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

, archbishop of Upsal, and one of the sons of the preceding, was born at Upsal in 1675. When he had finished his studies, his father sent him on his travels to the principal countries of Europe, and on his return, he was made librarian to the university of Upsal. He was afterwards for many years, and with great reputation, professor of divinity, and became successively bishop “of Gotcenburgh and Linkseping, and archbishop of Upsal, where he died in 1743. He was not only an able theologian, but versed in languages, history, and antiquities, and in all his wn< ings displays erudition and critical acumen. He published, 1.” vicnun*snta historica vetera Ecclesiae Sueco-Gothicit,“Upsal, 1704, 4to. 2.” Johannis Vastovii Vitis Aquilonia. sive Yitae Sanctorum regni SueeoGothici,“ibid. 1708, 4to. 3.” Dissertatio de Alexandria Ægypti,“ibid. 1711, 8vo. 4.” Laudatio funebris Michael. Enemanni,“Upsal, 1715, 4to. 5.” Dissertatio de re litteraria Judaeorum,“ibid. 1716, 4to. 6.” Acta Litteraria Suecia-, ab 1720 usque ad 1753,“ibid. 3 vols. 4to. 7.” Periculum Runicum, sive de origine et antiquitate Runarum,“ibid. 1724, 8vo. 8.” Oratio funebris in memoriam Laurcntii Molini, theologi Upsaliensis," ibid. 4to. Thesfe learned and ingenious works procured him very great reputation, and the correspondence of the most eminent men of learning in every part of Europe. In 1720, when librarian to the university, he associated with some of the professors in founding the academy of sciences of Upsal, which was soon after established by government, and is the oldest institution of that kind in the north; and when the academy of Stockholm was founded in 1739, Benzelius was admitted one of its first members.

, archbishop of Upsal, and brother tc the preceding, was born at Strengnes in 1689, and studied at Upsal. During his subsequent travels he happened to arrive at Bender, where Charles XII. was. This prince, who had more taste for the pursuit of scientific knowledge than is generally supposed, was desirous at this tim to send some men of learning to the East, and Benzehus was one whom he applied to, and who accordingly began his travels in 1714, visiting Syria, Palestine, and Egypt, and returning to Sweden through Italy, Germany, and Holland. The journal of this tour is preserved in manuscript at Upsal but a considerable part of Benzelius’s observations were printed in a Latin collection, under the title of “Syntagma dissertationum in Academia Lundensi habitarum,” Leipsic, 1745, 4to. Benzelius, after his return to Sweden, was made professor of theology, bishop of Lunden, and archbishop of Upsal, where he died in 1758. He was succeeded in the archbishopric by his brother Jacob, who wrote in Latin, an abridgment of theology, and a description of Palestine, and some other works. H. Jasper Benzelius, of the same learned family, who died about the end of the last century, bishop of Strengnes, had studied under Mosheim, and published in 1744 at Helmstadt, a Latin life or dissertation on John Dury, who in the seventeenth century, travelled over a considerable part of Europe, in hopes of reconciling the Lutherans and Calvinists.

, was born at Orleans in 1475, and died in 1550. According to the custom of that age, he Latinized his name into Beraldus Aurelius, and it is under that name that his friend Nicolas Bourbon celebrates him in one of his Latin poems. Berauld, according to Moreri, was preceptor to cardinal Coligni, his brother the admiral, and to Chatillon. Erasmus, in many parts of his works, acknowledges the kind hospitality of Berauld, when, in 1500, he was travelling by the way of Orleans into Italy, and highly praises the elegance of his style. In 1522, Erasmus dedicated to him his work “De conscribendis epistolis.” Berauld published various works in Latin, of which the principal are, 1. “Oratio de pace restituta et de fcedere sancito apud Cameracum,” Paris, 1528, 8vo. 2. “Metaphrasis in oeconomicon Aristotelis,” Paris, 4to, without date. In 1516, he edited the works of William bishop of Paris, in folio, and the same year an edition of Pliny’s natural history, with numerous corrections, yet Hardouin has not mentioned Berauld among the editors of Pliny. He also supplied notes to the Rusticus of Politian, and published a “Greek and Latin Dictionary,” that of Crafton, with additions, a preface, and notes. 3. “Syderalis /ibyssus,” Paris, 1514. 4. “Dialogus quo rationes explicantur quibus dicendi ex tempore facultas parari potest, &c.” Lyons, 1534. 5. “De jurisprudentia vetere ac novitia oratio,” Lyons, 1533. 6. “Enarratio in psalmos LXXI. et CXXX.” Paris, 1529, 4to. Berauld was greatly respected by Stephen Poucher, bishop of Paris, and afterwards archbishop of Sens, a celebrated patron of learning and learned men. Berauld’s son, Francis, born at Orleans, embraced the principles of Calvin he was esteemed a very learned man and a good Greek and Latin poet. He was particularly eminent for his knowledge of Greek, which he taught at Montbelliard, Lausanne, Geneva, Montargis, of which last college he was principal in 1571, and at Rochelle. Henry Stephens employed him to translate part of Appian, and preferred his translation to that of Coslius Secundus Curio.

, or Berenger, the celebrated archdeacon of Angers, was born at Tours in the beginning of the eleventh century, of an opulent family, and became the disciple of the famous Fulbert of Chartres, under whom he made rapid progress in grammar, rhetoric, dialectic, and what were then called the liberal arts. On his return to his country in 1030, he was appointed scholastic, or master of the school of St. Martin. His reputation soon reaching foreign parts, the number of his scholars greatly increased, and many of them were afterwards advanced to high rank in the church; nor did he quit his school when made archdeacon of Angers in 1039. The opinions, which have given him a name in ecclesiastical history, were said to have been first occasioned by a pique. In a dispute with Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, on a very trivial question, he happened to be defeated, and what was worse, his scholars began to go over to that rival. Berengarius, on this, took Erigena for his model, and attacked the mystery of the eucharist, as the popish writers term it, but in plain language, the doctrine of transubstantiation. Bruno, bishop of Angers, Hugh, of Langres, and Adelman, of Brescia, in vain endeavoured to cure him of his heresy, and his writings, which were taken to Rome, were condemned in two councils held by pope Leo IX. in 1050, and himself excommunicated. He then went to the abbey of Preaux in Normandy, hoping to be protected by duke William, surnamed the Bastard, but that young prince summonsed a meeting of the ablest bishops and divines, who again condemned Berengarius, and the council of Paris, in Oct. 1050, deprived him of all his benefices. This loss he is said to have felt more severely than their spiritual inflictions, and it disposed him to retract his sentiments in the council of Tours, in 1055, in consequence of which he was received into church-communion. In 1059 he was cited to the council at Rome, by pope Nicholas II. and having been confuted by Abbo and Laniranc, he abjured his errors, burnt his books, yet had no sooner reached France, than he protested against his recantation, as extorted by fear, and returned to his studies with the same spirit of inquiry. At length, however, Gregory VII having called a new council at Rome in 1078, Berengei more seriously abjured his opinions, returned to France, and passed the remaining years of his life in privacy and penance. He died Jan. 6, 1088, aged ninety. There have been many disputes betwixt protestant and popish authors, as to the reality or sincerity of his final recantation. His sentiments, however, did not perish on his recantation, or his death, and he may be considered as having contributed to that great reformation in the church which afterwards was carried into lasting effect by his successors. The greater part of his works are lost, but some are preserved among the works of Lanfranc, in the collections of d'Acheri and Martenne; and, in 1770, Lessing discovered and published his answer to Lanfranc, “De corpore et sanguine Jesu Christi.”

, a Latin poet, born in Denmark in 1627, whose taste for letters does not appear to have impeded his fortune, was a member of the royal council of finances, and historiographer to his majesty. It was to justify his promotion to this last office, that he published “Florus Danicus, sive Danicarum rerum a primordio regni ad tempera usque Christian! I. Oldenburgici Breviarium.” This work was printed in fol. 1698, at Odensee, the ca-, pital of Funen, at the private press of Thomas Kingorius, bishop of that island, who spared no expence to make an elegant book. The bookseller, however, to whom thesale was consigned, eager to get rid of the unsold copies, printed a new title with the date of 1700, and when that did not quite answer his expectations, he printed another with the date of 1709, and notwithstanding this obvious trick, there are connoisseurs who think the pretended edition of 1709 preferable to that of 1698. In 1716, however, a second edition was published in 8vo, at Tirnaro, under the direction of the Jesuits of that place. Bering’s poetry, printed separately, was collected in the 2d vol. of “Deliciae quorundam Danorum,” Leyden, 1693, 12mo. The smaller pieces, lyrics, sonnets, &c. are the best; he had not genius for the more serious efforts of the muse. He died in 1675.

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

We have already related by what means, and upon what occasion, Dr. Berkeley had first the honour of being known to queen Caroline. This princess delighted much in attending to philosophical conversations between learned and ingenious men for which purpose she had, when princess of Wales, appointed a particular day in the week, when the most eminent for literary abilities at that time in England were invited to attend her royal highness in the evening a practice which she continued after her accession to the throne. Of this company were doctors Clarke,­Hoadly, Berkeley, and Sherlock.- Clarke and Berkeley were generally considered as principals in the debates that arose upon those occasions; and Hoadly adhered to the former, as Sherlock did to the latter. Hoadly was no friend to our author: he affected to consider his philosophy and his Bermuda project as the reveries of a visionary. Sherlock (who was afterwards bishop of London) on the other hand warmly espoused his cause and particularly, when the “Minute Philosopher” came out, he carried a copy of it to the queen, and left it to her majesty to determine, whether such a work could be the production of a disordered understanding. After dean Berkeley’s return from Rhode Island, the queen often commanded his attendance to discourse with him on what he had observed worthy of notice in America. His agreeable and instructive conversation, engaged that discerning princess so much in his favour, that the rich deanery of Down in Ireland falling vacant, he was at her desire named to it, and the king’s letter actually came over fqr his appointment. But his friend lord Burlington having neglected to notify the royal intentions in proper time to the duke of Dorset, then lord lieutenant of Ireland, his excellency was so offended at this disposal of the richest deanery in Ireland, without his concurrence, that it was thought proper not to press the matter any farther. Her -majesty upon this declared, that since they would not suffer Dr. Berkeley to be a dean in Ireland, he should be a bishop and accordingly, in 1733,­the bishopric of Cioyne becoming vacant, he was by letters patent, dated March 17, promoted to that see, and was consecrated at St. Paul’s church in Dublin, on the 19th of May following, byTheophilus archbishop of Cashel, assisted by the bishops of Raphoe and Killaloe. His lordship repaired immediately to his manse-house at Cioyne, where he constantly resided (except one winter that he attended the business of parliament in Dublin) and applied himself with vigour to the faithful discharge of all episcopal duties. He revived in his diocese the useful office of rural dean, which had gone into disuse visited frequently parochially and confirmed in several parts of his see.

About this time he engaged in a controversy with the mathematicians, which made a good deal of noise in the literary world and the occasion of it is said to have been, this: Mr. Addison had, many years before this, given him an account of their common friend Dr. Garth’s behaviour in his last illness, which was equally un pi easing to both these advocates of revealed religion. For, when Addison. went to see the doctor, and began to discourse with him seriously about another world, “Surely, Addison,” replied he, “I have good reason not to believe those trifles, since my friend Dr. Halley, who has dealt so much in demonstration, has assured me, that the doctrines of Christianity are incomprehensible, and the religion itself an imposture.” The bishop, therefore, addressed to him, as to an infidel mathematician, a discourse called the “Analyst” with-a view to show that mysteries in faith were unjustly objected to by mathematicians, who admitted much greater mysteries, and even falsehoods in science, of which he endeavoured to prove, that the doctrine of fluxions furnished a clear example. This attack gave occasion to a smart controversy upon the subject of fluxions the principal answers to the “Analyst” were written by a person under the name of Philalethes Cantabrigiensis, generally supposed to be Dr. Jurin, who published a piece entitled “Geometry no friend to Infidelity,” 1734. To this the bishop replied in “A Defence of Freethinking in Mathematics,” 1735; which drew a second answer the same year from Philalethes, styled “The minute Mathematician, or the Freethinker no just thinker” and here the controversy ended, and whatever fault, mathematicians may find in this hostile attempt of our bishop, it must be acknowledged they have reaped no inconsiderable advantage from it, inasmuch as it gave rise to the Treatise of Fluxions by Maclaurin, in which the whole doctrine is delivered with more precision and fulness than ever was done before, or probably than ever would have been done, if no attack had been made upon it.

But the bishop, ever, active and attentive to the public good, was continually sending forth something or o-ther in 1735, the “Querist;” in 1736, “A Discourse addressed to Magistrates,” occasioned by the enormous licence and irreligion of the times and many other things afterwards of a smaller kind. In 1744 came forth his celebrated and curious book, entitled, “Siris a chain of philosophical reflections and inquiries concerning the virtues of Tar Water” a medicine which had been useful to himself in a case of nervous colic. This work, he has been heard to declare, cost him more time and pains than any other he had ever been engaged in. It underwent a second impression, with additions and emendations, in 1747 and was followed by “Farther thoughts on Tar Water,” in 1752. In July, the same year, he removed with his lady and family to Oxford, partly to superintend the education of his son, the subject of the following article, but chiefly to indulge the passion for learned retirement, which had ever strongly possessed him, and was one of his motives to form the Bermuda project. But as none could be more sensible tban his lordship of the impropriety of a bishop’s nonresidence, he previously endeavoured to exchange his high preferment for some canonry or headship at Oxford. Failing of success in this, he actually wrote over to the secretary of state, to request that he might have permission to resign his bishopric, worth at that time at least 1400l. per annum. So uncommon a. petition excited his majesty’s curiosity to inquire who was the extraordinary man that preferred it: being told that it was his old acquaintance Dr. Berkeley, he declared that he should die a bishop in spite of himself, but gave him- full liberty to reside where he pleased. The bishop’s last act before he left Cloyne was to sign a lease of the demesne lands in that neighbourhood, to be renewed yearly at the rent of 200l. which sum he directed to be distributed every year, until his return, among poor house-keepers of Cloyne, Youghal, and Aghadtla. The author of his life in the Biog. Brit, magnifies his love for the beauties of Cloyne, but the fact was, that he had never any idea of Cloyne as a beautiful situation, and we are happy to draw from the same authority which corrects this error, some additional particulars of his disinterested spirit. He declared to Mrs. Berkeley, soon after he was advanced to the prelacy, that his resolution was never to change his see; because, as he afterwards confessed to the archbishop of Tuam, and the late earl of Shannon, he had very early in life got the world under his feet, and he hoped to trample on it to his latest moment. These two warm friends had been pressing him to think of a translation but he did not love episcopal translations. He thought that they were sometimes really hurtful to individuals, and that they often gave, though unjustly, a handle to suspect of mean views, an order to which that holy and humble man was himself an honour, and to which it may be said, without adulation, that he would have been an honour in any age of the church. Humble and unaspiring as was the bishop of Cloyne, the earl of Chesterfield sought him out and when, as a tribute to exalted merit, that nobleman offered to him tl e see of Clogher, where he was told he might immediately receive fines to the amount of ten thousand pounds, he consulted Mrs. Berkeley, as having a family, and, with her full approbation, not only declined the bishopric of Clogher, but the offer which accompanied that proposal, of any other translation which might become feasible during lord Chesterfield’s administration. The primacy was vacated before the expiration of that period. On that occasion, the bishop said to Mrs. Berkeley, “I desire to add one more to the list of churchmen, who are evidently dead to ambition and avarice.” Just before his embarkation for America, queen Caroline endeavoured to stagger his resolution, by the offer of an English mitre but, in reply, he assured her majesty, that he chose rather to be president of St. Paul’s college, than primate of all England.

As to his person, he was handsome, with a countenance full of meaning and kindness, remarkable for great strength of limbs; and, till his sedentary life impaired it, of a very robust constitution. He was, however, often troubled with the hypochondria, and latterly with a nervous colic, from which he was greatly relieved by the virtues of his favourite tar-water, which he brought into extensive use. It was at one time a fashion to drink this medicine, to which more virtues were attached than the good bishop had ever thought of. When at Cloyne, he spent the morning, and often a great part of the day, in study and Plato, from whom many of his notions were borrowed, was his favourite author. The excellence of his moral character is conspicuous in his writings he was certainly a very amiable as well as a very great man. Atterbury once declared that he did not think so much understanding, so much knowledge, so much innocence, and so much humility, had been the portion of any but angels, until he saw Mr. Berkeley.

Dr. Berkeley has not been very fortunate in his biographers. An account of him was drawn up by his brother, the Rev. Dr. Robert Berkeley, vicar-general of Cloyne, who died in 1787. This was first inserted in the Biog. Britannica, and many mistakes pointed out, and additions made to it in a subsequent volume of that work. Previously to this, in 1776, an “Account of his Life” was published in a thin octavo volume, at London, which probably was drawn up from family information. Of this a second edition was published in 1784, professedly “with improvements,” but the errors both of the first edition and of the Biog. Brit, which had then appeared, are retained. In 1784 a new edition of the bishop’s entire works was published at Dublin and London, 2 vols. 4to, with the octavo life prefixed. The third vol. of the Biog. Brit, contains some important information from the bishop’s widow (who died 1786) and which we have endeavoured to incorporate. It remains only to be noticed that the romance called the “Adventures of Signer Gaudentio di Lucca,” often attributed to our author, was certainly not his production.

, second son of the preceding, by Anne, eldest daughter of the right hon. John Forster, a privy-counsellor and speaker of the Irish house of commons, by Anne, daughter to the right hon. John Monck, brother to the duke of Albemarle, was born on the 28th of September 1733, old style, in Grosvenor-street, Grosvenor-square. In his infancy he was removed with the family to Ireland, where he was instructed in the classics by his father only, the bishop taking that part of the education of his sons on himself. Instructed in every elegant and useful accomplishment, Mr. Berkeley was, at the age of nineteen, sent over to Oxford his father leaving it to his own choice to enter a gentleman commoner, either at Christ church or St. John’s college. But bishop Conybeare, then dean of Christ church, on his arrival offering him a studentship in that society, he accepted it, finding many of the students to be gentlemen of the first character for learning and rank in the kingdom. His first tutor was the late learned archbishop of York, Dr. Markham; on whose removal to Westminsterschool, he put himself under the tuition of Dr. Smallwell, afterwards bishop of Oxford. Having taken the degree of B. A. he served the office of collector in the university, and as he was allowed by his contemporaries to be an excellent Latin scholar, his collector’s speech was universally admired and applauded. In 1758 he took a small living from his society, the vicarage of East Garston, Berks, from which he was removed, in 1759, by archbishop Seeker, his sole patron, to the vicarage of Bray, Berks of which he was only the fifth vicar since the reformation. In 1759, also, he took the degree of M. A. The kindness of archbishop Seeker (who testified the highest respect for bishop Berkeley’s memory by his attention to his deserving son) did not rest here he gave him also the chancellorship of Brecknock, the rectory of Acton, Middlesex, and the sixth prebendal stall in the church of Canterbury. In 1768 he had taken the degree of LL. D. for which he went out grand compounder, and soon afterwards resigned the rectory of Acton. Some time after he had obtained the chancellorship of Brecknock, he put himself to very considerable expence in order to render permanent two ten pounds per annum, issuing out of the estate, to two poor Welch curacies. The vicarage of Bray he exchanged for that of Cookham near Maidenhead, and had afterwards from the church of Canterbury the vicarage of East-Peckham, Kent, which he relinquished on obtaining the rectory of St. Clement’s Danes which with the vicarage of Tyshurst, Sussex (to which he was presented by the church of Canterbury in 1792, when he vacated Cookham), and with the chancellorship of Brecknock, he; held till his death. His illness had been long and painful, but borne with exemplary resignation and his death was so calm and easy that no pang was observed, no groan was heard, by his attending wife and relations. He died Jan. 6, 1795, and was interred in his father’s vault in Christ church, Oxford. Not long before his death, he expressed his warmest gratitude to Mrs. Berkeley, of whose affection he was truly sensible, and of whom he took a most tender farewell. Dr. Berkeley’s qualifications and attainments were such as occasioned his death to be lamented by many. He was the charitable divine, the affectionate and active friend, the elegant scholar, the accomplished gentleman. He possessed an exquisite sensibility. To alleviate the sufferings of the sick and needy, and to patronize the friendless, were employments in which his heart and his hand ever co-operated. In the pulpit his manner was animated, and his matter forcible. His conversation always enlivened the social meetings where he was present; for he was equalled by few in affability of temper and address, in the happy recital of agreeable anecdote, in the ingenious discussion of literary subjects, or in the brilliant display of a lively imagination.

Dr. Berkeley published two or three single sermons; one of which, preached on the anniversary of king Charles’s martyrdom, 1785, entitled “The danger of violent innovations in the state, how specious soever the pretence, exemplified from the reigns of the two first Stuarts,” has gone through six editions, the last in 1794 one on Good Friday 1787 one at Cookham on the king’s accession, 1789. His Sermon on the consecration of bishop Home was not published until after his death. In 1799, his widow published a volume of his Sermons with a biographical preface. He married, in 1761, Eliza, eldest daughter and coheiress of the rev. Henry Finsham, M. A. by Eliza, youngest daughter and one of the coheiresses of the truly pious and learned Francis Cherry, esq. of Shottesbrook-house in the county of Berks, by whom he had four children, now no more. The late bishop Home, we may add, was one of Dr. Berkeley’s earliest and most intimate friends, the loss of whom he severely felt, and of whom he was used to speak with the sincerest respect and the most affectionate regard.

The next opponent of consequence with whom St. Bernard had to contend, was Gilbert'de Porree, bishop of Poictiers. The errors attributed to Gilbert, arose from certain metaphysical subtleties, which induced him to deny the incarnation of the divine nature but these refined notions being above the comprehension of St. Bernard, h6 opposed them with great vehemence in the council of Paris, 1147, and in that of Rheims, 1148: but in this latter council Gilbert, in order to put an end to the dispute, offered to submit his opinions to the judgment of the assembly, and of the Roman pontiff, by whom they were condemned. Towards the end of his days, Bernard was chosen to be mediator between the people of Mentz and some neighbouring princes, whom he reconciled with his usual skill. On his return, he fell sick of a weakness in his stomach, and died Aug. 20, 1153, leaving nearly one hundred and sixty monasteries of his order, founded by his care.

About this time a scheme was set on foot at Oxford, of collecting and publishing the ancient mathematicians. Mr. Bernard, who had first formed the project, collected all the books published on that subject since the invention of printing, and all the Mss. he could discover in the Bodleian and Savilian libraries, which he arranged in order of time, and according to the matter they contained. Of this he drew up a synopsis or view, which he presented to bishop Fell, a great encourager of the undertaking. This was published by his biographer, Dr. Thomas Smith, at the end of his life. As a specimen, Mr. Bernard published also a few sheets of Euclid, in folio, containing the Greek text, and a Latin version, with Proclus’s commentary in Greek and Latin, and learned scholia and corollaries. He undertook also an edition of the “Parva syntaxis Alexandrina” in which, besides Euclid, are contained the small treatises of Theodosius, Autolycus, Menelaus, Aristarchus, and Hipsicles but it was never published. In 1676, he was sent to France by Charles II. to be tutor to the dukes of Grafton and Northumberland, natural sons of the king, by the duchess of Cleveland, with whom they then lived at Paris; but the plainness and simplicity of his manners not suiting the gaiety of the duchess’s family, he continued with them only one year, when he returned to Oxford having reaped however the advantage, during his stay at Paris, of becoming acquainted with most of the learned men in that city, particularly Justel, Huet, Mabillon, Quesnel, Dacier, Renaudot, and others.

Upon his return to the university, he applied himself to his former studies and though, in conformity to the obligation of his professorship, he devoted the greatest part of his time to mathematics, yet his inclination was now more to history, chronology, and antiquities. He undertook a new edition of Josephus, but it was never completed. The history of this undertaking is somewhat curious. Several years before, bishop Fell had resolved, with our author’s assistance, to print at the theatre at Oxford a new edition of Josephus, more correct than any of the former. But, either for want of proper means to complete that work, or in expectation of one promised by the learned Andrew Bosius, this design was laid aside. Upon the death of Bosius, it was resumed again and Mr. Bernard collected all the manuscripts he could procure out of the libraries of Great Britain, both of the Greek text and Epiphanius’s Latin translation, and purchased Bosius’s valuable papers of his executors at a great price. Then he published a specimen of his edition of Josephus, and wrote great numbers of letters to his learned friends in France, Holland, Germany, and other countries, to desire their assistance in that work. He laboured in it a good while with the utmost vigour and resolution, though his constitution was much broken by intense application. But this noble undertaking was left unfinished, for these two reasons. First, many persons complained of Epiphanius’s translation, because it was defective, and not answerable to the original in many places, and required a new version, or at least to have that of Gelenins revised and corrected. Secondly, objections were made to the heap of various readings that were to be introduced in this edition, and with the length of the commentaries, in which whole dissertations were inserted without any apparent necessity, that ought to have been placed at the end of the work, or printed by themselves. These things occasioning a contest between Mr. Bernard and the curators of the Oxford press, the printing of it was interrupted and at last the purpose of having it done at the expence of the university, was defeated by the death of bishop Fell. However, about six or seven years after, Mr. Bernard was prevailed upon by three booksellers of Oxford to resume the work, and to publish it in a less form upon the model of his specimen but they not being able to bear the expence of it, on account of the war, after a few sheets were printed off, desisted from their undertaking. These repeated discouragements hindered the learned author from proceeding further than the four first books, and part of the fifth, of the Jewish Antiquities and the first book, tmd part of the second, of the Destruction of Jerusalem; which were printed at the Theatre at Oxford in 1686 and 1687, and published in 1700, fol. In the notes, the learned author shews himself an universal scholar and discerning critic and appears to have been master of most of the Oriental learning- and languages. These notes have been incorporated into Havercamp’s edition.

In 1683, he went again to Leyden, to be present at the sale of Nicholas Heinsius’s library; where he purchased, at a great price, several of the classical authors, thut had been either collated with manuscripts, or illustrated with the original notes of Joseph Scaliger, Bonaventure Vulcanius, the two Heinsiuses, and other celebrated critics. Here he renewed his acquaintance with several persons of eminent learning, particularly Gruevius, Spanheim, Triglandius, Gronovius, Perizonius, Ryckius, Gallaeus, Rulaeus, and especially Nicholas Witsen, burgomaster of Amsterdam, who presented him with a Coptic dictionary, brought from Egypt by Theodore Petraeus of Holsatia; and afterwards transmitted to him in 1686, the Coptic and Ethiopic types made of iron, for the use of the printingpress at Oxford. With such civilities he was so much pleased, and especially with the opportunities he had of making improvements in Oriental learning, that he would have settled at Leyden, if he could have been chosen professor of the Oriental languages in that university, but not being able to compass this, he returned to Oxford. He began now to be tired of astronomy, and his health declining, he was desirous to resign but no other preferment offering, he was obliged to hold his professorship some years longer than he intended; in 1684 he took his degree of D. D. and in 1691, being presented to the rectory of Brightwell in Berkshire, he quitted his professorship, and was succeeded by David Gregory, professor of mathematics at Edinburgh. In 1692, he was employed in drawing up a catalogue of the manuscripts in Great Britain and Ireland, which was published at Oxford 1697, fol. Dr. Bernard’s share in this undertaking was the drawing up a most useful and complete alphabetical Index to which he prefixed this title, “Librorum manuscriptorum Magnae Britanniae et Hibernise, atque externarum aliquot Bibliothecarum Index secundum alphabetum Edwardus Bernardus construxit Oxonii.” In this Index he mentions a great number of valuable Greek manuscripts, which are to be found in several foreign libraries, as well as our own. Towards the latter end of his life, he was much afflicted with the stone, yet, notwithstanding this and other infirmities, he took a third voyage to Holland, to attend the sale of Golius’s manuscripts. After six or seven weeks absence, he returned to London, and from thence to Oxford. There he fell into a languishing consumption, which put an end to his life, Jan. 12, 1696, before he was quite fifty-nine years of age. Four days after, he was interred in St. John’s chapel, where a monument of white marble was soon erected for him by his widow, to whom he had been married only three years. In the middle of it there is the form of an Heart carved, circumscribed with these words, according to his own direction a little before he died, Habemus Cor Bernard!: and underneath E. B. S. T. P. Obiit Jan. 12, 1696. The same is also repeated on a small square marble, under which he was buried. As to this learned man’s character, Dr. Smith, who knew him well, gives him a very great one. “He was (says he) of a mild disposition, averse to wrangling and disputes and if by chance or otherwise he happened to be present where contests ran high, he would deliver his opinion with great candour and modesty, and in few words, but entirely to the purpose. He was a candid judge of other men’s performances; not too censorious even on trifling books, if they contained nothing contrary to good manners, virtue, or religion and to those which displayed wit, learning, or good sense, none gave more ready and more ample praise. Though he was a true son of the Church of England, yet he judged favourably and charitably of dissenters of all denominations. His piety and prudence never suffered him to be hurried away by an immoderate zeal, in declaiming against the errors of others. His piety was sincere and unaffected, and his devotions both in public and private very regular and exemplary. Of his great and extensive learning, the works he published, and the manuscripts he has left, are a sufficient evidence.” This character is supported by the concurring evidence of all his learned contemporaries. The works he published were 1. “Tables of the longitudes and latitudes of the fixed Stars.” 2. “The Obliquity of the Ecliptic from the observations of the ancients, in Latin.” 3. “A Latin letter to Mr. John Flamsteed, containing observations on the Eclipse of the Sun, July 2, 1684, at Oxford.” All these are in the Philosophical Transactions, 4, “A treatise of the ancient Weights and Measures,” printed first at the end of Dr. Edward Pocock’s Commentary on Hosea, Oxford, 1685, fol. and afterwards reprinted in Latin, with very great additions and alterations, under this title, “De mensuris & ponderibus antiquis, libri tres,” Oxon. 1688, 8vo. 5. “Private Devotions, with a brief explication of the Ten Commandments,” Oxford, 1689, 12mo. 6. “Orbis eruditi Literatura a charactere Samaritico deducta” printed at Oxford from a copper-plate, on one side of a broad sheet of paper: containing at one view, the different forms of letters used by the Phoenicians, Samaritans, Jews, Syrians, Arabs, Persians, Brachmans, and other Indian philosophers, Malabarians, Greeks, Cophts, Russians, Sclavonians, Ethiopians, Francs, Saxons, Goths, &c. all collected from ancient inscriptions, coins, and manuscripts together with the abbreviations used by the Greeks, physicians, mathematicians, and chymists. 7. “Etymologicum Britannicum, or derivations of the British and English words from the Russian, Sclavonian, Persian, and Armenian languages printed at the end of Dr. Hickes’s Grammatica Anglo- Saxonica & Moeso-Gotthica,” Oxon. 1689, 4to. 8. He edited Mr. William Guise’s “Misnoe pars prima, ordinis primi Zeraim tituli septem,” Oxon. 1690, 4to. 9. “Chronologiae Samaritanae Synopsis,” in two tables the first containing the most famous epochas, and remarkable events, from the beginning of the world the second a catalogue of the Samaritan High Priests from Aaron, published in the “Acta Eruditqrum Lipsiensia,” April 1691, p. 167, &c. He also was author of the following: 10. “Notse in fragmentum Seguierianum Stephani Byzantini” in the library of monsieur Seguier, chancellor of France part of which, relating to Dodone, were published by Gronovius, at the end' of his “Exercitationes de Dodone,” Leyden, 1681. 11. “Adnotationes in Epistolam S. Barnabce,” published in bishop Fell’s edition of that author, Oxon. 1685, 8vo. 12. “Short notes, in Greek and Latin, upon Cotelerius’s edition of the Apostolical Fathers, printed in the Amsterdam edition of them. 13.” Veterum testimonia de Versione LXXII interpretum," printed at the end of Aristeae Historia LXXII interpretum, published by Pr. Henry Aldrich, Oxon. 1692, 8vo. 14. He translated into Latin, the letters of the Samaritans, which Dr. R. Huntington procured them to write to their brethren, the Jews in England, in 1673|­while he was at Sichem. Dr. Smith having obtained a copy of this translation, gave it to the learned Job LudoL fus, when he was in England, who published it in the collection of Samaritan Epistles, written to himself and other learned men. Besides these works, he also assisted several learned men in their editions of books, and collated manuscripts for them and left behind him in manuscript many books of his own composition, with very large collections which, together with the books enriched in the margin with the notes of the most learned men, and collected by him in France and Holland, were purchased by the curators of the Bodleian library, for the sum of two hundred pounds. They likewise bought a considerable number of curious and valuable books out of his library, which were wanting in the Bodleian, for which they paid one hundred and forty pounds. The rest of his books were sold by auction, all men of letters striving to purchase those which had any observations of Dr. Bernard’s own hand.

, a learned English divine of the seventeenth century, was educated in the university of Cambridge, where he took the degree of M. A. and was incorporated to the same degree at Oxford, July 15, 1628. He was probably created D. D. of the university of Dublin, but this has not been exactly ascertained. He was ordained by primate Usher, in 1626, in St. Peter’s church, Drogheda, while he was only B. A. and made his chaplain, and soon after, by his interest, was promoted to the deanery of Ardagh. His Grace having daily opportunities ojf taking notice of the learning and judgment of Mr. Bernard, employed him in making collections for some works he was then meditating, particularly for the antiquities of the British churches; which did not appear till 1639. The primate always expressed great friendship and esteem for him; and upon taking his leave of him at Drogheda in 1640, gave him “A serious preparative against the heavy sorrows and miseries that he should feel before he saw him again, and spoke of them with that confidence, as if they had been within his view.” This serious discourse proved in the event to be a prophecy, as will be noticed in the life of that prelate. The year following, Dr. Bernard published a book and a sermon which gave offence. These were entitled, 1. “The penitent death of a woful Sinner; or, the penitent death of John Atherton, late bishop of Waterford in Ireland, who was executed at Dublin the fifth of December, 1640; with some annotations on several passages,” London, 1641, 4to 1642, 8vo. 2. “A sermon preached at the burial of John Atherton, the next night after his execution, in St. John’s church, Dublin,” Lond. 1641, 4to 1642, 8vo. Dr. Bernard had the best opportunity in the world of knowing the truth of the fact for which bishop Atherton suffered, having attended him in his exemplary preparation for death, and in his last moments, and he gives us his behaviour and confession fairly and honestly. The cause of offence seems, upon the whole, to have been an opinion that this disgraceful affair had better be buried in oblivion. Archbishop Usher, however, who saw Dr. Bernard’s good intentions, did not withdraw from him his favour or countenance. The same year was published a pamphlet of his writing, upon the siege of Drogheda, of which he was an eye-witness. In the summer of 1642, having lost most of his substance, he returned safe to England to attend on the lord primate, and carried with him Usher’s valuable library, which was afterwards removed to Ireland, and is now in Trinity-college, Dublin. Upon his arrival in England, he was presented, by the earl of Bridgwater, to the rich rectory of Whitchurch in Shropshire, and after the declension of the royal cause, was made chaplain to the Protector, one of his almoners, and preacher to the society of Gray’s inn. Being thus comfortably settled, in 1642 he found leisure, from his pastoral charge, to publish “The whole proceedings of the siege of Drogheda,” London and Dublin, 1642, 4to and Dublin, 1736; and “A Dialogue tetweeu Paul and Agrippa,” London, 1642, 4to. After the restoration of king Charles II. in 1660, having no confidence in the settlement of the state of Ireland, he declined returning and taking possession of his deanery, and contilined at VV hitchurch to his death, which iiappened in winter, 1661. His other works were, 1. “A farewell sermon of comfort and concord, preached at Drogheda,” 1651, 8vo. 2. “The life and death of Dr. James Usher, late archbishop of Armagh, primate and metropolitan of all Ireland, in a sermon preached at his funeral in the abbey of Westminster, on the 17th of April, 1656,” London, 1656, 12mo, afterwards enlarged. 3. “The judgment of the late archbishop of Armagh and primate of Ireland concerning first, the extent of Christ’s death and satisfaction secondly, of the Sabbath, and observation of the Lord’s day,” &c. London, 1657, 8vo. This treatise was answered by Dr. Peter Heylyn, in a book entitled “Respondet Petrus or, the answer of Peter Heylyn, D. D. to so much of Dr. Bernard’s book entitled” The judgment of the late primate of Ireland, &c. as he is made a party by the said lord primate in the point of the Sabbath,“London, 1658, 4to. He also published several letters which passed between him and Dr. Heylyn, and published and enlarged several posthumous works of Dr. Usher as,” His judgment on Babylon being the present see of Rome, Rev. xviii. 4, with a sermon of bishop Bedell’s upon the same words,“London, 1659.” Devotions of the ancient church, in seven pious prayers,“&c. London, 1660, 8vo.” Clavi trabales, or nails fastened by some great masters of assemblies, confirming the king’s supremacy, the subject’s duty, and church government by bishops being a collection of some pieces written on these subjects by archbishop Usher, Mr. Hooker, bishop Andrews, and Dr. Hadrian Saravia; with a preface by the bishop of Lincoln," London, 1661, 4to.

, an ecclesiastic and saint, was born at Massa, in Tuscany, Sept. 8, 1380. Having lost his mother at three years of age, and his father at seven, his relations in 1392 sent for him to Sienna, where he learned g ammar under Onuphrius, and philosophy under John JSpoletanus. In 1396 he entered himself among the confraternity of the disciplinaries in the hospital de la Scala in that city and in 1400, when the plague ravaged all Italy, he attended upon the sick in that hospital with the utmost diligence and humanity. In 1404 he entered into a monastery of the Franciscan order, near Sienna, and, having been ordained priest, became an eminent preacher. He was afterwards sent to Jerusalem, as commissary of the holy land and upon his return to Italy, visited several cities, where he preached with great applause. His enemies accused him to pope Martin V. of having advanced in his sermons erroneous propositions upon which he was oidered to Rome, where he vindicated himself, and was allowed to continue his preaching. The cities of Ferrara, Sienna, and Urbino, desired pope Eugenius IV. to appoint him their bishop but Bernardine refused to accept of ibis honour. He repaired and founded above 300 monasteries in that country. He died at Aquila in AbruzzO, May 20, 1444, and was canonised in 1450, by pope Nicholas.

His works were first published by Peter Rodolphus, bishop of Sinigaglia, 1591, Venice, 4 vols. 4to, and father de Lahaye published a new edition at Paris, 1636, 5 vols, fol. which has been followed by one of the same number of volumes, at Venice, 1745. The edition of 1591 is thus analyzed Volume I. contains his “Quadragesimale de Religione Christiana” including sixty-one Lent sermons. The second contains “Quadragesimale de Evangelio aeterno,” or a course of Lent sermons upon the everListing gospel. The third contains two “Adventualia,” one concerning the life of Christ, according to Mr. Wharton, in his appendix to Dr. Cave’s Historia Literaria, or concerning the Beatitudes, according to Du Pin the other concerning Inspirations. The same volume likewise includes two “Quadragesimalia,” one concerning the Spiritual Combat, and the other entitled the Seraphim, or of Love several sermons upon the four last things, and others entitled Extraordinary, to the number of twenty-five “A treatise upon Confession” the “Mirror of Sinners” a discourse upon the precepts of the rule of the Minorite friars, or a “Tract concerning the Precepts of a Religious” a letter to the monks of his order in Italy, concerning several regulations; “Holy Breathings to God, for every day” a dialogue concerning Obedience, Father de la Haye is not of opinion the two Quadragesimalia in this volume are the genuine productions of our author, because they are written in a different style, and with less elevation and learning than the other works of 5>t. Bernardine. The last volume contains his sermons upon several other Sundays of the year, and the festivals of our Saviour and the Saints, with a “Commentary upon the Apocalypse.” We have not now extant his treatise of the “Conception of the blessed Virgin,” mentioned by'Trithemius and other authors. The sermons of St. Bernardino are not written in a very pure style but they contain a great deal of solid morality, and he does not fall so frequently into false conceits and puerilities, as the other preachers of that age.

, called by some writers Berna or Bernia, was one of the most celebrated Italian poets of the sixteenth century. He was born about the conclusion of the fifteenth, at Lamporecchio, in that part of Tuscany called Val-di-Nievole, of a noble but impoverished family of Florence. In his nineteenth year he went to Koine, to his relation cardinal Bibiena, who according to his own account, did him neither good nor harm. He was then obliged to take the office of secretary to Giberti, bishop of Verona, who was datary to pope Leo X. On this he assumed the ecclesiastical habit, in hopes of sharing some of that prelate’s patronage, but the mean and dull employment of his office of secretary, and for which he was ill paid, was very unsuitable to his disposition. There was at Rome what he liked better, a society or academy of young ecclesiastics as gay as himself, and lovers of wit and poetry like himself, who, no doubt in order to point out their taste for wine, and their thoughtless habits, were called Vignajuoli, vinedressers. To this belonged Mauro, Casa, Firenzuola, Capilupij and many others. In their meetings they laughed at every thing, and made verses and witticisms on the most grave and solemn subjects. The compositions Berni contributed on these occasions, were so superior to the others, that verses composed in the same style began to be called “La poesia Bernesca.”

, was born at St. Denis near Paris, and was educated at the college of the cardinal Lemoine, where he made great proficiency in the learned languages, and became an able theologian, mathematician, philosopher, and historian. In 1550 he was at Agen as preceptor to Hector Fregosa, afterwards bishop of that city, and here he was converted to the Protestant religion along with Scaliger and other learned men. When he arrived at Paris in 1558, he was chosen preceptor to Theodore Agrippa d' Aubigne“but the persecution arising, he was arrested at Constance and condemned to be burnt, a fate from which he was preserved by the kindness of an officer who favoured his escape. He then went to Orleans, Rochelle, and Sancerre, and distinguished himself by his courage during the siege of this latter place by the marshal de Lachatre. In 1574 we find him at Geneva, officiating as minister and professor of philosophy. His death is supposed to have taken place in 1576. He wrote a curious book entitled” Chronicon, sacrse Scripture auctoritate constitutnm,“Geneva, 1575, fol. In this he maintains that all chronological authorities must be sought in the holy scriptures Vossius and Scaliger speak highly of his talents. Draudius, in his” Bibliotheca Classica,“mentions another work in which he was concerned,” G. Mercatoris et Matthei Beroaldi chronologia, ab initio mundi ex eclipsis et observationibus astronomicis demonstrata," Basil, 1577, Cologne, 1568, fol. We have some doubts whether this is not the same as the work mentioned above.

, a pious and learned English divine, was born in London, September 24, 1688. His father, John Berriman, was an apothecary in Bishopsgatestreet; and his grandfather, the reverend Mr. Berriman, was rector of Bedington, in the county of Surrey. His grammatical education he received partly at Banbury, in Oxfordshire, and partly at Merchant-taylors’ school, London. At seventeen years of age he was entered a commoner at Oriel college, in Oxford, where he prosecuted his studies with great assiduity and success, acquiring a critical skill in the Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, Arabic, and Syriac. In the interpretation of the Scriptures, he did not attend to that momentary light which fancy and imagination seemed to flash upon them, but endeavoured to explain them by the rules of grammar, criticism, logic, and the analogy of faith. The articles of doctrine and discipline which he drew from the sacred writings, he traced through the primitive church, and confirmed by the evidence of the fathers, and the decisions of the more generally received councils. On the 2d of June, 1711, Mr. Berriman was admitted to the degree of master of arts. After he left the university, he officiated, for some time, as curate and lecturer of Allhallows in Thames-street, and lecturer of St. Michael’s, Queenhithe. The first occasion of his appearing in print arose from the Trinitarian controversy. He published, in 1719, “A seasonable review of Mr. Whiston’s account of Primitive Doxologies,” which was followed, in the same year, by “A second review.” These pieces recommended him so effectually to the notice of Dr. Robinson, bishop of London, that in 1720, he was appointed his lordship’s domestic chaplain and so well satisfied was that prelate with Mr. Berriman’s integrity, abilities, and application, that he consulted and entrusted him in most of his spiritual and secular concerns. As a further proof of his approbation, the bishop collated him, in April 1722, to the living of St. Andrew-Undershaft. On the 25th of June, in the same year, he accumulated, at Oxford, the degrees of bachelor and doctor in divinity. In 1723, Dr, Berriman lost his patron, the bishop of London, who, in testimony of his regard to his chaplain, bequeathed him the fifth part of his large and valuable library. In consequence of the evidence our learned divine had already given of his zeal and ability in defending the commonlyreceived doctrine of the Trinity, he was appointed to preach lady Moyer’s lecture, in 1723 and 1724. The eight sermons he had delivered on the occasion, were published in 1725, under the title of “An historical account of the Trinitarian Controvery.” This work, in the opinion of Dr. Godolphin, provost of Eton college, merited a much greater reward than lady Moyer’s donation. Accordingly, he soon found an opportunity of conferring such a reward upon Dr. Berriman, by inviting him, without solicitation, to accept of a fellowship in his college. Our author was elected fellow in 1727, and from that time he chiefly resided at Eton in the Summer, and at his parsonage-house in the Winter. His election into the college at Eton was a benefit and ornament to that society. He was a faithful steward in their secular affairs, was strictly observant of their local statutes, and was a benefactor to the college, in his will. While the doctor’s learned productions obtained for him the esteem and friendship of several able and valuable men, and, among the rest, of Dr. Waterland, it is not, at the same time, surprising, that they should excite antagonists. One of these, who then appeared without a name, and who at first treated our author with decency and respect, was Dr. Conyers Middleton but afterwards, when Dr. Middleton published his Introductory Discourse to the Inquiry into the miraculous powers of the Christian church, and the Inquiry itself, he chose to speak of Dr. Berriman with no small degree of severity and contempt. In answer to the attacks made upon him, our divine printed in 1731, “A defence of some passages in the Historical Account.” In 1733, came out his “Brief remarks on Mr. Chandler’s introduction to the history of the Inquisition,” which was followed by “A review of the Remarks. His next publication was his course of sermons at Mr. Boyle’s lecture, preached in 1730, 1731, and 1732, and published in 2 vols r 1733, 8vo. The author, in this work, states the evidence of our religion from the Old Testament; vindicates the Christian interpretation of the ancient prophecies; and points out the historical chain and connection of these prophecies. In the preface, he asserts the authority of Moses, as an inspired historian and law-giver, against his old antagonist Dr. Middleton who, in a letter to Dr. Waterland, had disputed the literal account of the fall, and had expressed himself with his usual scepticism concerning the divine origin of the Mosaic institution, as well as the divine inspiration of its founder. Besides the writings we have mentioned, Dr. Berrimaii printed a number of occasional sermons, and, among the rest, one on the Sunday before his induction to his living of St. Andrew Undershaft, and another on Family Religion. He departed this life at his house in London, on the 5th of February, 1749-50, in the 62d year of his age. His funeral sermon was preached by the rev. Glocester Ridley, LL. B. containing many of the particulars here noticed. Such was Dr. Berriman’s integrity, that no ill usage could provoke him, no friendship seduce him, no ambition tempt him, no interest buy him, to do a wrong, or violate his conscience. When a certain right reverend prelate, unsolicited, and in pure respect to his distinguished merit, offered him a valuable prebend in his cathedral church of Lincoln, the doctor gratefully acknowledged the generosity of the offer, but conscientiously declined it, as he was bound from accepting of it by the statutes of his college. The greatest difficulty of obtaining a dispensation was from himself. In the year of his decease, forty of his sermons were published, in two volumes, 8vo, by his brother, John Berriman, M. A. rector of St. Alban’s, Wood-street, under the title of” Christian doctrines and duties explained and recommended." In 1763, nineteen sermons appeared in one volume, under the same title. With respect to Dr. Berriman’s practical discourses, it is allowed that they are grave, weighty, and useful and well fitted to promote pious and virtuous dispositions, but belong to a class which have never been eminently popular.

, first chaplain to queen Catherine de Medicis, secretary of the cabinet and reader to Henry III. counsellor of state, abbot of Aulnai, and lastly bishop of Seez, was born at Caen in the year 1522, and died the 8th of June 1611, aged fifty-nine. He was the contemporary and friend of Ronsard and Desportes, and was thought superior to either. Some of his stanzas are written with ease and elegance and have not been excelled by the best poets of our own times. He has left poems sacred and profane, canticles, sengs, sonnets, and psalms. They.re interspersed with several happy thoughts, but turned in points, a taste which he caught from Seneca. He seems to have conducted himself with great propriety after his being advanced to the prelacy, and the bishop blushed at the gaiety of the courtier, but he had too much fondness for his early productions to consign them to oblivion, and he published them with his pious pieces, “the bane and antidote.” He left also a translation of some books of St. Ambrose, several controversial tracts, imperfect sermons for the principal festivals of the church, and a funeral discourse on Henry IV. to whose conversion he had greatly contributed. He was uncle to madame de Motteville, first woman of the bedchamber to Anne of Austria, and who published the memoirs of that princess. His “Oeuvres poetiques” were printed at Paris, 1602, 8vo, and with additions in 1605 but the Paris editions of 1620 and 1623, 8vo, are the most complete.

St. Francis de Sales, Caesar de Bus, cardinal Bentivoglio, &c. were among his friends and the admirers of his virtues. An edition of his controversial and spiritual works, published in 1644, 2 vols. folio, was reprinted in 1647, 1 vol. folio, by father Bourgoing, third general of the oratory. His life was written in French, by the abbé Cerisi, Paris, 1646, 4to, and in Latin by Doni d'Attichi, afterwards bishop of Autun, 1649, 8vo, and lastly by Carrac-r cioli, Paris, 1764, 12 mo.

, bishop of Bostra in Arabia, flourished about the year 230. After he had for a long time governed his see with great prudence and fidelity, he fell into several new and uncommon opinions, asserting that Christ before his incarnation had no proper subsistence, nor any divinity, but that of the Father residing in him. The bishops being assembled in order to dissuade him from this error, and having had several conferences with him upon that subject, Origen was desired to engage in the dispute, which he did with such success, that Beryllus immediately retracted his opinion. He wrote several treatises and epistles, particularly to Origen, in which he returned him, thanks for the pains which he had taken in recovering him from his errors. Eusebius tells us, that he left behind him several monuments of an elegant genius by which Henry Valesius in his notes upon that passage supposes that he means the hymns and poems which Beryllus probably wrote. There was extant in St. Jerom’s time, the dialogue between Origen and our bishop, in which the latter was convinced of his erroneous notions and this seems to be the same work which is mentioned by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, where he tells us, that there were extant at that time the acts of Beryllus and the synod assembled upon his account, in which were inserted the questions of Origen urged against him, and the whole series of the conference between them.

, a botanist, who was born in 1561, at Nuremberg, where he carried on the business of an apothecary, and died there in 1629, is entitled to notice chiefly for having published the most beautiful botanical work that had then appeared, the celebrated “Hortus Eystettensis,” Nuremberg, 1613, folio. It contains a description and plates of the greater part of the plants which the bishop of Aichstsedt, John Conrad de Gemmingen, a liberal patron, of the arts, had cultivated in his gardens and orchards on mount St. Willibald, on the top of which is his episcopal seat. This work, executed with uncommon magnificence, at the expence of the bishop, made a new aera in the history both of botany and engraving. It is illustrated by three hundred and sixty- five plates of the atlas folio size, descriptive of one thousand and eighty-six plants, the first, after the “Phytobasanos” of Columna, that were engraved on copper, all botanical engravings being formerly on wood. They are in general well designed, but do not point out the parts of fructification, and are classed only according to the seasons. Basil Besler had the care of this work, and although he was deficient in literature, and was not even acquainted with Latin, yet his zeal and love of the science enabled him to perform his task with considerable skill. Jerome Besler, his brother, a man of more learning, supplied the synonymy of the plants, and part of the descriptions, and Louis Jungermann, professor at Giessen, was the author of the text. A second edition appeared at Nuremberg in 1640, at the expence of Marquard II. bishop of Aichstaedt, in large folio, but is inferior to the first. Basil Besler also collected a museum of many of the curiosities of the three kingdoms of nature, which he had engraven at his own expence, and published under the title of “Fasciculus rariorum et aspectu digniorum, varii generis quae collegit et suis impensis aeri ad vivum incidi curavit Basilius Besler,” Nuremberg, 1616 1622. In honour of Besler, Plumier named a genus of plants Besleria.

, one of the revivers of literature in the fifteenth century, was born, not at Constantinople, as some writers assert, but at Trebisond, in 1389, a date which is ascertained by his epitaph written by himself, but as all the copies of this epitaph do not agree, Bandini, one of his biographers, gives 1395, as the time of his birth. He entered into the order of St. Basil, and passed twentyone years in a monastery of Peloponnesus, employed in the study of divinity and polite literature. The philosopher Gemistus Pletho was one of his masters. In 1438, when the emperor John Paleologus formed the design of going to the council of Ferrara, to re-unite the Greek with the Latin church, he drew Bessarion from his retirement, made him bishop of Nice, and engaged him to accompany him into Italy with Pletho, Marcus Eugenius, archbishop of Ephesus, the patriarch of Constantinople, and several other Greeks eminent for talents or rank. In the sittings of this council, the archbishop of Ephesus distinguished himself by his powers of reasoning, and Bessarion by the charms of his eloquence, but unfortunately from being rivals in talents, they soon became enemies. Eugenius was not favourable to the scheme of uniting the Greek and Latin churches; and Bessarioii, after having been of a contrary opinion, declared for the Latins, which was the side the emperor took. The union was accordingly announced, and in December 1439, pope Eugenius IV. to reward the zeal of Bessarion, created him a cardinal priest. ‘ Being now, in consequence of his new dignity, fixed in, Italy, a step which was at the same time rendered necessary by the commotions in Greece, where he was very unpopular, and the union universally rejected, Bessarion returned to the studious and simple life he had led in his convent in the Peloponnesus. His house became the resort of the learned, and when he appeared abroad, his train was composed of such men as Argyropulus, Philelphus, Valla, Theodore Gaza, George of Trebisonde, and Calderino. He obtained the confidence and friendship of several popes. Nicholas V. appointed him archbishop of S’ponto, and cardinal-bishop; and Pius II. in 1463, conferred upon him the title of Patriarch of Constantinople. On the death of Nicholas V. the college of cardinals would have elected him his successor, but this purpose was defeated by the intrigues of cardinal Alain. Some years after, Bessarion, was likely to have succeeded Paul II. but to accomplish this, it was necessary to secure the vote of the cardinal Orsini by an act of injustice, which he refused. Orsini, however, tendered his vote on the same terms to the cardinal de Rovere, who had none of Bessarion’s scruples, and was elected. Paul Jovius tells a foolish story of Bessarion’s having lost this election, by the blundering reply of his servant; and Gibbon, credulous enough when the object of belief is worth nothing, has repeated it after him, nor knowing that our countryman Hody had amply refuted it.

, a learned abbé of the convent of Benedictines of Gottvvich, in Austria, was born Sept. 5, 1672, at Buchheim in the electorate of Mentz. LothaireFrancis, archbishop of Mentz, of the family of the counts of Schoenborn, employed him in divers embassies at Rome, Vienna, and Wolfenbuttel, and admitted him of his privy council. In 1714 he was chosen abbé of Gottwich, and in 1720, the emperor Charles VI. sent him to Kempten to accommodate some differences which had arisen there. His convent having been destroyed by fire in 17 18, he succeeded in saving the library, and afterwards having rebuilt the convent with great magniticence, he enriched the library with a great many manuscripts and rare books, being an ardent lover of literature and learned men, and himself very learned in history and diplomacy. The “Chronicon Gottwicense, pars prima et secunda,” Tegernsée, 1732, fol. has been, often attributed to him, but there is reason to think that Francis Joseph de Hahn, afterwards bishop of Bamberg, was the real author. Bessel speaks of him in the preface as his coadjutor. It contains a great number of diplomas granted by the emperors from Conrad I. to Frederick II. whose seals and arms are very accurately engrayed, and throws so much light on the public law of Germany, that many writers have not scrupled to equal it to father Mabillon’s work “De re diplomatica,” Bessel also published St. Augustine’s letters to Optatus, “De pœnis parvulorum qui sine baptismate decedunt,” Vienna, 1733. He died Jan. 20, 1749.

, a learned divine in the seventeenth century, and bishop of St. Asaph, was born at Barrow in Leicestershire (where his grandfather, father, and brother, were vicars) in 1636-7. On the 24th of May, 1653, he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, and took his degrees of bachelor of arts in 1656, master of arts in 1660, and of doctor of divinity in 1679. At his coming to the university, he closely applied himself to the study of the learned languages and, by his great diligence and application, soon became so well skilled, particularly in all Oriental learning, that when he was not above eighteen years of age, he wrote a treatise of the excellency and use of the Oriental tongues, especially the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, and Samaritan, with a Syriac Grammar, in three books; which he published when he was about twenty years of age. He also distinguished himself, at the same time, by his early piety and seriousness of mind, and by his exemplary sobriety and integrity of life, all which procured him great esteem and veneration. January 3, 1660-1, he was ordained deacon in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, by Robert, bishop of Lincoln and priest, in the same place, the 31st of that month. About this time, Dr. Sheldon, bishop of London, collated him to the vicarage of Ealing in Middlesex. On the 22d of November, 1672, he was chosen, by the lord-mayor and aldermen of London, rector of St. Peter’s, Cornhill, London, and then he resigned the vicarage of Ealing. He now applied himself, with the utmost labour and zeal, to the discharge of his ministry, and so instructive was he in his discourses from the pulpit, so warm and affectionate in his private exhortations, so regular and uniform in the public worship of the church, and in every part of his pastoral function, and so remarkably were his labours crowned with success, that as he himself was justly styled “the great reviver and restorer of primitive piety,” so his parish was deservedly proposed, as the best model and pattern, for the rest of its neighbours to copy after. His singular merit having recommended him to the favour of his diocesan, bishop Henchman, he was collated by him, on the 22d of December, 1674, to the prebend of Chiswick, in the cathedral of St. Paul’s, London and, by his successor bishop Compton, he was also, on the 3d of November, 1681, collated to the archdeaconry of Colchester. In this dignity he behaved, as he had done before in every station of life, In a most regular, watchful, and exemplary manner and not satisfied with the false, or at least imperfect, reports given in by church-wardens at visitations, he visited everjr parish within his archdeaconry in person. November the 5th, 1684, he was installed prebendary of Canterbury, and became also chaplain to king William and queen Mary. In 1691, he was offered, but refused the see of Bath and Wells, then vacant by the deprivation of Dr. Thomas Kenn, for not taking the oaths to king William and queen Mary. liut though he refused that see, because, probably, being a man of a tender conscience, he would not eat Dr. Kenn’s tread, adtording to the language of those times, he afterwards accepted of that of St. Asaph, vacant by the translation of Dr. George Hooper to Bath and Wells, and was consecrated July 16, 1704. Being placed in this eminent station, his care and diligence increased in proportion as his power in the church was enlarged and now when his authority was extended to larger districts, he still pursued the same pious and laborious methods of advancing the honour and interest of religion, by watching over both clergy and laity, and giving them all necessary direction and assistance, for the effectual performance of their respective duties. Accoruingly, he was no sooner advanced to the episcopal chair, but in a pathetic letter to the clergy of his diocese, he recommended to them the “duty of catechising and instructing the people committed to their charge, in the principles of the Christian religion to the end they might know what they were to believe and do in order to salvation” and told them, “he thought it necessary to begin with that, without which, whatever else he or they should do, would turn to little or no account, as to the main end of the ministry.” And to enable them to do this the more effectually, he sent them a plain and easy “Exposition upon the Church Catechism.” This good man did not enjoy his episcopal dignity above three years seven months and twenty days for he died at his lodgings in the cloisters in Westminster- abbey, March 5, 1707-8, in the seventy-first year of his age, and was buried in St. Paul’s cathedral. He left the greatest part of liis estate to the societies for propagating the gospel, and promoting Christian knowledge. To the curacy of MountSorrel in particular, and vicarage of Barrow in the county of Leicester, in a thankful remembrance of God’s mercies vouchsafed to him thereabouts, he bequeathed twenty pounds a year for ever, on condition that prayers be read morning and evening every day, according to the Liturgy of the church of England, in the chapel, and parish church aforesaid; with the sum of forty shillings yearly, to be divided equally upon Christmas-eve, among- eight poor housekeepers of Barrow, as the minister and churchwardens should agree, regard being had especially to those who had been most constantly at prayers, and at the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, the foregoing year. And if it should so happen, that the Common- Prayer could not be read in the church or chapel aforesaid, his will then was, that what should have been given in either place for that, be in each place allowed to one chosen by the vk-ar of Barrow to teach school, and instruct the youth in the principles of the Christian religion, according to the doctrine of the church of England. His works were many, and full of great variety of learning. Those published by himself were a? follows: 1. “De Linguarum Orientalium, praesertim HeIpraicce, Chaldaica?, Syriacae, Arabicae, et Samaritans, praestantia et usu,” &c. mentioned above. Loud. 1658, 8vo. 2- “Institutionum Chronologicarum libri duo, una cum totidem Arithmetices Chronoiogicae libellis,” Loud. 1669, 4to. 3. “Swvo'&Kov, sive Pandectse Canonum Ss. Apostolorum, et Conciliorum ab Ecclesia Graeca receptoium necnon Canonicarum Ss. Patrum Epistolarum una cum Scholiis antiquorum singulis eorurn annexis, et scriptis aliis hue spectantibus quorum plurima e Bibliothecae Bodleianae aliarumque Mss. Codicibus nunc primum edita reliqua cum iisdem Mss. summa fide et diligentia collata,” Oxonii, 1672, 2 vols. fol. 4. “Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Primitivae vindicatus et illustratus,” Lond. 1679, 4to. 5. “The Church Catechism explained, for the use of the diocese of St. Asaph,” Lond. J 704, 4to, reprinted several times since. Next follow bishop Beveridge’s works, published after his decease by his executor Mr. Timothy Gregory 1. “Private Thoughts upon Religion, digested into twelve articles, with practical resolutions formed thereupon.” Written in his younger years (when he was about twenty-three years old), for the settling of his principles and conduct of life, Lond. 1709. 2. “Private Thoughts upon a Christian Life or, necessary directions for its beginning and progress upon earth, in order to its final perfection in the Beatific Vision,” part II. Lond. 1709. 3. “The great necessity and advantage of Public Prayer and frequent Communion. Designed to revive primitive piety with, meditations, ejaculations, and prayers, before, at, and after the sacrament,” Lond. 1710, These have been reprinted several times in 8vo and 12mo. 4. “One hundred and fifty Sermons and Discourses on several subjects,” Lond. 170S, &c. in 12 vols. 8vo, reprinted at London, 17iy, in 2 vols. fol. 5. “Thesaurus Theologians or, a complete system of Divinity, summed up in brief notes upon select places of the Old and New Testament; wherein the sacred text is reduced under proper heads; explained and illustrated with the opinions and authorities of the ancient fathers, councils, &c.” Lond. 1711, 4 vols. 8vo. 6. “A defence of the book of Psalms, collected into English metre by Thomas Sternhold, John Hopkins, and others with critical Observations on the New Version, compared with the Old,” Lond. 1710, 8vo. In this book he gives the old version the preference to the new. 7. “Exposition of the XXXIX Articles,” Lond. 1710, 1716, fol. Bishop Beveridge’s character is in general represented in a most advantageous light. He was a person of the strictest integrity, of true and sincere piety, of exemplary charity, and of great zeal for religion, and so highly esteemed, that when he was dying, one of the chief of his order deservedly said of him, “There goes one of the greatest and of the best men that ever England bred.” He is also celebrated as a man of extensive and almost universal learning; furnished, to a very eminent degree, with all useful knowledge; and much to be admired for his readiness in the scriptures, which he had thoroughly studied, so that he was able to produce suitable passages from them on all occasions, and happy in explaining them to others. Mr. Nelson says, that he cannot forbear acknowledging the favourable dispensation of Providence to the present age, in blessing it with so many of those pious discourses, which our truly primitive prelate delivered from the pulpit; and that he the rather takes the liberty to call it a favourable dispensation of Providence, because the bishop gave no orders himself that they should be printed, but humbly neglected them, as not being composed for the press. But that this circumstance is so far from abating the worth of the sermons, or diminishing the character of the author, that it raises the excellency of both, because it shews at once the true nature of a popular discourse which is to improve the generality of hearers, and for that purpose to speak to them in a plain and intelligible style. Dr. Henry Felton says, that our learned and venerable bishop delivered himself with those ornaments alone, which his subject suggested to him, and wrote in that plainness and solemnity of style, that gravity and simplicity, which gave authority to the sacred truths he taught, and unanswerable evidence to the doctrines he defended. That there is something so great, primitive, and apostolical, in his writings, that it creates an awe and veneration in our mind that the importance of his subjects is above the decoration of words and what is great and majestic in itself looketh most like itself, the less it is adorned. The author of one of the Guardians, having made an extract out of one of the bishop’s sermons, tells us, that it may for acuteness of judgment, ornament of speech, and true sublime, compare with any of the choicest writings of the ancients, who lived nearest to the apostles’ times. But the author of a pamphlet published in 1711, entitled “A short view of Dr. Bevericlge’s Writings,” passes a very different judgment upon bishop Beveridge’s works, in order to stop, as he says, the mischief they are doing, and that which the publication of his Articles may do. With regard to the bishop’s language, he observes, that he delights in jingle and quibbling; affects a tune and rhyme in all he says, and rests arguments upon nothing but words and sounds, &c. &c. But perhaps this animadverter will “by some be ranked among the persons, of whom Dr. Lupton gives the following character” Those who are censorious enough to reflect with severity upon the pious strains, which are to be found in bishop Beveridge, &c. may possibly be good judges of an ode or essay, but do not seem to criticise justly upon sermons, or express a just value for spiritual things.“After all, whatever faults may be found in bishop Beveridge’s posthumous works, must be charged to the injudiciousness of his executor. He must himself have been an extraordinary man who, with all the faults pointed out by the author of” The short view," could have conciliated the good opinion and favour of men of all principles, and the most eminent patrons of the church and the estimation in which his works continue to be held to this day, prove how little he was injured by the captious quibblings of a writer who was determined to find fault with' that, into the spirit of which he could not enter. The life of bishop Beveridge, prefixed to the folio edition of his works, was written by Mr. Kimber, a dissenting minister of the Baptist persuasion, in London.

, in Latin Beverlacius, archbishop of York in the eighth century, was born of a noble family among the English Saxons, at Harpham, a small town in Northumberland. He was first a monk, and afterwards abbot of the monastery of St. Hilda. He was instructed in the learned languages by Theodore, archbishop of Canterbury, and was justly esteemed one of the best scholars of his time. Alfred of Beverly, who wrote his life, pretends that he studied at Oxford, and took there the degree of master of arts; but bishop Godwin assures us this cannot be true, because such distinction of degrees was not then known at Oxford, nor any where else. Our abbot’s merit recommended him to the favour of Alfred, king of Northumberland, who, in the year 685, advanced him to the see of Hagustald, or Hexham, and, upon the death of archbishop Bosa in 687, translated him to that of York. This prelate was tutor to the famous Bede, and lived in the strictest friendship with Acca, and other AngloSaxon doctors, several of whom he put upon writing comments on the scriptures. He likewise founded, in 704, a college at Beverly for secular priests. After he had governed the see of York thirty-four years, being tired with the tumults and confusions of the church, he divested himself of the episcopal character, and retired to Beverly; and four years after died May 7, 721. The day of his death was appointed a festival by a synod held at London in 1416. Bede, and other monkish writers, ascribe several miracles to him. Between three and four hundred years after his death, his body was taken up by Alfric, archbishop of York, and placed in a shrine richly adorned with silver, gold, and precious stones. Bromton relates, that William the conqueror, when he ravaged Northumberland with a numerous army, spared Beverly alone, out of a religious veneration for St. John of that place. This prelate wrote some pieces, 1. “Pro Luca exponendo;” an essay towards an exposition of St. Luke, addressed to Bede. 2. “Homiliee in Evangelia.” 3. Epistolae ad Hildara Abbatissam.“4.” Epistolse ad Herebaldum, Andenum, et Bertinum.“- -Pits mentions another John of Beverly, so called from the place of his nativity, who was a Carmelite monk in the fourteenth century, and a very learned man, and doctor and professor of divinity at Oxford. He flourished about 1390, in the reign of Richard II. and wrote, 1.” Questiones in magistrum sententiarum“in four books. 2.” Disputationes ordinariae" in one book.

, a musician eminently skilled in the knowledge of practical composition, flourished towards the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign. He was of Welch extraction, and had been educated under Tallis, upon whose recommendation it was that in 1589 he was sworn in gentleman extraordinary of the chapel; from whence he was expelled in 1637, it being discovered that he adhered to the Romish communion. He was also organist of Bristol cathedral, but forfeited that employment at the same time with his place in the chapel. Child, afterwards doctor, was his scholar. He has composed sundry services, and a few anthems. Before Bevin’s time the precepts for the composition of canons was known to few. Tallis, Bird, Waterhouse, and Farmer, were eminently skilled in this most abstruse part of musical practice. Every canon, as given to the public, was a kind of enigma. Compositions of this kind were sometimes exhibited in the form of a cross, sometimes in that of a circle there is now extant one resembling a horizontal sun-dial, and the resolution, (as it was called) of a canon, which was the resolving it into its elements, and reducing it into score, was deemed a work of almost as great difficulty as the original compoition. But Bevin, with a view to the improvement of students, generously communicated the result of many years study and experience in a treatise which is highly commended by all who have taken occasion to speak of it. This book was published in 1631, 4to, and dedicated to Goodman bishop of Gloucester, with the following title: “A briefe and short instruction of the Art of Musicke, to teach how to make discant of all proportions that are in use; very necessary for all such as are desirous to attain to knowledge in the art; and may, by practice, if they sing, soone be able to compose three, four, and five parts, and also to compose all sorts of canons that are usuall, by these directions of two or three parts in one upon the plain song.” The rules contained in this book for composition in general are very brief; but for the composition of canons there are in it a great variety of examples of almost all the possible forms in which it is capable of being constructed, even to the extent of sixty parts.

, a divine and historian in the seventh century, was a Briton by birth, who taught the celebrated Nennius, afterwards abbot of the monastery of Bangor; and applied himself from his earliest youth to the study of learning, which he joined to the greatest purity of morals. Bale tells us. that he was master of a very extensive knowledge of things, and a great fluency of style, and was actuated by a warm zeal for the propagation of truth. He had a son, the subject of the following article; which is a proof, as the historian above-mentioned observes, that the priests in Britain were not at that time prohibited to marry; though Pits is of opinion that our author was not ordained when his son was born. He was extremely industrious in examining into the antiquities of nations, and tracing out the families of the English Saxons after they had entered Britain and from these collections he is said to have written a work “De Geneaiogiis Gentium.” He flourished in the year 600. Bishop Nicolson. in his “English Historical Library” calls him Benlanius, and confounds him with his son.

, a learned divine and historian of the seventh century, was son of the preceding, and born in Northumberland, but educated almost from his infancy in the isle of Wight. He was a man of a very humane and mild disposition, a good historian, and well skilled in geometry. He gave an accurate description of the isle of Wight from his own observations, as well as from the accounts of Ptolemy and Pliny. Upon his return to his own country he studied under Elbode, a bishop eminent for his uncommon sanctity and learning, by whose instructions he made great progress both in profane and sacred literature. At last he applied himself to the study of the history of his nation, which he examined with the utmost accuracy, and wrote in Latin “Annotations upon Nennius,” an “History of the actions of king Arthur in Scotland,” and an “Historical Itinerary.” Leland is of opinion that he was a monk, since all the learning which. was then extant, was among those of that profession. He flourished in the year 640, according to Bale; or 650, according to Pits. He had a very intimate friendship with the famous Nennius, abbot of Bangor.

, an Italian scholar of the last century, was born at Prato in Tuscany, Nov. 18, 1685. He had but just finished his education at Florence, when he was admitted a member of the academy of the Apatisti, and two years after, of that of Florence, nor was he more than twenty when he became known to and associated with the principal literati of that city. He went afterwards to Pisa, and studied philosophy and mathematics under Alexander Marchetti, the translator of Lucretius, and there he received the degree of doctor of laws, and the order of priesthood. There also the bishop of Prato appointed him to give public lectures on the works of the fathers, in the course of which he became particularly attached to those of St. Bernard and the bishop of Pistoia gave him the living of St. Peter at Ajolo, where he made himself very popular. Such also was his literary fame, that besides the academies we have mentioned, he was admitted a member of the Inlecundi of Prato, the Innominati of Bra in Piedmont, of the Rinvigoriti of Foligno, the Arcadians of Rome, the Columbarian society, and the della Crusca. His life was exemplary, his character loyal and ingenuous, although somewhat reserved. He loved retirement, yet was of a placid humour, and enjoyed effusions of wit but in his latter years he fell into a state of melancholy, aggravated by bodily disorder, which terminated in his death Feb. 17, 1749. His two most considerable works, were, 1. “De‘ gran duchi di Toscana della real casa de’ Medici,” Venice, 1741, fol. an account of the ancient sovereigns of Florence, as patrons of literature and the arts, but containing little new matter. 2. “Della satira Italiana, trattato,” Massa, 1714, 4to. Florence, 1729, 4to a critical work highly esteemed in Italy. To the second edition the author has annexed an Kalian dissertation, on the hypocrisy of men of letters, in which he exposes what would be called in this country the arts of puffing, which his biographer remarks, have made very gieat progress since his time. 3. “La Cantica de Cantici di Salomone tradotta in versi Toscani con annotazioni,” Venice, 1735. Various other small pieces of criticism, bibliography, &c. from his pen are inserted in the academical collections, particularly “Prose Fiorentine,” Venice, 1754, 4to.

, a celebrated Italian philosopher and physician, was born at Bologna, Sept. 30, 1717. After having studied physic with great diligence and success, he was in his nineteenth year appointed medical assistant in one of the hospitals, and after four years, was, in 1742, admitted to the degree of doctor. In 1743 and 1744 he published a valuable translation into Italian of Winslow’s Anatomy, 6 vols. 8vo. In the last mentioned year, his reputation induced the landgrave of Hesse-Darmstadt, prince and bishop of Augsburgh, to give him an invitation to reside with him, which Bianconi accepted, and remained there for six years. During this time he published “Due lettere di Fisica,” &c. Venice, 1746, 4to, addressed to the celebrated marquis MafFei, and wrote in French an “Essay on Electricity,” addressed to another learned friend, count Algarotti. He also began, in French, “Journal des nouveautes litteraires d' Italic,” printed at Leipsie, but with Amsterdam on the title, 1748, 1749, 8vo, which he continued to the end of a third volume. In 1730, he went to the court of Dresden, with a strong recommendation from pope Benedict XIV. to Augustus III. king of Poland, who received him into his confidence, and appointed him his aulic counsellor, and in 1760 sent him to France on a political affair of considerable delicacy, which he transacted with skill and satisfaction to his employer. In 1764, his majesty appointed him his resident minister at the court of Rome, where he felt his literary taste revive with its usual keenness, and was a contributor to various literary Journals. That of the “Effemeridi letterarie di Roma” owed its rise principally to him, and for sometime, its fame to his contributions. It was in this he wrote his eloges on Lupacchini, Piranesi, and Mengs, which last was published separately, with additions, in 1780. In his twelve Italian letters on the history of Cornelius Celsus, printed at Rome in 1779, he restores that celebrated physician to the age of Augustus, contrary to the common opinion, and to that of Tirasboschi (to whom they were addressed), who places him in what is called the silver age. He was projecting a magnificent edition of Celsus, a life of Petrarch, and some other literary undertakings, when he died suddenly at Perugia, Jan. 1, 1781, universally regretted. He left ready for the press, a work in Italian and French, on the circus of Caracalla, which was magnificently printed at Rome in 1790, with nineteen beautiful engravings.

, an eminent patron of literature, was born at Rouen in 1626, of an ancient family, and having no inclination to rise in the offices of magistracy, as many of his ancestors had done, nor to enter into the church, he determined to devote his time and fortune to the study and advancement of polite literature. His father, dean of the court of aids in Normandy, left him a library of six thousand volumes, including upwards of five hundred manuscripts, to which he made so many additions, that at his death it was valued at forty thousand franks and that it might not be scattered, he entailed it on his family, with handsome funds for the support and enlargement of it. It was, however, sold in July 1706, and the catalogue, which was printed, is in considerable request among bibliographers. During his life-time this library was the resort of a number of men of letters, who held frequent meetings here, in which Bigot presided. His travels in Holland, England, Germany, and Italy, procured him the acquaintance and correspondence of most of the literati of Europe, who frequently consulted him, and paid great regard to his opinions. His sole passion was to contribute by his wealth and studies to the perfection and illustration of the best Greek and Latin authors, and he employed these advantages with the utmost liberality and modesty. Having discovered in the library at Florence, the Greek text of the “Life of St. Chrysostom by Palladius, he published it at Paris in 1680, 4to, with some other ancient Greek remains, hitherto in manuscript, the whole accompanied with a Latin translation by Ambrose of Camaldoli. To this he added St. Chrysostom’s epistle to Cesarius, but it being discovered that this was an attack on the doctrine of transubstantiation, the licensers refused its being published, and caused the leaves on which it was printed to be cut out. A copy of these leaves, however, having fallen into the hands of Mr. (afterwards archbishop) Wake, was published by him in his” Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England against the exceptions of M. de Meaux, &c.“Lond. 1686, 4to. In this Wake has given a curious account not only of the suppression of this letter, but of the controversy to which it gave rise in archbishop Cranmer’s time. Du Pin says, that after Bigot’s death, some of his literary correspondence was published but this appears a mistake, if we except a letter of his written, in 1672, to the bishop of Trulle against the abbé de St. Cyran’s book” Le Cas Royal," and printed at Basil in 1690. Menage and Heinsius were among his most intimate friends, and such was his general knowledge and communicative disposition, that he was consulted by every one fond of literary history and anecdote. He died Oct. 18, 1689.

, a Swedish astronomer, was born about the middle of the seventeenth century. He became professor of mathematics at Upsal in 1679, but his zeal for the Cartesian system made him be considered as a dangerous innovator, and he might have been a serious sufferer from the prejudices raised against him, if he had not met with a kind protector in Charles XL This prince having travelled to Torneo, was so struck with the phenomena of the sun at the spring solstice, that he sent Biilberg and Spola to make observations on it, in the frontiers of Lapland, and their observations were confirmed by those of the French mathematicians sent thither by Louis XV. Under king Charles’s protection, Biilberg received considerable promotion, and having studied divinity, was at last made bishop of Strengnes. 'He died in 1717, leaving, 1. “Tractatus de Cometis,” Stockholm, 1682. 2. “Elementa Geometrices,” Upsal, 1687. 3. “Tractatus de refractione solis inoccidui,” Stockholm, 1696. 4. “Tractatus de reformatione Calendarii Juliani et Gregoriani,” Stockholm, 1699, and many other philosophical and theological dissertations.

, a learned writer, and bishop, in the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth century, was born in the city of Winchester, being the son of Harman Bilson, the same probably who was fellow of Merton-college in 1536, and derived his descent by his grandmother, or great-grandmother, from the duke of t>avaria. He was educated in Winchester school and in 1565 admitted perpetual fellow of New-college, after he had served two years of probation. October 10, 1566, he took his degree of bachelor, and April 25, 1570, that of master of arts; that of bachelor of divinity, June 24, 1579; and the degree of doctor of divinity on the 24th of January 1580. In his younger years, he was a great lover of, and extremely studious in, poetry, philosophy, and physic. But when he entered into holy orders, and applied himself to the study of divinity, which his genius chiefly led him to, he became a most solid and constant preacher, and one of the most accomplished scholars of his time. The first preferment he had was that of master of Winchester-school he was then made prebendary of Winchester, and afterwards warden of the college there. To this college he did a very important service, about the year 1584, by preserving the revenues of it when they were in danger of being swallowed up by a notorious forgery, of which, however, we have only an obscure account. In 1585, he published his book of “The true difference betweene Christian Subjection and unchristian Rebellion,” and dedicated it to queen Elizabeth a work, which, although it might answer her immediate purpose, was of fatal tendency to Charles I. few books being more frequently quoted by the mal-contents to justify their resistance to that prince. In 1593, he published a very able defence of episcopacy, entitled, “The perpetuall Government of Christes Church: wherein are handled, the fatherly superioritie which God first established in the patriarkes for the guiding of his Church, and after continued in the tribe of Levi and the Prophetes and lastlie confirmed in the New Testament to the apostles and their successors: as also the points in question at this day, touching the Jewish Synedrion: the true kingdome of Christ: the Apostles’ commission: the laie presbyterie: the distinction of bishops from presbyters, and their succession from the apostles times and hands: the calling and moderating of provinciall synods by primates and metropolitanes the allotting of dioceses, and the popular electing of such as must feede and watch the flock and divers other points concerning the pastoral regiment of the house of God.” On the 20th of April, 15y6, he was elected v confirmed June the llth, and the 13th of the same month consecrated bishop of Worcester and translated in May following to the bishopric of Winchester, and made a privy-counsellor. In 1599, he published “The effect of certaine Sermons touching the full Redemption of Mankind by the death and bloud of Christ Jesus wherein, besides the merite of Christ’s suffering, the manner of his offering, the power of his death, the comfort of his crosse, the glorie of his resurrection, are handled, what paines Christ suffered in his soule on the crosse together with the place and purpose of his descent to hel after death” &c. Lond. 4to. These sermons being preached at Paul’s Cross in Lent 1597, by the encouragement of archbishop Whitgift, greatly alarmed most of the Puritans, because they contradicted some of their tenets, but they are not now thought consonant to the articles of the church of England. The Puritans, however, uniting their forces, and making their observations, sent them to Henry Jacob, a learned puritan, who published them under his own name. The queen being at Farnham-castle, and, to use the bishop’s words, “taking knowledge of the things questioned between him and his opponents, directly commanded him neither to desert the doctrine, nor to let the calling which he bore in the church of God, to be trampled under foot by such unquiet refusers of trueth and authoritie.” Upon this royal command, he wrote a learned treatise, chiefly delivered in sermons, which was published in 1604, under the title of “The survey^of Christ’s sufferings for Man’s Redemption and of his descent to hades or hel for our deliverance,” Lond. fol. He also preached the sermon at Westminster before king James I. and his queen, at their coronation on St. James’s day, July 28, 1603, from Rom. xiii. L. London, 1603, 8vo. In January 1603-4, he was one of the speakers and managers at the Hampton-Court conference, in which he spoke much, and, according to Mr. Fuller, most learnedly, and, in general, was one of the chief maintainers and supports of the church of England. The care of revising, and putting the last hand to, the new translation of the English Bible in king James Ist’s reign, was committed to our author, and to Dr. Miles Smith, afterwards bishop of Gloucester. His last public act, recorded in history, was the being one of the delegates that pronounced and signed the sentence of divorce between Robert Devereux, earl of Essex, and the lady Frances Howard, in the year 1613 and his son being knighted soon after upon this very account, as was imagined, the world was so malicious as to give him the title of sir Nullity Bilson. This learned bishop, after having gone through many employments, departed this life on the 18th of June, 1616, and was buried in Westminsterabbey, near the entrance into St. Edmund’s chapel, on the south side of the monument of king Richard II. His character is represented to the utmost advantage by several persons. Sir Anthony Weldon calls him “an excellent civilian, and a very great scholler” Fuller, “a deep and profound scholar, excellently well read in the fathers” Bishop Godwin, “a very grave iman and how great a divine (adds he), if any one knows not, let him consult his learned writings” Sir John Harrington, “I find but foure lines (in bishop Godwin’s book) concerning him and if I should give him his due, in proportion to the rest, I should spend foure leaves. Not that I need make him better known, being one of the most eminent of his ranck, and a man that carried prelature in his very aspect. His rising was meerly by his learning, as true prelates should rise. Sint non modo labe mali sed suspicione carentes, not onely free from the spot, but from the speech of corruption.” He wrote in a more elegant style, and in fuller and betterturned periods, than was usual in the times wherein he lived. It is related of our prelate, that once, when he was preaching a sermon* at St. Paul’s Cross, a sudden panic, occasioned by the folly or caprice of one of the audience, seized the multitude there assembled, who thought that the church was falling on their heads. The good bishop, who sympathized with the people more from pity than from fear, after a sufficient pause, reassumed and went through his sermon with great composure.

About six or seven years after our author had taken up his residence at Worthy, he married Dorothea, one of the daughters of the rev. Richard Pococke, at that time rector of Colmer in Hampshire. By this lady, before he had any other preferment than the small living above-mentioned, he became the father of ten children yet neither did he suffer the rapid increase of his family, nor the consequent narrowness of his finances, to depress his spirits, or impede the progress of his studies. On the contrary, he appears to have applied to his literary pursuits with a closer and more persevering industry; and by those means, in the course of what cannot be considered as a long life, he was enabled to complete in this country retirement, besides several other single volumes, a most learned and laborious work, closely printed in ten volumes in octavo, under the title of “Origines Ecclesiastics, or the Antiquities of the Christian Church,” the first volume of which he published in 1708. He committed the last volume to the press in 1722. Of the various difficulties with which our author had to contend in the prosecution of his labours, he frequently speaks in such pointed terms as cannot but excite both our sympathy and regret. He tells us that he had to struggle with an infirm and sickly constitution, and constantly laboured under the greatest disadvantages, for want of many necessary books, which he had no opportunity to see, and no ability to purchase. At the same time he does not omit to express his gratitude to Providence, which had so placed him, that he could have recourse to a very excellent library, that of the cathedral church of Winchester, left by bishop Morley though even that vyas deficient in many works to which he had occasion to refer; and yet when we turn to ^he Index auct^ruai at the end of his work, we shull perhaps be astonished at the vast number of books which he appears to have consulted. But to such straits was he driven for want of books, that he frequently procured imperfect copies at a cheap rate, and then employed a part of that time, of which so small a portion was allotted him, and which therefore could so ill be spared, in the tedious task of transcribing the deficient pages instances of which are slill in being, and serve as memorials of his indefatigable industry on all occasions.

In 1712, sir Jonathan Trelawny, at that time bishop of Winchester, was pleased to collate our learned divine to the rectory of Havant, near Portsmouth, as a reward for his diligence which preferment, together with the sums he was daily receiving from the sale of his works, seemed i n some measure to have removed the narrowness of his circumstances, and to promise a comfortable maintenance for his numerous family; but this pleasing prospect shortly disappeared he lost almost or quite the whole of his hardly earned gains in 1720, by the bursting of the wellknown South Sea bubble. Yet such was the tranquillity of his disposition, that he continued his studies without intermission almost to the very end of his life for though but a few months elapsed between the publication of the last volume of Origines and his death, yet that short time was employed in preparing materials for other laborious works, and in making preparations for a new edition of Origiaes. With this view he inserted many manuscript observations, in a set of the Antiquities which he preserved for his own use, and which are now in the possession of the furnisher of this article. But from this and all other employments he was prevented by death. His constitution, which was by nature extremely weak and delicate, could not be otherwise than much impaired by so unremitted a course of laborious studies, in a life wholly sedentary and recluse, which brought on at an early period all the symptoms and infirmities of a very advanced age. The approach of his dissolution being clearly visible both to himself and friends, it was settled between the then bishop of Winchester, Dr. Trimnell, and himself, that he should resign Havant to enable his lordship to appoint some friend of the family to hold it, till his eldest son, then about years of age, could be collated to it. As this however was not carried into execution, it is probable that his death came on more hastily than had been expected, and prevented Dr. Trimnell from giving him what he fully intended, the first vacant prebend in Winchester.

At the time of his decease only six of his ten children, two sons and four daughters, were living these, with their widowed mother, were left in very contracted circumstances. Mrs. Bingham was therefore induced to sell the copy-right of her late husband’s writings to the booksellers, who immediately republished the whole of his works in two volumes in folio, without making any alterations whatsoever and though the eldest son undertook the office of correcting the press, he did not insert any of the manuscript additions which his father had prepared as he was then so very young, that he probably had not had an opportunity of examining his father’s books and papers sufficiently to discover that any such preparations for a new edition had been made. Of the four daughters, one married a gentleman of Hampshire the other three died single. The second son will be mentioned in the succeeding article. The widow died in a very advanced age, in bishop Warner’s college for clergymen’s widows, at Bromley, in Kent, in 1755.

Of such importance have the works of this eminent writer been esteemed in foreign countries, that they have all been correctly translated into Latin by Grichow, a divine of Halle in Germany, 11 vols. 4to, 1724 38, and were reprinted in 1751—61. But he did not live to receive this flattering mark of approbation, for he died in 1723. Here it may not be amiss to observe how frequently it occurs that the merits of an eminent ancestor derive honour and emolument on their posterity. It is presumed that the character of the person whose life we have been writing, was the means of procuring the living of Havant for his eldest son, and the late learned and excellent bishop of London, Dr. Lowth, expressly assigns that reason for bestowing a comfortable living on his grandson. “I venerate (says he in a letter which conveyed the presentation) the memory of your excellent grandfather, my father’s particular and most intimate friend. He was not rewarded as he ought to have been I therefore give you this living as a small recompense for his great and inestimable merits.” We shall conclude this article by giving the general character of this divine As a writer his learning was extensive and acute his style zealous and persuasive, and his application uncommonly persevering. His temper, on all common and indifferent occasions, was mild and benevolent and to these he united great zeal in the cause in which he was engaged. Though his passions were so wholly subject to the guidance of religion and virtue, that no worldly losses were sufficient to discompose him, yet whenever he believed the important interests of the church to be in danger, he was always eager to step forth in its defence.

How much Mr. Birch was affected by this calamity appears from some verses written by him, August 3d, 1729, on his wife’s coffin, and inserted in Mrs. Rowe’s Miscellaneous Works. That Mrs. Birch was a woman of very amiable accomplishments, is not only evident from the verses now mentioned, but from two Latin epitaphs drawn up for her one by her husband, and the other by Dr. Dale, which last was translated into English by Mr. James Ralph. In both these epitaphs, she is celebrated as having- possessed an uncommon share of knowledge and taste, and many virtues. After this melancholy event, he was ordained deacon by the bishop of Salisbury, Dr. Hoadly, Jan. 17, 1730, and priest by the same prelate, Dec. 21, 1731, and at the same time was presented to the rectory of Siddington St. Mary, and the vicarage of Siddington St. Peter, in Gloucestershire. He had been recommended, by a common friend, to the friendship and favour of the late lord high chancellor Hardwicke, then attorney-general; to whom, and to the late earl of Hardwicke, he was indebted for all his preferments. The chancellor gave him the living of Ulting in the county of Essex, to which he was instituted by Dr. Gibson, bishop of London, on the 20th of May, and he took possession of it on the day following. In 1734, he was appointed one of the domestic chaplains to William earl of Kilmarnock, the unfortunate nobleman who was afterwards beheaded, on the 18th of August, 1746, for having been engaged in the rebellion of 1745. The earl of Kilmarnock was, we believe, in more early life, understood to be a whig; and under no other character could Mr. Birch have been introduced to his lordship’s notice. On the 20th of February, 1734-5, Mr. Birch had the honour of being chosen a member of the royal society, sir Hans Sloane taking a leading part in the election. The same honour was done him on the llth of December 1735, by the society of antiquaries of which he afterwards became director. A few weeks before he was chosen into the latter, the Marischal college of Aberdeen had conferred on him, by diploma, the degree of master of arts. In the Spring of 1743, by the favour of his noble patron before mentioned, he received a more substantial benefit; being presented by the crown to the rectory of Landewy Welfrey in the county of Pembroke. To this benefice, which was a sinecure, he was instituted on the 7th of May, by Dr. Edward Willes, bishop of St. David’s. On the 24th of February, 1743-4, he was presented to the rectories of St. Michael, Wood-street, and St. Mary, Staining, united. His next preferment was likewise in the city of London; being to the united rectories of St. Margaret Pattens, and St. Gabriel, Fenchurch-street, to which he was presented in the beginning of February, 1745-6. In January, 1752, he was elected one of the secretaries of the royal society, in the room of Dr. Cromwell Mortimer, deceased. In January 1753, the Marischal college of Aberdeen created him doctor of divinity and in that year, the same honour was conferred on him by that excellent prelate, Dr. Thomas Herring, archbishop of Canterbury. Our author was also a trustee of the British Museum. The last preferment given to Dr. Birch, was the rectory of Depden in Essex; for which he was indebted to the late earl of Hardwicke. Depden itself, indeed, was in the patronage of Mr. Chiswell, and in the possession of the rev. Dr. Cock. But the benefice in lord Hardwicke’s gift, being at too great a distance from town, to be legally held by Dr. Birch, he obtained an exchange with Dr. Cock. Dr. Birch was instituted to Depden by the late eminent bishop Sherlock, on the 25th of February 1761; and he continued possessed of this preferment, together with the united rectories of St. Margaret Pattens, and St. Gabriel, Fenchurch-street, till his decease. In 1765, he resigned his office of secretary to the royal society, and was succeeded by Dr. Maty. Dr. Birch’s health declining about this time, he was ordered to ride for the recovery of it but being a bad horseman, and going out, contrary to advice, on a frosty day, he was unfortunately thrown from his horse, on the road betwixt London and Hampstead, and killed on the spot. Dr. William Watson, of Lincoln’s Inn Fields, as soon as he heard of the accident of the fall, hastened to the relief of his friend, but in vain. It is not known whether Dr. Birch’s fall might not have been occasioned by an apoplexy. This melancholy event happened on the 9th of January 1766, in the 61st year of his age, to the great regret of the doctor’s numerous literary friends. Some days after his death, he was buried in the chancel of his own church of St. Margaret Pattens. Dr. Birch had, in his life-time, been very generous to his relations; and none that were near to him being living at his decease, he bequeathed his library of books and manuscripts, many of which are valuable, to the British Museum. He, likewise, left the remainder of his fortune, which amounted to not much more than five hundred pounds, to be laid out in government securities, for the purpose of applying the interest to increase the stipend of the three assistant librarians. Thus manifesting at his death, as he had done during his whole life, his respect for literature, and his desire to promote useful knowledge.

Mr. Ayscough has extracted, from a small pocket-book belonging to Dr. Birch, the following memoranda of some pieces written by him, of which he was not before known to be the author. 1726, “A Latin translation of Hughes’s Ode to the Creator.” 1727, “Verses on the General history of Printing” published in the General history of Printing. Collections for Smedley’s View. 1728, “Abelard to Philotas.” 1732, Began the General History. 1739, “Account of Alga,” published in the Works of the Learned for July. “Account of Milton,” published in the Works of the Learned. 1741, Wrote the letter of Cleander to Smerdis, in the Athenian Letters. 1742, Wrote an account of Orr’s sermon, in the Works of the Learned. 1743, Wrote the preface to Boyle’s works. 1760, By a letter from Dr. Stonhouse, it appears that Dr. Birch was the author of the Life of the rev. Mr. James Hervey, which is prefixed to that gentleman’s writings. He was employed, likewise, in correcting a great number of publications, and among the rest Murden’s State Papers. At the time, of the doctor’s death, he had prepared for the press a collection of letters, to which he had given the title of “Historical Letters, written in the reigns of James I. and Charles I. containing a detail of the public transactions and events in Great Britain during that period with a variety of particulars not mentioned by our historians. Now first published from the originals in the British Museum, Paper-office, and private collections.” These are all the separate publications, or intended works, of Dr. Birch that have come to our knowledge, excepting a Sermon on the proof of the wisdom and goodness of God, from the frame and constitution of man, preached before the college of Physicians, in 1749, in consequence of lady Sadlier’s will to which we may add, that he revised new editions of Bacon’s, Boyle’s, and Tillotson’s works. The lives of Boyle and Tillotson, though printed by themselves, were drawn up partly with a view to their being prefixed to these great men’s writings. It would swell this article too much, were we to enter into a detail of our author’s communications to the royal society, and of the papers transmitted by him to that illustrious body. Whoever looks into his history of the early proceedings of the society, will have no doubt of the assiduity and diligence with which he discharged his peculiar duty as secretary. But there is nothing which sets Dr. Birch’s industry in a more striking light than the vast number of transcripts which he made with his own hands. Among these, not to mention many other instances, there are no less than sixteen volumes in quarto, of Anthony Bacon’s papers, transcribed from the Lambeth library and other collections; and eight more volumes of the same size, relative to history and literature. Our author’s correspondence, by letters, was, likewise, very large and extensive; of which numerous proofs occur in the British Museum. What enabled Dr. Birch to go through such a variety of undertakings, was his being a very early riser. By this method, he had executed the business of the morning before numbers of people had begun it and, indeed, it is the peculiar advantage of rising betimes, that it is not in the power of any interruptions, avocations, or engagements whatever, to deprive a man of the hours which have already been well employed, or to rob him of the consolation of reflecting, that he hath not spent the day in vain. With all this closeness of application, Dr. Birch was not a solitary recluse. He was of a cheerful and social temper, and entered much into conversation with the world. He was personally connected with most of the literary men of his time, and with some of them he maintained an intimate friendship, such as sir Hans Sloane, Dr. Mead, Dr. Salter, Mr. Jortin, and Dr. Maty Daniel Wray, esq. Dr. Morton, Dr. Ducarel, Dr. William Watson, &c. &c. With regard to the great, though perhaps he stood well with many of them, his chief connection was with the earls of Hardwicke, and with the rest of the branches of that noble and respectable family. No one was more ready than Dr. Birch to assist his fellow- creatures, or entered more ardently into useful and laudable undertakings. He was particularly active in the Society for promoting literature by the printing of books, to which we are indebted for the publication of Tanner’s Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica, and some few other valuable works. In short, Dr. Birch was entitled to that highest praise, of being a good man, as well as a man of knowledge and learning. His sentiments with respect to subjects of divinity resembled those of bishop Hoadly.

, a priest of Rome, who in the year 634 obtained leave of pope Honorius to preach the gospel to the idolaters in Britain, at which the pope was so much pleased, that he caused him to be ordained bishop. This missionary landing in the kingdom of the West Saxons, with many others baptised king Cynegilsus, who began to reign in the year 6 11, and filled the throne thirty-one years. St. Birinus fixed his see at Dercis, now Dorchester, in Oxfordshire, in the windows of which beautiful church are still some remains of painting relative to the history of his mission. He built and consecrated many churches, and had great success in converting the natives, until his death, about the year 650. November 29 is his day in the calendar. He was first buried at Dorchester, but his remains were afterwards translated to Winchester.

, a political author in the seventeenth century, was the son of Richard Birkenhead, of Northwych, in the county of Cheshire, an honest saddler, who, if some authors may deserve credit, kept also a little ale-house. Our author was born about 1615, and having received some tincture of learning in the common grammar-schools, came to Oxford, and was entered in 1632, a servitor of Oriel college, under the tuition of the learned Dr. Humphrey Lloyd, afterwards bishop of Bangor. Dr. Lloyd recommended him to Laud, archbishop of Canterbury, as his amanuensis, and in that capacity he discovered such talents, that the archbishop, by his diploma, created him A. M. in 1639, and the year following, by letter commendatory from the same great prelate, he was chosen probationary fellow of All-souls college. This preferment brought him to reside constantly in Oxford, and on king Charles I. making that city his head-quarters during the civil war, our author was employed to write a kind of journal in support of the royal cause, by which he gained great reputation; and his majesty recommended him to be chosen reader in moral philosophy, which employment he enjoyed, though with very small profit, till 1648, when he was expelled by the parliament visitors. He retired afterwards to London, where adhering steadily to his principles, he acquired, among those of his own sentiments, the title of “The Loyal Poet,” and suffered, from such as had then the power in their hands, several imprisonments, which served only to sharpen his wit, without abating his courage. He published, while he thus lived in obscurity, and, as Wood says, by his wits, some very tart performances, which were then very highly relished, and are still admired by the curious. These were, like his former productions, levelled against the republican leaders, and were written with the same vindictive poignancy that was then fashionable. Upon the restoration of king Charles II. he was created April 6, 1661, on the king’s letters sent for that purpose, D. C. L. by the university of Oxford and in that quality was o'ne of the eminent civilians consulted by the convocation on the question “Whether bishops ought to be present in capital cases?” and with the rest, Keb. 2, 1661-2, gave it under his hand, they ought and might. He was, about the same time, elected a burgess, to serve in parliament for Wilton, in the county of Wilts, and continuing his services to his master, was by him promoted, on the first vacancy, to some office at court, which he quitted afterwards, and became master in the Faculty office. He was knighted November 14, 1662, and upon sir Richard Fanshaw’s going with a public character to the court of Madrid, sir John Birkenhead succeeded him as master of requests. He was also elected a member of the royal society, an honour at that time conferred on none who were not well known in the republic of letters, as men capable of promoting the truly noble designs of that learned body. He lived afterwards in credit and esteem with men of wit and learning, and received various favours from the court, in consideration of the past, and to instigate him to other services; which, however, drew upon him some very severe attacks from those who opposed the court. Anthony Wood has preserved some of their coarsest imputations, for what reason is not very obvious, as Wood is in general very partial to the loyalist writers. He died in Westminster, December 4, 1679, and was interred at St. Martin’s in the Fields, leaving to his executors, sir Richard Mason, and sir Muddiford Bamston, a large and curious collection of pamphlets on all subjects.

In January 1783, he was elected head-master of Merchant Taylors, the duties of which important station entirely occupied his attention, and in 1789, the company of Merchant Taylors presented him to the living of St. Martin Outwich, as a reward for his long and faithful services. Dr. Warren, bishop of Bangor, a few years before had obtained for him, from the earl of Aylesford, the rectory of Ditton in Kent. But he did not long enjoy these preferments bodily infirmities grew fast upon him, and repeated fits of the gout undermined his constitution. In the beginning of 1795, he was alarmed by an oppression on his breath, which proved to be occasioned by water on the chest, and terminated in his death, Nov. 17, 1795. He left a widow, whose virtues he has affectionately commemorated in many of his poems, and one daughter. The year following his death, his “Poetical Works” were published by subscription, in 2 vols. 4to, with Memoirs of the Life of the Author, by the rev. Thomas Clare, M. A. now vicar of St. Bride’s, Fleet-street, from which the present sketch is taken and in 1798, the same editor published a volume of Mr. Bishop’s “Sermons, chiefly upon practical subjects.” The poems entitle Mr. Bishop to a very distinguished rank among minor poets, and among those who write with ease and elegance on familiar subjects; but we doubt whether his talents could have reached the higher species of the art. He is sometimes nervous, sometimes pathetic, but never sublime yet his vein of humour was well calculated for the familiar verses, epigrams, &c. which are so plentiful in these volumes. His style is always pure, and his imagination uncommonly fertile in those lesser poems which require a variety of the grave, gay, the witty and the instructive.

, vicar apostolical in England, and the first popish bishop that was sent thither after the reformation, was born in 1553, at Brayles in Warwickshire. He studied in the university of Oxford; Wood thinks, either in Gloucester-hall (now Worcester college), or in Lincoln college, the heads of both which were secret favourers of popery from Oxford he went to Rheims and Rome, and having been sent back to England, as a missionary, he was arrested at Dover, and confined in prison in London until the end of the year 1584. Being then released, he went to Paris, took his degree of licentiate, and came again to England in 1591. In two years he returned to Paris, completed his degree of doctor, and soon after his arrival in England, a dispute arising among the popish clergy here, he was sent to Rome with another missionary to appeal to the pope. In 1612 we find him again in England, and in confinement, on account of the oath of allegiance, to which, however, he was not so averse as many of his brethren. He had, in fact, written against the bull of pope Pius V. to prove that the catholics were bound to be faithful to their sovereigns, and in 1602 he had signed a declaration of the same principle, without any equivocacation or mental reservation, which gave great offence to the Jesuits. Out of respect, however, to the authority of the pope, who had proscribed that oath, he refused to take it, and was committed to prison. On his release he went to Paris, and wrote some tracts against those eminent protestant divines, Perkins and Abbot. Since the death of Watson, bishop of Lincoln, the last of the popish bishops who outlived the reformation, it had often been intended to re-establish the episcopal government in England; and the marriage of the prince Charles, afterwards Charles I. with the Infanta of Spain, seemed to offer a fair opportunity for carrying this scheme into execution, the hopes of the catholics being considerably raised by that match. Accordingly, Dr. Bishop was consecrated at Paris, in 1623, by the title of bishop of Chalcedon, and being sent to England, began his career by forming a chapter, appointing grand vicars, archdeacons, and rural deans, &c. but did not enjoy his promotion long, as he died April 16, 1624. His party speak liberally of his zeal, virtues, and learning, and he undoubtedly was the more useful to their cause in England, as he contrived to exercise his functions without giving much offence to government. Dodd and Wood have given a list of his controversial writings, which are now in little request, but it must not be forgot that he was the publisher of Pits’ s very useful work, “De illustribus Anglic Scriptoribus,” 1623, to which he wrote a verylearned preface.

, an English divine, was educated at Corpus Christi college, Oxford, where he proceeded M.A. in 1698, B. D. in 1708, and D. D. in 1712. In 1715 he was chosen preacher at the Rolls, and in 1716, on the deprivation of John Harvey, A. M. a nonjuror, he was presented to the chancellorship of Hereford, by his brother Dr. Philip Bisse, bishop of that diocese. He was also a prebendary of Hereford, and rector of Crudley and Weston. He died April 22, 1731. He was a frequent and eloquent preacher, and published several of his occasional sermons. Those of most permanent reputation are, 1. “The Beauty of Holiness in the Common Prayer, as set forth in four Sermons preached at the Rolls chapel,” 1716, and often reprinted. 2. “Decency and order in public worship, three Sermons,” 1723. 3. “A course of Sermons on the Lord’s Prayer,” 1740, 8vo. Some “Latin Poems” were published by him in 1716, which we have not seen.

, an eminent English divine, was born in London, 1654, and educated at Catherine-hail, Cambridge. In 1690, he was inducted into the living of South Okenden, Essex, and four years afterwards to the rectory of St. Mary Aldermary, London and was successively chosen lecturer of St. Olave’s, and of St. Dunstan’s in the West. He was likewise appointed chaplain to king William. He preached before the house of commons Jan. 30, 1699, and in his sermon animadverted on Mr. Toland for his asserting in his life of Milton, that Charles I. was not the author of “Icon Basilike,” and for some insinuations against the authenticity' of the holy scriptures which drew him into a controversy with that author. In 1700, he preached a course of sermons at Boyle’s lecture, in the cathedral church of St. Paul, which were afterwards published. In 1707, he was consecrated to the bishopric of Exeter. Burnet, having mentioned him and sir William Dawes as raised to bishoprics, tells us, “that these divines were in themselves men of value and worth; but their notions were all on the other side. They had submitted to the government but they, at least Blackall, seemed to condemn the revolution, and all that had been done pursuant to it.” And it is asserted in an anonymous pamphlet, published in 1705, that he had refused for two years to take the oath of allegiance to king William. But what contributed most to his fame in his life- time was a controversy he had with Mr. (afterwards bishop) Hoadly, which was occasioned by his sermon upon Rom. xiii. 3, 4, entitled, “The Divine Institution of Magistracy, and the gracious design of its institution,” preached before the queen at St. James’s on Tuesday, March 8, 1708, being the anniversary of her majesty’s happy accession to the throne, and published by her majesty’s special command. The next year, 1709, Mr. Hoadly animadverted upon the bishop’s sermon, in a piece, entitled “Some Considerations humbly offered to the right reverend the lord bishop of Exeter, occasioned by his lordship’s sermon before her majesty, March 8, 1708.” Upon this the bishop published “An Answer to Mr. Hoadly’s Letter,” dated from Bath, May the 10th, 1709. Mr. Hoadly endeavoured to vindicate himself, in “An humble Reply to the right reverend the lord bishop of Exeter’s answer; in which the Considerations offered to his lordship are vindicated, and an apology is added for defending the foundation of the present government,” London, 1709, in 8vo. In this controversy, bishop Blackall defends the High-church, Tory, principles (as they usually are called), of the divine institution of magistracy, and unlimited passive obedience and non-resistance; which Mr. Hoadly opposes. There were several pamphlets written on the side of the bishop against Mr. Hoadly particularly one, entitled, “The best Answer that ever was made, and to which no answer will be made” supposed to be wi'itten by Mr. Lesley, a nonjuring clergyman, and which Mr. Hoadly animadverts upon in the postscript to his humble reply. The wits in the Tatler engaged in this controversy on the side of Hoadly, and with an illiberality not usual in the writers of that paper. He died at Exeter, Nov. 29, 1716, and was interred in the cathedral there. Archbp. Dawes, who had a long and intimate friendship with him, declares, that in his whole conversation he never met with a more perfect pattern of a true Christian life, in all its parts, than in him: so much primitive simplicity and integrity; such constant evenness of mind, and uniform conduct of behaviour; such unaffected and yet most ardent piety towards God such orthodox and steadfast faith in Christ such disinterested and fervent charity to all mankind such profound modesty, humility, and sobriety such an equal mixture of meekness and courage, of cheerfulness and gravity such an exact discharge of all relative duties and in one word, such an indifferency to this lower world and the things of it and such an entire affection and joyous hope and expectation of things above. He says also, that his “manner of preaching was so excellent, easy, clear, judicious, substantial, pious, affecting, and upon all accounts truly useful and edifying, that he universally acquired the reputation of being one of the best preachers of his time.” Felton, in his Classics, commends him as an excellent writer. M. de la Roche, in his memoirs of literature, tells us, that our prelate was one of those English divines, who, when they undertake to treat a subject, dive into the bottom of it, and exhaust the matter. His works were published by archbishop Dawes, in 2 vols. fol. 1723, consisting of Practical discourses on our Saviour’s Sermon on the mount, and on the Lord’s Prayer, together with his sermons preached at Boyle’s lecture, with several others upon particular occasions.

, a learned English divine of the last century, was born in 1683, and educated at Trinity college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of M. A. Whether he had any promotion in the church is not certain; but soon after the revolution, he refused to take the oaths, and consequently excluded himself from advancing in the church. From that time he lived a very exemplary and studious life, endeavouring to be useful to mankind, both as a scholar and divine. To preserve his independence, he became corrector of the press to Bowyer, the celebrated printer, and was one of the most accurate of his profession. The edition of lord Bacon’s works in 1740 was superintended by him; and he was also editor of the castrations of Holinshed’s Chronicle, and of Bale’s “Chrouycle concernynge syr Johan Oldecastell.” A handsome compliment is paid him in Maittaire’s Lives of the Paris printers, 1717; and again in his “Miscellanea aliquot 8criptorum carmina,” 1722. For some years before his death, he was a nonjuring bishop, but lived retired in Little Britain among his old books. What his hopes were of a second revolution will appear from the answer he gave a gentleman who asked him if he was in his diocese? “Dear friend, we leave the sees open, that the gentlemen who now unjustly possess them, upon the restoration, may, if they please, return to their duty and be continued. We content ourselves with full episcopal power as suffragans.” Mr, Blackbourne died Nov. 17, 1741, and his library was sold by auction in February 1742. He was buried in Islington church-yard, with an epitaph, which may be seen in our authority.

, the celebrated author of the “Confessional,” was born at Richmond in Yorkshire, June 9, 1705. At the age of seventeen he was admitted pensioner of Catherine-hall, Cambridge, where his peculiar notions on civil and religious liberty rendered him obnoxious to his superiors, and occasioned the loss of a fellowship for which he was a candidate. In 1739, he was ordained by Dr. Gooch, bishop of Norwich, at Ely chapel, Holborn, and in a short time afterwards was inducted into the rectory of Richmond in Yorkshire, where he resided constantly for forty years, during which he composed all the pieces contained in the late edition of his works, besides a multitude of smaller ones. His first appearance as an author was on the following occasion. In 1749, the rev. John Jones, vicar of Alconbury, near Huntingdon, published his “Free and candid disquisitions relating to the Church of England,” containing many observations on the supposed defects and improprieties in the liturgical forms of faith and worship of the established church. As Mr. Blackburne corresponded with this gentleman, who had submitted the work to his perusal in manuscript, and as there were many of his opinions in which Mr. Blackburne coincided, it was not unnatural to suppose that he had a hand in the publication. This, however, Mr. Blackburne solemnly denied, and his biographer has assigned the probable reason. “The truth,” says he, “is, Mr. Blackburne, whatever desire he might have to forward the work of ecclesiastical reformation, could not possibly conform his style to the milky phraseology of the ‘ Disquisitions,’ nor could he be content to have his sentiments mollified by the gentle qualifications of Mr. Jones’s lenient pen. He was rather (perhaps too much) inclined to look upon those who had in their hands the means and the power of reforming the errors, defects, and abuses, in the government, forms of worship, faith and discipline, of the established church, as guilty of a criminal negligence, from which they should have been roused by sharp and spirited expostulations. He thought it became disquisitors, with a cause in hand of such high importance to the influence of vital Christianity, rather to have boldly forced the utmost resentment of the class of men to which they addressed their work, than, by meanly truckling to their arrogance, to derive upon themselves their ridicule and contempt, which all the world saw was the case of these gentle suggesters, and all the return they had for the civility of their application.” Animated by this spirit, which we are far from thinking candid or expedient, Mr. Blackburne published “An Apology,” for the “Free and candid disquisitions,” to which, whatever might be its superior boldness to the “milky phraseology” of Mr. Jones, he yet did not venture to put his name nor, although he was suspected to be the author, did he meet with any of that “arrogance,” which is attributed to those who declined adopting Mr. Jones’s scheme of church-reformation. On the contrary, in July, 1750, he was collated to the archdeaconry of Cleveland, and in August following to the prebend of Bilton, by Dr. Matthew Hutton, archbishop of York, to whom he had been for some years titular chaplain and when his friends intimated their suspicions that he would write no more “Apologies” for such books as “Free and candid Diquisitions,” he answered, “with a cool indifference,” that he had made no bargain with the archbishop for his liberty. His next publication, accordingly, was an attack on Dr. Butler bishop of Durham’s charge to his clergy in 1751, which, in Mr. Blackburne’s opinion, contained some doctrines diametrically opposite to the principles on which the protestant reformation was founded. This appeared in 1752, under the title of “A Serious Enquiry into the use and importance of external religion, &c.” but was not generally known to be his, until Mr. Baron, an enthusiast in controversies, republished it with Mr. Blackburne’s name, in his collection, entitled “The Pillars of Priestcraft and Orthodoxy shaken.”

His next publications were on the subjects of the new style Archdeacon Sharpe’s charges the Jew naturalization-bill a letter to archbishop Herring, on church reformation none of which require much notice. When in 1755, Dr. Law’s notion appeared concerning the soul and the state of death, or what was called “the soul-sleeping system,” Mr. Blackburne adopted, and defended it in a tract entitled “No proof in the Scriptures of an intermediate state of happiness or misery, between death and the resurrection,” and he urged the same opinion in a subsequent tract but as the Confessional is the publication on which his fame principally rests, the history of it is more interesting than any detail of his minor tracts. On Commencement Sunday 1757, Dr. Powell, an eminent tutor of St. John’s college, Cambridge, published a sermon on subscription to the Liturgy and XXXIX articles, in which he maintained that a latitude was allowed to subscribers, even, so far as to admit of the assent and conserit of different persons to different and even opposite opinions, according to their different interpretations of the propositions to be subscribed. Dr. Powell’s casuistry on the subject appeared to Mr. Blackburne so detestable, and so subversive of the principles of good faith among men, that he determined to expose and refute it to the best of his power, and accordingly published “Remarks on the rev. Dr. Powell’s Sermon in defence of Subscriptions, &c.” 1758. His sentiments on the subject of subscriptions are thus explained, in that part of his life which was written by himself. "When he took possession of the living of Richmond, he had been engaged in a way of life that did not give him time or opportunity to reflect upon subjects of that nature with precision; and though, upon taking his first preferment, he determined conscientiously to perform the duties of it, yet he was by no means aware of the difficulties that afterwards embarrassed him in qualifying himself for holding it. He, therefore, then subscribed as directed by law, without scruple, and without apprehending the obligation he laid himself under, according to the form, of giving his assent and consent to the whole system of the church. When the same form was to be subscribed to qualify him. to hold the archdeaconry and prebend, he consulted some of his friends, and particularly Dr. Law (afterwards bishop of Carlisle), who gave him his opinion at large, containing such reasons, as had occurred to himself on the several occasions he had to undergo that discipline. He was likewise referred to Dr. Clarke’s Introduction to his Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity and lastly, to the sixth article of the church of England all which appeared plausible enough to satisfy him, for that time, that with these salvos and modifications, he might safely subscribe to the prescribed forms. Some time afterwards, however, upon a prospect of farther advancement to a considerable preferment, he took occasion to re-consider these arguments, and thought they fell short of giving that satisfaction which an honest man would wish to have, when he pledges his good faith to society in so solemn a form as that prescribed by the 36th canon, enjoining subscription to the articles and liturgical forms of the church of England.

“Nor did mere difference of opinion, even on points of the highest political and religious consequence, or on speculative topics, where years of study had endeared conviction to him, operate as a bar to his approbation of the merits of his opponent and he readily acknowledged, and admired, literary talent and scriptural knowledge, or clear and able enforcements of the truths and obligations of religion, as well as personal virtue and eminent piety, in those from whom otherwise he differed widely, and whom, with no little eagerness, he had sometimes opposed. ”Mr. Blackburne’s cordial and eloquent compliment to the memory of Jortin, to whom, besides some specific disagreements, he was nearly as dissimilar in general characters as Luther to Erasmus, has been more than once repeated. His amanuensis testifies the genuine satisfaction which the reading of Dr. Johnson’s Prayers and Meditations appeared to afford his venerable friend and he well remembers with what delight Mr. Blackburne listened to the sermons of bishop Sherlock, which he had doubtless often himself perused before and with what frankness of heart he wished that it had been in his power to be equally useful as a preacher of the doctrines of Christianity.

In November 1759, he published a new edition of the Great Charter, and Charter of the Forest; which added much to his former reputation, not only as 'a great lawyer, but as an accurate antiquary, and an able historian. It must also be added, that the external beauties in the printing, the types, &c. reflected no small honour on him, as the principal reformer of the Clarendon press, from whence no work had ever before issued, equal in those particulars to this. This publication drew him into a short controversy with the late Dr. Lyttelton, then dean of Exeter, and afterwards bishop of Carlisle. The dean, to assist Mr. Blackstone in his publication, had favoured him with the collation of a very curious ancient roll, containing both the Great Charter, and that of the Forest, of the 9th of Henry III. which he and many of his friends judged to be an original. The editor of the Charters, however, thought otherwise, and excused himself (in a note in hjs introduction) for having made no use of its various readings, “as the plan of his edition was confined to charters which had passed the great seal, or else to authentic entries and enrolments of record, under neither of which classes the roll in question could be ranked.” The dean, upon this, concerned for the credit of his roll, presented to the Society of Antiquaries a vindication of its authenticity, dated June the 8th, 1761 and Mr. Blackstone delivered in an answer to the same learned body, dated May the 28th, 1762, alleging, as an excuse for the trouble he gave them, “that he should think himself wanting in that respect which he owed to the society, and Dr. Lyttelton, if he did not either own and correct his mistakes, in the octavo edition then preparing for the press, or subijiit to the society’s judgment the reasons at large upon which his suspicions were founded.” These reasons, we may suppose, were convincing, for here the dispute ended .

A few weeks before he died, he was applied to by the trustees for executing the will of the late sir George Downing, bart. who had bequeathed a large estate for the endowing a new college in Cambridge, to give his assistance in forming a proper plan for this society, and framing a body of statutes for its regulation. This was a task to which his abilities were peculiarly adapted and it may be difficult to determine, whether the application reflected more, honour on the trustees, or on him. He had mentioned to some of his most intimate friends, his undertaking this business with great pleasure, and seemed to promise himself much satisfaction in the amusement it would afford him but, alas his disorder was then coming on with such hasty strides, that before any thing could be done in it, death put an end to this and all his labours, and left the university of Cambridge, as well as that of Oxford, to lament the loss of Mr. Justice Blackstone. He was buried, by his own direction, in a vault he had built for his family, inliis parish church of St. Peter’s in Wallingford. His neighbour And friend Dr. Barrington, bishop of Landaff, now of Durham, at his own particular request, performed the funeral service, as a public testimony of his personal regard and highest esteem.

Soon after Dr. Blackwell became principal of his college he married Barbara Black, the daughter of a merchant of Aberdeen, by whom he had no children, and who survived him so late as 1793. Several years before his death, his health began to decline so that he was obliged to employ an assistant for teaching his Greek class. His disorder was of the consumptive kind, and it was thought to be increased by the excess of abstemiousness which he imposed on himself and, in which, notwithstanding all the remonstrances of his physicians, he obstinately persisted, from an opinion of his own knowledge of his constitution, and of what he found by experience to suit it best. His disease increasing, he was advised to travel; and accordingly, in February 1757, he set out from Aberdeen, but was able to go no farther than Edinburgh, in which city he died, on the 8th of March following, in the fifty-sixth year of his age. Dr. Blackwell enjoyed an equable flow of temper, in which his intimate friends scarcely ever observed any variation. This he maintained during his whole illness. The day before he set out from Aberdeen, he desired to meet with all the professors of the college, and spent two hours with them with his usual vivacity. In Edinburgh he was visited, at his own desire, by Dr. Wallace, one of the ministers of that city, whose ingenuity and learning are well known. Dr. Blackwell, on the very day in which he died, wrote letters to several of his friends, and took leave of them with the greatest chee. fulness. In the April following our author’s decease, it being Dr. Gerard’s business, as (at that time) professor of moral philosophy and logic in the Marischal college, to preside at conferring the degree of master of arts on those whose standing entitled them to it, the doctor took that occasion to pronounce publicly, on the late principal, such an encomium as his literature deserved. It was a fault in Dr. Blackwell, that he too much assumed the appearance of universal knowledge; the consequence of which was that he sometimes laid himself open, by entering on subjects of philosophy and mathematics, without a sufficient acquaintance with them. With all the ancient, and with most of the modern languages, he was really acquainted and his reading, in the departments of history and the belles lettres, was very extensive. He had a ready and lively manner of introducing his knowledge of this kind, which made his conversation both instructive and entertaining and it was rendered still more so by being accompanied with great good humour, and an entire command of his passions, even when he was provoked. Though he had something of the stiffness of the recluse, he joined with it much of the confidence and good breeding that are found in men who converse much in the world. His life was private and studious: he did not wholly decline mixed companies, though it was but seldom that he came into them and at home he chose only the conversation of the learned, or that of persons of superior rank or fortune. At London he was known to several men of eminence. The late duke of Newcastle, and Mr. Henry Pelham, were his patrons, and procured for him the office of principal of the Marischal college. It is confidently said that they had intended him an establishment at Cambridge, and that the professorship of modern history was fixed upon for him, if he had not died a short time before it became vacant. A man of Dr. Blackwell’s abilities and reputation could not fail of having some valuable literary connexions and correspondents; among whom he had the honour of numbering the late celebrated Dr. Mead, and the no less celebrated Dr. Warburton, bishop of Gloucester. It is said that Mr. Blackwell, soon after the publication of his Enquiry, being at Cambridge, paid a visit to Dr. Bentley, and the discourse turning upon the book, the doctor, being asked his opinion of it, answered, “That when he had gone through half of it, he had forgotten the beginning; and that, when he had finished the reading of it, he had forgotten the whole.” Whatever truth is in this story, it is certain, at least, that a similar objection had been started by others, if not by Dr. Bentley.

, professor of civil law at Poictiers, was born at Dumfermling, in Scotland, in 1539, descended of an ancient family. He was left an orphan in the tenth year of his age, and was sent by his uncle, the bishop of Orkney, to the university of Paris. On his uncle’s death, by which he seems to have lost the means of being able to remain at Paris, he returned to Scotland, but finding no encouragement there, he went again to Paris, where, by the liberality of Mary, queen of Scotland, he was enabled to pursue his studies in philosophy, mathematics, and the oriental languages. He then went to the university of Tholouse, where he studied civil law for two years and having obtained the patronage of Beaton, archbishop of Glasgow, he was chosen by the parliament of Poictiers one of their counsellors, and afterwards professor of civil law. He died in 1623, and was interred at Poictiers in St. Porcharius church, near his brother George. As a writer, he was chiefly known for his vindication of his royal mistress, when put to death by queen Elizabeth, written with all that bitterness of resentment which is natural for a man of spirit to feel, who, by an act of flagrant injustice, was deprived of his mistress and his sovereign, his friend and his benefactress. He addresses himself, in a vehement strain of passion, to all the princes of Europe, to avenge her death; declaring, that they are unworthy of royalty, if they are not roused on so interesting and pressing an occasion. He laboured hard to prove that Henry VIII.' s marriage with Anne Bolen was incestuous a calumny too gross to merit a formal refutation. This work was entitled “Martyre de Maria Stuart Reyne d'Escosse,” Antwerp, 1588, 8vo. His other works were, 1. “Adversus G. Buchanani Dialogum de Jure Ilegni apud Scotos, pro regibus apologia,” Pict. 1580, 8vo. 2. “De Vinculo Religionis et Imperii,” Paris, 1575, 8vo. 3. “Sanctarum precationum prsemia,” a manual of devotions, Pict. 1598, 8vo. 4. “Varii generis poemata,” ibid. 1609, 8vo. 5. “Jacobi I. Magnse Britanniae inauguratio,” Paris, 1606, 4to. These and some other pieces by him, were collected and published, with a life, by Gabriel Naudeus, 1644, 4to.

, another brother of the preceding, was born probably about 1526, at Dumfermling in Fifeshire, and educated at St. Andrew’s. He was also sent by his uncle, the bishop of Orkney, to Paris, where in 1551, he taught philosophy. He afterwards applied himself to the study of physic, became a member of the college of physicians, and was finally honoured with the dignity of clean of the faculty, a place of considerable importance in the college of Paris. He was also appointed physician to the duke de Longueville, with a salary of 20O pistoles. During the plague at Paris, he had the resolute humanity to continue in that city, much to his own honour, and the consolation of the people. He is supposed to have died in 16 J 3, or 1614. He wrote several medical and philosophical treatises, of which we only know of two that were printed 1. “Hippocratis quaedam cum Mss. collata,” Paris, 1625, and 2. “Questio Medica, an visceribus nutritiis aestuantibus aquarum metal licarum potus salubris” ibid. 4to. He had a son of both his names, likewise a physician of eminence, of whom Moreri gives a short account.

was born and bred in Scotland, and ordained and beneficed in the episcopal church there but meeting with some discouragements under an unsettled state of affairs, and having a prospect of discharging his ministerial function more usefully elsewhere, he quitted his preferments, and came into England near the end of Charles the Second’s reign. It was not long before he was taken notice of by Compton, bishop of London, who prevailed with him to go as missionary to Virginia, about 1685 where, by exemplary conduct, and unwearied labours in the work of the ministry, he did good service to religion, and gained to himself a good report amongst all: so that bishop Compton being well apprised of his worth, made choice of him, about 1689, as his commissary for Virginia, the highest office in the church there; which, however, did not take him off from his pastoral care, but only rendered him the more shining example of it to the rest of the clergy.

, a celebrated English admiral, was born August 1599, at Bridgewater, in Somersetshire, where he was educated at the grammar-school. He went from, thence to Oxford, and was entered at St. Alban’s hall, but removed to Wadham college, and in 1617 took the degree of B. A. In 1623 he wrote a copy of verses on the death of Camden, and soon after left the university. He was tinctured pretty early with republican principles and disliking that severity with which Laud, then bishop of Bath and Wells, pressed uniformity in his diocese, he began to fall into the puritanical opinions. The natural bluntness and sincerity of his disposition led him to speak freely upon all occasions, insomuch that, his sentiments being generally known, the puritan party got him elected member for Bridgewater in 1640. When the civil war broke out, he declared for the parliament. In 1643 he was at Bristol, under the command of col. Fiennes, who intrusted him with a little fort on the line and, when prince Rupert attacked Bristol, and the governor had agreed to surrender it upon, articles, Blake nevertheless for some time held out his fort, and killed several of the king’s forces: which exasperated prince Rupert to such a degree, that he talked of hanging him, had not some friends interposed, and excused him on account of his want of experience in war. He served afterwards in Somersetshire, under the command of Popham, governor of Lyme; and, being much beloved in those parts, he had such good intelligence there, that in conjunction with sir Robert Pye, he surprised Taunton for the parliament. In 1644 he was appointed governor of this place, w; ich was of the utmost importance, being the only garrison the parliament had in the west. The works about it were not strong, nor was the garrison numerous; yet, by his strict discipline, and kind behaviour to the townsmen, he found means to keep the place, though not properly furnished with supplies, and sometimes besieged, and even blocked up by the king’s forces. At length Goring made a breach, and actually took part of the town; while Blake still held out the other part and the castle, till relief came. For this service the parliament ordered the garrison a bounty of 2000l. and the governor a present of 500l. When the parliament had voted that no farther addresses should be made to the king, Blake joined in an address from the borough of Taunton, expressing their gratefulness for this step taken by the house of commons. However, when the king came to be tried, Blake disapproved of that measure, as illegal; and was frequently heard to say, he would as freely venture his life to save the king’s, as ever he did to serve the parliament. But this is thought to have been chiefly owing to the humanity of his temper; since after the death of the king he entered into all the measures of the republican party, and, next to Cromwell, was the ablest officer the parliament had.

, a saint and martyr, and according to the Breviary, bishop of Sebasta in Cappadocia, deserves this slight notice, as a person of great note among the vulgar, who in their processions of the wool-trade, always carry an effigies or representation of him, as the inventor or patron of their art of combing it. There was an order of knighthood also instituted in honour of him; and his day, which stands now marked in our Calendar, was Feb. 3. He suffered death in the reign of Dioclesian, about the year 283, according to the Legenda Aurea, but the English version of that book has the year 387, neither of which dates are strictly true, since Dioclesian did not succeed to the empire till the year 2Si, and died before the latter date. Before his death, which was by beheading, he was whipped, and had his flesh tornferreis pectinibiis, with iron combs and this seems to be the only foundation for the respect paid to his memory by wool-combers. Thus far the learned antiquary Dr. Pegge, in a letter on the history of St. Blase but Butler, in his “Lives of the Saints,” fixes his death in the year 316, when he was martyred in the persecution of Licinius, by the command of Agricolaus, governor of Cappadocia and the lesser Armenia.

, D. D. an eminent Hebrew critic, canon of Christ church, regius professor of Hebrew in the university of Oxford, 1787, and rector of Polshot, was first of Worcester college, where he proceeded M. A. 1753; afterwards fellow of Hertford college, where he took the degree of B. D. 1768, and of D. D. 1787 and was installed Hebrew professor Dec. 7. of that year. He was also some time a Whitehall preacher. He distinguished himself greatly as a scriptural commentator and translator. He published, 1. “A dissertation, by way of enquiry into the true import and application of the Vision related Dan. is. 20 to the end, usually called Daniel’s Prophecy of Seventy Weeks with occasional remarks on Michaelis’s letters to sir John Pringle on the same subject, 1775,” 4to. 2. “Jereiniah and Lamentations, a new translation, with notes critical, philosophical, and explanatory, 1784,” 8vo. 3. “The Sign given to Ahaz, a discourse on Isaiah vii. 14, 15, 16, delivered in the church of St. John, Devizes, at the triennial visitation of Shute, lord bishop of Sarum, July 26, 1786 with a proposed emendation of a passage in his dissertation on Daniel,” 1786, 4to. 4. “Christ the greater glory of the temple, a sermon, preached before the university of Oxford, at Christ church, Nov. 9, 1788,” 4to. J. “Zechariah, a new translation, with notes critical, philosophical, and explanatory and an Appendix, in reply to Dr. Eveleigh’s Sermon on Zechariah i. S 1 1 (to which is added, a new edition, with alterations, of the dissertation on Daniel), 1797,” 4to. In this dissertation on Daniel the study and criticism of this learned divine produced a translation very different from that in the common English Bible, as well as from that of Michaelis. It . is less liable to objection, particularly as it has no recourse to that ingenious but uncertain and unsatisfying method of computation by lunar years; it extends also to those verses of the chapter which Dr. Michaelis seemed to give up as inexplicable, almost in despair of ever attaining a probable solution of the difficulty. The translation of Jeremiah and Lamentations is on the plan of Dr. Lowth’s Isaiah, and does credit to its author both as a translator and a critic. The same may be said respecting the translation of Zechariah and it may be added, that the candour and liberality which Dr. Blayney opposes, in this instance, to the intemperance and acrimony of one of his antagonists, do him great honour. The doctor also took uncommon pains in correcting the text of the edition of the common version of the English Bible, which was printed at the Clarendon press in 1769, 4to. He made a great number of additional references in the margin, and produced the most correct Bible in our language; but, unfortunately, a large part of the impression was soon after burned at the Bible warehouse in Paternoster row, and it is now ranked among the most scarce and valuable editions.

Dr. Blayney diet! at Polshot, Sept. 20, 1801, and directed by will, that his critical papers should first be submitted to his much-valued patron and friend, the present bishop of Durham, and then deposited in the library at Lambeth. They consist of, 1. New version of the Psalms, 2 vols. 4to. 2. Critical comment on the Psalms, 3 vols. 4to. 3. Notes on Isaiah, 3 vols. 4to. 4. Remarks on the Minor Prophets, compared with bishop Newcome’s version and commentary, 1 vol. 4to. 5. Remarks on the Song of Moses, Psalin xviii. compared with 2 Sam. xxii and Deborah’s Song and Jacob’s Blessing, Gen. xlix and Moses’s Blessing, Deut. xxxiii; and Moses’s Monitory Song, Deut. xxxii. 6. Further observations on some of the Psalms and on some chapters of Isaiah and on several of the minor Prophets, particularly Zechariah, 1 vol. folio.

, bishop of Ripen, in Denmark, who was born in 1717, and died in 1773, cultivated the science of botany, particularly with a view to illustrate those passages of Scripture in which plants, &c. are mentioned. In 1767, he published at Copenhagen “Tentamen Phoenicologices sacra, seu dissertatio emblematico-theologica de Palma,” 8vo, a work containing many curious remarks on the palm or date-tree of Palestine and Idumea, which was called the phosnix by the Greeks and most of the eastern nations. It often occurs in the Bible, and the learned author has collected and explained the several passages. This species of palm is the phoenix dactylifera of modern botanists. A third author of the same name, John Erasmus Block, a Danish gardener, published at Copenhagen a treatise on the art of cultivating gardens, under the title “Horticultura Danica,” 1647, 4to.

, a protestant minister, celebrated for his knowledge in ecclesiastical and civil history, was born at Chalons in Champagne, 1591. He was admitted minister at a synod of the isle of France in 1614. A few years afterwards he began to write in defence of protestantism, for in 1619 he published a treatise entitled “Modeste declaration de la sincerite et verite des Eglises Reformees de France.” This was an answer to several of the catholic writers, especially to the bishop of Lucon, so well known afterwards under the title of cardinal Richelieu. From this time he was considered as a person of great hopes. He was secretary more than twenty times in the synods of the isle of France, and was deputed four times successively to the national synods. That of Castres employed him to write in defence of the Protestants. The national synod of Charenton appointed him honorary professor in 1645, with a handsome salary, which had never been granted to any professor before. He wrote several pieces; but what gained him most favour amongst the Protestants are, his “Explications on the Eucharist” his work entitled “De la primaute d'Eglise” his “Treatise of the Sybils” and his piece “De episcopis et presbyteris.” Some of his party, however, were dissatisfied with him for engaging in disputes relating to civil history; and particularly offended at the book he published to shew that what is related about pope Joan is a ridiculous fable.

, younger son of sir Henry Blount, and brother to sir Thomas Pope Blount hereafter mentioned, an eminent writer in the last century, was born at his grandfather’s seat at Upper Holloway, in the county of Middlesex, April 27, 1654. He was endowed by nature with a great capacity, and with a strong propensity to learning; which excellent qualities were properly cultivated by the assiduous care of his father, and under so able an instructor, he quickly acquired an extraordinary skill in the arts and sciences, without any thing of that pedantry, which is too frequently the consequence of young men’s application to study in the common course. His pregnant parts and polite behaviour brought him early into the world, so that his father, who was a true judge of men, thought fit, when he was about eighteen, to marry him to Eleanora, daughter of sir Timothy Tyrrel, of Shotover in the county of Oxford, and gave him a very handsome estate, having always respected him as a friend, as well as loved him with the affection of a father. The year after his marriage, he wrote a little treatise, which he published without his name, in defence of Dryden, whose “Conquest of Granada” was attacked by Richard Leigh, a player. In 1678, or perhaps in 1679, he published his “Anima Mnndi,” in which it is said, and with great probability, that he had the assistance of his father. It had been long before handed about in manuscript among the acquaintance of its author, with several passages in it much stronger than in that which was transmitted to the press, and licensed by sir Roger L'Estrange. This, however, did not hinder its giving great offence, insomuch that complaint was made to Dr. Compton, then Lord Bishop of London, who, upon perusal, signified that he expected it should be suppressed, and intimating, that he would thereupon rest satisfied. But afterwards, when the Bishop was out of town, an opportunity was taken by some zealous person to burn the book, which however has been reprinted since. The same year he published a broad sheet under the title of “Mr. Hobbes’s last Words and dying Legacy.” It was extracted from the “Leviathan,” and was intended to weaken and expose his doctrine yet he could be no very warm antagonist, since there is still extant a letter of his to Mr. Hobbes, wherein he professes himself a great admirer of his parts, and one who would readily receive his instructions. He afterwards gave a strong testimony in favour of liberty, in a pamphlet on the Popish Plot, and the fearof a Popish successor, entitled, “An Appeal from the country to the city for the preservation of his majesty’s person, liberty, property, and the Protestant religion.” This treatise is subscribed Junius Brutus, and is the strongest invective against Popery and Papists that was published even in that age, when almost all the wit of the nation was pointed that way. There are in it likewise such express recommendations of the Duke of Monmouth, as might well hinder the author from owning it, and give it, in the eyes of the lawyers of those times, an air of sedition at least, if not of treason. In 1680, he printed that work which made him most known to the world, “The Life of Apollonius Tyaneus,” which was soon after suppressed, and only a few copies sent abroad. It was held to be the most dangerous attempt, that had been ever made against revealed religion in this country, and was justly thought so, as bringing to the eye of every English reader a multitude of facts and reasonings, plausible in themselves, and of the fallacy of which, none but men of parts and learning can be proper judges. For this reason it is still much in esteem with the Deists, and the few copies that came abroad contributed to raise its reputation, by placing it in the lists of those that are extremely rare. In the same year he published his “Diana of the Ephesians,” which, as the author foresaw, raised a new clamour, many suggesting that, under colour of exposing superstition, he struck at all Revelation, and while he avowed only a contempt of the Heathen, seemed to intimate no great affection for the Christian priesthood. The wit, learning, and zeal of our author, had, by this time, raised him to be the chief of his sect; and he took a great deal of pains to propagate and defend his opinions in his discourses and familiar letters, as well as by his books, but he had the usual inconsistency of the infidel, and we find him owning, in a letter to Dr. Sydenham, that in point of practice, Deism was less satisfactory than the Christian scheme. The noise his former pieces had made, induced him to conceal, industriously, his being the author of a book, entitled, “Religio Laici,” published in 1683, but which is little more than a translation of Lord Herbert’s treatise under the same title and one may reasonably suppose, that the same motives prevailed on him to drop a design, in which it appears he was once engaged, of writing the Life of Mahomet, the Turkish prophet, which however has been since executed, in his manner, by a French author, Boulanvilliers. That the world might perceive Mr. Blount was capable of turning his thoughts to subjects very different from those he had hitherto handled, he, in 16S4, published a kind of introduction to polite literature, which shewed the extent of his knowledge, and the acquaintance he had in the several branches of philosophy and science. This was entitled “Janus Scientiarum or an Introduction to Geography, Chronology, Government, History, philosophy, and all genteel sorts of Learning,” London, 8vo. He concurred heartily in the Revolution, and seems to have had very honest intentions of punishing those who were king James’s evil counsellors, after the government was re-settled, by declaring the prince and princess of Orange king and queen. He gave another strong testimony of his sincere attachment to his principles, and inviolable love to freedom, by a nervous defence of the liberty of the press wherein he shews that all restraints on it can have no other tendency than to establish superstition and tyranny, by abasing the spirits of mankind, and injuring the human understanding. This little piece, therefore, has been always esteemed one of the best he ever wrote; and has furnished their strongest arguments to many succeeding writers. The warmth of Mr. Blount’s temper, his great affection for king William, and his earnest desire to see certain favourite projects brought about, led him to write a pamphlet, in which, he asserted king William and queen Mary to be conquerors, which was not well relished by the house of commons. The title of this very singular and remarkable piece at large, runs thus: “King William and queen Mary conquerors; or, a discourse endeavouring to prove that their majesties have on their side, against the late king, the principal reasons that make conquest a good title; shewing also how this is consistent with that declaration of parliament, king James abdicated the government, &c. Written with an especial regard to such as have hitherto refused the oath, and yet allow of the title of conquest, when consequent to a just war,” 1693, 4to.

, called in Latin Blondus, or Blundus, a very eminent divine in the thirteenth century, was educated in the university of Oxford, and went afterwards for his improvement to Paris, where he quickly distinguished himself, among many of his learned contemporaries, by the vivacity of his wit. On his return into England, he again settled himself at Oxford, and read divinity lectures there with universal applause. Wood says he was the first that lectured on Aristotle both in Paris and Oxford. The reputation of his learning obtained him also several other preferments, particularly those of prebendary andhancellor in the church of York. In 1232, the archiepiscopal see of Canterbuiy being vacant by the death of Richard Wethershed, and the rejection of two of his successors, Ralph Nevil, bishop of Chichester and chancellor of England, and John, sub-prior of Canterbury, by the pope, Dr. Blount was, by the chapter of Canterbury, elected archbishop. He did not, however, enjoy that dignity; for the pope immediately objected to him, and after a summary inquiry into the validity of his election, declared it void, for several reasons, of which our historians take notice, though very probably Bale has hit upon the true, although not the ostensible cause, namely, that his abilities rendered him obnoxious to the court of Rome, or, as Bale expresses it, that he was more learned than that court wished an archbishop to be.

Many of our modern writers, and particularly bishop Godwin, fall into frequent inaccuracies concerning this prelate, sometimes mistaking his sirname, and sometimes confounding him with Richard Blount, bishop of Lincoln. After his return from Rome, and being deprived of his high dignity, he retired once again to Oxford, and, as Leland tells us, consoled himself under his misfortunes, by an ardent application to his studies. In this manner he spent sixteen years, during which time he composed several learned works, and amongst them various commentaries on the Holy Scriptures. He was celebrated by his contemporaries for the elegance of his style, and for the extensiveness of his learning. John Ross, of Warwick, no contemptible historian, and who did not live above a century after his time, speaks of him as a prodigy of science. This very learned, though unfortunate person, having attained to a good old age, and to a high reputation for his knowledge, prudence, and piety, died hi 1248, having always shevyn an equanimity of mind, which demonstrated him worthy of the highest station, by enabling him to bear with fortitude his fall from thence.

In the same year (1597) he began the munificent work of restoring, or rather founding anew, the public library at Oxford, which was completed in 1599. In his memoirs he has admirably displayed his first thoughts, his first feelings, and his first precautions on this important undertaking. After adverting to the motives which induced him to retire from court and chuse a private life, he goes on thus “Only this I must truly confess of myself, that though I did never yet repent me of those, and some other my often refusals of honourable offers, in respect of emiching my private estate yet somewhat more of late I have blamed myself and my nicety that way, for the love that I bear to my reverend mother the university of Oxon, and to the advancement of her good, by such kind of means, as I have since undertaken. For thus I fell to discourse and debate in my mind tiiat although I might find it fittest for me to keep out of the throng of court contentions, and address my thoughts and deeds to such ends altogether, as I myself could best affect yet withal I was to think, that my duty towards God, the expectation of the world, and my natural inclination, and very morality did require, that I should not wholly so hide those little abilities that 1 had, but that in some measure, in one kind or other, I should do the true part of a profitable member of the state. Whereupon examining exactly for the rest of my life what course I might take, and having sought (as I thought) all the ways to the wood, to select the most proper, I concluded at the last to set up my staff at the library door in Oxon, being thoroughly persuaded, that in my solitude and surcease from the commonwealth affairs, 1 could not busy myself to better purpose, than by reducing that place (which then in every part lay ruined and waste) to the public use of students. For the effecting whereof I found myself furnished, in a competent proportion, of such four kinds of aids, as, unless I had them all, there was no hope of good success. For without some kind of knowledge, as well in the learned and modern tongues, as in sundry other sorts of scholastical literature without some purse-ability to go through with the charge without great store of honourable friends, to further the design and without special good leisure to follow such a work, it could but have proved a vain attempt and inconsiderate. But how well I have sped in all my endeavours, and how full provision I have made for the benefit and ease of all frequenters of the library, that which I have already performed in sight, that which besides I have given for the maintenance of it, and that which hereafter I purpose to add, by way of enlargement of that place (for the project is cast, an. I, whether I live or die, it shall be, God willing, put in full execution), will testify so truly and abundantly for me, as I need not be the publisher of the dignity and worth of my own institution.” Camden, under the year 1598, tells us, that Bodley, being at present unengaged from affairs of state, set himself a task, which would have suited the character of a crowned head, the promotion and encouragement of learning for he began to repair the public library at Oxford, and furnished it with new books. It was set up, he adds, by Humphrey duke of Gloucester, but through the iniquity of the times was, in the reign of Edward VI. stripped of all the books but he (Bodley) having made the choicest collection from all parts of the world of the most valuable books, partly at his own cost, and partly by contributions from others, he first stocked, and afterwards left it so well endowed at his death, that his memory deserves to bear a very lasting date amongst men of worth and letters.“The same author, in his” Britannia,“tells us, duke Humphrey’s library consisted of one hundred and twentynine volumes, procured from Italy at a great expence. His translator adds, that they were valued at above a thousand pounds, and that the duke in 1440 gave one hundred and twenty-six volumes more, and in 1443 a much greater number, besides considerable additions at his death three years after. But, before duke Humphrey’s time, Richard de Bury, alias Aungervil, bishop of Durham, in 1295, gave a great number of books to the university, which were kept in a place for that purpose in the college, now Trinity college, which the monks of Durham had founded in the north suburbs of Oxford; an account whereof may be gathered from a book written by himself, called” Philobiblos, sive de amore librorum, et institutione Bibliothecae.“And after him, in 1320, Thomas Cobham, bishop of Worcester, built another over the old Congregation-house in the north coemetery of St. Mary’s. In 1597, sir Thomas Bodley, taking into his consideration the ruinous condition of duke Humphrey’s library, and resolving to undertake the restoration of it at his own expence, wrote a letter, dated at London, Jan. 23, to Dr. Ravis, dean of Christ church, then vice-chancellor, to be communicated to the university; offering therein to restore the fabric of the said library, and to settle an annual income for the purchase of books, and the support of such officers as might be necessary to take care of it. This letter was received with the greatest satisfaction by the university, and an answer returned, testifying their most grateful acknowledgment and acceptance of his noble offer. On this, sir Thomas immediately set about the work, and in two years time brought it to a good degree of perfection. In 1601, the university had such a sense of his services that he was voted a public benefactor, and his name ordered to be included among the other benefactors repeated in the public prayers. He furnished it with a large collection of books, purchased in foreign countries at a great expence and thi.-, collection in a short time became so greatly enlarged by the generous benefactions of several noblemen, bishops, and others, that neither the shelves nor the room could contain them. &ir Thomas then offering to make a considerable addition to the building, the motion was readily embraced, and, on July 19, 1610, the first stone of the new foundation was laid with great solemnity, the vice-chancellor, Doctors, masters of arts, &c. attending in their proper habits, a speech being made upon the occasion. But sir Thomas Bodley did not live to see this part of his design completed, though he left sufficient means in trust, as he bestowed his. whole estate (his debts, legacies, and funeral charges defrayed) to the noble purposes of this foundation. By this, and the help of other benefactions, in procuring which sir Thomas was very serviceable by his great interest with many eminent persons, the university was enabled to add three other sides to what was already built, forming a noble quadrangle, and spacious rooms for schools of arts. By sir Thomas’s’ will 200l. per annum was settled on the library for ever out of whichhe appointed near forty pounds for the head librarian, ten pounds for the sub-librarian, and eight for the junior. He drew up likewise a body of excellent statutes for the government of the library. In this library is a statue erected to the memory of sir Thomas Bodley, by the earl of Dorset, chancellor of the university, with the following inscription:” Thomas Sackvillus Dorsettia? Comes, Summus Angliae Thesaurarius, et hujus Academise Cancellarius, Thomse Bodleio Equiti Aurato, qui Bibliothecam hanc instituit, honoris causa pie posuit i. e. Thi.mas Sackvile, earl of Dorset, lord high treasurer of England, and chancellor of this university, piously erected this monument to the honour of sir Thomas Bodley, knt. who founded this library.“King James I. we are told, when he came to Oxford in 1605, and, among other edifices, took a view of this famous library, at his departure, in imitation of Alexander, broke out into this speech” If I were not a king, I would be an university man and if it were so that I must be a prisoner, if I might have my wish, 1 would have no other prison than that library, and be chained together with so many good authors." A catalogue of the printed books in the Bodleian library was published in 1674 by Dr. Thomas Hyde, then chief librarian another of the manuscripts was printed in 1697; and a more ample catalogue of the books was printed at Oxford, in 1738, in two volumes, folio.

After king James’s accession to the throne, sir Thomas received the honour of knighthood and from this time, it appears by the Cabala (p. 95), he lived mostly at Parsons’ Green, Middlesex. His town house was in the parish of St. Bartholomew the Less, near Smithfield, London, where his wife died and was buried June 1611, and here likewise sir Thomas died, Jan. 28, 1612. It is probable he had been for some time indisposed, as we find by Wood’s Annals, that the vice-chancellor, heads of houses and proctors sent to him letters of condolence, dated Jan. 17. We learn from the same author, that as soon as his death was announced, the university assembled to consider of the most honourable testimony of respect for his memory, on which it was agreed that a distant day should be appointed for his interment in Merton college chapel, which he had himself desired. The ceremony was accordingly performed with a solemnity and pomp becoming the university which he had so amply enriched. The body lay in state for some days in the hall of Merton college, surrounded by three heralds at arms, the relations of the deceased, his executors, the vice-chancellor, dean of Christ church, the proctors and bedels, and the whole society of Merton. On the day of the funeral, March 27, a procession was formed of the heads of the several houses, all the distinguished members of the university, and sixty-seven poor scholars (the number of his years) chosen by the heads of houses: the body was removed from Merton college through Christ church, and thence through the high street to the divinity school, where it was deposited while an oration was delivered by Richard Corbet, afterwards bishop of Oxford. It was then removed to St. Mary’s church, where a funeral sermon was preached by Dr. William Goodwyn, dean of Christ church and these ceremonies being over, the corpse was conveyed to Merton college, and, after another speech by John Hales, fellow of Merton, “the ever memorable,” was interred at the upper end of the choir, under the north wall. In 1615 Stone the statuary was employed to erect a monument of black and white marble, on which is placed his effigies, in a scholar’s gown, surrounded with books and at the four corners stand grammar, rhetoric, music, and arithmetic. On each hand of his effigies stands an angel that on the left holds out to him a crown and that on the right a book open, in which are these words Non delebo nomen ejus de libro vitae I. e. “I will not blot his name out of the book of life.” Underneath is the figure of a woman, sitting before the stairs of the old library, holding in one hand a key, and in the other a book, wherein the greatest part of the alphabet appears; and behind are seen three small books shut, inscribed with the names of Priscianus, Diomedes, and Donatus. Beneath all are engraven these words Memoriae Thomae Bodley Militis, Publicae Bibliothecae fundatoris, sacrum. Obiit 28 Jan. 1612.

Among the other aids which sir Thomas Bodley received, in his noble design of restoring the public library at Oxford, his great friend, the earl of Essex, made him a present of a considerable part of the very valuable library that had belonged to the celebrated Jerom Osorius, successively bishop of Sylvas, and of Algarva, in which last see he died in 1580. This library had fallen to the earl’s share, among the booty which had been taken in the famous expedition against Cadiz, in 1596. King James I. likewise, enriched the Bodleian library at Oxford at the expence of his own for he gave a warrant to sir Thomas Bodley, under the privy seal, for any books, which that gentleman should like in any of his houses or libraries. However, his majesty amply supplied this loss, by purchasing lord Lumley’s library, which contained not only his own collection, but that of his father-in-law, Henry Fitz-Alan, earl of Arundel, who had lived in the reign of king Henry the eighth, when, upon the dissolution of the monasteries, he had great opportunities of collecting manuscripts. Many of these manuscripts, as well as of the printed books in the Royal library, have the name of Arundel and Lumley written in them and now constitute a part of the noble collection in the British Museum. In Hearne’s “Johannis Glastoniensis Historia de Rebus Glastoniensibus,” are two letters to sir Robert Cotton, which peculiarly belong to this article, as one of them gave rise to a very ridiculous report. They will be found in the note .

It would requirea volume to enumerate the many important additions made to the Bodleian library by its numerous benefactors, or to give even a superficial sketch of its ample contents in every branch of science. Among the earliest benefactors were, Robert Devereux, earl of Essex Thomas Sackville, lord Buckhurst and earl of Dorset Robert Sidney, lord Sidney of Penshurst viscount Lisle and earl of Leicester; George Carey,- lord Hunsdon William Gent, esq. Anthony Browne, viscount Montacute John lord Lumley Philip Scudamore, of London, esq. and Lawrence Bodley, younger brother to the founder. All these contributions were made before the year 16 Oo. In 1601, collections of books and manuscripts were presented by Thomas Allen, some time fellow of Trinity college Thomas James, first librarian Herbert Westphaling, bishop of Hereford sir John Fortescue, knt. Alexander Nowell, dean of St. Paul’s John Crooke, recorder of London, and chief justice of the Common Pleas and Nicholas Bond, D. D. president of Magdalen college. The most extensive and prominent collections, however, are those of the earl of Pembroke, Mr. Selden, archbishop Laud, sir Thomas Roe, sir Kenelm Digby, general Fairfax, Dr. Marshall, Dr. Barlow, Dr. Rawlinson, Mr. St. Amand, Dr. Tanner, Mr. Browne Willis, T. Hearne, and Mr. Godwin. The last collection bequeathed, that of the late eminent and learned antiquary, Richard Gough, esq. is perhaps the most perfect series of topographical science ever formed, and is particularly rich in topographical manuscripts, prints, drawings, and books illustrated by the manuscript notes of eminent antiquaries. Since 1780, a fund of more than 4001. a year has been esablished for the purchase of books. This arises from a small addition to the matriculation fees, and a moderate contribution annually from such members of the university as are admitted to the use of the library, or on their taking their first degree.

, a younger brother of sir Thonas Bodley, and, as already noticed, a benefactor to his library, was born in the city of Exeter, about the year 1546. After a suitable education, though in what school is not known, he was sent to Christ-church-college in Oxford, where he took the degrees of bachelor and master of arts. From thence he removed into his native country, where his merit became so conspicuous, that he was made one of the canons, residentiary of Exeter cathedral, and rector of Shobroke, about seven miles from that city, near Crediton. He was chief mourner at his brother’s funeral and, March 30, 1613, was created doctor in divinity, as a member of Christ-church. He died April the 19th, 1615, in the seventieth year of his age, and was interred in St. Peter’s cathedral in Exeter, near the choir, under a flat marble stone, with an epitaph. As to his character we are told, that for his pious zeal, and continual labour in the faithful discharge of the duties of his function, he cannot be over-praised, and that he was of an hospitable disposition, very charitable, and pious. In his will, he bequeathed to the mayor and chamber of Exeter, four hundred pounds in money, to purchase twenty pounds a year in lands, towards the maintenance of a preacher in that city. There is nothing of his writing extant, except an. elegy on the death of the famous bishop Jewel, inserted in Humphrey’s life of that prelate. Dr. John Prideaux, regius professor of divinity and rector of Exeter college, dedicated an act sermon to him, and acknowledges himself indebted to him for some preferment. Prideaux entered Exeter college as a poor servitor, and probably was then indebted to Dr. Bodley for his advancement.

, minister of the German chapel at St. James’s, London, the son of Anthony Boehm, minister at Oeetorff, in the county of Pyrmont, in Germany, who died 1679, was born June 1, 1673, and after his father’s death was sent to school at Lemgo, and afterwards at Hameln, whence, after making proficiency in Greek and Latin, he was removed to the newly-erected university at Halle. Having finished the usual course of studies here, and taken orders, he was for some time employed as tutor to the sons of noblemen and gentlemen. About the year 1701, some German families in London requested of the university of Halle to send over a proper person as schoolmaster to their children. Boehm was invited to accept this situation, and arrived at London in November of that year, where his first object was to acquire the English language. In 1702 he opened a school in Bedfordbnry, but met with so little encouragement, although invited hither for the purpose, that he must have returned to his own country, if, in 1705, he had not been appointed by prince George of Denmark, queen Anne’s husband, to be one of his chaplains, and officiate at his chapel, which he did for some time alternately with his colleague Crusius, and gave so much satisfaction, not only to the prince, but to the queen, that after his highness’s death, in 1708, the queen ordered the same service to be continued, and gave him access to her presence, which he improved occasionally in the promotion of acts, of charity and humanity. On one occasion, particularly, by his intercession, the queen prevailed on the king of France to release many of th French Protestants condemned to the gallies for religion. When king George I. came to the crown, Mr. Boehm was confirmed in his station, which beheld to his death, May 27, 1722. He was buried in Greenwich church-yard, with a characteristic epitaph. He appears to have been a man of unfeigned and fervent piety, and remarkably zealous in promoting works of piety and charity. Dr. Watts said of him, that he feared there were but few such men then in England, British or German, Episcopal or Non -conformist. His original works are 1. “Enchiridion Precum, cum introductione de natura Orationis,” 1707, 1715, 8vo. 2. “A volume of discourses and tracts,” in English. 3. “The duty of Reformation,” 1718. 4. “The doctrine of godly sorrow,” 1720. 5. “Plain directions for reading the Holy Bible,” 1708, and 1721. 6. “Various pious tracts, in the German language. He also translared the” Pietas Hallensis,“a curious history of the rise and progress of the Orphan school at Halle, 1705 6 7, and the first” Account of the Protestant mission at Tranquebar,“1709 11, some parts of the works of bishop Hopkins, Dr. Barrow, &c. Arndt’s” True Christianity" and edited a Latin edition of the same, and editions of some other pious treatises by foreign divines. He left an unfinished history of the reformation in England from Henry VIII. to Charles II. and some other manuscripts.

His most celebrated production, his ethic composition “De Consolatione Philosophise,” has always been admired both for the style and sentiments. It is an imaginary conference between the author and philosophy personified, who endeavours to console and soothe him in his afflictions. The topics of consolation contained in this work, are deduced from the tenets of Plato, Zeno, and Aristotle, but without any notice of the sources of consolation which are peculiar to the Christian system, which have led many to think him more of a Stoic than a Christian. It is partly in prose, and partly in verse; and was translated into Saxon by king Alfred, and illustrated with a commentary by Asser, bishop of St. David’s and into English, by Chaucer artel queen Elizabeth. It was also translated into English verse by John Walton, in 1410, of which translation there is a correct manuscript on parchment in the British Museum. Few books have been more popular, especially in the middle ages, or have passed through a greater number of editions in almost all languages. It has been observed by Mr. Harris, in his “Hermes,” that “with Boethius the Latin tongue, and the last remains of Roman dignity, may be said to have sunk in the western world.” To the same purpose, Gibbon says, “that the senator Boethius is the last of the Romans whom Cato or Tully would have acknowledged for their countryman.”

, a celebrated Scotch historian, was born at Dundee, in the shire of Angus, about 1470. After having studied at Dundee and Aberdeen, he was sent to the university of Paris, where he applied to philosophy, and became a professor of it there. There also he contracted an acquaintance with several eminent persons, particularly with Erasmus, who kept a correspondence with him afterwards. Elphinston, bishop of Aberdeen, having founded the king’s college in that city about 1500, sent for Boeis from Paris, and appointed him principal. He took for his colleague Mr. William Hay, and by their joint labour the kingdom was furnished with several eminent scholars. Upon the death of his patron, he undertook to write his life, and those of his predecessors in that see. The work is in Latin, and entitled “Vitae Episcoporum Murthlacensium et Aberdonensium,” Paris, 1522, 4tol He begins at Beanus, the first bishop, and ends at Gawin Dunbar, who was bishop when the book xyas published. A third part of the work is spent in the life of Elphinston, for whose sake it was undertaken. He next undertook to write in the same language the history of Scotland the first edition of which was printed at Paris by Badius Ascenslus in 152G, which consisted of seventeen books, and ended with the death of James I. but the next in 1574 was much enlarged, having the addition of the 18th book and part of the 19th the work was afterwards brought down to the reign of James III. by Ferrerius, a Piedmontese. It was translated by Bellenclen. (See Bellenden, John). Mackenzie observes, that of all Scots historians, next to Buchanan, Boethins has been the most censured and commended by the learned men who have mentioned him. Nicolson tells us, that in the first six books there are a great many particulars not to be found in Fordun or any other writer now extant and that, “unless the authors which he pretends to have seen be hereafter discovered, he will continue to be shrewdly suspected for the contriver of almost as many tales as Jeoffrey of Momnouth.” His 18th book, however, is highly commended by Ferrerius, who says, “that he has treated of things there in so comprehensive a manner, that he believes no one could have done it more fully or significantly on the same subject.” His stylo, says another writer, has all the purity of Caesar’s, and is so nervous both in the reflections and diction, that he seems to have absolutely entered into the spirit of Livy, and made it his own. Erasmus, who was intimately acquainted with him, says, in one of his epistles, “that he was a man of an extraordinary happy genius, and of great eloquence.” “He was certainly,” says another writer, “a great master of polite learning, well skilled in divinity, philosophy, and history; but somewhat credulous, and much addicted to the be-> lief of legendary stories. With regard to his other accomplishments, he was discreet, well-bred, attentive, generous, affable, and courteous.“Dr. Johnson in his Tour in Scotland observes that Hector Boethius may be” justly reverenced as one of the revivers of elegant learning. The style of Boethins, though, perhaps, not always rigorously pure, is formed with great diligence upon ancient models, and wholly uninfected with monastic barbarity. His history is written with elegance and vigour, but his fabulousness and credulity are justly blamed. His fabulousness, if he was the author of the fictions, is a fault for which no apology can be made; but his credulity may be excused in an age when all men were credulous. Learning was then rising on the world; but ages, so long accustomed to darkness, were too much dazzled with its light to see any thing distinctly. The first race of scholars, in the fifteenth century, and some time after, were, for the most part, learning to speak, rather than to think, and were therefore more studious of elegance than of truth. The contemporaries of Boethius thought it sufficient to know what the ancients had delivered. The examination of tenets and of facts was reserved for another generation.”

, a voluminous political and miscellaneous writer of the seventeenth century, was born at Ringsfield, in Suffolk, the only son of Baxter Bohun, who with his ancestors, had been lords of the manor of Westhall, in that county, from the 25th Henry VIII. In 1663, he was admitted fellow-commoner of Queen’s college, Cambridge, and continued there till the latter end of 1666, when the plague obliged him and others to leave the university. In 1675 he was made a justice of peace for Suffolk, and continued in that office till the second of James II. when he was discharged, but was restored to that office in the first of William and Mary. The time of his death is not mentioned, but he was alive in 1700. He wrote, 1. “An Address to the Freemen and Freeholders of the nation, in three parts, being the history of three sessions of parliament in 1678, 1682,and 1683,” 4to. 2. “A Defence of the Declaration of king Charles II. against a pamphlet styled, A just and modest Vindication of the proceedings of the two last Parliaments.” This was printed with and added to the Address. 3. “A Defence of Sir Robert Filmer, against the mistakes and representations of Algernon Sydney, esq. in a paper delivered by him to the sheriffs upon the scaffold on Tower-hill, on Friday, Dec. 7, 1683, before his execution there,” Lond. 1684. 4. “The Justice of Peace’s Calling, a moral essay,” Lond. 1684, 8vo. 5. “A Preface and Conclusion to Sir Robert Filmer’s Patriarcha,” ibid. 1685, 8vo. 6. “A Geographical Dictionary,” ibid. 1688, 8vo. 7. “The History of the Desertion; or an account of all the public affairs of England, from the beginning of Sept. 1688 to Feb. 12 following,” ibid. 1689, 8vo. 8. “An Answer to a piece called The Desertion discussed (by Jeremy Collier),” printed at the end of the “History of the Desertion.” 9. “The Doctrine of Passive Obedience and Non-Resistance no way concerned in the controversies now depending between the Williamites and the Jacobites,” ibid. 1689, 4to. In page 24th is a passage respecting bishop Ken, which Mr. Bohun found to be untrue, and therefore requests that it may be cancelled. 10. “The Life of John Jewell, bishop of Salisbury,” prefixed to a translation of his Apology, 1685. 11. “Three Charges delivered at the general quarter sessions holden at Ipswich, for the county of Suffolk, in 1691, 1692, and 1693,” 4to. 12. “The great Historical, Geographical, and Poetical Dictionary,” Lond. 1694, fol. He also translated Sicurus’ origin of Atheism the Universal Bibliotheque, or account of books for Jan. Feb. and March 1687 Sleidan’s History of the Reformation Puffendorff’s Present State of Germany, and Degory Wheare’s Method of reading History, Lond. 1698, 8vo.

, a pious and useful clergyman of Leicestershire, was born at Leicester in 1679, and at the age of fifteen had made such progress in letters as to be matriculated at St. John’s college, Cambridge. Having taken the degree of B. A. in 1698, he retired to Hinckley in Leicestershire, where he engaged in teaching a small endowed school, and retained that employment until 1732, at the humble salary of 10l. per annum. At the usual age, he was admitted into holy orders to serve the curacy of Stoney Stanton near Hinckley. It appears from the parish register, that he commenced his parochial duties in May 1702; and the care of the parish was confided to him, his rector then residing on another benefice. His stipend was only 30l. a year, as the living was a small one, being then in the open-field state. Nor does it appear that he had made any saving in money from the profits of his school all the property he seems to have brought with him to his curacy was, his chamber furniture, and a library, more valuable for being select than extensive. When Mr. Bold was examined for orders, his diocesan (Dr. James Gardiner, bishop of Lincoln) was so much pleased with his proficiency in sacred learning, that he had determined to make Mr. Bold his domestic chaplain: but the good bishop’s death soon after closed his prospect of preferment as soon as it was opened in that quarter; and Mr. Bold framed his plan of life and studies upon a system of rigid ceconomy and strict attention to his professional duties, which never varied during the fifty years he passed afterwards on his curacy. Remote from polished and literary society, which he was calculated both to enjoy and to adorn, he diligently performed the duties of an able and orthodox divine; a good writer; an excellent preacher, and an attentive parish priest. He appears, from the early age of 24 years, to have formed his plan of making himself a living sacrifice for the benefit of his flock; and to have declined preferment (which was afterward offered to him) with a view of making his example and doctrine the more striking and effective, by his permanent residence and labours in one and the same place. He appears to have begun his ecclesiastical labours in a spirit of self-denial, humility, charity, and piety. He had talents that might have rendered him conspicuous any where, and an impressive and correct delivery. His life was severe (so far as respected himself); his studies incessant; his spiritual labours for the church and his flock, ever invariably the same. His salary, we have already mentioned, was only ZOl. a year, which was never increased, and of which he paid at firsts/, then J2l. and lastly 16l. a year, for his board. It needs scarcely be said that the most rigid ceconomy was requisite, and practised, to enable him to subsist; much more to save out of this pittance for beneficent purposes. Yet he continued to give away annually, 5l.; and saved 5l. more with a view to more permanent charities: upon the rest he lived. His daily fare consisted of water-gruel for his breakfast; a plate from the farmer’s table, with whom he boarded, supplied his dinner; after dinner, one half pint of ale, of his own brewing, was his only luxury; he took no tea, and his supper was upon milk-pottage. With this slender fare his frame was supported under the labour of his various parochial duties. In the winter, he read and wrote by the farmer’s fire-side; in the summer, in his own room. At Midsummer, he borrowed a horse for a day or two, to pay short visits beyond a walking distance. He visited all his parishioners, exhorting, reproving, consoling, instructing them.

The last six years of his life he was unable to officiate publicly; and was obliged to obtain assistance from the Rev. Charles Cooper, a clergyman who resided in the parish on a small patrimonial property, with whom he divided his salary, making up the deficiency from his savings. Mr. Bold’s previous saving of 5l. annually, for the preceding four or five and forty years (and that always put out to interest) enabled him to procure this assistance, and to continue his little charities, as well as to support himself, though the price of boarding was just doubled upon him from his first entrance on the cure, from 8l. to 16l. a year. But, from the annual saving even of so small a sum as 5l. with accumulating interest during that term, he not only procured assistance for the last years of his life, but actually left by his will securities for the payment of bequests to the amount of between two and three hundred pounds: of which 100l. was bequeathed to some of his nearest relations; 100l. to the farmer’s family in which he died, to requite their attendance in his latter end, and with which a son of the family was enabled to set up in a little farm; and 40l. more he directed to be placed out at interest, of which interest one half is paid at Christmas to the poorer inhabitants who attend at church; and the other, for a sermon once a year, in Lent, “on the duty of the people to attend to the instructions of the minister whom the bishop of the diocese should set over them.”

, second wife of king Henry VIII. was born in 1507. She was daughter of sir Thomas Bolen, afterwards earl of Wiltshire and Ormonde, by Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Howard, duke of Norfolk. When she was but seven years of age, she was carried over to France with the king’s sister Mary, who was married to Lewis XII. And though, upon the B'rench king’s death, the queen dowager returned to England, yet Anne Bolen was so highly esteemed at the court of France, that Claude, the wife of Francis I. retained her in her service for some years; and after her death in 1524, the duchess of Alenzon, the king’s sister, kept her in her court during her stay in that kingdom. It is probable, that she returned from thence with her father, from his embassy in 1527; and was soon preferred to the place of maid of honour to the queen. She continued without the least imputation upon her character, till her unfortunate fall gave occasion to some malicious writers to defame her in all the parts of it. Upon her coming to the English court, the lord Percy, eldest son of the earl of Northumberland, being then a domestic of cardinal Wolsey, made his addressee to her, and proceeded so far, as to engage himself to marry her; and her consent shews, that she had then no aspirings to the crown. But the cardinal, upon some private reasons, using threats and other methods, with great difficulty put an end to that nobleman’s design. It was prohably about 1528, that the king began to shew some favour to her, which caused many to believe, that the whole process with regard to his divorce from queen Catherine was moved by the unseen springs of that secret passion. But it is not reasonable to imagine, that the engagement of the king’s affec tion to any other person gave the rise to that affair; for so sagacious a courtier as Wolsey would have infallibly discovered it, and not have projected a marriage with the French king’s sister, as he did not long before, if he had seen his master prepossessed. The supposition is much more reasonable, that his majesty, conceiving himself in a manner discharged of his former marriage, gave a full liberty to his affections, which began to settle upon Mrs. Bolen; who, in September 1532, was created marchioness of Pembroke, in order that she might be raised by degrees to the height for which she was designed; and on the 25th of January following was married to the king, the office being performed by; Rowland Lee, afterwards bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, with great privacy, though in the presence of her uncle the duke of Norfolk, her father, mother, and brother. On the 1st of June, 1533, she was crowned queen of England with such pomp and solemnity, as was answerable to the magnificence of his majesty’s temper; and every one admired her conduct, who had so long managed the spirit of a king so violent, as neither to surfeit him with too much fondness, nor to provoke with too much reserve. Her being so soon with child gave hopes of a numerous issue; and those, who loved the reformation, entertained the greatest hopes from her protection, as they knew she favoured them. On the 13th or 14th of September following, she brought forth a daughter, christened Elizabeth, afterwards the renowned queen of England, Cranmer, archbishop of Canterb ry, being her god-father. But the year 1536 proved fatal to her majesty; and her ruin was in all probability occasioned by those who began to be distinguished by the name of the Romish party. For the king now proceeding both at home and abroad in the point of reformation, they found that the interest which the queen had in him was the grand support of that cause. She had risen, not only in his esteem, but likewise in that of the nation in general; for in the last nine months of her life, she gave above fourteen thousand pounds to the poor, and was engaged in several noble and public designs. But these virtues could not secure her against the artifices of a bigoted party, which received an additional force from several other circumstances, that contributed to her destruction. Soon after queen Catharine’s death in Jan. 1535-6, she was brought to bed of a dead son, which was believed to have made a bad impression on the king’s mind; and as he had concluded from the death of his sons by his former queen, that the marriage was displeasing to God, so he might upon this misfortune begin to have the same opinion of his marriage with queen Anne. It was also considered by some courtiers, that now queen Catharine was dead, his majesty might marry another wife, and be fully reconciled with the pope and the emperor, and the issue by any other marriage would never be questioned; whereas, while queen Anne lived, the ground of the controversy still remained, and her marriage being accounted null from the beginning, would never be allowed by the court of Rome, or any of that party. With these reasons of state the king’s own passions too much concurred; for he now entertained a secret love for the lady Jane Seymour, who had all the charms of youth and beauty, and an humour tempered between the gravity of queen Catharine, and the gaiety of queen Anne. Her majesty therefore perceiving the alienation of the king’s heart, used all possible arts to recover that affection, the decay of which she was sensible of; but the success was quite contrary to what she designed. For he saw her no more with those eyes which she had formerly captivated; but gave way to jealousy, and ascribed her caresses to some other criminal passion, of which he began to suspect her. Her chearful temper indeed was not always limited within the bounds of exact decency and discretion; and her brother the lord Rochford’s wife, a woman of no virtue, being jealous of her husband and her, possessed the king with her own apprehensions. Henry Norris, groom of the stole, William Brereton, and sir Francis W'eston, who were of the king’s privy chamber, and Mark Smeton, a musician, were by the queen’s enemies thought too officious about her; and something was pretended to have been sworn by the lady Wingfield at her death, which determined the king; but the particulars are not known. It is reported likewise, that when the king held a tournament at Greenwich on the 1st of May, 1536, he was displeased at the queen for letting her handkerchief fall to one, who was supposed a favourite, and who wiped his face with it. Whatever the case was, the king returned suddenly from Greenwich to Whitehall, and immediately ordered her to be confined to her chamber, and her brother, with the four persons abovementioned, to be committed to the Tower, and herself to be sent after them the day following. On the river some privy counsellors came to examine her, but she made deep protestations of her innocence; and as she landed at the Tower, she fell down on her knees, and prayed Heaven so to assist her, as she was free from the crimes laid to her charge.“The confusion she was in soon raised a storm of vapours within her; sometimes she laughejj, and at other times wept excessively. She was also devout and light by turns; one while she stood upon her vindication, and at other times confessed some indiscretions, which upon recollection she denied. All about her took advantage from any word, that fell from her, and sent it immediately to court. The duke of Norfolk and others, who came to examine her, the better to make discoveries, told her, that Morris and Smeton had accused her; which, though false, had this effect on her, that it induced her to own some slight acts of indiscretion, which, though no ways essential, totally alienated the king from her. Yet whether even these small acknowledgments were real truths, or the effects of imagination and hysterical emotions, is very uncertain. On the 12th of May, Morris, Brereton, Weston, and Smeton, were tried in Westminster-hall. Smeton is said by Dr. Burnet to have confessed the fact; but the lord Herbert’s silence in this matter imports him to have been of a different opinion; to which may be added, that Cromwell’s letter to the king takes notice, that only some circumstances were confessed by Smeton. However, they were all four found guilty, and executed on the 17th of May. On the 15th of which month, the queen, and her brother the lord Rochford, were tried by their peers in the Tower, and condemned to die. Yet all this did not satisfy the enraged king, who resolved likewise to illegitimate his daughter Elizabeth; and, in order to that, to annul his marriage with the queen, upon pretence of a precontract between her and the lord Percy, now earl of Northumberland, who solemnly denied it; though the queen was prevailed upon to acknowledge, that there were some just and lawful impediments against her marriage with the king; and upon this a sentence of divorce was pronounced by the archbishop, and afterwards confirmed in the convocation and parliament. On the 19th of May, she was brought to a scaffold within the Tower, where she was prevailed upon, out of regard to her daughter, to make no reflections on the hardships she had sustained, nor to say any thing touching the grounds on which sentence passed against her; only she desired, that” all would judge the best." Her head being severed from her body, they were both put into an ordinary chest, and buried in the chapel in the Tower.

, an eminent puritan divine, and one of the best scholars of his time, was born at Blackburn in Lancashire, in 1572, and educated in queen Elizabeth’s free-school in that place, where he made such proficiency as to be accounted a young man of extraordinary talents and industry. In his eighteenth year he went to Oxford, and entered of Lincoln college, under the tuition of Mr. John Randal, where he went through a course of logic and philosophy with distinguished approbation, and particularly took pains to acquire a critical knowledge of Greek, transcribing the whole of Homer with his own hand. By this diligence he attained a greater facility than was then usual, writing, and even disputing, in Greek with great correctness and fluency. From Lincoln he removed to Brazen-nose, in hopes of a fellowship, as that society consisted most of Lincolnshire and Cheshire men. In 1596 he took his bachelor’s degree in this college, and was kindly supported by Dr. Brett of Lincoln, himself a good Grecian, and who admired the proficiency Bolton had made in that language, until 1602, when he obtained a fellowship, and proceeded M. A. the same year. His reputation advancing rapidly, he was successively chosen reader of the lectures on logic, and on moral and natural philosophy in his college. In 1605, vrhen king James came to Oxford, the vice-chancellor (Abbot, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury) appointed him to read in natural philosophy in the public schools, and to be one of the disputants before his majesty. Afterwards he increased his stock of learning by metaphysics, mathematics, and scholastic divinity. About this time, one Anderton, a countryman and schoolfellow, and a zealous Roman catholic, endeavoured to seduce him to that religion, and a place of private conference was fixed, but Anderton not keeping his appointment, the affair dropped. Mr. Bolton, with all his learning, had been almost equally noted for immorality, but about his thirty-fourth year, reformed his life and manners, and became distinguished for regularity and piety. In 1609, about two years after he entered into holy orders, which he did very late in life, he was presented to the living of Broughton in Northamptonshire, by Mr. afterwards sir Augustine Nicolls, serjeant at law, who sent for him to his chamber* in Serjeant’s Inn and gave him the presentation. Dr. King, bishop of London, being by accident there at the same time, thanked the serjeant for what he had done for Broughton, but told him that he had deprived the university of a singular ornament. He then went to his living and remained on it until his death, Dec. 17, 1631. He was, says Wood, a painful and constant preacher, a person of great zeal in his duty, charitable and bountiful, and particularly skilled in resolving the doubts of timid Christians. Of his works, the most popular in his time, was “A Discourse on Happiness.” Lond. 1611, 4to, which was eagerly bought up, and went through six editions at least in his life-time. He published also various single and volumes of sermons, a list of which may be seen in Wood. After his death Edward Bagshaw, esq. published “Mr. Bolton’s last and learned work of the Four last Things, Death, Judgment, Hell, and Heaven, with an Assize Sermon, and Funeral Sermon for his patron Judge Nichols,” Loncl. 1633. Prefixed to this is the life of Mr. Bolton, to which all his subsequent biographers have been indebted.

, dean of Carlisle, was born in London in April 1697, and was the only surviving child of Mr. John Bolton, a merchant in that city, whom he lost when he was but three years old. He was first educated in a school at Kensington, and was admitted a commoner at Wadham college, Oxford, April 12, 1712. He was afterwards elected a scholar of that house, where he took his degree of B. A. in 1715, and of M. A. June 13, 1718, expecting to be elected fellow in his turn; but in this he was disappointed, and appealed, without success, to the bishop of Bath and Wells, the visitor. In July 1719 he removed to Hart Hall; and on the 20th December following, was ordained a deacon, in the cathedral church of St. Paul, by Dr. John Robinson, bishop of London. He then went to reside at Fulham, and seems to have passed two years there: for he was ordained priest by the same bishop in the chapel of Fulham palace, April 11, 1721. While at Fulham he became acquainted with Mrs. Grace Butler of Rowdell in Sussex, on whose daughter Elizabeth he wrote an epitaph, which is placed in Twickenham church-yard, where she was buried. This epitaph gave occasion to some verses by Pope, which appear in Uuff'head’s life of that poet, and were communicated to the author by the hon. Mr. Yorke, who probably did not know that they first appeared in the Prompter, a periodical paper, No. VIII. and afterwards in the works of Aaron Hill, who by mistake ascribes the character of Mrs. Butler to Pope.

Being chosen senior fellow of Dulwich college, he went to reside there, March 10, 1722, where he remained three years, and resigned his fellowship May 1, 1725. About this time he removed to Kensington, living upon a small fortune he possessed; and here he appears to have become acquainted with the celebrated Whiston; and partly, as it is said, by his recommendation, became known to sir Joseph Jekyll, master of the rolls, by whom he was appointed his domestic chaplain, and, in 1729, preacher at the Rolls, on the resignation of Dr. Butler, afterwards bishop of Durham. This connection introduced him to the patronage of lord Hardwicke, by whose means, in 1734, he was promoted to the deanery of Carlisle, and, in 1738, to the vicarage of St. Mary’s Reading. He had his degree of doctor of civil law from the archbishop of Canterbury, Jan. 13, 1734, and went to reside at Carlisle in 1736. Both these preferments, the only ones he ever received, he held until the time of his death. He was an excellent parishpriest, and a good preacher, charitable to the poor, and having from his own valetudinary state acquired some knowledge of physic, he kindly assisted them by advice and medicine. He was greatly beloved by his parishioners, and deservedly; for he performed every part of his duty in a truly exemplary manner. On Easter Tuesday in 173y he preached one of the spital sermons at St. Bride’s, Fleet' street, which was afterwards printed in 4to, but we do not find that he aspired to the character of an author, though so well qualified for it, until late in life. His first performance was entitled “A Letter to a lady on Cardplaying on the Lord’s day, 8vo, 1748; setting forth in a lively and forcible manner the many evils attending the practice of gaming on Sundays, and of an immoderate attachment to that fatal pursuit at any time. In 1750 appeared” The Employment of Time, three essays,“8vo, dedicated to lord Hardwicke; the most popular of our author’s performances, and, on its original publication, generally ascribed to Gilbert West. In this work two distinguished and exemplary female characters are supposed to be those of lady Anson and lady Heathcote, lord Hardwicke' s daughters. The next year, 1751, produced” The Deity’s delay in punishing the guilty considered on the principles of reason,“8vo; and in 1755,” An answer to the question, Where are your arguments against what you call lewdness, if you can make no use of the Bible?“8vo. Continuing to combat the prevailing vices of the times, he published in 1757,” A Letter to an officer of the army on Travelling on Sundays,“8vo; and, in the same year,” The Ghost of Ernest, great grandfather of her royal highness the princess dowager of Wales, with some account of his life,“8vo. Each of the above performances contains good sense, learning, philanthropy, and religion, and each of them is calculated for the advantage of society. The last work which Dr. Bolton gave the public was not the least valuable. It was entitled” Letters and Tracts on the Choice of Company, and other subjects,“1761, 8vo. This he dedicated to his early patron, lord Hardwicke, to whom he had inscribed The Employment of Time, and who at this period was no longer chancellor. In his address to this nobleman he says,” An address to your lordship on this occasion in the usual style would as ill suit your inclinations as it doth my age and profession. We are both of us on the confines of eternity, and should therefore alike make truth our care, that truth which, duly influencing our practice, will be the security of our eternal happiness. Distinguished by my obligations to your lordship, I would be so by my acknowledgments of them: I would not be thought to have only then owned them when they might have been augmented. Whatever testimony I gave of respect to you when in the highest civil office under your prince, I would express the same when you have resigned it; and shew as strong an attachment to lord Hardwicke as I ever did to the lord chancellor. Receive, therefore, a tribute of thanks, the last which I am ever likely in this manner to pay. But I am hastening to my grave, with a prospect which must be highly pleasing to me, unless divested of all just regard to those who survive me."

, a celebrated doctor, cardinal, and saint of the church of Rome, was born at Bagnarea in Tuscany, 1221. He was admitted into the order of St. Francis, about 1243; and studied divinity at the university of Paris under the celebrated Alexander de Hales, with so much success, that at the end of seven years he was thought worthy to read public lectures upon the Sentences. He was created doctor in 1255 along with St. Thomas Aquinas, and the year after appointed general of his order, in which office he governed with so much zeal and prudence, that he perfectly restored the discipline of it, which had been greatly neglected. Pope Clement IV. nominated him to the archbishopric of York in England; but Bonaventure disinterestedly refused it. After the death of Clement the see of Rome lay vacant almost three years, and the cardinals not being able to agree among themselves who should be pope, came at length to a most solemn engagement, to leave the choice to Bonaventure; and to elect whoever he should name, though it should be even himself, which, from his modest character, was not very probable. Accordingly, he named Theobald, archdeacon of Liege, who was at that time in the Holy land, and who took the title of Gregory X. By this pope he was made a cardinal and bishop of Albano; and appointed to assist at a general council, which was held at Lyons soon after. He died there in 1274, and was magnificently and honourably conducted to his grave; the pope and whole council attending, and the cardinal Peter of Tarantais, afterwards pope Innocent V. making his funeral oration. Sixtus IV. canonized him in 1482. He. has had the good fortune to be almost equally praised by popish and protestant writers, Bellarmine has pronounced Bonaventure a person dear to God and men; and Luther calls him “vir prtestantissimus,” a most excellent man. His works were printed at Rome in 1588, in 8 vols. folio. Excepting his commentary upon the master of the Sentences, they are chiefly on pious and mystical subjects, and have gained him the name of the Seraphic doctor. Brucker gives us the following account of his method of philosophizing, from his treatise “De reductione Artium ad Theologiam;” on the “application of Learning to Theology:” Human knowledge he divides into three branches, logical, physical and moral. Each of these he considers as the effect of supernatural illumination, and as communicated to men through the medium of the holy scriptures. The whole doctrine of scripture he reduces to three heads; that which respects the eternal generation and incarnation of Christ, the study of which is the peculiar province of the doctors of the church; that which concerns the conduct of life, which is the subject of preaching; and that which relates to the union of the soul with God, which is peculiar to the monastic and contemplative life. Physical knowledge he applies to the doctrine of scripture emblematically. For example, the production of the idea of any sensible object from its archetype, is a type of the generation of the Logos; the right exercise of the senses typifies the virtuous conduct of life; and the pleasure derived from the senses represents the union of the soul with God. In like manner, logical philosophy furnishes an emblem of the eternal generation and the incarnation of Christ: a word conceived in the mind resembling the eternal generation; its expression in vocal sounds, the incarnation. Thus the multiform wisdom of God, according to this mystical writer, lies concealed through all nature; and all human knowledge may, by the help of allegory and analogy, be spiritualised and transferred to theology. How wide a door this method of philosophising opens to the absurdities of mysticism the reader will easily perceive from this specimen.

Mr. Bond has left “Annotationes in poemata Quiuti Horatii,” Lond. 1606, 8vo. Han. 1621, 8vo, and Ley den, 1653, 8vo. The best edition is that of Amst. 1636, 12mo. His Persius was not printed till two years after his death, in 8vo, under the following. title, “Auli Persii Flacci Satyrae sex, cum posthumis commentariis Johannis Bond,” 1614, 8vo. It was published by Roger Prowse, who had married his daughter Elizabeth, and who, in the dedication to Dr. Montague, bishop of Bath and Wells, informs us, that his father-in-law had not put the last hand to these Commentaries; which may be the reason of those considerable defects in some points of history and philosophy which are to be found in them. Mr. Wood is of opinion that, besides these, he wrote several other pieces, which were never published.

, a celebrated saint of the eighth century, and usually styled the Apostle of Germany, was an Englishman, named Wilfrid, and born at C red ton or Kirton in Devonshire, about the year 680. He was educated from the age of thirteen in the monastery of Escancester or Exeter, and about three years after removed to Nutcell, in the diocese of Winchester, a monastery which was afterwards destroyed by the Danes, and was never rebuilt. Here he was instructed in the sacred and secular learning of the times; and at the age of thirty, was ordained priest, and became a zealous preacher. The same zeal prompted him to undertake the functions of a missionary among the pagans and with that view he went with two monks into Friezeland, about the year 716; but a war which broke out between Charles Martel, mayor of the French palace, and Radbod, king of Friezeland, rendering it impracticable to preach the gospel at that time, he returned to England with his companions. Still, however, zealously intent on the conversion of the pagans, he refused being elected abbot of Nutcell, on a vacancy which happened on his return; and having received recommendatory letters from the bishop of Winchester, went to Rome, and presented himself to the pope Gregory II. who encouraged his design, and gave him a commission for the conversion of the infidels, in the year 719. With this he went into Bavaria and Thuringia, and had considerable success: and Radbod, king of Friezeland, being now dead, he had an opportunity of visiting that country, where he co-Operated with Willibrod, another famous missionary, who would have appointed him his successor, which Wilfrid rt fused, because the pope had particularly enjoined him to preach in the eastern parts of Germany. Through Hesse, or a considerable part of it, even to the confines of Saxony, he extended his pious labours, and had considerable success, although he suffered many hardships, and was often exposed to danger from the rage of the infidels.

After some time he returned to Rome, where Gregory II. consecrated him bishop of the new German churches, by the name of Boniface, a Roman name, which Gregory probably thought might procure from the German converts more respect to the pope, than an English one. Solicitous also to preserve his dignity, Gregory exacted from Boniface an oath of subjection to the papal authority, drawn up in very strong terms. Boniface then returned to the scenes of his mission, and had great success in Hesse, encouraged now by Charles Martel, the dominion of the French extending at this time a considerable way into Germany. We do not, however, find that he derived any other assistance from the civil authority, than personal protection, which doubtless was of great importance. If he complied with the instructions sent from England, he employed no means but what became a true missionary. These, instructions, or rather advice sent to him by Daniel, bishop of Winchester, about the year 723, afford too striking an instance of good sense and liberality in that dark age, to be omitted. Daniel’s method of dealing with idolaters was conceived in these words, “Do not contradict in a direct manner their accounts of the genealogy of their gods; allow that they were born from one another in the same way that mankind are: this concession will give you the advantage of proving, that there was a time when they had no existence. Ask them who governed the world before the birth of their gods, and if these gods have ceased to propagate? If they have not, shew them the consequence; namely, that the gods must be infinite in number, and that no man can rationally be at ease in worshipping any of them, lest he should, by that means, offend one, who is more powerful. Argue thus with them, not in the way of insult, but with temper and moderation: and take opportunities to contrast these absurdities with the Christian doctrine: let the pagans be rather ashamed than incensed by your oblique mode of stating these subjects. Shew them the insufficiency of their plea of antiquity; inform them that idolatry did anciently prevail over the world, but that Jesus Christ was manifested, in order to reconcile men to God by his grace.” From this same prelate he received other instructions respecting reforming the church, and exercising discipline 'with the refractory and scandalous priests, who occasioned much obstruction to his mission. In the mean time, the report of his success induced many of his countrymen to join him, who dispersed themselves and preached in the villages of Hesse and Thuringia.

In the year 732, he received the title of archbishop from Gregory II f. who supported his mission with the same spirit as his predecessor Gregory II.; and under this encouragement he proceeded to erect new churches, and extend Christianity. At this time, he found the Bavarian churches disturbed by one Eremvolf, who would have seduced the people into idolatry, but whom he condemned, according to the canons, and restored the discipline of the church. In the year 738, he again visited Rome; and after some stay, he induced several Englishmen who resided there, to join with him in his German mission. Returning into Bavaria, he established three new bishoprics, at Salczburgh, Frisinghen, and Ratisbon. At length he was fixed at Mentz, in the year 745, and although afterwards many other churches in Germany have been raised to the dignity of archbishoprics, Mentz has always retained the primacy, in honour of St. Boniface. He also founded a monastery at Fridislar, another at Hamenburgh, and one at Ordorfe, in all which the monks gained their livelihood by the labour of their hands. In the year 746, he laid the foundation of the great abbey of Fulda, which continued long the most renowned seminary of religion and learning in all that part of the world. The abbot is now a prince of the empire. In the mean time his connection with England was constantly preserved; and it is in the epistolary correspondence with his own country, that the most striking evidence of his pious views appears. Still intent on his original design, although now advanced in years, he determined to return into Friezeland, and before his departure, acted as if he had a strong presentiment of what was to happen. He appointed Lullus, an Englishman, his successor as archbishop of Mentz, a privilege which the pope had granted him, and ordained him with the consent of king Pepin. He went by the Rhine to Friezeland, where, assisted by Eoban, whom he had ordained bishop of Utrecht, he brought great numbers of pagans into the pale of the church. He had appointed a day to confirm those whom he had baptized; and in waiting for them, encamped with his followers on the banks of the Bordue, a river which then divided East and West Friezeland. His intention was to confirm, by imposition of hands, the converts in the plains of Dockum. On the appointed day, he beheld, in the morning, not the new converts whom he expected, but a troop of enraged pagans, armed with shields and lances. The servants went out to resist; but Boniface, with calm intrepidity, said to his followers, “Children, forbear to fight; the scripture forbids us to render evil for evil. The day which I have long waited for is come; hope in God, and he will save your souls.” The pagans immediately attacked them furiously, and killed the whole company, fifty-two in number, besides Boniface himself. This happened on June 5, 755, in the fortieth year after his arrival in Germany. His body was interred in the abbey of Fulda, and was long regarded as the greatest treasure of that monastery. Boniface’s character has been strangely misrepresented by Mosheim, and by his transcribers, but ably vindicated by Milner, who has examined the evidence on both sides with great precision. His works, principally sermons and correspondence, were published under the title “S. Bonifacii Opera, a Nicolao Serrario,” Mogunt. 1605, 4to.

, the son of a lawyer of the same name, was born at Crema, in the Venetian state about 1584. In his thirtieth year he went to study at Padua, and made such proficiency as to be created doctor of laws at the age of eighteen. About two years after he was appointed law professor in the college of Rovigo, where he first lectured on the institutes of Justinian. He afterwards accompanied the pope’s nuncio Jerome Portia, as secretary, and was himself employed in some affairs of importance. On his return to Venice, he had several preferments, and among others that of archpriest of Rovigo. In Oct. 1619, he was elected Greek and Latin professor at Padua, but declined accepting the office. In 1620, he assisted at Venice, in the establishment of an academy for the education of the young nobility, and gave lectures on the civil law. Pope Urban VIII. bestowed on him the archdeaconry of Trevisa, which he held, with the office of grand vicar of that diocese, under four successive bishops. He assisted also very essentially in founding a new academy at Padua for the Venetian nobility, in 1636, and was the first director or president of it, and founded a similar establishment at Trevisa. In 1653 he was appointed bishop of Capo d'Istria, which he held until his death in 165i). He was a man of various learning, as appears by his “Historia Trevigiena,” 4to, his “Historia Ludicra,” 1656, 4to, a collection of singular narratives from authors of every description. He published also some “Latin poems” in 1619, 12mo. “De Romanae Historian Scriptoribus excerpta ex Bodino, Vossio et aliis,” Venice, 1627, 4to.

, bishop of London, proverbial for his cruelty, was the son of an honest poor man, and born, at Hanley in Worcestershire, although some have very eagerly reported that he was the natural son of one George Savage, a priest, as if the circumstance of his birth could have had any effect on his future disposition. He was maintained at school by an ancestor of Nicholas Lechmere, esq. a baron of the exchequer in the reign of king William; and in 1512, he was entered at Broadgate-hall in Oxford, now Pembroke college. On June 12, 1519, he was admitted bachelor of the canon, and the day following bachelor of the civil law. He entered into orders about the same time, and had some employment in the diocese of Worcester; and on the 12th of July 1525, was created doctor of the canon law. He was a man of some, though not great learning, but distinguished himself chiefly by his skill and dexterity in the management of affairs, which made him be taken notice of by cardinal Wolsey, who appointed him his commissary for the faculties; and he was with this prelate at Cawood, when he was arrested for high treason. He enjoyed at once the livings of Blaydon and Cherry Burton in Yorkshire, Ripple in Worcestershire, East Dereham in Norfolk, and the prebend of Chiswick in the cathedral church of St. Paul: but the last he resigned in 1539, an of East Dereham in 1540. He was installed archdeacon of Leicester, October 17, 1535.

After the cardinal’s death, he got into the good graces of king Henry VIII. who appointed him one of his chaplains. On this he began his career in a manner not very consistent with his after-conduct. He was not only a favourer of the Lutherans, but a promoter of the king’s divorce from queen Catherine of Spain, and of great use to his majesty in abrogating the pope’s supremacy. He was also in high favour with lord Cromwell, secretary of state, by whose recommendation he was employed as ambassador at several courts. In 1532, he was sent to Rome, along with sir Edward Karne, to excuse king Henry’s personal appearance upon the pope’s citation. In 1533, he was again sent to Rome to pope Clement VII. then at Marseilles, upon the excommunication decreed against king Henry VIII. on account of his divorce; to deliver that king’s appeal from the pope to the next general council. But in this he betrayed so much of that passionate temper which appeared afterwards more conspicuously, and executed the order of his master in this affair with so much vehemence and fury, that the pope talked of throwing him into a caldron of melted lead, on which he thought proper to make his escape. He was employed likewise in other embassies to the kings of Denmark and France, and the emperor of Germany. In 1538, being then ambassador in France, he was nominated to the bishopric of Hereford, Nov. 27; but before consecration he was translated to London, of which he was elected bishop Oct. 20, 1539, and consecrated April 4, 1540.

At the time of the king’s death in 1547, Bonner was ambassador with the emperor Charles V.; and though during Henry’s reign he appeared zealous against the pope, and had concurred in all the measures taken to abrogate his supremacy, yet these steps he appears to have taken merely as the readiest way to preferment; for his principles, as far as such a man can be said to have any, were those of popery, as became evident from his subsequent conduct. On the 1st of September 1547, not many months after the accession of Edward VI. he scrupled to take an oath, to renounce and deny the bishop of Rome, and to swear obedience to the king, and entered a protestation against the king’s injunction and homilies. For this behaviour he was committed to the Fleet; but having submitted, and recanted his protestation, was released, and for sometime complied outwardly with the steps taken to advance the reformation, while he used privately all means in his power to obstruct it. After the lord Thomas Seymour’s death, he appeared so remiss in putting the court orders in execution, particularly that relating to the use of the common prayer book, that he was severely reproved by the privy council. He then affected to redouble his diligence: but still, through his remissness in preaching, and his connivance at the mass in several places, many people in his diocese being observed to withdraw from the divine service and communion, he was accused of neglect in the execution of the king’s orders. He was summoned before the privy council on the llth of August, when, after a reproof for his negligence, he was enjoined to preach the Sunday three weeks after at Paul’s cross, on certain articles delivered to him; and also to preach there once a quarter for the future, and be present at every sermon preached there, and to celebrate the communion in that church on all the principal feasts: and to abide and keep residence in his house in London, till he had licence from the council to depart elsewhere. On the day appointed for his preaching, he delivered a sermon to a crowded audience on the points assigned to him. But he entirely omitted the last article, the king’s royal power in his youth; for which contempt he was complained of to the king by John Hooper, afterwards bishop of Worcester: and archbishop Cranmer, bishop Ridley, sir William Petre, and sir Thomas Smith, secretaries of state, and William May, LL. D. and dean of St. Paul’s, were appointed commissioners to proceed against him. Appearing before them several days in September, he was, after a long trial, committed to the Marshalsea; and towards the end of October deprived of his bishopric.

On the accession of queen Mary, Bonner had an opportunity of shewing himself in his proper character, which indeed had been hitherto but faintly-concealed. He was restored to his bishopric by a commission read in St. Paul’s cathedral the 5th of September 1553; and in 1554, he was made vicegerent, and president of the convocation, in the room of archbishop Cranmer, who was committed to the Tower. The same year he visited his diocese, in order to root up all the seeds of the Reformation, and behaved in the most furious and extravagant manner; at Hadham, he was excessively angry because the bells did not ring at his coming, nor was the rood-loft decked, or the sacrament hung up. He swore and raged in the church at Dr. Bricket, the rector, and, calling him knave and heretic, went to strike at him; but the blow fell upon sir Thomas Joscelyn’s ear, and almost stunned him. On his return he set up the mass again at St. Paul’s, before the act for restoring it was passed. The same year, he was in commission to turn out some of the reformed bishops. In 1555, and the three following years, he was the occasion of above two hundred of innocent persons being put to death in the most cruel manner, that of burning, for their firm adherence to the Protestant religion. On the 14th of February 1555-6, he came to Oxford (with Thirlby bishop of Ely), to degrade archbishop Cranmer, whom he used with great insolence. The 29th of December following he was put into a commission to search and raze all registers and records containing professions against the pope, scrutinies taken in religious houses, &c. And the 8th of February 1556-7, he was also put in another commission, or kind of inquisition, for searching after and punishing all heretics.

Upon queen Elizabeth’s accession, Bonner went to meet her at Highgate, with the rest of the bishops; but she looked on him as a man stained with blood, and therefore would shew him no mark of her favour. For some months, however, he remained unmolested; but being called before the privy council on the 30th of May 1359, he refused to take the oath of allegiance and supremacy: for which reason only, as it appears, he was deprived a second time of his bishopric the 29th of June following, and committed to the Marshalsea. After having lived in confinement some years, he died September 5, 1569, and three days after he was buried at midnight, in St. George’s churchyard, Southwark, to prevent any disturbances that might have been made by the citizens, who hated him extremely. He had stood excommunicated several years, and might have been denied Christian burial; but of this no advantage was taken. As to his character, he was a violent, furious, and passionate man, and extremely cruel in his nature; in his person he was very fat and corpulent, the consequence of excessive gluttony, to which he was much addicted. He was a great master of the canon law, being excelled in that faculty by very few of his time, and well skilled in politics, but understood little of divinity. Several pieces were published under his name, of which the following is a list 1. Preface to the Oration of Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, concerning true Obedience. Printed at London, in Latin, 1534, 1535, and at Hamburgh in 1536, 8vo. Translated into English by Mi-, chael Wood, a zealous Protestant, with a bitter preface to the reader, and a postscript, Roan, 1553, 8vo. It is also inserted in J. Fox’s book of Martyrs. In the preface Bonner speaks much in favour of king Henry the VHIth’s marriage with Ann Boleyn, and against the tyranny exercised by the bishop of Rome in this kingdom. 2. Several letters to the lord Cromwell. 3. A declaration to lord Cromwell, describing to him the evil behaviour of Stephen (bishop of Winchester), with special causes therein contained, wherefore and why he misliked of him. 4. Letter of his about the proceedings at Rome concerning the king’s divorce from Catherine of Arragon. 5. An admonition and advertisement given by the bishop of London to all readers of the Bible in the English tongue. 6. Injunctions given by Bonner, bishop of London, to his clergy (about preaching, with the names of books prohibited). 7. Letter to Mr. Lechmere. 8. Responsum & exhortatio, Lond. 1553, 8vo. Answer and exhortation to the clergy in praise of priesthood: spoken by the author in St. Paul’s cathedral, the 16th October, 1553, after a sermon preached before the clergy, by John Harpesfield. 9. A letter to Mr. Lechmere, 6th September, 1553. 10. Articles to be enquired of in the general visitation of Edmund bishop of London, exercised by him in 1554, in the city and diocese of London, &c. To ridicule them, John Bale, bishop of Ossory, wrote a book, entitled, A declaration of Edmund Bonner’s articles, concerning the clergy of London diocese, whereby that execrable anti-christ is in his right colours revealed, 1554, and 1561, 8vo. 11. A profitable and necessary doctrine, containing an exposition on the Creed, seven Sacraments, ten Commandments, the Pater Noster, Ave Maria, with certain homilies adjoining thereto, for the instruction and information of the diocese of London, Lond. 1554-5, 4to. This book was drawn up by his chaplains John Harpesfield and Henry Pendleton; the former part of it, which is catechism, is mostly taken out of the Institution of a Christian man, set out by king Henry VIII. only varied in some points. 12. Several letters, declarations, arguings, disputes, &c. of his are extant in John Fox’s book of Martyrs, vol. last. 13. His objections against the process of Robert Horn, bishop of Winchester, who had tendered the oath of supremacy to him a second time, are preserved by Mr. Strype in his Annals of the Reformation. The character of bishop Bonner is so familiar to our readers as to require little illustration, or any addition to the preceding account from the former edition of this Dictionary; yet some notice may be taken of the defence set up by the Roman Catholic historians. Dodd, alluding to his cruelties, says, that “Seeing he proceeded according to the statutes then in force, and by the direction of the legislative power, he stands in need of no apology on that score.” But the history of the times proves that Bonner’s character cannot be protected by a reference to the statutes, unless his vindicator can likewise prove that he had no hand in enacting those statutes; and even if this were conceded, his conduct will not appear less atrocious, because, not content with the sentence of the law carried into execution by the accustomed officers, Bonner took frequent opportunities to manifest the cruelty of his disposition by anticipating, or aggravating, the legal punishments. He sometimes whipped the prisoners with his own hands, till he was tired with the violence of the exercise; and on one occasion he tore out the beard of a weaver who refused to relinquish his religion; and that he might give him a specimen of burning, he held his hand to a candle, till the sinews and veins shrunk and burst . The fact is, that Bonner was constitutionally cruel, and delighted in the sufferings he inflicted. Granger very justly says, that “Nature seems to have designed him for an executioner,” and as, wherever he could, he performed the character, how can he be defended by an appeal to the statutes? The most remarkable circumstance in his history is the lenity shown to him after all this bloody career. There seems no reason to think that he would have even been deprived of his bishopric, had he consented to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, a circumstance which is surely very extraordinary. His compliance, had he taken, that step, could have been only hypocritical, and what an object it would have been to have seen the duties and power of a protestant prelate intrusted to such a monster, and in that diocese, where so many families preserved the bitter remembrance of his cruelty.

, an ancient prelate of the fourth century, is known in church history as the heretical bishop of Naissus in Dacia, though some authors say of Sardica, the metropolis of that province. In the year 391 he was accused of crimes against the canons of the chnrch and the law of God, and was reported for heresy at the council of Capua, which met the latter end of that year. The particulars of his crimes cannot now be known, but his heresy may be gathered from St. Augustin and St. Ambrose. He had, before, been condemned by Damasus, bishop of Rome, who died A. D. 384. The council of Capua committed the hearing of his cause to the bishops of Mecodon, his neighhours, under their metropolitan Anysius, bishop of Thessalonica. The bishops assembled, agreeably to the order of the council, and Bonosus appeared before them; after examination, they were so well convinced of the truth of the charge, that they immediately suspended him from all episcopal functions; at the same time writing a letter to Syricius bishop of Rome, declaring their abhorrence of the detestable error, that the virgin Mary should have other children than Christ. Bonosus died A. D. 410; but his doctrine did not die with him, being maintained by some 200 years after his death. Pope Gregory makes mention of the Bonosians in the latter end of the sixth century.

, a learned English antiquary, was born at Pendeen, in the parish of St. Just, Cornwall, February 2, 1695-6. The family of that name, from which he was descended, had been settled at the place from whence they derived it (Borlase), from the time of king William Rufus. Our author was the second son of John Borlase, esq. of Pendeen, in the parish before mentioned, by Lydia, the youngest daughter of Christopher Harris, esq. of Hayne in the county of Devon; and was put early to school at Penzance, from which he was removed, in. 1709, to the care of the rev. Mr. Bedford, then a learned school-master at Plymouth. Having completed his grammatical education, he was entered of Exeter college, Oxford, in March 1712-13; where, on the 1st of June 1719, he took the degree of master of arts. In the same year, Mr. Borlase was admitted to deacon’s orders, and ordained priest in 1720. On the 22d of. April, 1722, he was instituted, by Dr. Weston, bishop of Exeter, to the rectory of Ludgvan in Cornwall, to which he had been presented by Charles Duke of Bolton . On the 28th of July, 1724, he was married in the church of Illuggan, by his elder brother, Dr. Borlase of Castlehorneck, to Anne, eldest surviving daughter and coheir of William Smith, M. A. rector of the parishes of Camborn and Illuggan. In 1732, the lord chancellor King, by the recommendation of sir William Morice, bart. presented Mr. Borlase to the vicarage of St. Just, his native parish, and where his father had a considerable property. This vicarage and the rectory of Ludgvan were the only preferments he ever received.

When Mr. Borlase was fixed at Ludgvan, which was a retired, but delightful situation, he soon recommended himself as a pastor, a gentleman, and a man of learning. The duties of his profession he discharged with the most rigid punctuality and exemplary dignity. He was esteemed and respected by the principal gentry of Cornwall, and lived on the most friendly and social terms with those of his neighbourhood. In the pursuit of general knowledge he was active and vigorous; and his mind being of an inquisitive turn, he could not survey with inattention or indifference the peculiar objects which his situation pointed to his view. There were in the parish of Ludgvan rich copper works, belonging to the late earl of Godolphin. These abounded with mineral and metallic fossils, which Mr. Borlase collected from time to time; and his collection increasing by degrees, he was encouraged to study at large the natural history of his native county. While he was engaged in this design, he could not avoid being struck with the numerous m'onuments of remote antiquity that are to be met with in several parts of Cornwall; and which had hitherto been passed over with far less examination than they deserved. Enlarging, therefore, his plan, he determined to gain as accurate an acquaintance as possible with the Druid learning, and with the religion and customs of the ancient Britons, before their conversion to Christianity. To this undertaking he was encouraged by several gentlemen of his neighbourhood, who were men of literature and lovers of British antiquities; and particularly by sir John St. Aubyn, ancestor of the present baronet of that family, and the late rev. Edward Collins, vicar of St. Earth. In the year 1748, Mr. Borlase, happening to attend the ordination of his eldest son at Exeter, commenced an acquaintance with the Rev. Dr. Charles Lyttelton, late bishop of Carlisle, then come to be installed into the deanry, and the Rev. Dr. Milles, the late dean, two eminent antiquaries, who, in succession, have so ably presided over the society of antiquaries in London. Our author’s correspondence with these gentlemen was a great encouragement to the prosecution of his studies; and he has acknowledged his obligations to them, in several parts of his works. In 1750, being at London, he was admitted a fellow of the royal society, into which he had been chosen the year before, after having communicated an ingenious Essay on the Cornish Crystals. Mr. Borlase having completed, in 1753, his manuscript of the Antiof Cornwall, carried it to Oxford, where he finished the whole impression, in folio, in the February following. A second edition of it, in the same form, was published at London, in 1769. Our author’s next publication was, “Observations on the ancient and present state of the Islands of Scilly, and their importance to the trade of Great Britain, in a letter to the reverend Charles Lyttelton, LL. D. dean of Exeter, and F. R. S.” This work, which was printed likewise at Oxford, and appeared in 1756, in quarto, was an extension of a paper that had been read before the royal society, on the 8th of February 1753, entitled, “An Account of the great Alterations which the Islands of Scilly have undergone, since the time of the ancients, who mention them, as to their number, extent, and position.” It was at the request of Dr. Lyttelton, that this account was enlarged into a distinct treatise. In 1757, Mr. Borlase again employed the Oxford press, in printing his “Natural History of Cornwall,” for which he had been many years making collections, and which was published in April 1758. After this, he sent a variety of fossils, and remains of antiquity, which he 'had described in his works, to be placed in the Ashmolean museum; and to the same repository he continued to send every thing curious which fell into his hands. For these benefactions he received the thanks of the university, in a letter from the vice-chancellor, dated November 18, 1758; and in March, 1766, that learned body conferred on him the degree of doctor of laws, by diploma, the highest academical honour.

, or Borch, a very learned physician, son of a Lutheran minister in Denmark, was born 1626, and sent to the university of Copenhagen in 1644, where he remained six years, during which time he applied himself chierly to physic. He taught publicly in his college, and Acquired the character of a man indefatigable in labour, and of excellent morals. He gained the esteem of Caspar Brochman, bishop of Zealand, and of the chancellor of the kingdom, by the recommendation of whom he obtained the canonry of Lunden. He was offered the rectorship of the famous school of Heslow, but refused it, having formed a design of travelling and perfecting his studies in physic. He began to practise as a physician during a most terrible plague in Denmark, and the contagion being ceased, he prepared for travelling as he intended; but was obliged to defer it for some time, Mr. Gerstorf, the first minister of state, having insisted on his residing in his house in the quality of tutor to his children. He continued in this capacity five years, and then set out upon his travels; but before his departure, he was appointed professor in poetry, chemistry, and botany. He left Copenhagen in November 1660, and, after having visited several eminent physicians at Hamburgh, went to Holland, the Low Countries, to England, and to Paris, where he remained two years. He visited also several other cities of France, and at Angers had a doctor’s degree in physic conferred upon him. He afterwards passed the Alps, and arrived at Rome in October 1665, where he remained till March 1666, when he was obliged to set out for Denmark, where he arrived in October 1666. The advantages which Borrichius reaped in his travels were very considerable, for he had made himself acquainted with all the learned men in the different cities through which he passed. At his return to Denmark he resumed his professorship, in the discharge of which he acquired great reputation for his assiduity and universal learning. He was made counsellor in the supreme council of justice in 1686, and counsellor of the royal chancery in 1689. This same year he had a severe attack of 'the stone, and the pain every day increasing, he wss obliged to be cut for it; the operation however did not succeed, the stone being so big that it could not be extracted. He bore this affliction with great constancy and resolution till his death, which happened in October 1690.

Upon the whole St. Charles Borromeo appears entitled to the praises bestowed on him. His piety, however mistaken in some points, was sincere, and he practised with perfect disinterestedness and true consistency what he recommended to others. His life was written by Austin Valerio, bishop of Verona, Boscape, bishop of Novara, and by Giussano, a Milanese priest; but the best life of him, and the most free from superstitious narrative, is that of the abbé Touron, “La Vie et l'esprit de St. Charles Borromeo,” Paris, 1761, 3 vols. 12 mo.

, a French minister, and the greatest preacher in his time among the protestants, was son of William du Bosc, advocate to the parliament of Roan, and born at Bayeux, February 21, 1623. He made such progress, after having studied divinity eighteen months at Montauban, and three years at Saumur, that although he was but in his three and twentieth year, he was qualified to serve the church of Caen, to which he was presented Nov. 15, 1645, and received the imposition of hands Dec. 17, the same year. The merit of his colleagues, and above all that of Mr. Bochart, did not hinder Mr. du Bosc from acquiring speedily the reputation of one of the first men of his function; and his eloquence became so famous throughout the whole kingdom, that the church of Charenton would have him for their minister, and sent to desire him of his church, in the beginning of 1658. The strongest solicitations were made use of; but neither the eloquence of the deputies of Paris, nor the letters of persons of the greatest eminence in France amongst the protestants, could engage the church of Caen to part with him, nor him to quit his flock. It was impossible that such talents and fame should not give umbrage to the enemies of the protestant religion, which they shewed in 1664, by procuring a lettre de cachet, which banished him from Chalons till a new order, for having spoke disrespectfully of auricular confession. Mr. du Bosc, as he passed through Paris to go to the place of his banishment, explained to Mr. le Tellier his opinion on confession, and in what manner he had spoken of it, with which Le Tellier was satisfied, and told him that he had never doubted of the falseness of the accusation. Mr. du Bosc recovered the liberty of returning to his church October 15, 1664, and the joy which was at Caen among the brethren, when he came there, November 8, was excessive, A great many honourable persons of the other party congratulated him; and there was a catholic gentleman who celebrated the event in a very singular manner, as thus related by Du Bosc’s biographer. “A gentleman of the Roman religion, of distinction in the province, whose life was not very regular, but who made open profes&ion of loving the pastors who had particular talents, and seemed particularly enamoured with the merit of Mr. du Bosc, having a mind to solemnize the feast with a debauch, took two Cordeliers whom he knew to be honest fellows, and made them drink so much, that one of them died on the spot. He went to see Mr. du Bosc the next day, and told him that he thought himself obliged to sacrifice a monk to the public joy; that the sacrifice would have been more reasonable, if it had been a Jesuit; but that his offering ought not to displease him, though it was but of a Cordeiier. This tragical accident, of which he was only the innocent occasion, did not fail to disturb the joy which he had upon seeing himself again in his family and amongst his flock.” During the prosecutions of the protestant churches in 1665, he defended that of Caen, and many others of the province, against the measures of the bishop of Bayeux. The king having published in 1666 a severe proclamation against the protestants, all the chrrches sent deputies to Paris to make humble remonstrances to his majesty. The churches of Normandy deputed Mr. du Bosc, who departed from Caen July 3, 1668. As soon as he was arrived at Paris, the other deputies chose him “to draw up several memoirs. It being reported that the king would suppress some chambers of the edict, all the deputies ran to Mr. de Ruvigni, the deputy general, to speak with him about so important an affair, in hopes of procuring leave to throw themselves at his majesty’s feet; but Mr. du Bosc only was admitted to the audience. He harangued the king, who was alone in his closet, November 27, 1668; and after having ended his discourse, he had the courage to represent several things, and succeeded so well as to make all the court speak of his eloquence and prudence. After several conferences with Mr. le Tellier, and many evasions and delays, in April 1669, he obtained some relaxation of the declaration of 1666. After that time Mr. du Bosc went several journies about the churches’ affairs, and supported them, before the ministers of state and the intendants, with great force and ability, until he was commanded himself, by an act of the parliament of Normandy June 6, 1685, not to exercise his ministry any more in the kingdom. It was, however, universally acknowledged, t.iat if it had been possible to preserve the reformed church of France by the means of negotiation, he was more likely to succeed than any one that could be employed. He retired into Holland after his interdiction, and was minister of the church of Rotterdam, until his death, which happened January 2, 1692. He published some volumes of sermons; and after his death, P. Le Gendre, his son-in-law, published his” Life, Letters, Poems, Orations, Dissertations," and other curious documents respecting the history of the reformed churches in his time, Rotterdam, 1694, 8vo, dedicated to lord viscount Galloway.

, bishop of Lodeve, and afterwards of Montpellier, was one of the most learned French prelates in the seventeenth century. He was born at Narbonne, May 28, 1605, and studied atThoulouse. He was afterwards appointed judge royal of Narbonne, intendant of Guienne and Languedoc, solicitor general to the parliament of Normandy, and counsellor of state in ordinary. For his services in this last office he was promoted to the bishopric of Lodeve, Jan. 1650. When the affair of the five propositions was agitated at Rome, Bosquet was appointed deputy on the part of the king and clergy of France, and while there, the cardinal Este appointed him bishop of Montpellier. He was exemplary for piety, disinterestedness, and charity, and, like the best of his brethren at that time, practised rigorous austerities. He assisted at the general assembly of the clergy held at Paris in 1670, and was distinguished for his learning and eloquence. An apoplexy carried him off July 24, 1676, and he was interred in the cathedral, with an epitaph celebrating his many virtues. The first work he published was “Pselli Synopsis Legum,” 1632, apiece never before printed, and written in Greek verse by Pselius for the use of his pupil Michael Ducas,in the eleventh century. Bosquet translated it into Latin, and added notes to it. He then published, 2. “Ecclesiye Gallicanae Historiarum liber primus,” 1656, 4to. 3. “Pontificum Romanorum qui e Gallia oriundi in ea seclerunt, historia, ab anno 1315 ad ann. 1394 ex Mss. edita,” Paris, 1632, The second edition of his history of the Gallican Church, the one above mentioned "in 1636, was much enlarged, but some passages were omitted that had appeared in the first octavo edition, which archbishop Usher has transcribed. By these it appears that Bosquet was of opinion that the mistaken zeal of the monks was the chief cause of those fabulous traditions which have destroyed all confidence in the early history of the Gallican church, and while he makes some apology for the credulous believers of those stories, he makes none for those who originally invented them, a concession of great liberality from a prelate of the Romish church.

, bishop of Meaux, an eminent French writer and preacher, was born at Dijon, 27th of September 1627. He received the first rudiments of his education there, and in 1642 was sent to Paris to finish his studies at the college of Navarre. In 1652 he took his degrees in divinity, and soon after went to Metz, where he was made a canon. Whilst he resided here, he applied himself chiefly to the study of the scriptures, and the reading of the fathers, especially St. Augustine. In a little time he became a celebrated preacher, and was invited to Paris, where he had for his hearers many of the most learned men of his time, and several persons of the first rank at court. In 1669 he was created bishop of Condom, and the same month was appointed preceptor to the dauphin; upon which occasion, and the applause he gained in the discharge of so delicate an office, pope Innocent XI. congratulated him in a very polite letter. When he had almost finished the education of this prince, he addressed to him his “Discours surl'Histoire Universelle,” which was published in 1681, and is by far the best of his performances. About a year after he was made preceptor he gave up his bishopric, because he could not reside in his diocese, on account of his engagement at court. In 1680 the king appointed him first almoner to the dauphiness, and the year after gave him the bishopric of Meaux. In 1697 he was made counsellor of state, and the year following first almoner to the duchess of Burgundy. Nor did the learned world honour him less than the court; for he had been admitted a member of the French academy; and in 1695, at the desire of the royal college of Navarre, of which he was a member, the king constituted him their superior.

His celebrated “Exposition of the Roman Catholic Faith,” mentioned above, was designed to show the protestants, that their reasons against returning to the Romish church might be easily removed, if they would view the doctrines of that church in their true light, and not as they had been erroneously represented by protestant writers. Nine years, however, passed before this book could obtain the pope’s approbation. Clement X. refused it positively; and several catholic priests were rigorously treated and severely persecuted, for preaching the doctrine contained in the exposition of Bossuet, which was likewise formally condemned by the university of Louvain in the year 1685, and declared to be scandalous and pernicious. All this we should have thought a proof of the merit of the work, if it had not been at length licensed and held up as unanswerable by the protestants. The artifice, however, employed in the composition of it, and the tricks that were used in the suppression and alteration of the first edition, have been detected with great sagacity by archbishop Wake in the introduction to his “Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England,” and in his two “Defences” of that Exposition, in which the perfidious sophistry of Bossuet is unmasked and refuted in the most satisfactory manner. There was also an excellent answer to Bossuet' s book by M. de la Bastide, one of the most eminent protestant ministers in France. Of this answer the French prelate took no notice during eight years: at the end of which he published an advertisement, in a new edition of his “Exposition,” which was designed to remove the objections of La Bastide. The latter replied in such a demonstrative manner, that the learned bishop, notwithstanding all his eloquence and art, was obliged to quit the field of controversy. There is a very interesting account of this insidious work of Bossuet, and the controversies it occasioned, in the “Bibliotheque des Sciences,” published at the Hague, vol. XV Ih. This account, which is curious, ample, accurate, and learned, was given partly on occasion of a new edition of the “Exposition” printed at Paris in 1761, and accompanied with a Latin translation by Fleury, and partly on occasion of Burigny’s “Lite of Bossuet,” published the same year at Paris.

Had the French press, however, remained open, the controversy between the catholics and protestants might have soon been brought to a conclusion: but other measures were to be adopted, more characteristic of the genius of popery. Bossuet has been praised by most French writers for his laudable attempts to promote an union between the catholic and reformed churches of France. The basis of this union was not very promising. The reformed were to give up every thing, the catholics nothing, and the subsequent practice was worse than this principle. In the “Memoirs pour servira I'histoire des Refugies Francois dans les etats du Roi,” or Memoirs of the French refugees in the dominions of the king of Prussia, by Messrs. Erman and Reclam, published at Berlin in 1782, we have a curious developement of the plan of union, as detected by the celebrated Claude. The reformed church of Paris, which was a considerable edifice, was to be surrounded with troops; the archbishop of Paris and the bishop of Meaux (Bosquet) accompanied with a train of priests and the lieutenant of the police, were to march thither in procession, during divine service: one of these prelates was to mount the pulpit and summon the congregation to submit to the mother church and re-unite; a number of Roman Catholics, posted for the purpose in different parts of the church, as if they belonged to it, were to answer the prelate’s summons, by crying out “re-union!” after which the other prelate was to give the congregation a public absolution from the charge of heresy, and to receive the new pretended converts into the bosom of the church; and this scandalous farce was to be imposed upon the world for an actual re-union. This plan affords a tolerable specimen of Bossuet as a prelate, and a man of candour; and it is worthy of notice, that his associate in this expedition, was the libertine Harlai, archbishop of Paris, whose life and death were so scandalous, that not a single curate could be found, among the most unprincipled part of the Romish clergy, who would undertake to preach his funeral sermon.

, or William Worcester, an ancient English writer, acquainted with history, antiquities, heraldry, physic, and astronomy, was born at Bristol about 1415; his father’s name was Worcester, and his mother’s Botoner, hence he often names himself William Wyrcester, alias Botoner; and hence the error in Pits, and others, of making two distinct persons of the two names. He studied at Hart-hall, Oxford, 1434. He had been exercised in wars above 44 years; and had so faithfully served sir John Fastolff that he left him one of his executors. He wrote many books, the first of which, that was printed, was his translation from the French, of “Cicero de Senectute,” which he addressed to William Wainfleet, bishop of Winchester. He tells us that he presented it to the bishop at Asher [JSsher] August 10, 1475, but received no reward (nullum regardum recepide episcopo). He wrote also “Antiquities of England;” “Abbreviations of the Learned;” “Medicinal collections;” a book of Astrology; another of Astronomy; besides a particular treatise, gratefully preserving the life and deeds of his master, under the title of “Acta Domini Johannis Fastolff;” “the Acts of John duke of Bedford;” “Polyandrium Oxoniensium, or memoirs of Oxford Students;” and other lesser pieces; of which see Tanner Bibl. Brit. p. 115. His “Annals of England” were printed by Hearne at the end of his “Liber Niger Scaccarii,” p. 424 451. His “Itinerary” was published from a ms. not improbably the original, in the library at Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, by Mr. James Nasmith, fellow of the said college, Cantab. 1778, 8vo. Fuller cites a book of Botoner’s, containing all the ancient gentry of the county of Norfolk, long preserved in the county, but not now extant. He also wrote something in poetry, as that htimoroirs ballad in Nasmith’s edition of his Itinerary, called " Comedia a<i Monasterium Hulme/' &c. and a long chronographical epitaph in verse, on the lady Milicent Fastoif; in the possession of Richard Poley, esq. late prothonotary of the common pleas. He is supposed to have died about 1490. The son of this Worcester, among other things, also made a collection of several authentic instruments relating to the English wars and government in France; which he dedicated to king Edward IV. containing a catalogue of the princes, dukes, earls, barons, bannerets, knights, and other persons of eminence, who were of the regent’s court. A copy of this collection, in quarto, was some time in the custody of the late Brian Fairfax, esq. one of the commissioners of the customs.

Of his exemplary conduct in the discharge of his ministerial functions in the western hemisphere, abundant proof is furnished by a work published by him in the year 1797, intituled, “A View of the Causes and Consequences of the American Revolution, in thirteen discourses, preached in North America between the years 17t.3 and 1775.” In the preface to that work, which contains anecdotes and observations respecting the writers and most eminent persons concerned in the American Revolution, he observes, that, “cast as his lot was by Providence, in a situation of difficult duty, in such an hour of danger, it would have been highly reproachful to have slept on his post. Investigations on the important subjects of religion and government, when conducted with sobriety and decorum, can never be unseasonable; but they seem to be particularly called for in times like those in which these discourses were written times when the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers took counsel against the Lord and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bonds asunder^ and cast away their cords from us.” He adds, in the words of Bishop Wetenhall’s preface to his Royal Sermons, printed in Ireland in 1695, that his Discourses in America were preached by him “with a sincere intention of conscientiously performing his duty, and approving himself to God, in his station, by doing what lay in him (at a time of exigence) to confirm the wavering, to animate the diffident, to confirm, excite, and advance all in their loyalty and firm adhesion to. his gracious majesty, our present, alone, rightful liege lord and sovereign.” Indeed, these sermons unequivocally demonstrate that their pious author was not to be deterred, by the personal difficulties in which the schism and faction that then pre^ vailed had placed him, from maintaining, with undaunted resolution, those doctrines, political and religious, in which he had been educated.

, D. D. archbishop of Armagh, primate and metropolitan of all Ireland, was born in or near London, Jan. 4, 1671, of a reputable and opulent family, received his first rudiments] of learning at Merchant-Taylor’s school, and was admitted from thence a commoner of Christ-church, Oxford, some time before the Revolution. His merit became so conspicuous there, that immediately after that great event, he was elected a demi of Magdalencollege, with the celebrated Mr. Addison, and Dr. Joseph Wilcox, afterwards bishop of Rochester and dean of Westminster, from whose merit and learning Dr. Hough, who was then restored to the presidentship of that college (from which he had been unwarrantably ejected in the reign of king James II.) used to call this election by the name of the golden election, and the same respectful appellation was long after made use of in common conversation in the college*, Mr. Boulter was afterwards made fellow of Magdalen-college. He continued in the university till he was called to London, by the invitation of sir Charles Hedges, principal secretary of state in 1700, who made him his chaplain;

* Dr. Welsted, a physician, was also The primate maintained a son of the of this golden election, and when he doctor’s, as a commoner, at Hart-halt became poor in the latter part of his in Oxford; and would effectually have life, the archbishop, though he was no provided for him, if the young gentlerelation, gave him, at the least, two man had not died before he had taken hundred pounds a year, till his death, a degree. Dr. Welsted was one of the Nor did his grace’s kindness to the editors of the Oxford Pindar, and doctor’s family end with his decease-, esteemed an excellent Greek scholar. and some time after he was preferred to the same honour by Dr. Thomas Tenison, archbishop of Canterbury. In these stations he was under a necessity of appearing often at court, where his merit obtained him the patronage of Charles Spencer, earl of Sunderland, principal secretary of state, by whose interest he was advanced to the rectory of St. Olave in Southwark, and to the archdeaconry of Surrey. The parish of St. Olave was very populous, and for the most part poor, and required such a liberal and vigilant pastor as Dr. Boulter, who relieved their wants, and gave them instruction, correction, and reproof. When king George I. passed over to Hanover in 1719, Dr. Boulter was recommended to attend him in quality of his chaplain, and also was appointed tutor to prince Frederic, to instruct him in the English tongue; and for that purpose drew up for his use “A set of Instructions.” This so recommended him to the king, that during his abode at Hanover, the bishopric of Bristol, and deanery of Christchurch, Oxford, becoming vacant, the king granted to him that see and deanery, and he was consecrated bishop of Bristol, on the fifteenth of November, 1719. In this last station he was more than ordinarily assiduous in the visitation of his diocese, and the discharge of his pastoral duty; and during one of these visitations, he received a letter by a messenger from the secretary of state, acquainting him, that his majesty had nominated him to the archbishopric of Armagh, and primacy of Ireland, then vacant by the death of Dr. Thomas Lindsay, on the 13th of July, 1724-, and desiring him to repair to London as soon as possible, to kiss the king’s hand for his promotion. After some, consultation on this affair, to which he felt great repugnance, he sent an answer by the messenger, refusing the honour the king intended him, and requesting the secretary to use his good offices with his majesty, in making his excuse, but the messenger was dispatched back to him. by the secretary, with the king’s absolute commands that he should accept of the post, to which he submitted, though not without some reluctance, and soon after addressed himself to his journey to court. Ireland was at that juncture not a little inflamed, by the copper-coin project of one Wood, and it was thought by the king and ministry, that the judgment, moderation, and wisdom of the bishop of Bristol would tend much to allay the ferment. He arrived in Ireland on the third of November, 1724, had no sooner passed patent for the primacy, than he appeared at all the public boards, and gave a weight and vigour to them; and, in every respect, was indefatigable in promoting the real happiness of the people. Among his other wise measures, in seasons of great scarcity in, Ireland, he was more than once instrumental in averting a pestilence and famine, which threatened the nation. When the scheme was set on foot for making a navigation, by a canal to be drawn from Lough -Neagh to Newry, not only for bringing coal to Dublin, but to carry on more effectually an inland trade in the several counties of the north of Ireland, he greatlv encouraged and promoted the design, not only with his counsel but his purse. Drogheda is a large and populous town within the diocese of Armagh, and his grace finding that the ecclesiastical appointments were not sufficient to support two clergymen there, and the cure over-burthensome for one effectually to discharge, he allotted out of his own pocket a maintenance for a second curate, whom he obliged to give public service every Sunday in the afternoon, and prayers twice every day. He had great compassion for the poor clergy of his diocese, who were disabled from giving their children a proper education, and maintained several of the sons of such in the university, in order to qualify them for future preferment, He erected four houses at Drogheda for the reception of clergymen’s widows, and purchased an estate for the endowment of them, after the model of primate Marsh’s charity; which he enlarged in one particular: for as the estate he purchased for the maintenance of the widows, amounted to twenty-four pounds a year more than he had set apart for that use, he appointed that the surplus should be a fund for setting out the children of such, widows apprentices, or otherwise to be disposed of for the benefit of such children, as his trustees should think proper. He also by his will directed, which has since been performed, that four houses should be built for clergymen’s widows at Armagh, and endowed with fifty pounds a year. During his life, he contracted for the building of a stately market-house at Armagh, which was finished by his executors, at upwards of eight hundred pounds expence. He was a benefactor also to Dr. Stevens’s hospital in the city of Dublin, erected for the maintenance and cure of the poor. His charities for augmenting small livings, and buying of glebes, amounted to upwards of thirty thousand pourids, besides what he devised by his will for the like purposes in England. Though the plan of the incorporated society for promoting English protestant working schools, cannot be imputed to primate Boulter, yet he was the chief instrument in forwarding the undertaking, which he lived to see carried into execution with consider, able success. His private charities were not less munificent, but so secretly conducted, that it is impossible to give any particular account of them: it is affirmed by those who were in trust about him, that he never suffered an object to leave his house unsupplied, and he often sent them away with considerable sums, according to the judgment he made of their merits and necessities. With respect to his political virtues, and the arts of government, when his health would permit him he was constant in his attendance at the council-table, and it is well known what weight and dignity he gave to the debates of that board. As he always studied the true interest of Ireland, so he judged, that the diminishing the value of the gold coin would be a means of increasing silver in the country, a thing very much wanted in order to effect which, he supported a scheme at the council- table, which raised the clamours of unthinking people, although experience soon demonstrated its wisdom. He was thirteen times one of the lords justices, or chief governors of Ireland; which office he administered oftener than any other chief governor on record. He embarked for England June 2, 1742, and after two days illness died at his house in St. James’s place, Sept. 27, and was buried in Westminster-abbey, where a stately monument has been erected to his memory. His deportment was grave, his aspect venerable, and his temper meek and humble. He was always open and easy of access both to rich and poor. He was steady to the principles of liberty, both in religion and politics. His learning was universal, yet more in substance than shew; nor would his modesty permit him to make any ostentation of it. He always preserved such an equal temper of mind that hardly any thing could ruffle, and amidst obloquy and opposition, steadily maintained a resolution of serving his country, embraced every thing proposed for the good of it, though by persons remarkable for their opposition to him: and when the most public-spirited schemes were introduced by him, and did not meet with the reception they deserved, he never took offence, but was glad when any part of his advice for the public good was pursued, and was always willing to drop some points, that he might not lose all; often saying, “he would do all the good to Ireland he could, though they did not suffer him to do all he would.” His life was mostly spent in action, and therefore it is not to be expected that he should have left many remains of his learning behind him nor do we know of any thing he bath written, excepting a few Charges to his clergy at his visitations, which are grave, solid, and instructive, and eleven Occasional Sermons, printed separately. In 1769, however, were published, at Oxford, in two volumes 8vo, “Letters written by his excellency Hugh Boulter, D. D. lord primate of all Ireland, &c. to several ministers of state in England, and some others. Containing an account of the most interesting transactions which passed in Ireland from 1724 to 1738.” The originals, which are deposited in the library of Christ church, in Oxford, were collected by Ambrose Philips, esq. who was secretary to his grace, and lived in his house during that space of time in which they bear date. They are entirely letters of business, and are all of them in Dr. Boulter’s hand-writing, excepting some few, which are fair copies by his secretary. The editor justly remarks, that these letters, which could not be intended for publication, have been fortunately preserved, as they contain the most authentic history of Ireland, for the period in which they were written: “a period,” he adds, “which will ever do honour to his grace’s memory, and to those most excellent princes George the first and second, who had the wisdom to place confidence in so worthy, so able, and so successful a minister; a minister who had the rare and peculiar felicity of growing still more and more into the favour both of the king and of the people, until the very last day of his life,” It is much to be regretted that in some of his measures, he was opposed by dean Swift, particularly in that of diminishing the gold coin, as it is probable that they both were actuated by an earnest desire of serving the country. In one affair, that of Wood’s halfpence, they appear to have coincided, and in that they both happened to encourage a public clamour which had little solid foundation. The writer of archbishop' Boulter’s Life in the Biog. Brit, seems to doubt whether he assisted Ambrose Philips in the paper called the “Freethinker;” but of this we apprehend there can be no doubt. It was published while he held the living of St. Olave’s.

, archbishop of Canterbury in the successi^eio-ns of Henry VI. Edward IV. Edward V. Richard III. tf Henry VII. was son of William Bourchier earl of Ewe in Normandy, and the countess of Stafford, and brother of Henry earl of Essex, and, consequently, related to the preceding lord Berners. He had his education in Neville’s-inn at Oxford, and was chancellor of that university three ears viz. from 1433 to 1437. His first dignity in the church was that of dean of the collegiate church of St. Martin’s in London; from which, in 1433, he was advanced, by pope Eugenius IV. to the see of Worcester but his consecration was deferred to May 15, 1436, by reason (as is supposed) of a defect in age. He had not sat a full year, before he was elected by the monks of Ely bishop of that see, and confirmed by the pope: but, the king refusing his consent, Bourchier did not dare to comply with the election,' for fear of incurriig the censure of the laws, which forbad, under very sevtfe penalties, the receiving the pope’s bull without the khg’s leave. Nevertheless, seven or eight years after, the see of Ely still continuing vacant, and the king consenting, he was translated thither, the 20th of December 1443. The author of the “Historia Eliensis” speaks very disadvantageously of him, as an oppressor, and neglectfi of his duty during his residence on that see, which was ten years twenty-three weeks and five days. At last he was elected archbishop of Canterbury, in the room of John Kemp, the 23d of April 1454. This election was the irre remarkable, as the monks were left entirely to trir liberty of choice, without any interposition either frc the crown or the papal chair. On the contrary, pof Nicolas Vth’s concurrence being readily obtained, t> archbishop was installed with great solemnity. In the m^th of December following, he received the red hat from vome, being created cardinal-priest of St. Cyriacus in Ttemis, but Bentham thinks this was not till 1464, The next ear, he was made lord high chancellor of England, but‘esigned that office in October the year following. So’ after his advancement to the see of Canterbury, he be^aia visitation in Kent, and made several regulations fothe government of his diocese. He likewise publish* 3 - constitution for restraining the excessive abuse of papa'rovisions, but deserved most highly of the learned world, r being the principal instrument in introducing the no 2 art of printing into England. Wood’s account^ althou not quite correct, is worth transcribing. Bourchier being informed that the inventor, Tossan^ alias John -ithenberg, had set up a press at Harlem, was extremely desirous that the English might be made masters of s^ 6116 ^ ^ an art. To this purpose he persuaded fcino Henry VI. to dispatch one Robert Tournour, belong to the wardrobe, privately to Harlem. This man, f ur ed with a thousand marks, of which the archbishop suried three hundred, embarked for Holland, and, to disise the matter, went in company with one Caxton, a, nnhant of London, pretending himself to be of the same profession. Thus concealing his name and his business, he went first to Amsterdam, then to Leyden, and at last settled at Harlem where having spent a -great deal of time and money, he sent to the king for a fresh supply, giving his Highness to understand, that he had almost compassed the enterprize. In short, he persuaded Frederic Corselli, one of the compositors, to carry off a set of letters, and embark with him in the night for London. When they arrived, the archbishop, thinking Oxford a more convenient place for printing than London, sent Corselli down thither. And, lest he should slip away before he had discovered the whole secret, a guard was set upon the press. And thus the mystery of printing appeared ten years sooner in the university of Oxford than at any other place in Europe, Harlem and Mentz excepted. Not long after, there were presses set up at Westminster, St. Alhan’s, Worcester, and other monasteries of note. After this manner printing was introduced into England, by the care of archbishop Bourchier, in the year of Christ 1464, and the third of king Edward IV."

, a Jesuit, and one of the most eloquent preachers France ever produced, was born at Bourges, Aug. 20, 1632, and entered the society of the Jesuits in 1648. After having passed some years in teaching grammar, rhetorick, philosophy, and divinity, his talents pointed him out for the office of preacher, and the extraordinary popularity of his sermons in the country, determined his superiors to call him to Paris in 1669, to take the usual course of a year’s preaching in their church of St. Louis, which soon became crowded with multitudes of both sexes both from the court and city; nor was this a transient impression, as whoever heard him once wished to hear him again, and even Louis XIV. listened with pleasure, although he appears to have introduced subjects in his discourses which could not be very acceptable in his court. On the revocation of the edict of Nantz, the king sent him into Languedoc to strengthen the new or pretended converts from the heresies of the protestant faith, and we are told the effect of his eloquence was great. His eloquence was undoubtedly superior to that of his contemporaries, and he has justly been praised for introducing a more pure style than was customary in the French pulpips. One effect of his preaching was, that great numbers of his hearers requested him to take their souls into his hands, and be the director of their consciences, in other words, to turn father confessor, with which he complied, and frequently sat five or six hours in the confessional, completing there, says his biographer, what he had only sketched in the pulpit. He was yet more admired for his charitable attentions and the sick and poor, among whom he passed much of his time, in religious conference and other acts of humanity. He died at Paris May 13, 1704, universally lamented and long remembered as the most attractive and eloquent of preachers. He had preached thirty -four years at court and in Paris. Father Bretonneau published two editions of his works, the first of 16 vols. 8vo. 1716, reckoned the best, or at least, the most beautifully printed; and the second in 18 vols. 12rrio. Comparisons have been formed between him and Massillon, but several are still inclined to give him the preference. There is warmth, zeal, and elegance in his style and reasoning, but he is frequently declamatory and verbose. It is difficult, however, for English critics to appreciate the merits of his sermons, calculated as they were for a class of hearers with whose taste we are unacquainted. Of his catholic spirit we have an instance on record, that in an interview with bishop Burnet at Paris, he told the English prelate that he believed “all honest protestants would be saved.”

This is the narrative which, after thirty years, Mr. Bower gave the public as a genuine account. Whether owing to the inaccuracy of those who had formerly heard it, to the variations to which a tale frequently repeated is always liable, or to the neglect of veracity in the writer, it certainly differed from accounts which had been orally given by him too much not to furnish some suspicions of the author. On his arrival in England it appears to have been his first object to procure att introduction to some persons of respectability in the country destined for his’ future residence. He had heard of Dr. Aspinwall soon after his arrival; and that divine having formerly belonged to the order of Jesuits, he waited on him, and was kindly received. By this gentleman he was introduced to Dr. Clarke; and to them both he opened, as he says, his mind, without disguise, respecting his doubts relative to his faith. After several conferences with these gentlemen, and some with Berkeley, the bishop of Cloyne, then dean of Londonderry, added to his own reading and reasoning, he obtained, as he says, the fullest conviction that many of the favourite doctrines of Rome were not only evidently repugnant to scripture and reason, but wicked, blasphemous, and utterly inconsistent with the attributes of the supreme and infinite being. He therefore withdrew himself from the communion of the church without further delay, took leave of the provincial, quitted the order, and broke off all connection with those of the communion. This happened in the month of November, 1726.

Being thus disengaged from his literary employment, though he had not then received back his money from the Jesuits, he, on the 25th of March 1747, put forth the proposals for his “History of the Popes;” a work, winch, he says, he undertook some years since at Rome, and then brought it down to the pontificate of Victor, that is, to the close of the second century. In the execution of this work at that period he professes to have received the first unfavourable sentiments of the pope’s supremacy. On the 13th of May 1748, he presented to the king the first volume; and on the death of Mr. Say, keeper of queen Caroline’s library (10th of September), one of his friends (Mr. Lyttelton, afterwards lord Lyttelton) applied to Mr. Pelham for that place for him, and obtained it. The next year, 1749, on the 4th of August, he married a niece of bishop Nicolson, and daughter of a clergyman of the church of England, a younger son of a gentleman’s family in Westmoreland, who had a fortune of 4000l. sterling, and then had a child by a former husband; which child he afterwards deposed on oath was no way injured by his marriage. He had been engaged in a treaty of marriage, which did not take effect, in 1745. In 1751, the second volume of the History of the Popes made its appearance. In the same year, 1751, Mr. Bower published by way of supplement to his second volume, seventeen sheets, which were delivered to his subscribers gratis; and about the latter end of 1753 he produced a third volume, which brought down his history to the death of pope Stephen, in 757. His constant friend Mr. Lyttelton, at this time become a baronet, in April 1754 appointed him clerk of the buck warrants, instead of Henry Read, esq. who held that place under the earl of Lincoln. This office was probably of no great emolument. His appointment to it, however, serves to shew the credit he was in with his patron.

, an ingenious scholar, who, from his Attachment to Spanish literature, was usually called by his friends Don Bowle, was a descendant from Dr. John Bowle, bishop of Rochester in the early part of the seventeenth century. He was born in 1725, and educated at Oriel college, Oxford, where he took his master’s degree in 1750, and having entered into holy orders, was presented to the vicarage of Idmiston, Wiltshire. In 1776 he was elected F. S. A. He was a man of great erudition, and muca respected for his various researches in antiquity, and varios other lucubrations in obscure literature. He had the honour or being one of the first detectors of Lauder’s forgeries, and according to Dr. Douglas’s account, had the juste-st claim to be considered as the original detector o! thai unprincipled impostor. In 1765, he was editor of “Miscellaneous pieces of ancient English Poesie,” containing Shakspeare’s “King John,” and some of the satires of Marston. To a very accurate and extensive fund of classical learning, he had added a comprehensive knowledge of most of the modern languages, particularly of the Spanish, Italian, and French; and in the course of his reading contracted a fondness for Cervantes’ admirable romance, which could scarcely be said to be kept within reasonable bounds. Don Quixote himself did not sally forth with more enthusiasm than Mr. Bowie, when in 1777 he published “A Letter to the rev. Dr. Percy, concerning a new and classical edition of Historia del valoroso CavaU lero Don Quixote de la Mancha, to be illustrated by annotations and extracts from the historians, poets, and romances of Spain and Italy, and other writers ancient and modern, with a glossary and indexes, in which are occasionally interspersed some reflections on the learning and genius of the author, with a map of Spain adapted to the history, and to every translation of it,” 4to. He gave also an outline of the life of Cervantes in the Gent. Mag. for 1731, and circulated proposals to print the work hy subscription at three guineas each copy. It appeared accordingly in 1781, in six quarto volumes, the first four consisting of the text, the fifth of the annotations, and the sixth is wholly occupied by the index, but the work did not answer his expectations. The literary journals were either silent or spoke slightingly of his labours; and the public sentiment seemed to be that annotations on Cervantes were not quite so necessary as on Shakspeare. He appears, however, to have taken some pains to introduce them to the public in a favourable light. In 1784 (Gent. Mag. LIV. p. 565) we find him lamenting certain “unfair practices respecting the admission of an account of the work into two periodical publications to which he had some reason to think he was entitled.” He adds, that the perpetrators of these practices were “a false friend, and another, whose encomium he should regard as an affront and real slander the one as fond of the grossest flattery, as the other ready to give it, and both alike wholesale dealers in abuse and detraction.” Nor was this all; in 1785 he published “Remarks on the extraordinary conduct of the Knight of the Ten Stars and his Italian Squire, to the editor of Don Quixote. In a letter to I. S. D. D.” 8vo. This produced an answer from the “Italian Squire,” Baretti, not of the most gentleman-like kind, entitled “Tolondron. Speeches to John Bowie, about his edition of Don Quixote,” 8vo, 1786, and with this the controversy ended. Mr. Bowie contributed many valuable hints and corrections to Granger’s History, and many criticisms and illustrations to Johnson and Steevens’s edition of Shakspeare, and Warton’s History of Poetry. His course of reading well qualified him for literary aid of this description. In the Archaeologia, vol. VI. VII. and VIII. are four papers by him, on the ancient pronunciation of the French language; on some musical instruments mentioned in “Le Roman de la Rose;” on parish registers; and on cards. He was also, under various signatures, a frequent contributor to the Gentleman’s Magazine, but as a divine he was not known to the public. He died Oct. 26, 1788.

, the most learned English printer of whom we have any account, was born in Dogwelt-court, White Fryars, London, on the 19th of December, 1699. His father, whose name was also William, was of distinguished eminence in the same profession; and his maternal grandfather (Thomas Dawks) was employed in printing the celebrated Polyglott Bible of bishop Walton. At a proper age, he was placed, for grammatical education, under the care of Mr. Ambrose Bonwicke, a non-juring clergyman of known piety and learning, who then lived at Headley, near Leatherhead in Surrey. Here Mr. Bowyer made such advances in literature as reflected the highest credit both on himself and his preceptor; for whose memory, to his latest years, he entertained the sincerest respect; and to whose family he always remained an useful friend. The attachment, indeed, was mutual; and the following instance of the good school-master’s benevolence made an indelible impression on the mind of his pupil. On the 30th of January, 1712-13, the whole property of the elder Mr. Bowyer was destroyed by a dreadful fire; on which occasion, Mr. Bonwicke, with great generosity, and no less delicacy (endeavouring to conceal its being his own act of kindness), took upon him, for one year, the expences of his scholar’s board and education. In June 1716, young Mr. Bowyer was admitted as a sizar at St. John’s college, Cambridge, of which Dr. Robert Jenkin was at that time master. The doctor had been a benefactor to the elder Mr. Bowyer in the season of his calamity; and the son, at the distance of sixty years, had the happiness of returning the favour to a relation of the worthy master, in a manner by which the person obliged was totally ignorant to whom he was indebted for the present he received, Mr. Bowyer continued at Cambridge under the tuition, first, of Dr. Anstey, and afterwards of the rev. Dr. John Nevvcome, till June 1722, during which time he obtained Roper’s exhibition, and wrote, in 1719, what he called “Epistola pro Sodalitio a rev. viro F. Roper mihi legato;” but it does not appear that he took his degree of bachelor of arts. Notwithstanding an habitual shyness of disposition, which was unfavourable to him at his first appearance, the regularity of his conduct, and his application to study, procured him the esteem of many very respectable members of the university. Here it was that he formed an intimacy with Mr. Markland and Mr. Clarke, two learned friends with whom he maintained a regular correspondence through life and their letters contain a treasure of polite literature and sound criticism. On the death of Mr. Bonwicke, his grateful scholar had an opportunity of requiting, in some measure, the obligations he had received, by officiating, for a time, in the capacity of a schoolmaster, for the benefit of the family; but before this, he had entered into the printing business, together with his father, in June 1722; and one of the first bucks which received the benefit of his correction, was the complete edition of Selden by Dr. David Wilkins, in three volumes, folio. This edition was begun in 1722, and finished in 1726; and Mr. Bowyer’s great attention to it appeared in his drawing up an epitome of Selden “de Synedriis,” as he read the proof-sheets, and tue several memoranda from “The privileges of the Baronage” and “Judicature in Parliament,” &c. which are now printed in his “Miscellaneous Tracts.” In 1727, the learned world was indebted to him for nn admirable sketch of William Baxter’s Glossary of the Roman Antiquities. The sketch was called “A View of a Book, entitled, * Reliquiae Baxtevianae.' In a Letter to a Friend;” a single sheet, 8vo. Very few copies were printed; and, having never been published, it is seldom found with the Glossary; but it was reprinted in the “Miscellaneous Tracts.” Dr. Wotton and Mr. Clarke were highly pleased with this first public proof given by Mr. Bowyer of his literary abilities. On the 20th of December, 1727, he lost an affectionate mother, upon which occasion he received a letter of pious consolation, from Mr. Chishull, the learned editor of the “Antiquitates Asiaticae.”

In 1744, Mr. Bowyer is supposed to have written a small pamphlet on the present state of Europe, taken principally from Pufendorff. In 1746, he projected, what during his whole life he had in view, a regular edition of Cicero’s Letters, in a chronological order, on a plan which it is to be lamented that he did not complete; as an uniform series thus properly arranged would have formed a real history of Tully’s life, and those which cannot be dated might be thrown to the end without any inconvenience. In the same year he published “The Life of the Emperor Julian,” translated from the French of M. Bleterie, and improve^ with twelve pages of curious notes, and a genealogical table. The notes were not entirely Mr. Bowyer’s, but were drawn up, in part, by Mr. Clarke and other learned men. The translation, by Miss Anne Williams (Dr. Johnson’s inmate), and the two sisters of the name of Wilkinson, was made under Mr. Bowyr’s immediate inspection. In this year also, he printed, and is supposed to have assisted in thp composition of, “A Dissertation, in which the objections of a late pampinet (by bishop Ross) to the writings of the anci nits, after the mariner of Mr. Maryland, are clearly answered: those passages in Tuily corrected, on which some of the objections are founded; with Amendments of a few pieces of criticism in Mr. Maryland’s Epistola Critica,” 8vo. On the 2d of August, 1747, Mr. Bowyer entered a second time into the matrimonial state, with a most benevolent and worthy woman, Mrs. Elizabeth Bill, by whom he had no children. In 1750, he had the honour of sharing, with Dr. Burton, in the invectives most liberally bestowed by Dr. King, in his “Elogium Famse inserviens Jacci Etouensis, sive Gigantis: or, the Praises of Jack of Eaton, commonly called Jack the Giant.” Dr. King’s abuse was probably owing to his having heard that our learned printer had hinted, in conversation, his doubts concerning the doctor’s Latiriity. Mr. Bowyer drew up strictures in his own defence, which he intended to insert at the conclusion of a preface to Montesquieu’s Reflections, &c.; but, in consequence ol Mr. Clarke’s advice, they were omitted. In the same year, a prefatory critical dissertation, and some valuable notes, were annexed, by our author, to Kuster’s Treatise “De vero usu Verborum Mediorum;” a new edition of which work, with further improvements, appeared in 1773. He wrote, likewise, about the same time, a Latin preface to Leedes’s “Veteres Poeta? citati, &c.” Being soon after employed to print an edition of colonel Bladen’s translation of Cæsar’s Commentaries, that work received considerable improvements from. Mr. Bowyer’s hands, and the addition of such notes in it as are signed Typogr. In the subsequent editions of this work, though printed by another person, and in our author’s life-time, the same signature, contrary to decorum, and even justice, was still retained. In 1751, he wrote a long preface to Montesquieu’s “Reflections on the Rise and Fall of the Rouian Empire;” translated the Dialogue between Sylla and Socrates; made several corrections to the work from the Baron’s “Spirit of Laws,” and improved it with his own notes. A new edition, with many; new notes, was printed in 1759. He gave likewise to the public, in 1751, with a preface, the first translation that was made of Rousseau’s paradoxical oration on the effects of the arts and sciences, which gained the prize at the academy of Dijon, in 1750; and which first announced that singular genius to the attention and admiration of Europe. On the publication of the third edition of lord Orrery’s “Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr. Swift,” in 1752, Mr. Bowyer wrote and printed, but never published, “Two Letters from Dr. Bentley in the shades below, to lord Orrery in a land of thick darkness.” The notes signed B, in the ninth quarto volume of Swift’s works, are extracted from these Letters, which are reprinted at large in his “Tracts.” In 1752, when Bp. Clayton published his “Vindication of the Histories of the Old and New Testament, in answer to the Objections of Lord Bolingbroke,” Mr. Bowyer drew up an analysis of the same, with an intention of sending it to the Gentleman’s Magazine: it is now printed in Mr. Nichols’s “Anecdotes.” In 1753, to allay the ferment occasioned by the Jew bill, he published, in quarto, “Remarks on a Speech made in Common Council, on the Bill for permitting persons professing the Jewish Religion to be naturalized, so far as Prophecies are supposed to be affected by it.” The design of this sensible little tract, which was written with spirit, and well received by those who were superior to narrow prejudices, was to shew, that whatever political reasons might be alleged against the Bill, Christianity would in no degree be prejudiced by the indulgence proposed to be gVanted to the Jews. In the same year, some of Mr. Bowyer’s notes were annexed to bishop Clayton’s translation of “A Journal from Grand Cairo to Mount Sinai, and back again.” In 1754, with a view of lessening his fatigue, he entered into partnership with a relation; but some disagreements arising, the connection was dissolved in 1757, and he resumed the active part of business. In 1760 he superintended a second edition of Arnald’s “Commentary on the Book of Wisdom,” and enriched it with the remarks of Mr. Markland. Upon the death of Mr. Richardson, in 1761, Mr. Bowyer, through the patronage of the late earl of Macclesfield, was appointed printer to the Royal Society; and, under the friendship of five successive presidents, had the satisfaction of continuing in that employment till his death. In the same year (1761), appeared “Verses on the Coronation of their late majesties, king George the Second and queen Caroline, October 4, 1727, spoken by the Scholars of Westminster school (some of them now the ornaments of the Nation) on January 15th following, being the Day of the Inauguration of Queen Elizabeth, their foundress with a Translation of all the Latin copies The whole placed in order of the transactions of that important day. Adorned with the Coronation Medals pf the Royal Pair, and a bust of our present king. To which is subjoined the Ceremonial of the august Procession, very proper to be compared with the approaching one; and a Catalogue of the Coronation Medals of the Kings and Queens of England.” The original part of this pamphlet, in which a great deal of humour is displayed, was entirely Mr. Bowyer' s: the Latin verses were translated partly by him, but principally by Mr. Nichols. Our learned printer’s next publication was of a more serious and weighty nature, an excellent edition of the Greek Testament, in two volumes, 1763, 12mo, under the following title: “Novum Testamentum Greecum, ad Fidem GrascorUm solum Codicum Mss. nunc primum expressum, adstipulante Joanne Jacobo Wetstenio, juxta Sectiones Jo. Albert! Bengelii divisum; et nova Interpunctione saepius illustratum. Accessere in altero Volumine Emendationes conjecturales virorum doctorum undecunque collectse.” This sold with great rapidity; though Mr. Bowyer, in his advertisements of it in the public papers, was pleased to add, that it boasted neither elegance of type nor paper, but trusted to other merits. The conjectural emendations are a very valuable addition to the Greek Testament, and were extremely well received by the learned. In a letter of thanks, from the president and fellows of Harvard college, in Cambridge, New-England, to Mr. Bowyer, in 1767, for several benefactions of his to that college, they express themselves as follows: “It is a particular pleasure to us to mention your very curious edition of the Greek Testament, in two volumes, with critical notes, and many happy conjectures, especially as to the punctuation, an affair of the utmost importance as to ascertaining the sense. This work, though small in bulk, we esteem as a rich treasure of sacred learning, and of more intrinsic value than many large volumes of the commentators.” A second edition of the Conjectures on the New Testament, with very considerable enlargements, was separately published, in one volume, 8vo, in 1772, a third in 4to, 1782, and a fourth from the interleaved -copy of Dr. Owen, which he bequeathed to the honourable and right reverend Dr. Shute Barrington, bishop of Durham, is just published (1812). Bishop Wavbnrton having censured apassage in the first edition, Mr. Bowyer sent him a copy of the second, with a conciliatory letter. In 1765, at the request of Thomas Hollis, esq. our learned printer wrote a short Latin preface to Dr. Wallis’s “Grammatica Linguae Anglicanse.” A larger English preface, which was written by him, and intended for that work, is printed in his “Tracts.” Some copies of this book were sent by him to the rev. Edward Clarke, when, chaplain to the earl of Bristol at Madrid, to be given to the Spanish literati. Towards the latter end of the same year, in consequence of overtures from a few respectable friends at Cambridge, Mr. Bowyer had some inclination to have undertaken the management of the University press, by purchasing a lease of its exclusive privileges. He went, accordingly, to Cambridge for this purpose; but the treaty proved fruitless, and he did not much regret the disappointment. In the beginning of 1766, by engaging in a partnership with Mr. Nichols, he was again enabled to withdraw, in some degree, from that close application, which had begun to be prejudicial to his health. His new associate had been trained by him to the profession, and had assisted him several years in the management of business. He was very happy in this connection; and it is unnecessary to add how successfully Mr. Nichols has trod in the steps of his worthy and learned friend and partner. In, that year (1766) Mr. Bowyer wrote an excellent Latin preface to “Joannis Harduini, Jesuitae, ad Censuram Scriptorum veterum Prolegomena; juxta Autographum.” In this preface he gives an account of the nature of the work, and of the manner in which it had been preserved. Mr. De Missy’s remarks on the celebrated Jesuit’s extraordinary production were published about the same time, in a letter to Mr. Bowyer, written in Latin. In 1767, he was appointed to print the Journals of the House of Lords, and the Rolls of Parliament. The noble peer to whom he was indebted for this appointment, and his gratitude to whom is testified in the inscription which he left behind him, to be placed in Stationers Hall, was the earl of Marchmont. Mr. Bowyer was now compelled, from the want of sufficient room, to exchange White Fryars for Red Lion-passage; and it was not without reluctance that he quitted a residence to which he had been accustomed from his infancy. His new printing-house was opened with the sign of his favourite Cicero’s Head: under which was inscribed, “M, T, Cicero, A Quo Primordia Preli,” in allusion to the well-known early editions of Tally’s Offices. Having printed this year Mr. Clarke’s excellent and learned work on “The Connexion of the Roman, Saxon, and English Coins,” he wrote some notes upon it, which are interspersed throughout the volume with those of the author. Part of the dissertation on the Roman Sesterce was, likewise, Mr. Bowyer’s production; and the index, which is an uncommonly good one, and on which he did not a little pride himself, was drawn up entirely by him. On the 14th of January, 177 J, he lost his second wife, who died at the age of seventy. His old friend, Mr. Clarke, who had administered consolation to him, on a similar occasion, nearly forty years before, again addressed him with tenderness on this event. In the Philosophical Transactions for 1771, was printed a very ingenious “Enquiry intothe value of the antient Greek and Roman Money,” by the late Matthew Raper, esq. The opinions advanced by this respectable gentleman, on these subjects, not coinciding with those of Mr. Bowyer, he printed a small pamphlet, entitled, “Remarks, occasioned by a late Dissertation on the Greek and Roman Money.” The pamphlet was intended as an appendix to Mr. Clarke’s Treatise on Coins. The opinions of many excellent writers in Germany and France having been ably controverted in that elaborate work, Mr. Bowyer transmitted a copy of it to the French king’s library, and inscribed his little appendix,

Mr. Bowyer had always been subject to a bilious colic; and during the last ten years of his life, he was afflicted with the palsy and the stone. But, notwithstanding these infirmities, he preserved, in general, a remarkable cheerfulness of disposition; and received great satisfaction from the conversation of a few literary friends, by whom he continued to be visited. The faculties of his mind, though somewhat impaired, were strong enough to support the labour of almost incessant reading, which had ever been his principal amusement; and he regularly corrected the learned works, and especially the Greek books, which came from his press. This he did till within a very few weeks of his death; which happened on the 18th of November, 1777, when he had nearly completed his 78th year. The publications of Mr. Bowyer are an incontrovertible evidence of his abilities and learning; to which may be added that he was honoured with the friendship and patronage of many of the most distinguished ornaments of his age. We already have had occasion to mention the earls of Macclesfield and Marchmont, Dr. Wotton, Mr. Pope, Mr. Chishull, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Markland, bishop Warburton, the right honourable Arthur Onslow, Mr. Hollis, Dr. Salter, Mr, De Missy, Dr. Owen, and Dr. Heberden. To these, among other respectable names, might be added those of archbishop Seeker, bishop Kennett, bishop Tanner, bishop Sherlock, bishop Hoadly, bishop Lyttelton, bishop Pearce, bishop Lowth, bishop Barrington, bishop Hurd, bishop Percy, lord Lyttelton, lord Sandys, dean Prideaux, doctors Robert and John Freind, dean Freind, dean Milles, the very learned Dr. Taylor, chancellor of Lincoln, Dr. Barnard, Dr. Powell, Dr. Wilkins, Mr. Maittaire, Messrs. R. and S. Gale, Mr. Browne Willis, Mr. Spelman, Mr. Morant, Dr. Ducarel, Dr. Pegge, Mr. Garrick, and most of the distinguished scholars and antiquaries of his time. His connec^ tion with the late eminent and excellent Richard Gough, esq. so well known by his acquaintance with British topography and antiquities, is apparent from his last will; where his obligations to Dr. Jenkin, dean Stanhope, and Mr. Nelson, are acknowledged. The late excellent Dr. Robert Clayton, bishop of Clogher, so highly esteemed his friendship, that he not only honoured him by a regular epistolary intercourse, but presented him with the copy-right of all his valuable writings. Mr. Bowyer stood unrivalled, for more than half a century, as a learned printer; and some of the most masterly productions of this kingdom have undoubtedly appeared from his press. To his literary and professional abilities, he added an excellent moral character. His regard to religion was displayed in his publications, and in the course of his life and studies; and he was particularly distinguished by his inflexible probity, and an uncommon alacrity in assisting the necessitous. His liberality in relieving every species of distress, and his endeavours to conceal his benefactions, reflect great honour on his memory. Though he was naturally fond of retirement, and seldom entered into company, excepting with men of letters, he was, perhaps, excelled by few in the talent of justly discriminating the real characters of mankind. He judged of the persons he saw by a sort of intuition; and his judgments were generally right. From a consciousness of literary superiority, he did not always pay that particular attention tQ the booksellers which was expedient in the way of his business. Too proud to solicit the favours in that way which he believed to be his due, he was often disappointed in his expectations. On the other hand, he' frequently experienced friendships in cases where he had much less reason to have hoped for them so that, agreeably to his own expression, “in what he had received, and what he had fyeen denied, he thankfully acknowledged the will of Heaven.” The two great objects of Mr. Bowyer’s view, in the decline of his life, were to repay the benefactions his father had met with, and to be himself a benefactor to the meritorious of his own profession. These purposes are fully displayed in his last will: for which reason, and because it illustrates the turn of his mind in other respects, we shall insert it at large. After a liberal provision for his son, among other legacies are these “I likewise give to my son all my plate; except the small silver cup which was given to my father (after his loss by fire) by Mrs. James, and which I give to the Company of Stationers in London, hoping they will preserve it as a memorial. Having committed my body to the earth, I would testify my duty and gratitude to my few relations and numerous benefactors after my father’s loss by fire. I give and bequeath to my cousin Scott, lately of Westminster, brewer, and to his sister, fifty pounds each. I give and bequeath to my relations Mr. Thomas Linley and his wife one thousand pounds four per cent, consolidated annuities, to be transferred to them, or to the survivor of them; and which I hope they will take care to settle, at their deaths, for the benefit of their son and daughter. I give to the two sons and one daughter of the late reverend Mr. Maurice of Gothenburgh iuSweden, who married the only daughter of Mr. Richard Williamson, bookseller (in return for her father’s friendship to mine), one thousand pounds four per cent, consolidated annuities, to be divided equally between them. Among my father’s numerous benefactors, there is not, that I can hear of, one alive: to several of them I made an acknowledgement. But one respectable body I am still indebted to, the University of Cambridge; to whom I give, or rather restore, the sum of fifty pounds, in return for the donation of forty pounds made to my father at the motion of the learned and pious master of Saint John’s college, doctor Robert Jenkin: to a nephew of his I have already given another fifty pounds, as appears by his receipt of the thirty-first of May, one thousand seven hundred and seventy. The benefactions which my father received from Oxford I can only repay with gratiiude; as he received them, not from the university as a body, but from particular members. I give thirty pounds to the dean and chapter of Canterbury, in gratitude for the kindness of the worthy doctor Stanhope (sometime dean of Canterbury) to my father; the remembrance of which amongst the proprietors of his works I have long out-lived, as I have experienced by not being employed to print them: the like I might say of the works of Mr. Nelson, another respectable friend and patron of my father’s, and of many others. I give to doctor William Heberden my little cabinet of coins, with H ickes’s Thesau rus, Tristan, and the odd volume, Spanheim’s Numismata, Harduin’s Opera Selecta, in folio, Nummi Populorum et Urbium, in quarto, and any other of my books he chooses to accept: to the reverend doctor Henry Owen, such of my Hebrew books and critical books on the New Testament, as he pleases to take: to Richard Gough, esq. in like manner, my books on topographical subjects: to Mr. John Nichols, all books that relate to Cicero, Livy, and the Roman history, particularly the * Cenotaphia' of Noris and Pighius, my grammars and dictionaries, with Swift’s and Pope’s works: to my son, whatever books (not described above) he thinks proper to take. And now I hope I may be allowed to leave somewhat for the benefit of printing. To this end, I give to the master and keepers or wardens and commonalty of the mystery or art of a stationer of the city of London, such a sum of money as will purchase two thousand pounds three per cent, reduced Bank annuities, upon trust, to pay the dividends and yearly produce thereof, to be divided for ever equally amongst three printers, compositors or pressmen, to be elected from time to time by the master, wardens, and assistants, of the said company, and who at the time of such election shall be sixty-three years old or upwards, for their respective lives, to be paid half-yearly; hoping that such as sha.ll be most deserving will be preferred. And whereas I have herein before given to my son the sum of three thousand pounds four per cent, consolidated annuities, in case he marries with the consent of my executors: Now, I do hereby give and bequeath the dividends and interest of that sum, till such marriage take place, to the said company of stationers to be divided equally between six other printers, compositors or pressmen, as aforesaid, in manner as aforesaid; and, if my said son shall die unmarried, or married without such consent as aforesaid, then I give and bequeath the said capital sum of three thousand pounds to the company of stationers, the dividends and yearly produce thereof to be divided for ever equally amongst six other such old printers, compositors or pressmen, for their respective lives, to be qualified, chosen, and paid in manner as aforesaid. It has long been to me matter of concern, that such numbers are put apprentices as compositors without any share of school-learning, who ought to have the greatest: in hopes of remedying this, I give and bequeath to the said company of stationers such a sum of money as will purchase one thousand pounds three per cent, reduced bank annuities, for the use of one journeyman compositor, such as shall hereafter be described; with this special trust, that the master, wardens, and assistants, shall pay the dividends and produce thereof half-yearly to such compositor: the said master, wardens, and assistants of the said company, shall nominate for this purpose a compositor who is a man of good life and conversation, who shall usually frequent some place of public worship every Sunday unless prevented by sickness, and shall not have worked on a newspaper or magazine for four years at least before such nomination, nor shall ever afterwards whilst he holds this annuity, which may be for life, if he continues a journeyman; he shall be able to read and construe Latin, and at least to read Greek fluently with accents; f which he shall bring a testimonial from the rector of St. Martin’s Ludgate for the time being: I could wish that he shall have been brought up piously and virtuously, if it be possible, at Merchant Taylors, or some other public school, from seven years of age till he is full seventeen, and then to serve seven years faithfully as a compositor, and work seven years more as a journeyman, as I would not have this annuity bestowed on any one under thirty -one years of age: if after he is chosen he should behave ill, let him be turned out, and another be chosen in his stead. And whereas it may be many years before a compositor may be found that shall exactly answer the above description, and it may at some times happen that such a one cannot be found; I would have the dividends in the mean time applied to such person as the master, wardens, and assistants, shall think approaches nearest to what I have described. And whereas the above trusts will occasion some trouble: I give to the said company, in case they think proper to accept the trusts, two hundred and fifty pounds.” It is almost superfluous to add, that the trust was accepted, and is properly executed.

It is much to be regretted that so faithful a servant of the public should have lived at variance with the earl of Strafford, himself a man of virtue, talents, and patriotism, and afterwards a sacrifice to the fury of the republican party in England; yet it cannot be denied that the earl of Strafford behaved in a very arrogant and haughty manner to the earl of Cork; and that the conduct of the lord deputy was such, as it could not reasonably be expected any man of spirit would patiently submit to, and especially a man of so much worth and merit as the noble subject of this article. His lordship gave evidence at Strafford’s trial, that when he had commenced a suit at law, in a case in which he apprehended himself to be aggrieved, the earl of Strafford, in the most arbitrary manner, forbad his prosecuting his suit, saying to him, “Call in your writs, or if you will not, I will clap you in the castle; for I tell you, I will not have my orders disputed by law, nor lawyers.” We have, however, already seen that lord Cork had other enemies, who took various opportunities of displaying their jealousy of his power and talents. One singular opportunity was taken on the death of his second lady, which we shall detail, as including some traits of the taste and prejudices of the times. This lady was privately interred on the 27th of February 1629-30, but her funeral was publicly solemnized on the llth of March following; soon after which$ the earl of Cork purchased from the dean and chapter of St. Patrick’s church, the inheritance of the upper part of the chancel where the vault was, in which the bodies of her grandfather by the mother’s side, the lord chancellor Weston, and of her father sir Geoffry Fenton, were laid, over which the earl her husband caused a fine marble tomb to be erected. This presently gave offence to some people, who suggested that it stood where the altar ought to stand, of which they complained to the king, who mentioned it to Dr. Laud, then bishop of London; who after the lord Wentworth was made lord deputy of Ireland, and himself archbishop of Canterbury, moved him that it might be inquired into, as it was, and this affair made afterwards a very great noise. The earl of Cork procured a letter from Dr. Usher, then lord primate of Ireland, and also from Dr. Launcelot Bulkeiey, then archbishop of Dublin, justifying, that the tomb did not stand in the place of the altaf, and that instead of being an inconvenience, it was a great ornament to the church; which letters archbishop Laud transmitted to the lord deputy, and at the same time acquainted^ him that they did not give himself any satisfaction. The postscript to this letter, dated Lambeth, March 11, 1634, is very remarkable, and shews both the rise and the falsehood of the common opinion, that it was the lord deputy, afterwards earl of Strafford, who set this matter on foot out of prejudice to the earl of Cork. “I had almost forgot to tell you, that all this business about demolishing my lord of Cork’s tomb is charged upon you, as if it were done only because he will not marry his son to my lord Clifford’s daughter, and that I do it to join with you; whereas the complaint came against it to me out of Ireland, and was presented by me to the king before I knew that your lordship was named for deputy there. But jealousies know no end.” The archbishop afterwards wrote in very strong terms to the earl of Cork himself, in which he affirms the same thing, and deals very roundly with his lordship upon that and other subjects, advising him to leave the whole to the lord deputy and the archbishops. As to the issue of the affair, it appears clearly from a letter of the lord deputy Wentworth’s, dated August 23, 1634, to the archbishop, in which he delivers himself thus: “I have issued a commission, according to my warrant, for viewing the earl of Cork’s tomb: the two archbishops and himself, with four bishops, and the two deans and chapters, were present when we met, and made them all so ashamed, that the earl desires he may have leave to pull it down without reporting further into England; so as I am content if the miracle be done, though Mohammed do it, and there is an end of the tomb before it come to be entombed indeed. And for me that my lord treasurer do what he please; I shall ever wish his ways may be those of honour to himself, and dispatch to my master’s affairs; but go it as it shall please God with me, believe me, my lord, I will be still tlwrow and thorowout one and the same, and with comfort be it spoken by myself, and your grace’s commendations.” It may be added that though the tomb has been taken away above a century, yet the inscription that was upon it is still extant.

But philosophy and inquiries into nature, though they engaged his attention deeply, did not occupy it entirely; since we find, that he still continued to pursue critical and theological studies. Inthese he had the assistance of some great men, particularly Dr. Edward Pocock, Mr, Thomas Hyde, and Mr. Samuel Clarke, all of great eminence for their skill in the oriental languages. He had also a strict intimacy with Dr. Thomas Barlow, at that time head-keeper of the Bodleian library, and afterwards bishop of Lincoln, a man of various and extensive learning. In 1659, Dr. Wallis, so distinguished for his mathematical and philosophical learning, dedicated to him his excellent treatise on the Cycloid. This year also Mr. Boyle, being acquainted with the unhappy circumstances of the learned Sanderson, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, who had lost all his preferments for his attachment to the royal party, conferred upon him an honorary stipend of 50l. a year. This stipend was given as an encouragement to that excellent master of reasoning, to apply himself to the writing of cases of conscience and accordingly he printed his lectures “de obligatione conscientise,” which he read at Oxford, 1647, and dedicated them to his friend and patron. The dedication bears date Nov. 22, 1659.

Upon the restoration of Charles II. he was treated with great civility and respect by the king, as well as by the two great ministers, Southampton and Clarendon. He was solicited by the latter to enter into orders, for Mr. Boyle’s distinguished learning and unblemished reputation induced lord Clarendon to think that so very respectable a personage would do great honour to the clergy. Mr. Boyle considered all this with due attention; but reflected, that in his present situation, whatever he wrote upon religion, would have so much the greater weight, as coming from a layman; since he well knew, that the irreligious fortified themselves against all that the clergy could offer, by supposing and saying that it was their trade, and that they were paid for it. He considered likewise that$ in point of fortune and character, he needed no accessions; and indeed he never had any appetite for either. But bishop Burnet, who preached his funeral sermon, and to whom Mr. Boyle communicated memorandums concerning his own life, tells us, that what had the greatest weight in determining his judgment was, “the not feeling within himself any motion or tendency of mirjd which he could safely esteem a call from the Holy Ghost, and so not venturing to take holy orders, lest he should be found to have lied unto it.” He chose therefore to pursue his philosophical studies in such a manner as might be most effectual for the support of religion; and began to communicate to the world the fruits of those studies. The first of them was printed at Oxford, 1660, in 8vo, under the title of 1. “New experiments, physico-mechanical, touching the spring of the Air and its effects, made for the most part in a new pneumatical engine: addressed to his nephew the lord Dungarvan.” This work was attacked by Franciscus Linus and Mr. Hobbes, which occasioned Mr. Boyle to subjoin to a second edition of it, printed at London, 1662, in 4to, “A Defence,” &c. in which he refuted the objections of those philosophers with equal candour, clearness, and civility. A third edition was printed in 1682, 4to. 2. “Seraphic Love; or, some motives and incentives to the Love of God, pathetically discoursed of in a letter to a friend,” 1660, 8vo. This piece, though it did not appear till now, 'was finished as early as the year 1648. It has run through many editions, and been translated into Latin. The fame of Mr. Boyle’s great learning and abilities extended itself even at this time beyond the bounds of our island, so that the grand duke of Tuscany, a prince distinguished for learning, was extremely desirous of a correspondence with him: of which he was advertised in a letter, dated Oct. 10, 1660, from Mr. Southwell, then resident at Florence. 3. “Certain physiological Essays and other Tracts,” 1661, 4to. They were printed again in 1669, 4to, with large additions, especially of “A Discourse about the absolute rest of bodies” and were translated into Latin. 4. “Sceptical Chemist,” 1662, 8vo, a very curious and excellent work reprinted in 1679, 8vo, with the addition of divers experiments and notes about the producibleness of chemical principles.

In June 1686, his friend Dr. Gilbert Burnet, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, transmitted to him from the Hague the manuscript account of his travels, which he had dra.vn up in the form of letters, addressed to Mr. Boyle: who, in his answer to the doctor, dated the 14th of that month, expresses his satisfaction in “finding, that all men do not travel, as most do, to observe buildings and gardens, and modes, and other amusements of a superficial and almost insignificant curiosity; for your judicious remarks and reflections, says he, may not a little improve both a statesman, a critic, and a divine, as well as they will make the writer pass for all three.” In 1687, Mr. Boyle published, 36. “The martyrdom of Theodora and Dydimia,” 8vo; a work he had drawn up in his youth. 37. “A disquisition about the final causes of natural things; wherein it is enquired, whether, and, if at all, with what caution, a naturalist should admit them.” With an appendix, about vitiated light, 1688, 8vo.

He was buried in St. Martin’s church in the Fields, Westminster, on the 7th of January following: and his funeral sermon was preached by his friend Dr. Gilbert Burnet, bishop of Salisbury. The bishop made choice upon this occasion of a text very apposite to his subject, namely, “For God giveth to a man, that is good in his sight, wisdom, knowledge, and joy.” Eccles. xi. 26. After explaining the meaning of the words, he applies the doctrine to the honourable person deceased; of whom, he tells us, he was the better able to give a character, from the many happy hours he had spent in conversation with him, in the course of nine-and-twenty years. He gives a large account of Mr. Boyle’s sincere and unaffected piety, and more especially of his zeal for the Christian religion, without having any narrow notions concerning it, or mistaking, as so many do, a bigoted heat in favour of a particular sect, for that zeal which is the ornament of a true Christian. He mentions, as a proof of this, his noble foundation for lectures in defence of the gospel against infidels of all sorts; the effects of which have been so conspicuous in the many volumes of excellent discourses which have been published hi consequence of that noble and pious foundation . He had, says our prelate, designed it in his life-time, though some accidents did, upon great considerations, divert him from settling it; but not from ordering by his last will, that a liberal provision should be made for one who should, in a very few well-digested sermons, every year set forth the truth of the Christian religion in general, without descending to the subdivisions among Christians. He was at the charge of the translation and impression of the New Testament into the Malayan tongue, which he sent over all the East Indies. He gave a noble reward to him that translated Grotius’s incomparable book of the truth of the Christian religion into Arabic: and was at the charge of a whole impression, which he took care should be dispersed in all the countries where that language is understood. He was resolved to have carried on the impression of the New Testa-, meut in the Turkish language; but the company thought it became them to be the doers of it, and so suffered him only to give a large share towards it. He was at 700l. charge in the edition of the Irish Bible, which he ordered to be distributed in Ireland: and he contributed liberally, both to the impression of the Welsh Bible, and of the Irish Bible for Scotland. He gave, during his life, 300l. to advance the design of propagating the Christian religion in America; and, as soon as he heard that the East India company were entertaining propositions for the like design in the East, he presently sent a hundred pounds for a beginning, as an example; but intended to carry it much farther when it should be set on foot to purpose. When he understood how large a share he had in impropriations, he ordered considerable sums to be given to the incumbents in those parishes, and even to the widows of those who were dead before this distribution of his bounty. He did this twice in his life-time, to the amount of above 600l. and ordered another distribution, as far as his estate would bear, by his will. In other respects his charities were so bountiful and extensive, that they amounted, as this prelate tells us, from hfs own knowledge, to upwards of 1000l. per annum.

But that part of his discourse which concerns us most, is, the copious and eloquent account he has given of this great man’s abilities. “His knowledge,” says he, “was of so vast an extent, that if it were not for the variety of vouchers in their several sorts, I should be afraid to say all I know. He carried the study of the Hebrew very far into the rabbinical writings, and the other oriental tongues, He had read so much of the fathers, that he had formed a clear judgment of all the eminent ones. He had read a vast deal on the scriptures, had gone very nicely through the various controversies in religion, tind was a true master of the whole body of divinity. He read the whole compass of the mathematical sciences; and, though he did not set himself to spring any new game, yet he knew the abstrusest parts of geometry. Geography, in the several parts of it that related to navigation or travelling; history and books of novels, were his diversions. He went very nicely through all the parts of physic; only the tenderness of his nature made him less able to endure the exactness of anatomical dissections, especially of living animals, though he knew these to be most instructing. But for the history of nature, ancient and modern, of the productions of allcountries, of the virtues and improvements of plants, of ores, and minerals, and all the varieties that are in them jn different climates, he was by much, by very much, the readiest and' the perfectest I ever knew, in the greatest compass, and with the nicest exactness. This put him in the way of making all that vast variety of experiments beyond any man, as far as we know, that ever lived. And in these, as he made a great progress in new discoveries, so he used so nice a strictness, and delivered them with so scrupulous a truth, that all who have examined them have found how safely the world may depend upon them. But his peculiar and favourite study was chemistry, in which he was engaged with none of those ravenous and ambitious designs that drew many into it. His design was only to find out nature, to see into what principles things might be resolved, and of what they were compounded, and to prepare good medicaments for the bodies of men. He spent neither his time nor fortune upon the vain pursuits of high promises and pretensions. He always kept himself within the compass that his estate might well bear and, as he made chemistry much the better for his dealing in it, so he never made himself either worse or the poorer for it. It was a charity to others, as well as an entertainment to himself; for the produce of it was distributed by his sister and others, into whose hands he put it.” To thiseulogium of the bishop, we will only add that of the celebrated physician, philosopher, and chemist, Dr. Herman Boerhaave; who, after having declared lord Bacon to be the father of experimental philosophy, asserts, that “Mr. Boyle, the ornament of his age and country, succeeded to the genius and enquiries of the great chancellor Verulam. Which,” says he, “of all Mr. Boyle’s writings shall I recommend? All of them. To him we owe the secrets of fire, air, water, animals, vegetables, fossils: so that from his works may be deduced the whole system of natural knowledge.” The reader perhaps recollects, that Mr. Boyle was born the same year in which lord Bacon died. “Sol occubuitj nox nulla secuta est.”

Mr. Boyle was never married: but Mr. Evelyn was assured, that he once courted the beautiful and ingenious daughter of Gary, earl of Monmouth; and that to this passion was owing his Seraphick Love. In the memorandum of Mr. Boyle’s life, set down by bishop Burnet, it is remarked, that he abstained from marriage, at first out of policy, afterwards more philosophically; and we find, by a letter of Dr. John Wallis to him, dated at Oxford, July 17, 1669, that he had an overture made him with respect to the lady Mary Hastings, sister to the earl of Hunting, don. But it does not appear from any of his papers, that he had ever entertained the least thoughts of that kind; nay, there is a letter of his, written when he was young to the lady Barrymore his niece, who had informed him of a report that he was actually married, which almost shews that he never did. The letter is written with great politeness, and in the true spirit of gallantry; and is a clear proof, that though Mr. Boyle did not choose to marry, yet it was no misanthropic cynical humour which restrained him from it. It is impossible to entertain the reader better, than by presenting him with that part of it which concerns the point in question. " It is high time for me to hasten the payment of the thanks I owe your ladyship for the joy you are pleased to wish me, and of which that wish possibly gives me more than the occasion of it would. You have certainly reason, madam, to suspend your belief of a marriage, celebrated by no priest but fame, and made unknown to the supposed bridegroom. I may possibly ere long give you a fit of the spleen upon this theme; but at present it were incongruous to blend such pure raillery, as I ever prate of matrimony and amours with, among things I am so serious in, as those this scribble presents you. I' shall therefore only tell you, that the little gentleman and I are still at the old defiance. You have carried away too many of the perfections of your sex, to leave enough in this country for the reducing so stubborn a heart as mine; whose conquest were a task of so much difficulty, and is so little worth it, that the latter property is always likely to deter any, that hath beauty and merit enough to overcome the former. But though this untamed heart be thus insensible to the thing itself called love, it is yet very accessible to things very near of kin to that passion; and esteem, friendship, respect, and even admiration, are things that their proper objects fail not proportionably to exact of me, and consequently are qualities, which, in their highest degrees, are really and constantly paid my lady Barrymore by her most obliged humble servant, and affectionate uncle,

, earl of Orrery, second son of Roger second earl of Orrery, by lady Mary Sackville, daughter to Richard earl of Dorset and Middlesex, was born in August 1676, at his father’s house in Chelsea; and at fifteen entered a nobleman of Christ-church, in Oxford, under the care of Dr. Francis Atterbury, afterwards bishop of Rochester, and Dr. Freind. Dr. Aldrich, the head of that society, observing his uncommon application, drew up for his use that compendium of logic which is now read at Christ-church, wherein he styles him “the great ornament of our college.” Having quitted the university, he was in 1700 chosen member for the town of Huntington. A petition being presented to the house of commons, complaining of the illegality of his election, he spoke in support of that election with great warmth; and this probably gave rise to his duel with Mr. Wortley, the other candidate, in which, though Mr. Boyle had the advantage, the wounds he received threw him into a dangerous fit of sickness that lasted for many months. On the death of his elder brother, he became fourth earl of Orrery; soon after, he had a regiment given him, and was elected a knight of the Thistle. In 1706 he married lady Elizabeth Cecil, daughter to the earl of Exeter. In 1709 he was promoted to the rank of major-general, and sworn of her majesty’s privy council. He was envoy extraordinary from the queen to the states of Flanders and Brabant, with an appointment of ten pounds a day, at a very critical juncture, namely, during the treaty of Utrecht. There, some in authority at Brussels, knowing they were soon to become the emperor’s subjects, and that his imperial majesty was not on good terms with the queen, shewed less respect to her minister than they had formerly done: upon which, Orrery, who considered their behaviour as an indignity to the crown of Great Britain, managed with so much resolution and dexterity, that, when they thought his power was declining, or rather that he had no power at all, he got every one of them turned out of his post, Her majesty, in the tenth year of her reign, raised him to the dignity of a British peer, under the title of lord Boyle, baron of Marston, in Somersetshire. On the accession of king George I. he was made a lord of the bedchamber, and lord -lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county of Somerset. His frequent voting against the ministers gave rise to a report that he was to be removed from all his posts; upon which he absented himself from the court: but his friends assuring him that they had ground to believe the king had a personal esteem for him, he wrote a letter to his majesty, signifying that though he looked upon his service as a high honour, yet, when he first entered into it, he did not conceive it was expected from him that he should vote against his conscience and his judgment; that he must confess it was his misfortune to differ widely in opinion from some of his majesty’s ministers; that if those gentlemen had represented this to his majesty as a crime not to be forgiven, and his majesty himself thought so, he was ready to resign those posts he enjoyed, from which he found he was already removed by a, common report, which was rather encouraged than contradicted by the ministers. The king going soon after to Hanover, lord Orrery’s regiment was taken from him; which his lordship looking upon as a mark of displeasure, resigned his post of lord of the bedchamber.

In October 1733, lord Orrery returned to England, and having now no attachment to London, he disposed of his house in Downing-street, Westminster, as likewise of his seat at Britwell, near Windsor, and retired to his seat at Marston, in Somersetshire. As this place had been much neglected by his ancestors, and was little more than a shell of a large old house, he amused himself in building offices, in fitting out and furnishing apartments, and laying out gardens and other plantations. Study and retirement being his principal pleasures, he took care to supply the loss he had sustained from his father’s will, by furnishing his library anew with the best authors. In the summer of 1734, probably in his way to France, where he sometimes went, he visited the tomb of his ancestors, Roger Boyle, esq, and Joan his wife, in Preston church, near Feversham. This monument, when the title of earl of Cork devolved upon him, he intended to have repaired, if his life had been prolonged. In the middle of the year 1735, we find him again in Ireland. On the 31st of October, in the same year, an amiable relation, and a most promising youth, Edmund duke of Buckingham, died at Rome, upon which melancholy event, lord Orrery paid a just tribute to the memory of the young nobleman, in an elegiac poem. It was printed in 1736, and is one of the most pleasing specimens which our author has afforded of his poetical abilities. In the winter of 1735-6, the duke of Dorset being then lord lieutenant of Ireland, the eail of Orrery neglected no opportunity of endeavouring to render his administration easy. If Dr. Swift is to be credited, Ireland was about that time in a wretched condition. As a proof of it, the dean asserted in a letter to Mr. Pope, that lord Orrery had 3000l. a year in the neighbourhood of Cork, and that more than three years rent was unpaid. In April 1737, his lordship, who was then at Cork, earnestly pressed Dr. Swift to accompany him to England; but the doctor, who never saw Marston, did not accept the invitation. Lord Orrery took over with him to Mr. Pope all the letters of that great poet to Swift, which the dean had preserved or could find, which were not more in number than twenty-five. About this time, our noble author, that his sons might be educated under his own eye, and also have the benefit of attending Westminster-school, took a small house in Duke-street, Westminster. On the 30th of June, 1738, the earl of Orrery, after having been six years a widower, married, in Ireland, Mrs. Margaret Hamilton, only daughter and heiress of John Hamilton, esq. of Caledon, in the county of Tyrone, grand-daughter of Dr. Dopping, bishop of Meath, and niece of Dr. Dopping, bishop of Ossory. Swift, in a letter to Miss Hamilton, on her intended nuptials, after pretending a prior claim, as she had made so many advances to him, and confessed “herself to be nobody’s goddess but his,” archly waves it, and politely “permits lord Orrery to make himself the happiest man in the world; as I know not,” he adds, “any lady in this kingdom of so good sense or so many accomplishments.” He gives a great character of her, likewise, in his last printed letter to Mr. Pope. In this lady, the earl of Orrery, with gratitude to Heaven, acknowledged that the loss of his former countess was repaired. In 1739 he published a new edition, 2 vols. 8vo, of the dramatic works of his great-grandfather. Though these volumes cannot be particularly valuable, they are now become exceedingly scarce. In 1741 he published separately, in folio, “The first Ode of the first book of Horace imitated, and inscribed to the earl of Chesterfield;” and “Pyrrha, an imitation of the fifth Ode of the first book of Horace.” In the preface to the last, lord Orrery characterises Dacier’s and Sanadon’s translations, and makes some observations on Horace, which shew that he entered with taste and spirit into the peculiar excellencies of that poet. In 1742 he published in one volume, folio, the “State Letters” of his great-grandfather, the first earl; to which were prefixed Morrice’s memoirs of that eminent statesman. On the 25th of August, 1743, his lordship was presented by the university of Oxford to the honorary degree of D. C. L.; and he was, likewise, F.R. S. Lord Boyle, in 1746, being settled at Oxford, and Mr. Boyle in the college at Westminster, their father quitted London, and fixed his residence at Caledon, in Ireland. During one of his occasional visits to England, after the publication of the second volume of the Biographia Britannica, he thanked Dr. Campbell, “in the name of all the Boyles, for the honour he had done to them, and to his own judgment, by placing the family in such a light as to give a spirit of emulation to those who were hereafter to inherit the title.” Lord Orrery resided in Ireland, with very little intermission, from 1746 to 1750; happy in that domestic tranquillity, that studious retirement and inactivity, from which, as he himself expressed it, he was scarcely ever drawn, but with the utmost reluctance. “Whenever,” as he observed in a private letter, “we step out of domestic life in search of felicity, we come back again disappointed, tired, and chagrined. One day passed under our own roof, with our friends and our family, is worth a thousand in any other place. The noise and bustle, or, as they are foolishly called, the diversions of life, are despicable and tasteless, when once we have experienced the real delight of a fire-side.” These sentiments, which do so much honour to the rectitude of his lordship’s understanding, and the goodness of his heart, reflect, at the same time, a just reproach on the absurd and criminal dissipation that prevails for the most part among persons of rank and fortune. During the earl of Orrery’s residence in Ireland, he employed his leisure in laying out gardens and plantations at Caledon, and in improving and adorning its fine situation. On his return to Marston, he continued his alterations and improvements in the house and gardens at that place, many of the plans for which were designed by lord Boyle, who had a taste for architecture. In the mean while, the amusement of our noble author’s winter evenings was his translation of “The Letters of Pliny the Younger, with observations on each letter, and an Essay on Pliny’s life, addressed to Charles lord Boyle.” The essay is dated Leicester-fields, January 27, 1750-1; and, together with the translation, was published at London, in the following April, in 2 vols. 4to. This work met with so good a reception from the public, that three editions of it in octavo have since been printed. In the summer of the same year, lord Orrery addressed to his second son Hamilton a series of letters, containing “Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr. Swift, dean of St. Patrick’s, Dublin.” This work gave rise to many strictures and censures on his lordship for having professed himself Swift’s friend while he was exposing his weaknesses. Subsequent inquiries into Swift’s character have proved that the portrait he drew was not unfaithful. To this, however, we shall have occasion to recur in our account of Swift.

Dr. Johnson, less biassed by friendship, and more discriminating, said of him, “My friend, the late earl of Cork, had a great desire to maintain the literary character of his family: he was a genteel man, but did not keep up the dignity of his rank. He was so generally civil, that nobody thanked him for it.” Warburton, in his letters to bishop Hurd, lately published, employs the full measure of his coarse censure on him for publishing his character of Swift.

Lord Burlington’s house at Chiswick, the idea of which was borrowed from a well-known villa of Palladio, is a model of taste, though not without faults. Other works designed by lord Burlington were, the dormitory at Westminster-school, the assembly-room at York, lord Harrington’s at Petersham (afterwards lord Camelford’s), except the octagon buildings at each end, which were added by Shepherd; the duke of Richmond’s house at Whitehall, and general Wade’s in Cork-street. Both these last were ill-contrived and inconvenient; but the latter has so beautiful a front, that lord Chesterfield said, “as the general could not live in it to his ease, he had better take a house over against it, and look at it.”, Pope dedicated to him his Epistle IV. and addressed to him his incomparable letter oa a Journey to Oxford with Lintot. He is also to be noticed with honour as the first patron of bishop Berkeley, whom he loved for his taste in architecture. He died December 1753, and by his death the title of Earl of Burlington became extinct. His lady, Dorothy Saville, had no less attachment to the arts than her lord. She drew in crayons, and succeeded admirably in likenesses, but working with too much rapidity, did not do justice to her genius.

, a learned clergyman of the seventeenth century, and nephew to the dean of Canterbury, hereafter mentioned, was of a good family in Kent, and was educated at Eton school, from which he was admitted a scholar of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, in May 1620. Here he took the degree of A. B. in 1623, of A. M. 1627, and was elected fellow in 1651. He proceeded B. D. and was appointed one of the university preachers in 1634; and in 1640, was presented to the rectory of Mautboy in Norfolk, upon the death of Mr. Thomas D'Engayne; but before he left college, he gave to its library a fine set of Binnius’s Councils. His patron was William Paston, esq. his friend and contemporary at college, to whose sou sir Robert Paston, bart. of Oxnead in that county, a volume of his “Sermons,” Lond. 1672, 4to, was dedicated sometime after his decease, by his friend the editor, Roger Flynt, who had likewise been of Bene r t college. He died either in 1665 or 1667, March 10. He was a much admired preacher, a favourite of the bishop of Norwich (the celebrated Hall), and a chaplain to Charles I. His editor, in the preface to the above “Sermons,” informs us that it was with difficulty he obtained leave of the dying author to make them public, and obtained it only upon condition that he should say nothing of him. He has, however, given a short, but excellent character of him.

, one of the translators of the Bible in the reign of James I. was son of William Bois, rector of West-Stowe, near St. Edmundsbury, in Suffolk, and born at Nettlestead in that county, Jan. 3, 1560. He was taught the first rudiments of learning by his father; and his capacity was such, that at the age of five years he read the Bible in Hebrew, and before he was six could write it in an elegant hand. He went afterwards to Hadley school, and at fourteen was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he distinguished himself by his skill in the Greek; and such was his diligence that we are told he would go to the university library in summer, at four in the morning, and remain till eight in the evening without any intermission. Happening to have the small-pox when, he was elected fellow, to preserve his seniority, he caused himself to be carried, wrapped up in blankets, to be admitted. He applied himself for some time to the study of medicine, but fancying himself affected with every disease he read of, he quitted that science. June 21, 1583, he was ordained deacon, and next day, by virtue of a dispensation, priest. He was ten years chief Greek lecturer in his college, and read every day. He voluntarily read a Greek lecture for some years, at four in the morning, in liis own chamber, which was frequented by many of the fellows. On the death of his father, he succeeded him in the rectory of West Stowe; but his mother going to live with her brother, he resigned that preferment, though he might have kept it with his fellowship. At the age of thirty-six, he married the daughter of Mr. Holt, rector of Boxworth, in Cambridgeshire, whom he succeeded in that living, 1596. On quitting the university, the college gave him one hundred pounds. His young wife, who was bequeathed to him with the living, which was an advowson, proving a bad economist, and himself being wholly immersed in his studies, he soon became so much in debt, that he was forced to sell his choice collection of books to a prodigious disadvantage. The loss of his library afflicted him so much, that he thought of quitting his native country. He was, however, soon reconciled to his wife, and he even continued to leave all domestic affairs to her management. He entered into an agreement with twelve of the neighbouring clergy, to meet every “Friday at one of their houses by turns, to give an account of their studies. He usually kept some young scholar in his house, to instruct his own children, and the poorer sort of the town, as well as several gentlemen’s children, who were boarded with him. When a new translation of the Bible was, by James I. directed to be made, Mr. Bois was elected one of the Cambridge translators. He performed not only his own, but also the part assigned to another (part of the Apocrypha), with great reputation, though with little profit: for he had no allowance but his commons. The king indeed nominated him one of the fellows of his new college at Chelsea, but he never derived any benefit, as the scheme was not executed. He was also one of the six who met at Stationers-hall to revise the whole translation of the Bible, which task they went through in nine months, having each from the company of stationers during that time thirty shillings a week. He afterwards assisted sir Henry Saville in publishing the works of St. Chrysostom, and received a present of one copy of the book, for many years labour spent upon it: which however was owing to the death of sir Henry Saville, who intended to have made him fellow of Eton. In 1615, Dr. Lancelot Andrews, bishop of Ely, bestowed on him, unasked, a prebend in his church. He died 1643, in the 84th year af his age; leaving a great many manuscripts behind him, particularly a collation of the text of the Gospels and Acts. When he was a young student at Cambridge, he received from the learned Dr. Whitaker these three rules, for avoiding those distempers which usually attend a sedentary life, to which he constantly adhered: the first was, to study always standing; the second, never to study in a window; the third, never to go to bed with his feet cold . The work mentioned above, which Wolfius says is” Liber infrequentissimus etrarissime occurrens,“owing to very few copies having been printed, was entitled” Veteris interpretis cum Beza aliisque recentioribus Collatio in Quatuor Evangeliis et Apostolorum Actis, autore Johanne Boisio, Eccl. Eliensis Canonico, opus auspiciis rev. Praesulis Lancelot!, Winton. Episc. caeptum et perfectum," Lond. 1655, 12mo.

His “Postils,” a series of Sermons on the book of Common Prayer, Epistles, and Gospels, &c. were first published in 1614, 4to; and afterwards reprinted in folio, 1622 and 1629, with some additional lectures. The editions of 1622 and 1629 have an engraved frontispiece, with four portraits of the author in different attitudes. After his death his remains, viz. “Certaine Sermons,” were printed, 1631, 4to. He is also said to have written a “Defence of bishop Andrews’s Tortura Torti,” against Becanus the Jesuit. The manuscript of his Postils was deposited by his nephew Edward in the library of Bene't college, Cambridge.

a protestant dissenting minister, was born at Leeds in Yorkshire, in January, 1659-60. After early instruction under the care of his parents, he received the first part of his education for the ministry at the private academy of the rev. Mr. Frankland, near Kendal, in Westmoreland, and completed it under the tuition of the rev. Mr. Edward Veal, who kept a private academy at Stepney, near London. Having continued in these seminaries five years, and availed himself of the opportunities which he enjoyed in the latter situation of attending on the preaching of many able divines, both conformists and non-conformists, he entered on the exercise of his ministry about the year 1680. In 1683, finding that he could not discharge the duties of his function in England without molestation, he accepted an invitation to be joint pastor with Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Daniel Williams, in Dublin; and had afterwards for his coadjutor the rev. Mr. Thomas Emlyn, so well known for his writings and his sufferings. This connection subsisted for more than ten years with mutual friendship and uninterrupted harmony; but it was at length dissolved in consequence of Mr. Emlyn’s sentiments concerning the doctrine of the Trinity. On this occasion the zeal of Mr. Boyse for the orthodox led him to take some steps that were thought injurious to his former colleague, and inconsistent with the friendship that had subsisted between them; though he disapproved the prosecution which Mr. Emlyn suffered, and behaved towards him with a greater degree of kindness than any of the other dissenting ministers of Dublin. The latter years of Mr. Boyse^s life were embittered by bodily disorders and straitened circumstances. His funeral sermon was preached in December, 1728; but the precise time of his death is not known. He was considered as a pious, learned, and useful divine; assiduous in the exercise of his ministry, and in his conduct generally esteemed. He had a principal concern in promoting the act of toleration in Ireland. His works were published in 1728, in 2 vols. fol. The first contains 71 sermons, 6 dissertations on the doctrine of justification, and a paraphrase on those passages of the New Testament which chiefly relate to that doctrine. One of his sermons, originally printed separately, on “the Office of a Christian Bishop,” was ordered to be burnt by the Irish parliament in Nov. 1711. The second volume contains several pieces, of which the principal is a“Vindication of the true Deity of our blessed Saviour,” in answer to Mr. Emlyn’s “Humble inquiry into the Scripture account of Jesus Christ, &c.” As Mr. Boyse’s answer was published at the time when Mr. Emlyn was under prosecution for his sentiments, his conduct did not escape censure from the friends of Emlyn, who did not think it candid, liberal, or ingenuous.

In 1743, he published without his name, an ode on the battle of Dettingen, entitled “Albion’s Triumph,” a fragment of which is printed in the last edition of the Poets. In 1745 we find him at Reading, where he was employed by the late Mr. David Henry in compiling a work, published in 1747, in two volumes octavo, under the title of “An historical Review of the Transactions of Europe, from the commencement of the war with Spain in 1739 to the insurrection in Scotland in 1745; with the proceedings in parliament, and the most remarkable domestic occurrences during that period. To which is added, An impartial History of the late Rebellion, interspersed with characters and memoirs, and illustrated with notes.” To this he affixed his name, witli the addition of M. A. a degree which it is probable he assumed without authority. The work, however, considered as a compilation of recent and consequently very imperfectly-known events, is said to possess considerable merit. In a letter, published by Mr. Nichols, we have some information relative to it, and to the present state of his mind and situation. “My salary is wretchedly small (half a guinea a week) both for writing the history and correcting the press; but I bless God I enjoy a greater degree of health than I have known for many years, and a serene melancholy, which I prefer to the most poignant sensations of pleasure I ever knew. All I sigh for is a settlement, with some degree of independence, for my last stage of life, that I may have the comfort of my poor dear girl to be near me, and close my eyes. I should be glad to know if you have seen my history, from which you must not expect great things, as I have been over-persuaded to put my name to a composure, for which we ought to have had at least more time and better materials, and from which I have neither profit nor reputation to expect. I am now beginning * The History of the Rebellion,‘ a very difficult and invidious task. All the accounts I have yet seen are either defective, confused, or heavy. I think myself, from my long residence in Scotland, not unqualified for the attempt, but I apprehend it is premature; and, by waiting a year or two, better materials would offer. Some account, I think, will probably be published abroad, and give us light into many things we are now at a loss to account for. I am about a translation (at my leisure hours) of an invaluable French work, entitled * L’Histoire Universelle,' by the late M. Bossuet, bishop of Meaux, and preceptor to the dauphin, eldest son of Lewis XIV. I propose only to give his dissertations on the ancient empires, viz. the Egyptian, Assyrian, Grecian, and Roman, which he has described with surprising conciseness, and with equal judgment and beauty. I design to inscribe it to the right honourable Mr. Lyttelton, one of the lords of the treasury, one of the most amiable men I have ever known, and to whose uncommon goodness, if you knew my obligations, you would esteem him as much as he deserves.”

, one of the most eminent of the protestant divines who suffered martyrdom in the reign of queen Mary, was born in the former part of Henry Vjii.'s reign in Manchester, where he was educated in grammar, Latin, and accounts, in which last he was reckoned so expert that he was employed as clerk or secretary to sir John Harrington, treasurer and paymaster of the English forces in France; and in this employment he lived many years in great credit. His exchanging so profitable a situation for the clerical profession is rather obscurely accounted for by his biographers, some attributing it to his having imbibed the principles of the reformers, and being encouraged to join their number; others to certain abuses in sir John Harrington’s office, in which he either participated, or at which he connived, and the iniquity of which first struck him on hearing a sermon of bishop Latimer upon the subject of restitution as constituting the only basis of repentance. There is much reason, however, to doubt whether this sermon was not subsequent to the restitution he made of about 500l. which he apprehended the king had lost by some error in his and sir John Harrington’s accounts. The author of his life in the Biog. Brit, dwells with tiresome prolixity on this affair, as a new discorery of greater importance than, upon a perusal of the whole, we have beeri able to attach to it. The fact seems to have been, that Bradford was a man of great tenderness of conscience, and where he imagined he had done an injury, was restless until he had made restitution; and lamented his crime on this occasion with more bitterness than will be thought necessary by many persons who have been, intrusted with, much larger public accounts.

It appears that after he left the army, he studied for some time in the Inner Temple, but is said to have heard more sermons than law-lectures, and at length determined to study divinity. With this view he went to Cambridge about the month of August 1548, and took his degree of master of arts at Katherine-hall, and not Queen’s college, as some authors have reported. Dr. Ridley, bishop of Rochester, and afterwards of London, being then master of Pembroke-hall, invited him and his pious companion Thomas Horton, to become fellows of that hall, to which he was chosen. When urged by Bucer to take orders, he pleaded his inability, notwithstanding the high reputation for learning which he had established in college; but Bucer reconciled him by saying, “Though thou couldst not feed the flock with fine cakes and white bread, yet should thou satisfy them with barley-bread.” In 1550, when Ridley was translated to the see of London, he sent for him to take upon him deacon’s orders, after which he became one of the most celebrated and popular preachers of his time, and was made one of the king’s chaplains. The bishop afterwards gave him a prebend in St. Paul’s, and lodged him in his house.

For some time after the death of Edward VI. Bradford continued his public services; but a man of such zeal against popery could not be long safe, and the method that was taken to bring him to the stake is one of the most tyrannical measures of Mary’s reign. It is thus related by his biographers: On the 13th of August, in the first year of queen’s Mary’s reign, Gilbert Bourne, then preacher at Paul’s Cross, but not then bishop of Bath as Fox mistakes, he not being elected to that see before the beginning of the next year, made a seditious sermon at the said cross; wherein he so much traduced the late king, and harangued so intolerably in favour of popery, that the auditory were ready to pull him out of the pulpit. Neither could the reverence of the place, nor the presence of the bishop of London, nor the authority of the lord mayor, restrain their rage. Bourne, seeing himself in this peril, and his life particularly aimed at by a drawn dagger that was hurled at him in the pulpit, which narrowly missed him, turned about, and perceiving Bradford behind him, he earnestly begged him to come forwards and pacify the people. Bradford was no sooner in his room, and recommended peace and concord to them, than with a joyful shout at the sight of him, they cried out, ‘ Bradford, Bradford, God save thy life, Bradford!’ and then, with profound attention to his discourse, heard him enlarge upon peaceful and Christian obedience; which when he had finished, the tumultuous people, for the most part, dispersed; but, among the rest who persisted, there was a certain gentleman, with his two servants, who, coming up the pulpitstairs, rushed against the door, demanding entrance upon Bourne; Bradford resisted him, till he had secretly given Bourne warning, by his servant, to escape; who, flying to the mayor, once again escaped death. Yet conceiving the danger not fully over, Bourne beseeched Bradford not to leave him till he was got to some place of security; in which Bradford again obliged him, and went at his back, shadowing him from the people with his gown, while the mayor and sheriffs, on each side, led him into the nearest house, which was Paul’s school; and so was he a third time delivered from the fury of the populace. It is added that one of the mob, most inveterate against Bourne, exclaimed, ‘ Ah! Bradford, Bradford, dost thou save his life who will not spare thine? Go, I give thee his life; but were it not for thy sake, I would thrust him through with my sword.’ The same Sunday, in the afternoon, Bradford preached at Bow church in Cheapside, and sharply rebuked the people for their outrageous behaviour. Three days after this humane interposition, Aug. 16, he was summoned by the council and bishops to the Tower of London, where the queen then was, and charged with sedition, and preaching heresy; and notwithstanding the defence he made, was committed to prison in the Tower, where he lay for a year and a half. This forbearance is the more remarkable, because, when in the Tower, or other prisons, by his discourses, exhortations, and especially by his letters, he did nearly, if not quite as much service to the protestant cause, as when he was at large. In his letters, he evinced a spirit of inflexible constancy in his principles, a primitive and apostolic zeal for the propagation of truth, and a sincere abhorrence of the delusions of the church of Rome; and strengthened the minds of the adherents of the reformation to such a degree that his enemies at last determined to cut him off. In 1554, he was removed to the court of king’s bench, Southvvark, and on Jan. 22, examined before Gardiner, bishop of Winchester and chancellor, Bonner bishop of London, and others. For this and his other examinations we refer to Fox. After it was over, he was sent back to the same prison under stricter restraint than before, especially as to the exercise of his pen: but the sweetness of his comportment towards his keepers so won upon them, that it defeated the severity of his enemies’ commands in that particular; and his arguments, thus discharged out of prison, did their cause more hurt, than all the terror of their tyrannical treatment did it good. A week after, on the 29th, he was brought before them in the church of St. Mary Overies to his second examination, and next day to a third, in all which he acknowledged and adhered to his principles with undaunted constancy, and answered every thing offered in the shape of argument with authority from the scriptures, and every reproach with meekness. He was now condemned to die, but he lay after this in the Poultry counter for five months, visited constantly by some of the popish bishops, their chaplains or priests, so desirous were they to gain over a champion of his consequence. We are told that both while he lay in the king’s bench, and in the counter, he preached twice a-day, unless sickness hindered him. The Sacrament was often‘ ministered; and, through his keeper’s indulgence, there was such a resort of pious people to him, that his chamber was usually almost filled with them. He made but one short meal a-day, and allowed himself but four hours rest at night. His gentle nature was ever relenting at the thoughts of his infirmities, and fears of being betrayed into inconstancy; and his behaviour was so affecting to all about him, that it won even many papists to wish for the preservation of his life. His very mien and aspect begat veneration; being tall and spare, or somewhat macerated in his body; of a faint sanguine complexion, with an auburn beard; and his eyes, through the intenseness of his pious contemplations, were often so solemnly settled, that the tears would silently gather in them, till he could not restrain them from overflowing their banks, and creating a sympathy in the eyes of his beholders. The portions of his time he did not spend in prayer or preaching, he allotted to the visitation of his fellow-prisoners; exhorting the sick to patience, and distributing his money to the poor, and to some who had been the most violent opposers of his doctrines; nor did he leave the felons themselves without the best relief they were capable of receiving, under the distresses they had brought upon themselves, which excited them to the most hearty and sincere repentance. On the last day of June 1555, he was carried to Newgate, attended by a vast multitude of people, who, because they had heard he was to suffer by break of day, that the fewer spectators might be witnesses of his death, either stayed in Smithfield all night, or returned in greater numbers thither by four o’clock the next morning, the 1st of July; but Bradford was not brought thither till nine o'clock, and then came under a stronger guard of halberdeers than was ever known on the like occasion. As he came out of Newgate, he gave his velvet cap and his handkerchief to an old friend, with whom he had a little private talk. Such was the inveteracy of his enemies, that his brother-in-law, Roger Beswick, for only taking leave of him, had his head broke, till the blood ran down his shoulders, by the sheriff Woodrofe. When he came to Smithfield, and in his company a Yorkshire youth, who was an apprentice in London, named John Lyefe, and to be burnt at the same stake with him, for maintaining the like faith in the sacrament, and denying that priests had any authority to exact auricular confession, Bradford went boldly up to the stake, laid him down flat on his face on one side of it, and the said young man, John Lyefe, went and laid himself on the other; where they had not prayed-to themselves above the space of a minute, before the sheriff bid Bradford arise, and make an end; for the press of the people was very great. When they were on their feet, Bradford took up a faggot and kissed it, and did the like to the stake. When he pulled off his clothes, he desired they might be given to his servant; which was granted. Then, at the stake, holding up his hands and his face to Heaven, he said aloud, “O England, England, repent thee of thy sins! Beware of idolatry, beware of antichrists, lest they deceive you.” Here the sheriff ordered his hands to be tied; and one of the fire-rakers told him, if he had no better learning than that, he had best hold his peace. Then Bradford forgiving, and asking forgiveness of, all the world, turned his head about, comforted the stripling at the same stake behind him, and embracing the flaming reeds that were near him, was heard among his last words to say, “Strait is the way, and narrow is the gate,” &c.

, D. D. bishop of Rochester, was a native of London, the son of William Bradford, of whom it is recorded, that being a parish-officer in the time of the plague, he looked upon it as his duty to take care in person both of the dead and living, although he removed his family to Islington. The subject of this article was born Dec. 20, 1652, in St. Anne’s Blackfriars, and was educated at St. Paul’s school, and afterwards in the Charter-house. In 1669, he was admitted a student of Bene't college, Cambridge, and matriculated March 27, 1672, but left it without taking a degree, having at that time some scruples of conscience respecting the subscriptions, declarations, and oaths then required. He pursued his studies, however, in private, and after studying divinity, having overcome his scruples by a careful examination of the matters in controversy, he became desirous of orders in the church of England; but as he was then twenty-eight years old, and could not return to the university and go regularly on in the statutable course of taking his degrees, archbishop Sancroft procured him a royal mandate for M. A. in 1680, and he was admitted to the same at Oxford in 1697. As the state of affairs, however, was critical at the time he received his degree at Cambridge, he declined proceeding in his design, living as a private tutor to gentlemen’s families, until after the revolution, when he was ordained deacon and priest in 1690, and in the spring following was elected minister of St. Thomas’s church, Southwark, by the governors of that hospital.

He was soon aften chosen lecturer of St. Mary-le-Bow, and engaged by archbishop Tillotson to educate his grandsons, which occasioned him to reside at Carlisle-house in Lambeth. While here, the rector of St. Mary-le-Bow died, and the parishioners were so pleased with Mr. Bradford, as to solicit the archbishop to give him the living, with which his grace complied, but not without acquainting them with the informality of such applications. On this Mr. Bradford resigned St. Thomas’s, and the lectureship of Bow;‘ but soon after accepted that of Allhallows, in Bread-street. In 1698, he preached on the 30th of January before king William, who was so well pleased with the sermon, as to command it to be published; and also, in March following, appointed him one of his chaplains in ordinary, in which office he was retained by queen Anne. In 1705, when she visited Cambridge, he was made D. D. and in 1707, her majesty gave him a prebend of Westminster. He now was exemplary in a diligent and conscientious discharge of his parochial duties, and enjoyed the esteem of his superiors, the good opinion and friendship of his brethren the clergy, and the affection of his parishioners. In 1710, he refused the bishoprick of St. David’s, as the then ministry would not suffer him to hold his prebend in commendam, nor the rectory of Bow, either of which was necessary to enable him to keep up his rank as a bishop. In 1716, he was unanimously elected master of Bene’t college, and in 1718 was consecrated bishop of Carlisle, whence in 1723 he was translated to Rochester, which he held with the deanry of Westminster. About a year afterwards he resigned the mastership of the college. He died May 17, 1731, and was buried in Westminsterabbey. His character appears to have been excellent, according to every account. His Boylean lectures were published in 4to, 1699, under the title of “The Credibility of the Christian Religion from its intrinsic evidence, being eight sermons, &c. with a ninth as an appendix, in reply to an objection from the imperfect promulgation of the gospel,” 4to. He published also separately twenty-three sermons preached on public occasions, and assisted in the publication of Tillotson’s works. He left two daughters, one married to Dr. Reuben Clarke, archdeacon of Essex, and the other to Dr. John Denne, archdeacon of Rochester.

, D. D. Savilian professor of astronomy in Oxford, F. R. S. and member of the academies of sciences and belles-lettres of Paris, Berlin, Petersburgh, and Bologna, was born at Shireborn in Gloucestershire in 1692, and educated at Northleach in the same county. Thence he was admitted a commoner of Balliol-college in Oxford, March 15, 1710: where he took the degree of B. A. Oct. 14, 1714, and of M. A. Jan. 21, 1716. He was ordained deacon and priest in 1719, and instituted the same year to the vicarage of Bridstow in Herefordshire. He never had any other preferment in the church, except the small rectory or sinecure of Landewy Welfry, in the county of Pembroke, and diocese of St. David: and his institution to this bears date the Jst of March 1719. It is presumed that the bishop of Hereford, to whom he was chaplain, was his patron to the vicarage; and Mr. Molyneux, who was then secretary to the prince of Wales, procfcred him the sinecure.

About 1748, he became entitled to bishop Crew’s benefaction of 30l. per aim. to the lecture reader in experimental philosophy in Oxford. He was elected member of the royal society in 1752; of the academy of sciences at Paris, in 1748; of that at Petersburg, in 1754; of the academy of sciences at Bologna, in 1757; and also of the royal Prussian academy of sciences and belles lettres, but the time when does not appear amongst his papers.

, an eminent puritan divine, was born in 1571 at Market-Bosworth, in Leicestershire, of an ancient but reduced family, and was first educated at Worcester free school, at the expense of an uncle, ou whose death he was obliged to return to Bosworth, but afterwards found a friend in Mr. Ainsworth, schoolmaster at Ashby-de-la-Zouch, who continued his education in that school. In 1589, he was admitted along with Joseph Hall, afterwards the celebrated bishop of Exeter, into Emmanuel college, Cambridge, and took in course his degree of B. A. and M. A. but could not obtain a fellowship, according to the statutes, which allow but of one of a county at time, and that for Leicestershire was gained by Mr. Hall. The master of the college, however, Dr. Chaderton, who had a high respect for him, first procured him to be tutor to the children of sir Thomas Leighton, governor of Guernsey, and afterwards to be fellow of Sidney Sussex college, then newly founded. He then entered into holy orders, and preached first as a lecturer at Abington, near Cambridge, and at Steeple Morton. Afterwards, by the recommendation of Dr. Chaderton, he was in 101i settled at Chatham, in Kent; but before he had been there a year, he was sent for by the archbishop of Canterbury (Whitgift) and commanded to subscribe, which he refusing, was suspended. He therefore was obliged to remove, but was afterwards licensed by the bishop of Litchfield and Coventry (Dr. Overton) to preach any where in his diocese, and at length coming to London, was chosen lecturer of Christ Church, Newgate-street. Here, however, he published a treatise against the Ceremonies, which obliged him, to leave the city and retire to the house of his friend and patron, Mr. Redriche, at Newhall, in Leicestershire, and he remained here until near his death, which happened when, on a visit at Chelsea in 1618. Bishop Hall says of him$ that he was “of a strong brain and of a free spirit, not suffering himself for small differences of judgment to be alienated from his friends, to whom, notwithstanding his seeming austerity, he was very pleasing in conversation, being full of witty and harmless urbanity. He was very strong and eager in arguing, hearty in friendship, regardless of the world, a despiser of compliments, a lover of reality, full of digested and excellent notions, and a painful labourer in God’s vineyard.” The rev. Thomas Gataker, of Ilotherhiihe, wrote his life, a long and not uninteresting account.

, an English divine of good parts and learning, the son of Nicholas Brady, an officer in the king’s army in the civil wars of 1641, was born at Bandon, in the county of Cork, Oct. the 28th, 1659; and continued in Ireland till he was 12 years of age. Then he was sent over to England to Westminster-school; and from thence elected stuJent to Christ-church in Oxford. After continuing there about four years, he went to Dublin, where his father resided; at which university he immediately commenced B. A. When he was of due stanuing, his diploma for the degree of D. D. was, on account of his uncommon merit, presented to him by that university while he was in England; and brought over by Dr Pratt, then senior travelling fellow, afterwards provost of that college. His first ecclesiastical preferment was to a prebend in the cathedral of St. Barry, at Cork; to which he was collated by bishop Wettenhal, whose domestic chaplain he was. He was a zealous promoter of the revolution, and in consequence of his zeal suffered for it. In 1690, when the troubles broke out in Ireland, by his interest with king Tatnes as general, M'Carty, he thrice prevented the burning of the town of Bandon, after three several orders given by that prince to destroy it. The same year, having been deputed by the people of Bandon, he went over to England, to petition the parliament for a redress of some grievances they had suffered while king James was in Ireland; and afterwards quitting his preferments in Ireland, he settled in London; where, being celebrated for his abilities in the pulpit, he was elected minister of St. Catherine Cree church, and lecturer of St. Michael’s Wood-street. He afterwards became minister of Richmond in Surry. and Stratford upon Avon in Warwickshire, and at length rector of Clapham in Surry; which last, together with Richmond, he held till his death. His preferments amounted to 600l. a year, but he was so little of an Œconomist as to be obliged to keep a school at Richmond. He was also chaplain to the duke of Ormond’s troop of horse-guards, as he was to their majesties king William and queen Mary. He died May 20, 1726, aged 66, leaving behind him the character of being a person of an agreeable temper, a polite gentleman, an excellent preacher, and a good poet. He has no high rank, however, among poets, and would have long ere now been forgotten in that character, if his name was not so familiar as a translator of the new version of the “Psalms,” in conjunction with Mr. Tate, which version was licensed 1696. He translated also the Æneids of Virgil,“published by subscription in 1726, 4 vols. 8vo,­and a tragedy, called” The Rape, or the Innocent Impos-­tors,“neither performances of much character. His prose works consist of” Sermons," three volumes of which were published by himself in 1704, 1706, and 1713, and three others by his eldest son, who was a clergyman at Tooting, in Surry, London, 1730, 8vo.

In 1630 he took a doctor of divinity’s degree at Cambridge; and soon after was invited to Ireland by the lord viscount Wentworth, deputy of that kingdom, and sir Christopher Wandesford, master of the rolls. He went over in 1633, having first resigned all his church preferments in England; and a little while after obtained the archdeaconry of Meath, the best in that kingdom. The first public service he was employed in was a royal visitation, when, finding the revenues of the church miserably wasted, the bishoprics, in particular, wretchedly dilapidated by fee-farms and long leases, and small rents, the discipline scandalously despised, and the ministers but meanly provided, he applied in process of time proper remedies to these several evils. In 1634 he was promoted to the bishopric of Londonderry; and improved that see very much, not only by advancing the rents, but also by recovering lands detained from his predecessors. But the greatest service he did the church of Ireland, was by getting, with the lord deputy’s assistance, several acts passed in the parliament which met in that kingdom on the 14th of July, 1634, for the abolishing fee-farms, recovering impropriations, &c. by which, and other means, he regained to the church, in the space of four years, 30 or 40,000^. a year. In the convocation that met at the same time, he prevailed upon the church of Ireland to be united in the same faith with the church of England, by embracing the thirty-nine articles of religion, agreed upon in the convocation holden at London in 1562. He would fain, also, have got the English canons established in Ireland; but could obtain no more than that such of our canons as were proper for the Irish should be extended thither, and others new framed, and added to them. Accordingly, a book of canons was compiled, chiefly by our bishop, and having passed in convocation, received the royal confirmation; but these efforts were either misunderstood or misrepresented, and his zeal for uniformity of opinion was branded by one party as Arminianism, and by another, as Popery, neither of which charges, however, diverted him from his steady purpose.

In 1637, he took a journey into England, and was there surprised with the news of an information exhibited against him in the star-chamber, “for being present at Rippon when one Mr. Palmes had made some reflecting discourse upon his majesty, and neither reproving nor informing against him.” The words deserved no very great punishment if they had been true, being no more than, that “he feared a Scottish mist was come over their town,” because the king had altered his lodgings from Rippon, where he had designed them, to sir Richard Graham’s house, not far from that place. But the bishop easily cleared himself and the whole company. After having received much honour from Charles 1. and many civilities from archbishop Laud and other persons, he returned to Ireland, and, with 6000l. for which he sold his estate in England, purchased another at Omagh, in the county of Tyrone, and began a plantation, which the distractions of that kingdom hindered him from perfecting. In March 1641 articles of high treason were exhibited against him in Ireland, wherein he was charged with having conspired with others to subvert the fundamental laws of that kingdom, to introduce an arbitrary and tyrannical government, &c. The bishop was at Londonderry, when he received intelligence of this accusation. All his friends wrote to him to decline the trial; but, thinking it dishonourable to fly, he went directly to Dublin, and was made a close prisoner by the parliament. In this distress he wrote to the primate Usher, then in England, for his advice and comfort; who mediated so effectually in his behalf with the king, that his majesty sent a letter to Ireland, to stop proceedings against him. This letter was very slowly obeyed; however, the bishop was at length restored to liberty, but without any public acquittal, the charge lying still dormant against him, to be awakened when his enemies pleased. Shortly after his return to Londonderry, sir Phelim O'Neil laid a plot to affect his life, in the following manner. He directed a letter to him, wherein he desired, “that, according to their articles, such a gate of the city should be delivered to him;” expecting that the Scotch in the place would, upon the discovery, become his executioners: but the person who was to manage the matter, ran away with the letter. But, though this design faded, the bishop did not find any safety there: the city daily being crowded with discontented persons out of Scotland, he began to be afraid lest they should deliver him up. One night they turned a cannon against his house to affront him; and, being persuaded by his friends to consider that as a warning, he took their advice, and privately embarked for England. Here he continued active in the king’s service, till his majesty’s affairs were grown desperate; and then, embarking with several persons of distinction, he landed at Hamburgh on July 8, 1644. Shortly after, at the treaty of Uxbridge, the parliaments of England and Scotland made this one of their preliminary demands, that bishop Bramhall, together with archbishop Laud, &c. should be excepted out of the general pardon.

From Hamburgh he went to Brussels, where he continued for the most part till 1648, with sir Henry de Vic, the king’s president; constantly preaching every Sunday, and frequently administering the sacrament. In that year he returned to Ireland; from whence, after having undergone several difficulties, he narrowly escaped in a little bark: all the while he was there, his life was in continual danger. At Limerick he was threatened with death, if he did not suddenly depart the town. At Portumnagh, indeed, he afterwards enjoyed more freedom, and an allowance of the church service, umler the protection of the marquis of Clanrickard: but, at the revolt of Cork, he had a very narrow deliverance; which deliverance, however, troubled Cromwell so, that he declared he would have given a good sum of money for that Irish Canterburv, as he called him. His escape from Ireland is accounted wonderful: for the vessel he was in was closely chased hy two of the parliament frigates, and when they were come so near, that all hopes of escape vanished, on a sudden the wind sunk into a perfect calm, by which it happened wonderfully that his ship got off, while the frigates were unable to proceed at all. During this second time of being abroad, he had many disputes about religion with the learned of all nations, sometimes occasionally, at other times by appointment and formal challenge; and wrote several things in defence of the church of England. He likewise purposed to draw a parallel between the liturgy of the church of England, and the public forms of the protestant churches abroad; and with this view he designed to travel about. But he met with a very unexpected interruption in his first day’s journey: for he no sooner came into the house where he intended to refresh himself, but he was known and called by his name by the hostess. "While the bishop was wondering at his being discovered, she revealed the secret by shewing him his picture, and assured him there were several of them upon the road, that, being known by them, he might be seized; and that her husband, among others, had power to that purpose, which he would certainly make use of if he found him. The bishop saw evidently he was a condemned man, being already hanged in effigy; an'd therefore, making use of this intelligence, prudently withdrew into safer quarters.

His various works, published at different times, were reprinted at Dublin in 1677, in one vol. fol. with his Life by the editor, Dr. Vesey, bishop of Limerick. His funeral sermon, with a shorter account of his life, was preached and published by Dr. Jeremy Taylor, bishop of Down and Connor, Dublin, 1663, 4to. His works are chiefly levelled at the Roman catholics and the sectaries, some of both parties, in his opinion, uniting for the destruction of the established government and church. But perhaps the most valuable part of his works is that in which he contended with Hobbes. He argued with great acuteness against Hobbes’s notions on liberty and necessity, and attacked the whole of his system in a piece called the “Catching of the Leviathan,” originally published in 1658, in which he undertakes to demonstrate, out of Hobbes’s own works, that no sincere Hobbist can be a good Christian, or a good Common-wealth’s-man, or reconcile himself to himself. For some time an answer to Milton’s “Defensio populi,” was attributed to archbishop Bramhall, but with what injustice Mr. Todd has lately shewn, in his accurate and valuable Life of Milton.

, an eminent mathematician of the seventeenth century, son of Thomas Brancker, some time bachelor of artsj,in Exeter college, Oxford, was born in Devonshire in 1636, and was admitted batler (and not butler, as some late biographical compilations blunderingly assert), of the said college, Nov. 8, 1652, in the seventeenth year of his age. In 1655, June 15, he took the degree of bachelor of arts, and was elected probationary fellow the 30th of the same month. In 1658, April 22, he took the degree of master of arts, and became a preacher; but after the restoration, refusing to conform to the ceremonies of the church of England, he quitted his fellowship in 1662, and retired to Chester: but not long after, he became reconciled to the service of the church, took orders from a bishop, and was made a minister of Whitegate. He had, however, for some time, enjoyed great opportunity and leisure for pursuing the bent of his genius in the mathematical sciences; and his skill both in the mathematics and chemistry procured him the favour of lord Brereton, who gave him the rectory of Tilston. He was afterward chosen master of the well-endowed school at Macclesfield, in that county, where he spent the remaining years of his life, which was terminated by a short illness in 1676, at 40 years of age; and he was interred in the church at Macclesfield.

, a learned ecclesiastical historian, was born at Amsterdam, July 2 5, 1626, and after having made distinguished progress in Greek, Hebrew, Latin, philosophy, and divinity, he was invited to be pastor of a church of remonstrants at Nieukoop, where he married Susanna, daughter of the celebrated professor Gaspard Barleus. In 1660, he came to Hoorn, and in L667 to Amsterdam. He died Oct. 11, 1685, leaving two sons, both excellent scholars, Caspar and Gerard. He wrote in German, 1. “A short history of the Reformation,” and of the war between Spain and the Netherlands, until 1600, Amst. second edit. 1658, which has a continuation, in the form of a chronicle, until that year. 2. Also in German, “A history of the Reformation in the Low Countries, &c.” 4 vols. 4to, 1671, and following years, a work of which the pensionary Fagel said to bishop Burnet, that it was worth while to learn German on purpose to read it. The English public, however, has been long acquainted with it, in a translation in 4 vols. fol. 1720, & seqq. The translator was John Chamberlayne, whom Foppen has converted intoRichardCumberland, merely that he may add,with true Popish bigotry, that he was “pseudo-episcopus Petro^ burgensis.” Brandt’s history was also abridged in 1725, in English, in 2 vols. 8vo, apparently from a French abridgement. Ruleus or Ruillius, a minister of the reformed church, having attacked some parts of his history, Brandt published an apology. 3. “A history of Enkhuisen,” a celebrated mercantile town. 4. “The Life of De Ruyter,” the celebrated Dutch admiral, Amst. 1684, fol. translated into French, ibid. 1690. 5. “Historical Diary,” with biographical notices of eminent men, Amst. 1689, 4to. 6. “Poemata,” Rotterdam^ 1649, 8vo. 7. “Poemata sacra et prophana,” Amst. 1638, 4to, and 1726, in. 2 vols. 8. “Historia judicii habiti annis 1618 and 1619^ de tribus captivis, Barnevelt, Hogerbeets, et Grotio,” Rotterdam, 1708, and 1710, 4to, with some other works, enumerated by Foppen, and Adrian a Cattenburg in his “Bibl. Scriptorum Remonstrantium.”

, was second son of sir Richard Bray, one of the privy council to king Henry VI. who lies buried in the north aile of Worcester cathedral, in which county sir Reginald was born. One of this family (which were lords of Braie, or Bray, in Normandy) came with William the Conqueror into England, where they flourished in the counties of Northampton and Warwick; but Edmond, the father of sir Richard, is styled of Eton Bray, in the county of Bedford, which county they had represented in parliament in 18 Ed. I. and 6 Ed. II. In 1 Rich. III. this Reginald had a general pardon granted to him, probably on account of his having taken part with Henry VI. to whose cause he had a personal as well as hereditary attachment being receiver- general to sir Henry Stafford, who married Margaret, countess of Richmond, mother to the earl of Richmond, afterward king Henry VII. and continued in her service after the death of sir Henry, and was put in trust for her dowry, on her marriage to Thomas, earl of Derby. When the duke of Buckingham had concerted with Morton, bishop of Ely (then his prisoner at Brecknock in Wales), the marriage of the earl of Richmond with the princess Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Edward I V. and the earl’s advancement to the throne, the bishop recommended sir Reginald for the transaction of the affair with the countess, telling the duke he had an old friend with her, a man sober, secret, and well-witted, called Reginald Bray, whose prudent policy he had known to have compassed matters of great importance; and accordingly wrote to him in Lancashire, where he then was with the countess, to come to Brecknock with all speed. He readily obeyed the summons, entered heartily into the design, and was very active in carrying it on; and soon engaged sir Giles Daubeney (afterwards lord Daubeney), sir John Ciieney, Richard GuiUbrd, esq. and many other gentlemen of note, to take part with Henry. After the success at Bosworth, he gradually rose into great favour with the king, who eminently distinguished and liberally rewarded his services. His attachment to that prince was sincere and uriremitted; and such were his ptudence and abilities, that he never forfeited the confidence he had acquired, during an attendance of seventeen years on the most suspicious monarch of his time. He was made a knight banneret, probably at the battle of Bosworth; a knight of the bath at the king’s coronation, and afterwards a kni“ht of the garter. In the first year of the kind’s reign he had a grant of the constableship of the castle of Oakham in Rutlandshire, and was appointed joint chie‘ justice, with the lord Fitzwalter, of all the forests south of Trent, and chosen of the privy council. After this he was appointed high-treasurer, chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and nigh steward of the university of Oxford. At the queen’s coronation, the ducliess of Norfolk, &c. sat at one side-table at the other, lady Ferrars, v>f Chartley, lady Bray, &c. At the christening of prince Arthur, sir Reginald bore a rich salt of gold which was given by the earl of Derby. He was amongst the knights bannerets when Henry, the king’s second son, was created duke of York in 1494. In the 7th year of the king, he by indenture covenanted to serve him in his wars beyond sea a whole year, with twelve men, himself accompted, each having his custrell and page, twenty-four demy lances, seventy-seven archers on horseback, two hundred and thirty-one archers, and bil’.es on foot twenty-four. In the 10th year he had a grant for life of the Isle of Wight, castle of Carisbrook, and the manors of Swainston, Brixton, Thorley, and Welow, in that isle, at th^ rent of 308l. 6s. 8rf. Camden mentions the grant of the Isle of Wight at the rent of 300 marks. In June 1497 he was at the battle of Blackheath, when the lord Audley, having joined the Cornish rebels, was taken prisoner; on whose execution and attainder, his manor of Shire Vachery and Crap ley in Surry, with a large estate there, was given to sir Reginald. He received many other marks of the king’s bounty and favour, and died 5th August 1503, possessed of a very great estate; notwithstanding which, and his activity as a minister, under a monarch whose love of, money was the cause of great and just complaints amongst the people, historians call him the father of his country, a sage and grave person, a fervent lover of jusuce, and one who would often admonish the king when he did any thing contrary to justice or equity. That he should do this, and the king still continue his favour, is an ample proof of the sense which his sovereign entertained of his services and abilities. He appears to have taken great delight in architecture, and to have had no small skill in it, as he had a principal concern and direction in building Henry Vllth’s chapel in Westminster-abbey, and in the finishing and bringing to perfection the chapel of St. George at Windsor, to which he was a liberal benefactor in his life-time, and for the completion of which he made farther provision by his will. His arms, crest, and device (R. B.) are exhibited on the cieling of the chapel at Windsor in many places; and in the middle of the south aile is a spacious chapel erected by him, and still called by his name, in which also, by his own particular direction, he was interred, though his executors neglected to erect a tomb for him, as he desired. Perhaps they thought his merit would be the most lasting monument. It is supposed that he is buried under the stone which covers Dr. Waterland; for, on opening the vault for that gentleman, who died in 1740, a leaden coffin, of ancient form and make, was found, which by other appearances also was judged to be that of sir Reginald, and was, by order of the dean, immediately arcned over with great decency. He was of great devotion, according to the piety of the times, and a bountiful friend, in his life-time, to many churches. In one of the letters of the dean and chapter of Westminster, John, abbot of Newminster in Northumberland, addresses him as founder of the monastery of Pipwell (in Northamptonshire); but this must be on account of some donations, as that house was founded by William Boutevileyr in 1143. In 1494, being then high steward of Oxford, he gave 40 marks to repair the church of St. Mary’s, in a window of which were the figures of him and his wife kneeling, their coats of arms on their backs, remaining in 1584. The dean and chapter of Lincoln, in recompence for his services to them, receive him and my lady his wife to be brother and sister of their chapter, and to be partakers of all suffrages, prayers, masses, fastings, almsdeeds, and other good deeds, whatever they be, done in the said church, both in their lives and after their deceases. The prior of the cathedral church of Durham receives him in like manner. In a south window of the priory church of Great Malvern in Worcestershire, were the portraits of Henry VII. Elizabeth his queen, prince Arthur, sir Reginald Bray, John Savage, and Thomas LoveJ), esquires, with their coats of arms on their armour, and the following words underneath:” Orate pro bono statu nobilissimi et excellentissimi Regis Henrici Septimi et Elizabeths Reginse, ac Domini Arthuri Principis filii eorundem, nee not) praedilectissimae consortis suoe, ac suorum trium militum." The portraits of the king and sir Reginald remained in 1774, and are engraved in Mr. Strutt’s View of the Arms and Habits of the English, vol. II, plate 60. The others have been broken and destroyed. He had no issue, and his elder brother John having only one daughter, married to sir William Sandes, afterwards lord Sandes of the Vine, he left the bulk of his fortune to Edmund, eldest son of his younger brother John (for he had two brothers of that name). This Edmund was summoned to parliament in 1530, as baron of Eaton Bray; but his son John lord Bray dying without issue in 1557, the estate was divided amongst six daughters of Edmund. Sir Reginald left very considerable estates to Edward and Reginald, younger brothers of Edmund. From Edward the manor of Shire Vachery and Cranley, above mentioned, has descended to the rev. George Bray, who was owner in 1778. Reginald settled at Barrington in Gloucestershire, where the male line of that branch became extinct about sixty years ago.

, D.D. an eminent learned and pious divine of the seventeenth century, was born at Marton in Shropshire, in 1656, where his parents were persons of good reputation. His infancy discovering promising parts, he was early sent to the school at Oswestry, in the same county, and his close application to school-learning, determining his parents to dedicate him to religion and learning, he was entered of Hart-hall, Oxford. Here he soon made a considerable proficiency in divinity, as well as other studies necessary for the profession for which he was intended: but, labouring under the common disadvantages of a narrow fortune, his circumstances not permitting a longer residence at Oxford, he left the university soon after he had commenced bachelor of arts. Much about this time he entered into holy orders; and the first duty he had was that of a parish near Bridgenorth in Shropshire, his native county, from which curacy he soon removed into Warwickshire, officiating as chaplain in sir Thomas Price’s family, of Park-hall, and had the donative of Lac Marsin given him by sir Thomas, which proved very advantageous; for living now in the neighbourhood of Coieshill, his exemplary behaviour, and distinguished diligence in his calling, introduced him into the acquaintance of Mr. Kettlewell, sir Charles Holt, and the lord Simon Digby. One incident which contributed to establish his character at this juncture, was his preaching the assize sermon at Warwick, on which occasion Mr. Bray, though but young, acquitted himself to the satisfaction of the whole audience, particularly the lord Digby, who was afterwards pleased to honour him with many proofs of his friendship and esteem, recommending him to the worthy and honourable patronage of his brother, the fifth lord Digby, who some time after gave him the vicarage of Over-Whitacre in the same county, since augmented, by his patron’s uncommon generosity, with the great tithes. In 1690, the rectory of Sheldon being vacant, by Mr. Digby Bull’s refusing to take the oaths at the revolution, his lordship presented Mr. Bray to it; which preferment he held till about a quarter of a year before his death, when he resigned it by reason of his advanced age, and the known worth and abilities of his appointed successor, the Rev. Mr. Carpenter. Dec. 12, 1693, he took his master of arts degree in Hart-hall, Oxford. In this parish of Sheldon he composed his “Catechetical Lectures,” a work which met with general approbation and encouragement, and produced to him the sum of 700l. This publication, which drew him out of his rural privacy to London, determined Dr. Compton, bishop of London, to pitch upon him as a proper person to model the infant church of Maryland, and establish it upon a solid foundation. Accordingly, in April 1696, he proposed to Mr. Bray to go, on the terms of having the judicial office of commissary, valued, as was represented to him, at four hundred pounds per annum, conferred upon him, for his support in that service. Mr. Bray, disregarding his own interest, and the great profit which would have arisen from finishing his course of lectures on the plan he had formed, soon determined, in his own mind, that there might be a greater field for doing good in the Plantations, than by his labours here, and no longer demurred to the proposal, than to inquire into the state of the country, and inform himself what was most wanting to excite good ministers to embark in that design, as well as enable them most effectually to promote it. With this view he laid before the bishops the following considerations: That none but the poorer sort of clergy could be persuaded to leave their friends, and change their native country for one so remote; that such persons could not be able sufficiently to supply themselveswith books; that without such a competent provision of books, they could not answer the design of their mission; that a library would be the best encouragement to studious and sober men to undertake the service; and that, as the great inducement to himself to go, would be to do the most good of which he could be capable, he therefore purposed, that if they thought fit to encourage and assist htm in providing parochial libraries for the ministers, he would then accept of the commissary’s office in Maryland. This proposal for parochial libraries being well approved of by the bishops, and due encouragement being promised in the prosecution of the design, both by their lordships and others, he set himself with all possible application to provide missionaries, and to furnish them with libraries, intending, as soon as he should have sent both, to follow after himself. But, upon his accepting of this employment of commissary of Maryland, it fell to his share to solicit at home whatever other matters related to that church, more particularly to the settlement and establishment thereof, which he laboured to promote with unwearied diligence, and spared neither expence or trouble. But, above all, it was his greatest care, to endeavour to send over to Maryland, and the other colonies, pious men, of exemplary lives and conversations, and to furnish those whom he had a hand in sending, with good libraries of necessary and useful bdbks, to render them capable of answering the ends of their mission, and instructing the people in all things ecessary to their salvation. The sense of the clergy and inhabitants, with respect to these'important services, was testified by the solemn letters of thanks, returned him from the assemblies of Maryland, from the vestries of Boston and Baintrie in New England, from Newfoundland, Rhode Island, New York, Philadelphia, North Carolina, Bermudas, and by the acknowledgments of the royal African company, on account of those procured for their factories. About the same time it was, that the secretary of Maryland, sir Thomas Lawrence, with Mr. Bray, waited on the then princess of Denmark, in behalf of that province, humbly to request her gracious acceptance of the governor’s and country’s dutiful respects, in having denominated the metropolis of the province, then but lately built, from her royal highness’s name, Annapolis: and Mr. Bray being soon after favoured with a noble benefaction from the same royal hand, towards his libraries in America, he dedicated the first library in those parts, fixed at Annapolis, and which had books of the choicest kind belonging to it, to the value of four hundred pounds, to her memory, by the title of the Annapolitan Library, which words were inscribed on the several books. Another design was also set on foot, much about the same time, by Dr. Bray, to raise lending libraries in every deanery throughout England and Wales, out of which the neighbouring clergy might borrow the books they had occasion for, and where they might consult upon matters relating to their function, and to learning. Upon this, many lending libraries were founded in several parts of the kingdom, besides above a hundred and fifty parochial ones in Great Britain and the plantations, from ten to fifty pounds value, those in South Britain being afterwards secured to posterity, by an act of parliament passed for that purpose in 1708. Soon after, upon the repeated instances of the governor and some of the country, Mr. Bray was at the charge of taking the degree of doctor of divinity, which, though it might be of some use, as procuring a certain degree of respect, did then but ill comport with his circumstances. He took his degrees of bachelor of divinity, and doctor, together, by accumulation, not of Hart hall where he was entered, but of Magdalen college, Dec. 17, 1696. Soon after, the better to promote his main design of libraries, and to give the missionaries directions in prosecuting their theological studies, he published two books, one entitled, “Bibiiothee* Paroctnalis or, a Scheme of such Theological and other heads, as seem requisite to be perused, or occasionally consulted by the reverend Clergy, together with a catalogue of books, which may be profitably read on each of those points,” &c. The other, “Apostolic Charity, its nature and excellency considered, in a discourse upon Daniel xii. 3. preached at St. Paul’s, at the ordination of some Protestant Missionaries to be sent into the plantations. To which is prefixed, a general view of the English colonies in America, in order to show what provision is wanting for the propagation of Christianity in those parts, together with proposals for the promoting the same r to induce such of the clergy of this kingdom, as are persons of sobriety and abilities, to accept of a mission.” During this interval, viz. in the year 1697, a bill being brought into the house of commons to alienate lands given, to superstitious uses, and to vest them in Greenwich hospital, he preferred a petition to the house, that some share thereof might be appropriated for the propagation of religion in the Plantations, and that the same should be vested in a body politic, to be erected for that purpose; which petition was received very well in the house, and a fourth part of all that should be discovered, after one moiety to the discoverer, was readily and unanimously allotted by the committee for that use, it being thought by far more reasonable, to appropriate some part at least of what was given to superstitious uses, to uses truly pious, than altogether to other, though charitable purposes: but the bill was never suffered to be reported. In the year 1698, failing of a public and settled provision by law, for carrying on the service of the church in Maryland, and the other plantations, he addressed his majesty for a grant of some arrears of taxes due to the crown; and some time after, was obliged to be at the charge and trouble of going over to the king in Holland, to have the grant completed. The recovery of these arrears of taxes was represented as very feasible and very valuable, and also without any grievance *o the subject: but as they proved troublesome to be recovered, so they were scarcely of any value. All designs failing of getting a public fund for the propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts, he thereupon formed a design, of which he then drew the plan, of having a Protestant confregation, pro jide propaganda, by charter from the king, ut this he was obliged to defer till a more favourable opportunity. However, to prepare the way for such a charlet-society, he soon after made it his endeavour, to find worthy persons ready to form a voluntary society, both to carry on the service already begun for the Plantations, and to propagate Christian knowledge as well at home as abroad, hoping afterwards to get such a society incorporated. This he laid before the bishop of London, in the year 1697, and a society was constituted on this plan; and though the design of having them incorporated by charter could not then be brought to bear, yet they still subsisted and acted as a voluntary society. But their number and benefactions at last increasing, a different constitution and more extensive powers appeared necessary for the success of the undertaking: application was therefore made, by Dr. Bray, to his then majesty king William, for his royal charter. The doctor’s petition to his majesty, with other papers relating to the corporation to be erected for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts, was read May 5, 1701; and his majesty’s letters patent, under the great seal of England, for erecting a corporation, by the name of “The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts,” was laid before the society, and read the ninth of June following. He received no advantage all this time from his commissary’s place in Maryland; neither was any allowance made him at home, or preferment give him, to support the charge of living altogether in town, to solicit the establishment and endowment of the church of Maryland, and to provide missionaries for that and all the colonies on the Continent; which, excepting Virginia, lay upon him; all the benefactions that were received being to be laid out to raise them libraries, which also he did faster than money came in to answer the charge. This being observed by some of his friends, they endeavoured to persuade him to lay his design of going abroad aside, and take two good preferments that were then offered him at home, of as good or better value than what was proposed to him in Maryland, viz. that of sub-almoner, and the donative of Aldgate, in the city of London. But he declined all offers that were inconsistent with his going to Maryland, as soon as it should become proper for him to take that voyage. By the year 1699, having waited upwards of two years for the return of the act of religion from Maryland, with such amendments as would render it without exception at the court of England; and it being presumed by his superiors, that it would be requisite the doctor should now hasten over, as well to encourage the passing of that act in their assemblies, as to promote other matters for the service of religion there, it was signified to him from them that they would have him take the opportunity of the first ship; and indeed, the doctor having, by this time, tried all ways he could think of, and done all he was able to do here, to serve those parts, and according to proposal having provided Maryland, as also many other colonies, with a competent number of missionaries, and furnished them with good libraries, to be fixed in the places where they were sent, to remain there for ever, he was himself eager to follow, and did so accordingly, even, in the winter, though he had no allowance made him towards his charge of the voyage, and the service he was to do; but was forced to dispose of his own small effects, and raise money on credit to support him. With this poor encouragement, and thus, on his own provision, he took the voyage, December 16, 1699, and set sail from the Downs the twentieth of the same month; but was driven back into Plymouth-sound on Christmas-eve, and remained in harbour almost all the holydays, where his time was not unusefully spent, in the recovery of a tolerable library there out of dust and rubbish, which was also indebted to him for a benefaction of books and where he left a proposal for taking in subscriptions to make it a sea- port library, for the use of missionaries and sea-chaplains, as well as others. After an extremely tedious and dangerous passage, the doctor arrived at Maryland the twelfth of March, where he applied himself immediately to repair the breach made in the settlement of the parochial clergy; in order to which he consulted, in the first place, the governor, whom he found ready to concur in all proper methods for the re-establishment of their maintenance. Before the next assembly, which was to be in May following, he sent to all the clergy on the western shore, who only could come together in that season, to learn from them the disposition of the people, and to advise with them what was proper to be done, in order to dispose the members of the assembly to re-enact their law next meeting. Soon after he had dismissed their clergy, he made his parochial visitation, as far as it was possible for him at that season; in which, he met with very singular respect from persons of the best condition in the country, which the doctor turned to the advantage of that poor church. During the sessions of the assembly, and whilst the re-establishment of the church was depending, he preachod very proper and seasonable sermons, with a tendency to incline the country to the establishment of the church and clergy; all which were so well received, that he had the thanks of the assembly, by messages from the house. The doctor was providentially on such good term* with the assembly, that they ordered the attorney-general to advise with him in drawing up the bill; and that he himself might be the better advised in that case, he sent for the most experienced clergy within reach, to suggest to him, what they found would be of advantage to them and the church, to be inserted in, or left out of it; by which means the constitution of that church had much the advantage of any in America. It may not be amiss to observe in this place, that as well during the general court or assize, which preceded the assembly, and lasted thirteen days, as during the sessions of the assembly itself, he was under a necessity of entertaining the gentlemen of the province, who universally visited him; a charge, however, which he thought requisite as circumstances then were, that he might strengthen his interest in them, the better to promote the establishment of the clergy’s maintenance. The bill being prepared, passed with a nemiilt contradicente; but it was on all hands declared and confessed, that it was very providential that Dr. Bray came into the country at that juncture. Soon after the assembly was up, the commissary cited the whole clergy of the province to a general visitation at Annapolis, to be held May 22, 1700. At the close of this visitation, the clergy taking into consideration, that the opposition of the Quakers against the establishment of that church would in all probability continue, so as to get the law for its establishment so lately re-enacted, annulled again at home, they entered into debates, whether it would not be of consequence to the preservation and final settlement of that church, that the doctor should be requested to go home with the law, and to solicit the royal assent. It had been before voted, at the passing the bill in the house of burgesses, that he should be desired to request his grace of Canterbury, and the bishop of London, to favour that good law, by obtaining his majesty’s royal assent to it with all convenient speed; and the members who gave him an account of passing their vote, told him withal, that it was the general opinion of the house, that he could be most serviceable by waiting personally on their lordships, rather, than by letters, in which he conld not crowd all that might be necessary to be represented concerning the then state of the church, and the necessity, at that time, of their utmost patronage: and it was in debate, whether this should not be the desire of the assembly; but it was thought too unreasonable a request from them, who were sensible of the great danger and fatigue he had already been at in the service of that province, as they had a few days before acknowledged by a message of thanks from that house. Such were the sentiments of the members of the assembly, as to the necessity of his coming home to solicit the establishment of that church; and the clergy meeting at their visitation, some weeks after, represented to him, as the earnest desire of the more sensible persons throughout the country, as well as of the assembly-men, that he should go over with the law for England; being aware that its opponents would make the utmost efforts against the establishment of that church, by false representations at home of the numbers and riches of their party, and by insinuating, that to impose upon them an established maintenance for the clergy, would be prejudicial to the interest of the province, by obliging so many wealthy traders to remove from thence, the falsity of which, or any other suggestions, they thought him best able to make appear, by the information he had gained from this visitation, There were also many other advantages to the church in those parts, which they proposed by his coming home at that time, upon the consideration of all which he took his voyage soon after. He was no sooner arrived in England, but he found their apprehensions in Maryland'not ill grounded; but the objections raised against the plan, Dr. Bray refuted, by a printed memorial, representing truly the state of the church of Maryland, to the full satisfaction of all to whom it was communicated. The quakers’ opposition to the establishment now depending, was carried by united councils and contributions; but the doctor refuted their specious objections by unanswerable reasons, and placed the affair in such an advantageous light, that his majesty decided, without any appearance of hesitation, in the church’s favour, and gave the royal assent in these remarkable words: “Have the Quakers the benefit of a toleration? let the established church have an established maintenance.” This chargeable and laborious undertaking having swallowed up the doctor’s own small fortune, lord Weymouth generously presented him with a bill of 300l. for his own private use, a, large portion of which the doctor devoted to the advancement of his farther designs. Though he was vested with the character of commissary, yet no share of the revenue proposed was annexed to it; and his generosity even induced him to throw in two sums of fifty pounds each, that were presented to himself in Maryland, towards defraying the charges of their libraries and law. After the return of Dr. Bray from thence in 1701, he published his “Circular Letters to the Clergy of Maryland,” a memorial, representing the present state of religion on the continent of North America, and the acts of his visitation held at Annapolis; for which he had the thanks of the society above mentioned. Not only the bishop of London approved entirely of all these transactions, but also the archbishop of Canterbury declared, that he was well satisfied with the reasons of Dr. Bray’s return from the West Indies, and added, that his mission thither would be of the greatest consequence imaginable to the establishment of religion in those parts. In 1706, he had the donative of St. Botolph without Aldgate offered him again, which he then accepted of, worth about 150l. per annum. In the year 1712, the doctor printed his “Martyrology; or, Papal Usurpation,” in folio. That nothing might be wanting to enrich and adorn the work, he established a correspondence with learned foreigners of the first distinction, and called in the assistance of the most eminent hands. This work consists of some choice and learned treatises of celebrated authors, which were grown very scarce, ranged and digested into as regular an history as the nature of the subject would admit. He proposed to compile a second volume, and had, at no small expence and pains, furnished himself with materials for it; but he was afterwards obliged to lay the prosecution, of his design aside, and bequeathed by will his valuable collection of Martyrological Memoirs, both printed and manuscript, to Sion college. He was, indeed, so great a master of the history of popery, that few authors could be presumed able, with equal accuracy and learning, to trace the origin and growth of those exorbitant claims which are made by the see of Rome. He was happily formed by nature both for the active and for the retired life. Charity to the souls of other men, was wrought up to the highest pitch in his own: every reflection on the dark and forlorn condition of the Indians and negroes, excited in his bosoin the most generous emotions of pity and concern. His voyage to Holland, to solicit king William’s protection and encouragement to his good designs, and the proofs he gave of a public spirit and disinterested zeal, in such a series of generous undertakings, obtained him the esteem of M. d‘Allone of the Hague, a gentleman not more celebrated for his penetration and address in state affairs, than for a pious disposition of mind. An epistolary correspondence commenced very early between him and the doctor upon this subject; the result of which was, that M. d’Allone gave in his life-time a sum to be applied to the conversion of negroes, desiring the doctor to accept the management and disposal of it. But that a standing provision might be inade for this purpose, M. d'Allone bequeathed by will a certain sum, viz. 900 pounds, out of his English estate, to Dr. Bray and his associates, towards erecting a capital fund or stock, for converting the negroes in the British plantations. This was in the year 1723, much about which time Dr. Bray had an extremely dangerous fit of illness, so that his life and recovery were despaired of. In the year 1726, he was employed in composing and printing his “Directorium Missionarium,” his “Primordia Bibliothecaria,” and some other tracts of the like kind. About this time he also wrote a short account of Mr. Rawlet, the author of “The Christian Monitor;” and reprinted the Life of Mr. Gilpin. Some of these were calculated for the use of the mission; and in one he has endeavoured to shew, that civilizing the Indians must be the first step in any successful attempt for their conversion. In his “Primordia Bibliothecaria,” we have several schemes of parochial libraries, and a method laid down to proceed by a gradual progression, from a collection not much exceeding one pound in value, to one of a hundred. His attention to other good works occasioned no discontinuance of this design, the success of which was so much the object of his desires; and accordingly benefactions came in so fast, that he had business enough upon his hands to form the libraries, desired. As trie furnishing the parochial clergy with the means of instruction, would be an effectual method to promote Christian knowledge, so another expedient, manifestly subservient to the same end, would be, he thought, to imprint on the minds of those who are designed for the ministry, previously to their admission, a just sense of its various duties, and their great importance. With a view to this, he reprinted the “Ecclesiastes of Erasmus.” In the year 1727, an acquaintance of Dr. Bray’s made a casual visit to Whitechapel prison; and his representation of the miserable state of the prisoners had such an effect on the doctor, that he immediately applied himself to solicit benefactions in order to relieve them; and he had soon contributions sufficient to provide a quantity of bread, beef, and broth, on Sundays, and now and then on the intermediate days, for this prison and the Borough compter. To temporal, he always subjoined spiritual, provisions; and to enure them to the most distasteful part of their office, the intended missionaries were here employed in reading and preaching. On this occasion that scene of inhumanity was imperfectly discovered, which afterwards some worthy patriots of the house of commons took so much pains to inquire into and redress. Being now far advanced in years, and continually reminded of his approaching change, by the imbecility and decays of old age, he was desirous of enlarging the number of his associates, and adding such to them, ^in whose zeal and integrity he might repose an entire confidence. His inquiry into the state of the gaols, made him acquainted with Mr. (afterwards general) Oglethorpe, who accepted the trust himself, and engaged several others, some of the first rank and distinction, to act with him and the former associates. In short, most of the religious societies and good designs in London, owe grateful acknowledgment to his memory, and are, in a great measure, formed on the plans he projected; particularly the society for the reformation of manners, charity schools, and the society for the relief of poor proselytes, &c. The doctor having thus happily lodged his principal designs in the hands of able managers, departed this life February 15, 1730, in the seventy-third year of his age, leaving issue a son and daughter.

, a learned lawyer in the seventeenth century, was born at Little Wool ford, in Warwickshire, in 1573, being the son of Anchor Brent of that place, gent. In 1589, he became pordonist, or post-master, of Merton-college, in Oxford; and, on the 20th of June 1593, took the degree of bachelor of arts. The year following he was admitted probationer-fellow of the college. On the 3 1st of October 1598; he took the degree of master of arts and then entered upon law studies. In 1607, he was one of the proctors of the university. Some years after, in 1613, &c. he travelled into foreign parts, and became acquainted with several of the most learned men abroad. After his return, he married Martha daughter and heir of Dr. Robert Abbot, bishop of Salisbury, and niece to Dr. George Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury, which was the cause of his succeeding great preferments. About the year 1618, he was sent to Venice by archbishop Abbot, on purpose to get a copy of the History of the Council of Trent, then newly composed by the most renowned Padre Paolo Sarpi; in procuring of which he exposed himself to very great dangers. In 1621, he Was elected warden of Merton-college, through the archbishop’s recommendation; who also made him his vicar-general, commissary of the diocese of Canterbury, master of the faculties, and at length judge of the prerogative. On the llth of October, 1623, he accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor of law. The 23d of August, 1629, he received the honour of knighthood from king Charles I. at Woodstock, being then supposed well-affected to the church and hierarchy. But in the great disputes that arose between archbishop Abbot and bishop Laud, he entirely sided with the first, and his adherents, the puritan party; and grew so inveterate against Laud, that he was a frequent witness against him at his trial. He likewise deserted Oxford when king Charles I. garrisoned that place, and took the covenant: for which reason he was deprived of his wardenship of Merton-college, by his majesty’s command; but restored again when Oxford garrison was surrendered for the parliament’s use, in 1646. In 1647 and 1648, he was appointed chief visitor of that university, and countenanced all the violent and arbitrary proceedings there used, not sparing his own college. When an order was made against pluralities, he was forced to leave Mertoncollege, on the 27th of November, 1651; at which time he refused also the oath called the Engagement. Upon this, retiring to his house in Little Britain, in London, he died there November 6, 1652, aged 79; and was buried, the seventeenth of the same month, with great solemnity, in the church of St. Bartholomew the Less.

, perhaps worth mentioning here, as the assumed name of one James Anderton, of Lostock in Lancashire, in the seventeenth century, who published under it, 1. “The Protestant’s Apology for the Roman Church, 4to, 1604, 1608, 1615. 2.” The Liturgy of the Mass, &c.“in Latin, Cologn, 1620, 4to. 3.” St. Augustin’s Religion; giving an account of his opinion in matters of controversy between Catholics and Protestants,“1620, 8vo. Dr. Thomas Morton, the learned bishop of Durham, answered the” Protestant’s Apology“in a work entitle4” A Catholic Appeal for Protestants," 1606, 4to. Some farther particulars of Anderton’s works, although none of his life, may be seen in our authority.

, bishop of Hereford in the thirteenth century, was born in England, and educated there, and after he had made himself master of the Latin tongue, he applied himself to the study of the law, in which he made so great a progress, that he was created doctor of civil and canon law. He distinguished himself in this profession by his admirable talents in the decision of the most difficult causes; and by this means procured himself very considerable interest af the court of king Henry III. who raised him on account of his merit to the bishopric of Hereford. Bale acknowledges his eminent abilities in the law, but expresses himself in very severe terms against him on that account, as neglecting his episcopal duties. He made a large collection of the laws of England from various authors, digested into one volume, which Leland tells us was of great advantage to king Edward I. the son and successor of Henry III. and to the whole nation. He died in 1275, and was succeeded in his see by Thomas Cantilupe.

His father was for some time undetermined whether he should send him to the university, but at length placed him in Queen’s-college, Cambridge, where he was admitted March 1684. Here he continued till he became soph, when some irregularities in money-matters, and improper company, induced his father to recal him, and he remained at home until he had missed the time of taking the degree of A. B. Upon his return to Cambridge some time after, finding his books embezzled by an idle scholar who had been put into his chamber, he determined to leave that college, and was admitted into Corpus Christ! Jan. 17, 1689, where he proceeded LL. B. on St. Barnabas day following, and made no scruple of taking the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to king William and queen Mary; his father, and other relations, who were accounted whigs, having taught him whig principles. He saw also that the tories of his acquaintance took these oaths without any scruple, although they had formerly sworn allegiance to king James, which he had never done: even his schoolmaster, Mr. Pratt, complied, who had early instilled such principles into his mind as he could never thoroughly reconcile with the revolution. The bishop of Winchester ordained him deacon at Chelsea, Dec. 21, 1690, when he undertook the service of the cure of Folkstone> for a twelvemonth; after which he came up to London, entered into priests’ orders, and was chosen lecturer of Islington, Oct. 4, 1691; where, from his frequent conversation with Mr. Gery , the vicar, who was a tory, he became entirely of the same principles.

At each of these institutions he took the oath of abjuration, and without scruple, until by frequent discourse on the subject of parties, with his near relation the lord chief baron Gilbert, who endeavoured to bring him over to the whigs, that he might have the better opportunity of recommending him to higher preferment, he unwittingly opened his eyes, as he terms it, and rivetted him the firmer in his former opinions; and, upon reading the trial of Dr. Sacheverel, published soon after, he began in earnest to believe he had taken oaths which he ought not to have taken, and resolved never to repeat them. In this dilemma, however, he had no scruple about the schism in the church, nor about continuing to pray for a prince in possession of the throne, until upon the accession of a new one, an act of parliament was made obliging all persons to take the oaths afresh. But this, in the present state of his conscience, he could not comply with, and wrote to his patron the archbishop, in April 1715, desiring he would give him leave to resign his livings, to which his grace answered very kindly, that he would advise him to consider farther of it, and not to do that rashly of which he might afterwards repent. Dr. Brett accordingly took his advice, and made no resignation, considering that his non-compliance with the act of parliament would' in a short time vacate them of course. He left off, however, to officiate in either of them, but still went to his own parish church as a lay communicant, until Mr. Campbell wrote to him, by order of bishop Hickes, (who had got some information of his resolution) pressing him earnestly to refrain entirely from all communion with the parish churches, urging the point of schism. On this he had recourse to ?.lr. Dodwell’s tracts on that subject, whose arguments not satisfying his mind, he resolved to surrender himself up to bishop Hickes, and upon a penitential confession, was received into his communion July 1, 1715, who from this time appears to have had a great influence over him.

His works were: 1. “An account of Church-government and governors, wherein is shewed that the government of the church of England is most agreeable to that of the primitive church; for the instruction of a near relation, who had been brought up among the Dissenters,” Lond. 1707, 8vo. Some reflections were made upon this in “The beautiful Pattern,” written by Mr. Nokes, pastor of an independent congregation, who afterwards conformed to the church of England. A second edition of this tract was published in 1710, with large additions and amendments, and a chapter on “Provincial Synods,” which was animadverted upon in a pamphlet entitled “Presbytery not always an authoritative part of Provincial Synods,” written by Mr. Lewis, of Margate, 1711. 2. “The Authority of Presbyters vindicated, in answer thereto.” In a letter to a friend, however, he afterwards acknowledges he was convinced of being mistaken, for although Presbyters were often connected with, yet they had no authoritative votes in the ancient church. 3. “Two letters on the times wherein Marriage is said to be prohibited,” Lond. 1708, 4to. 4. “A letter to the author of LayBaptism invalid, wherein the doctrine of Lay-Baptism, taught in a sermon said to have been preached by the B of S 7 Nov. 1710, is censured and condemned by all reformed churches,” Lond. 1711. 5. “A sermon on Remission of Sins, Joh. xx. 21—23,” Lond. 1712, which Dr. Cannon made two motions in the house of convocation to have censured, but not succeeding, he published an account of them, which was answered the same year, in 6. “The doctrine of Remission, &c. explained and vindicated.” He afterwards owned he went too far, and that Dr. Marshall, in his “Doctrine of the primitive church,” had set this matter right. With this sermon he also published in 1715, five others, on “The honour of the Christian priesthood. The extent of Christ’s commission to baptise. The Christian Altar and Sacrifice. The Dangers of a Relapse. And, True Moderation.” The “Extent of Christ’s commission to baptise,” with “the Letter to the author of Lay-Baptism invalid,” was answered by Mr. Bingham in his “Scholastic History of Lay-Baptism,” and being reflected upon by the bishop of Oxford in a charge, he wrote 7. an “Enquiry into the judgment and practice of the primitive church, &c. in answer thereto,” Lond. 1713; and upon Mr. Bingham’s reply, he published, 8. “A farther Enquiry, &c.” 1714. 9. “A review of the Lutheran principles,” shewing how they differ from the church of England, &c.“In the same year, Mr. Lewis, in answer to this, undertook to show their agreement, with which Dr. Brett was very angry, and threatened him with a reply, from which his friends dissuaded him. In a second edition, however, he nvule some transient remarks upon, two letters to the lord viscount Townsend, by Robert Watts, in answer thereto. 10.” A vindication of himself from the calumnies cast upon him in some news-papers, falsely charging him with turning papist; in a letter to the hon. Arch. Campbell, esq.“Lond. 1715. 11.” Dr. Bennet’s concessions to the Non-jurors proved destructive to the cause he endeavours to defend,“1717. 12.” The Independency of the Church upon the State, as to its pure spiritual powers, &c.“1717. 13.” The Divine right of Episcopacy, &c.“1718; and in the same year, 14.” Tradition necessary to explain and interpret the Holy Scriptures,“with a postscript in answer to” No sufficient reason, &c.“and a preface, with remarks on” Toland’s Nazarenus,“and” a further proof of the necessity of Tradition, &c.“15.” A Vindication of the postscript in answer to No just grounds, &c.“1720. 16.” A discourse concerning the necessity of discerning Christ’s body in the Holy Communion,“Lond. 1720. 17.” A dissertation on the principal liturgies used by the Christian church in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist,“1720. He is also supposed to have written, 18.” Some discourses on the ever-blessed Trinity,“in the same year. 19.” Of degrees in the university,“a dissertation in the Biblioth. Liter. N”. 1. “An essay on the various English translations of the Bible,” N. 4. “An historical essay concerning arithmetical figures,” N. 8, with an appendix to it, N. 10, 1722, 3, 4, in 4to. 20. “An instruction to a person newly confirmed, &c.” 1725. 21. “A Chronological essay on the Sacred History, &c.” in defence of the computation of the Septuagint, with an “Essay on the confusion of languages,” 1729. 22. “A general history of the World, &c.” 1732. There is a letter of his to Dr. William Warren, fellow of Trinity-hall, in Peck’s Desiderata, lib. VII. p. 13, containing an account of Richard Plantagenet (a natural son of king Richard III.) dated from Spring-grove, 1 Sept. 1733, which is said to be a forgery, invented to impose upon the doctor’s credulity, and to ridicule modern antiquaries. 23. “An answer to the plain account of the Sacrament,” in 1735 or 6. 24. “Some remarks on Dr. Waterland’s Review of the doctrine of the Eucharist,” &c. with an Appendix in answer to his charges,“1741. 25.” A letter to a clergyman, shewing why the Hebrew Bibles differ from the Septuagint,“1743. 26.” Four letters between a Gentleman and a Clergyman, concerning the necessity of Episcopal communion for the valid administration of Gospel ordinances,“1743. 27.” The life of Mr. John Johnson, A.M.“ prefixed to his posthumous tracts in 1748, with several prefaces to the works of others, particularly a very long one to Hart’s” Bulwark stormed,“&c. In 1760 was published” A dissertation on the antient versions of the Bible,“a second edition prepared for the press by the author, and” now first published," 8vo.

, a learned divine of the seventeenth century, was born in the Isle of Jersey, in the reign of king James I. and probably educated in grammar-learning in that place. From thence he went and studied logic and philosophy in the Protestant university of Saumur, where he took the degree of master of arts, on September 12, 1634. Coming to Oxford, he was, October 12, 1638, incorporated M. A. as he stood at Saumur. About this time king Charles I. having through archbishop Laud’s persuasion founded three fellowships in the colleges of Pembroke, Exeter, and Jesus, for the islands of Jersey and Guernsey, alternately, Mr. Brevint was nominated the first fellow at Jesus-college upon this foundation, in 1638. Here he continued till he was ejected from his fellowship by the parliament- visitors, for refusing to take the solemn league and covenant, and withdrew to his native country, but upon the reduction of that place by the parliament’s forces, he fled into France, and became minister of a Protestant congregation in Normandy. Not long after, he had the honour of being made chaplain to the viscount de Turenne, afterwards marshal of France, whose lady was one of the most pious women of her time. Whilst he was in that station, he was one of the persons “employed about the great design then in hand, of reconciling the Protestant and Popish religions; which gave him an access into, and made him acquainted with every corner of that church,” as he says himself. At the restoration of king Charles II. he returned to England, and was presented by that prince (wjio had known him abroad) to the tenth prebend in the church of Durham, vacant by the promotion of Dr. J. Cosin to that see, and was installed March 15, 1660-61. By bishop Cosiu, who had been his fellow-sufferer, he was also collated to a living in the diocese of Durham. On the 27th of February, 1661-62, he took his degree of D. D. at Oxford. Having during his exile seen Popery in its native deformity, and observed all the mean and dishonest arts that are used to support it, he in 1672 published “Missale Romanum; or, the depth and mystery of the Roman Mass laid open and explained, for the use of both reformed and unreformed Christians,” and the next year, “The Christian Sacramenc and Sacrifice, by way of discourse, meditation, and prayer, upon the nature, parts, and blessings of the holy communipn,” reprinted on the recommendation of Dr. Waterland, in 1739. And in 1674, “Saul and Samuel at Endor, or the new waies of salvation and service, which usually tempt men to Rome, and detain them there, truly represented and refuted,” reprinted 1688. At the end of which is, “A brief account of R. F. his Missale Vindicaturo, or vindication of the Roman mass,” being an answer to “The depth and mystery of the Roman Mass,” above-mentioned. The learning and other eminent qualifications of the author having recommended him to the esteem of the world, and to the favour of his sovereign, he was promoted to the deanery of Lincoln, and was installed January 3, 1681-82, and had the prebend of WeltonPayns-hall annexed thereto, January 7th following. He died May 5, 1695, and was buried in the cathedral church of Lincoln, behind the high altar; where, on a gravestone, is an inscription to his memory. He was a person of extensive reading, especially in the controversy between the Protestants and Papists; zealous for the church of England; and for his life and learning, truly praise-worthy. Besides the above works, he published in Latin: 1. “Ecclesiae primitives Sacramentum & Sacrificium, a pontificiis corruptelis, & exinde natis controversiis liberum,” written at the desire of the princesses of Turenne and Bouillon. 2. “Eucharistiae Christianse prsesentia realis, & pontificia ficta, luculentissimis non testimoniis modo, sed etiam fundamentis, quibus fere tota S. S. Patrum Theologia nititur, hsec explosa, ilia suffulta & asserta.” 3. “Pro Serenissima Principe Weimariensi ad Theses Jenenses accurata Responsio.” 4. “Ducentue plus minus Praelectiones in Matthaei xxv capita, et aliorum Evangelistarum locos passim parallelos.” He also translated into Frenck “The judgment of the university of Oxford concerning the solemn League and Covenant.”

, one of the most eminent nonconformists of the seventeenth century, was born in 1600, and educated at Emmanuel college, Cambridge, where he took his master’s degree, in 1626, and was several years a fellow. After preaching in Essex for five years, he was called to Norwich, where he preached in the parish of St. George’s Tombland, until 1636, when he was silenced by bishop Wren for nonconformity in some points, and remaining obstinate, he was excommunicated, and the writ de ca> pitndo issued against him. On this he quitted Norwich, where he had a lecture and two cures, and went into Holland. At Rotterdam he was chosen pastor to a congregational church, but returned to England in 1642, frequently preached before the long parliament, and was chosen one of the assembly of divines, although he agreed with them only in doctrinal matters. At length he fixed at Yarmouth, where he preached until the Bartholomew act took place, when he was ejected. He died March 12, 1670. He was a man of considerable learning, and possessing a library well furnished with the fathers, schoolmen, and critics, was a very close student, rising every morning, both in winter and summer, at four o'clock, and continuing in his library until eleven. He was inflexibly attached to the independent party, but too charitable towards men of opposite sentiments to follow their example in all respects. His principal works are collected in 2 vols. 4to, 1657, besides which he published many single sermons before the parliament, and some tracts enumerated by Calamy. In Peck’s Desiderata are two letters from him to Scobell, the clerk of the council, by which we learn that he was a leading man among the independents.

, a lawyer of considerable eminence, was the son of Dr. John Bridgeman, bishop of Chester, and educated to the profession of the law, in which, as he disapproved of the usurpation, he made no figure until the restoration, when on May 13, 1660, he was called to be a serjeant by the king’s special writ, and on June 1, was advanced to be lord chief baron of the exchequer, from which, Oct. 22, he was removed to be lord chief justice of the common pleas. While he presided in this’ court, his reputation was at its height for equity and moderation. In 1667, when the great seal was taken from lord Clarendon, the king delivered it, August 13, to sir Orlando, with the title of Keeper. After this, his good name began to decline: he was timid and irresolute, and his timidity still increased with his years: nor was his judgment equal to all the difficulties of his office. His Jady, a woman of cunning and intrigue, was too apt to interfere in chancery suits; and his sons, who practised under him, did not bear the fairest characters. He was desirous of an union with Scotland, and a comprehepsion with the dissenters: but was against tolerating the papists. He is said to have been removed from his office for refusing to affix the seal to the king’s declaration for liberty of conscience, Nov. 17, 1672. The time of his death we have not been able to ascertain, but a singular account of his son sir Orlando, may be seen in the Biog. Brit. vol. VI. p. 3740. The lord-keeper is known as a law writer, by his “Conveyances, being select precedents of deeds and instruments concerning the most considerable estates in England,” 1682, 1699, 1710, 1725, 2 parts, folio.

, a non-conformist divine, was born at Ashby-de-la-Zouch, in Leicestershire, in 1600. His father was also a divine of the puritan kind, and master of the school at Ashby. The noted astrologer William Lilly, was at his school in 1613. His mother was sister to bishop Hall. After being educated by his father, he was admitted of Emanuel college, Cambridge, at the age of thirteen and a half. Having resided there three or four years, he attended his uncle Hall, then dean of Worcester, as his amanuensis, to the synod of Dort, and after his return, resumed his studies at Cambridge, and being elected schoJar of the house, resided there until he took his degrees. When ordained he preached first at Preston, near Chelmsford, then at Somerieyton in Suffolk, and lastly was called to Yarmouth, on the election of the township, but his principles being objected to by Dr. Harsnet, bishop of Norwich, he could only preach on the week days at a country village adjoining, whither the people of Yarmouth followed him, until the township applied to the king for his licence for Mr. Brinsley to preach in Yarmouth. This being granted by his majesty, he remained there until the restoration, when he was ejected with his numerous brethren, who refused the terms of conformity. Although a man of moderate sentiments, he appears to have been inflexible in the points which divided so large a tody of clergymen from the church, and is said to have refused considerable preferment to induce him to remain in it. He is praised by his biographer for piety, and extensive learning in theology. He died Jan. 22, 1665. He wrote several treatises enumerated by Calamy, none of which, we believe, are now much known. He had a son, Robert, who was ejected from the university, and afterwards studied and took his degree of M. D. at Leyden, and practised at Yarmouth.

, a divine of great eminence for his extensive knowledge in Hebrew and rabbinical learning, was descended from an ancient family, and born in 1549, at Oldbury, in the county of Salop. Dr. Lightfoot says, that it is uncertain in what school he was instructed in grammar, but, according to the writers of the life of Bernard Gilpin, he was brought up in the school founded by that excellent man at Houghton, and by him sent to Cambridge. Gilpin is said to have become acquainted with him by accident, when he was a poor boy travelling on the Oxford road, and finding him a good scholar, took the charge of his farther education. The biographer of Gilpin adds, apparently upon slender foundation, that Broughton acted with ingratitude to Gilpin, when the latter was old and infirm, and persuaded the bishop of Durham to give him a living intended for Gilpin.

In 1588, he published a piece, entitled “The Consent of Scriptures.” This was a work in which he was employed several years; and which, therefore, he used to call his “little book of grest pains.” It is a kind of scripture chronology, and scripture genealogies, and appears to have been compiled with great labour. It was dedicated to queen Elizabeth, to whom it was presented by himself, on her inauguration day, Nov. 17, 1589 . He appears to have had some assistance in it from Speed, who overlooked the press, and compiled those genealogies which are prefixed to the old Bibles; but Broughton certainly directed and digested them. Speed is said to have owed many obligations to Broughton, and had a vast number of his manuscripts, which, for whatever reason, he burnt. But, to return to the “Consent of Scripture;” it excited much attention at its first publication, but was strongly opposed by Dr. Reynolds at Oxford. This gave great offc-nce to Mr. Broughton, who had a very earnest and absurd desire to have the dispute between him and Dr. Reynolds, concerning the scripture chronology, settled by public authority. He addressed on this subject queen Elizabeth, Dr. Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr. Aylmer, bishop of London. His work was opposed, not only at Oxford, but at Cambridge, where Mr. Lively, a professor, read publicly against it. He was, therefore, induced to read lectures in defence of his performance, which he did first in St. Paul’s, at the east end of the church, and afterwards in a large room in Cheapside, and in Mark-lane .

He continued several years in London, where he procured many friends. One of these was Mr. William Cotton, whose son Rowland, who was afterwards knighted, he instructed in the Hebrew tongue. In 1589 Mr. Broughton went over into Germany, accompanied by Mr. Alexander Top, a young gentleman who had put himself under his care, and travelled with him, that he might continually receive the benefit of his instructions. He was some time at Frankfort, where he had a long dispute in the Jewish synagogue, with rabbi Elias, on the truth of the Christian religion. He appears to have been very solicitous for the conversion of the Jews, and his taste for rabbinical and Hebrew studies naturally led him to take pleasure in the conversation of those learned Jews whom he occasionally met with. In the course of his travels, he had also disputes with the papists; but in hig contests both with them and with the Jews, he was not very attentive to the rules either of prudence or politeness. It appears, that in 1590 he was at Worms; but in what other places is not mentioned. In 1591 he returned again to England, and met at London with his antagonist Dr. Reynolds; and they referred the -decision of the controversy between them, occasioned by his “Consent of Scripture,” to Dr. Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr. Aylmer, bishop of London. Another piece which he published, entitled “An Explication of the article of Christ’s Descent to Hell,” was a source of much controversy, though his opinion on this subject is now generally received. Two of his opponents in this controversy were archbishop Whitgift and bishop Bilson. He addressed on this subject “An Oration to the Geneveans,” which was first published in Greek, at Mentz, by Albinus. In this piece he treats the celebrated Beza with much severity. In 1592 he was in Germany again, and published a piece called “The Sinai Sight,” which he dedicated to the earl of Essex, and had the odd whim of having it engraved on brass, at a considerable expence. About the year 1596, rabbi Abraham Reuben wrote an epistle from Constantinople to Mr. Broughton, which was directed to him in London; but he was then in Germany. He appears to have continued abroad till the death of queen Elizabeth; and during his residence in foreign countries, cultivated an acquaintance with Scaliger, Raphelengius, Junius, Pistorius, Serrarius, and other eminent and learned men. He was treated with particular favour by the archbishop of Mentz, to whom he dedicated his translation of the Prophets into Greek. He was also offered a cardinal’s hat, if he wo<;ld have embraced the Romish religion. But that offer he retused to accept, and returned again to England, soon after the accession of king James I. In 1603 he preached before prince Henry, at Oatlands, upon the Lord!s Prayer. In 1607 the new translation of the Bible was begun; and Mr. Broughton’s friends expressed much surprize that he was not employed in that work. It might probably be disgust on this account, which again occasioned him to go abroad; and during his stay there, he was for some time puncher to the English at Middleburgh. But finding his health decline, 'having a consumptive disorder, which he found to increase, he returned again to England in November, 1611. He lodged in London, during the winter, at a friend’s house in Cannon-street; but in the spring he was removed, for the benefit of the air, to the house of another friend, at Tottenham High-cross, where he died of a pulmonary consumption on the 4th of August, 1612, in the sixty-third year of his age. During his illness he made such occasional discourses and exhortations to his friends, as his strength would enable him; and he appears to have had many friends and admirers’ even to the last. His corpse was brought to London, attended by great numbers of people, many of whom had put themselves in mourning for him; and interred in St. Amholin’s church, where his funeral sermon was preached by the rev. James Speght, B. D. afterwards D. D. minister of the church in Milkstreet, London. Lightfoot mentions it as a report, that the bishops would not suffer this sermon to be published; but it was afterwards printed at the end of his works.

, a learned divine, and one of the original writers of the Biographia Britannica, was born at London, July 5, 1704, in the parish of St. Andrew, Holborn; of which parish his father was minister. At an early age he was sent to Eton-school, where he soon distinguished himself by the acuteness of his genius and the studiousness of his disposition. Being superannuated on this foundation, he removed, about 1722, to the university of Cambridge; and, for the sake of a scholarship, entered himself of Gonville and Caius college. Here two of the principal objects of his attention were, the acquisition of the knowledge of the modern languages, and the study of the mathematics under the famous professor Sanderson. May 28, 1727, Mr. Broughton, after taking the degree of B. A. was admitted to deacon’s orders. In the succeeding year, Sept. 22, he was ordained priest, and proceeded to the degree of M. A. At this time he removed from the university to the curacy of Offley in Hertfordshire. In 1739, he was instituted to the rectory of Stepington, otherwise Stibmgton, in the county of Huntingdon, on the presentation of John duke of Bedford, and was appointed one of that nobleman’s chaplains. Soon after, he was chosen reader to the Temple, by which means he became known to bishop Sherlock, then master of it, who conceived so high an opinion of our author’s merit, that, in 1744, this eminent prelate presented Mr. Broughton to the valuable vicarage of Bedminster, near Bristol, together with the chapels of St. Mary Redcliff, St. Thomas, and Abbot’s Leigh, annexed. Some short time after, he was collated, by the same patron, to the prebend of Bedminster and Redcliff, in the cathedral of Salisbury. Upon receiving this preferment, he removed from London to Bristol, where he married the daughter of Thomas Harris, clerk of that city, by whom he had seven children, six of whom survived him. He resided on his living till his death, which happened Dec. 21, 1774, in the 71st year of his age. He was interred in the church of St. Mary RedclifF.

Brown now began to make no small figure as a writer 5 and in 1751, published Jiis “Essays on Shaftesbury’s Characteristics,” 8vo, a work written with elegance and spirit, aud so applauded as to be printed a fifth time in 1764. This was suggested to him by Warburton, and to Warburton by Pope, who told Warburton that to his knowledge the Characteristics had done more harm to revealed religion in England than all the works of infidelity put together. He is imagined to have had a principal hand in another book, published also the same year, and called w An essay on musical expression;“though the avowed author was Mr. Charles Avison. (See Avison.) In 1754 he printed a sermon,” On the use and abuse of externals in religion: preached before the bishop of Carlisle, at. the consecration of St. James’s church in Whitehaven, and soon after he was promoted to Great Horkesiey in Essex; a living conferred upon him by the late earl of Hard wick e. His next appearance was as a dramatic writer. In 1755, hk tragedy “Barbarossa,” was produced upon the stage, and afterwards his “Athelstan” in 1756. These tragedies were acted with considerable success, under the management of Garrick; and the former long remained what is called a stock-piece, notwithstanding many critical objections offered to it in the publications of the time.

Between the first and second volume of the Estimate, he republished Dr. Walker’s “Diary of the Siege of Londonderry;” with a preface, pointing out the useful purposes to which the perusal of it might be applied. He was, about this time, presented by the bishop of Carlisle, Dr. Osbaldeston, to the vicarage of St. Nicholas in Newcastle upon Tyne, resigning Great Horkesley in Essex; and was made one of the chaplains in ordinary to his present majesty. These were all the preferments our author ever received; and, as this was supposed to be no small mortification to a man of Dr. Brown’s high spirit, so it was probably this high spirit which was the cause of it; for such was his temper that he never could preserve his friends long, and he had before this time quarrelled with Warburton and lord Hardwicke. In 1760 he published an additional dialogue of the dead, between “Pericles and Aristides,” being a sequel to a dialogue of lord Lyttelton’s between “Pericles and Cosmo.” This is supposed by some to have been designed as a vindication of Mr. Pitt’s political character, against some hints of disapprobation by lord Lyttelton; while others have not excluded a private motive of resentment. It is said that lord Lyttelton in a numerous and mixed company neglected to take notice of our author in so respectful a manner as he thought he deserved; and in revenge, weak enough certainly, he composed the dialogue. His next publication was “The Cure of Saul,” a sacred ode; which was followed the same year by a “Dissertation on the rise, union, and power, the progressions, separations, and corruptions of poetry and music,” 4to. This is a pleasing performance, displays great ingenuity, and, though not without mistakes, very instructing as well as amusing. “Observations” were printed upon it by an anonymous writer, and Dr. Brown defended himself in “Remarks.” He published in 8vo, 1764, the “History of the rise and progress of Poetry through its several species:” being the substance of the above work concerning poetry only, for the benefit of classical readers not knowing in music. The same year, he printed a volume of “Sermons,” most of which had been printed separately; and in 1765, “Thoughts on Civil Liberty, Licentiousness, and Faction;” a piece, drawn up with great parade, and assuming a scientific form, with an intention to censure the opposers of administration at that time. A sermon on the “Female character and education,” preached the 16th of May, 1765, before the guardians of the asylum for deserted female orphans.

, an English divine of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth century, from whom the sect of the Brownists derived its name, was descended of an ancient and worshipful family, says Fuller, (one whereof founded a fair hospital in Stamford), and was nearly allied to the lord-treasurer Cecil. He was the son of Anthony Brown, of Tol thorp, in Rutlandshire, esq. (though born at Northampton, according to Mr. Collier), and grandson of Francis Brown, whom king Henry VIII. in the eighteenth year of his reign, privileged by charter to wear Jiis cap in the presence of himself, his heirs, or any of his nobles, and not to uncover but at his own pleasure; which charter was confirmed by act of parliament. Robert Brown studied divinity at Cambridge, in Corpus Christi college, and was afterwards a schoolmaster in Southwark. He was soon discovered by Dr. Still, master of Trinity-college, to have somewhat extraordinary in him that would prove a great disturbance to the church. Brown soon verified what the doctor foretold, for he not only jm^ bibed Cartwright’s opinions, but resolved to refine upon his scheme, and to produce something more perfect of his own. Accordingly, about the year 1580, he began to inveigh openly against the discipline and ceremonies of the church of England, and soon shewed that he intended to go much farther than Cartwright had ever done. In his discourses the church government was antichristian; her sacraments clogged with superstition; the liturgy had a mixture of Popery and Paganism in it; and the mission of the clergy was no better than that of Baal’s priests in the Old Testament. He first preached at Norwich, in 1581, where the Dutch having a numerous congregation, many of them inclined to Ahabaptism; and, therefore, being the more disposed to entertain any new resembling opinion, he made his first essay upon them; and having made some progress, and raised a character for zeal and sanctity, he then began to infect his own countrymen; for which purpose he called in the assistance of one Richard Harrison, a country schoolmaster, and they formed churches out of both nations, but mostly of the English. He instructed his audience that the church of England was no true church; that there was little of Christ’s institution in the public ministrations, and that all good Christians were obliged to separate from those impure assemblies; that their only way was to join him and his disciples, among whom all was pure and unexceptionable, evidently inspired by the Spirit of God, and refined from all alloy and prophanation. These discourses prevailed on the audience; and his disciples, now called Brownists, formed a society, and made a total defection from the church, refusing to join any congregation in any public office of worship. Brown being convened before Dr. Freake, bishop of Norwich, and other ecclesiastical commissioners, he maintained his schism, to justify which he had also written a book, and behaved rudely to the court, on which he was committed to the custody of the sheriff of Norwich; but his relation, the lord treasurer Burghley, imputing his error and obstinacy to zeal, rather than malice, interceded to have him charitably persuaded out of his opinions, and released. To this end he wrote a letter to the bishop of Norwich, which procured his enlargement. After this, hisjordship ordered Brown up to London, and recommended him to archbishop Whitgift for his instruction and counsel, in order to his amendment; but Brown left the kingdom, and settled at Middleburgh in Zealand, where he and his followers obtained leave of the states to form a church according to their own model, which was drawn in a book published by Brown at Middleburgh in 1582, and called “A treatise of Reformation, without staying for any man.” How long he remained at Middleburgh, is not precisely known; but he was in England in 1585, when he was cited to appear before archbishop Whitgift, to answer to certain matters contained in a book published by him, but what this was, we are not informed. The archbishop, however, by force of reasoning, brought Brown at last to a tolerable compliance with the church of England; and having dismissed him, the lord treasurer Burgh.­Jey sent him to his father in the country, with a letter to recommend him to his favour and countenance, but from another letter of the lord treasurer’s, we learn that Brown’s errors had sunk so deep as not to be so easily rooted out as was imagined; and that he soon relapsed into his former opinions, and shewed himself so incorrigible, that his good old father resolved to own him for his son no longer than his son owned the church of England for his mother; and Brown chusing rather to part with his aged sire than his new schism, he was discharged the family. When gentleness was found ineffectual, severity was next practised; and Brown, after wandering up and down, and enduring great hardships, at length went to live at Northampton, where, industriously labouring to promote his sect, Lindsell, bishop of Peterborough, sent him a citation to come before him, which Brown refused to obey; for which contempt he was excommunicated. This proved the means of his reformation; for he was so deeply affected with the solemnity of this censure, that he made his submission, moved for absolution, and received it; and from that time continued in the communion of the church, though it was not in his power to close the chasrn^ or heal the wound he had made in it. It was towards the year 1590 that Brown renounced his principles of separation, antl was soon after preferred to the rectory of Achurch, near Thrapston in Northamptonshire. Fuller does not believe that Brown ever formally recanted his opinions, either by word or writing, as to the main points of his doctrine; but that his promise of a general compliance with the church of England, improved by the countenance of his patron and kinsman, the earl of Exeter, prevailed upon the archbishop, and procured this extraordinary favour for him. He adds, that Brown allowed a salary for one to discharge his cure; and though he opposed his parishioners in judgment, yet agreed in taking their tithes. He was a man of good parts and some learning, but was imperious and uncontroulable; and so far from the Sabbatarian strictness afterwards espoused by some of his followers, that he led an idle and dissolute life. In a word, says Fuller, he had a wife with whom he never lived, and a church in which he never preached, though he received the profits thereof: and as all the other scenes of his life were stonny and turbulent, so was his end: for the constable of his parish requiring, somewhat roughly, the payment of certain rates, his passion moved him to blows, of which the constable complaining to justice St. John, he rather inclined to pity than punish him but Brown behaved with so much insolence, that he was sent to Northampton gaol on a feather-bed in a cart, being very infirm, and aged above eighty years, where he soon after sickened and died, anno 1630, after boasting, “That he had been committed to thirty-two prisons, in some of which he could not see his hand at noon-day.” He was buried in his church of Achurch in Northamptonshire.

, an English judge, the son of sir Weston Browne of Abhess-roding in Essex, was born in that county, and educated for some time at Oxford, whence he removed to the Middle Temple, where he became eminent in the law, and was chosen summer reader in the first of queen Mary, 1553. The following year he was made serjeant at law, and was the first of the call. Soon after he was appointed serjeant to the king and queen, Philip and Mary. In 1558, he was preferred to be lord chief justice of the common pleas; but removed upon queen Mary’s decease, to make way for sir James Dyer, for though a Roman catholic, and queen Elizabeth might not chuse he should preside in that court, she had such an opinion of his talents that he was permitted to retain the situation of puisne on the bench as long as he lived. It is even said that he refused the place of lord keeper, which was offered to him, when the queen thought of removing sir Nicholas Bacon for being concerned in Hales’s book, written against the Scottish line, in favour of the house of Suffolk. This book sir Anthony privately answered , or made large collections for an answer, which Leslie, bishop of Ross, and Morgan Philips afterwards made use of, in the works they published in defence of the title of Mary queen of Scots. Sir Anthony Browne died at his house in the parish of Southwold in Essex, May 6, 1567. The only works attributed to him were left in ms.: namely, 1. “A Discourse upon certain points touching the Inheritance of the Crown,” mentioned already, and 2. “A book against Robert Dudley, earl of Leicester,” mentioned by Dr. Matthew Paterson, in his “Jerusalem and Babel,” 1653, p. 587, but the object of which we are unacquainted with. Plowden says of sir Anthony, that he was “a judge of profound genius and great eloquence.”

, the first bishop that embraced and promoted the Reformation in Ireland, was originally an Austin friar of London. He received his academical education in the house of his order, near Halywell, in Oxford, and becoming eminent for his learning and other good qualities, was made provincial of the Austin monks in England. In 1523 he supplicated the university for the degree of B. D. but it does not appear that he was then admitted. He took afterwards the degree of D. D. in some university beyond sea, and was incorporated in the same degree at Oxford, in 1534, and soon after at Cambridge. Before that time, having read some of Luther’s writings, he took a liking to his doctrine; and, among other things, was wont to inculcate into the people, “That they should make their applications solely to Christ, and not to the Virgin Mary, or the saints.” King Henry VIII. being informed of this, took him into his favour, and promoted him to the archbishopric of Dublin, to which he was consecrated March 19, 1534-5, by Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, assisted by the bishops of Rochester and Salisbury. A few months after his arrival in Ireland, the lord privy-seal, Cromwell, signified to him that his majesty having renounced the Papal supremacy in England, it was his highness’ s pleasure that his subjects of Ireland should obey his commands in that respect as in England, and nominated him one of the commissioners for the execution thereof. On November 28, 1535, he acquainted the lord Cromwell with his success; telling him that he had “endeavoured, almost to the danger and hazard of his life, to procure the nobility and gentry of the Irish nation to due obedience, in owning the king their supreme head, as-well spiritual as temporal.” In the parliament which met at Dublin, May l, 1536, he was very instrumental in having the Act for the king’s supremacy over the church of Ireland passed; but he met with many obstacles in the execution of it; and the court of Rome used every effort to prevent any alterations in Ireland with regard to religious matters; for this purpose the pope sent over a bull of excommunication against all such as had ownedj or should own, the king’s supremacy within that kingdom, and the form of an oath of obedience to be taken to his holiness, at confessions. Endeavours were even used to raise a rebellion there; for one Thady é Birne, a Franciscan friar, being seized by archbishop Browne’s order, letters were found about him, from the pope and cardinals to O'Neal; in which, after commending his own and his father’s faithfulness to the church of Rome, he was exhorted “for the glory of the mother church, the honour of St. Peter, and his own security, to suppress heresie, and his holiness’s enemies.” And the council of cardinals thought fit to encourage his country, as a sacred island, being certain while mother church had a son of worth as himself, and those that should succour him and join therein, she would never fall, but have more or less a holding in Britain in spite of fate. In pursuance of this letter, O'Neal began to declare himself the champion of Popery; and having entered into a confederacy with others, they jointly invaded the Pale, and committed several ravages, but were soon after quelled. About the time that king Henry VIII. began to suppress the monasteries in England and Ireland, archbishop Browne completed his design of removing all superstitious reliques and images out of the two cathedrals of St. Patrick’s and the Holy Trinity, in Dublin, and out of the rest of the churches within his diocese, and in their room placed the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, and the Ten Commandments in gold letters. And in 1541, the king having converted the priory of the Holy Trinity into a cathedral church, consisting of a dean and chapter, our archbishop founded three prebends in the same in 1544, namely, St. Michael’s, St. John’s, and St. Michan’s, from which time it has generally been known by the name of Christ-church. King Edward VI. having caused the Liturgy to be published in English, sent an order to sir Anthony St. Leger, governor of Ireland, dated February 6, 1550-1, to notify to all the clergy of that kingdom, that they should use this book in all their churches, and the Bible in the vulgar tongue. When sir Anthony imparted this order to the clergy (on the 1st of March), it was vehemently opposed by the Popish party, especially by George Dowdall, primate of Armagh, but archbishop Browne received it with the utmost satisfaction; and on Easter-day following the Liturgy was read, for the first time within Ireland, in Christ -church, Dublin, in presence of the mayor and bailiffs of that city, the lord deputy St. Leger, archbishop Browne, &c. On this occasion the archbishop preached a sermon against keeping the Scriptures in the Latin tongue, and the worship of images, which is printed at the end of his life, and is the only part of his writings extant, except the letters mentioned above . But Dowdall, in consequence of his violent and unseasonable opposition to the king’s order, was deprived of the title of primate of all Ireland, which, by letters patent bearing date the 20th of October, 1551, was conferred on archbishop Browne, and his successors in the see of Dublin for ever. However, he did not long enjoy this dignity, for he was deprived both of it and his archbishopric in 1*554, the first of queen Mary I. under pretence that he was married, but in truth because he had zealously promoted the Reformation; and archbishop Dowdall, who had lived in exile during part of the reign of king Edward VI. recovered the title of primate, and also the archbishopric of Armagh, which had been given to Hugh Goodacre. While archbishop Browne enjoyed the see of Dublin, the cathedral of St. Patrick’s was suppressed for about the space of eight years; but queen Mary restored it to its ancient dignity, towards the end of the year 1554. The exact time of archbishop Browne’s death is not recorded; only we are told that he died about the year 1556. He was a man, says Usher, of a cheerful countenance; meek and peaceable: in his acts and deeds plain and downright; of good parts, and very stirring in what he judged to be for the interest of religion, or the service of his king; merciful and compassionate to the poor and miserable; and adorned with every good and valuable qualification.

, D.D. provost of Queen’s-college, Oxford, was born at a place called the Tongue, in Watermillock, Cumberland, in 1700, and was baptised Dec. 19, of that year. His father, George Browne, was a reputable yeoman, who was enabled to give his son a classical education at Barton school, and afterwards sent him to Queen’s-college, where he was admitted a member March 22, 1716-17. Here his good behaviour and rapid progress in knowledge, procured him many friends that were of great service to him. In due time he was elected taberdar upon the foundation; and having gone through that office with honour, he took the degree of M. A. Nov. 4th, 1724, and was chosen one of the chaplains of the college. In 1726 he published, from the university press, a most beautiful edition of cardinal Barberini’s Latin poems, with notes and a life of the author, (who was afterwards pope Urban VIII.) and a dedication to his friend Edward Hassel, esq. of Dalemain* his friend and patron. In April 1731, he was elected fellow, and became an eminent tutor, having several young noblemen of the first rank intrusted to his care. In this useful and important station he continued many years, exercising strict discipline, and assiduously studying to promote the prosperity of the college. He took the degree of D. D. July 9, 1743, and was presented by the provost and society to the rectory of Bramshot, in Hampshire, May 1, 1746, The university also conferred upon him the professorship of natural philosophy in 1747, which he held till his death. At his living at Bramshot, he resided more than ten years, during which time he was collated to the chancellorship of Hereford, and was made a canon-residentiary by the right rev. lord James Beauclerk, bishop of that diocese, who had formerly been his pupil.

, esq. F. R. S. and a very ingenious and elegant poet of the last century, was born at Burton-upon-Trent, January 21, 1705-6; and was the son of the rev. William Browne, minister of that parish, where he chiefly resided, vicar of Winge, in Buckinghamshire, and a prebendary of Litchfield, which last preferment was given him by the excellent bishop Hough. He was possessed, also, of a small paternal inheritance, which he greatly increased by his marriage with Anne, daughter of Isaac Hawkins, esq. all whose estate, at length, came to his only grandson and heir-at-law, the subject of this article. Our author received his grammatical education, first at Litchfield, and then at Westminster, where he was much distinguished for the brilliancy of his parts^ and the steadiness of his application. The uncommon rapidity with which he passed through the several forms or classes of Westminster school, attracted the notice, and soon brought him under the direction of the head master, Dr. Freind, with whom he was a peculiar favourite. Mr. Browne stayed above a year in the sixth, or head form, with a view of confirming and improving his taste for classical learning and composition, under so polite and able a scholar. When he was little more than sixteen years of age, he was removed to Trinity-college, Cambridge, of which college his father had been fellow. He remained at the university till he had taken his degree of M. A. and though during his residence there he continued his taste for classical literature, which through his whole life was his principal object and pursuit, he did not omit the peculiar studies of the place, but applied himself with vigour and success to all the branches of mathematical science, and the principles of the Newtonian philosophy. When in May 1724, king George the First established at both universities, a foundation for the study of modern history and languages, with the design of qualifying young men for employments at court, and foreign embassies, Mr. Browne was among the earliest of those who were selected to be scholars upon this foundation. On the death of that prince, he wrote an university copy of verses, which was the first of his poems that had been printed, and was much admired. About the year 1727, Mr. Browne, who had been always intended for the bar, settled at Lincoln’s-inn. Here he prosecuted, for several years, with great attention, the study of the law, and acquired in it a considerable degree of professional knowledge, though he never arrived to any eminence in the practice of it, and entirely gave it up long before his death. He was the less solicitous about the practice of his profession, and it was of the less consequence to him, as he was possessed of a fortune adequate to his desires; which, by preserving the happy mean between extravagance and avarice, he neither diminished nor increased.

Mr. Browne’s application to the law did not prevent his occasionally indulging himself in the exercise of his poetical talents. It was not long after his settlement at Lincoln’s-inn that he wrote his poem on “Design and Beauty,” addressed to Highmore the painter, for whom he had a great friendship. In this, one of the longest of his poems, he shews an extensive knowledge of the Platonic philosophy; and pursues, through the whole, the idea of beauty advanced by that philosophy. By design is here meant, in a large and extensive sense, that power of genius which enables the real artist to collect together his scattered ideas, to range them in proper order, and to form a regular plan before he attempts to exhibit any work in architecture, painting, or poetry. He wrote several other poetical pieces during the interval between his fixing at LincolnVinn and his marriage one of the mostpleasing and popular of which was his “Pipe of Tobacco,” an imitation of Gibber, Ambrose Philips, Thomson, Young, Pope, and Swift, who were then all living; the peculiar manner of these several writers is admirably hit off by our author, who evidently possessed an excellent imitative genius. Indeed, nothing but a nice spirit of discrimination, and a happy talent at various composition, could have enabled him to have succeeded so well as he hath done in the “Pipe of Tobacco.” The imitation of Ambrose Philips was not written by our poet, but by an ingenious friend, the late Dr. John Hoaclly, chancellor of the diocese of Winchester, and second son of -the bishop. Dr. Hoadlyy however, acknowledged that his little imitation was altered so much for the better by Mr. Browne, that he fairly made it his own.

On the 10th of February 1743-4, Mr. Browne married Jane, daughter of the rev. Dr. David Trimnell, archdeacon of Leicester, and precentor of Lincoln, and niece to the right rev. Dr. Charles Trimnell, bishop of Winchester, a woman of great merit, and of a very amiable temper. He was chosen twice to serve in parliament; first upon a vacancy in December 1744, and then at the general election in 1748, for the borough of Wenlock in Shropshire, near to which his estate lay. This was principally owing to the interest of William Forester, esq. a gentleman of great fortune and ancient family in Shropshire, who recommended Mr. Browne to the electors, from the opinion he entertained of his abilities, and the confidence he had in his integrity and principles. As Mr. Browne had obtained his seat in parliament without opposition or expence, and without laying himself under obligations to any party, he never made use of it to interested or ambitious purposes. The principles, indeed, in which he had been educated, and which were confirmed by reading and experience, and the good opinion he had conceived of Mr. Pelham’s administration, led him usually to support the measures of government; but he never received any favour, nor desired any employment. He saw with great concern the dangers arising from parliamentary influence, and was determined that no personal consideration should biass his public conduct. The love of his country, and an ardent zeal for its constitution and liberties, formed a distinguishing part of his character. In private conversation, Mr. Browne possessed so uncommon a degree of eloquence, that he was the admiration and delight of all who knew him. It must, therefore, have been expected that he should have shone in the house of commons, as a public speaker. But he had a modesty and delicacy about him, accompanied with a kind of nervous timidity, which prevented him from appearing in that character. His case, in this respect, was similar to that of the third earl of Shaftesbury, Mr. Addison, and other ingenious men. Dr. Johnson said of him, “I. H. Browne, one of the first witsof this country, got into parliament, and never opened hismouth.”

In 1754 Mr. Browne published what may be called his. great work, his Latin poem “I}e Aiumi Immortalitate^ in two books, the reception of which was such as its merit deserved. It immediately excited the applause of the most polite scholars, and has been praised by some of the most eminent and ingenious men of the age, by archbishop Herring, Dr. E. Barnard, R. O. Cambridge, Mr. Upton, bishop Hoadly, bishop Green, Mr. Harris, Dr. Beattie, &c. &c. Its popularity was so great, that several English translations of it appeared in a little time. The first was by Mr. Hay, author of an” Essay on Deformity,“and other pieces; and the second in blank verse, by Dr. Richard Grey, a learned clergyman, well known by his” Memoria Technica,“and his publications in scripture criticism. A third translation was published without a name, but with a laboured preface, containing some quotations from sir John Davies’s” Nosce Teipsum,“which were supposed to be analogous to certain passages in Mr. Browne. All these versions made their appearance in the course of a few months; and there was afterwards printed, by an unknown hand, a translation of the first book. Some years after Mr. Browne’s death, the” De Animi Immortalitate“was again translated by the rev. Mr. Crawley, a clergyman in Huntingdonshire, and more recently Dr. John Lettice published a translation in blank verse, with a commentary and annotations, 1795, 8vo. A close and literal version, of it in prose was inserted by Mr. Highmore the painter in his publication which appeared in 1766, entitled” Essays moral, religious, and miscellaneous," But the best translation is that by Soame Jenyns, esq. printed in his Miscellanies, and since published in Mr. Browne’s poems. These testimonies and attentions paid to our ingenious author’s principal production, are striking evidences of the high sense which was justly entertained of its merit. Not to mention the usefulness and importance of the subject, every man of taste must feel that the poem is admirable for its perspicuity, precision, and order; and that it unites the philosophical learning and elegance of Cicero, with the numbers, and much of the poetry, of Lucretius and Virgil. Mr. Browne intended to have added a third book. In these three books he proposed to carry natural religion as far as it would go, and in so doing, to lay the true foundation of Christianity, of which he was a firm believer. But he went no farther than to leave a fragment of the third book, enough to make us lament that he did not complete the whole.

, a native of Ireland, /was at first provost of Trinity college in Dublin, and afterwards bishop of Cork: in the palace of which see he died in 1735, after having distinguished himself by some writings. 1. “A refutation of Toland’s Christianity not mysterious.” This was the foundation of his preferment; which occasioned him to say to Toland himself, that it was he who had made him bishop of Cork. 2. “The progress, extent, and limits of the human understanding,” 1728, 8vo. This was meant as a supplemental work, displaying more at large the principles on which he had confuted Toland. 3. “Sermons,” levelled principally against the Socinians, written in a manly and easy style, and much admired. He published also, 4. A little volume in 12mo, against the “Custom of drinking to the memory of the dead.” It was a fashion among the Whigs of his time, to drink to the glorious and immortal memory of king William III. which greatly disgusted our bishop, and is supposed to have given rise to the piece in question. His notion was that drinking to the dead is tantamount to praying for the dead, and not, as is really meant, an approbation of certain conduct or principles. The only effect, however, was that the whigs added to their toast, “in spite of the bishop of Cork.”

His portrait, in his latter days, is very faithfully drawn by Warburton, in one of his letters to bishop Hurd.

, bishop of Exeter, was born at Ipswich in Suffolk, in 1592. His father, who was a merchant of that place, dying when he was but a few weeks old, his mother took due care of his education, in which he made a very considerable progress. At the age of fourteen, he was sent to Pembroke-hall in Cambridge, of which he successively became scholar and fellow; and there he distinguished himself by his facetious and inoffensive wit, his eloquence, and his great skill and knowledge in philosophy, history, poetry, &c. He took his master’s degree in 1617, B. D. in 1621, and D. D. in 1626. He was appointed prevaricator when James I. visited the university, and discharged that employment to the universal aUmiration of the whole audience. His first preferments were, the rectory of Barley in Hertfordshire, and a prebend of Ely in 1621, to both which he was collated by Dr. Nicholas Felton, bishop of Ely. July 15, 1628, he was incorporated doctor of divinity at Oxford. On the 2 1st of September, 16-29, he was collated to the prebend of Tachbrook, in the cathedral church of Lichfield, which he quitted September 19, 1631, when he was admitted to the archdeaconry of Coventry. He was likewise master of Catherine-hall in Cambridge, and proved a great benefit and ornament both to that college and the whole university. In 1637, 1638, 1643, and 1644, he executed the office of vice-chancellor, to the universal satisfaction of all people, and to his own great credit. In 1641, he was presented to the eleventh stall or prebend in the church of Durham, by Dr. Thomas Morton, bishop of that diocese, to whom he was chaplain. Upon the translation of Dr. Joseph Hall to the bishopric of Norwich, Dr. Brown rig was nominated to succeed him in the see of Exeter, in 1641. Accordingly he was elected March 3 1, 1642; confirmed May 14; consecrated the day following; and installed the 1st of June. But the troubles that soon after followed, did not permit him long to enjoy that dignity. Before the beginning of them, he was much esteemed, and highly commended, by his relation John Pym, and others of the presbyterian stamp: but they forsook him, only because he was a bishop; and suffered him to be deprived of his revenues, so that he was almost reduced to want. Nay, once he was assaulted, and like to have been stoned by the rabble, his episcopal character being his only crime. About 1645, he was deprived of his mastership of Catherine-hall> on account of a sermon preached by him before the university, on the king’s inauguration, at some passages of which, offence was taken by the parliament party; and neither his piety, gravity, or learning, were sufficient to preserve him in his station. Being thus robbed of all, he retired to the house of Thomas Rich, of Sunning, esq. in Berkshire, by whom he was generously entertained: and there, and sometimes at London, at Highgate, and St. Edmundsbury, spent several years. During this time, he had the courage to advise Oliver Cromwell to restore king Charles II. to his just rights, but yet he suffered in his reputation, as not being zealous enough for the church. About a year before his decease, he was invited to be a preacher at the Temple, in London, with a handsome allowance; and accordingly he went and settled there, in good lodgings furnished for him. But his old distemper, the stone, coming upon him with greater violence than usual, and being attended with the dropsy and the infirmities of age, they all together put an end to his life, on the 7th of December, 1659: he was buried the 17th following in the Temple church, where there is an epitaph over him. He was once married, but never had a child. Though he was very elaborate and exact in his compositions, and completely wrote his sermons, yet he could not be persuaded to print any thing in his life-time. Bishop Brownrig, as to his person, was tall and comely. The majesty of his presence was so allayed with meekness, candour, and humility, that no man was farther from any thing morose or supercilious. He had a great deal of wit, as well as wisdom; and was an excellent scholar, an admirable orator, an acute disputant, a pathetic preacher, and a prudent governor, full of judgment, courage, constancy, and impartiality. He was, likewise, a person of that soundness of judgment, of that conspicuity for an unspotted life, and of that unsuspected integrity, that he was a complete pattern to all. Dr. Gauden, who had known him above thirty years, declares that he never heard of any thinor said or done by him, which a wise and good man would have wished unsaid or undone. Some other parts of Dr. Gauden’s character of him may be supposed to proceed from the, warmth of friendship. Echard says of him, that “he was a great man for the Anti-Arminian cause (for he was a rigid Calvinist), yet a mighty champion for the liturgy and ordination by bishops: and his death was highly lamented by men of all parties.' 7 Baxter, Neal, and other writers of the nonconformist party, are no less warm in his praises. He was one of those excellent men with whom archbishop Tillotson cultivated an acquaintance at his first coming to London, and by whose preaching and example he formed himself. After his death some of his sermons were published, under the title” Forty Sermons, &c." 1662, fol. and reprinted with the addition of twenty-five, making a second volume, 1674, fol. His style is rather better than that of many of his contemporaries.

, an eminent physician, a native of Cumberland, was born in 1711, and educated in medical science at Leyden, under Albinus, Euler, and Boerhaave. Having taken his medical degree in 1737, he returned to his native country, and settled at Whitehaven, where his practice became very extensive. About twenty years before his death, he retired to Ormathwaite, where he died, Jan. 7, 1800, in his eighty-ninth year, regretted as a man of amiable and endearing virtues, and a most skilful physician. His principal publications were, 1. His inaugural thesis, “De Praxi medica ineunda,” Leyden, 1737, 4to. 2. “A treatise on the art of making common Salt,” Lond. 1748, 8vo, which procured him the honour of being chosen a fellow of the royal society. This work, which has long been out of print, was praised by Chaptal and bishop Watson for the profound knowledge of the subject displayed in it. 3. “An enquiry concerning the mineral elastic spirit contained in the water of Spa in Germany,” printed in the Philosophical Transactions, vol. LV. 4. A treatise, “On the means of preventing the communication of pestilent contagion.” A trip to the Spas of Germany suggested to him the idea of analizing the properties of the Pyrmont springs, and of some others, and led him into that train of nice and deep disquisition, which terminated in the de-elementizing one of our elements, and fixing its invisible fluid form into a palpable and visible substance. All this he effected by producing the various combinations of gases and vapours which constitute atmospheric air, and separating into many forms this long-supposed one and indivisible, whilst he solidified its fluid essence into a hard substance. That Dr. Brownrigg was the legitimate father of these discoveries was not only known at the time to his intimate and domestic circle, but also to the then president of the royal society, sir John Pringle; who, when called upon to bestow upon Dr. Priestley the gold medal for his paper of “Discoveries of the Nature and Properties of Air,” thus observes, “And it is no disparagement to the learned Dr. Priestley, that the vein of these discoveries was hit upon, and its course successfully followed up, some years ago, by my very learned, very penetrating, very industrious, but too modest friend, Dr. Brownrigg.” To habits, indeed, of too much diffidence, and to too nice a scrupulosity of taste, the world has to attribute the fewness of his publications. One of his literary projects was a general history of the county of Cumberland, but it does not appear that he had made much progress. He assisted Mr. West, however, in his entertaining.“Tour to the Lakes,” forming the plan of that popular work.

, or Robert Mannyng, the first English poet who occurs in the fourteenth century, was born probably before 1270, as he was received into the order of black canons at Brunne, about 1288. Malton appears to have been his birth-place, but what Malton is doubtful. He was, as far as can be discovered, merely a translator. His first work, says Warton, was a metrical paraphrase of a French book, written by Robert Grosthead, bishop of Lincoln, called “Manuel Pecche” (Manuel des Péchés), being a treatise on the decalogue, and on the seven deadly sins, which are illustrated with many legendary stories. It was never printed, but is preserved in the Bodleian library, Mss. No. 415, and in the Harleian Mss. No. 1701. His second and more important work is a metrical chronicle of England, in two parts, the former of which (from Æneas to the death of Cadwallader) is translated from Wace’s “Brut d'Angleterre,” and the latter (from Cadwallader to the end of the reign of Edward I.) from a French chronicle written by Peter de Langtoft, an Augustine canon of Bridlington in Yorkshire, who is supposed to have died in the reign of Edward II. and was therefore contemporary with his translator. Hearne has edited Robert de Brunne, but has suppressed the whole of his translation from Wace, excepting the prologue, and a few extracts which he found necessary to illustrate his glossary. Mr. Ellis, to whom we are indebted for this article, has given some specimens of de Brunne’s work.

, founder of the Carthusian monks, was descended from an ancient and honourable family, and born at Cologn about the year 1030. He was educated first among the clergy of St. Cunibert’s church at Cologn, and afterwards at Rheims, where he attracted so much notice by his learning and piety, that on a vacancy occurring, he was promoted to the office or rank of Scholasticus, to which dignity then belonged the direction of the studies, and all the great schools of the diocese. In this office, which he filled with great reputation, he continued until 1077, when the scandalous conduct of Manasses, archbishop of Rheims, who, by open simony had got possession of that church, induced him to join with some others in accusing Manasses in a council held by the pope’s legate at Autun. Manasses accordingly was deposed, and the church of Rheims was about to choose Bruno for his successor in the archbishopric, when he resigned his office, and persuaded some of his friends to accompany him into solitude. After searching for some time to discover a proper place, they arrived at Grenoble in 1084, and requested the bishop to allot them some place where they might serve God, remote from worldly affairs. The bishop having assigned them the desert of Chartreuse, and promised them his assistance, Bruno and his companions, six in number, built an oratory there, and small cells at a little distance one from the other like the ancient Lauras of Palestine, in which they passed the six days of the week, but assembled together on Sundays. Their austerities were rigid, generally following those of St. Benedict; and, among other rules, perpetual silence was enjoined, and all their original observances, it is said, were longer preserved unchanged than those of any other order. Before the late revolution in France, they had 172 convents divided into sixteen provinces, of which five only are said to have been nunneries, all situated in the catholic Netherlands, and where the injunction of silence was dispensed with. There were nine monasteries of this order in England at the dissolution under Henry VIII.

After St. Bruno had governed this infant society for six years, he was invited to Rome by pope Urban II. who had formerly been his scholar at Rheims, and now received him with every mark of respect and confidence, and pressed him to accept the archbishopric of Reggio. This however he declined, and the pope consented that he should withdraw into some wilderness on the mountains of Calabria. Bruno found a convenient solitude in the diocese of Squiiiaci, where he settled in 1090, with some new disciples, until his death, Oct. 6. 1101. There are only two letters of his remaining, one to Raoul le Verd, and the other to his monks, which are printed in a folio volume, entitled “S. Brunonis Qpera et Vita,” 1524, but the other contents of the volume belong to another St. Bruno, first a monk of Soieria in the diocese of Ast, and hence called Astiensis. He distinguished himself at the council of Rome in 1079 against Berenger, and was consecrated bishop of Segni by Gregory VII. He died in 1125, and is reckoned among the fathers of the church. He is reputed to have written with more elegance, clearness, and erudition, than most authors of his time, and there are several editions of his works. The Carthusian Bruno wrote on the Psalms and on some of St. Paul’s epistles. He followed the system of Augustine concerning grace, but it seems doubtful if any genuine works of his remain, unless what we have mentioned.

, a Latin historian and poet, was born at Egra in Bohemia, 1518. He was devoted to books from his childhood, and especially to poetry; in which he so happily succeeded, that he could make a great number of verses, and those not bad ones, extempore. He began early to publish some of them on several subjects; and acquired so much reputation, that he attained to the poetical crown, to the dignity of poet laureat, and of count palatine, which honour he received at Vienna from Ferdinand of Austria, king of the Remaps, in 1552. His business in that city was to present a work to Maximilian, king of Hungary, which he had dedicated to him, the “First century of the German monasteries.” In his return from Vienna, he stopped at Passau; where, finding a patron in Wolfgang bishop of Salms, he resolved to settle, and to remove his library and family. He hoped that he could better go on there with a great work he had undertaken, which was, “The history of all the bishoprics and bishops of Germany.” He had travelled much, and looked into several records *and libraries, to gather materials for his purpose. How long he staid there does not appear; but he was at Basil in June 1553, and lived in the citadel of Oporin. Arx Oporina: the usual way of speaking of that famous printer’s house, which stood on a rising ground. Here he published writings he had finished at Passau, some in prose, and others in verse. Bruschius was married, but had no children. He was far from being rich; but his poetical patrons assisted him, and he received presents also from the abbots and abbesses, whose monasteries he described. He was particularly well received by the abbess of the convent of Caczi, and obtained some presents from her, which, Melchior Adam says, was owing to his having described the antiquities of that convent. The liberalities of some abbots, while he was with Oporin at Basil, enabled him to buy a new suit of clothes; but when he found that appearing well dressed in the streets procured him many marks of respect from the vulgar, he tore his new finery to pieces, “as slaves (says the same author) that had usurped their master’s honours.”

, an eminent English prelate, was the son of William Buckeridge, by Elizabeth his wife, daughter of Thomas Keblewhyte of Basilden in Berks, son of John Keblewhyte, uncle to sir Thomas White, founder of St. John’s college, Oxford. He was educated in Merchant Taylors’ school, and thence sent to St. John’s college, Oxon, in 1578, where he was chosen fellow, and proceeded, through other degrees, to D. D. in the latter end of 1596. After leaving the university, he became chaplain to Robert earl of Essex, and was rector of North Fambridge in Essex, and of North Kiiworth in Leicestershire, and was afterwards one of archbishop Whitgii't’s chaplains, and made prebendary of Hereford, and of Rochester. In 1604, he was preferred to the archdeaconry of Northampton; and the same year, Nov. 5, was presented by king James to the vicarage of St. Giles’s, Cripplegate, in which he succeeded Dr. Andrews, then made bishop of Chichester. About the same time he was chaplain to the king; was elected president of St. John’s college, 1605, and installed canon of Windsor, April 15, 1606. His eminent abilities in the pulpit were greatly esteemed at court; insomuch that he was chosen to be one of the four (Dr. Andrews, bishop of Chichester, Dr. Barlow of Rochester, and Dr. John King, dean of Christ-church, Oxford, being the other three) who were appointed to preach before the king at Hampton-court in September 1606, in order to bring the two Melvins and other presbyterians of Scotland to a right understanding of the church of England. He took his text out of Romans xiii. 1. and managed the discourse (as archbishop Spotswood, who was present, relates), both soundly and learnedly, to the satisfaction of all the hearers, only it grieved the Scotch ministers to hear the pope and presbytery so often equalled in their opposition to sovereign princes.

In the year 1611 he was promoted to the see of Rochester, to which he was consecrated June 9. Afterwards, by the interest of his sometime pupil, Dr. Laud, then bishop of Bath and Wells, he was translated to Ely in 1628; where, having sat a little more than three years, he died May 23, 1631, and on the 31st was buried in the parish church of Bromley in Kent, without any memorial, although he appears to have been a very pious, learned, and worthy bishop, and had been a benefactor to the parish. His works are “De Potestate Papae in rebus temporalibus, sive in regibus deponendis usurpata: adversus Robertum Cardinalem Bellarminum, lib. II. In quibus respondetur authoribus, scripturis, rationibus, exemplis contra Gul. Barclaium allatis,” Lon. 1614, 4to. He published also “A Discourse on Kneeling at the Communion,” and some occasional sermons, of which a list may be seen in Wood.

, a popish divine of some note^ was born at West Harptre, the seat of an ancient family of his name in Somersetshire, about 1564. In 1579, he was admitted commoner in Magdalen college, Oxford, and afterwards passed some years in one of the inns of court. Having at last embraced the popish religion, he spent seven years in Doway college, and being ordained priest, returned to England, acted as a missionary for about twenty years, and died in 1611. He published, 1. A translation of the “Lives of the Saints” from Surius. 2. “A Per. suasive against frequenting Protestant Churches,” 12mo. 3. “Seven sparks of the enkindled flame, with four lamentations, composed in the hard times of queen Elizabeth,” 12mo. From this book, archbishop Usher, in a sermon preached in 1640, on Nov. 5, produced some passages hinting at the gun-powder plot. The passages are not, perhaps, very clearly in point, nor can we suppose any person privy to the design fool enough at the same time to give warning of it. This Buckland also wrote “De Persecutione Vandalica,” a translation from the Latin of Victor, bishop of Biserte, or Utica.

, esq. a very ingenious but unfortunate writer, was born at St. Thomas, near Exeter, about 1685, and educated at Christ-church, Oxford. His father, Gilbert Budgell, D. D. descended of an ancient family in Devonshire; his mother, Mary, was only daughter of Dr. William Gulston, bishop of Bristol, whose sister Jane married dean Addison, and was mother to the famous Addison. After some years stay in the university, Mr. Budgell went to London, and was entered of the Inner Temple, in order to study law, for which his father always intended him; but his inclinations led him more to study polite literature, and keep company with the genteelest persons in town. During his stay at the Temple, he contracted a strict intimacy and friendship with Addison, who was first cousin to his mother; and when Addison was appointed secretary to lord Wharton, lord-lieutenant of Ireland, he offered to make his friend Eustace one of the clerks of his office, which Mr. Budgell readily accepted. This was in April 1710, when he was about twenty-five years of age. He had by this time read the classics, the most reputed historian^ and the best French, English, and Italian writers, and became concerned with Steele and Addison, not in writing the Tatler, as has been asserted, but the Spectator, which was begun in 1711. Ail the papers marked with an X were written by him, and the whole eighth volume is attributed to Addison and himself, without the assistance of Steele. Several little epigrams and songs, which have a good deal of wit in them, together with the epilogue to the “Distressed Mother,” which had a greater run than any thing of the kind before, were also written by Mr. Budgell near this time; all which, together with the known affection of Addison for him, raised his character so much as to give him considerable consequence in the literary and political world. Upon the laying down of the Spectator, the Guardian was set up; and to this work our author contributed, along with Addison and Steele. In the preface it is said, that those papers marked with an asterisk were written by Mr. Budgell.

It was thought he had some hand in publishing Dr. Tindal’s “Christianity as old as the Creation,” for he often talked of another additional volume on the same subject, but never published it. However, he used to inquire very frequently after Dr. Conybeare’s health, who had been employed by queen Anne to answer the first volume, and rewarded with the deanery of Christ-church for his pains; saying, “he hoped Mr. Dean would live a little longer, that he might have the pleasure of making him a bishop; for he intended very soon to publish the pther volume of Tindal, which would certainly do the business.”

, a protestant dissenting minister, was born in London, Oct 18, 1719. His mother was the daughter, by a second wife, of the celebrated Matthew Henry. He was educated first at Chester, from whence he went to Dr. Doddridge’s academy at Northampton in 1736, and commenced preacher in the summer of 1740, his first settlement being at Welford, in Northamptonshire. He appears to have afterwards removed to London, but quitted the presbyterian sect, was baptized by immersion, and joined the general baptists. He preached likewise at Colchester, but how long cannot be ascertained. In 1743, he was chosen minister of a meeting in White’s alley, Moorfields. In 1745, this congregation removed to Barbican, and in 1780 to Worship-street, Shoreditch, where it remained until his death April 15, 1797. Before this event his infirmities had unfitted him for. public service; yet at one period he must have enjoyed great popularity, as he was chosen to succeed Dr. James Foster, in the Old Jewry lecture. Besides several single sermons, preached on particular occasions, he published 1. “Discourses on several subjects,” 1752. 2. “A Vindication of Lord Shaftesbury’s writings,” 1753. 3. “Notes on Lord Bolingbroke’s Philosophical Writings,” 1755, 8vo. 4v “Observations on Natural Religion and Christianity, candidly proposed in a Review of the Discourses lately published by the lord bishop of London,” 1757. 5. “Œconomy of the Gospel,” 1764, 4to. 6. “Discourses on the Parables and Miracles of Christ,” 1770, 4 vols. 7. “Catechetical Exercises,” 1774. 8. “Preface to notes on the Bible,” 1791, and after his death, “Notes on the Bible,” 3 vols. 8vo.

, bishop of St. David’s, was born March 25, 1634, in the parish of St. Cuthbert, at Wells in Somersetshsre. He was descended from an ancient and genteel family, seated at Shapwick in that county. Our prelate’s father, Mr. George Bull, dedicated his son to the church from his infancy, having declared at the font, that he designed him for holy orders, but he died when George was but four years old, and left him under the care of guardians, with an estate of two hundred pounds per annum. When he was fit to receive the first rudiments of learning, he was placed in a grammar-school at Wells, from whence he was soon removed to the free-school of Tiverton, in Devonshire, where he made a very quick progress in classical learning, and became qualified for the university at fourteen years of age.

He was entered a commoner of Exeter-college, in Oxford, the 10th of July, 1648, under the tuition of Mr. Baldwin Ackland, and though he lost much time in the pursuit of pleasures and diversions, yet, by the help of logic, which he mastered with little labour, and a close way of reasoning, which was natural to. him, he soon gained the reputation of a smart disputant, and as, such was taken notice of and encouraged by his superiors, particularly Dr. Conant, rector of the college, and Dr. Prideaux, bishop of Worcester, who at that time resided in Oxford. He continued in Exeter-college till January, 1649, at which time having refused to take the oath to the Commonwealth of England, he retired with his tutor, Mr. Ackland, who had set him the example, to North-Cadbury, in Somersetshire, where he continued under the care of that good and able man, till he was about nineteen years of age. This retreat gave him an opportunity of frequent converse with one of his sisters, whose good sense, and pious admonitions, weaned him entirely from all youthful vanities, and influenced him to a serious prosecution of his studies. And now, by the advice of his friends and guardians, he put himself under the care of Mr. William Thomas, rector of Ubley, in Somersetshire, a puritan divine, in whose house he boarded, with some of his sisters, for the space of two years. To this gentleman’s principles, however, he had no lasting attachment, and as he advanced in reading, he beg'an to study Hooker, Hammond, Taylor, Episcopius, &c. with which his friend Mr. Samuel Thomas, the son of his host, supplied him, much against the old gentleman’s will, who told his son that he would “corrupt Mr. Bull.” Soon after he had left Mr. Thomas, he entertained thoughts of entering into holy orders, and for that purpose applied himself to Dr. Skinner, the ejected bishop of Oxford, by whom he was ordained deacon and priest in the same day, being at that time but twenty-one years of age, and consequently under the age prescribed by the canons, with which, however, in times of such difficulty and distress, it was thought fit to dispense. Not long after, he accepted the small benefice of St. George’s, near Bristol, where, by his constant preaching twice every Sunday, the method he took in governing his parish, his manner of performing divine service, his exemplary life and great charities, he entirely gained the affections of his flock, and was very instrumental in reforming his parish, which he found overrun with quakers and other sectarists.

Whilst he remained minister of this parish, the providence of God wonderfully interposed for the preservation of his life; for his lodgings being near a powder-mill, Mr. Morgan, a gentleman of the parish, represented to him. the danger of his situation, and at the same time invited him to his own house. Mr. Bull, at first, modestly declined the offer, but after some importunity accepted it; and, not many days after his removal to Mr. Morgan’s, the mill was blown up, and his apartment with it. In this part of his life he took a journey once a year to Oxford, where he stayed about two months, to enjoy the benefit of the public libraries. In his way to and from Oxford, he always paid a visit to sir William Masters, of Cirencester, by which means he contracted an intimacy with Mr. Alexander pregory, the minister of the place, and after some time married Bridget, one of his daughters, on the 20th of May, 1658. The same year he was presented by the lady Pool, to the rectory of Suddington St. Mary, near Cirencester, in Gloucestershire. The next year, 1659, he was made privy to the design of a general insurrection in favour of king Charles II. and several gentlemen of that neighbourhood who were in the secret, chose his house at Suddington for one of the places of their meeting. Upon the restoration, Mr. Bull frequently preached for his father-in-law, Mr. Gregory, at Cirencester, where there was a large and populous congregation; and his sermons gave such general satisfaction, that, upon a vacancy, the people were very solicitous to have procured for him the presentation; but the largeness of the parish, and the great duty attending it, deterred him Trom consenting to the endeavours they were making for that purpose. In 1662, he was presented by the lord high-chancellor, the earl of Clarendon, to the vicarage of Suddington St. Peter, which lay contiguous to Suddington St. Mary, at the request of his diocesan Dr. Nicholson, bishop of Gloucester, both livings not exceeding 100l. a year. When Mr. Bull came first to the rectory of Suddington, he began to be more open in the use of the liturgy of the church of England, though it was not yet restored by the return of the king; for, being desired to marry a couple, he performed the ceremony, on a Sunday morning, in the face of the whole congregation, according to the form prescribed by the book of common -prayer. He took the same method in governing these parishes, as in that of St. George’s, and with the same success; applying himself with great diligence to the discharge of his pastoral functions, and setting the people an admirable example in the government and œconomy of his own family. During his residence here, he had an opportunity of confirming two ladies of quality in the protestant communion, who were reduced to a wavering state of mind by the arts and subtleties of the Romish missionaries. The only dissenters he had in his parish were quakers; whose extravagances often gave him no small uneasiness. In this part of his life, Mr. Bull prosecuted his studies with great application, and composed most of his works during the twenty-seven years that he was rector of Suddington. Several tracts, indeed, which cost him much pains, are entirely lost, through his own neglect in preserving them; particularly a treatise on the posture used by the ancient Christians in receiving the Eucharist; a letter to Dr. Pearson concerning the genuineness of St. Ignatius’ s epistles; a long one to Mr. Glanvil, formerly minister of Bath, concerning the eternity of future punishments; and another, on the subject of popery, to a person of very great quality. In 1669, he published his Apostolical Harmony, with a view to settle the peace of the church, upon a point of the utmost importance to all its members; and he dedicated it to Dn William Nicholson, bishop of Gloucester. This performance was greatly disliked, at first, by many of the clergy, and others, on account of the author’s departing therein from the private opinions of some doctors of the church, and his manner of reconciling the two apostles St. Paul and St. James, as to the doctrine of justification. It was particularly opposed by Dr. Morley, bishop of WinChester; Dr. Barlow, Margaret-professor of divinity at Oxford; Mr. Charles Gataker, a presbyterian divine; Mr. Joseph Truman, a non-conformist minister; Dr. Tully, principal of St. Edmund’s-hall; Mr. John Tombes, a famous anabaptist preacher; Dr. Lewis Du Moulin, an independent; and by M. De Marets, a French writer, who tells us, “that the author, though a professed priest of the church of England, was more addicted to the papists, remonstrants, and Socinians, than to the orthodox party.” Towards the end of 1675, Mr. Bull published his “Examen Censuræ,” &c. in answer to Mr. Gataker, and his “Apologia pro Harmonia,” &c. in reply to Dr. Tully. Mr. Bull’s notion on this subject was “That good works, which proceed from faith, and are conjoined with faith, are a necessary condition required from us by God, to the end that by the new and evangelical covenant, obtained by and sealed in the blood of Christ the Mediator of it, we may be justified according to his free and unmerited grace.” In this doctrine, and throughout the whole book, Mr. Bull absolutely excludes all pretensions to merit on the part of men; but the work nevertheless excited the jealousy of many able divines both in the church and among the dissenters, as appears from the above list. About three years after, he was promoted by the earl of Nottingham, then lord chancellor, to a prebend in the church of Gloucester, in which he was installed the 9th of October, 1678. In 1680, he finished his “Defence of the Nicene Faith,” of which he had given a hint five years before in his Apology. This performance, which is levelled against the Arians and Socinians on one hand, and the Tritheists and Sabellians on the other, was received with universal applause, and its fame spread into foreign countries, where it was highly esteemed by the best judges of antiquity, though of different persuasions. Five years after its publication, the author was presented, by Philip Sheppard, esq. to the rectory of Avening in Gloucestershire, a very large parish, and worth two hundred pounds per annum. The people of this parish, being many of them very dissolute and immoral, and many more disaffected to the church of England, gave him for some time great trouble and uneasiness; but, by his prudent conduct and diligent discharge of his duty, he at last got the better of their prejudices, and converted their dislike iuto the most cordial love and affection towards him. He had not been long at Avening, before he was promoted, by archbishop Sancroft, to the archdeaconry of Landaff, in which he was installed the 20th of June, 1686. He was invited soon after to Oxford, where the degree of doctor in divinity was conferred upon him by that university, without the payment of the usual fees, in consideration of the great and eminent services he had done the church. During the reign of James II. the doctor preached very warmly against popery, with which the nation was then threatened. Some time after the revolution, he was put into the commission of the peace, and continued in it, with some little interruption, till he was made a bishop. In 1694, whilst he continued rector of Avening, he published his “Judicium Ecclesia? Catholicse, &c.” in defence of the “Anathema,” as his former book had been of the Faith, decreed by the first council of Nice. The last treatise which Dr. Bull wrote, was his “Primitive Apostolical Tradition,” &c. against Daniel Zwicker, a Prussian. All Dr. Bull’s Latin works, which he had published by himself at different times, were collected together, and printed in 1703, in one volume in folio, under the care and inspection of Dr. John Ernest Grabe, the author’s age and infirmities disabling him from undertaking this edition. The ingenious editor illustrated the work with many learned annotations, and ushered it into the world with an excellent preface. Dr, Bull was in the seventy-first year of his age, when he was acquainted with her majesty’s gracious intention of conferring on him the bishopric of St. David’s; which promotion he at first declined, on account of his ill state of health and advanced years; but, by the importunity of his friends, and strong solicitations from the governors o*f the church, he was at last prevailed upon to accept it, and was accordingly consecrated in Lambeth-chapel, the 29th of April, 1705. Two years after, he lost his eldest son, Mr. George Bull, who died of the small-pox the 11th of May, 1707, in, the thirty-seventh year of his age. Our prelate took his seat in the house of lords in that memorable session, when the bill passed for the union of the two kingdoms, and spoke in a debate which happened upon that occasion, in favour of the church of England. About July after his consecration, he went into his diocese, and was received with all imaginable demonstrations of respect by the gentry and clergy. The episcopal palace at Aberguilly being much out of repair, he chose the town of Brecknock for the place of his residence; but was obliged, about half a year before his death, to remove from thence to Abermarless, for the benefit of a freer air. He resided constantly in his diocese, and carefully discharged all the episcopal functions. Though bishop Bull was a great admirer of our ecclesiastical constitution, yet he would often lament the distressed state of the church of England, chiefly owing to the decay of ancient discipline, and the great number of lay-impropriations, which he considered as a species of sacrilege, and insinuated that he had known instances of its being punished by the secret curse which hangs over sacrilegious persons. Some time before his last sickness, he entertained thoughts of addressing a circular letter to all his clergy; and, after his death, there was found among his papers one drawn up to that purpose. He had greatly impaired his health, by too intense and unseasonable an application to his studies, and, on the 27th of September, 1709, was taken with a violent fit of coughing, which brought on a spitting of blood. About the beginning of February following, he was seized with a distemper, supposed to be an ulcer, or what they call the inward piles; of which he died the 17th of the same month, and was buried, about a week after his death, at Brecknock/ leaving behind him but two children out of eleven.

Bishop Bull’s Sermons and the larger discourses, were published in 1713, 3 vols. 8vo, by Robert Nelson, esq. with a Life, occupying a fourth volume, which was also published separately. Some of the sermons are on curious subjects, and seem rather ingenious than edifying, but as an assertor of the doctrine of the Trinity, bishop Bull must be allowed to rank among the ablest divines of the last age.

, a celebrated astronomer and scholar, was born of protestant parents, at Houdun in France, September the 28th, 1605; and having finished his studies in philosophy at Paris, and in civil law at Poictiers, he applied to mathematics, theology, sacred and profane history, and civil law, with such assiduity, that he became eminent in each of these departments, and acquired the reputation of an universal genius. As he had travelled for his improvement into Italy, Germany, Poland, and the Levant, he formed an extensive acquaintance with men of letters, and maintained a correspondence with the most distinguished persons of his time. Although he had been educated a protestant, he changed his profession at the age of 27 years, and became a catholic priest. His life was prolonged to his 89th year; and having retired to the abbey of St. Victor at Paris in 1689, he died there November the 25th, 1694. Besides his pieces concerning ecclesiastical rights, which excited attention, and the history of Ducas, printed at the Louvre, in 1649, in the original Greek, with a Latin version and notes, he was the author of several other works, chiefly mathematical and philosophical. His “Treatise on the Nature of Light” was published in 1638; and his work entitled, “Philolaus, sive de vero Systema Mundi,” or his true system of the world, according to Philolaus, an ancient philosopher and astronomer, in the same year, and republished in 1645, under the title of “Astronomia Philolaica,” grounded upon the hypothesis of the earth’s motion, and the elliptical orbit described by the planet’s motion about a cone. To which he added tables entitled “Tabulæ Philolaicæ:” a work which Riccioli says ought to be attentively read by all students of astronomy. He considered the hypothesis, or approximation of bishop Ward, and found it not to agree with the planet Mars; and shewed in his defence of the Philolaic astronomy against the bishop, that from four observations made by Tycho on the planet Mars, that planet in the first and third quarters of the mean anomaly, was more forward than it ought to be according to Ward’s hypothesis; but in the 2d and 4th quadrant of the same, the planet was not so far advanced as that hypothesis required. He therefore set about a correction of the bishop’s hypothesis, and made it to answer more exactly to the orbits of the planets, which were most eccentric, and introduced what is called by Street, in his “Caroline Tables,” the Variation: for these tables were calculated from this correction of Bullialdus, and exceeded all in exactness that went before. This correction is, in the judgment of Dr. Gregory, a very happy one, if it be not set above its due place; and be accounted no more than a correction of an approximation to the true system: For by this means we are enabled to gather the coequate anomaly a priori and directly from the mean, and the observations are well enough answered at the same time; which, in Mercator’s opinion, no one had effected before. It is remarkable that the ellipsis which he has chosen for a planet’s motion, is such a one as, if cut out of a cone, will have the axis of the cone passing through one of its foci, viz. that next the aphelion.

, an elegant Latin scholar, was born at Toulouse in 1499, and studied at Paris, where he was distinguished by his quick progress and promising talents. On his return to Toulouse, finding his family unable to maintain him, he went to Padua, where he was supported by Emilius Perrot. He was afterwards taken into the family of Lazarus de Baif, the French ambassador at Venice, by whose generosity he was not only maintained, but enabled to study the Greek tongue, and he afterwards studied Hebrew. George de Selve, bishop of Lavaur, who succeeded de Baif as ambassador, retained Bunel in his service, and when his embassy was finished, carried him with him to Levaur. Upon the death of that prelate, which happened in 1541, Bunel returned to Toulouse^ where he would have been reduced to the greatest indigence, had not messieurs de Faur, the patrons of virtue and science, extended their liberality to him unasked. One of these gentlemen appointed him tutor to his sons; but whilst he was making the tour of Italy with them, he was cut off at Turin by a fever, in 1546. Mr. Bayle says, that he was one of the politest writers of the Latin tongue in the sixteenth century; but though he was advantageously distinguished by the eloquence of his Ciceronian style, he was still more so by the strictness of his morals. The magistrates of his native town of Toulouse set up a marble statue to his memory in their town-house. He left som'e Latin epistles written with the utmost purity, which were first published by Charles Stevens in 1551, and afterwards by Henry Stevens in 1581. Another, but a more incorrect edition, was printed at Toulouse in 1687, with notes by Mr. Gravero, advocate of Nimes.

, author of the justly-admired allegory of the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” was born at Elstow, near Bedford, 1628. His parents, though very mean, took care to give him that learning which was suitable to their condition, bringing him up to read and write, both which he quickly forgot, abandoning himself to all manner of wickedness, but not without frequent checks of conscience. One day being at play with his companions (the writer of his life tells us), a voice suddenly darted from heaven into his soul, saying, “Wilt thou leave thy sins and go to heaven, or have thy sins and go to hell!” This put him into such a consternation, that he immediately left his sport; and looking up to heaven, thought he saw the Lord Jesus looking down upon him, as one highly displeased with him, and threatening him with some grievous punishment for his ungodly practices. At another time, whilst he was uttering many oaths, he was severely reproved by a woman, who was herself a notorious sinner: she told him he was the ugliest fellow for swearing that ever she heard in all her life, and that he was able to spoil all the youth of the town, if they came but into his company. This reproof coming from a woman, whom he knew to be very wicked, filled him with secret shame; and made him, from that time, very much refrain from it. His father brought him up to his own business, which was that of a tinker. Being a soldier in the parliament army, at the siege of Leicester, in 1645, he was drawn out to stand sentinel; but another soldier of his company desired to take his place, to which he agreed, and thus escaped being shot by a musket-ball, which took off his comrade. About 1655 he was admitted a member of a baptist congregation at Bedford, and soon after was chosen their preacher. In 1660, being convicted at the sessions of holding unlawful assemblies and conventicles, he was sentenced to perpetual banishment, and in the mean time committed to gaol, from which he was discharged, after a confinement of twelve years and an half, by the compassionate interposition of Dr. Barlow, bishop of Lincoln. During his imprisonment, his own hand ministered to his necessities, making many an hundred gross of long-tagged thread laces, a trade which he had learned since his confinement. At this time he also wrote many of his tracts, particularly the “Pilgrim’s Progress.” Afterwards, being at liberty, he travelled into several parts of England, to visit and confirm the brethren, which procured him the epithet of Bishop Bunyan. When the declaration of James II. for liberty of conscience was published, he, by the contributions of his followers, built a meeting-house in Bedford, and preached constantly to a numerous audience. He died in London of a fever, 1688, aged sixty. He had by his wife four children, one of whom, named Mary, was blind. This daughter, he said, lay nearer his heart whilst he was in prison, than all the rest; and that the thought of her enduring hardship would be sometimes almost ready to break his heart, but that God greatly supported him by these two texts of scripture, “Leave the fatherless children, I will preserve them alive; and let the widows trust in. me. The Lord said, Verily it shall be well with thy remnant; verily I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well in the time of evil.” Jer. xlix. 11. and chap. xv. 11. His works are collected in two volumes in folio, printed at London in 1736-7, and reprinted in 1760, and often since in various forms. The continuator of his life, in the second of those volumes, tells us, that “he appeared in countenance to be of a stern and rough temper, but in his conversation mild and affable; not given to loquacity, or much discourse in company, unless some urgent occasion required it; observing never to boast of himself or his parts, but rather seem low in his own eyes, and submit himself to the judgment o others; abhorring lying and swearing; being just in all that lay in his power to his word; not seeking to revenge injuries, loving to reconcile differences, and making friendship with all. He had a sharp quick eye; accompanied with an excellent discerning of persons, being of good judgment and quick wit. As for his person, he was tall of stature, strong boned, though not corpulent: somewhat of a ruddy face, with sparkling eyes, wearing, his hair oil his upper lip, after the old British fashion; his hair reddish, but in his latter days time had sprinkled it with gray; his nose well-set, but not declining or bending, and his mouth moderately large; his forehead something high, and his habit always plain and modest.”

Dr. Johnson, whose opinion has been already quoted in part, conceived so high an opinion of the allegorical structure of the Pilgrim, that he thought Bunyan must have read Spenser, and observes, as a remarkable circumstance, that the Pilgrim’s Progress begins very much like the poem of Dante, although there was no translation of Dante when Bunyan wrote. Dr. Beattie says that some of the allegories in the Pilgrim are well conceived, and prove the author to have possessed powers of invention, which, if they had been refined by learning, might have produced something very noble. What learning might have done to Bunyan we no more can tell than we can tell what it might have done to Shakspteare; but, in our opinion, Bunyan, without its aid, has produced “something very noble,” because he has produced a work the most perfect in its kind, and which has baffled, and continues to baffle all attempts at imitation. The elegant author, whom we have just quoted, goes on to say “that the work has been imitated, but with little success. The learned bishop Patrick wrote the ‘ Parable of the Pilgrim,’ but I am not satisfied that he borrowed the hint, as it is generally thought he did, from John Bunyan. There is no resemblance in the plan, nor does the bishop speak a word of the Pilgrim’s Progress, which I think he would have done, if he had seen it. Besides, Bunyan’s fable is full of incident; Patrick’s is dry, didactic, verbose, and exceedingly barren in the invention.”

As in proceeding with St. Peter’s, he had, agreeably to his patent, chosen his own workmen, and dismissed others, the latter seldom failed of exerting such malice against him as they could display with impunity; and being exasperated by disappointments, they endeavoured to represent him as an unworthy successor of San Gallo, and upon the death of Paul III. an effort was mad^ to remove him from his situation, but Julius III. who succeeded to the pontificate, was hot less favourably disposed towards him than his predecessor; however, they presented a memorial, petitioning the pope to hold a committee of architects in St. Peter’s at Rome, to convince his holiness that their accusations and complaints were not unfounded. At the head of this party was cardinal Salviati, nephew to Leo X. and cardinal Marcello Cervino, who was afterwards pope by the title of Marcellus II. Julius agreed to the investigation, and the parties appeared in his presence. The complainants stated, that the church wanted light, and the architects had previously furnished the two cardinals with a particular example to prove the basis of the general position, which was, that he had walled up a. recess for three chapels, and made only three insufficient windows; upon which the pope asked Michel Angelo. to give his reasons for having done so; he replied, “I should wish first to hear the deputies.” Cardinal Marcello immediately said for himself and cardinal Salviati, “We ourselves are the deputies.” Then said Michel Angelo, “In the part of the church alluded to, over those windows are to be placed three others.” “You never said that before,” replied the cardinal; to which he answered with some warmth: “1 am not, neither will I ever be obliged to tell your eminence, or any one else, what I ought or am disposed to do; it is your office to see that the money be provided, to take care of the thieves, and to leave the building of St. Peter’s to me.” Turning to the pope, “Holy father, you see what I gain; if these machinations to which I am exposed are not for my spiritual welfare, I lose both my labour and my time.” The pope replied, putting his hands upon his shoulders, “Do not doubt, your gain is Dpw, and will be hereafter;” and at the same time gave him assurance of his confidence and esteem. Julius prosecuted no work in architecture or sculpture without consulting him. What was done in the Vatican, or in his villa on the Flaminian way, was with Michel Angelo’s advice and superintendance. He was employed also to rebuild a bridge across the Tiber, but as his enemies artfully pretended to commiserate his advanced age, he so far fell into this new snare as to leave the bridge to be completed by an inferior artist, and in five years it was washed away by a flood, as Michel Angelo had prophesied. In 1555 his friend and patron pope Julius died, and perhaps it would have been happier for Michel Angelo if they had ended their days together, for he was now eighty-one years old, and the remainder of his life was interrupted by the caprices of four successive popes, and the intrigues under their pontificates. Under all these vexations, however, he went on by degrees with his great undertaking, and furnished designs for various inferior works, but his enemies were still restless. He now sawthat his greatest crime was that of having lived too long; and being thoroughly disgusted with the cabals, he was solicitous to resign, that his last days might not be tormented by the unprincipled exertions of a worthless faction. That he did not complain from the mere peevishness of age will appear from a statement of the last effort of his enemie.s, the most formidable of whom were the directors of the building. Their object was to make Nanni Biggio the chief architect, which they carefully concealed, and the bishop of Ferratino, who was a principal director, began the contrivance by recommending to Michel Angelo not to attend to the fatigue of his duty, owing to his advanced age, but to nominate whomever he chose to supply his place. By this contrivance Michel Angelo willingly yielded to so courteous a proposition, and appointed Daiiiello da Volterra. As soon as this was effected, it was made the basis of accusation against him, for incapacity, which left the directors the power of choosing a successor, and they immediately superseded da Volterra, by appointing Biggio in his stead. This was so palpable a trick, go untrue in principle, and so injurious in its tendency, that in justice to himself, he thought it necessary to represent it to the pope, at the same time requesting that it might be understood there was nothing he more solicited than his dismission. His holiness took up the discussion with interest, and begged he would not recede until he Vol. VII. X had made proper inquiry, and a day was immediately appointed for the directors to meet him. They only stated in general terms, that Michel Angelo was ruining the building, and that the measures they had taken were essentially necessar}*, but the pope previously sent Signor Gabrio Serbelloni to examine minutely into the affair, who was a man well qualified for that purpose. Upon this occasion he gave his testimony so circumstantially, that the whole scheme was shown in one view to originate in falsehood, and to have been fostered by malignity. Biggio was dismissed and reprimanded, and the directors apologized, acknowledging they had been misinformed, but Michel Angelo required no apology; all he desired was, that the pope should know the truth; and he would have now resigned, had not his holiness prevailed upon him to hold his situation, and made a new arrangement, that his designs might not only be strictly executed as long as he lived, but adhered to after his death.

, a Nonconformist clergyman, was the son of a schoolmaster at Watford, in Hertfordshire^ and educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge. He afterwards became a fellow of Emanuel college, and took his master’s degree. He obtained the living of SuttonColfield, in Warwickshire, in 1635, by the death of the rev. John Burgess, but no relation. He was afterwards one of the assembly of divines, and although inclined to conformity before the rebellion, acquired such opinions on the subject as induced him to submit to ejectment aftet the restoration. Dr. Racket, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, who had a high opinion of his learning, and said he was fit for a professor’s chair in the university, endeavoured by every argument to retain him in the church, but in vain, although Mr. Burgess went to the parish church of Tamworth, where he spent the remainder of his days, and lived in cordiality with the incumbent. At what time he died, is not mentioned. The celebrated Dr. John Wallis was his pupil, and says he was “a pious, learned, and able scholar, a good disputant, a good tutor, an eminent preacher, and a sound and orthodox divine.” (See Hearne’s Langtoft, publisher’s appendix to his preface, p. cxlviii). His principal works are: 1. “Spiritual Refinings; or a Treatise of Grace and Assurance,” 1658, foJ. 2. Sermons on John xvii.“fol. 1656. 3.” The Doctrine of Original Sin,“1659, fol. 4.” Commentary on the 1. and 2. of Corinthians," 1661, 2 vols. fol. with some smaller tracts, and several sermons before the long parliament.

Mr. Burgh being of a sociable disposition, and not meeting, at Marlow, with company which was suited to his liberal taste, he quitted that place, and engaged himself as art assistant to Mr. Kenross at Enfield. Here he remained only one year; for, at the end of that term, Mr. Kenross very generously told him, that he ought no longer to lose his time, by continuing in the capacity of an assistant; that it would be adviseable for him to open a boardingschool for himself; and that, if he stood in need of it, he would assist him with money for that purpose. Accordingly, in 1747, Mr. Burgh commenced master of an academy at Stoke Newington, in Middlesex; and in that year he wrote “Thoughts on Education.” The next production of his pen was “An hymn to the Creator of the world,” to which was added in prose, “An Idea of the Creator, from his works.” A second edition, in 8vo, was printed in 1750. After Mr. Burgh had continued at Stoke Newington three years, his house not being large enough to contain the number of scholars that were offered to him, he removed to a more commodious one at Newingtongreen, where, for nineteen years, he carried on his school with great reputation and success. Few masters, we believe, ever existed, who have been animated with a more ardent solicitude for forming the morals as well as the understandings of their scholars. In 1751, Mr. Burgh married Mrs. Harding, a widow lady, and a woman of excellent sense and character, who zealously concurred with him in promoting all his laudable and useful undertakings. In the same year, at the request of Dr. Stephen Hales, and Dr. Hayter, bishop of Norwich, he published a small piece, in 12mo, entitled “A Warning to Dram Drinkers.” Our author’s next publication was his great work, entitled “The Dignity of Human Nature; or, a brief account of the certain and established means for attaining the true end of our existence.” This treatise appeared in 1754, in one volume quarto, and has since been reprinted in two volumes octavo. It is divided into four books, in which the author treats distinctly concerning prudence, knowledge, virtue, and revealed religion; and makes a great number of important observations under each of these heads. In 1762 Mr. Burgh published, in octavo, “The Art of Speaking;” consisting, first, of an essay, in which are given rules for expressing properly the principal passions and humours that occur in reading, or in public elocution; and secondly, of lessons taken from the ancients and moderns, exhibiting a variety of matter for practice. The essay is chiefly compiled from Cicero, Quintilian, and other rhetorical writers. In the lessons, the emphatical words are printed in Italics, and marginal notes are added to shew the various passions, in the several examples, a they change from one to another. It is evident, from an inspection of this work, that it must have cost our author no small degree of labour. It has gone through three editions, and was much used as a school-book. The late sir Francis Blake Delaval, who had studied the subject of elocution, and who had distinguished himself in the private acting of several plays in conjunction with some other persons of fashion, had so high an opinion of Mr. Burgh’s performance, that he solicited on that account an interview with him. Our author’s next appearance in the literary world was in 1766, in the publication of the first volume, in 12mo, of “Crito, or Essays on various subjects.” To this volume is prefixed a dedication, not destitute of humour, “To the right rev. father (of three years old) his royal highness Frederic bishop of Osnaburgh.” The essays are three in number: the first is of a political nature; the second is on the difficulty and importance of education, and contains many pertinent remarks, tending to shewthat Mons. Rousseau’s proposals on this head are improper, ineffectual, or impracticable; and the third is upon the origin of evil. In this essay Mr. Burgh has collected together and arranged, though with but little regard to order, the sentiments of many writers, both ancient and modern, on the subject, and endeavoured to shew the inconsistency of their reasonings. His own opinion is, that the natural and moral evil which prevails in the world, is the effect of the hostility of powerful, malignant, spiritual beings; and that Christianity is the deliverance of the human species from this peculiar and adventitious distress, as an enslaved nation is by a patriotic hero delivered from tyranny. In 1767 came out the second volume of “Crito,” with a long dedication (which is replete with shrewd and satirical observations, chiefly of a political kind) to the good people of Britain of the twentieth century. The rest of the volume contains another “Essay on the Origin of Evil,” and the rationale of Christianity, and a postscript, consisting of farther explanations of the subjects before considered, and of detached remarks on various matters. If our author has not succeeded in removing the difficulties which relate to the introduction of evil into the world, and to the ceconomy of the gospel, it may be urged in his favour, that he is in the same case with many other ingenious philosophers and divines.