellor, and to reward his services, restored the rank of nobility which had been in his family. Eyben died July 25, 1699. His works were collected into a folio volume, and printed at Strasburgh in 1708. They are all on subjects of law. His son, Christian William, who was born in 1663, and died in 1727, was also a lawyer and classical antiquary. He published at Strasburgh, in 1684, “Dissertatio de ordine equestri veterum Romanorum,” folio, which was afterwards inserted in Sallengre’s “Thesaurus.”

, a Jew, was a Greek poet, who wrote tragedies on subjects of the sacred history. Large fragments of a tragedy by him, on the departure of Israel from Egypt, have been preserved by Clemens of Alexandria, and Eusebius. Various opinions are held concerning the time in which he lived. Eusebius introduces a Demetrius as quoting him; and if that was (as an eminent writer of the present day supposes) Demetrius Phalereus, he must have lived near 300 years before the birth of our Saviour. Others bring him down to a century after that period. He must, at all events, have been prior to Clemens, who quotes him; and certain it is, that there are some remarkable expressions concerning the divine Logos in his fragments. 3

, an eminent Lutheran divine, was born in 1520, at Soraw in Lusatia, on the confines of Silesia. He was bred to letters, and successively became a teacher in the schools at Nordhausen, Tennstadt, and Quedlinburg, and lastly, rector of the Augustinian college of Erfurt. He was a zealous Lutheran, and translated into German, the remarks of Luther on Genesis. He published also observations on Cicero, and other learned works, and was concerned in the Magdeburgh Centuries; but the 'chief foundation of his fame was his “Thesaurus Eruditionis Scholasticse,” an undertaking which required the labour of many able men to render it complete. It was first published in 1571. After his death it was augmented and improved by Buchner, Thomasius, the great Christopher Cellarius, and the Grarvius’s, father and son. The edition published at the Hague in 1735, in 2 vols. folio, was long esteemed the best, but that by John Henry Leich, published at Francfort in 1749, 2 vols. fol. is thought superior.

, an eminent French officer, was the son of a bookseller at Mentz (author of “Notes sur la Couturhe de Lorraine,” 1657, fol.) He was educated with the duke d'Epernon, and saved the royal army at the famous retreat of Mentz; which has been compared by some authors to that of Xenophon’s 10,000. Being wounded in the thigh by a musket at the siege of Turin, M. de Turenne, and cardinal de la Valette, to whom he was aid de camp, intreated him to submit to an amputation, which was the advice of all the surgeons but he replied, “I must not die by piece-meal death shall have me intire, or not at all.” Having, however, recovered from this wound, he was afterwards made governor of Sedan; where he erected strong fortifications, and with so much ceconomy, that his majesty never had any places better secured at so little expence. In 1654 he took Stenay, and was appointed marechal of France in 1658. His merit, integrity, and modesty, gained him the esteem both of his sovereign and the grandees. He refused the collar of the king’s orders, saying it should never be worn but by the ancient nobility; and it happened, that though his family had been ennobled by Henry IV. he could not produce the qualifications necessary for that dignity, and “would not,” asi he said, “have his cloke decorated with a cross, and his soul disgraced by an imposture.” Louis XIV. himself answered his letter of thanks in the following terms: “No person to whom I shall give this collar, will ever receive more honour from it in the world, than you have gained in my opinion, by your noble refusal, proceeding from so generous a principle.” Marechal Fabert died at Sedan, May 17, 1662, aged sixty-three. His Life, by father Barre, regular canon of St. Genevieve, was published at Paris, 1752, 2 vols. 12mo. There is one older, in one thin vol. 12ino.

, a voluminous French writer, or rather compiler, was born April 25, 1668, at Paris, the son of an eminent surgeon. He was subdeacon, and bachelor of the Sorbonne, and had been second teacher at St. Quintin, when he entered the congregation of the oratory at Paris. He rose to be successively professor of philosophy at Itumilly in Savoy, at Toulon, Riom, Mans, and Nantes; afterwards taught theology three years at Riom, and during three more at the seminary of the congregation at Lyons. While he lived in the last named city, he published a small dictionary, Latin and French, 8vo, compiled from the best classical authors, which has passed through several editions; and he also published at Lyons, in 1709, a new edition of Richelet’s dictionary, 2 vols. folio, under the title of Amsterdam, which edition was suppressed on account of several theological articles respecting the affairs of the times; and because in his list of authors, he bestowed great encomiums on Messrs, of Port Royal, but none on their adversaries. This obliged him to quit the oratory, and retire to Clermont in Auvergne, where, being destitute of a maintenance, he undertook the education of some children, and had recourse to father Tellier, a Jesuit, the king’s confessor, who twice supplied him with money. In the latter end of 171 Fabre again entered the congregation of the oratory, and was sent to Douay, where he wrote a small pamphlet, entitled “Entretigns de Christine^ et de Pelagie, sur la lecture de PEcriture-Sainte” which is still in request. Having afterwards preached the Sunday sermons of the oratory of Tragany with great credit (for he had also talents for preaching), he went to reside at Montmorency, towards the end of 1723, and there began his “Continuation de l'Histoire Ecclesiastique, de feu M. TAbbe Fleury;” and published 16 vols. 4to or 12mb, which induced his superiors to invite him again to their houses, Rue St. Honore*, at Paris, where he died, October 22, 1755, aged eighty-five, much lamented by his brethren and friends, for his mildness, candour, modesty, and virtue. The discourse “Sur le renouvellement des etudes ecclesiastiques,” &c. at the beginning of the thirteenth volume of the Continuation, is by the abbe Goujet. This Continuation discovers great learning, and facility in writing, but has neither the wit, penetration, character, style, nor accuracy of judgment possessed by the abbe Fleury. Fabre would have carried it on much farther, but was forbidden to print any new volumes. He made the index to M, de Thou’s history translated into French, 4to, and had begun one to the “Journal des Sgavans,” but soon gave up his undertaking to the abbe* de Claustre, to whom the public owes that useful work, 10 vols. 4to. Fabre also left a moderate translation of Virgil, 4 vols. 12mo, and a translation of the Fables of Phaedrus, Paris, 1728, 12mo, with notes.

, a very learned antiquary of Italy, was born at Urbino, of a noble family, in 1619. After he had passed through his first studies at Cagli, he returned to Urbino to finish himself in the law, in which he was admitted doctor at eighteen. Having an elder brother at Rome, who was an eminent advocate, he also went thither, and applied himself to the bar; where he soon distinguished himself to such advantage, that he was likely to advance his fortune. Cardinal Imperiali entertained so great an esteem for him, that he sent him into Spain, to negociate several important and difficult affairs; which he did with such success, that the office of the procurator fiscal of that kingdom falling vacant, the cardinal procured it for him. Fabretti continued thirteen years in Spain, where he was for some time auditor general of the Nunciature. These employments, however, did not engage him so much, but that he found time to read the ancients, and apply himself to polite literature. He returned to Rome with cardinal Bonelli, who had been nuncio in Spain; and from his domestic became his most intimate friend. He was appointed judge of the appeals to the Capitol; which post he afterwards quitted for that of auditor of the legation of Urbino, under the cardinal legate Cerri. His residence in his own country gave him an opportunity of settling his own private affairs, which had been greatly disordered during his absence. He continued there three years, which appeared very long to him, because his inclination to study and antiquities made him wish to settle at Rome, where he might easily gratify those desires to the utmost. He readily accepted, therefore, the invitation of cardinal Corpegna, the pope’s vicar, who employed him in drawing up the apostolical briefs, and other dispatches belonging to his office, and gave him the inspection of the reliques found at Rome and parts adjacent. Alexander VIII. whom Fabretti had served as auditor when cardinal, made him secretary of the memorials, when he was advanced to the pontificate; and had so great a value and affection for him, that he would certainly have raised him to higher dignities, if he had lived a little longer.

, an eminent physician, was born at Rostock, Aug. 28, 1577. Following the advice of Hippocrates, he joined the study of the mathematics with thai of medicine, and was a pupil of Tycho Brahe, as he had been before of the learned Chytraeus. His medical studies were not confined to his own country; for he travelled through England, Germany, and the Low Countries, in order to obtain the instructions of the most celebrated professors; and afterwards repaired to Jena, where he was distinguished by the extent of his acquirements, and obtained the degree of doctor at the age of twenty-six. He soon gained extensive employment in his profession, and, at length received several lucrative and honourable appointments. He filled the stations of professor of medicine and of the mathematics at Rostock during forty years, was first physician to the duke of Mecklenburgh, and afterwards retired to Copenhagen, where he was appointed chief physician to the kings of Norway and Denmark, Christian IV. and Frederick III. He died at Copenhagen on August 14, 1652, in the seventy-fifth year of his age and his remains were carried to Rostock for interment, by his sonsin-law and daughters, and a monument was afterwards erected to his memory. His works are entitled, 1. “Periciihim Medicum, seu Juvenilium Faeturae priores,” Halae, 1600. 2. “Uroscopia, seu de Urinis Tractatus,” Rostochii, 1605. 3. “De Cephalalgia Autumnali,” ibid. 1617. 4. “Institutio Medici practicam aggredientis,” ibid. 1619. 5. “Oratio Renunciationi novi Medicinse Doctoris prceinissa, de Causis Cruentantis cadaveris praesente Homicida,” ibid. 1620. 6. “Dissertatio de Novo-antiquo Capitis Morbo ac Dolore, cum aliis Disquisitionibus Medicis de diffic. nonnul. Materiis Practice,” ibid. 1640.

, one of the most eminenjt and laborious scholars of his time in Europe, was descended both by the father’s and mother’s side from a family originally of Holstein. His father, Werner Fabricius, a native of Itzhoa, in Holstein, was director of the music at St.Paul'p in Leipsic, organist of the church of St. Nicholas in that city, and a poet and a man of letters, as appears by a work be published in 1657, entitled “Delicias Harmonicas.” His mother was Martha Corthum, the daughter of John Corthum, a clergyman of Bergedorff, and the descendant of a series of protestant clergymen from the time of the reformation. He was born at Leipsic Nov. 11, 1668. His mother died in 1674, and his father in 1679; but the latter, while he lived, had begun to instruct him, and on hig death-bed recommended him to the care of Valentine Albert, an eminent divine and philosopher, who employed, as his first master, Wenceslau* Buhl, whom Mayer calls the common Msecenas of orphans; and he appears to have been taught by him for about five years. He also received instructions at the same time under Jo. Goth. Herrichius, rector of the Nicolaitan school at Leipsic, an able Greek and Latin scholar, whose services Fabricius amply acknowledges in the preface to Herrichius’s “Poemata Graeca et Latina,” which he published in 1718, out of regard to the memory of this tutor. In 1684, Valentine Albert sent him to Quedlinburgh to a very celebrated school, of which the learned Samuel Schmidt was at that time rector. It was here that he met with, in the library, a copy of Barthius’s “Adversaria,” and the first edition of Morhoff’s “Polyhistor,” which he himself informs us, gave the first direction to his mind as to that species of literary history and research which he afterwards carried beyond all his predecessors, and in which, if we regard the extent and accuracy of his labours, he has never had an equal. Schmidt had accidentally shown him Barthius^, and requested him to look into it; but it seemed to open to him such a wide field of instruction and pleasure, that he requested to take it to his room and study it at leisure, and from this he conceived the first thought, although, perhaps, at that timfe, indistinct, of his celebrated Bibliothecas. After his return, to Leipsic in 1686, he met with Morhoff, who, he says, gave his new-formed inclination an additional spur. He now was matriculated in the college of Leipsic, and was entirely under the care of his guardian Valentine Albert, one of the professors, with whom he lodged for seven years. During this time he attended the lectures of Carpzovius, Olearius, Feller, Rechenberg, Ittigius, Menckenius, &c. and other learned professors, and acknowledges hisobligations in particular to Ittigius, who introduced him to a knowledge of the Christian fathers, and of ecclesiastical history. It is perhaps unnecessary to add of one who has given such striking proofs of the fact, that his application to his various studies was incessant and successful. His reading was various and extensive, and, like most scholars of his class, he read with a pen in his hand.

, an eminent protestant divine of the seventeenth century, was born at Schafhousen, July 29, 1639. He began his studies under the inspection of his father, who was rector of thq college; but in 1647 went to Cologne, where his brother Sebaldus lived, and there for about a year studied Greek and Latin. In 1643 he returned to Schafhousen, but left it for Heidelberg in the following year, where his brother had been appointed professor of history and Greek. In 1650 he went to Utrecht, and for about two years was employed in teaching. At the end of that time he visited Paris as tutor of the son of M. de la Lane, governor of Reez, and remained in tnis station for three years. Having returned to Heidelberg in 1656, he took his degree of master of arts, and the following year was admitted into holy orders, and appointed professor extraordinary of Greek, but was, not long after, requested by the elector to go again to Paris as tutor to the baron Rothenschild, and in 1659 he accompanied his pupil to the Hague, and afterwards into England. On their return to France they parted, and Fabricius went to Leyden, where he took his degree of doctor in divinity. Soon after he was appointed professor of divinity at Heidelr berg, superintendant of the studies of the electoral prince, inspector of the college of wisdom, and philosophy professor. In 1664 he was appointed ecclesiastical counsellor to the elector, who, in 1666, sent him to Schafhousen to explain to that canton the reasons for the war of Lorraine, which office Dr. Boeckelman had discharged in the other cantons. In 1674, when the French army advanced towards Heidelberg, Fabricius retired to Fredericksburgh, and to Cologne, but returned the same year. In 168O, although a Calvinist, he was commissioned with a Roman catholic to open the temple of concord at Manheim. In 1688, the French, who had taken possession of Heidelberg, showed so much respect for his character as to give him a passport, which carried him safely to Schafhousen; but the continuance of the war occasioned him again to shift his place of residence, and when at Francfort, he was employed by the king of England (William III.) and the States General to join the English envoy in Swisserland, and watch the interests of the States General. In the execution of this commission he acquitted himself with great ability, and was particularly successful in adjusting tjbe differences between the Vaudois and the duke of Savoy, and afterwards in accomplishing an alliance between the duke and the States General. We find him afterwards at Heidelberg, and Francfort, at which last he died in 1697. From these various employments it appears that he was a man of great abilities and political weight, and he derived likewise considerable reputation from his writings as a divine. Such was his abhorence of Socinianism that he opposed the settlement of the Socinian Poles when driven out of their own country in the Palatinate; in which, however, at that time he was not singular, as, according to Mosheim, none of the European nations could be persuaded to grant a public settlement to a sect whose members denied the divinity of Christ. The same historian informs us that he “was so mild and indulgent” as to maintain, that the difference between the Lutherans and Roman catholics was of so little consequence, that a Lutheran might safely embrace popery; an opinion, which, mild and indulgent as Mosheim thinks it, appears to us more in favour of popery than of Lutheranism. His works, on controversial topics, were collected and published in a quarto volume, by Heidegger with a life of the author, printed at Zurich in 1698.

, an eminent surgeon and physician, was known also by his surname of Hildanus, from Hilden, a village of Switzerland, where he was born, July 25 t 1560. Like his predecessor of the same name, Fabricius of Aquapendunte, he became one of the most eminent surgeons of his age, and contributed not a. little to the improvement of the art. He repaired to Lausanne in 1586, where he completed himself in the art of surgery, under the instruction of Griffon, an intelligent teacher in that city. Here he pursued his researches with indefatigable industry, and undertook the cure of many difficult cases, in which he was singularly successful. He combined aknowledge of medicine with that of his own art, and began to practise both at Payerne in 1605, where he remained ten years, and in 1615 settled himself at Berne, in consequence of an invitation from the senate, who granted him a pension. Here he enjoyed the universal esteem of the inhabitants. But in the latter period of his life he was prevented by severe and frequent attacks of the gout from rendering his services to his fellow-citizens with his accustomed assiduity. At length, liowever, this malady left him, and he was seized with an asthma, of which he died on the 14th of February, 1634, at the age of seventy-four. His works were written in the German language, but most of them have been translated into the Latin. He published five “Centuries of Observations,” which were collected after his death, and printed at Lyons in 1641, and at Strasburgh in 1713 and 1716. These “Observations” present a considerable number of curious facts, as well as descriptions of a great number of instruments of his invention. His collected treatises were published in Latin, at Francfort in 1646, and again in 1682, in folio, under the title of “Opera Omnia.” And a German edition appeared at Stutgard in 1652.

, an eminent Italian scholar and biographer, was born Sept. 25, 1732, at Marradi in Tuscany, of a family once so opulent as to be able to assist the falling fortunes of the Medici. He was the youngest of the eleven children of Alexander and Hyacinth Fabroni. He was educated first at home under able masters, and afterwards went to Rome, in 1750, to the college founded by Bandinelli for the youth of Tuscany, who were also required to attend the public schools of the Jesuits. Here he studied rhetoric, logic, geometry, physics, and metaphysics. After he had been here three years, Peter Francis Foggini, who had acted as a second father to him (for his own died in 1750), introduced him to Bottari, as his assistant in the duties of a canonicate which he held in the church of St. Mary; and as Bottari was a great favourer of the Jansenists, Fabroni thought to please him by translating from the French of Quesnel, and publishing “La preparazione alia morte;” and “Principi e regale della vita Cristiana.” About the same time he published “Ler Massime della Marchesa di Sable,” also translated from the French, with notes. This, he informs us, was a work of little consequence, yet served to show that he was at this time tolerably versed in the reading of ancient authors.

, an eminent French physician in the reign of Louis XIV. was born at Paris, May 11, 1638. He was the son of Henry Fagon, commissioner in ordinary of war, and of Louisa de la Brosse, niece of Guy de la Brosse, physician in ordinary to Louis XIII. and grandson of a physician in ordinary to Henry IV. He studied first in the Sorbonne, under M. Gillot, an eminent doctor, with whom he resided as student, and who persuaded him to chuse the medical profession. M. Fagon never forgot M. Gillot in his highest prosperity; but, if he met him in the street, alighted from his coach, and conducted him to the house where he was going. This young physician had scarcely begun to dispute, when he ventured to maintain, in a thesis, the circulation of the blood, which was at that time held as a paradox among the old doctors; and also another on the use of tobacco, published long afterwards; “An frequens Nicotian ye usus vitam abbreviet,” Paris, 1699, 4to. He took his doctor’s degree 1664, M. Vallot wishing to repair and replenish the royal garden, M. Fagon offered his services; and going, at his own expence, to Auvergne, Languedoc, Provence, the Alps, and the Pyrenees, returned with an ample collection of curious and useful plants. He had the principal share in the catalogue of the plants in that garden, puhlished 1665, entitled “Hortus Regius,” to which he prefixed a little Latin poem of his own. M. Fagon was made professor of botany and chemistry at the royal garden, and began to have the plants engraved; but there are only forty -five plates finished, which are very scarce. The king appointed bim first physician to the dauphiness in 1680, and to the queen some months after. In 1693 he was made first physician to the king, and superintendant of the royal garden in 1698, to which he retired after the king’s death, and, for the improvement of which, he persuaded Louis XIV. to send M. de Tournfort into Greece, Asia, and Egypt, which produced the scientific voyage so well known to the learned world. Fagon died March 11, 1718, aged near eighty. The academy of sciences had chosen him an honorary member in 1699. He left “Les Qualités du Quinquina,” Paris, 1703, 12mo. He married Mary Nozereau, by whom he had two sons Anthony, the eldest, bishop of Lombez, then of Vannes, died February.16, 1742 the second, Lewis, counsellor of state in ordinary, and to the royal council, and intendant of the finances, died at Paris May 8, 1741, unmarried. The Fagonia, in botany, was so called by Tournfort in honour of him.

, an eminent lawyer, was born October 30, 1554, at Rome. He was a Roman advocate, and fiscal procurator ^ took pleasure in defending the least supportable causes, and is said to have acted with extreme rigour and severity in his office of fiscal procurator. This conduct drew him into very disagreeable situations, and would have proved his ruin, had not some cardinals, who admired his wit and genius, interceded for him with Clement VIII. who said, alluding to the name of Farinaccio, that “the farina was excellent, but the sack which contained it was good for nothing.” Farinaccio died at Rome October 30, 1618, aged sixty-four. His works have been printed at Antwerp, 1620 and the following make 13 vols.' folio “Decisiones Rotse,” 2 vols. “Decisiones Rotas novissimse,” 1 vol. “Decisiones Rotae recentissimae,” 1 vol.; “Repertorium Judiciale,” 1 vol.; “De Haeresi,” i Tol.; “Consilia,” 2 vols. “Praxis Criminalis,” 4 vols. “Succus praxis criminalis,” 1 vol. All these were considered as valuable works by the Roman lawyers.

, an English divine, was born at Sunning in Berks, 1596. He was admitted scholar of Trinity college, Oxford, in 1612, and elected fellow in 1617. Three years after, he took a master of arts degree; about which time entering into orders, he became a celebrated preacher in those parts, an eminent tutor in the college, and, as Wood says, an example fit to be followed by all. In 1634, being then bachelor of divinity, he was made vicar of Bray near Maidenhead in Berks, and soon after divinity-reader in the king’s chapel at Windsor. He con^ tinued at the first of these places, though not without some trouble, till after the civil commotions broke out; and then he was ejected, and reduced with his wife and family to such extremities, as to be very near starving. Lloyd says that his house was plundered by Ireton, in mean revenge, because Mr. Faringdon had reproved him for some irregularities when at Trinity college. At length sir John Robinson, alderman of London, related to archbishop Laud, and some of the parishioners of Milk-street, London, invited him to be pastor of St. Mary Magdalen in that city, which he gladly accepted, and preached with great approbation from the loyal party. In Io47, he published a folio volume of these sermons, and dedicated them to his patron Robinson, “as a witnesse or manifesto,” says he to him, “of my deep apprehension of your many noble favours, and great charity to me and mine, when the sharpnesse of the weather, and the roughnesse of the times, had blown all from us, and well-neer left us naked.”

, an eminent physician at Taunton, was born in 1741, of parents who were protestant dissenters, and was first educated at the dissenting academy at Warrington, from whence he removed to Edinburgh, and there and at Leyden pursued his medical studies, taking his degree at the latter university* He afterwards settled at Taunton, where he was highly esteemed for his skill and personal character. To the learning which peculiarly qualified him for his profession, he united a considerable acquaintance with general literature and science; and with medical knowledge and judgment, he possessed the powers of instructing and entertaining, as the lively and sensible companion of the social hour. He died March 11, 1795, at the house of John Fisher, esq. Upcott, near Taunton. His publications, in most of which he discovers much original observation, extensive experience, and correct theory, were, 1. “An Essay on the medical virtues of Acids,” 1769, 12mo. 2. “Aphorismi de Marasmo, ex summis medicis collecti,” 1772, 12mo. His attention to the subject of consumption produced again, 3. “Inquiry into the propriety of Blood-letting in Consumption,” 1775, *vo. Although he does not absolutely prohibit bloodletting, he seems to place little reliance on it in this cruel disorder. 4. “The History of Epidemics; by Hippocrates, in seven books, translated into English from the Greek, with notes and observations, and a preliminary dissertation on the nature and cause of infection,” 1781, 4to. In this work are not a few errors in judgment, proceeding, probably, from a too great attachment to the authority of Hippocrates. Dr. Farr acquired more reputation by his last work, 5. “The Elements of Medical Jurisprudence; to which are added, directions for preserving the Public Health,” 1788, 8vo.

Amidst Mr. Fearne’s various pursuits of knowledge, he had always a particular attachment to experimental philosophy, which, both at school and at the Temple, he practised occasionally. In this employment, he fancied that he had discdvered the art of dying Morocco leather of particular colours, and after a new process. It appears that the Maroquoniers in the Levant (who are called so from dressing the skin of this goat, named the Maroquiu) keep secret the ingredients which they put into the liquor, which gives it that fine red colour. This secret, or what would answer equally as well, Fearne thought he had discovered, and, like most projectors, saw great profits arising from the discovery. It was his misfortune, however, to form a connection in this scheme, with a needy and expensive partner, which opened his eyes to the fallacy of his hopes; and at the suggestion of his friends, he reverted to his original profession, or what his father intended for such, and sat down to the study of the law with unremitting diligence. He had not been long in chambers, when his habits of study, diligence, and sobriety, were observed by an eminent attorney in the Temple, who wanted an abstract to be made of a voluminous body of papers, so as to bring the matter clearly before counsel. The papers were so intricate, and of such various references, that they required a very clear head, and a man not much taken up with other business, to arrange them. He saw Fearne answered this last description very well; and told him, “That having a great body of papers to arrange, he should be glad to employ him.” Fearne accepted the offer, and performed his task so ably, that his employer not only rewarded him handsomely for his trouble, but from that time gave him a considerable part of his business.

In 1610, and the two following years, we find him in attendance upon sir Thomas Edmondes, the king’s minister at the court of France. Several of the sermons he preached, during this time, in the ambassador’s chapel, are collected in his “Clavis Mystica,” and those which were levelled at the errors of popery are said to have been very successful both in converting some catholics, and in confirming the opinions of those who had before embraced. the doctrines of the reformation. He had also very frequent conferences in the Cleremont with the Jesuits, and with the members of the Sorboane, but especially with fathers Sirmund and Petau, who, although they at first ridiculed his figure, for he was low of stature, yet afterwards were impressed with a regard for his controversial talents, and treated his memory with respect. His three disputations at Paris are confessed by Holden, an eminent English catholic writer, to have done more harm to the popish cause than thirtythree he had read of before. By most of the foreign universities he was held in such honour as a disputant, that in the tables of the celebrated schoolmen, whom they honoured with the epithets of resolute, subtle, angelic, &c. he was called acutissimus et acerrimus. According to Wood, he commenced B. D. in 1613, and was the preacher at the act of that year. His sermon on this occasion is said to have been No. 37. in the “Clavis Mystica;” but, according to the evidence of his nephew John Featley, he did not take that degree until 1615, and the sermon he delivered was a Latin concio ad clerum, dated March 25. In 1610 he had preached the rehearsal sermon at Oxford, and by the bishop of London’s appointment he discharged the same duty at St. Paul’s cross in 1613. By invitation from Mr. Ezekiel Ascot, who had been his pupil, he accepted the rectory of Northill in Cornwall, which he vacated on his institution to the rectory of Lambeth in 1618. a change which, if not more profitable, was certainly highly agrees ahle to him, as he became now, by the recommendation of the university, domestic chaplain to Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury.

, an eminent scholar and translator, was born at Montacute, in Somersetshire in his youth he was for some time a chorister, which gave him an opportunity of being instructed in Latin as well as music. Being afterwards sent to Winchester school for academical education, he was admitted of New college, Oxford, and chosen fellow in 1552, studying chiefly the civil law. In queen Mary’s reign he was made chief master of a noted free-school at St. Edmundsbury, in Suffolk, where he acquired great reputation as a teacher. This station he retained for some part of queen Elizabeth’s reign, but an information having been laid against him, as unqualified by the laws of the reformation, he was obliged to quit it. Some time after he went to Flanders, and afterwards to Rome, where he was admitted into the English college, studied theology for four years, and took orders. Returning afterwards to Flanders, he became confessor to the English nuns at Louvain, where he lived forty years, employing his leisure hours in translating several books favourable to the Roman catholic religion. He died at an advanced age, Dec. 27, 1615, with an excellent character from those of his persuasion, for learning and piety. His publications are, 1. “Vitae quorundam martyrum in Anglia,” which is inserted in Bridgwater’s “Concertatio Ecclesise Catholicae in Anglia.” 2. Several of bishop Fisher’s English works, translated into Latin. 3. “Catechismus Tridentinus,” translated into English. 4. Osorius’s treatise against Walter Haddon, translated into English, Louvain, 1568, 8vo. 5. “The Life of St. Catherine of Sienna,” from the Italian, 1609, 8vo. 6. “A Treatise on Tribulation,” from the Italian of Caccia Guerra. 7. “Mysteries of the Rosary,” from Caspar Loartes. Fuller says that he proceeded Bachelor of Laws at New college, till (in 1562) for his popish activity, he was ejected by the queen’s commissioners. Wood, who mentions this in his Annals, although not in his “Athens,” leaves it doubtful whether he did not resign it of his own accord.

, an eminent puritan divine, was born in 1660, and educated at Pembroke-hall, Cambridge, where he took his degree of M. A. and in 1622 was admitted to the same at Oxford. He afterwards took his degree of B. D. and became a preacher at Sedgeley, in Staffordshire. Here he continued for four years, and theu for some time appears to have officiated from place to place, without any promotion, until the earl of Warwick, who was his great friend and patron, presented him to the rectory of Rochford, in Essex, in 1629, which he held until his death, about 1640. Besides his popularity as a preacher, and as a casuist, which was very great, he derived no small posthumous reputation from the sermons and pious tracts which he wrote, none of which appear to have been published in his life-time. They were collected in 1658, in 1 vol. fol.

, an eminent writer and statesman during the reigns of Elizabeth and James I. was brother to the preceding, but the time of his birth does not appear. He was certainly educated liberally, though we cannot tell where; since, while a young man, he gave many proofs of his acquaintance with ancient and modern learning, and of his being perfectly versed in the French, Spanish, and Italian languages. He is well known for a translation from the Italian of “The History of the Wars of Italy, by Guicciardini,” the dedication of which to queen Elizabeth bears date Jan. 7, 1579. This was, however, his last work. He had published before, 1. “Certaine Tragical Discourses written oute of French and Latin,” 1567, 4to, reprinted 1579. Neither Ames nor Tanner appear to have seen the first edition. The work is, says Warton, in point of selection and size, perhaps the most capital miscellany of the kind, a. e. of tragical novels. Among the recommendatory poems prefixed is one from Turberville. Most of the stories are on Italian subjects, and many from Bandello. 2. “An Account of a Dispute at Paris, between two Doctors of the Sorbonne, and two Ministers of God’s Word,”1571, a translation. 3. “An Epistle, or Godly Admonition, sent to the Pastors of the Flemish Church in Antwerp, exhorting them to concord with other Ministers: written by Antony de Carro, 1578,” a translation. 4. “Golden Epistles; containing variety of discourses, both moral, philosophical, and divine, gathered as well out of the remainder of Guevara’s works, as other authors, Latin, French, and Italian. Newly corrected and amended. Mon heur viendra, 1577.” The familiar epistles of Guevara had been published in English, by one Edward Hellowes, in 1574; but this collection of Fenton’s consists of such pieces as were not contained in that work. The epistle dedicatory is to the right honourable and vertuous lady Anne, countess of Oxen ford; and is dated from the author’s chamber in the Blackfriars, London, Feb. 4, 1575. This lady was the daughter of William Cecil lord Burleigh; and it appears from the dedication, that her noble father was our author’s best patron. Perhaps his chief purpose in translating and publishing this work, was to testify his warm zeal and absolute attachment to that great minister.

, an eminent experimental philosopher, mechanist, and astronomer, was born in Bamffshire, in Scotland, 1710, of very poor parents. At the very earliest age his extraordinary genius began to unfold itself. He first learned to read, by overhearing his father teach his elder brother: and he had made this acquisition before any one suspected it. He soon discovered a peculiar taste for mechanics, which first arose on seeing his father use a lever. He pursued this study a considerable length, while he was yet very young; and made a watch in wood-work, from having once seen one. As he ha'd at first no instructor, nor any help from books, every thing he learned had all the merit of an original discovery; and such, with inexpressible joy, he believed it to be.

, an eminent artist of Valdugia, was born in 1484. He is by Vasari called “Gaudenzio Milanese.” Some have supposed him a scholar of Perugino, but Lomazzo, who was a nurseling of his school, names Scotto and Luini as his masters. His juvenile works prove what Vasari says, that he had profited by those of Lionardo da Vinci. He went young to Rome^ and is said to have been employed in the Vatican by Raffaello; and there, it is probable, that he acquired that style of design and tone of colour which eclipsed what before him had been done in Lombardy. He possessed a portentous feracity of ideas, equal to that of Giulio, but far different; instead of licentious excursions over the wilds of mythology, he attached himself to sacred lore, to represent the majesty of Divine Being, the mysteries of religion, and emotions of piety, and succeeded to a degree which acquired him the name of “eximie pius” from a Novarese synod. Strength was his element, which he expressed less by muscles forcibly marked, than by fierce and terrible attitudes, as in the Passion of Christ, at the grazie of Mu Jano, where he had Titian for a competitor; and in the Fall of Paul, at the conventuals of Vercelli, which approaches that of M. Angelo, at the Paolina; in the expression of character and mind, he is inferior perhaps only to Raffaelo; and at St. Cristoforo of Vercelli has shewn himself master of angelic grace, With a full and genial vein of colour, Gaudenzio unites an evidence which admits of no hesitation, and attracts the eye in the midst of other works. His tone is determined by the subject, as his carnations by character; but his draperies and parerga are commended more by caprice and novelty, than simplicity and grandeur. Whether it were modesty, situation, ignorance, or envy, that defrauded powers so eminent, of the celebrity often lavished on minor talents, is not now to be determined. Ferrari was little known, and less favoured by Vasari, whom the blind herd of dilettanti on either side of the Alps generally follow in their search of excellence in art. He is supposed to have died in 1550. There was another of the name John Andrew Ferrari, or De Ferrara, who was born at Genoa, in 1599, and was a disciple of Bernard Castelli; but, in order to obtain a more extensive knowledge in his profession, he studied afterwards for some time under Bernardo Strozzi. His application was attended with success, for he at last attained to such a degree of excellence, that he was equally expert in painting history, landscape, fruit, animals, and flowers; and those subjects he finished in a small size, but with extraordinary beauty and exactness, so that few of the princes or nobility of his time were satisfied without possessing some of his compositions. Benedetto Castiglioue was his disciple. He died in 1669.

, an eminent French anatomist and surgeon, was born Oct. 27, 1693, at Frepech in Agenois. He practised at Montpellier, and was a member of the faculty of that city and of Paris, member of the academy of sciences, and professor of physic in the royal colllege. He was the author of two works; one entitled “Lectures on Medicine,” the other, “Lectures on the Materia Medica” each in three volumes, 12ino, which were published in 1783, and proved the soundness of his knowledge. He held, however, some peculiar notions as to the formation of the voice, which he was not able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of his contemporaries. He died at Paris Feb. 28, 1769.

, in Latin Ferrius, a most learned divine of Germany, was born of a considerable family at Metz, in 1591. He was sent to study divinity at Montaban, and made so uncommon a progress, that he was admitted a minister at Metz in 1610. Though he was but nineteen, he had then published a book of poems; the advertisement to which he finished in these words, “sat ludo nugisque datum.” He had eminent talents for preaching: his graceful presence, his venerable countenance, and fine delivery, adding great force to his eloquence, which was very powerful and moving. His enemies reported, falsely, that he was one of the ministers whom cardinal Richelieu had bribed to procure a coalition of the two religions; however, it is certain that he was grieved at the division of the p'otestants, and hoped that he could contribute somewhat to forward a re-union; and it is supposed that with this view he kept a correspondence with Dury (See Dury). His death happened in 1669, when above fourscore stones were found in his bladder, which had occasioned it. He had a very fine library, which he increased by several works of his own. In 1616 he published “Scholastic} Orthodox! Specimen,” in which he shews, that the protestant doctrine of grace has been taught by the schoolmen. This treatise gained him the esteem of Du Plessis Mornay, who wrote him a letter upon it, in which he advised him about another work he was upon, entitled “Le dernier desespoir de la Tradition,” &c. In 1630 he published at Leyden, “Vindiciae pro Scholastico Orthodoxo,” against Perinus, an eminent Jesuit, who had published in 1619 a book entitled “Thrasonica Pauli Ferrii Calvinistae.” In 1654 he published “General Catechisme de la Reformation,” which was answered by Bossuet; and left behind him collections for a history of Metz, which are referred to by Calmet, as abounding in curious researches; and a vast number of sermons, of which about eleven hundred are on the epistle to the Hebrews.

, an eminent lawyer, called sometimes the Cato of France, was born at Toulouse in 1506. He was admitted a doctor of law at Padua; and from a professor in the university of Toulouse, was raised to be a counsellor in the parliament of the same city. It is remarkable of him, that though he was a protestant in his heart for a good part of his life, he did not profess himself to be so till a little before his death. He had indeed often discovered that he was no bigotted papist; and was so strongly suspected of heresy in 1559, that he would have been imprisoned if he had not made his escape. He harangued, in 1562, in the council of Trent, whither he was sent ambassador by the French king; and he expressed himself in so bold a manner in favour of the interests of France, that the Italian priests were highly offended at him. He went afterwards ambassador to Venice, where he continued several years; and took occasion to assist father Paul in collecting materials for his “History of the Council of Trent.” On his return from Venice, Du Plessis Mornay, who knew his thoughts, pressed him so earnestly to declare the truth, that Ferrier openly professed himself a protestant, and the king of Navarre made him his chancellor. He was about seventy-six years old at the time of his renouncing popery; and he only lived to seventy-nine. He died in 1585. It has been said that he conspired with the chancellor de l'Hospital to break the knot which united the French king with the holy see; to assemble a national council, in which the king of France, after the example of the king of England, should be declared head of the Gallican church; and to usurp all the estates of the church of France. He was reckoned among the greatest men in Europe, and was the author of some literary works.

, an eminent painter, was born at Rome in 1589, and educated under Lodovico Civoli, a famous Florentine painter. As soon as he quitted the school of Civoli, he went to Mantua; where the paintings of Julio Romano afforded him the means of becoming a great painter, and from them he derived his colouring, and the boldness of his characters. Cardinal Ferdinand Gonzaga, afterwards duke of Mantua, discovering the merit of Fetti, retained him at his court, furnished him with means of continuing his studies, and at last employed him in adorning his palace. Few painters, according to a modern connoisseur, have possessed a greater freedom of pencil, a more harmonious style of colouring, or a greater knowledge of expression than Fetti. If he painted a head of character, he entered into the detail of it with such spirit, that it produced an astonishing relief; and that too without the least hardness, so judiciously are the tints varied. It is the same* with his large composition* the light and shade are ingeniously balanced the figures are grouped with so much art, and the general disposition is so well observed, that they produce the most striking and harmonious effects. His pictures are scarce, and mucb Bought alter. He painted very little for churches. Goingto Venice, he abandoned himself to disorderly courses, which put an end to his life in its very prime, in 1624, when he was only in his thirty-fifth year. The duke of Mantua regretted him exceedingly, and sent for his lather and sister, whom he took care of afterwards. The sister, who painted well, became a nun, and exercised her talent in the convent, which she adorned with several of her works. Other religious houses in Mantua, were also decorated with her paintings.

, an eminent French civilian, was born at Semur, the capital of Auxois, Dec. 16, 1583. After studying at Dijon, Orleans, and other places, he was received as an advocate of parliament in 1602, when only nineteen years old, and the same year he went into Germany to attend the celebrated Bongars, who was sent by Henry IV. resident from France, into the empire; but soon left him, to study the law at Heidelberg, where the well-known Codefroy was at that time law-professor. Godefroy paid great attention to Fevret, who was recommended by several persons of quality: he received him into his house, and caused him to hold public disputations, which; he did with great applause. In 1607, Fevret returned to Dijon, where he married Mrs. Anne Brunet of Beaulne, by whom he had nineteen children; fourteen of which they brought up together during eight years. After his wife’s death, which happened in 1637, he very whimsically caused his bed to be made one half narrower, and never would marry again. He gained great reputation at the bar at Dijon; and was chosen counsellor to the three estates of the province. In 1629, Lewis the Thirteenth being come to Dijon in order to punish a popular insurrection, Fevret was chosen to petition the king that he would graciously be pleased to pardon the guilty. He spoke for all the corporations, and made so elegant a discourse, that the king commanded him to print it, and to send it to him at Lyons. His majesty then pardoned the authors of the sedition, and granted to Fevret the place of counsellor in the parliament of Dijon; but not being permitted to employ a deputy, he refused it, because he would not quit his profession of an advocate, and contented himself with the posts of king’s counsellor and secretary to the court, with a pension of 900 livres. He wrote a history of this insurrection, which was published some time after. As he was frequently sent a deputy to the court, he was known to de Morillac, keeper of the seals of France, who honoured him with his friendship. As early as 1626 and 1627, Monsieur, the king’s brother, had chosen him for his counsellor in ordinary in all his affairs; and the prince of Conde had made him intendant of his house, and of his affairs in Burgundy. He was continued in the same post by his son Louis de Bourbon prince of Cond6; and, during the life of these two princes, he was honoured with their favour in a distinguished manner. Frederic Casimir, prince palatine of the Rhine, and his consort Amelia Antwerpia, born princess of Orange, chose him also their counsel and intendant for their affairs in Burgundy. He had an extensive correspondence with all the learned civilians in his time. He died at Dijon, in 1661.

, was an eminent prior, and doctor of the Sorbonne in 1454, and rector of the university of Paris in 1467, who taught rhetoric, philosophy, and divinity, with great reputation. He opposed the plan formed by Louis XI. of arming the scholars, and was entrusted with several commissions of importance. Fichet went to Rome with cardinal Bessarion, who dedicated his orations to him in 1470, and he was well received by pope Sixtus IV. and appointed his chamberlain. We have a work of his on “Rhetoric,” and some “Epistles,” written in very elegant language for that age, printed at the Sorbonne., 1471, 4to, and which has been sold as high as 50l. It was Fichet, who with his friend John de la Pierre, brought Martin Crantz, Ulric Gering, and Michael Friburger, from Germany to the Sorbonne, in order to introduce printing in France; and Fichet’s works above mentioned were among the first they produced.

, an eminent English divine, was born Oct. 15, 1561, in the parish of Hempsted in the county of Hertford, of an ancient family of good repute in that county. The estate which came to him from his father and grandfather had been in the family many years before, and it is recorded as somewhat singular that out of his grandfather’s house, there had died but three owners of this estate in 160 years. He received his first education in the free school of Berkhampstead, and was afterwards admitted of Magdalen-hall, Oxford; and such was the character he left behind him, that his chambers and study there were shewn, for a long time after he quitted them. But according to Wood’s account, he was first admitted of Magdalen college in the year 1577, and proceeded A. B. before he went to Magdalen-hall, where he took his master’s degree, and was esteemed the best disputant in the schools. After some time spent in the study of divinity, he read the catechetical lecture in Magdalen-hall, which, though a private lecture, was in his hands rendered so inieresting as to be much frequented by the whole university. Dr. John Reynolds, though greatly his senior, and either then or soon after Margaret professor, and president of Corpus Christi college, was a constant auditor. Field was well skilled in school divinity, and a frequent preacher while he lived in Oxfordshire, and is said to have been very instrumental in preventing the increase of nonconformity in the university. His father had provided a match for him, as being his eldest son; but his not taking orders being made an indispensable requisite, he thought fit to decline the choice, and returned to Oxford and after he had spent seven years there, he became divinity reader in Winchester cathedral.

, an eminent performer and composer for the hautbois, was born at Fribourg, and educated at a common reading school at a village in Bohemia, where all the children learn music, reading, and writing, as a matter of course. He first learned a little on the violin, but changed it soon for the hautbois, and became early in life so excellent a performer on that instrument, as to be appointed one of the king of Poland’s celebrated band ait Dresden. On the dissolution of this band he went to Berlin, where he had the honour, during a month, to accompany Frederick the late king of Prussia alone, four hours every day. From Berlin he went to Manheim, and thence to Paris, where he was heard with admiration, and as soon as he had acquired some money he came over to England, and here, as soon as he had been once heard in public, which was at a benefit, no other concert, public or private, was thought complete without his performance; and being engaged to play a concerto every night at Vauxhall, he drew thither all the lovers of music, but particularly professors. When the queen’s band was formed, Fischer was appointed one of her majesty’s chamber musicians; and when Bach and Abel, uniting, established a weekly subscription concert at Hanover-square, where, for a long time, no music was heard but that of these excellent masters, Fischer was allowed to compose for himself, and in a style so new and fanciful, that in point of invention, as well as tone, taste, expression, and neatness of execution, his piece was always regarded as one of the highest treats of the night, and heard with proportionate rapture.

, earl of Clare, and lord high chancellor of Ireland, the son of John Fitzgibbon, esq. an eminent lawyer at the Irish bar, who died in 1780, was born in 1749, educated at the universities of Dublin and Oxford, and afterwards entered upon the study of the law, of which profession he became the great ornament in his native country. In 1784 he was appointed attorney-general on the elevation of Mr. Scott to the bench, and on the decease of lord chancellor Lifford in 1789, his lordship received the seals, and was raised to the dignity of the peerage by the title of baron Fitzgibbon of Lower Connello. To these dignities were added the titles of viscount Clare, Dec. 20, 1793, and earl of Clare, June 10, 1795; and the English barony of Fitzgibbon of Sidbury, in Devonshire, Sept. 24, 1799. In 1802 his health appeared to be so seriously affected, that his physicians thought proper to recommend a more genial climate; and he had arrived at Dublin from his country seat at Mountshannon, designing to proceed immediately to Bath, or if his strength permitted to the south of France. The immediate cause of his death was the loss of a great quantity of blood, while at Mountshannon, which was followed by such extreme weakness, that upon his arrival at Dublin on the 25th, there was reason to fear he could not survive the ensuing day; on Wednesday these alarming appearances increased so much, that upon a consultation of physicians, he was given over. On being made acquainted with this melancholy truth, the firmness of his lordship’s mind did not forsake him. To prevent any impediment to the public business, he directed the new law officers to be called, and from his bed administered to them the necessary oaths. Soon after, his lordship fell into a lethargic slumber, and continued motionless until Thursday Jan. 28, 1802, when he ceased to breathe.

, an eminent naval commander, and earl of Southampton, in the sixteenth century, was the second son of sir Thomas Fitzvviliiam, of Aldwarke, in Yorkshire, knt. by Lucia, his wife, daughter and co-heir to John Neville, marquis Montacute. In 151O he was made one of the esquires for the body of king Henry VIII. which office was renewed to him for life ia 1512. The year following he was one of the chief commanders in the fleet sent out against France, to clear the sea of French ships before Henry and his allies attacked France by land; and he was seriously wounded by an arrow in attempting to destroy the French fleet at Brest. Shortly after he attended king Henry at the siege of Tournay, where his bravery procured him the honour of knighthood. In 1620 he was vice-admiral of England, and em^ ployed in guarding the channel at the time the emperor Charles V. came to England. He so ingratiated himself with his royal master that he obtained from him, in 1521, 9. grant of the manor of Navesby in Northamptonshire, part of the possessions of Edward Stafford, duke of Buckingham, then lately attainted. At that time he was ambassador in France; but, upon a rupture between that kingdom and England, he was recalled, Jan. 1521-2, and ordered to sea with a strong fleet of twenty-eight sail, to secure our merchants, and take what French ships he could. Shortly after he assisted at the taking of Morlaix, in Bretagne; and with sir William Sandes and sir Maufice Berkeley, went and burnt Marguison, which was newly built and fortified, and many villages. In 1523, the king of France, preparing to send John duke of Albany, regent of Scotland, into that kingdom in order to invade England from that quarter, sir William was made admiral, and dispatched with a strong fleet to intercept him. Having missed him, he landed on the French coast at Treport, in Normandy, and burnt the suburbs of that town and several ships in the harbour, though there were but 700 English opposed to 6000 French. The year following, being captain of Guisnes, in Picardy, he greatly annoyed Boulogne, and other places adjacent. Before the end of that year he was made treasurer of the king’s household; and in October sent to France with Dr. John Taylor, a civilian, to see the lady regent (whose son, Francis I. was then prisoner in Spain) swear to observe the articles of a treaty newly concluded between the two crowns. In 1529 he was one of those who subscribed the articles exhibited in parliament against cardinal Wolsey. At the grand interview between the ki:igs of England and France, in 1532, he attended his master Henry V11I. to Boulogne, the place of interview between many other persons of the highest quality. In May 1535, he was sent with the duke of Norfolk, the of Ely, and Dr. Fox, to treat with the French king’s commissioners about a league between the crowns of England and France; one of the articles of which was, that the duke of Angonleme, third son to the king of France, should marry Elizabeth, second daughter of king Henry. Shortly after, he was made knight of the garter, and chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster; and in 1536 constituted admiral of England, Wales, Ireland, Normandy, Gascony, and Aquitaine. On Oct. 18, 1537, he was advanced to the title of earl of Southampton, and made lord privy-seal Oct. 27,1539. In April following, some disputes having arisen between England and France, he, with John lord Russel, lately made high admiral, were sent over to Calais with a few troops of horse, and returned quickly after executing their orders. He was also employed as captain of the Foreward in the expedition to Scotland, in October 1542, but died in his way thither, at Newcastle, so much esteemed, that, in honour of his memory, his standard was borne in the vanguard in all that expedition. By his will bearing date Sept. 10, of the same year, he ordered his body to be buried in the church of Midhurst, in Sussex. He left no issue by Mabel his wife, daughter to Henry lord Clifford, and sister to Henry first earl of Cumberland. Of his personal character it is only recorded that there was not a serviceable man under his command whose name he knew not; not a week passed but he paid his ships; not a prize but his seamen shared in as well as himself; and it was his opinion, that none fought well but those who did it for a fortune, which may be admitted, in some measure, if we consider that fortune and honours in the naval and military services are generally joined.

, an eminent German astronomer, was born May 28, 1721, at Achleiten, a village in hither Austria, not far from Kremsmunster. He received the rudiments of his education in the convent of Kremsmunster, which was indebted to his uncle the abbot, Alexander Fixlmillner, for an excellent school and an observatory. Placidus conceived an early attachment to the mathematics, and took so much pleasure in delineating mathematical figures, that his mother, out of derision, called him the almanack-maker. After some stay at the above seminary he removed to Salzburg, where he completed his course of philosophy, and obtained in that faculty the degree of doctor. His taste for the mathematics, however, became still stronger. His father having asked him one da)' what present he should give him, he requested Wolff’s Epitome of the Mathematics; which he studied with the greatest pleasure and satisfaction during such hours as he could spare from his other avocations: but having destined himself for the convent, he was admitted a noviciate at Kremsmunster, in 1737, and next year he publicly took the vows before the abbot Alexander. After a stay of two years in the convent, he was sent again to Salzburg, to complete his studies in jurisprudence and theology; but at the same time he applied with great assiduity to the mathematics, languages, history, and antiquities. He learned also to play on the harpsichord and organ, and made so much progress in music, that he composed several pieces, both in the sacred and theatrical style. He disputed in some theological theses; and in 1745 returned to his convent, where he was consecrated to the priesthood.

, an eminent physician of Montpellier, the son of Nicholas Fizes, professor of mathematics in that university, was born in 1690, and at first educated by his father, who hoped that he would succeed him in the mathematical chair; but his disposition being more to the study of medicine, his father sent him to complete his medical education at Paris, under the tuition of Du Verney, Lemery, and the two messrs. De Jussieu. On his return to Montpellier, he employed himself in observing diseases in the hospital de la Charite, and in public teaching. On the death of his father, he was appointed joint professor of mathematics with M. de Clapiers, and soon became his sole successor. In 1732, the medical professorship in the university being vacant by the resignation of M. Deidier, Fizes was elected his successor. He fulfilled the duties of this chair with great propriety, but was more highly distinguished as a practitioner. He appreciated at once the character of the most complicated disease; and was above all admired for the accuracy of his prognostics. These qualifications placed him at the head of his profession at Montpellier; his fame extended to the metropolis, and he was invited to the office of physician to the duke of Orleans. His age was now, however, advanced; and the fear of the jealousy which this high appointment might produce among his brethren, led him to make some efforts to be permitted to decline this honour. He removed to Paris, nevertheless; but, unused to the intrigues and railJeries and cabals of a court, he was unhappy in his situation; his health began to fail, and he was induced to request permission to resign his office, and returned to Montpellier, after residing fourteen months at Paris, honoured with the protection of the prince, and the friendship of M. Senac, Astruc, Bordeu, &c. He was accused of a little misanthropy on this occasion; but he was an enemy to adulation and selfishness, and seemed to revolt from very species of artificial politeness. He resumed the functions of his professorship at Montpellier but for a short period; for he was carried off by a malignant fever in the course of three days, and died on August 14, 1765, aged about seventy-five years. His works were principally essays on different points of theory and practice. 1. “De Hominis Liene sano,” Montpellier^ 1716; 2. “De naturali Secretione Bilis in Jecore,” ibid.' 1719 3. “Specimen de Suppuratione in Partibus mollibus,” ibid. 1722 4. “Partium Corporis himiani Solidarum Conspectus Anatomico-Mechanicus,” ibid. 1729; 5. “De Cataracta” 6. “Universae Physiologiae Conspectus,” ibid. 1737; 7. “De Tumoribus in Genere,” ibid. 1738; 8. “Tractatus de Febribus,” ibid. 1749. The greater part of the writings of Fizes were collected in one 4to volume, and were published at Montpellier in 1742.

, an eminent Latin poet, whose family name was Zarrabini, was born at Serevalle in 1498. His father, John Anthony, who first changed the family name to Flaminio on entering a literary society at Venice, was himself a man of learning, and professor of belles-lettres in different academies in Italy, and has left some works both in prose and verse, particularly twelve books of letters, in which are many particulars of literary history. He bestowed great pains on the instruction of his son, and sent him, when at the age of sixteen, to Rome, with a poem addressed to Leo X. exhorting him to make war against the Turks, and a critical work entitled “Annotationum Sylvae.” Leo appears to have been so pleased with the appearance of young Flaminio, as to request that he might remain at Rome, promising to encourage his studies there; but although this did not take place, in his after-visits to Rome, the pope patronized him with great liberality, and Flaminio answered every expectation that had been formed of his talents. In 1515 he accompanied the count Castiglione to Urbino, where he resided some months, and was held in the highest esteem by that accomplished nobleman for his amiable qualities and great endowments, but particularly for his. early and astonishing talents for Latin poetry. In this year he published at Fano, the first specimen of his productions, with a few poems of Marullus, not before printed, in a very rare volume in 8vo. entitled, “Michaelis Tardaaniotas Marulli Neniae. Ejusdem epigrammata nunquarn alias impressa. M. Antonii Flaminii carminum libellus. Ejusdem Ecloga Thyrsis.” Of these poems some have been printed, often with variations, in the subsequent editions of his works; but several pieces appear there which are not to be found in the edition by Mancurti, published at Padua, by Comino, in 1727, which is considered as the most complete; whence it is probable this early publication of Flaminio was not known to his editors.

, a very popular nonconformist divine, was born in Worcestershire about 1627, and educated at University-college, Oxford, where he took his degree of B. A. In 1650 he settled as assistant minister to Mr. Waiplate, rector of Diptford, in Devonshire, and shortly after succeeded to the rectory, which, however, in 1656 he resigned to become minister of a very populous parish at Dartmouth, though the stipend in this situation was much less. In 1662, when ejected with the other nonconformists, he occasionally preached and administered the sacrament privately till the passing of the Oxford act, in 1665, when he was obliged to retire to Slapton, a village five miles from Dartmouth, where also he sometimes preached when he could do it with safety, and sometimes when his safety was endangered. In 1685, the mob was excited against him, and would probably have destroyed him, had he fallen into their hands. He then came to London, where he narrowly escaped being apprehended, but returning to Dartmouth, when in 1687 king James granted more liberty to nonconformists, Mr. Flavel’s congregation immediately obtained for him a large place, in which he was enabled to exercise his ministerial functions; and by the revolution in 1688, he enjoyed complete liberty. He died at KxeUT in 1691, in his sixty-fourth year, having long possessed, in an eminent degree, the respect and esteem of all good men. He was a man of exemplary piety, and his various works are still in considerable popularity, and are regarded by those who hold Calvinistic sentiments. They were collected after his death, in 2 vols. folio, and have been since often printed in 6 vols. 8vo.

, an eminent Scotch politician, and ranked among the patriots of that country, was the son of sir Robert Fletcher of Saltown, in Scotland, and was born in 16S3. Being left fatherless while he was a child, he was placed under the tuition of Dr. Gilbert Bunu-t, then rector of Saltown, from whom he is supposed to have imbibed some of those political principles which he afterwards carried to a high degree of enthusiasm. He then spent some years of his youth in foreign travel, and first appeared as a public character in the station of a commissioner for East Lothian in the Scotch parliament, but his opposition to the arbitrary measures of the court, rendered it necessary to withdraw to Holland; and upon being cited to appear by a summons from the lords of the council, which it was known he could not obey, he was outlawed, and his estate confiscated. In 1683 he came over to England to assist, with his friend Mr. Baillie of Jerviswood, in the consultations held among the friends of liberty in England and Scotland, to concert measures for their common security; and by his prudence and address he avoided giving any pretext to the ministry for his apprehension. He returned to the continent, and in 1685 engaged in the enterprise of the duke of Monmouth. He landed in the west of England, but was obliged to quit the country again on account of a dispute which he had with a man who insulted him, and whom he shot dead, his temper being at all times most irascible. From England he went to Spain, and afterwards passed into Hungary, where he engaged in the war with the Turks, and distinguished himself by his valour and skill. The interest which he took in the fate of his country soon brought him back to join in the conferences which were held among the Scotch refugees in Holland, for the purpose of effecting a revolution; and upon that event taking place, he returned to Scotland, and resumed the possession of his estate. He was a member of the convention for the settlement of the new government in Scotland, and in all his political conduct he shewed himself the zealous asserter of the liberties of the people, without any regard to party distinction, and free from all views of his own interest. In 1698 he printed “A Discourse of Government with relation to Militias.” Also “Two Discourses concerning the Affairs of Scotland.” In one of these he suggests a plan for providing for the poor by domestic slavery, a most preposterous plan to be proposed by a friend to liberty. When a bill was brought into the parliament of Scotland for a supply to the crowq, in 1703, he moved that, previously to this, or to any other business, the house should consider what acts were necessary to secure their religion and liberties in case of the queen’s death, and he proposed various limitations of the prerogative, which were received in the “Act of Security,” passed through his exertions into a law, but rendered ineffectual by the subsequent union, to which he was a determined enemy. He died at London in 1716. His publications, and some of his speeches, were collected in one volume octavo, entitled, “The Political Works of Andrew Fletcher, Ksquire,” and his Life was lately published by the earl of Burhan, with a very high panegyric on his political virtues. Another very high character of him may be seen in our authority.

, an eminent physician, was born at Hinters, in Staffordshire, about 1649, and received his education at the university of Oxford, where the degree of doctor of physic was conferred upon him, on the 8th of July, 1680. He settled himself in the practice of his profession at Litchfield, in his native county; where his indefatigable attention to the sick, and the consequent practical skill which he attained, not only procured for him the confidence of the inhabitants, but gained him a reputation so extensive, that his sovereign honoured him with knighthood, as a reward for his talents. He was a great friend to the use of cold bathing, and left no means untried, by which he might disseminate the knowledge of its utility and safety, and bring the practice into general vogue: he particularly recommended it in chronic rheumatisms, and in nervous disorders, and he maintained that consumptions had prevailed extensively in England only since the practice of baptizing children by immersion had been relinquished. This recommended his work in a very particular manner to the attention of the Baptists, whose historian, Crosby, has made some extracts from it in corroboration of the propriety of baptism by immersion. It appears to have been by sir John’s advice, that Dr. Johnson, when an infant, was sent up to London to be touched by queen Anne for the evil; a proof that he had not surmounted the prejudices of his age. Sir John died Feb. 1, 1734. The following are the titles of his different publications: 1. “The Touchstone of Medicines,” London, 1687, 8vo. 2. “The Preternatural state of the Animal Humours described by their sensible qualities,” London, 1696, 8vo, in which he maintained the doctrine of fermentation. 3; “An Enquiry into the right use of Baths,” London, 1697, 8vo. This work afterwards appeared under different titles, such as “Ancient Psychrolusy revived,” London, 1702 and the subject was more amply treated in another edition “History of hot and cold Bathing, ancient and modern, with an Appendix by Dr. Baynard,” London, 1709, and again in 1715, and 1722. It was also in some measure renewed in his “Essay to restore the dipping of infants in their baptism,” 1721. 4. His next work was “A Treatise on the Asthma,” first published in 1698, and re-published in 1717 and 1726. He was himself the subject of asthma from the age of puberty, yet lived to be an old man. 5. “The Physicians’ Pulsewatch,” 1707 and 1710, in 2 vols. 8vo. Sir John Floyer was one of the first to count the pulsations of the arteries; for although the pulse had been the subject of observation from ancient times, the number of beats in a given time had not been attended to. 6. “Medici na Geronomica; of preserving old men’s health; with an appendix concerning the use of oil and unction, and a letter on the regimen of younger years,” Lond. 1724. Several of these treatises were translated into the continental languages.

, an eminent French officer and author, famous for his skill and knowledge in the military art, was born at Avignon, in 1669, of a noble but not a rich family. He discovered early a happy turn for the sciences, and a strong passion for arms; which last was so inflamed by reading Cxsar’s Commentaries, that he actifally enlisted at sixteen years of age, and although his father obtained his discharge, and shut him up in a monastery, he made his escape in about two years after, and entered himself a second time in quality of cadet. His inclination for military affairs, and the great pains he took to accomplish himself in every branch of the art, recommended him to notice; and he was admitted into the friendship of the first-rate officers. M. de Vendome, who commanded in Italy in 1720, made him his aid-de-camp, having conceived the highest regard for him; and soon after sent him with part of his forces into Lombardy. He was entirely trusted by the commander of that army; and no measures were concerted, or steps taken, without consulting him. By pursuing his plans, many places were taken, and advantages gained; and his services were remunerated by a pension of four hundred livres, and the cross of St. Lewis. He distinguished himself greatly, Aug. 15, 1705, at the battle of Cassano; where he received such a wound upon his left hand, as entirely deprived him of the use of it. M. de Vendome, to make him some amends, tried to have him made a colonel, but did not succeed. It was at this battle, that Folard conceived the first idea of that system of columns, which he afterwards prefixed to his Commentaries upon Poly bins.

, an eminent English scholar and antiquary, was the eldest son of Martin Folkes, esq. counsellor at law, and one of the benchers of Gray’s Inn, and was born in Queen-street, Lincoln’s-hm-fields, Oct. 29, 1690. From the age of nine to that of sixteen, he was under the tuition of the learned Mr. Cappel, son and successor to Mr. Lewis Cappel, Hebrew professor at Saumur, in France, which he quitted when that university was suppressed in 1695. After making great proficiency in the Greek and Roman classics under this master, Mr. Folkes was in 1707 entered of Clare-hall, Cambridge, where his progress in all branches of learning, and particularly in mathematics and philosophy, was such, that when he was scarcely more than twenty-three years of age, he was in 1714 admitted a fellow of the royal society, and two years afterwards had so distinguished himself as to be chosen one of the council. About this time he made his first communication to the society, relative to the eclipse of a fixed star in Gemini by the body of Jupiter. This was followed at various times by other papers, for which it may be sufficient to refer to the Philosophical Transactions. In Oct. 1717 he had the degree of M. A. conferred on him by the university of Cambridge, when that learned body had the honour of a visit from king George I. He was chosen a second time of the council of the royal society, December 14, 1718, and continued to be re-chosen every year till 1727; and in Jan. 1723, had the farther distinction of being appointed by their illustrious president, sir Isaac Newton, one of his vice-presidents nor were these honours unjustly bestowed for Mr. Folkes was not only indefatigable himself in observing the secret operations and astonishing objects of nature, but also studious to excite the same vigilance in others. In February 1720, he was elected a fellow of the society of antiquaries.

, an eminent Italian architect, but perhaps more justly celebrated for his knowledge of mechanics, was born at Mili, on the lake of Lugano, in 1543, and came to Rome in his twentieth year, to study architecture. Sixtus V. to whom his merits were known when he was cardinal Montalti, was no sooner raised to the tiara, than he made him his architect. Among other great designs for ornamenting the city of Rome, this pontiff had conceived the project of digging out and re-erecting the famous obelisk, formed of one entire piece of granite, originally from Egypt, which had formerly decorated the circus of Nero, but was now partly buried near the wall of the sacristy of St. Peter’s. For this purpose he called together the ablest artists, engineers, and mathematicians, to consider of the means by which this vast relic of Roman grandeur, which was thirty-six feet high, and weighed above a million of pounds, could be removed, and placed on its pedestal in the front of the piazza of St. Peter’s. The machinery employed by the Egyptians in preparing this obelisk, or of conveying il to Rome, were so forgotten, that even tradition preserved no probable conjecture; but the ingenuity of Fontana was completely successful. He first produced before the pope a model of the machinery to be employed, and demonstrated the practicability of the operation; and having made all the necessary erections, the obelisk was raised and safely transported to the piazza, about 150 yards distance, and placed on its pedestal amidst the acclamations of the astonished populace of Rome, on Sept. 10, 1586, the same day that the duke of Luxembourg, ambassador from Henry IV. made his entry into the city. It is said that Fontana undertook this work with the alternative of losing his head if it did not succeed, and that he had provided horses at every gate at Rome, to aid his escape, in case of any accident. Be this as it may, the pope revyarded him munificently. He created him a knight of the golden spur, gave him titles of nobility, and caused medals to be struck to his honour. To all this he added a pension of 2000 crowns, with reversion to his heirs; 3000 crowns as a gift, and all the materials employed on the undertaking, the value of which was computed at 20,000 crowns. Besides the erection of this obelisk, on which Fontana’s fame chiefly rests, he constructed three others, and built for the pope a superb palace near St. John of Lateran, and the library of the Vatican, and repaired some of the ancient monuments of art in Rome. His forte, indeed, was rather in mechanics than in original architecture, in which last he is said to have committed many mistakes; and either this, or the envy which his great enterprize created, is supposed to have raised him enemies, who at length persuaded pope Clement VIII. to dismiss him from his office of pontifical architect. In 1592, however, he was invited to Naples by the viceroy, the count Miranda, who made him royal architect and chief engineer. In that city he built the royal palace and some other considerable edifices, and died there in 1607. He published an account of the removal of the obelisk, entitled “Delia transportatione dell' Obelisco Vaticano e delle fabriche Sixto V.” Rome, 1590, fol. reprinted at Naples in 1603. He had a brother, John, who assisted him in his works at Rome, but who excelled chiefly in hydraulic machinery. He died at Rome in the year 1614.

, an eminent historian and biographer, was professor of divinity at Louvaine, and canon and archdeacon of Mechlin, where he died July 16 1761, highly respected as a man of learning and virtue, but of his private history we have no further particulars. His first publication appears to have been “Batavia Sacra, sive res gestae Apostolicorum virorum,” fol. 1714. He then published, 2. “Historia Episcopatus Antverpiensis,” Brussels, 1717, 4to. 3. “Historia Episcopatus Sylvicducensis,” ibid. 1721. 4. A new edition of “Auberti Minci Opera Diplomatics et Historica,” with large additions, ibid, 1723, 2 vols. fol. 5. “Diplomatum Belgicorum novu collectio,” being a supplement to the former, 1734 and 1748, 2 vols. foi. 6. “Chronologia sacra Episcoporum Belgii, ab anno 1561 ad annum 1761,” 12mo, a work in verse, with prose notes. He also published a new edition of the “Basilica Bruxellensis” of J. B. Christian, at Mechlin in 1743, 2 vols. 8vo, but is best known by his “Bibliotheca Belgica,” or lives of the Belgic authors, 1739, 2 vols. 4to, being a continuation of Miraeus, Sweert, and Valerius Andreas, ornamented with near 150 portraits, not half of which are to be found in the most complete copies. We lie under too many obligations to this work to examine it with the rigour which Marchand has employed, and for which we refer to his “Dictionnaire Historique.” The inaccuracies, as far as we have examined the work, are few, and for an occasional want of liberality, we must seek an apology in his religion. He has, however, taken some credit to himself, for not omitting those epitaphs on protestant writers in which their principles are commended and of this merit he ought not to be deprived.

, an eminent Scotsman, was born in 1564, when the affairs of the church of Scotland were in great confusion. He was distinguished by his family, an well as by his uncommon merit, being himself lord of Corse, and baron of O'Neil, in the shire of Aberdeen. He was liberally educated both at Aberdeen and St. Andrew’s; and having a plentiful estate, a noble alliance, and great credit in his country, he contributed much towards restoring order, by encouraging pious and peaceable ministers, and by instructing the people in set conferences as well as occasional discourses; especially the papists, who would hear nothing from the pulpit. In this laudable manner he acted as a layman; and his abilities became so conspicuous, that he was often solicited to enter into the ministry by eminent persons both in church and state. He at length submitted to their judgment, and was ordained a presbyter at the age of 28. He was admitted minister of Keith, where he continued with the highest applause till 1618; and then, at the earnest desire of the clergy and laity of the diocese of Aberdeen, as well as at the express command of the king, was promoted to the bishopric of Aberdeen, which he had held about seventeen years. “It was,” says Burnet, “with great difficulty, that king James made him accept that dignity; and for several months he refused it, having proposed to himself to live in a less conspicuous state. It was soon seen, how much, he deserved to be a bishop; and that his refusal was not counterfeit, but the real effect of his humility. In all his behaviour he has displayed the character of a truly apostolic man. He visited his diocese without pomp and noise, attended only by one servant, that he might more easily be informed of what belonged to his care, &c.”

, an eminent political and financial writer of France, was born at Mans, Oct. 2, 1722. His father, Francis, Louis Veron Duverger, was a merchant of that city. Having finished his education at the college of Beauvais, i,Ek Paris, he left it in the sixteenth year of his age, to followthe tarn my trade, which had long been carried on by his family; his great grandfather having established at Mans a, manufactory of tammies, which, from that circumstance, in Spain were called Verones. In 1741 he was sent by his father to Spain and Italy, whence he returned to Mans in 1743. His grandfather by the mother’s side, having soon after retired from business, he was thereby enabled to trade on his own account; but declining, from motives of delicacy, to carry on at Mans the same trade as his father, he Avent to Nantes, where his uncle was established as a shipowner, to obtain a knowledge of the mercantile concerns and transactions of that city. Having spent several years at Nantes, and collected much valuable information on maritime and colonial trade, he entered in 1752 upon a speculation, which induced him to go to Paris. Confined to a small circle of friends and acquaintance, he lived there in great privacy, yet presented to government several memoirs, which experiencing a very cool reception, he resolved to write in future, not for administration, but the public. He published accordingly in 1753, his “ThtJorie et pratique du Commerce et de la Marine,” a free translation from the Spanish of Dr. Geron. de Votariz, which was soon followed by the “Considerations sur les Finances d'Espagne relativement a eel les de France,” a work in which he displayed such intimate acquaintance with the Spanish system of finance, that the Spanish ambassador at the court of Versailles proposed him to marshal cle Noailles, as consul-general of Spain; but the former being soon after recalled by his court, the appointment did not take place. About the same time he published, in 1754, his “Essai sur la partie politique du commerce de terre et de mer, de Pagriculture et des finances,” which within three weeks passed through two editions; the third edition was published in 1766, and the fourth in 1796, considerably improved and enlarged. From his profound knowledge in matters relative to money and coinage, he was appointed in 1755, to examine into the enormous abuses which had crept into the administration <yf the French mint. He immediately proposed a new coinage, but his plan was not carried into execution until 1771; he was, however, in the meanwhile, appointed inspectorgeneral of the mint, a new office expressly established for him. Having obtained free admittance to the library of the family of Noailles, rich in manuscripts relative to the administration of the finances of France, he conceived the idea of composing his “Recherches et considerations sur les finances de France depuis 1595 jusqu'a 1721,” printed at Basle, 1758, in 2 vols. 4to, and reprinted the same, year at Liege, in 6 vols. 8vo. This valuable work expeperienced the most distinguished reception both in France and other countries, and supplied Thomas with matter for his observations on the true principles of financial administration in his eulogy of Suny. The duke de Choiseuil being appointed prime minister, he endeavoured to place Forbonnois in the department for foreign affairs; but the latter declining the appointment, Choiseuil requested he would apply himself to lay down a general system of trade, and to comment on all commercial treaties concluded by France, in order that certain and uniform principles might be introduced into that important department of political economy. While he was making the necessary preparations for executing that commission, the abandoned state of the French finances in 1759, occasioned the appointment of the noted Sithonette to the office of comptroller-general or minister of finances. Without being in the least connected with that minister, Forbonnois received an offer of the place of principal clerk of the department of finance, which being declined, the minister requested he would at least privately lend him his assistance in projecting the first financial operations necessary for opening the war both by sea and land, at a time when 1,500,000 livres only were left in the treasury. Eight days after, Forbonnois brought him all the plans and draughts of edicts for the first operations. They were approved by the minister, and laid before Louis XV. who in consequence thereof appointed Forbonnois inspector of the depot of the general financial comptrol, a title which he himself suggested, in order to avoid the eclat of a more brilliant appointment. However, Forbonnois’ acknowledged superiority as a financier, which proved exceedingly offensive to the minister’s lady, soon brought on a coolness between her husband and him, which induced Forbonnois to retire into the country until Sithonette’s disgrace and dismission. He might have succeeded him as comptroller-general, had he been willing to consent to sacrifices which he could not reconcile with his honesty and candour. While he held the place of inspector of the depot of the general financial comptrol, he published his “Lettre d'un Banquier a son correspondent cle province;” chiefly intended to give a favourable account of the minister’s operation. In 1760 he pointed out to the Duke de Choiseuil the perilous situation of France, and suggested the plan of a treaty of peace, calculated to tempt the ambition of Great Britain, and at the same time to save resources for France. This plan met with so much applause, that Don de Fuentes, at that lime Spanish ambassador at Paris, who was admitted to the conferences, offered an armed neutrality on the part of his court to tacilitate its execution. Forbonnois was charged to draw up the necessary acts and plans, and to elucidate a great variety of points respecting the fisheries, the means of enlarging them, the sacrifices to be made to England, &c. nay, he was offered the appointment of plenipotentiary to conclude the treaty; but having executed his charge, and demanded a conference, he received no answer. Being entrusted with the secrets of the state, he began to entertain strong apprehensions for his personal safety, and took refuge in a glass-manufactory in the mountains of Burgundy, in which he was concerned. He returned, however, afterwards to Paris, and in order to render both the minister and the financiers perfectly easy on his account, he purchased the place of a counsellor or member of the parliament of Metz.