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

After the restoration, and the marriage of king Charles II. queen Catharine appointed our author, who was then become one of the mission in England, her chaplain, and from that time he resided in Somerset-house, in the Strand. The great regularity of his life, his sincere and unaffected piety, his modest and mild behaviour, his respectful deportment to persons of distinction, with whom he was formerly acquainted when a protestant, and the care he took to avoid all concern in political affairs or intrigues of state, preserved him in quiet and safety, even in the most troublesome times- He was, however, a very zealous champion in the cause of the church of Rome, and was continually writing in defence of her doctrines, or in answer to the books of controversy written by protestants of distinguished learning or figure; and as this engaged him in a variety of disputes, he had the good fortune to acquire great reputation with both parties, the papists looking upon him to be one of their ablest advocates, and the protestants allowing that he was a grave, a sensible, and a candid writer. Among the works he published after his return to England, were: 1. “A non est inventus returned to Mr. Edward Bagshaw’s enquiry and vainly boasted discovery of weakness in the Grounds of the Church’s Infallibility,” 1662, 8vo. 2. “A Letter to an English gentleman, dated July 6th, 1662, wherein bishop Morley is concerned, printed amongst some of the treatises of that reverend prelate,” 3. “Roman Catholic Doctrines no Novelties; or, an answer to Dr. Pierce’s court-sermon, miscalled The primitive rule of Reformation,” 1663, 8vo; answered by Dr. Daniel Whitby. But that which contributed to make him most known, was his large and copious ecclesiastical history, entitled “The Church History of Britanny,” Roan, 1668, fol. which was indeed a work of great pains and labour, and executed with much accuracy and diligence. He had observed that nothing made a greater impression upon the people in general of his communion, than the reputation of the great antiquity of their church, and the fame of the old saints of both sexes, that had flourished in this island; and therefore he judged that nothing could be more serviceable in promoting what he styled the catholic interest, than to write such a history as might set these points in the fairest and fullest light possible. He had before him the example of a famous Jesuit, Michael Alford, alias Griffith, who had adjusted the same history under the years in which the principal events happened, in four large volumes, collected from our ancient historians; but, as this was written in Latin, he judged that it was less suited to the wants of common readers, and therefore he translated what suited his purpose into English, with such helps and improvements as he thought necessary. His history was very much approved by the most learned of his countrymen of the same religion, as appears by the testimonies prefixed to it. Much indeed may be said in favour of the order, regularity, and coherence of the facts, and the care and punctuality shewn in citing his authorities. On the other hand, he has too frequently adopted the superstitious notions of many of our old writers; transcribing from them such fabulous passages as have been long ago exploded by the inquisitive and impartial critics of his own faith. The book, however, long maintained its credit among the Romanists, as a most authentic ecclesiastical chronicle, and is frequently cited by their most considerable authors. He proposed to have published another volume of this history, which was to have carried it as low as the dissolution of monasteries by king Henry VIII. but he died before he had proceeded full three hundred years lower than the Norman conquest. Dodd, however, informs us that a considerable part of the second volume was preserved in ms. in the Benedictine monastery at Douay, and that it was never published “upon account of some nice controversies between the see of Rome, and some of our English kings, which might give offence.” While engaged on this work, he found leisure to interfere in all the controversies of the times, as will presently be noticed. His last dispute was in reference to a book written by the learned Dr. Stillingfleet, afterwards bishop of Worcester, to which, though several answers were given by the ablest of the popish writers, there was none that seemed to merit reply, excepting that penned by father Cressey, and this procured him the honour of a very illustrious antagonist, his old friend and acquaintance at Oxford, Edward earl of Clarendon. Being now grown far in years, and having no very promising scene before his eyes, from the warm spirit that appeared against popery amongst all ranks of people, and the many excellent books written to confute it by the most learned of the clergy, he was the more willing to seek for peace in the silence of a country retirement; and accordingly withdrew for some time to the house of Richard Caryll, esq. a gentleman of an ancient family and affluent fortune, at East Grinstead, co. Sussex, and dying upon the 10th of August 1674, being then near the seventieth year of his age, was buried in the parish church there. His loss was much regretted by those of his communion, as being one of their ablest champions, ready to draw his pen in their defence on every occasion, and sure of having his pieces read with singular favour and attention. His memory also was revered by the protestants, as well on account of the purity of his manners, and his mild and humble deportment, as for the plainness, candour, and decency with which he had managed all the controversies that he had been engaged in, and which had procured him, in return, much more of kindness and respect, than almost any other of his party had met with, or indeed deserved. It is very remarkable, however, that he thought it necessary to apologize to his popish readers for the respectful mention he made of the prelates of our church. Why this should require an apology, we shall not Inquire, but that his candour and politeness deserve the highest commendation will appear from what he says of archbishop Usher: “As for B. Usher, his admirable abilities in ‘chronological and historical erudition,’ as also his faithfulness and ingenuous sincerity in delivering without any provoking reflection*, what with great labour he has observed, ought certainly at least to exempt him from being treated by any one rudely and contemptuously, especially by me, who am moreover always obliged to preserve a just remembrance of very many kind effects of friendship, which I received from, him.” We have already taken notice of his inclination to the mystic divinity, which led him to take so much pains about the works of father Baker, and from the same disposition he also published “Sixteen revelations of divine love, shewed to a devout servant of our Lord, called mother Juliana, an anchorete of Norwich, who lived in the days of king Edward Hi.” He left also in ms. “An Abridgment of the book called The cloud of unknowing, and of the counsel referring to the same.” His next performance, was in answer to a famous treatise, written by Dr. Stillingfleet, against the church of Rome, which made a very great noise in those days, and put for some time a stop to the encroachments their missionaries were daily making, which highly provoked those of the Roman communion. This was entitled “Answer to part of Dr. Stillingfleet’s book, entitled Idolatry practised in the church of Rome,” 1672, 8vo, and was followed by “Fanaticism fanatically imputed to the Catholic Church by Dr. Stillingfleet, and the imputation refuted and retorted,” &c. 1672, 8vo, and “Question, Why are you a Catholic? Question, Why are you a Protestant?” 1673, 8vo. In support of Dr. Stillingfleet, the earl of Clarendon wrote “Animadversions” upon our author’s answer; in which he very plainly tells him and the world, that it was not devotion, but necessity and want of a subsistence, which drove him first out of the church of England, and then into a monastery. As this noble peer knew him well at Oxford, it may be very easily imagined that what he said made a very strong impression, and it was to efface this, that our author thought tit to send abroad an answer under the title of “Epistle apologetical to a person of honour, touching his vindication of Dr. Stillingfleet,' 1 1674, 8vo. In this work he gives a large relation of the state and condition of his affairs, at the time of what he styles his conversion, in order to remove the imputation of quitting his faith to obtain bread. The last work that he published was entitled” Remarks upon the Oath of Supremacy."

, bishop of Durham, the fifth sen of John lord Crewe, of Stean, co. Northampton, by Jemima, daughter and coheir of Edward Walgrave, of Lawford, in Essex, esq. was born at Stean, the 3 1st of January, 1633; and in 1652 admitted commoner of Lincoln college, in Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. Feb. 1, 1655-6; soon after which he was chosen fellow of that college. On June 29th, 1658, he took the degree of M. A. At the restoration he declared heartily in favour of the crown and hierarchy; and in 1663 was one of the proctors of the university. The year following, on the 2d of July, he took the degree of LL. D.; and soon after went into holy orders. August the 12th, 1668, he was elected rector of Lincoln -college, upon the decease of Dr. Paul Hood. On the 29th of April, 1669, he was installed dean of Chichester, and held with that dignity, the praecentorship, in which he had been installed the day before. He was also appointed clerk of the closet to king Charles II. In 1671, upon the translation of Dr. Blandford to the see of Worcester, he was elected hishop of Oxford in his room, on the 16th of June, confirmed June the ISth, consecrated July the 2d, and enthroned the 5th of the same month; being allowed to hold with it, in commendam, the living of Whitney, and the rectorship of Lincoln college, which last he resigned in October 1672. In 1673 he performed the ceremony of the marriage of James duke of York with Maria of Este; and through that prince’s interest, to whom he appears to have been subservient, he was translated, the 22d of October, 1674, to the bishopric of Durham. In the beginning of J6.75, he baptized Katharina- Laura, the new-born daughter of James duke of York. The 26th of April, 1676, he was sworn of the privy council to king Charles II. and upon the accession of king James II. to the crown, he was in great favour with that prince; he was made dean of his majesty’s royal chapel in 1685, in the room of Compton, bishop of London, who had been removed; and within a few days after, was admitted into the privy council. In 1686 he was appointed one of the commissioners in the new ecclesiastical commission erected by king James, an honoqr which he is said to have valued beyond its worth. By virtue of that commission, he appeared on the 9th of August, at the proceedings against Henry bishop of London, and was for suspending him during the king’s pleasure; though the earl and bishop of Rochester, and chief justice Herbert, were against it. Immediately after that bishop’s suspension, commissioners were appointed to exercise all manner of ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the diocese of London, of which bishop Crewe was one. The 20th of November following, he was present at, and consenting to, the degradation of Mr. Samuel Johnson, previously to the most severe punishment that was inflicted on that eminent divine; and countenanced with his presence a prosecution carried on, in May 1687, against Dr. Peachy, vice-chancellor of Cambridge, for refusing to admit one Alban Francis, a Benedictine monk, to the degree of master of arts in that university, without taking the oaths. In July the same year, he offered to attend the pope’s nuncio at his public entry into London; but we are told his coachman refused to "drive lijm that way. His name was put again in a new ecclesiastical commission issued out this year, in October; in which he acted, during the severe proceedings against Magdalen college in Oxford, for refusing to elect one Anthony Farmer their president, pursuant to the king’s mandate. The bishop continued acting as an ecclesiastical commissioner till October 1688; when that commission was abolished. Towards the end of the year 1687, he was employed, with the bishops of Rochester and Peterborough, to draw up a form of thanksgiving for the queen’s being with child. But finding that the prince of Orange’s party was likely to' prevail, he absented himself from the council-board, and told the archbishop of Canterbury, that he was sorry for having so long concurred with the courtand desired now to be reconciled to his grace, and the other bishops. Even in the convention that met January 22, 1688-9, to consider of filling the throne, he was one of those who voted, on the 6th of February, that king James II. had abdicated the kingdom. Yet his past conduct was too recent to be forgotten, and therefore he was excepted by name out of the pardon granted by king William and queen Mary, May 23, 1690, which so terrified him, that he went over to Holland, and returned just in time to take the oaths to the new government, and preserved his bishopric. But, in order to secure to himself the possession of that dignity, he was forced to permit the crown to dispose of, or at least to nominate to, his prebends of Durham, as they should become vacant. By the death of his two elder brothers, he became in 1691, baron Crewe of Stean; and, about the 21st of December the same year, he married, but left no issue. During the rest of king William’s reign, he remained quiet and unmolested; and in the year 1710, he was one of the lords that opposed the prosecution then carried on against Dr. Sacheverell, and declared him not guilty; and likewise protested against several steps taken in that affair. He applied himself chiefly, in the latter part of his life, to works of munificence and charity. Particularly, he was a very great benefactor to Lincoln college, of which he had been fellow and rector; and laid out large sums in beautifying the bishop’s palace at Durham; besides many other instances of generosity and munificence of a more private nature. At length, his lordship departed this life on Monday September 18, 1721, aged eighty-eight; and was buried in his chapel at Stean, the 30th of the same month, with an inscription on his monument. He held the see of Durham forty-seven years. Dying without issue, the title of Baron Crewe of Stean became extinct with him.

The next account we have of Crichton, and which appears to have been transmitted, through sir Thomas Urquharr, to later biographers, is of an extraordinary instance of bodily courage and skill. It is said, that at Mantua there was at this time a gladiator, who had foiled, in his travels, the most famous fencers in Europe, and had lately killed three persons who had entered the lists with him. The duke of Mantua was much grieved at having granted this man his protection, as he found it to be attended with such fatal consequences. Crichton, being informed of his highness’s concern, offered his service, not only to drive the murderer from Mantua, but from Italy, and to fight him for fifteen hundred pistoles. Though the duke was unwilling to expose such an accomplished gentleman to so great a hazard, yet, relying upon the report he had heard of his warlike achievements, he agreed to the proposal; and, the time and place being appointed, the whole court attended to behold the performance. At the beginning of the combat, Crichton stood only on his defence; while the Italian made his attack with such eagerness and fury, that, having over-acted himself, he began to grow weary. Our young Scotchman now seized the opportunity of attacking his antagonist in return; which he did with so much dexterity and vigour, that he ran him through the body in three different places, of which wounds he immediately died. The acclamations of the spectators were loud and extraordinary upon this occasion; and it was acknowledged by all of them, that they had never seen art grace nature, or nature second the precepts of art, in so lively a manner as they had beheld these two things accomplished on that day. To crown the glory of the action, Crichton bestowed the prize of his victory upon the widows of the three persons who had lost their lives in fighting with the gladiator. It is asserted, that, in consequence of this, and his other wonderful performances, the duke of Mantua made choice of him for preceptor to his son Vincentio di Gonzaga, who is represented as being of a riotous temper and a dissolute life. The appointment was highly pleasing to the court. Crichton, to testify his gratitude to his friends and benefactors, and to contribute to their diversion, framed, we are told, a comedy, wherein he exposed and ridiculed all the weaknesses and failures of the several employments in which men are engaged. This composition was regarded as one of the most ingenious satires that was ever made upon mankind. But the most astonishing part of the story is, that Crichton sustained fifteen characters in the representation of his own play. Among the rest, he acted the divine, the philosopher, the lawyer, the mathematician, the physician, and the soldier, with such inimitable grace, that every time he appeared upon the stage he seemed to be a different person . From being the principal actor in a comedy, Crichton soon became the subject of a dreadful tragedy. One night, during the time of carnival, as he was walking along the streets of Mantua, and playing upon his guitar, he was attacked by half a dozen people in masks. The assailants found that they had no ordinary person to deal with; for they were not able to maintain their ground against him. In the issue, the leader of the company, being disarmed, pulled off his mask, and begged his life, telling him that he was the prince his pupil. Crichton immediately fell on his knees, and expressed his concern for his mistake; alleging, that what he had done was only in his own defence, and that if Gonzaga had any design upon his life he might always be master of it. Then, taking his own sword by the point, he presented it to the prince, who immediately received it, and was so irritated by the affront which he thought he had sustained in being foiled with all "his attendants, that he instantly ran Crichton through the heart. Various have been the conjectures concerning the motives which could induce Vincentio di Gonzaga to be guilty of so ungenerous and brutal an action. Some have ascribed it to jealousy, asserting that he suspected Crichton to be more in favour than himself with a lady whom he passionately loved; and sir Thomas Urqnhart has told a story upon this head which is extravagant and ridiculous in the highest degree. Others, with greater probability, represent the whole transaction as the result of a drunken frolic; and it is uncertain, according to Imperiaiis, whether the meeting of the prince and Crichton was by accident or design. However, it is agreed on all hands, that Crichton lost his life in this rencontre. The time of his decease is said, by the generality of his biographers, to have been in the beginning-of July 1583; but lord Buchan, most likely in consequence of a more accurate immiry, fixes it to the same month in the preceding year. There is a difference likewise with regard to the period of life at which Crichton died. The common accounts declare that he was killed in the thirty-second year of his age; but Imperialis asserts that he was only in his twenty-second when that calamitous event took place; and this fact is confirmed by lord Buchan. Criehton’s tragical end excited a very great and general lamentation. If the foolish ravings of sir Thomas Urquhart are to be credited, the whole court of Mantua went three quarters of a year into mourning for him; the epitaphs and elegies that were composed upon his death, and stuck upon his hearse, would exceed, if collected, the bulk of Homer’s works; and, for a long time afterwards, his picture was to be seen in most of the bed-chambers and galleries of the Italian nobility, representing him on horseback, with a lance in one hand and a book in the other. From all this wonderful account we can only infer, with any degree of confidence, that Crichton was a youth of such lively parts as excited great present admiration, and high expectations with regard to his future attainments. He appears to have had a fine person, to have been adroit in his bodily exercises, to have possessed a peculiar facility in learning languages, to have enjoyed a remarkably quick and retentive memory, and to have excelled in a power of declamation, a fluency of speech, and a readiness of reply. His knowledge likewise was probably very uncommon for his years; and this, in conjunction with his other qualities, enabled him to shine in public disputation. But whether his knowledge were accurate or profound, may justly be questioned; and it may equally be doubted whether he would have arisen to any extraordinary degree of eminence in the literary world, which, however, his early and untimely death prevented from being brought to the test of experiment.

, a divine and physician, was born June 11, 1600, at Trapani, a town in Sicily, and received the early part of his medical education under his father, whom he succeeded in his practice, and became one of the most popular physicians of his time. Some years before his death, which happened in 1683, he united the office of priest to that of physician, and retired altogether from business. Among his publications are: “In lethargum febri supervenientem acutæ, Commentarii duo,” Panorini, 1668, 4to, and “De sputo sanguinis a partibus corporis infirmis, supervenientis cum Tussi, &c.” 1682, 4to, the practice recommended in which has been very little altered since his time. He wrote also a treatise on the cure of infectious fever by venisection and cathartics, the mode now recommended in the yellow fever, and another on the most celebrated mineral waters of the island, with an examination of their constituent parts.

, an Italian divine and poet, of the sixteenth century, was born at Gallipoli, in the kingdom of Naples. Having entered into the church, his merit procured him the friendship of many of the most learned men of his time, and particularly of the cardinal Jerome Seripando, to whom he was for some time secretary; and he was also in great request as a teacher of jurisprudence, philosophy, and theology. He died about 1595, at the time when pope Clement VIII. intended to have promoted him to a bishopric. His principal work is a piece of criticism, much admired in his time, “De ethnicis philosophis caute legendis,” Rome, 1594, folio. Crispus’s other works are two orations concerning the war against the Turks, printed at Rome in 1594, 4to. “De JMedici Laudibus, Oratio ad cives suos Gallipolitanos,” Home, 1591, 4to. The “Life of Sannazarius,” Rome, 1583, reprinted at Naples in 1633, 8vo. A draught or map of the city of Gallipoli, dedicated to Flaminio Caraccioli January the 1st, 1591. Some of his Italian poems are in a collection published by Scipio de Monti, under the title “Le Rime,” &c. 1585, 4to.

, a protestant divine, and author of a “History of the Quakers,” was born at Amsterdam April 27, 1642. He was partly educated there, but principally at Leyden, where he studied polite literature under Gronovius and Hornius, and divinity under Cocceius and Hoornbek. He then accompanied the son of admiral de Ruyter to Smyrna, and on his return came to England, and had some intention of residing at Norwich, but preferring his own country, he was appointed chaplain to the garrison of Ypres, and pastor of the church of Alblas near Dort, where he died May 10, 1710. His principal work was his “History of the Quakers,” entitled “Historia Quakeriana,” Amst. 1695, 8vo, and translated into English 1696. It does not appear that this history gave much satisfaction to the sect, and it is certainly very inferior to that of Sewell, who furnished him with some materials, of which, according to Sewell, he did not make a judicious use. It was also answered by a quaker at Amsterdam, in a work entitled “DiluciJationes quasdam valde neces$ariae in Gerardi Croesii Hist.” 1696, 8vo. Croese’s other publication, a singular mixture of misapplied learning and fanciful criticism, is entitled “Homerus Hebraeus, sive Historia Hebraeorum ab Homero, Hebraicis hominibus ac sententiis conscripta, in Odyssea et Iliade, exposita et illustrata,” Dort, 1704. Perizonius, and after him Saxms, conceives that nothing can be imagined more foolish than this book, in which probably our readers will agree, when they are told that his object is to prove that the Odyssey contains the history of the Jews in the patriarchal ages, and the Iliad is an account of the siege and capture of Jericho. Croese left also some dissertations.

In the mean time, he was not so intent upon his private concerns in his diocese, but that he shewed himself ready to serve the public as often as he thought it in his power. Accordingly, in 1675, when the quarrel with the non-conformists was at its height, and the breach so artfully widened that the Roman catholics entertained hopes of entering through it, he published a piece, entitled, “The Naked Truth; or, the true state of the primitive church,” 4to, which was printed at a private press, and addressed to the lords and commons assembled in parliament. This, though no more than a small pamphlet of four or five sheets, excited an uncommon degree of attention, and was read and studied by all people of sense and learning in the kingdom. The author’s design was to recommend to the legislature measures for reconciling the differences among protestants, and for securing the church against the attempts of papists. He begins with articles of faith; and having shewn the danger of imposing more than are necessary, especially as terms of communion, he proceeds next through all the great points in dispute between the church of England and those that dissent from her: labouring to prove throughout, that protestants differ about nothing that can truly be styled essential to religion; and that, for the sake of union, compliances would be more becoming, as well as more effectual, than enforcing uniformity by penalties and persecution. 7'he whole is written with the best intentions, and with great force of argument: nevertheless it was attacked with great zeal by some of the clergy, particularly by Dr. Turner, master of St. John’s college in Cambridge, in his Animadversions on a pamphlet called “The Naked Truth;” 1676, 4to. This was answered by Andrew Marvell, in a piece, entitled, “Mr. Smirke, or the Divine in Mode;” in which after descending, as the title shows, to personal ridicule, he says, that bishop Croft’s work is a treatise, which, “if not for its opposer, needs no commendation, being writ with that evidence and demonstration of truth, that all sober men cannot but give their assent and consent to it unasked. It is a book of that kind, that no Christian can scarce peruse it, without wishing himself to have been the author, and almost imagining that he is so: the conceptions therein being of so eternal idea, that every man finds it to be but a copy of the original in his own mind.” Many other pamphlets were written against “The Naked Truth;” but the author did not vouchsafe them any reply, and it continued for a considerable time to be read and reprinted.

, a musician, was born at NetherEatington in Warwickshire, about 1657. He was educated in the royal chapel under Dr. Blow, and became organist at St. Anne’s, Westminster. In 1700 he was admitted a gentleman-extraordinary of the chapel royal, and in 1704organist of the same. In 1708 he succeeded Dr. Blow as master of the children, and composer to the chapel royal, and also as organist at Westminster-abbey. In 1712 he published, but without his name, “Divine Harmony, or a new collection of select anthems;” to which is prefixed, “A brief account of Church Music.” In 1715 he was created doctor in music at Oxford: his exercise for that degree was an English and also a Latin ode, written by Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Joseph Trapp, which, with the music, were published with the title of “Musicus apparatus Academicus.” In 1724 he published by subscription a noble work of his own, entitled “Musica Sacra, or Select Anthems in score,” in 2 vols, the first containing the burial service, which Purcell had begun, but lived not to complete. He died Aug. 1727, of an illness occasioned by attending upon his duty at the coronation of George II; and there is a monument erected for him in Westminsterabbey, by his friend Humphrey Wyrley Birch, esq. a gentleman of the bar, of a whimsical character, and extremely fond of funeral music. The character of Croft’s musical compositions is given in our authorities.

, a non-conformist divine, of the family of sir Edward Crofton, was born in Ireland, and for the most part had his education in Dublin. When the Irish troubles broke out, he came over to England; and having but one groat in his pocket, he spent it the first night at his quarters. His first living in the church was at Wrenbury in Cheshire, from whence he was expelled for refusing to take the engagement, 1648. He then came to London, and after being for some time minister at St. James’s Garlike-hithe, obtained the living of St. Botolph’s near Aldgate, where he continued until the restoration, when he was ejected for non-conformity. Not long after he entered into a controversy with bishop Gauden concerning the solemn league and covenant, for his defence of which he was imprisoned in the Tower, until he was obliged to petition for his liberty. He afterwards went into Cheshire, where he was again imprisoned; but obtaining his liberty, took a small farm, or as Calamy says, kept a grocer’s shop, for the support of his family. In 1667 he returned to London, and taught a school near Aldgate, where he died about 1672. He published a great number of controversial pamphlets, and some sermons, few of which have outlived their day. He was a man of learning, and acuteness in controversy; but, Calamy allows, of a warm and hasty temper.

In the beginning of 1658 he pleased himself with the hopes of being once at the head of an assembly somewhat resembling the ancient parliaments of England; and, pursuant to their own adjournment, the commons met Jan. 20, as the other house also did, agreeably to the writs of summons issued by the lord protector. He sent for them by the black rod, and began his speech with the pompous words, “My lords, and you the knights, citizens, and burgesses of the house of commons, &.c.” All this only served to shew that his administration was founded in military force, and nothing else: for the ancient nobility would not resume their seats in such company as he had assigned them; and the house of commons would have nothing to do with the new nobles in the other house; and the new nobles could do nothing by themselves. Thus in less than a fortnight the new system was in a fair way of being pulled to pieces, which obliged the protector to come, Feb. 4th, and to dissolve them with great bitterness of speech and sorrow of heart: for now he plainly saw that a regular establishment was a thing impracticable. Some farther designs against him were soon after discovered, not of the cavaliers only, but of the fifth-monarchy men also. With the latter he was obliged to observe some measures; the former he delivered over to a high court of justice. By the sentence of that court, Dr. Hewett, a divine of the church of England, suffered death for contumacy, June 8, 1658; having refused to plead, or to own the jurisdiction of the court. Aug. 6, the protector’s favourite daughter Elizabeth, wife of John Claypole, esq. of Narborough in Northamptonshire, died, which affected him greatly on more accounts than one. For her illness being very painful, distempered her mind not a little; and in her deliriums she exclaimed vehemently against him for his cruelties, and especially for the death of Dr. Hewett, on whose behalf she had made the most importunate intercessions. He is said to have been from that time wholly altered, and daily more reserved and suspicious: and indeed not without reason; for he found a general discontent prevailed through the nation, a signal disaffection in the army, and a great increase of the influence of the republicans, to whom some of his relations, and even his wife, inclined: so that he knew not which way to turn, or what to expect. These cares having long tormented his mind, at last affected his body; so that while at Hampton-court, he fell into a kind of slow fever, which soon degenerated into a tertian ague. For a week this disorder continued without any dangerous symptoms, insomuch that every other day he walked abroad; but one day after dinner his five physicians coming to wait upon him, one of them having felt his pulse, said that it intermitted. At this being somewhat surprised, he turned pale, fell into a cold sweat, and when he was almost fainting, ordered himself to be carried to bed; where, by the assistance of cordials, being brought a little to himself, he made his will with respect to his private affairs.

, a Franciscan friar and popish missionary in England, was chaplain to king James II. and followed the abdicated monarch to St. Germain’s in 1688, where he died a few years after. H was esteemed to be a man of parts, and published: 1. “A Sermon before the king and queen at St. James’s palace,” 1686. 2. “Cynosura, or the Miserere psalm paraphrased,” thin folio. 3. “Divine Poems.” 4. “Philotheus’s Pilgrimage to perfection, in a practice of ten days solitude,” Bruges, 1668.

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

As a divine, Dr. Croxall seems entitled to little respect. He owed his preferments to his political services. He published, however, six single sermons, and while house chaplain to the palace at Hampton court, preached a sermon on a public occasion, in which, under the character of a corrupt and wicked minister of state, he was supposed to mean sir Robert Walpole, who had intercepted some ecclesiastical dignity which he wished to obtain. It was expected that for this offence he would have been removed from his chaplainship: but the court over-ruled it, as he had always manifesed himself to be a zealous friend to the Hanover succession. To the list of his poems may be added, an “Ode.” inscribed to king George the First, on his landing to receive the crown; and “Colin’s Mistakes,” formerly ascribed to Prior, but printed as Croxall’s in Mr. Nichols’s Collection. His having written the dedications to the “Select Novels,” printed for Watts in 1729, suggested to some bookseller to affix his name to a compilation called “The Tea-table Miscellany,” 1766.

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

Cudworth died at Cambridge, June 26, 1688, and was interred in the chapel of Christ’s college. He was a man of very extensive erudition, excellently skilled in the learned languages and antiquity, a good mathematician, a subtle philosopher, and a profound metaphysician. The main design of his celebrated work, “The Intellectual System,” is to refute the principles of atheism, and in this he has successfully employed a vast fund of learning and reading. But his partiality for the Platonic philosophy, in judging of which, after the example of his contemporaries, he paid too much respect to the writings of the modern Alexandrian Platonists, led him into frequent mistakes. In physics he adopted the atomic system; but, abandoning Democritus and Epicurus as the first patrons of impiety, he added to the doctrine of atoms that of a certain middle substance between matter and spirit, to which he gave the appellation of plastic nature, which he supposed to be the immediate instrument of the divine operation; and this hypothesis gave rise to the controversy above mentioned between Bayle and Le Clerc. Cudworth stands at the head of those divines who, considering the belief in a triune God as a fundamental article of Christian belief, maintain that both the Platonic, and all the other Pagan trinities are only corruptions and mutilations of certain primaeval revelations and patriarchal traditions relative to the asserted distinction in the divine nature; and he has very ably discussed this important subject in his Intellectual System. A great number of writers commend Cudworth’s piety and modesty; and Burnet having observed, that Dr. Henry More studied to consider religion as a seed of a deiform nature, and in order to this, set young students much on reading the ancient philosophers, chiefly Plato, Tully, and Plotinus, and on considering the Christian religion as a doctrine sent from God, both to elevate and sweeten human nature, tells us, that “Cudworth carried this on with a great strength of genius, and a vast compass of learning; and that he was a man of great conduct and prudence; upon which his enemies did very falsely accuse him of craft and dissimulation.” He left several manuscripts which seem to be a continuation of his “Intellectual System,” of which he had given the world only the first part. One of these was published by Chandler, bishop of Durham, 1731, in 8vo, under this title, “A Treatise concerning eternal and immutable Morality.” This piece was levelled against the writings of Hobbes and others, who revived the exploded opinions of Protagoras; taking away the essential and eternal differences of moral good and evil, of just and unjust, and making them all arbitrary productions of divine or human will. He left also several other Mss. with the following titles“: 1. A discourse of moral good and evil.” 2. Another book of morality, wherein Hobbes’s philosophy is explained. 3. A discourse of liberty and necessity, in which the grounds of the atheistical philosophy are confuted, and morality vindicated and explained. 4. Another book “De libero arbitrio.” 5. Upon Daniel’s prophecy of the 70 weeks, wherein all the interpretations of the Jews are considered and confuted, with several of some learned Christians. 6. Of the verity of the Christian religion, against the Jews. 7. A discourse of the creation of the world, and immortality of the soul. 8. Hebrew learning. 9. An explanation of Hobbes’s notion of God, and of the extension of spirits. The history of these Mss. is somewhat curious. Having been left to the care of his daughter, lady Masham , they for a long time quietly reposed in the library at Oates, in Essex. But, about the year 1762, when the late lord Masham married his second lady, his lordship thought proper to remove a number of volumes of ancient learning, which had been bequeathed to the family by Mr. Locke, and the manuscripts of Dr. Cudworih, to make room for books of polite amusement. For this purpose, he sold either the whole, or a considerable part of them, to Mr. Robert Davis, then a bookseller in Piccadilly. Mr. Davis being told, or having concluded, that the manuscripts were the productions of Mr. Locke, it became an object of consideration with him, how to convert them, as a tradesman, to the best advantage. They contained, among other things, sundry notes on scripture. About the same time, a number of manuscript scriptural notes by Dr. Waterland came into the possession of the booksellers. It was therefore projected, by the aid of such celebrated names as Mr. Locke and Dr. Waterland, to fabricate a new Bible with annotations. At a consultation, however, it was suggested, that, though these names were very important, it would be necessary, to the complete success of the design, to join with them some popular living character. The unfortunate Dr. Dodd was then in the height of his reputation as a preacher, and was fixed upon to carry on the undertaking. This was the origin of Dr. Dodd’s Bible, and part of the materials put into his hands the doctor made use of in the “Christian Magazine.” When the manuscripts were returned to Mr. Davis, he carried them down to Barnes in Surry, which was his country retirement, and threw them into a garret, where they lay exposed to the dangers of such a situation. About the beginning of the year 1777, a gentleman, who had a veneration for the name of Mr. Locke, and was concerned to hear that any of his writings were in danger of being lost, went to Barnes, to see these manuscript*; and being positively assured by Mr. Davis, that they were the real compositions of that eminent man, he immediately purchased them fur forty guineas. He was, however, soon, convinced, after an examination of them, that the authority of the bookseller was fallacious, and having remonstrated against the deception, the vender condescended to take them again, upon being paid ten guineas for his disappointment in the negociation. In the investigation of the manuscripts, the gentleman having discovered, by many incontestable proofs, that they were the writings of Dr. Cudworth, he recommended them to the curators of the British Museum, by whom they were purchased; and thus, at last, after many perils and mutilations, they are safely lodged in that noble repository.

That sir John Cullum was a profound antiquary, a good natural historian, and an elegant scholar, the “History of Hawsted” sufficiently evinces. That he most punctually and conscientiously discharged the proper duties of his profession as a divine, has been testified by the grateful recollection of his parishioners. His discourses in the pulpit were plain, unaffected, and rarely in any degree controversial; adapted to the village congregation which he gladdened by residing very near them. His attention to their truest interest was unremitted, and his example their best guide. His friendships in private life were amiable; and in his general commerce with the world, the uniform placidity of his manners, and his extensive literary acquirements, secured to him universal esteem. He was among the most valued correspondents of Mr. Gough, who sincerely lamented his loss. A specimen of his familiar letters will be found in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1797, vol. LXVII. p. 995.

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

Mr. Cumberland now for the first time entered the lists of controversy, in a pamphlet entitled “A Letter to the right rev. the lord bishop of O d (Lowth) containing some animadversions upon a character given of the late Dr. Bentley, in a Letter from a late professor in the university of Oxford to the right rev. author of the Divine Legation,” &c. It passed through two editions. Dr. Lowth did not reply to this pamphlet nor did he accept the services of a clergyman of his diocese, who offered to undertake it; acknowledging that Cumberland had just reason for retaliation.

In the year 249, the emperor Decius began to issue out very severe edicts against the Christians, which particularly affected those living upon the coasts of Africa; and in the beginning of the year 250, the heathens, in the circus and amphitheatre at Carthage, loudly insisted upon Cyprian’s being thrown to the lions: a common method, as is well known, of destroying the primitive Christians. Cyprian upon this withdrew from his church at Carthage, and fled into retirement, to avoid the fury of the persecution; which step, how justifiable soever in itself, gave great scandal, and seems to have been considered by the clergy of Rome, in a public letter written upon the subject of it to the clergy of Carthage, as a desertion of his post and pastoral duty. It is no wonder, therefore, to find Cyprian himself, as well as his apologist, Pontius, the writer of his life, so solicitous to excuse it; which they both endeavour to do by affirming, in the true spirit of the times, “that he was commanded to retire by a special revelation from heaven; and that his flight was not the effect of any other fear but that of offending God.” It is remarkable, that this father was a great pretender to visions. For instance, in a letter to Caecilius, he declares, “that he had received a divine admonition, to mix water with wine in the sacrament of the eucharist, in order to render it effectual.” In another to the clergy, concerning certain priests, who had restored some lapsed Christians too hastily to the communion of the church, he threatens them to execute “what he was ordered to do against them, in a vision, if they did not desist.” He makes the same threat to one Pupianus, who had spoken ill of him, and withdrawn himself from his communion. In a letter likewise to the clergy and the people, he tells them, “how he had been admonished and directed by God to ordain one Numidicus a priest.” Dodwell, in his “Dissertationes Cyprianicae,” has made a large collection of these visions of Cyprian, which he treats with more reverence than they seem to deserve.

, a very learned Lutheran divine of the sixteenth century, of whose personal history little is known, deserves notice as thetranslator of Luther’s German Bible into the Sclavonian, which language being . spoken in Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola, the states of those countries came to a determination that this Bible should be printed for their use. They first employed John Manlius, a printer of Laybach, who was the first that printed the Sclavonic in Roman letters: but while Manlius was making his calculations of expence, &c. the archduke Charles of Austria forbad him to print it. This appears to have happened in 1580. The states, however, only changed their determination so far as to have it printed elsewhere, and sent Dalmatin for that purpose to Gratz, where he was to correct the press, after the copy had been carefully revised at Laybach by him, in conjunction with other eminent divines and Oriental scholars. But, finding that no impression of this Bible would be permitted in the Austrian dominions, the states sent, in April 1583, Dalmatin, and another divine, Adam Bohoritsch, to Wittemberg, with a recommendation to the elector of Saxony, and the work being begun in May 1583, was finished Jan. 1, 1584. They had agreed with Samuel Seelfisch, bookseller at Wittemberg, that he should print fifteen hundred copies, each to contain two hundred and eighty sheets of the largest paper, on a fine character, with wooden cuts; for which the states of Carniola were to pay after the rate of twenty florins for every bale of five hundred sheets. The expences of the impression of this Bible amounted to about eight thousand florins: towards which the states of Styria gave a thousand florins, those of Carirrthia nine hundred, and the evangelic states of Carniola six thousand one hundred. These particulars may not be unacceptable to typographical students, as it is but seldom we have access to the history of early printing. Of Dalmatin we are only told that he afterwards was put in possession of the cure of St. Khazaim, or St. Catiani, near Aurspergh, by Christopher, baron of Aurspergh, in 1585, who, when the popish party banished Dalmatin in 1598, kept him concealed in his house; and a vault under the stable before the castle used long to be shewn as the hole of the preacher."

He returned to Madras from this eastern voyage, Jan. 23, 1762. The company’s administration approved of his proceedings, and in March 1762, having resolved to send on the company’s account the cargo stipulated, employed him in expediting the provision of that cargo. His expences in the voyage of almost three years, amounted to 612l. which was repaid by the governor and council of Madras, but he neither asked or received any pecuniary advantage to himself. On the 10th of May, the London packet was destined for the Sooloo voyage, and Mr. Dalrymple was appointed captain. In the passage from Madras to Sooloo, he first visited Balambangan; and on his arrival at Sooloo, found the small-pox had swept off many of the principal inhabitants, and dispersed the rest; so that very ineffectual measures had been taken towards providing the intended cargo. But although this unexpected calamity, which in the Eastern Islands is similar in its effects to the plague, was a sufficient reason for the disappointment of the cargo, yet a still more efficient cause, was the death of Bandahara, soon after Mr. Dalrymple’s departure from Sooloo, the preceding year. A few days before the death of this good man, he sent for the linguist whom Mr. Dalrymple had employed, and who had remained behind at Sooloo, asking if he thought the English would certainly come again. The linguist declaring that it was not to be doubted; Bandahara thereupon expressed his concern, saying that it would have made him very happy to have lived to have seen this contract faithfully performed on their part, and the friendship with the English established on a firm footing. The linguist observed, that they were all equally bound. Banclahara replied, that although this was true, all had not the same disposition; and perhaps none else the power of enforcing the due execution of their engagements; but that he was resigned to the divine will.

, the seventh baron and first viscount Stair, was born in 1609, studied at the college of Glasgow, and passed all the regular degrees of learning in that university. On the commencement of the rebellion in the reign of Charles I. he accepted a captain’s commission from the parliament, in the earl of Glencain.'s regiment, but was soon called off to a more suitable province, that of filling a philosophy chair in the university of Glasgow. Having applied himself particularly to the study of the laws, he entered as an advocate in 1648, and became eminent for his judgment and skill, if not for his integrity. When the estates of the nation sent commissioners to Breda to invite Charles II. to Scotland, he was appointed secretary to the embassy, and acquitted himself entirely to his majesty’s satisfaction. He then resumed his practice at the bar, but could not be prevailed upon to take any oaths to the government during the usurpation. When Charles II. was restored to the throne, he conferred on Mr. Dalryrnple the honour of knighthood, appointed him a senator of the college of justice, and in 1671, lord president of the session, in which office his conduct was very unpopular; and in 1682, being dismissed from all his offices, he retired to Holland, where he became such a favourite with William prince of Orange, that when advanced to the throne of these kingdoms, his majesty restored him to his place of lord president, and raised him to the dignity of viscount Stair, lord Glenluce and Stranrawer. His lordship continued to enjoy his high legal office, and the favour of his prince, till his death, Nov. 25, 1695 4 His character as a politician has not been favourably drawn by some historians, particularly Mr. Laing, in. his lately -published “History of Scotland.” His personal character seems liable to less objection, and of his learning no doubt can be justly entertained. He wrote: 1. “The Institutions of the Law of Scotland,” second edit. fol. 1693. 2. “Decisions of the Court of Session from 1661 to 1681,'” 2 vols. fol. 3. “Philosophia nova experimentalis,” published in Holland during his exile, and much commended by Bayle in his Journal. 4. “A Vindication of the Divine Perfections, &c. by a Person of Honour,” 1695, 8vo. 5. “An Apology for his own Conduct,” 4to, the only copy of which extant is said to be in the advocates’ library at Edinburgh. Had lord Orford read much of his history, he needed not have added that “it is not known on what occasion-he published it.”

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

, a learned German divine of the Lutheran church, and whose talents contributed greatly to raise the reputation of the university of Jena, was born Feb. 1, 1654, at Sandhusen, a village near Gotha. He appears to have obtained the patronage of the duke Frederick, who defrayed the expence of his education, both at school, and at the university of Wittemberg, where he took his master’s degree in 1676. Having devoted much of his attention to the Hebrew language and antiquities, he went to Hamburgh, where he profited by the assistance of Esdras Edzardi and other learned Jews, and was enabled to read the rabbinical writings with facility. From Hamburgh he went to Leipsic, and thence to Jena, from which in 1683 he visited Holland and England, acquiring in both countries the acquaintance of men of learning. On his return, having determined to settle at Jena, he was appointed professor extraordinary of the oriental languages, and on the death of the learned Frischmuth, was advanced to be professorordinary. In these offices he acquired great reputation, and attracted a number of foreign students. Some time after, he was appointed professor of divinity, in which he was no less popular. He died of a stroke of apoplexy, Dec. 20, 1727. He wrote, among many other works, “Sinceritas sacrae Scripturae veteris testamenti triumphans, cujus prodromus Sinceritas Scriptuvae Vet. Test, prevalente Keri vacillans,” Jena, 1713, 4to; and various dissertations in Latin, in controversy with the Jews, or on topics of Jewish antiquities, particularly “Divina Elohim inter coaequales de primo homine condendo deliberatio,” 1712 “Inauguratio Christi haud obscurior Mosaica, decem dissert, asserta,” Jena, 1717, 4to and a very ingenious tract entitled “Davidis in Ammonitas devictos mitigata crudelitas,” 1713.

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

, a learned Englishman, was born at Coventry, in Warwickshire, about 1598, and educated in grammar-learning at a school in that city. He was sent to Merton-college in Oxford at fifteen years of age; where, spending two years, he, upon an invitation from some Romish priest, afterwards went to Doway. He remained there for some time; and then going to Ypres, he entered into the order of Franciscans among the Dutch there, in 1617. After several removals from place to place, he became a missionary into England, where he went by the name of Franciscus a Sancta Clara; and at length was made one of the chaplains to Henrietta Maria, the royal consort of Charles I. Here he exerted himself to promote the cause of popery, by gaining disciples, raising money among the English catholics to carry on public matters abroad, and by writing books for the advancement of his religion and order. He was very eminent for his uncommon learning, being excellently versed in school-divinity, in fathers and councils, in philosophers, and in ecclesiastical and profane histories. He was, Wood tells us, a person of very free discourse, while his fellowlabourer in the same vineyard, Hugh Cressey, was reserved; of a lively and quick aspect, while Cressey was clouded and melancholy: all which accomplishments made him agreeable to protestants as well as papists. Archbishop Laud, it seems, had some knowledge of this person; for, in the seventh article of his impeachment, it is said, that “the said archbishop, for the advancement of popery and superstition within this realm, hath wittingly and willingly received, harboured, and relieved divers popish priests and Jesuits, namely, one called Sancta Clara, alias Davenport, a dangerous person and Franciscan friar, who hath written a popish and seditious book, entitled, ‘ Dens, Natura, Gratia,’ &c. wherein the thirtynine articles of the church of England, established by act of parliament, are much traduced and scandalized: that the said archbishop had divers conferences with him, while he was writing the said book,” &c. To which article, the archbishop made this answer: “I never saw that Franciscan friar, Sancta Clara, in my life, to the utmost of my memory, above four times or five at most. He was first brought to me by Dr. Lindsell: but 1 did fear, that he would never expound the articles so, that the church of England might have cause to thank him for it. He never came to me after, till he was almost ready to print another book, to prove that episcopacy was authorised in the church by divine right; and this was after these unhappy stirs began. His desire was, to have this book printed here; but at his several addresses to me for this, I still gave him this answer: That I did not like the way which the church of Rome went concerning episcopacy; that I would never consent, that any such book from the pen of a Romanist should be printed here; that the bishops of England are very well able to defend their own cause and calling, without any help from Rome, and would do so when they saw cause: and this is all the conference I ever had with him.” Davenport at this time absconded, and spent most of those years of trouble in obscurity, sometimes beyond the seas, sometimes at London, sometimes in the country, and sometimes at Oxford. After the restoration of Charles II. when the marriage was celebrated between him and Catherine of Portugal, Sancta Clara became one of her chaplains; and was for the third time chosen provincial of his order for England, where he died May 31, 1680, and was buried in the church-yard belonging to the Savoy. It was his desire, many years before his death, to retire to Oxford to die, purposely that his bones might be laid in St. Ebb’s churcb, to which the mansion of the Franciscans or grey-friars sometime joined, and in which several of the brethren were anciently interred, particularly those of his old friend John Day, a learned friar of his order, who was there buried in 165;s. He was the author of several works: 1. “Paraphrastiea expositio articulorum confessionis Anglicae:” this book was, w r e know not why, much censured by the Jesuits, who would fain have had it burnt; but beino-soon after licensed at Rome, all farther rumour about it stopped. 2. “Deus, Natura, Gratia sive, tractatus de praedestinatione, de mentis,” &c. this book was dedicated to Charles I. and Prynne contends, that the whole scope of it, as well as the paraphrastical exposition of the articles, reprinted at the end of it in 1635, was to reconcile the king, the church, and the articles of our religion, to the church of Rome. He published also a great number of other works, which are not now of consequence enough to be mentioned.

, elder brother of Christopher just mentioned, was born at Coventry in 1597, and sent from thence with his brother to Merton-college in 1613; but while Christopher went to Doway, and became a catholic, John went to London, and became a puritan. He was minister of St. Stephen’s in Coleman-street, and esteemed by his brethren a person of excellent gifts in preaching, and in other qualities belonging to a divine. About 1630 he was appointed one of the feoffees for the buying in impropriations, which involved him in a dispute with archbishop Laud; but that project miscarrying, he left his pastoral charge about 1633, under pretence of opposition from the bishops, and went to Amsterdam. Here, endeavouring to be a minister in the English congregation, and to join with them in all duties, he was opposed by John Paget, an elder, on account of some difference between them about baptism; upon which he wrote, in his own defence, “A Letter to the Dutch Classis, containing a just complaint against an unjust doer; wherein is declared the miserable slavery and bondage that the English church at Amsterdam is now in, by reason of the tyrannical government and corrupt doctrine of Mr. John Paget, their minister,” Amst. 1634. Two or three more pieces relating to this controversy were published by him afterwards; and such were his parts and learning, that he drew away from them many of their congregation, to whom he preached and prayed in private houses.

His poetical works are numerous, but discover very little taste or talent: 1. “St. Peter’s Complaint, with other Poems,” Loud. 1595, 4to. 2. “Mirum in modo; a glimpse of God’s glory, and the soul’s shape,” ibid. 1602, and 1616, 8vo. 3. “Microcosmus, or the Discovery of the Little World,” Oxon. 1603, 4to. 4. “The Holy Rood of Christ’s Church,” Lond. 1609, 4to, with Sonnets. 5. “Humours Heaven and Earth, with the civil wars of Death and Fortune,” ibid. 1609, 8vo. 6. “Wit’s Pilgrimage,” Lond. 4to, no date. 7. “Muse’s Sacrifice, or Divine Meditations,” ibid. 1612, 12mo. 8. “The Muse’s Tears for the loss of their hope, the heroic and never too much praised Henry, prince of Wales,” ibid. 1613, 4to, &c. &c. &c. Four of these volumes are noticed in the Censura Literaria, one in Beloe’s Anecdotes, and one in the British Bibliographer, by Mr. Haslewood, whose character of Davis’s poetry may be adopted with confidence. “Davis’s poetical attempts are generally heavy, dull, obscure, and inharmonious and his pages are remarkable for inconsistency. One while he is pouring forth celestial rhapsodies, and then * with jerkes of wit (as he terms them) to whip every vice,' blundering on expressions too gross for pen or press, while the reader, who may have been edified by his morality, is left to fill up the blank of a disgusting parenthesis. His witticisms are often feeble puns, double entendres, and occasionally have their point depending on a fabricated name. Yet though the whole of his pieces now class as rare, from their number it seems presumable they were not ill received. To us moderns, however, there seldom appears poignancy in his wit, or nerve in his poetry.”

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

Montbar had given birth, about the same time, to the celebrated Buffon, a man of a very different character; who, though possessed of an independent fortune, a robust constitution, and actuated by a violent passion for pleasure, had determined to devote himself to the cultivation of the sciences; and of those, at length to give the preference to natural history, which he saw in its infancy and rude state, and very justly conceived that every thing must be collected, revised, and examined. Perceiving, however, that iiis ardent and lively imagination rendered him unequal to such laborious and difficult researches, and even that the weakness of his sight excluded the hope of succeeding in them, he endeavoured to discover a man, who, besiJes a sound judgment, and a certain quickness of perception, should possess sufficient modesty and devotedness to induce him to rest satisfied with acting, in appearance, a subordinate part, and to serve him, as it were, as a hand and an eye in the prosecution of his undertaking. Such a man he at last found in Daubenton, the companion of his early years. The character, however, of these two philosophers was almost opposite in every respect. Buffon was violent, impatient, rash: Daubenton was all gentleness, patience, and caution: Buffon wished to divine the truth rather than to discover it: Daubenton believed nothing which he had not himself seen and ascertained: Buffon suffered his imagination to lead him from nature; Daubenton, on the contrary, discarded from his writings every expression which was calculated to mislead. They were thus happily fitted to correct each other’s faults. Accordingly, the History of Quadrupeds, which appeared while they laboured together, is the most exempt from error of any of the divisions which constitute Buffon’s Natural History.

, a learned French protestant divine, was born about 1670, and came to England on the revocation of the edict of Nantz. Of his history we hare only a short memorandum in ms. by Mr. Whiston, who supposes that he died in 1740. He wrote “Pro Testinonio Josephi de Jesn Christo, contra Tan. Fubrum et alios,” Lond. 1700, 8vo; and a “Commentary on the Revelation of St. John,” 1712, folio. This was, in 1730, published by Peter Lancaster, vicar of Bowden in Cheshire, under the title of “A Perpetual Commentary, &c. newly modelled, abridged, and rendered plain to the meanest capacities.” Mr. Daubuz is here said to have been vicar of Brotherton in Cheshire. Mr. Whiston adds that he had a son, a clergyman, also beneficed in Yorkshire, near Ferrybridge, a studious man, who lived in obscurity, and died a bachelor about 1752.

, a learned English divine, was born in 1530, at Barton-Kirk in Westmoreland, and became a student in Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1597, and when B. A. was made tabarder, and in 1605, master of arts and fellow. At college he was of a retired studious disposition, and accounted an ornament to the society. Having taken orders, he was beneficed at Barton-kirk, and afterwards presented to a prebend of Carlisle. About the same time he received the degree of D. D. from the university of St. Andrew’s, and was promoted to the rectory of Ashby in Westmoreland. He was much esteemed for learning, and talents in preaching, of which he published a specimen in “Sermons preached upon several occasions,” London, 1653. He died in the month of February in the same year, and was buried in the chancel of Bartonkirk. His character was honoured by verses in Greek, Latin, and English, by Tully, Williamson, and Ellis, three scholars of Queen’s.

, a great mathematician, and greater enthusiast, the son of Rowland Dee, gentleman sewer to Henry VIII. and grandson of Bedo Dee, standard bearer to lord de Ferrars at the battle of Tournay, was born at London, July 13, 1527; and, after some time spent at school there, and at Chelmsford in Essex, sent to John’s college in Cambridge, where he informs us of his progress in the following words: “Anno 1542, I was sent, by my father Rowland Dee, to the university of Cambridge, there to begin with logic, and so to proceed in the learning of good arts and sciences; for I had before been meetly well furnished with understanding of the Latin tongue, I being then somewhat above 15 years old. In the years 1543, 1544, 1545, I was so vehemently bent to study, that for those years I did inviolably keep this order, only to sleep four hours every night; to allow to meat and drink, and some refreshing after, two hours every day; and of the other eighteen hours, all, except the time of going to, and being at, the divine service, was spent in my studies and learning.” In 1547 he went into the Low Countries, on. purpose to converse with Frisius, Mercator, &c. and other learned men, particularly mathematicians; and in about eight months alter returned to Cambridge, where, upon the founding of Trinity college by Henry VIII. he was chosen one of the fellows, but his bias was to the study of mathematics and astronomy. He brought over with him from the Low Countries several instruments “made by the direction of Frisius, together with a pair of large globes made by Mercator; and his reputation was very high. His assiduity, however, in making astronomical observations, which in those days were always understood to be connected with the desire of penetrating into futurity, brought some suspicion upon him; which was so far increased by a very singular accident that befel him, as to draw upon him the imputation of a necromancer, which he deserved afterwards rather mre than now. This affair happened soon after his removal from St. John’s-college, and being chosen one of the fellows of Trinity, where he” was assigned to he the under-reader of the Greek tongue, Mr. Pember being the chief Greek reader then in Trinity-college. Hereupon,“says he,” I did set forth, and it was seen of the university, a Greek comedy of Aristophanes, named in Greek Eijpwij in Latin, Pax; with the performance of the scarabaeus, or beetle, his flying up to Jupiter’s palace with a man and his basket of victuals on his back; whereat was great wondering, and many vain reports spread abroad of the means how that was effected."

Dr. Delany, on the 9tti of June 1743, married a second time. The lady with whom he formed this connexion was Mrs. Pendarves, the relict of Alexander Pen Janes, esq a very ingenious and excellent woman; of whom some account will be given in the next article. The doctor had lost his first wife December 6, 1741. March 13, 1744, our author preached a sermon before the society for promoting protestant working schools in Ireland. In May 1744, he was raised to the highest preferment which he ever attained, the deanry of Down, in the room of Dr. Thomas Fletcher, appointed to be bishop of Dro no re. In the same year, previously to this promotion, our author published a volume of sermons upon social duties, fifteen in number, to which in a second edition, 1747, were added five more, on the opposite vices. This is the most useful of Dr. Delany’s performances; the objects to which rt relates being of very important and general concern. Dr. Delany’s next publication was not till 174-8, and that was only a sixpenny pamphlet. It was entitled “An Essay towards evidencing the divine original of Tythes,” and had at first been drawn up, and probably preached as a sermon. The text, rather a singular one, was the tenth commandment, which forbids us to covet any thing that is our neighbour’s; and it required some ingenuity to deduce the divine original of tithes from that particular prohibition. After an interval of six years, Dr. Delany again appeared in the world as an author, in answer to the earl of Orrery’s “Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr. Swift.” Many of Su ill’s zealous admirers were not a little displeased with the representations which the noble lord had given of him in various respects. Of this number was Dr. Delany, who determined therefore to do justice to the memory of his old friend; for which few were better qualified, having been in the habits of intimacy with the dean of St. Patrick’s, from his first coming over to Ireland, and long before lord Orrery could have known any thing concerning him. On the whole, it was thought that this production of the doctor’s enabled the public to form a far more clear estimation of the real character of the dean of St. Patrick’s, than any account of him which had hitherto been given to the world; yet perhaps the fairest estimate must be made by a comparison of both. However zealous Dr. Delany might be for the honour of his friend, he did not satisfy Deane Swift, esq. who, in his Essay upon the life, writings, and character of his relation, treated our author with extreme ill manners and gross abuse; to which he thought proper to give an answer, in a letter to Mr. Swift, published in 1755. In this letter the doctor justified himself; and he did it with so much temper and ingenuity, so much candour, and yet with so much spirit, that the polite gentleman, and the worthy divine, were apparent in every page of his little pamphlet. The year 1754 also produced another volume of sermons; the larger part of them are practical, and these are entitled to great commendation, particularly two discourses on the folly, iniquity, ad absurdity of duelling. During this part of Dr. Delany’s life, he was involved in a law-suit of great consequence, and which, from its commencement to its final termination, lasted more than nine years. It related to the personal estate of his first lady; and although a shade was cast on his character by the decision of the Irish court of chancery, his conduct was completely vindicated by that decree being reversed in the house of lords in England. But he was not so deeply engaged in the prosecution of his law-suit as entirely to forget his disposition to be often appearing in. the world as an author. In 1757 he began a periodical paper called “The Humanist,” whicli was carried on through 15 numbers, and then dropped. In 1761 Dr. Delany published a tract, entitled “An humble apology for Christian Orthodoxy,” and several sermons. It was in 1763, after an interval of nearly thirty years from the publication of his former volumes, that he gave to the world the third and last volume of his “Revelation examined with candour.” In the preface the doctor has indulged himself in some peevish remarks upon Reviewers of works of literature; but from complaints of this kind few writers have ever derived any material advantage. With regard to the volume itself, it has been thought to exhibit more numerous instances of the prevalence of imagination, over judgment than had occurred in the former part of the undertaking. In 1766 Dr. Delany published a sermon against transubstantiation; which was succeeded in the same year by his last publication, which was a volume containing 18 discourses. Dr. Delany departed this life at Bath, in May 1763, in the 83d year of his age. Though in general he was an inhabitant of Ireland, it appears from several circumstances, and especially from his writings, almost all of which were published in London, that he frequently came over to England, and occasionally resided there for a considerable time. Of his literary character an estimate may be formed from what has been already said. With regard to two of his principal works, the “Revelation examined with candour,” and the “Life of David,” they contain so many fanciful ^ul doubtful positions, that all the ability and learning i.,i., played in them will scarcely suffice to hand them down, with any eminent degree of reputation, to future ages. It is on his sermons, and particularly on those which relate to social duties, that will principally depend the perpetuity of his fame. With respect to his personal character, he appears to have been a gentleman of unquestionable piety and goodness, and of an uncommon warmth of heart. This warmth of heart was, however, accompanied with some inequality, impetuosity, and irritability of temper. Few excelled him in charity, generosity, and hospitality. His income, which for the last twenty years of his life was 3006J. per annum, sunk under the exercise of these virtues, and he left little behind him besides books, plate, and furniture. Of a literary diligence, protracted to above fourscore years, Dr. Delany has afforded a striking example; though it may possibly be thought, that if, wben his body and mind grew enfeebled, he had remembered the solve senescentem equum, it would hate been of no disadvantage to his reputation.

The fundamental difference between the doctrine of Democritus, and that of former philosophers, concerning atoms, is, that the latter conceived small particles endued with various qualities; whereas this philosopher conceived the qualities of bodies to be, as we have already said, the mere effect of arrangement. Democritus, in his whole system, pays no regard to an external efficient cause, but absurdly supposes, that the intrinsic necessity, which gives motion to atoms, is alone sufficient to account for the phaenomena of nature. Whatever he is said to have taught concerning nature, fate, or providence, he merely asserted, that the fire, which resulted from the combination of certain subtle atoms, and which has been called the soul of the world, is a mechanical agent in nature, causing by its rapid motion the changes which take place in the universe. Plutarch says, that Democritus considered the sun and moon as ignited plates of stone; but this is not consistent with his general system, and with his knowledge of nature. The belief of the materiality of the soul was the natural result of the atomic system; for if the soul be a mere composition of atoms, when these are dispersed, it must perish; As to the reviviscence of human bodies, he can only be supposed to mean, that the atoms composing any human soul, would, after their dispersion, coalesce again, in some distant period, and recover their former life. The term eiJaXov^ or image, seems to have had, in his use of it, two different significations: it denoted those images which he supposed to flow from external objects, and, striking upon the senses, excite ideas in the mind, and also, those divine beings that existed in the air, and which he called gods. Although Democritus rejected the notion of Deity, and allowed him no share in the creation or government of the world, he endeavoured to conceal his impiety, by admitting the popular belief of divinities inhabiting the aerial regions, and teaching that they make themselves visible to some favoured mortals, and enable them to predict future events.

, an English divine and theological writer, became a student of Baliiol college, Oxford, in the beginning of 1590; and, when he had taken the degree of M. A. entered into holy orders, and was afterwards admitted to the degree of D. D. He was domestic chaplain to George duke of Buckingham, and to James I. and successively vicar of all the three churches in Reading; being instituted to St. Lawrence’s, Jan. 7, 1603; to St. Giles’s, July 9, 1612; and to St. Mary’s, March 31, 1614. He died at Reading, in Jan. 1628-9, and was buried in St. Mary’s church. Besides some sermons, enumerated by Wood, he published, 1. “A threefold resolution necessary to salvation, &c.” Loud. 1616, 8vo, 4th edit. 2. “Justification of kneeling at the Sacrament,” ibid. 16!9, 8vo. 3. “On the two Sacraments, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper,” ibid. 1621, 4to, and some controversial pieces, the most distinguished of which is a work on auricular confession, in answer to cardinal Bellarmine on that subject. The title is, “De confessionis auricularis vanitate, adversus Card. Bellarmini sophismata,” Oxon. 1621, 4to. Dr. Denison gave several valuable books to the Bodleian library, as appears by a letter of sir Thomas Bodley to Dr. King, dean of Christ-church, and vice-chancellor, which on July 8, 1628, was read in convocation.

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

The historian of his college says very justly, that whether Dr. Denne is to be considered as the minister of a parish, or as a governor in the church, he never failed, by an uncommon degree of application, to acquit himself with credit in each station. His abilities as a scholar and divine maybe estimated from his printed sermons, amounting to sixteen, preached on occasional subjects; a “Concio ad Clerum,” 174-5; “Articlesof inquiry for a parochial Visitation,” 1732; “The State of Bromley College, in Kent” and “A Register of Benefactions to the parish of Shoreditch,” drawn up in 1745, with notes, but not printed till 1772, 4to. His assiduityand usefulness in promoting what he conceived to be for the interest and credit of this parish, were conspicuous, in his successful researches after the benefactions, and the application of them 5 in the business of rebuilding the church from its origin to the completion; and in establishing upon the present plan the vegetable lecture founded by Mr. Faircliild.

Dr. Denne was yet more frequently useful by his researches as an antiquary, and the valuable assistance he contributed to many eminent antiquaries in the publication of their works. At the time of his becoming a member of the chapter of Rochester, not a few of its muniments and papers were in much confusion; these he digested, and by that means rendered the management of the affairs of the dean and chapter easy to his contemporaries and their successors. He was particularly conversant in English ecclesiastical history; and this employment afforded him an opportunity of extending his knowledge to many points not commonly accessible. His attention to such matters began at a very early period; whilst a fellow of Corpus Christi college, he transmitted to Mr. Lewis, from M8S. in the libraries of the university of Cambridge, many useful materials for his “Life of Wicliff,” and when that learned divine was afterwards engaged in drawing up his “History of the Isle of Thanet,” he applied to Mr. Denne for such information as could be collected from archbishop Parker’s Mss. in his college. He also collated Hearne’s edition of the “Textus Rorfensis,” with the original at Rochester, and transcribed the marginal additions by I ambarde, Bering, e. carefully referred to the other Mss. that contain these instruments, as Reg. Temp. Ruff, and the Cotton library, with all which he furnished the late venerable Dr. Pegge. It was evidently his intention to have written a history of the church of Rochester, and his reading and inquiry were directed to that object, which, however, he delayed until his health would not permit the necessary labour of transcription and arrangement.

, an English divine, author of some small controversial pieces, was born in 1625, and educated at Clare-hall, Cambridge, and was admitted sizar and pupil to Mr. David Clarkson, on the 4th of May, 1646, as appears from the register of the college. He was ejected by the act of uniformity in 1662, from the living of Oswaldkirk, near Helmsley, in Yorkshire, and not from that of Bolton, as Dr. Calamy affirms in his account, p. 818, who has rectified that mistake in his Continuation, p. 950, though, as it seems, without knowing that it was a mistake, it being indeed Mr. Nathan, and not Mr. John Denton, who was ejected from Bolton upon Dearn, or more properly Darwent. Mr. John Denton afterwards conformed; and being re-ordained by Dr. Thomas Barlow, bishop of Lincoln, was collated to the living of Stonegrave, within two miles of Osvvaldkirk, and a prebend of the church of York, both which he held till his death, January 4, 1708, in the eighty-third year of his age, as is evident from the inscription on his tomb-stone in the church of Stonegrave, in which living he was succeeded by his son, Mr. Robert Denton, who was educated at Catherine-hall, in Cambridge, and died about 1748. Mr. John Denton having contracted an intimate friendship with Mr. Tillotson, at Clare-hall, they kept up a constant correspondence during his grace’s life.

, an excellent philosopher and divine, was born at Stoughton near Worcester, Nov. 26, 1657; and educated in grammar-learning at Ulockley in. that county. In May 1675 he was admitted of Trinity college, Oxford and when he took his degree of B. A. was already distinguished for his learning and exemplary character. He was ordained deacon by Compton bishop of London, in May 1681; priest by Ward bishop of Salisbury, in July 1682; and was the same month presented to the vicarage of Wargrave in Berkshire. August 1689, he was presented to the valuable rectory of Upminster in Essex: which living, lying at a moderate distance from London, afforded him an opportunity of conversing and corresponding with the most eminent philosophers of the nation. Here in a retirement suitable to his contemplative and philosophical temper, he applied himself with great eagerness to the study of nature, and to mathematics and experimental philosophy; in which he became so eminent, that in 1702 he was chosen F. R. S. He proved one of the most useful and industrious members of this society, frequently publishing in the Philosophical Transactions curious observations and valuable pieces, as may be seen by their Index. In his younger years he published separately, “The artificial Clock-maker; or, a treatise of watch and clock-work, shewing to the meanest capacities the art of calculating numbers to all sorts of movements; the way to alter clock-work; to make chimes, and set them to musical notes; and to calculate and correct the motion of pendulums. Also numbers for divers movements: with the ancient and modern history of clockwork; and many instruments, tables, and other matters, never before published in any other book.” The fourth edition of this book, with large emendations, was published in 1734, 12mo. In 1711 and 1712 he preached “Sixteen Sermons” at Boyle’s lectures; which, with suitable alterations in the form, and notes, he published in 1713 under the title “Physico-theology; or, a demonstration of the beine: and attributes of God from his works of creation,” 8vo. In pursuance of the same design, he published, in 1714, “Astro-theology or, a demonstrationof the being and attributes of God from a survey of the heavens,” illustrated with copper-plates, 8vo. These works, the former especially, have been highly and justly valued, translated into French and several other languages, and have undergone several editions. In 1716 he was made a canon of Windsor, being at that time chaplain to the prince of Wales; and in 1730 received the degree of D. D. from the university of Oxford by diploma, on account of his learning, and the services he had done to religion by his culture of natural knowledge “Ob libros,” as the terms of the diploma run, “ab ipso editos, quibus physicam & mathesin auctiorem reddidit, & ad religionem veramque fidem exornandam revocavit.” When Eleazer Albin published his natural history of birds and English insects, in 4 vols. 4to, with many beautiful cut?, it was accompanied with very curious notes and observations by our learned author. He also revised the “Miscellanea Curiosa,” published in three volumes, 1726, 8vo. He next published “Christo-theology or, a demonstration of the divine authority of the Christian religion, being the substance of a sermon preached at Bath, Nov. 2, 1729, and published at the earnest request of the auditory, 1730,” 8vo. The last work of his own composition was “A Defence of the Churches right in Leasehold Estates. In answer to a book called ‘An Inquiry into the customary estates and TenantRights of those who hold lands of the Church and other Foundations,’ published under the name of Everard Fleetwood, esq.” 1731, 8vo. But, besides his own, he published some pieces of Mr. Ray, and gave new editions of others, with great additions from the author’s own Mss. To him the world is likewise indebted for the “Philosophical Experiments and observations of the late eminent Dr. Robert Hooke, and other eminent virtuosos in his time, 1726,” 8vo; and he communicated to the royal society several pieces, which he received from his learned correspondents.

, a puritan divine of the sixteenth century, was a native of the county of Kent, and related to the Derings of Surrenden. He was educated at Christ’s college, Cambridge, of which he was chosen fellow ia 1668, and then took his degree of bachelor of divinity. The year before, according to Mr. Cole, he was admitted lady Margaret’s professor of divinity. He was also one of the preachers at St. Paul’s, and in 1569 obtained the rectory of Pluckley in the diocese of Canterbury, and became chaplain to the duke of Norfolk. On Dec. 20, 1571, he was presented by the queen to the prebend of Chardstoke in the cathedral of Salisbury. He was much celebrated for his eloquence in the pulpit, and for his general learning and acuteness as a disputant, of which last he gave a proof, in a work written against the popish Dr. Harding, entitled “A Sparing Restraint of many lavish Untruths,” &c. 1568, 4to. But at length he not only adopted the sentiments of Cartwright and others on the subject of habits and ceremonies, but contended in the pulpit for the entire change of church government by bishops, &c. for which he was, after a long examination and controversy, suspended from preaching in 1573. Strype has given a particular account of his prosecution and answers. He died June 26, 1576, lamented for his piety and usefulness. But he appears to have carried his resistance to the established religion to a greater height than most of his brethren, and did not spare the queen herself. Once when preaching before her majesty, he told her, that when she was persecuted by queen Mary, her motto was tanquam ovis (“like a sheep”), but now it might be tanquam indomita juvjenca (“like an untamed heifer”). The queen, however, retained so much of her milder character as only to forbid his preaching at court; to which Neal, who quotes Fuller for this anecdote, adds that “he lost all his preferments in the church,” although no such words are to be found in Fuller. His principal works are, 1. a A Lecture or Exposition upon a part of the fifth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, as it was read in St. Paul’s, Dec. 6, 1572,“Lond. 1581, Itnno. This work was extended to” Twenty-seven Lectures or Readings upon part of that Epistle,“1576. 2.” A Sermon preached before the Queen’s Majesty, Feb. 25, 1569,“Lond. 1584. 3.” A Sermon preached at the Tower of London, Dec. 11, 1569,“ibid. 158-k These three are noticed, with extracts, in the Bibliographer, vol. I. 4.” Certain godly and comfortable Letters, full of Christian consolation," &c. no date, 4to, all which, with some other tracts of Dering’s, were collected and printed in one vol. 8vo, by Field in 1595. His correspondence with lord Burleigh may be seen in Strype’s Annals.

In Dr. Desaguliers’s character as a divine, we find only one publication by him, a single sermon, in octavo, preached before the king in 1717, from Luke xiii. 5. “I tell you nay; but except you repent, you shall all likewise perish.” It was a thanksgiving-sermon; but on what particular occasion it was delivered we are not informed.

, an ingenious French painter, was born at Rouen in Normandy, in 1729. He received the first elements of design from his father, and afterwards practised at Paris, under M. Vermont; but learned from Restout those excellent principles which he afterwards cultivated with so much success, and soon obtained many of the medals which the academy gave as prizes for design. In a journey he took to Rouen (his native place), he obtained several commissions for historical pieces, several of which he executed while under M, Restout. His picture of Potiphar’s wife, which he painted as a candidate for the academy’s prize, procured him the friendship of M. Boucher, at that time principal painter to the king, and Restout consented to yield the young Dehais, as an eleve of that artist. In 1751 he carried the first prize of the academy; and in consequence became a disciple of the king’s school, under the direction of M. Carlo Vanloo; and during three years he profited much by the instructions he received from that great master, extcuting many pieces of great merit. After this, hu vesided some time at Rome; and in spite of very bad health, prosecuted his profession with unremitting diligence, and great success. On his return to Paris, he married the daughter of M. Boucher, and was received into the academy with universal approbation the pictures which he presented on that occasion were of such merit as to give very sanguine hopes that he would one day become one of the greatest of the French artists. Every successive exhibition at the Louvre proved in the clearest manner, that his reputation was fixed on the surest foundation: but he died in the midst of his career, in the beginning of 1765. The principal of his works are, the History of St. Andrew, in four large pictures, at Rouen; the Adventures of Helen, in nine pieces, for the manufactory of Beauvais; the Death of St. Benet, at Orleans; the Deliverance of St. Peter, at Versailles. The Marriage of the Virgin is a subject simple in itself, but is nobly elevated by the painter. The grand priest is standing up, and turned towards the sacred spouse; his arms are extended, and his countenance directed towards the illuminated glory. Scarce any thing can be more expressive than the air of this head. The grandeur and the majestic simplicity of the virgin’s head are also finely conceived; and her whole figure admirable. The picturesque composition of the groupe is very well managed the draperies are in a bold and elegant taste the lights and shades finely imagined, melting into all the happy effects of the clear obscure. — His Resurrection of Lazarus is full of expression: the different emotions of surprise, terror, and admiration are most ingeniously varied, and finely characterised in the three apostles. The two women who behold the miracle, display the invention of the painter; one of them is full of astonishment, mixed with terror, at the idea of the sight before her the other falls prostrate to the ground, adoring the divine worker of the miracle: the whole piece is full of character and expression. His picture of Joseph’s Chastity is one of the finest that ever issued from his happy pencil: Potiphar’s wife is represented darting herself from the bed, and catching Joseph by his garment. The crime, hope, and fear of her passion, are expressed in the most lively manner in her eyes and countenance. The figure of Joseph is well designed; but it was on the woman that the painter, with great justness, bent all the efforts of his imagination, and his art. Among his other works are the Combat of Achilles against the Xanthus and Simo'is; Jupiter and Antiope, in which the figure of the woman is wonderfully delicate and pleasing. A small piece representing Study, very fine. Artemisia at the tomb of her husband, &c.

, a native of the island of Melos, surnamed the Atheist, lived in the ninety-first olympiad, or 412 B. C. and was a follower of Democritus. Having been sold as a captive in his youth, he was redeemed by Democritus for 10,000 drachmas, and instead of being made his servant, was trained up in the study of philosophy, for which he had probably showed a capacity. At the same time he cultivated polite learning, and distinguished himself in the art of lyric poetry, which was so successfully practised about that period by Pindar, Bacchylis, and others. His name has been transmitted to posterity as an. avowed advocate for the rejection of all religious belief; and although Clemens Alexandrinus and others have taken pains to exculpate him, by pleading that his only intention was to ridicule heathen superstitions, the general voice of antiquity has so strongly asserted his atheistical principles, that we cannot refuse credit to the report without allowing too much indulgence to historical scepticism. It is easy to conceive, that one who had studied philosophy in the school of Democritus, who admitted no other principles in nature than atoms and a vacuum, would reject the whole doctrine of Deity as inconsistent with the system which he had embraced. And it is expressly asserted by ancient writers, that when, in a particular instance, he saw a perjured person escape punishment *, he publicly declared his disbelief of divine providence, and from that time not only spoke with ridicule of the gods, and of all religious ceremonies, but even attempted to lay open the sacred mysteries, and to dissuade the people from submitting to the rites of initiation. These public insults offered to religion brought upon him the general hatred of the Athenians; who, upon his refusing to obey a summons to appear in the courts of judicature, issued forth a decree, which was inscribed upon a brazen column, offering the reward of a talent to any one who should kill him, or two talents to any one who should bring him alive before the

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

The great objects which Diderot and his coadjutors had in view when they entered upon this work, are now universally known. It has been completely proved, that their intention was to sap the foundation of all religion; not directly or avowedly, for \mre-faced atheism would not then have been suffered in France. They had engaged a very worthy, though not very acute clergyman, to furnish the theological articles, and while he was supporting, by the best arguments which he could devise, the religion of his country, Diderot and D'Alembert were overturning those arguments under titles which properly allowed of no such disquisitions. This necessarily produced digressions: for the greatest genius on earth could not, when writing on the laws of motion, attack the mysteries of Christianity without wandering from his subject; but that the object of these digressions might not pass unnoticed by any class of readers, care was taken to refer to them from the articles where the question was discussed by the divine. That when employed in this way, Diderot seems to write obscurely, is indeed true; but the obscurity is not his. His atheism was so plain, that for the most part, D'Alembert or some other leader, had to retouch his articles, and throw a mist over them, to render their intention less obvious.

, a Lutheran divine, was born June 30, 1647, at Stade in the duchy of Bremen, where his father was also a clergyman. He studied at Giessen, Jena, and Wirtemberg, at which last university he took his master’s degree. In 1672 he finished his course of study, and in 1675 was appointed rector of Stade. In 1683 he was raised to the dignity of superintendant of the duchies of Bremen and Ferden, and about that time was honoured with the degree of doctor of divinity by the university of Kiel. In 1712, the war obliging him to leave Stade, he went to Bremen; but after three years returned, and was re-instated in his office at Stade, where he died July 4, 1720. He wrote, 1. “De naturalismo cum aliorum, turn maxime Joannis Bodini, ex opere ejus manuscripto anecdoto, de abditis rerum subliinium arcanis, schediasnaa,” Leipsic, 1684, 12mo. This is a very able answer to the impious freedoms of Bodin (See Bodin). 2. “Specimen glossarii Latino-theodisci.” 3. “Dissertationes de sparsione florum.” 4. “De dissensu ecclesiae orientalis et Latinae circa purgatorium.” 5. “Enneacles animadversionum in diversa Joca annalium cardinalis Baronii,” &c. He wrote also various tracts in the German language, collected in a volume, Hamburgh, 1709, 4to. But he is, perhaps, better known as the publisher of an edition of the Stade Bible, which is a revision of Luther’s German Bible.

, the son of John Conrad, first minister of the church of Butzbach, and afterwards superintendent of Giessen, and nephew of Conrad Dieterk, another learned German divine, was born at Butzbach, Jan. 19, 1612. After having studied at Marpurg, Jena, and Strasburgh, he maintained a thesis, in 1635, under professor Dilher, on the utility of profane authors in the study of the Holy Scriptures. He then went into Holland, where he became acquainted with the learned Vossius, Boxborn, Barlaeus, Heinsius, and other eminent scholars. Thence he travelled into Denmark and Prussia, remaining some time at Konigsberg. On his return, George II. landgrave of Hesse, appointed him professor of Greek and history in 1639. From the observations which he left on the aphorisms of Hippocrates, he appears to have in some early part of his life studied medicine. On certain disputes arising between the princes of the house of Hesse, prince George invited him to his court to arrange the papers and documents preserved in the archives. In 1647, he obtained leave to go to Hamburgh, where he remained until these family-disputes were adjusted. In 1653, when the college of Giessen was founded, which had brought many visitors from Marpnrg, he became one of the professors, and remained in this office, with great reputation, until his death in 1669. The letters which John Christian, baron of Boinebourg, wrote to him, and which were printed in 1703, evince the high esteem which that nobleman entertained for him. He was editor of a work written by Henry of Bunau, entitled “Historia imperatorum Germanicorum familise Saxonies, Henrici I. Ottonis magni; Ottonis II. Ottonis III. et Henrici II.” Giessen, 1666, 4to. His own works are, 1. “Breviarium historicum et geographicum.” 2. “Breviarium pontificum.” 3. “Discursus historico-politicus de perigratione studiorum,” Marpurg, 1640, 4to. 4. “Graecia exulans, seu de infelicitate superioris sseculi in Greecarum litterarum ignoratione.” 5. “Antiquitates llomanai.” 6. “latraeum Hippocraticum,” Ulm, 1661, 4to. 7. “Breviarium ha3reticorurn et conciliorum.” 8. “Index in Hesiodum.” 9. “Lexicon Etymologico-Graecum.” 10. “Antiquitates Biblicue, in quibus decreta, prophetiae, sermones, consuetudincs, ritusque ac dicta veteris Testamenti de rebus Judaeorum et Gentilium, qua sacris, qua profanis, expenduntur; ex editione Joannis-Justi Pistorii,” Giessen, 1671, folio, which, with the following, was posthumous, 11. “Antiquitates Nov. Testamenti, seu illustramentum Nov. Test, sive Lexicon philologico-theologicum Græco-Latinum,” Francfort, 1680, folio.

, second son of sir John Dingley, knt. by a sister of Dr. Henry Hammond, was born in Surrey in 1619, and educated at Magdalen college, Oxford; where he was a strict observer of all church ceremonies. He afterwards became a zealous puritan; and was remarkably active in ejecting such as were, by that party, styled ignorant and scandalous ministers and school-masters. He was rector of Brighton, in the Isle of Wight, when his kinsman colonel Hammond was governor there. The Oxford antiquary has given us a catalogue of his works, the most extraordinary of which is “The Deputation of Angels, or the Angel Guardian 1. proved by the divine light of nature, &c. 2. from many rubs and mistakes, &c. 3. applied and improved for our information, &c. chiefly grounded on Acts xii. 15.” London, 1654, 8vo. He died in 1659, and was buried in the chancel of Brighton church.

, a very eminent divine, descended of a noble family of Lucca, was born June 6, 1576; but of his early years we have no information. When, however, he was only nineteen years of age, we find him appointed professor of Hebrew at Geneva. In 1619 the church of Geneva sent him to the synod of Dort, with his colleague Theodore Tronchin. Diodati gained so much reputation in this synod, that he was chosen, with five other divines, to prepare the Belgic confession of faith. He was esteemed an excellent divine, and a good preacher. His death happened at Geneva, Oct. 3, 1649, in his seventy-third year, and was considered as a public loss. He has rendered himself noticed by some works which he published, but particularly by his translation of the whole Bible into Italian, the first edition of which he published, with notes, in 1607, at Geneva, and reprinted in 16 n. The New Testament was printed separately at Geneva in 1608, and at Amsterdam and Haerlem in 1665. M. Simon observes, that his method is rather that of a divine and a preacher, than of a critic, by which he means only, that his work is more of a practical than a critical kind. He translated the Bible also into French, but not being so intimate with that language, he is not thought to have succeeded so well as in the Italian. This translation was printed in folio, at Geneva, in 1664. He was also the first who translated into French father Paul’s “History of the Council of Trent,” and many have esteemed this a more faithful translation than de la Houssaye’s, although less elegant in language. He also is said to have translated sir Edwin Sandys’ book on the “State of Religion in the West.” But the work by which he is best known in this country is his Annotations on the Bible, translated into English, of which the third and best edition was published in 1651, fol. He is said to have begun writing these annotations in 1606, at which time it was expected that Venice would have shaken off the popish yoke, a measure to which he was favourable; and he went on improving them in his editions of the Italian and French translations. This work was at one time time very popular in England, and many of the notes of the Bible, called the “Assembly of Divines’ Annotations,” were taken from Diodati literally. Diodati was at onetime in England, as we learn from the life of bishop Bedell, whom he was desirous to become acquainted with, and introduced him to Dr. Morton, bishop of Durham. From Morrice’s “State Letters of the right hon. the earl of Orrery,” we learn that when invited to preach at Venice, he was obliged to equip himself in a trooper’s habit, a scarlet cloak with a sword, and in that garb he mounted the pulpit; but was obliged to escape again to Geneva, from the wrath of a Venetian nobleman, whose mistress, affected by one of Diqdati'a sermons, had refused to continue her connection with her keeper. The celebrated Milton, also, contracted a friendship for Diodati, when on his travels; and some of his Latin elegies are addressed to Charles Diodati, the nepheiv of the divine. This diaries was one of Milton’s most intimate friends, and was the son of Theodore Diodati, who, although originally of Lucca, as well as his brother, married an English lady, and his son in every respect became an Englishman. He was also an excellent scholar, and being educated to his father’s profession, practised physic in Cheshire. He was at St. Paul’s school, with Milton, and afterwards, in 1621, entered of Trinity-college, Oxford. He died in 1638.

, or of Apollonia, in the island of Crete, was a disciple of Anaximenes, and the successor of Anaxagoras in the Ionic school. Following the steps of his master, he devoted himself to the contemplation of nature; not, however, without mingling with the severer pursuits of philosophy the study of eloquence. This qualified him to execute the office of preceptor with great reputation, both at Miletus and at Athens. But his success, and perhaps his opinions, excited so much jealousy and aversion among the Athenians, that, like Anaxagoras, he was obliged to provide for his safety by flight. What befel him afterwards, or what was the exact time of his birth or death, is unknown. With Anaximenes, he taught that air, or a subtle ether, is the first material principle in nature, but that it partakes of a divine intelligence, without which nothing could be produced. From comparing the imperfect accounts of his doctrine which remain, with the opinions of his predecessors, it appeals probable that he conceived the infinite ether to be animated by a divine mind, and all things to be formed from this compound principle.

, surnamed Exiguus, or Little, on account of his stature, was a monk by profession, and born in Scythia, where he is supposed to have died about the year 540, as Dupin reckons, or 556, according to Cave. He understood Greek and Latin, and was well acquainted with the holy scriptures. Cassiodorus, who was intimate with him, wrote his panegyric in the 23d chapter of his book on divine learning. At the desire of Stephen, bishop of Salone, he made a collection of canons, which contains, besides those which were in the code of the universal church, the fifty first canons of the apostles, those of the council of Sardica, and 138 canons of the council of Africa. This code of canons was approved and received by the church of Rome, and France, and by the Latin churches; and was printed by Justel in 1628, with a version of the letter of St. Cyril, and of the council of Alexandria against Nestorius, which is also the translation of Dionysius Exiguus. He afterwards joined these with the decretals of the popes from Syricius to Anastasius, to which have been, since added those of Hilary, Simplicius, and other popes, to St. Gregory. This second collection was printed by Justel in his Bibliotheca of Canon law. Dionysius was the first who introduced the way of counting the years from the birth of Jesus Christ, and who fixed it according to the epocha of the vulgar sera. He wrote also two letters upon Easter in the years 525 and 526, which were published by Petavius and Buchevius; and made a cycle of 95 years. Father Mabillon published a letter of his written to Eugippius, about the translation which he made of a work of Gregory Nyssen, concerning the creation of man. With respect to the epoch which he invented, he began his account from the conception or incarnation, usually called the Annunciation, or Lady-day which method obtained in the dominions of Great Britain till 1752, before which time the Dionysian was the same as the English epoch but in that year the Gregorian calendar having been admitted by act of parliament, they now reckon from the first of January, as in the other parts of Europe, except in the court of Rome, where the epoch of the Incarnation still obtains for the date of their bulls.

, a learned English divine and magistrate, was born at Lincoln in 1677. At the grammar school in that city he received the early part of his education, and afterwards studied at a private academy among the dissenters, to whom his father was attached. He was next entered at the Middle Temple with a view of making himself so far acquainted with the law as to enable him to become respectable as a magistrate and an author. The former character he sustained with dignity and much reputation: he was diligent, disinterested, and impartial in his decistons: he took an active part with those who formed themselves into a society for the suppression of vice and immorality. His regard to duty gained him the respect of the wise and good, and on some occasions he was singled out as meriting the thanks of the judges of the circuit for services that he had rendered his country. As he advanced in life, and after he had acted as a magistrate more than twenty years, he conceived the design of becoming a minister in the church of England, with which he had communicated from the time that he had attained to manhood. He was accordingly first ordained a deacon, and afterwards, in 1719, a priest. In the same year he was presented with the vicarage of Croft, and to the rectory of Kirby-superBaine, both in his native county. In the year 1722, he was instituted to the vicarage of St. Mary in Nottingham, to which town he removed; and here he remained till his death, Feb. 3, 1729-30, in the 53d year of his age. He was buried, according to his own request, in the chancel of his church, near to the communion-table, having no other inscription over his grave than the initial letters of his name, and the year of his death. He left a widow, who afterwards lived at her own family-seat, Flintham-hall, in Nottinghamshire, and died there May 20, 1763, in the 86th year of her age, by whom he had five sons and three daughters.

He published: 1. “Primitive Sacrse, the reflections of a devout solitude, consisting of Meditations and Poems on divine subjects,” London, 1701 and 1703, 8vo. 2. “Flora,” in admiration of the Gardens of Rapin, and the translation of Mr. Gardiner, written in 1705, prefixed to Subdean Gardiner’s translation of “Rapin of Gardens,” the third edition of which was published 1728, 8vo. 3. “An Essay upon the Execution of the Laws against Immorality and Profaneness. With a Preface addressed to her Majesty’s justices of the peace,” London, 1708 and 1710, 8vo. His portrait is prefixed to several copies on large paper. 4. “A Second Essay upon the Execution of the Laws against Immorality and Profaneness. Wherein the case of giving informations to the magistrate is considered, and objections against it answered. By John Disney, esq. With a Preface addressed to grand juries, constables, and churchwardens,” London, 1710, 8vo. The preface to this second essay was afterwards printed in a small size by itself, in order to distribute it among those whom it more particularly concerned. 5. “Remarks upon a Sermon preached by Dr. Henry Sacheverell, at the assizes held at Derby, Aug. 15, 1709. In a Letter to himself. Containing a just and modest defence of the Societies for Reformation of Manners, against the aspersions cast upon them in that Sermon,” London, 1711, 8vo. 6. Proposals for the publication of his great work, entitled “Corpus Legum de Moribus Reformandis,” dated Lincoln, 1713; a single sheet, and republished in the “View of ancient laws.” 7. “The Genealogy of the most serene and most illustrious House of Brunswick Lunenburgh, the present royal family of Great Britain; drawn up from the best historical and genealogical writers,” 1714. Dedicated to his majesty, king George I. and engraved by J. Sturt, on two sheets of imperial paper. N. B. A mistake in this Genealogical Table is corrected in the “Acta Regia,” 1716, 8vo, vol. I. p. 102. Rymer says, that “Albert Great Duke of Brunswick married Adelhard, daughter to Henry the magnanimous duke of Brabant; whereas, Mr. Disney makes Adelhard daughter of the marquis of Montserrat, 8.” A Sermon, preached in the parish church of St. Botolph’s, Aldgate, London, on Sunday, Nov. 22, 1719,“London, 1720, 8vo. 9 14. Six other occasional Sermons. 15.” A View of ancient laws against Immorality and Profaneness, under the following heads lewdness profane swearing, cursing, and blasphemy perjury; profanation of days devoted to religion contempt or neglect of divine service drunkenness gaming, idleness, vagrancy, and begging; stage-plays and players; and duelling. Collected from the Jewish, Roman, Greek, Gothic, Lombard, and other Laws, down to the middle of the eleventh century.“Dedicated to lord King, lord high chancellor,” Cambridge, 1729, fol.

His works are: I. “Maimonidis constit. de Jurejurando,” with notes and additions, Leyden, 4to. 2. “Gregorii VII. pontif. Ilomani Vita,” Francfort, 8vo. 3. “Historia belli inter imperium et sacerdotium,” ibid. 8vo. 4. “Teschenmacheri Annalis divine, &c. notis, tabulis genealogicis et codice diplomatico illustrati,” ibid. fol. 5. “Summa Capita Antiq. Judaicarum et Romanarutn in usum praelectionum privatarum,” ibid. 4to. 6. “Chytraci Marchia Brandenburgensis ad nostra tempora continuata,” ibid. 8vo. 7. “Delineatio historic Brandenburgensis in privatis pnelectionibus prolixius illustranda,” ibid. 8vo. 8. “Delineatio historise praecipuorurn juris, aut pnetensium statibus Europe competentium in collegio private magis illustranda,” ibid. 9. “C. Corn. Taciti Germania, cum perpetuo et pragmatico Commentario,” ibid. 8vo, a very correct and valuable edition, which has been twice reprinted since its first appearance, in 1724. 10. “ Dissertatio deabdicatione regnorum, aliarumqtie dignitatum illustrium turn secularium quamecclesiasticarum,” ibid. 1724-, 4to; a pamphlet. 11. “Cotnmentatio de honoratissimo ordine militari de Balneo,” ibid. 1729, fol. containing a history of the origin of the order of the Bath its progress, restoration (by George I. about four years before this publication), the rules of the order, and a list of the members. 12. An edition of the history of the order of St. John, by Becman, in German, 4to. 13. Introduction to the knowledge of finance, police,c. also in German, 8vo. Besides these, he contributed some papers to the literary journals, and superintended before his death a collection of his dissertations on various subjects of law and history, which was published at Leipsic in 1737, 8vo.

, an ingenious divine, of unfortunate memory, was born in 1729, at Bourne in Lincolnshire; of which place his father, of the same names, was many years vicar. After being educated at a private school in classical learning, he was admitted a sizar of Clare-hall in Cambridge in 1745, where he gave early proofs of parts and scholarship, and so early as in 1747 began to publish little pieces of poetry. In this year he published (without his name) “A Pastoral on the Distemper among the horned cattle;” in 174y, “The African prince, now in England, to Zara at his father’s court,” and “Zara’s answer;” in 1750, “A day in Vacation at College,” a mock-heroic poem in blank verse abridgments of Grotius “De jure belli et pacis,” and of Clarke on the being and attributes of God, with sir Jeffrey Gilbert’s Abstract of Locke on the human understanding, all inscribed to Dr. Keene, then vice-chancellor of the university, and afterwards bishop of Ely, under the title “Synopsis compendiaria Librorum H. Gfotii de jure belli et pacis, S. Clarkii de Dei existentia et attributes, et J. Lockii de intellectu humano.” He published also, while at Cambridge, “A new Book of the Dunciad, occasioned by Mr. Warburton’s edition of the Dunciad complete,” in which “Warburton is made the hero. About the same time he published proposals for a translation, by subscription, of the Hymns of Callimaehus, the fragments of Orpheus, &c. from the Greek; and wrote a tragedy, with choruses, called” The Syracusan.“He continued to make frequent publications in this light way, in which there were always marks of sprightliness and ingenuity; but at the same time imbibed that taste for expence and dissipation which finally proved his ruin. In January 1750 he took the degree of 13. A. with reputation; and that of master in 1757. Before he was in orders he had begun and finished his selection of 4< The Beauties of Shakspeare,” which he published soon after in 2 vols. 12mo, and, at the conclusion of the preface, tells us, as if resigning all pursuits of the profane kind, that “better and more important things henceforth demanded his attention:” nevertheless, in 1755, he published his translation of the hymns of Callimachus, in English verse; in the preface to which he was assisted by Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Home, bishop of Norwich. Happy would it have been, had he remained longer in the friendship of that excellent man, whom, however, he soon disgusted by his vanity and unbecoming conduct. His “Callimachus” was dedicated to the duke of Newcastle, by tile recommendation of Dr. Keene, bishop of Chester; who, having conceived a good opinion of Dodd at the university, was desirous of bringing him forward into the world.

index. Faulkner’s Hist, of Fulham. Park’s Royal and Noble Authors. Cumberland’s Life. Some account of his uncle, Knight’s Life ofColet. Hawkins’s Life of Johnson. Dodsley’s, Pcareh’s, and NiclioU's Poems. Bowles’s edition of Pope’s Works, Louoj^r’s Common-place li^ok, vol. 1. Cose’s Life of purity of his own character in the following terms: “It is no more fit for a judge to decline to give an account of his doings than for a Christian of his faith. God knoweth I have endeavoured always to keep a good conscience; for a troubled one who can bear? I have now sat in this court fifteen years, and I should know something. Surely, if I had gone in a mill so long, dust would cleave to my clothes. I am old, and have one foot in the grave; therefore I will look to the better part as near as 1 can. But omnia haberc in memoria, et in nullo errarc, divinum potius est quain human um.” He died Sept. 13, 1628, in the seventy-third year of his age, and was buried in the ambulatory before the door of the library, formerly called Lady Mary’s Chapel, in the cathedral church of Exeter. Within that library is a very sumptuous monument erected to his memory, containing his figure and that of his wife, cut in alabaster, under a stately arch supported by marble pillars. This learned judge, by his happy education, accompanied with excellent natural parts and unremitted industry, became so general a scholar, that it was said of him, that it was difficult to determine whether he were the better artist, divine, civil or common lawyer. Among his other studies, he was a great lover of antiquities, and attained to such an eminence of knowledge and skill in that department of literature, that he was regarded as one of the ablest members of the famous society of antiquaries, which may be said to have begun in 1571, but which more particularly flourished from 1590 to 1614. Rewrote, I. “The Lawyer’s Light; or, due direction for the study of the Law,” London, 1629, 4to. 2. “A complete Parson, or a description of advowsons and church livings, delivered in several readings, in an inn of chancery called the New Inn,” printed 1602, 1603, 1630, 4to. 3. “The History of the ancient and modern estate of the principality of Wales, duchy of Cornwall, and earldom of Chester,” 1630, 4to. 4. “The English Lawyer, a treatise describing a method for the managing of the Laws of this Land, and expressing the best qualities requisite in the student, practiser, judges, &c.” London, 1631, 4to. 5. “Opinion touching the antiquity, power, order, state, manner, persons, and proceedings, of the High Courts of Parliament in England,” London, 1658, 8vo. 6. “A Treatise of particular Estates,” London, 1677, duodecimo, printed at the end of the fourth edition of William Noy’s Works, entitled, “The Ground and Maxims of the Law.” 7. “A true representation of forepassed Parliaments to the view of the present times and posterity.” This still remains in manuscript. Sir John Doddridge also enlarged a book called “The Magazine of Honour,” London, 1642. 7'he same book was afterwards published under his name by the title of “The Law of Nobility and Peerage,” Lond. 16S7, 1658, 8vo. In the Collection of curious Discourses, written by eminent antiquaries, are two dissertations by our judge; one of which is on the dimensions of the land of England, and the other on the office and duty of heralds in this country. Mr. Bridgman, in his “Legal Bibliography,” informs us that many valuable works have been attributed to sir John Doddridge, which in their title-pages have borne the names of others. He mentions particularly Sheppard’s “Law of Common Assurances touching Deeds in general,” and “Wentworth’s office and dutie of Executors;” both which are said to have been written by Doddridge.

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

Mr. Dodwell came the same year to England, and resjded at Oxford for the sake of the public library. Thence he returned to his native country, and in 1672 published, at Dublin, in 8vo, a posthumous treatise of his late learned tutor John Steam, M. D. to which he put a preface of his own. He entitled this book, “De Obstinatione: Opus posthumum Pietatem Chrisdano-Stoicam scholastico more suadens:” and his own preface, “prolegomena Apologetica, de usu Dogmatum Philosophicorum,” &c. in which he apologizes for his tutor; who, by quoting so often and setting a high value upon the writings and maxims of the heathen philosophers, might seem to depreciate the Holy Scriptures. Mr. Dodwell therefore premises first, that the author’s design in that work is only to recommend moral duties, and enforce the practice of them by the authority of the ancient philosophers; and that he does not meddle with the great mysteries of Christianity, which are discoverable only by divine revelation. His second work was, “Two letters of advice. 1. For the Susception of Holy Orders. 2. For Studies Theological, especially such as are rational.” To the second edition of which, in 1681, was added, “A Discourse concerning the Phoenician History of Sanchoniathon,” in which he considers Philo-Byblius as the author of that history. In 1673, he wrote a preface, without his name, to “An introduction to a Devout Life,” by Francis de Sales, the last bishop and prince of Geneva; which was published at Dublin, in English, this same year, in 12mo. He came over again to England in 1674, and settled in London; where he became acquainted with several learned men; particularly, in 1675, with Dr. William Lloyd, afterwards successively bishop of St. Asaph, Litchfield and Coventry, and Worcester . With that eminent divine he contracted so great a friendship and intimacy, that he attended him to Holland, when he was appointed chaplain to the princess of Orange. He was also with him at Salisbury, when he kept his residence there as canon of that church; and spent afterwards a good deal of time with him at St. Asaph. In 1675 he published “Some Considerations of present Concernment; how far the Romanists may be trusted by princes of another persuasion,” in 8vo, levelled against the persons concerned in the Irish remonstrance, which occasioned a kind of schism among the Irish Roman catholics. The year following he published “Two short Discourses against the Romanists. 1. An Account of the fundamental Principle of Popery, and of the insufficiency of the proofs which they have for it. 2. An Answer to six Queries proposed to a gentlewoman of the Church of England, by an emissary of the Church of Rome,” 12mo, but reprinted in 1688, 4to, with “A new preface relating to the bishop of Meaux, and other modern complainers of misrepresentation.” In 1679, he published, in 4to, “Separation of Churches from episcopal government, as practised by the present non-conformists, proved schismatical, from such principles as are least controverted, and do withal most popularly explain the sinfulness and mischief of schism.” This, being animadverted upon by R. Baxter, was vindicated, in 1681, by Mr. Dodwell, in “A Reply to Mr. Baxter’s pretended confutation of a book, entitled, Sepafration of Churches,” &c. To which were added, “Three Letters to Mr. Baxter, written in 1673, concerning the Possibility of Discipline under a Diocesan Government,” &c. 8vo. In 1682 came out his “Dissertations on St. Cyprian,” composed at the reqviest of Dr. Fell, bishop of Oxford, when he was about to publish his edition of that father. They were printed in the same size, but reprinted at Oxford in 1684, 8vo, under the title “Dissertationes Cyprianse.” The eleventh dissertation, in which he endeavours to lessen the number of the early Christian martyrs, brought upon him the censure of bishop Burnet, and not altogether unjustly. The year following, he published “A Discovirse concerning the One Altar, and the One Priesthood, insisted on by the ancients in the disputes against Schism ,” Lond. 8vo. In 1684, a dissertation of his on a passage of Lactantius, was inserted in the new edition of that author at Oxford, by Thomas Spark, in 8vo. His treatise “Of the Priesthood of Laicks,” appeared in 1686, in 8vo. The title was “De jure Laicorum,” &c. It was written in answer to a book published by William Baxter, the antiquary, and entitled “AntiDodwellism, being two curious tracts formerly written by H. Grotius, concerning a solution of the question, whether the eucharist may be administered in the absence of, or want of pastors.” About the same time he was preparing for the press the posthumous works of the learned Dr. John Pearson, bishop of Chester, Lond. 1688, 4to. He published also,“Dissertations on Irenseus,” 1689, 8vo. On the 2d of April, 1688, he was elected, by the university of Oxford, Camden’s professor of history, without any application of his own, and when he was at a great distance from Oxford; and the 21st of May was incorporated master of arts in that university. But this beneficial and creditable employment of professor he did not enjoy long; being deprived of it in November, 1691, for refusing to take the oaths of allegiance to king William and queen Mary. When their majesties had suspended those bishops who would not acknowledge their authority, Mr. Dodwell published “A cautionary discourse of Schism, with a particular regard to the case of the bishops, who are suspended for refusing to take the new oath,” London, 8vo. And when those bishops were actually deprived, and others put in their sees, he joined the former, looking upon the new bishops, and their adherents, as schismatics. He wrote likewise “A Vindication of the deprived Bishops:” and “A Defence of the same,” 1692, 4to, being an answer to Dr. Hody’s “Unreasonableness of Separation,” &c. After having lost his professorship, he continued for some time in Oxford, and then retired to Cookham, a village near Maidenhead, about an equal distance between Oxford and London; and therefore convenient to maintain a correspondence in each place, and to consult friends and books, as he should have occasion. While he lived there, he became acquainted with Mr. Francis Cherry of Shottesbrooke, a person of great learning and virtue, for the sake of whose conversation he removed to Shottesbrooke, where he chiefly spent the remainder of his days. In 1692, he published his Camdenian lectures read at Oxford; and, in 1694, “An Invitation to Gentlemen to acquaint themselves with ancient History” being a preface to Degory Whear’s “Method of reading history,” translated into English by Mr. Bohun. About this time having lost one or more of the Dodwells, his kinsmen, whom he designed for his heirs, he married on the 24th of June, 1694, in the 52d year of his age, a person, in whose father’s house at Cookham he had boarded several times, and by her had ten children . In 1696 he drew up the annals of Thucydides and Xenophon, to accompany the editions of those two authors by Dr. John Hudson and Mr. Edward Wells. Having likewise compiled the annals of Velleius Paterculus, and of Quintilian, and Statius, he published them altogether in 1698, in one volume, 8vo. About the same time he wrote an account of tUe lesser Geographers, published by Dr. Hudson; and “A Treatise concerning the lawfulness of instrumental music in holy offices:” occasioned by an organ being set up at Tiverton in 1696: with some other things on chronology, inserted in “Grabe’s Spicilegium.” In 1701, he published his account of the Greek and Roman cycles, which was the most elaborate of all his pieces, and seems to have been the work of the greatest part of his life. The same year was published a letter of his, inserted in Richardson’s “Canon of the New Testament,” &c. concerning Mr. Toland’s disingenuous treatment of him. The year following appeared “A Discourse [of his] concerning the obligation to marry within the true communion, following from their style of being called a Holy Seed;” and “An Apology for the philosophical writings of Cicero,” against the objections of Mr. Petit; prefixed to Tally’s five books De Finibus, or, of Moral Ends, translated into English by Samuel Parker, gent, as also the annals of Thucydides and Xenophon, Oxoa. 4to. In 1703 he published “A Letter concerning the Immortality of the Soul, against Mr. Henry Layton’s Hypothesis,” 4to and, “A Letter to Dr. Tillotson about Schism,” 8vo, written in 1691.The year following came out, his “Chronology of DionX'Sius Halicarnasseus,” in the Oxford edition of that historian by Dr. Hudson, folio; his “Two Dissertations on the age of Phalaris and Pythagoras,” occasioned by the dispute between Bentley and Boyle; and his “Admonition to Foreigners, concerning the late Schism in England.” This, which was written in Latin, regarded the deprivation of the nonjuring bishops. When the bill for preventing occasional conformity was depending in parliament, he wrote a treatise, entitled, “Occasional Communion fundamentally destructive of the discipline of the primitive catholic Church, and contrary to the doctrine of the latest Scriptures concerning Church Communion;” London, 1705, 8vo. About the same time, observing that the deprived bishops were reduced to a small number, he wrote, “A Case in View considered in a Discourse, proving that (in case our present invalidly deprived fathers shall leave all their sees vacant, either by death or resignation) we shall not then be obliged to keep up our separation from those bishops, who are as yet involved in the guilt of the present unhappy schism,” Lond. 1705, 8vo. Some time after, he published “A farther prospect of the Case in View, in answer to some new objections not then considered,” Lond. 1707, 8vo. Hitherto Mr. Dodwell had acted in such a manner as had procured him the applause of all, excepting such as disliked the nonjurors; but, about this time, he published some opinions that drew upon him almost universal censure. For, in order to exalt the powers and dignity of the priesthood, in that one communion, which he imagined to be the pecuHum of God, and to which he had joined himself, he endeavoured to prove, with his usual perplexity of learning, that the doctrine of the soul’s natural mortality was the true and original doctrine; and that immortality was only at baptism conferred upon the soul, by the gift of God, through the hands of one set of regularly-ordained clergy. In support of this opinion, he wrote “An Epistolary Discourse, proving, from the scriptures and the first fathers, that the soul is a principle naturally mortal; but immortalized actually by the pleasure of God, to punishment, or to reward, by its union with the divine baptismal spirit. Wherein is proved, that none have the power of giving this divine immortalizing spirit, since the apostles, but only the bishops,” Lond. 1706, 8vo. At the end of the preface to the reader is a- dissertation, to prove “that Sacerdotal Absolution is necessary for the Remission of Sins, even of those who are truly penitent.” This discourse being attacked by several persons, particularly Chishull, Clarke, Norris, and Mills afterwards bishop of Waterford, our author endeavoured to vindicate himself in the three following pieces: 1. “A Preliminary Defence of the Epistolary Discourse, concerning the distinction between Soul and Spirit: in two parts. I. Against the charge of favouring Impiety. II. Against the charge of favouring Heresy,” Lond. 1707, 8vo. 2. “The Scripture account of the Eternal Rewards or Punishments of all that hear of the Gospel, without an immortality necessarily resulting from the nature of the souls themselves that are concerned in those rewards or punishments. Shewing particularly, I. How much of this account was discovered by the best philosophers. II. How far the accounts of those philosophers were corrected, and improved, by the Hellenistical Jews, assisted by the Revelations of the Old Testament. III. How far the discoveries fore-mentioned were improved by the revelations of the Gospel. Wherein the testimonies also of S. Irenaens and Tertullian are occasionally considered,” Lond. 1708, 8vo. And, 3. “An Explication of a famous passage in the Dialogue of S. Justin Martyr with Tryphon, concerning the immortality of human souls. With an Appendix, consisting of a letter to the rev. Mr. John Norris, of Bemerton; and an expostulation relating to the late insults of Mr. Clarke and Mr. Chishull,” Lond. 1708, 8vo. Upon the death of Dr. William Lloyd, the deprived bishop of Norwich, on the first of January 1710-11, Mr. Dodwell, with some other friends, wrote to Dr. Thomas Kenn, of Bath and Wells, the only surviving deprived bishop, to know, whether he challenged their subjection? He returned for answer, that he did not: and signified his desire that the breach might be closed by their joining with the bishops possessed of their sees; giving his reasons for it. Accordingly, Mr. Dodwell, and several of his friends, joined in communion with them. But others refusing this, Mr. Dodwell was exceedingly concerned, and wrote, “The case in view now in fact. Proving, that the continuance of a separate communion, without substitutes in any of the late invalidlydeprived sees, since the death of William late lord bishop of Norwich, is schismatical. With an Appendix, proving, that our late invalidly-deprived fathers had no right to substitute successors, who might legitimate the separation, after that the schism had been concluded by the decease of the last survivor of those same fathers,” Lond. 1711, 8vo. Our author wrote some few other things, besides what have been already mentioned *. At length, after a

, was born at Shottesbrooke, in Berkshire, June 17, 1709, and was educated at Trinity college, Oxford, where he took the degree of master of arts, on the 8th of June, 1732. In the course of his life, he obtained several considerable preferments. He was rector of Shottesbrooke, and vicar of Bucklesbury and of White-Waltham. Dr. Sherlock, when bishop of Salisbury, gave him a prebendal stall in that cathedral, and he afterwards became a canon of the same church. Bishop Thomas promoted him to the archdeaconry of Berks. The principal works by which he was distinguished, were, “A Free Answer to Dr. Middleton’s Free Enquiry,” published in 1749; and “A full and final Reply to Mr. Toll’s Defence of Dr. Middleton,” which appeared in 1751. Both these works were written with temper, as well as with learning. Our author was judged to have performed such good service to the cause of religion by his answer to Dr. Middleton, that the university of Oxford conferred upon him the degree of doctor in divinity by diploma, in full convocation on Feb. 23, 1749-50. He published also, “Two Sermons on the eternity of future punishment, in answer to Whiston with a Preface,” Oxford, 1743; “Visitation Sermon on the desireableness of the Christian Faith, published at the request of bishop Sherlock,” Oxford, 1741 “Two Sermons on a rational faith,” Oxford, 1745 “Sermon on the practical influence of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity,” Oxford, 1715; “Dissertation on Jepthah’s Vow, occasioned by Romaine’s Sermon on that subject,” London, 1745; “Practical Discourses (14) on moral subjects, vol.1.” London, 1748. A Dedication to his patron Arthur Vanittart, esq. of Shottesbrooke, precedes a masterly preface of considerable length, stating the great duties of morality, c. “Vol. II. London, 1749, containing 14 more;” and preceded by a Dedication to bishop Sherlock, whose “unsolicited testimony of favour” to him laid him “under personal obligations. Such a testimony from such a patron, and the obliging manner of conferring it, added much to the value of the favour itself.” “Assize Sermon on Human Laws,” Oxford, 1750; “Sermon on St. Paul’s Wish,” Oxford, 1752; “Two Sermons on Superstition,” Oxford, 1754; “Assize Sermon on the equal and impartial discharge of Justice,” Oxford, 1756 “Letter to the Author of Considerations on the Act to prevent Clandestine Marriages; with a Postscript occasioned by Stebbing’s Enquiry into the annulling Causes,” &c. London, 1755. This Letter *' by a Country Clergyman“was known, at the time, as Dr. DodwelPs;” Two Sermons on the Doctrine of the Divine Visitation by Earthquakes,“Oxford, 1756;” Assize Sermon on the False Witness, Oxford, 1758; “Sermon at the Meeting of the Charity Schools,” London, 1758; “Two Sermons on a particular Providence,” Oxford, 1760 “Sermon before the Sons of the Clergy,” London, 1760; “Charge to the Clergy of the archdeaconry of Berks,” London, 1764-; “Sermon at the Consecration of Bishop Moss, in 1766,” London, 1767; “The Sick Man’s Companion; or the Clergyman’s Assistant in visiting the Sick; with a Dissertation on Prayer,” London, 1767; “The Prayer, on laying the foundation stone of the Salisbury infirmary, subjoined to dean Greene’s Infirmary Sermon,” Salisbury, 1767; “Infirmary Sermon,” Salisbury, 1768. In 1302, the eldest son of our author permitted the “Three Charges on the Athanasian Creed,” in consequence of the request of some Oxford friends, to see the light. They were accordingly printed at the university press; and contributed, as the author expresses himself in his second page, “to obviate all real mistakes, to silence all wilful misrepresentations, to remove prejudices, to confirm the faith of others, and to vindicate our own sincerity in the profession of it” and it was considered by him as “not unseasonable or unuseful to review and justify that which is called the Athanasian Creed not, we well know, as composed by him whose name it bears, but as explaining the doctrine which he so strenuously maintained.”

Dr. Dodwell died Oct. 21, 1785, with the character, which his publications amply justify, of an orthodox, diligent, and learned divine.

When the civil wars broke out, Mr. Dolben took arms for the royal cause in the garrison at Oxford, and served as an ensign in the unfortunate battle of Marston-Moor, in 1644, where he received a dangerous wound in the shoulder from a musquet-ball; but in the defence of York, soon after, he received a severer wound of the same kind in the thigh; which broke the bone, and confined him twelve months to his bed. In the course of his military service he was advanced to the rank of captain, and, according to Wood, of major. In 1646, when there appeared no longer any hope of serving the king’s cause by arms, when Oxford and his other garrisons were surrendered, and himself in the hands of his enemies, Mr. Dolben retired again to his college, and renewed his studies; a sense of duty had made him an active soldier; inclination and natural abilities rendered him at all times a successful student. In 1647 he took the degree of master of arts, and remained at college till ejected by the parliamentarian visitors in 1648. In the interval between this period and the year 1656, when he entered into holy orders, we have no account of him; but it is most probable that his time was, in general, studiously employed, and especially from the moment when he took up that design. From 1657, when he married Catharine daughter of Ralph, elder brother of archbishop Sheldon, to the time of the king’s restoration, he lived in Oxford, at the bouse of his father-in-law, in St. Aldate’s parish; and throughout that interval, in conjunction with Dr. Fell and Dr. Allestree, constantly performed divine service and administered the sacraments, according to the Liturgy of the church of England, to the great comfort of the royalists then resident in Oxford, particularly the students ejected in 1648, who formed a regular and pretty numerous congregation*. The house appropriated to this sacred purpose was then the residence of Dr. Thomas Willis, the celebrated physician, and is yet standing, opposite to Merton college. The attachment of Mr. Dolben to what he considered as the right cause had before been active and courageous; it was now firm and unwearied, with equal merit, and with better success.

St. Dominic had spent ten years in preaching in Languedoc, when, in 1215, he founded the celebrated order of preaching friars, or Dominicans, as they were afterwards called. The same year it was approved of by Innocent III. and confirmed in 1216, by a bull of Honorius III. under the title of St. Augustin; to which Dominic added several austere precepts and observances, obliging the brethren to tuke a vow of absolute poverty, and to abandon entirely all their revenues and possessions; and they were called preaching friars, because public instruction was the main end of their institution. The first convent was founded at Tholouse by the bishop thereof, and Simon de Montfort. Two years afterwards they had another at Paris, near the bishop’s house and iome time after, viz. in 1218, a third in the rue St Jaques, St. James’s- street, whence the denomination of Jacobins. Just before his death, Dominic sent Gilbert de Fresney, with twelve of the brethren, into England, where they founded their first monastery at Oxford, in 1221, and soon after another at London. In 1276, the mayor and aldermen of the city of London gave them two whole streets by the river Thames, where they erected a very commodious convent, whence that place is still called Black Friars, from the name by which the Dominican? were called in England. St. Dominic, at first, only took the habit of the regular canons, that is, a black cassock, and rochet; but this he quited in 1219, for that which they now wear, which, it is pretended, was shewn by the blessed Virgin herself to the beatiiied Renaud d'Orleans. This order is diffused throughout the whole known world. It has forty-five provinces under the general, who resides at Rome; and twelve particular congregations, or reforms, governed by vicars-general. They reckon three popes of this order, above sixty cardinals, several patriarchs, a hundred and fifty archbishops, and about eight hundred bishops; beside masters of the sacred palace, whose office has been constantly discharged by a religious of this order, ever since St. Dominic, who held it under Honorius III. in 1218. The Dominicans are also inquisitors in many places. Of all the monastic orders, none enjoyed a higher degree of power and authority than the Dominican friars, whose credit was great and their influence universal. Nor will this appear surprising, when we consider that they filled very eminent stations in the church, presided every where over the terrible tribunal of the inquisition, and had the care of souls, with the function of confessors in all the courts of Europe, which circumstance, in those times of ignorance and superstition, manifestly tended to put most of the European princes in their power. But the measures they used, in order to maintain and extend their authority, were so perfidious and cruel, that their influence began tq decline towards the beginning of the sixteenth century. The tragic story of Jetzer, conducted at Bern in 1501), for determining the uninteresting dispute between them and the Franciscans, relating to the immaculate conception, will reflect indelible infamy on this order. They were indeed perpetually employed in stigmatizing with the opprobrious name of heresy numbers of learned and pious men; in encroaching upon the rights and properties of others, to augment their possessions; and in laying the most iniquitous snares and stratagems for the destruction of their adversaries. They were the principal counsellors, by whose instigation and advice LeoX. was determined to the public condemnation of Luther. The papal see never had more active and useful abettors than this order and that of the Jesuits. The dogmata of the Dominicans are usually opposite to those of the Franciscans. They concurred with the Jesuits in maintaining, that the sacraments have in themselves an instrumental and official powe". by virtue of which they work in the soul (independently of its previous preparation or propensities) a disposition to receive the divine grace; and this is what is commonly called the opus operatum of the sacraments. Thus, according to their doctrine, neither knowledge, wisdom, humility, faith, nor devotion, are necessary to the efficacy of the sacraments, whose victorious energy nothing but a mortal sin can resist.

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

At this period of our history, it was deemed expedient to select such men for high offices in the church, as promised by their abilities and zeal to vindicate the reformed religion. King James, who was no incompetent judge of such merit, though perhaps too apt to measure the talents of others by his own standard, conceived from a perusal of the “Pseudo-Martyr,” that Donne would prove an ornament and bulwark to the church, and therefore not only endeavoured to persuade him to take orders, but resisted every application to exert the royal favour towards him in any other direction. When the favourite earl of Somerset requested that Mr. Donne might have the place of one of the clerks of the council, then vacant, the king replied, *' I know Mr. Donne is a learned man, has the abilities of a learned divine, and will prove a powerful preacher, and my desire is to prefer him that way, and in that way I will deny you nothing for him." Such an intimation must have made a powerful impression, yet there is no reascn to conclude from any part of Mr. Donne’s character, that he won I'd have been induced to enter the church merely by the persuasion of his sovereign, however flattering. To him, however, at this time, the transition was not difficult. He had relinquished the follies of youth, and had nearly outlived the remembrance of them. His studies had long inclined to theology, and his frame of mind was adapted to support the character expected from him. His oldfriend Dr, Morton probably embraced this opportunity to second the king’s wishes, and remove Mr. Donne’s personal scruples; and Dr. King, bishop of London, who had been chaplain to the chancellor when Donne was his secretary, and consequently knew his character, heard of his intention with much satisfaction. By this prelate he was ordained deacon and afterwards priest; and the king, although not uniformly punctual in his promises of patronage, immediately made him his chaplain in ordinary, and gave him hopes of higher preferment.

While in this full tide of popularity, he had the misfortune to fall under the displeasure of the king, who had been informed that in his public discourses he had meddled with some of those points respecting popery which were more usually handled by the puritans. Such an accusation might have had very serious consequences, if the king had implicitly confided in those who brought it forward. But Dr. Donne was too great a favourite to be condemned unheard, and accordingly his majesty sent for him, and represented what he hud heard, and Dr. Donne so completely satisfied him as to his principles in church and state, that the king, in the hearing of his council, bestowed high praise on him, and declared that he rejoiced in the recollection that it was by his persuasion Dr. Donne had become a divine.

a popish divine, who acquired some celebrity from the characters of Jewell, and Nowell, against whom he wrote, was born at Berkhamstead in Hertfordshire, and educated by the care of his uncle Thomas Dorman, of Amersham in Buckinghamshire. He was afterwards educated by Richard Reeve, a very celebrated schoolmaster at Berkhamstead, whence he went to Winchester school, and afterwards to New College, Oxford, where he was admitted probationer-fellow. From this college, however, he removed to All Souls, of which he was elected fellow in 1554. He appears at this time to have been popishly affected, but afterwards avowed his principles by quitting his fellowship and country, and retiring first to Antwerp, and afterwards to Louvaine, where he resumed his studies. He had taken his degrees in law at Oxford, but now proceeded in divinity, and became doctor in that faculty. During his abode at Louvaine, he attacked Jew r ell and Nowell, who replied to him in the most satisfactory manner. In 1569, he was invited to the English college at Doway, where he taught for some time, and afterwards was beneficed at Tournay, in which city he died either in 1572, or 1577. His works, of which a particular account, with the answers, may be seen in Mr. Archdeacon Churton’s excellent “Life of Nowell,” are, 1. “A proof of certain articles in Religion denied by Mr. Jewell,” Antwerp, 1564, 4to. 2. “A Request to Mr. Jewell, that he keep his Promise, made by solemn protestation in his late sermon had at Paul’s Cross,” London, 1567, 8vo. 3. “A Disproof of Mr. Alexander Nowell'a Reproof,” Antwerp, 1565, 4to.

, a very learned divine, and the friend of Erasmus, was born at Naaldrwyck, in Holland, and became professor of philosophy in the university of Louvaine. He was also esteemed an able divine and linguist, but died in the prime of life, May 31, 1525. Besides some academical orations, he published “Dialogus Veneris et Cupidinis, Herculem animi ancipitem in suam militiam, invita virtute, propellentium;” “Complementum Aularioe Plautinae, et Prologus in Militem ejusdem” “Epistola de Hollandorum moribns” and “Oratio de laudibus Aristotelis,” against Laurentius Valla.

, a French divine, was born of a noble family at Issoudun, and educated in the seminary de St. Magloire, at Paris, where he took a doctor’s degree, 1695. After being official at Chalons, he became canon of the church at Paris, and successively archdeacon, grand chanter, and official. Dorsane always opposed the bull Unigenitus, and retired when he found that M. de Noailles was about to issue his mandate for its acceptance. He died November 13, 1728, leaving an historical journal of all that had passed respecting the bull Unigenitus, which extends to 1728, 6 vols. 12mo, or 1756, 2 vols. 4to, which last is reckoned the best edition.

, an English divine, was born about 1598 at Martley near Worcester, and educated at Worcester, whence at the age of sixteen he became a student at Oxford. After he had taken his bachelor’s degree, he was one of those excellent scholars who were candidates for a fellowship in Merton college, and after a severe examination by the then warden, sir Henry Savile, Mr. Doughty gained the election. He there completed his degree of M. A. and entering into orders, became a very popular and edifying preacher. In 1631 he served the office of proctor only for four months, the proctors being removed by the king; but about that time he became chaplain to the earl of Northumberland, and his college bestowed on him the rectory of Lapworth in Warwickshire. On the commencement of the rebellion, he left Lapworth, to avoid sequestration and imprisonment, and joined the king at Oxford. Soon after Dr. Duppa, bishop of Salisbury, gave him the lectureship of St. Edmund’s in that city, where he continued about two years; but, on the defeat of the royal army in the West, he went to London, and found an asylum in the house of sir Nathaniel Brent, in Little Britain. After the restoration, his loyalty and public services were rewarded with a prebend in Westminster, and the rectory of Cheam in Surrey, and about the same time he was created doctor of divinity. He died at Westminster, after he had lived, says Wood, “to be twice a child,” December 25, 1672, and was buried in the abbey.

He published, 1. “Two Sermons,” on the abstruseness of divine mysteries, and on church schisms, 1628, 4to. 2. “The King’s Cause rationally, briefly, and plainly debated, as it stands de facto, against the irrational misprision of a deceived people,” Oxford, 1644, 4to. 3. “Velitationes polemicae; or polemical short discussions of certain particular and select questions,” Lond. 1651 and 1652, 8vo. 4. “Analecta sacra; sive excursus philologici, &c.” Lond. 1658 and 1660, 8vo.

This learned prelate enjoyed a very high share of reputation during a very long life. He was, if not one of the most profound, one of the most general scholars in the kingdom, and the range of his information was most extensive. Nor was he more an enlightened scholar, than a warm friend to men of learning and genius; in private life, he was amiable, communicative, and interesting in his conversation and correspondence. As a divine, if he took no distinguished part in the controversies of the times, he evinced by his “Criterion,” his detection of Lauder, and his controversy with Bower, what a formidable antagonist he could have proved, and what an unanswerable assertor of truth. His character likewise stood high for fidelity and a conscientious discharge of the public duties of his station., and when not employed in the pulpit, for always countenancing public worship by his presence. His punctuality in this last respect is still remembered by the congregations of St. Faith’s and St. Paul’s. In a word, as his talents recommended him in early life to patronage, so he soon demonstrated that he wanted only to be better known to be thought deserving of the highest preferments.

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

, an English divine, the eldest son of Calybute Downing of Shennington, in Gloucestershire, gent, was born in 1606, and in 1623 became a commoner of Oriel college, Oxford, where he took one degree in arts. His master’s degree, according to Wood, he took at Cambridge, or abroad; after which, entering into orders, he held the vicarage of Hackney, near London, with the parsonage of Hickford, in Buckinghamshire. But these not being sufficient for his ambition, he stood in competition with Dr. Gilbert Sheldon for the wardenship of All -soul’s; and losing that, was a suitor to be chaplain to the earl of Strafford, lord lieutenant of Ireland, thinking that road might lead to a bishopric. But failing there also, he joined the parliament party, and became a great promoter of their designs; and in a sermon preached before the artillery-company, Sept. 1, 1640, delivered this doctrine: “That for the defence of religion, and reformation of the church, it was lawful to take up arms against the king” but fearing to be called in question for this assertion, he retired to the house of Robert earl of Warwick, at Little Lees, in Essex. After this he became chaplain to the lord Robert’s regiment, and in 1643 was one of the assembly of divines; but died in the midst of his career, in 1644. He has some political discourses and sermons in print, enumerated by Wood. He was father of sir George Downing, made by king Charles II. secretary to the treasury, and one of the commissioners for the customs.

When he was upwards of fifty years of age, he commenced prophet. He had his first vision in the night of Feb. 23, 1638, and the second in the night of Jan. 23, 1643. The first vision promised him in general great armies from the north and east, which should crush the house of Austria; the second declared particularly, that Ragotski, prince of Transylvania, should command the army from the east, and ordered Drabicins to inform his brethren, that < was about to restore them to their own country, and to revenge the injuries done to his people and that they should prepare themselves for this deliverance by fasting and prayer. He received orders to write down what been revealed to him and to begin in the manner of the ancient prophets, “The word of the Lord came unto me.” His visions, however, were not much regarded at first. These two were followed by many others in the same year, 1643; and there was one, which ordered, that he should open the whole affair to Comenius, who was then at Elbing, in Prussia. One of his visions, in 1644, assured him that the imperial troops should not destroy the refugees. They committed great ravages upon the territories of Kagotski, plundered the town of Leidnitz, and besieged the castle. Drabicius shut himself up there, and did not depend so entirely upon the divine assurances as to think human means unnecessary. He even set his hand to the works: “he would not only be present,” says Comenius, who blames him for it, “but also fire one of the cannon himself; whereas, it would have been more proper for him to have been in a corner, and to have applied himself to prayer. But the imprudent zeal of this new Peter, presuming to defend the Lord with the material sword, was chastised by the Lord himself, who permitted part of the flame to recoil upon his face, and to hurt one of his eyes.” The imperialists raised the siege; but soon after besieged the place again, and took it. The refugees were plundered, and Drabicius fell into the hands of the imperialists. This did not prevent him from going to Ragotski, and telling him, Aug. 1645, that God commanded him to destroy the house of Austria and the pope; and that, “if he refused to attack that nest of vipers, he would draw down upon his family a general ruin.” The prince already knew that Drabicius had assumed the character of a prophet for Drabicius, according to the repeated orders which he had received in his ecstacies, had sent him a copy of his revelations, which Ragotski threw into the fire. The death of that prince, in Oct. 16 7, plunged Drabicius into extreme sorrow; who was in the utmost fear lest his revelation should vanish into smoke, and himself be exposed to ridicule. But he had one ecstatic consolation, which re-animated him; and that was, that God would send him Comenius, to whom he should communicate his writings. Comenius having business in Hungary, in 1650, saw Drabicius there, and his prophecies; and made such reflections as he thought proper, upon the vision’s having for three years before promised Drabicius that he should have Comenius for a coadjutor. Sigismond Ragotski, being urged by Drabicius to make war against the emperor, and by his mother to continue in peace with him, was somewhat perplexed. Drabicius denounced against him the judgments of the Almighty, in case of peace; and his mother threatened him with her curse in case of war. In this dilemma he recommended himself to the prayers of Drabicius and Comenius, and kept himself quiet till his death. In 1654 Drabicius was restored to his ministry, and his visions p esemed themselves more frequently than ever; ordering from lime to time that they should be communicated to his coadjutqr Comenius, that be might publish them to all nations and languages, and particularly to the Turks and Tartars. Comenius found himself embarrassed between the fear of God, and that of men; he was apprehensive that by not printing the revelations of Drabicins he should disobey God, and that by printing them he should expose himself to the ridicule and censure of men. He took a middle way; he resolved to print them, and not to distribute the copies; and upon this account he entitled the book “Lux in Tenebris.” But his resolution did not continue long; it gave way to two remarkable events, which were taken for a grand crisis, and the unravelling of the mystery. One of these events was the irruption of George Ragotski into Poland; the other, the death of the emperor Ferdinand III., but both events far from answering the predictions, served only to confound them. Ragotski perished in his descent upon Poland; and Leopold, king of Hungary, was elected emperor in the room of his father Ferdinand III. by which election the house of Austria was almost restored to its former grandeur, and the protestants in Hungary absolutely ruined. Drabicius was the greatest sufferer by this; for the court of Vienna, being informed that he was the person who sounded the trumpet against the house of Austria, sought means to punish him, and, as it is said, succeeded in it. What became of him, we cannot learn; some say that he was burnt for an impostor and false prophet; others, that he died in Turkey, whither he had fled for refuge; but neither of these accounts is certain.

, an English divine and poet, of the sixteenth century, was educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of bachelor in divinity in 1569. The same year he was admitted to the prebend of Firles in the cathedral of Chichester, June 27, and on July 2 to that of Chamberlaynward in St. Paul’s, and March 9 following, he was installed archdeacon of Lewes. He seems to have been chaplain to Grindall, when archbishop of York. He was a tolerable Latin poet, and translated the Ecclesiastes into Latin hexameters, 1572, 4to, and published two miscellanies of Latin poetry, the one entitled “Sylva,” and the other “Poemata varia et externa,” the last printed at Paris. In the “Sylva,” he mentions his new version of David’s psalms, which Wartou supposes to have been in English, and says, he had begun to translate the Iliad, but had gone no further than the fourth book. In 1566 he published what he called “A medicinable Morall, that is, the two bookes of Horace his satyres Englished, according to the prescription of St. Hierome,” &c. Lond. and in the following year appeared “Horace, his arte of Poetrie, Pistles, and Satyrs Englished.” This version, which Drant undertook in the character of a grave divine, and as a teacher of morality, is very paraphrastic, and sometimes parodical. His other publications are, 1. “Gregory Nazianzen his Epigrams and spiritual sentences,” 1568, 8vo. 2. “Shaklocki, epigrammatis in mortem Cuthberti Scoti, apomaxis,” Lond. 1565, 4to which occurs in Herbert’s Antiquities under the title “An Epygrame of the death of Cuthberte Skotte some tyme beshoppe of Chester, by Roger Shacklocke, and replyed against by Thomas Drant.” 3. “Thomae Drantae Angli, Advordingamiae Praesul,” 1575, 4to. These two last are in the British Museum. 4. “Three godly and learned Sermons, very necessary to be read and regarded of all men,” 1584, 8vo. Extracts from these are given in the Bibliographer. The time of his death is no where mentioned, but as the archdeaconry of Lewes was vacant in 1578, it might have been in consequence of that event.

In 1626 we find him styled poet laureat, in a copy of his own verses written in commendation of Abraham Holland, and prefixed to the posthumous poems of that author. It is probable, that the appellation of poet laureat was not formerly confined so strictly, as it is now, to the person on whom this title is conferred by the crown, who is presumed to have been at that time Ben Jonson; because we find it given to others only as a distinction of their excellency in the art of poetry; to Mr. George Sandys particularly, who was our author’s friend. The print of Drayton, before the first volume of his works in folio, has a wreath of bays above his head, and so has his bust in Westminster-abbey; yet when we find that the portraits of Joshua Sylvester, John Owen, and others, who never had any grant of the laureat’s place, are as formally crowned with laurel as those who really possessed it, we have reason to believe, that nothing more was meant by it, than merely a compliment. Besides, as to Drayton, he tells us himself, in his dedication to sir William Aston of “The Owl,” that he leaves the iaurel to those who may look after it. In 1627 was published the second volume of his poems, containing his “Battle of Agincourt, Miseries of queen Margaret, Court of Fairies, Quest of Cynthia, Shepherd’s Syrena, elegies, also, the Moon-Calf,” which is a strong satire upon the masculine affectations of women, and the effeminate disguises of the men, in those times. The elegies are 12 in number, though there are but eight reprinted in the edition of 1748. In 1630 he published another volume of poems in 4to, entitled, the “Muses’ Elyzium:” with three divine poems, on Noah’s flood, Moses’s birth and miracles, and David and Goliath. Draytori died in 1631, and was buried in Westminster-abbey amongst the poets.

His leg having become mortified, his surgeon recommended an amputation of the limb, with a view to stop the further progress of the disorder; but he would not undergo the operation, saying, that as by the course of nature he had not many years to live, he would not attempt to prolong an uncomfortable existence by a painful and uncertain experiment, but patiently submit to death. This account, which was given by a contemporary writer, not long afterwards, is strongly corroborated by the unquestionable testimony of Mrs. Elizabeth Creed, his kinswoman; who informs us, that he received the notice of his approaching dissolution with perfect resignation and submission to the Divine Will; and that in his last illness he took the most tender and affectionate farewell of his afflicted friends, “of which sorrowful number she herself was one.” Twentytwo years afterwards this very respectable lady, who was then in her eightieth year, erected a monument at Tichmarsh, in honour of our poet and his parents, on which these circumstances so much to his honour are recorded. (See Creed, vol. X.)

a distinguished clergyman of the established church of Scotland, the third son of the rev. John Drysdale, minister of Kirkaldy, was born April 29, 1718, and educated there in classical learning. In 1732, he was sent to finish his studies at the university of Edinburgh; and in 1740, was licensed to preach by the presbytery of Kirkaldy, was several years assistant minister of the collegiate church in Edinburgh, and in 1748 was presented to the church of Kirkliston. After residing there for fifteen years, he was presented to lady Yester’s church, by the town-council of Edinburgh. This being the first instance in which the magistrates of that city had exercised their right of presentation, which was thought to reside in the parishioners, and Mr. Drysdale being suspected of favouring in his discourses the Arminian tenets, a very common objection to the modern church of Scotland, a formidable opposition was made to his institution; but the magistrates proving victorious, he obtained a settlement in lady Yester’s church. The sermons he preached there, says professor Dalzel, although his mode of delivery was by no means correct, always attracted a great concourse of hearers, whom he never failed to delight and instruct by an eloquence of the most nervous and interesting kind. His natural diffidence for some prevented his appearing as a speaker in the ecclesiastical judicatures; but he was at length induced to co-operate with Dr. Robertson, in defence of what was termed the moderate party in the church of Scotland. In 1765, the university of Aberdeen, unsolicited, conferred upon him the degree of D, D. by diploma, and on the death of Dr. Jardine, he was preferred to the church of Tron, and appointed a king’s chaplain, with the allowance of one-third the emoluments arising from the deanery of the chapel royal. In 1773, having obtained the character of an able and impartial divine, he was unanimously elected moderator of the general assembly of the Scottish kirk; “the greatest mark of respect,” observes his biographer, “which an ecclesiastical commonwealth can bestow.” In 1784 he was re-elected, by a great majority, to the same dignity. In May, 17s8, he appeared at the general assembly, and the first day acted as principal clerk, but was taken ill, and died on the 16th of June following, aged seventy years. His general character was that of betievolence and inflexible integrity. His candour obtained him many friends; and even such as were of different sentiments in church affairs, and held different religious tenets, esteemed the man, and with these he kept up a friendly intercourse. “Indeed,” adds the professor, “never any man more successfully illustrated what he taught by his own conduct and manners.” His reputation as a preacher was very great; and on an occasional visit he made to London, Mr. Strahan, the late printer, endeavoured to persuade him to publish a volume of sermons. On his return to Scotland he began a selection for the purpose, but his modesty hindered his proceeding, and induced him, finally, to relinquish the plan. After his death, his son-in-law, the late professor Dalzel, who h;,d the inspection of his manuscripts, made a selection of his sermons, and published them in two 8vo volumes, with biographical anecdotes of his life, which were published also in the " Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.

, was a divine and a poet, the effusions of whose muse have been honoured with a place in Dr. Johnson’s collection, but of whose early history little is known, nor do we know who his parents were, or where he was born. His grammatical education he received under the famous Dr. Busby, at Westminster-school, into wnich he was admitted in 1670, and from which he was elected in 1675, to Trinity- college, Cambridge. In 1673 he took the degree of B. A. and that of M. A. in 1682. He became likewise a fellow of the college, and it is related that he was for some time tutor to the duke of Richmond. Having entered into holy orders, he was presented to the rectory of Blaby, in Leicestershire, in 1687-8, made a prebendary of Gloucester, and in 1688 chosen a procior in convocation for that church, and was chaplain to queen Anne. In 1710 he was presented by sir Jonathan Trelawny, bishop of Winchester, to the wealthy living of Witney, in Oxfordshire, which, however, he enjoyed but a few months; for, on the 10th of February, 1710-11, having returned from an entertainment, he was found dead the next morning. When Mr. Duke left the university, being conscious of his powers, he enlisted himself among the wits of the age. He was in particular the familiar friend of Otway, and was engaged, among other popular names, in the translations of Ovid and Juvenal. From his writings he appears not to have been ill-qualified for poetical composition. “In his Review,” says Dr. Johnson, “though unfinished, are some vigorous lines. His poems are not below mediocrity; nor have I found in them much to be praised.” With the wit, Mr. Duke seems to have shared the dissoluteness of the times for some of his compositions are such as he must have reviewed with detestation in his later days. This was especially the case with regard to two of his poems; the translation of one of the elegies of Ovid, and the first of the three songs. “Perhaps,” observes Dr. Johnson, “like >ome other foolish young men, he rather talked than lived viciously, in an age when he that would be thought a wit was afraid to say his prayers; and whatever might have been bad in the first part of his life was surely condemned and reformed by his better judgment;” and this, it is hoped, was the case.

Mr. Duke, in his character as a divine, published three sermons in his life-time. The first was on the imitation of Christ, preached before the queen in 1703, from 1 John, ii. 6. The second was from Psalm xxv. 14, and was likewise preached before the queen in 1704. The third was an assize sermon, on Christ’s kingdom, from John xviii. 36, and published in the same year. In 1714, fifteen of his sermons on several occasions, were printed in one vol. 8vo, which were held in good reputation, and are spoken of in strong terms of commendation by Dr. Henry Felton, who, in his Dissertation on reading the Classics, says, “Mr. Duke may be mentioned under the double capacity of a poet and a divine. He is a bright example in the several parts of writing, whether we consider the originals, his translations, paraphrases, or imitations. But here I can only mention him as a divine, with this peculiar commendation, that in his sermons, besides liveliness of wit, purity and correctness of style, and justness of argument, we see many fine allusions to the ancients, several beautiful passages handsomely incorporated in the train of his own thoughts; and, to say all in a word, classic learning and a Christian spirit.”

In 1728, a letter by Mr. Duncombe, signed Philopropos, was printed in the London Journal of March 30, containing some animadversions on the “Beggar’s Opera,” then exhibiting with great applause at Lincoln’s-i-intheatre, shewing its pernicious consequences to the practice of morality and Christian virtue. And the same popular entertainment having been soon after most seasonably condemned in a sermon preached at Lincoln’s-inn chapel by Dr. Herring (afterwards archbishop of Canterbury), of whom Mr. Duncombe was a constant auditor, in a subsequent letter on the same subject in the London Journal of April 20, subscribed Benevolus, he paid a just compliment to the “clear reasoning, good sense, and manly rhetoric, the judicious criticism, as well as the Christian oratory,” there displayed. This introduced him to the acquaintance and friendship of that excellent divine, which continued without interruption till his grace’s death, in March 1757; this favour being gratefully acknowledged by him “as one of the most generous and disinterested offers of friendship which he ever received from any one since he was acquainted with the world.” In August of the same year, our author published a pamphlet (without a name) entitled “Remarks on M.Tindal’s Translation of M. de Rapin Thoyras’s History of England, in a letter to S. T. [Sigismund Trafford,] esq.” criticising Tindal’s style, which is certainly none of the best.

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

John Duns was at first a follower of Thomas Aquinas; but, differing from his master on the question concerning the efficacy of divine grace, he formed a distinct sect, and hence the denominations of the Thomists and Scotists, who were engaged for centuries in eager and trifling disputes, and the nances of the two sects still subsist in some of the Roman Catholic schools. On account of Scotus’s acuteness in disputation, he was called “the most subtile Doctor;” but his ingenuity was wholly employed in embarrassing, with new fictions of abstraction, and with other scholastic chimeras, subjects already sufficiently perplexed. He was the author of a. vast number of works, several of which have been separately published, and in 1474, the English Franciscans printed a collection of the larger part. At length, the whole of them (some few still remaining in manuscript excepted) were collected together by Luke Wadding, illustrated with notes, and published at Lyons in 1639, in 12 vols. folio. Absurd as many of the questions were which called forth the exertions of his talents, it is probable that in a more enlightened age, genius and abilities like his might have been of lasting benefit to posterity.

It may not be unamusing to recite an example of the extravagant praises that have been bestowed upon Duns Scotus by his followers. They tell us that “He was so consummate a philosopher, that he could have been the inventor of philosophy, if it had not before existed. His knowledge of all the mysteries of religion was so profound and perfect, that it was rather intuitive certainty than belief. He described the divine nature as if he had seen God; the attributes of celestial spirits, as if he had been an angel; the felicities of a future state, as if he had enjoyed them; and the ways of providence, as if he had penetrated into all its secrets. He wrote so many books, that one man is hardly able to read them; and no one man is able to understand them. He would have written more, if he had composed with less care and accuracy. Such was our immortal Scotus, the most ingenious, acute, and subtile, of the sons of men.” His portraits at Windsor and Oxford have been generally considered as ideal.

was born of noble parents at Glastonbury, in Somersetshire, in the year 925. Under the patronage of his uncle Aldhelm, archbishop of Canterbury, he was instructed in the literature and accomplishments of those times, and in consequence of his recommendation invited by king Athelstan to court, who bestowed on him lands near Glastonbury, where he is said to have spent some years in retirement. Edmund, the successor of Athelstan, appointed him abbot of the celebrated monastery which he began to rebuild in that place in the year 042, and by the munificence of the king, who gave him a new charter in the year 944, he was enabled to restore it to its former lustre. Among other legendary stories reported of St. Dunstan we are told that he had been represented to the king as a man of licentious manners; and dreading the ruin of his fortune by suspicions of this nature, he determined to repair past indiscretions by exchanging the extreme of superstition for that of licentiousness. Accordingly he secluded himself altogether from the world; and he framed a cell so small that he could neither stand erect in it, nor stretch out his limbs during his repose; and here he employed himself perpetually in devotion or manual labour. In this retreat his mind was probably somewhat deranged; and he indulged chimeras which, believed by himself and announced to the credulous multitude, established a character of sanctity among the people. He is said to have fancied that the devil, among the frequent visits which he paid him, was one day more earnest than usual in his temptations; till Dunstan, provoked hy his importunity, seized him by the nose with a pair of red-hot pincers as he put his head into the cell, and he held him there till the malignant spirit made the whole neighbourhood resound with his bellowings. The people credited and extolled this notable exploit, and it ensured to Dunstan such a degree of reputation, that he appeared again in the world, and Edred, who had succeeded to the crown, made him not only the director of that prince’s conscience, but his counsellor in the most important affairs of government. He was also placed at the head of the treasury; and being possessed of power at court, and of credit with the populace, he was enabled to attempt with success the most arduous enterprizes. Taking advantage of the implicit confidence reposed in him by the king, Dunstan imported into England a new order of monks, the Benedictines, who, by changing the state of ecclesiastical affairs, excited, on their first establishment, the most violent commotions. Finding also that his advancement had been owing to the opinion of his austerity, he professed himself a parti zan of the rigid monastic rules; and after introducing that reformation into the convents of Glastonbury and Abingdon, he endeavoured to render it universal in the kingdom. This conduct, however, incurred the resentment of the secular clergy; and these exasperated the indignation of many courtiers, which had been already excited by the haughty and over-bearing demeanour which Dunstan assumed. Upon the death of Edred, who had supported his prime-minister and favourite in all his measures, and the subsequent succession of Edwy, Dunstan was accused of malversation in his office, and banished the kingdom. But, on the death of Edwy, and the succession of Edgar, Dunstan was recalled and promoted first to the see of Worcester, then to that of London and about the year 959, to the archiepiscopal see of Canterbury. For this last advancement it was requisite to obtain the sanction of the pope; and for this purpose Dunstan was sent to Rome, where he soon obtained the object of his wishes, and the appointment of legate in England, with very extensive authority. Upon his return to England, so absolute was his influence over the king, he was enabled to give to the Romish see an authority and jurisdiction, of which the English clergy had been before in a considerable degree independent. In order the more effectually and completely to accomplish this object, the secular clergy were excluded from their livings, and disgraced; and the monks were appointed to supply their places. The scandalous lives of the secular clergy furnished one plea for this measure, and it was not altogether groundless; but the principal motive was that of rendering the papal power absolute in the English church; for, at this period, the English clergy had not yielded implicit submission to the pretended successors of St. Peter, as they refused to comply with the decrees of the popes, which enjoined celibacy on the clergy. Dunstan was active and persevering, and supported by the authority of the crown, he conquered the struggles which the country had long maintained against papal dominion, and gave to the monks an influence, the baneful effects of which were experienced in England until the era of the reformation. Hence Dunstan has been highly extolled by the monks and partizans of the Romish church; and his character has been celebrated in a variety of ways, and particularly by the miracles which have been wrought either by himself or by others in his favour. During the whole reign of Edgar, Dunstan maintained his interest at court; and upon his death, in the year 975, his influence served to raise his son Edward to the throne, in opposition to Ethelred. Whilst Edward was in his minority, Dunstan ruled with absolute sway, both in the church and state, but on the murder of the king, in the year 979, and after the accession of Ethelred, his credit and influence declined; and the contempt with which his threatenings of divine vengeance were regarded by the king, are said to have mortified him to such a degree, that on his return to his archbishopric, he died of grief and vexation, May 19, 988. A volume of his works was published at Doway, in 1626. His ambition has given him a considerable place in ecclesiastical and civil history; and he appears to have been a man of extraordinary talents. Dr. Burney, in his history, notices his skill in music, and his biographers also inform us that he was a master of drawing, engraved and took impressions from gold, silver, brass, and iron, and that he even practised something like printing. Gervase’s words are, “literas formare,” which however, we think, means no more than that he cut letters on metal.

, bookseller and miscellaneous writer, was born at Graff bam, in Huntingdonshire, the 14th of May, 1659; the son of John Dunton, fellow of Trinity-college, Cambridge, and rector of Graft ham, whose works he published in 8vo, embellished with very curious engravings. Dunton was in business upwards of twenty years, during which time he traded considerably in the Stationers’ company; but, about the beginning of the last century, he failed, and commenced author; and in 1701, was amanuensis to the editor of a periodical paper called the “Post Angel.” He soon after set up as a writer for the entertainment of the public; and projected and carried on, with the assistance of others, the “Athenian Mercury,” or a scheme to answer a series of questions monthly, the querist remaining concealed. This work was continued to about 20 volumes; and afterwards reprinted by Bell, under the title of the “Athenian Oracle,” 4 vols. 8vo. It forms a strange jumble of knowledge and ignorance, sense and nonsense, curiosity and impertinence. In 1710 he published his “Athenianism,” or the projects of Mr. John Dunton, author of the “Essay on the hazard of a deathbed repentance.” This contains, amidst a prodigious variety of matter, six hundred treatises in prose and verse, by which he appears to have been, with equal facility, a philosopher, physician, poet, civilian, divine, humourist, &c. To this work he has prefixed his portrait, engraved by M. Vander Gucht; and in a preface, which breathes all the pride of self-consequence, informs his readers he does not write to flatter, or for hire. As a specimen of this miscellaneous farrago, the reader may take the following heads of subjects: 1. The Funeral of Mankind, a paradox, proving we are all dead and buried. 2. The spiritual hedge-hog; or, a new and surprising thought. 3. The double life, or a new way to redeem time, by living over to-morrow before it comes. 4. Dunton preaching to himself; or every man his own parson. 5. His creed, or the religion of a bookseller, in imitation of Brown’s Religio Medici, which h.is some humour and merit. This he dedicated to the Stationers’ company. As a satirist, he appears to most advantage in his poems entitled the “Beggar mounted” the “Dissenting Doctors;” “Parnassus hoa!” or frolics in verse “Dunton’s shadow,” or the character of a summer friend but in all his writings he is exceedingly prolix and tedious, and sometimes obscure. His “Case is altered, or Dunton’s remarriage to his own wife,” has some singular notions, but very little merit in the composition. For further particulars of this heterogeneous genius, see “Dunton’s Life and Errors,” a work now grown somewhat scarce, or, what will perhaps be more satisfactory, the account of him in our authority. Dunton died in 1733.

, D. D. a very eloquent French protcstant preacher at the Savoy in London, and a fellow of the royal society, was born about 1679 at St. Pargoire in Lower Languedoc, and was the son and brother of two distinguished protestant clergymen. Of his history, however, our memoirs are very scanty. It appears that he had a congregation first at Amsterdam, whence he was invited to that of the Savoy in London, where he died Jan. 16, 1763. His character was that of an universal scholar, a deep divine, a devotee to truth, and a most benevolent and disinterested man. Among: his works are, 1. “La Vie et les Sentimens de Lucilio Vanini,” Rotterdam, 1717, 12mo, and afterwards published in English. 2. “Histoire de la Peinture ancienne,” from Pliny’s Natural History, with the Latin text, and notes, Lond. 1725, fol. without his name. [3. “A volume of Sermons in French,” Lond. 1726.] 4. “Hist, naturelle del‘Oretde l’Argent,” edited in the same manner, 1729, fol. and both marked by French bibliographers among their rare books. 5. “C. Plinii historiae naturalis ad Titum imperatorem pra?fatio,” collated with ancient Mss. &c. Lond. 1728, 8vo. 6. An edition of Telemachus, with notes and illustrations, and a life of Fenelon, Hamburgh, 1731, 2 vols. 12mo, and revised by Dr. Durand for Watts of London, 1745. 7. “Histoire du XVI Siecle,” Lond. 1725 29, 6 vols. 8vo, on the plan of Perizonius. 8. “Onzieme et douzieme volumes de l‘Hist. d’Angleterre par Rapin,” Hague, 1734, and Paris, 1749, 2 vols. 4to. 9. “Academica, sive de judicio erga verum, in ipsis primis fontibus, opera P. Valentiae Zafrensis, editio jiova emendatior,” Lond. 1740, 8vo, printed by Bowyer, in French and Latin. This work is so scarce in France, that when M. Capperonnier, one of the keepers of the national library, wanted to add it to the other editions published by Barbou, he was obliged to transcribe the whole from a copy lent to him by M. Chardin, who had one of the finest libraries in Paris. 10. “Exercices Francais et Anglais,” Lond. 1745, 8vo. 11. “Dissertation en forme cTentretien sur la Prosodie Francaise,” prefixed to Boyer’s Dictionary. 12. “Eclaircissemens sur le toi et sur le vous,” ibid. 1753, 12mo. His sentiments on the thce and thoit have been adopted by La Harpe in his late lectures. In 1777, a posthumous work by Dr. Durand, a life of Ostervald, was published, with a preface by the late rev. Samuel Beuzeville of Bethnal-green, a French clergyman, who died in 1782.

, so called from a town in Auvergne, a learned French divine of the fourteenth century, entered the Dominican order, took a doctor’s degree at Paris, was master of the sacred palace, bishop of Puy in Velay, and afterwards bishop of Meaux, where he died in 1333. Durand was one of the most eminent divines of his age he left Commentaries on the four books of Sentence, Paris, 1550, 2 vols. fol. and “Trait de TOrigine des Jurisdictions,” 4to. He frequently combats the opinions of St. Thomas, being an adherent of Scotus, and displayed so much ingenuity in his disputes, as to be called the Most resolute Doctor. Although the Thomists could not conquer him in his life, one of the number contrived to dispose of him after death, in these lines:

, a learned divine in the seventeenth century, who wrote several pieces in vindication of the Church of England, was born at St. Helier’s in the Isle of Jersey, in 1625. About the end of 1640, he was entered of Merton-college in Oxford; but when that city came to be garrisoned for king Charles I. he retired into France: and, having studied for some time at Caen in Normandy, took the degree of master of arts, in the Sylvanian college of that place, on the 8th of July 1664. Then he applied himself to the study of divinity, for above two years, at Saumur, under the celebrated Amyrault, divinity reader in that Protestant university. In 1647 he returned to Jersey, and continued for some time until the reduction of that island by the parliament-forces in 1651, when on account of his being in the defence of it for the king, he was forced to withdraw, or rather was expelled thence. He then went to Paris, and received episcopal ordination in the chapel of sir Richard Browne, knt. his majesty’s resident in France, from the hands of Thomas, bishop of Galloway. From Paris, he removed to St. Malo’s, whence the reformed church of Caen invited him to be one of their ministers, in the absence of the learned Samuel Bochart, who was going into Sweden. Not long after, the landgrave of Hesse having written to the ministers of Paris, to send him a minister to preach in French at his highness’s court, he was by them recommended to that prince, but preferred being chaplain to the duke de la Force, father to the princess of Turenne; in which station he continued above eight years. Upon the restoration he came over to England, and was very instrumental in setting up the new episcopal French church at the Savoy in London, in which he officiated first on Sunday, 14 July, 1661, and continued there for some years after, much to the satisfaction of his hearers. In April 1663, he was made prebendary of North Auiton, in the cathedral of Salisbury, being then chaplain in ordinary to his majesty; and, the llth of February following, succeeded to a canonry of Windsor. On the 1st of July, 1668, he was installed into the fourth prebend of Durham, and had a rich donative conferred on him. The 28th of February, 1669-70, he was actually created doctor of divinity, by virtue of the chancellor’s letters. In 1677, king Charles II. gave him the deanery of Windsor, vacant by the death of Dr. Bruno Ryves, into which he was installed July 27. He had also the great living of Witney in Oxfordshire conferred on him, all which preferments he obtained, partly through his own qualifications, being not only a good scholar, but also “a perfect courtier, skilful in the arts of getting into the favour of great men;” and partly through his great interest with king Charles II., to whom he was personally known both in Jersey and France. Mr. Wood thinks, that, had he lived some years longer, he would undoubtedly have been promoted to a bishopric. He published several things; and, among the rest, 1. “The Liturgy of the Church of England asserted, in a Sermon, preached [in French] at the chapel of the Savov, before the French Congregation, which usually assembles in that place, upon the first day that divine service was there celebrated according to the Liturgy of the Church of England.” Translated into English by G. B. doctor in physic, Lond. 1662, 4to. 2. “A View of the Government and public Worship of God in the reformed churches of England, as it is established by the act of uniformity,” Lond. 1662, 4to. Exceptions having been made to this book by the nonconformists, partly m a book called “Apologia pro ministris trt Anglia (vulgo) noneonformistis,” by an anonymous author, supposed to be Henry Hickman, he published, 3. “Sanctae Ecclesise Anglicanao ad versus iniquas atque inverecundas Schismaticorum Criminationes, Vindiciae.” The presbyterians, taking great offence at it, published these answers: 1. “Bonasus Vapulans or some castigations given to Mr. John Durel for fouling himself and others in his English and Latin book,” Loud. 1672, 8vo, reprinted in 1676 under this title, “The Nonconformists vindicated from the Abuses put upon them by Mr. Durel and Mr. Scrivner.” 2. Dr. Lewis Du Moulin published also this answer thereto: “Patronus bonre fidei, in causa Puritanorum,” &c Lond. 1672, 8vo. Besides these, Dr. Durel published his “Theoremata philosophise,” consisting of some theses maintained at the university of Caen; a French and Latin edition of the Common Prayer Book; and a French translation of the Whole Duty of Man, partly written by his wife.

, a learned divine, and biblical critic, of the church of England, was a native of the island of Jersey, and probably a descendant of the preceding Dr. John Durel. That the Durells were a very respectable family in Jersey is evident from there being several persons of the name who received considerable promotions both in that island and in England during the reign of king George the Second. He was born in 1728, and after going through a proper course of grammatical education, was matriculated at the university of Oxford, and became a member of Pembroke college, where, on the 20th of June, 1753, he took the degree of master of arts. After this, he was chosen a fellow of Hertford college, and was admitted principal of the same, in 1757, in the room of Dr. William Sharp, who resigned that office, and was afterwards regius professor of Greek in the university, and rector of East-Hampstead in Berks. On the 23d of April, 1760, Mr. Durell took the degree of bachelor in divinity, and that of Doctor on the 14th of January, 1764. Previously to the taking his last degree, he published, in 1763, his first learned work, entitled, “The Hebrew text of the parallel prophecies of Jacob and Moses, relating to the Twelve Tribes; with a translation and notes: and the various lections of near forty Mss. To which are added, 1. The Samaritan Arabic version of those passages, and part of another Arabic version made from the Samaritan text, neither of which have been before printed. 2. A map of the Land of Promise. 3. An Appendix, containing four dissertations on points connected with the subject of these prophecies,” Oxford, 4to. In this work our author exhibited a valuable and decisive proof of his skill in Oriental literature, and of his capacity and judgment in elucidating the sacred Scriptures. In 1767, he was made a prebendary of Canterbury, in the room of Dr. Potter, who had resigned. The only remaining preferment, which Dr. Durell appears to have been possessed of, was the vicarage of Tysehurst in Sussex. In 1772, he gave a farther evidence of his great proficiency in biblical learning, by publishing “Critical remarks on the books of Job, Psalms, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles,” Oxford, 4to, printed at the Clarendon press. In the preface to this performance, the author pleads for a new translation of the Bible. He intended to publish some remarks on the prophetic writings; but this design he was prevented from accomplishing, by his comparatively premature death, which happened when he was only forty-seven years of age. He died at his college, on the 19th of October, 1775, and was buried at St. Peter’s in the East, Oxford, where there is an inscription on his grave-stone, with his arms. By his last will, he bequeathed twenty pounds a-year, arising from money by him lent for the building of Oxford-market; one half of which sum is given to the principal of Hertford college; the other, to the two senior fellows. From all that we have heard concerning Dr. DurelPs character, we understand him to have been a gentleman of eminent piety and goodness.

The particular account which we find in Vasari of his engravings is curious; and it is no small compliment to him to have this Italian author own, that the prints of Durer, being brought to Italy, excited the painters there to perfect that part of the art, and served them for an excellent model. Vasari is profuse in his praises of Duivr’s delicacy, and the fertility of his imagination. As Durer could not hope to execute all his designs while he worked on copper, he bethought himself of working on wood. One of his best pieces in this style is a Saint Eustachius kneeling before a stag, which has a crucifix between its horns which cut, says Vasari, is wonderful, and particularly for the beauty of the dogs represented in various attitudes. John Valentine Andreas, a doctor in divinity in the duchy of Wirtemberg, sent this piece to a prince of the house of Brunswick; to whom the prince replied by letter, “You have extremely obliged me by your new present; a cut which merits a nobler metal than brass, done by the celebrated painter of Nuremberg, and which, I think, wants nothing, unless Zeuxis or Parrhasius, or some person equally favoured by Minerva, should add colours and the native form.” The praises which this same divine gave to Durer in his answer to the prince’s letter, are remarkable, and worth transcribing: “I could easily guess,” says he, “that the Eustachius of Durer would not prove an unacceptable present to you, from whatever hand a performance of that admirable artist came. It is very surprising in regard to that man, that, in a rude and barbarous age, he was the first of the Germans who not only arrived to an exact imitation of nature by the perfection of his art, but likewise left no second; being so absolute a master of it in all its parts, in etching, engraving, statuary, architecture, optics, symmetry, and the rest, that he had no equal, except Michel Angelo Buonaroti, his contemporary and rival; and left behind him such works as were too much for the life of one man. He lived always in a frugal manner, and with the appearance of poverty. The Italians highly esteem him, and reproach us for not setting a due value on the ornaments of our own country.” We learn from the same authority, that the emperor Rodolphus II. ordered the plate of St. Eustachius to be gilded; and that Durer, at the intimation of his friend and patron Bilibaldus Pirkheimer, corrected an error in it, which was, that the stirrups of the horse on which Eustachius was to ride, were too short.

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

, an English divine, son of John Durham of Willersley near Carnpden in Gloucestershire, was born there in 1611, and educated at Broadway in the same county. In 1626 he became a student of New-inn, Oxford, took his degrees in arts, and after receiving orders became curate of St. Mary’s, Reading. In the beginning of the rebellion he went to London, conformed with the ruling powers, and became preacher at the Rolls chapel. He was afterwards presented to the rectory of Burfield in Berkshire, and that of Tredington in Worcestershire; but after the restoration was ejected and came to London, where he remained unemployed for some time. At length upon his conformity to the established church, Sir Nich. Crispe presented him to the rectory of St. Mildred’s, Bread-street, where he died July 7, 1684. He published several single sermons, a tract on family instruction, and, what is now the most valuable of his works, the life of Dr. Harris, president of Trinity college, Oxford, 1660, 12mo. He had a son, of the same names, who was D. D. of Cambridge, rector of Letcombe Basset in Berkshire, and chaplain to the duke of Monmouth. He died of an apoplexy June 18, 1686.

, in Latin Duroeus, was a divine of Scotland, in the seventeenth century, who laboured with great zeal to unite the Lutherans and Calvinists. He was bora educated for the ministry in Scotland. In 1624 he came to Oxford for the sake of the public library. Hovr long he remained there is uncertain; for his strong inclination for his great work, and his sanguine hopes of success in it, induced him to let his superiors know, that he could employ his talents better by travelling through the world, than if he was confined to the care of one flock. They agreed to his proposals, and permitted him to go from place to place, to negociate an accommodation between the protestant churches. He obtained likewise the approbation and recommendation of Laud archbishop of Canterbury; and was assisted by Bedell bishop of Kilmore, and also by Dr. Joseph Hall, bishop of Exeter, as he acknowledges in the preface to his “Prodromus.” He began by publishing his plan of union in 1634; and the same year appeared at a famous assembly of the evangelical churches in Germany at Francfort. The same year also the churches of Transylvania sent him their advice and counsel. Afterwards he negociated with the divines of Sweden and Denmark: he turned himself every way: he consulted the universities; he communicated their answers, and was not deterred by the ill success of his pains, even in 1661 . He appeared at that time as much possessed as ever with hopes of succeeding in this wild and impracticable scheme; and, going for Germany, desired of the divines of Utrecht an authentic testimony of their good intentions, after having informed them of the state in which he had left the affair with the king of Great Britain and the elector of Brandenburgh; and of what had passed at the court of Hesse, and the measures which were actually taken at Geneva, Heidelberg, and Metz. He desired to have this testimonial of the divines of Utrecht, in order to shew it to the Germans; and having obtained it, he annexed it to the end of a Latin work, which he published this year at Amsterdam, under the following title: “Johannis Dursei irenicorum tractatuum prodromus, &c.” The preface of this book is dated at Amsterdam, October 1, 1661.

, an English divine, reckoned by some the founder of Antinomianism, was a native of Kent, where he was born in 1575, and studied at Oxford, being the first of Blount’s exhibitioners in Trinity-college, to which he was admitted in 1590. He took his degree of M. A. in 1603, and entering into holy orders, officiated as a curate for several years, and at length, in 1625, was made minister and preacher at Wickbam Market, in Suffolk, where he died and was buried in 1641. His works are, 1. ‘.’ The discovery of a most dangerous dead faith,“Lond. 1641, 12mo; and 2.” The Honeycomb of free justification,“Lond. 1642, 4to, published by Robert Lancaster, who informs us in his preface that” the author’s faith, zeal, and diligence in doing his calling, and his faith, patience, and cheerfulness in suffering for the same," were highly exemplary. It appears that he was imprisoned in the Gate-house, Westminster, for his book on justification; and Neal admits that he committed some mistakes in his assertions about the doctrines of grace. Ecbard gives him in other respects a favourable character.

, a Swedish divine, who became professor of philosophy at the university of Halle, and died at Stockholm, Jan. 6, 171)6, in the sixty-ninth year of his age, was a member of several learned societies, and owed much of his reputation to a work he published in German, called “An Inquiry into the doctrine respecting the salvation of Heathens,” or “The New apology for Socrates,” which was translated from German into French by Dumas, and published at Amsterdam in 1773, 8vo. It contains also a defence of Marmontel’s “Belisarius,” which at that time had occasioned a controversy in Holland and Germany. Eberhard had among his countrymen the reputation of a man who was a powerful advocate for revealed religion in its original simplicity.

In 1719 he published, in a thin volume, 8vo, “Maxims and Discourses, moral and divine: taken from the works of archbishop Tillotson, and methodized and connected.” He was presented by king George I. to the livings of Rendlesham, Sudborn, and Alford, in Suffolk; at which places be lived about eight years; but in a Continual ill state of health. Finding himself grow worse, and being advised to go to Scarborough for the benefit of the waters, he set out, but, declining very fast, he was unable to proceed farther than Lincoln, where soon after his arrival, going out to take the air, he died in his chariot, on the 16th of August, 1730, and was interred in the chancel of St. Mary Magdalen’s church, but without any monument or memorial of him. He was a member of the Society of Antiquaries. He married two wives; first, Jane, daughter to the rev. Mr. Potter, of Yorkshire; and, "Secondly, a daughter of Mr. Robert Wooley, a gentleman of Lincolnshire: but he had no children by either of them.

, a learned divine, and professor in the university of Ingoldstadt, was born in Suabia, in 1483. He is memorable for promoting the reformation by the weakness of the opposition he gave to Luther, Melancthon, Carolostadius, and other leading protestants in> Germany; and for his disputes and writings against them in defence of his own communion, all which terminated in, his defeat, and in exciting a spirit of inquiry and discussion which eminently advanced the reformation. In 1518 he disputed with Luther at Leipsic, about the supremacy of the pope, penance, purgatory, and indulgences, before George duke of Saxony; at which time even the Lutherans were ready to grant that he acquitted himself as well as a man could do in the support of such a cause, and were not a little pleased that they were able to answer itg greatest supporter. He disputed the year after, against Carolostadius, on the subject of free will. He appeared at the diet of Augsburg in 1538, where he argued against the protestant confession; and in 1541 he disputed for three days with Melancthon and other divines at Worms, concerning the continuance of original sin after baptism. This conference, by the emperor’s command, was adjourned to Ratisbon; where he dissented again from Pfiug and Cropper, with reference to the articles of union. He was the most conspicuous orator in all the public disputes which the Roman catholics had with the Lutherans and Zwinglians. He wrote a great many polemical tracts; and, among the rest, a Manual of Controversies, in which he discourses upon most of the heads contested between the papists and protestants. This book was printed at Ingoldstadt, in 1535. He wrote another tract against the articles proposed at the conference at Ratisbon, printed at Paris in 1543. He composed likewise two discourses upon the sacrifice of the mass; some other controversial pieces an exposition upon the prophet Haggai; and several homilies. Upon the whole, he was a person of uncommon parts, uncommon learning, and uncommon zeal; and to his perseverance in the cause of popery, the reformers were greatly indebted. He died at Ingoldstadr, in 1543, aged sixty years.

“My petition to God (if petitions to God are not presumptuous) is, that he would remove from me all desire of pursuing natural history or any other study, and inspire me with as much knowledge of his divine nature as my imperfect state is capable of; that I may conduct myself, for the remainder of my days, in a manner most agreeable to his will, which must consequently be most happy to myself. What my condition may be in futurity, is known only to the wise disposer of all things; yet my present desires are (perhaps vain, and inconsistent with the nature of 'things!) that 1 may become an intelligent spirit, void of gross matter, gravity, and levity; endowed with a voluntary motive-power, either to pierce infinitely into boundless ethereal space, or into solid bodies; to see and know how the parts of the great universe are connected with each other, and by what amazing mechanism they are put and kept in regular and perpetual motion. But, O vain and daring presumption of thought; I most humbly submit my future existence to the supreme will of the One Omnipotent.”

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

, an English divine and able writer against Socinianism, was born at Wrexham in Denbighshire in 1629; and in 1655 became a servitor of Christ church, Oxford, where he was admitted B. A. in Oct. 1659; elected fellow of Jesus college in 1662, and took his bachelor’s degree in divinity in March 1669. He was afterwards rector of Kiddington in Oxfordshire, which he exchanged, in 1681, for Hinton in Hampshire. On Nov. 2, 1636, he was unanimously elected principal of Jesus college, and became treasurer of Llandaff in 1687. He took his degree of D. D. immediately after his election as principal, and served the office of vice-chancellor in the years 1689, 1690, and 1691. He held two other livings, one in Anglesea and the other in Caernarvonshire. He was also proctor in the convocation, 1702, for the chapter of Llandaff. He died July 20, 1712, and was buried in the chapel of his college, where is an inscription celebrating his learning, usefulness as principal, and his munificence as a benefactor. Besides many books given in his life-time, he bequeathed his own collection of upwards of 1000 volumes to the college library, and gave near 1000l. to the repairs of the chapel, &c. What he wrote against the Socinians is entitled “A Preservative against Socinianism” in four parts, 4to, published from 1693 to 1703.

, president of the college of New Jersey, and a divine of very considerable fame in America, was descended from English parents who emigrated in the reign of queen Elizabeth, and was born, Oct. 5, 1703, at Windsor, in the province of Connecticut in North- America. In 1716 he became a student of Yale college, and received the degree of B. A. in 1720, before he had completed his seventeenth year. His mental powers are said to have opened themselves so early and so strong, that he read Locke’s “Essay on the Human Understanding” with delight, in his second year at this college. After taking his bachelor’s degree he remained two years more at college preparing himself for the ministry, and after the usual trials, was licensed to preach. In August 1722 he was invited to preach to the English presbyterians at New York, where he continued with approbation above eight months; but as this society was too small to maintain a preacher, he returned in the spring of 1723 to his father’s house at Connecticut, where, for some time, he applied to his studies with great industry and perseverance; and severe application became habitual to him, although he was of a delicate constitution. In the spring of 1724, having taken his master’s degree, he was appointed tutor of Yale college, and notwithstanding his youth, and the time necessary to be devoted to his own improvement, he filled this office for two years in a manner which afforded his superiors no reason to repent of their choice. He would probably have remained longer here, had he not received, in Sept. 1726, an invitation from the people of Northampton in Connecticut, to become assistant to his mother’s father, Mr. Stoddard, who was the settled minister of the town. Having accepted this offer, he was ordained colleague to Mr. Stoddard, Feb. 15, 1727, when only in his twenty-fourth year, and continued pastor of this congregation until June 1750, at which time his congregation dismissed him with every mark of contempt and insult. This, however, will appear to reflect no discredit on Mr. Edwards, when the reader is told that the first cause of complaint against him was, his having detected and endeavoured to expose a combination of youths who had imported obscene books, and were corrupting one another’s principles with great eagerness. So many of these young men were connected with the best families, that the parents declared their children should not be called to an account, and all inquiry was stifled. Still, however, they could not have proceeded to expel their preacher, if they had not soon afterwards laid hold of another pretext, which arose from Mr. Edwards’s refusing to administer the sacrament to persons of notoriously loose lives. Meetings were held, in which he endeavoured to justify his opinions; but upon a decision, on the question of continuing him their pastor, he was left in a minority of 180, after a residence among them of twenty-four years, and a character of unimpeachable integrity and piety. As it is impossible to suppose that all his hearers joined in the above decision, he appears to have been supported for some time, by the kindness of those who admired his character, until sent on a mission to the Indians at Stockbridge, in the western part of Massachusett’s bay, about sixty miles from his former residence. Here he arrived in 1751, and enjoying a quiet retirement, employed himself at his leisure hours in composing the principal part of his works, until 1757, when, on the death of Mr. Aaron Burr, he was chosen president of New Jersey college. He had not, however, long commenced the business of his new office when the small-pox raging with great virulence, he caught the infection, although after inoculation, and died of the disorder March 22, 1758. Mr. Edwards was a man of extensive learning, principally in theology, and his avidity for knowledge was insatiable. He commonly spent thirteen hours a day in his study, and yet did not neglect the necessary exercises of walking and riding. He read all the books, especially in divinity, that he could procure, from which he could hope to get any help in his pursuit of knowledge. And in this, he did not confine himself to authors of any particular sect or denomination; but took much pains to procure the works of the most noted writers who advanced a scheme of divinity most contrary to his own, which was nearly that termed Calvinistic.

, a learned divine of the church of England, was born at Coventry, August 10, O.S. 1729, and was the son of the Rev. Thomas Edwards, M. A. vicar of St. Michael’s in that city, and of Katharine his wife. His grammatical education he received partly under the tuition of Edward Jackson, D. D. master of the free grammar-school in Coventry, but principally under the care of his own father; and such was his eagerness for the acquisition of knowledge, that he seldom engaged in the diversions common to boys. In 1747, at the age of eighteen, he was matriculated at the university of Cambridge, and entered of Clare hall, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1750, and of M. A. in 1754. He was likewise a fellow of his college. In the younger part of his life he was a self-taught musician, and became no mean performer on the spinnet and the bass-viol: but, finding that this amusement encroached too much upon his studies, he entirely relinquished it. On the 22d of September, 1751, he was ordained deacon, and on the 23d of September, 1753, he was ordained priest, both which orders he received from the hands of Dr. Frederick Cornwallis, at that time bishop of Litchfield and Coventry. In the spring of 1755, when Mr. Edwards was not yet twenty-six years of age, he gave a striking proof of the diligence with which he applied himself to the study of the learned languages, and the acquisition of sacred literature. This was his publication of “A new English Translation of the Psalms from the original Hebrew, reduced to metre by the late bishop Hare with notes, critical and explanatory, illustrations of many passages, drawn from the classics, and a preliminary dissertation, in which the truth and certainty of that learned prelate’s happy discovery is stated, and proved at large,” 8vo. It was Mr. Edwards’s design to make Dr. Hare’s system of Hebrew metre better known, and to prove, that, by a judicious application of it, great light might be thrown upon the poetical parts of the Hebrew scriptures. He was of opinion that Dr. Hare’s hypothesis was rejected by many persons, partly from an over-hasty determination, and partly from too scrupulous a veneration for the Hebrew text. The notes, which comprehend more than one third of this book, chiefly contain emendations of the Hebrew text, pointed out by the metre, and illustrations of some passages, drawn from the classics, together with an explanation of the most difficult places. Considerable use is made by our author of Hare and Mudge, but with no servile adherence to their authority. Mr. Edwards’s next publication was only a single sermon, which he had preached at St. Michael’s in Coventry, on the 6th of February, 1756. On the 2d of May, 1758, he was nominated, by the corporation of Coventry, master of the free grammar-school, and presented to the rectory of St. John, the Baptist in that city. This promotion was- followed by his marriage, November 27th, in the same year, to Anne Parrott, daughter of Stony er Parrott, esq. of Hawkesbury, in the parish of Foleshill, in the county of Warwick, by whom he had one son, Dr. Edwards of Cambridge. Early in 1759, Mr. Edwards published one of his principal works, “The doctrine of irresistible Grace proved to have no foundation in the writings of the New Testament.” This was levelled at the opinions of the Calvinists on that subject. Our author’s next publication, which appeared in 1762, was entitled “Prolegomena in Libros Veteris Testamenti Poeticos; sive dissertatio, in qua viri eruditissimi Francisci Harii nuper Episcopi Cicestriensis de antiqua Hebraeorum poesi hypothesin ratione et veritate niti, fuse ostenditur, atque ad objecta quaedam respond etur. Subjicitur Metricae Lowthianae Confutatio, cum indicibus necessariis,” 8vo. This attack upon Dr. Lowth’s “Metricae Harianaj brevis Confutatio,” which had been annexed to the first edition of his admirable “Praelectiones de sacra Poesi Hebraeorum,” did not pass unnoticed by that gentleman. In the second edition of his “Praelectiones” he added a note, in which he strenuously maintained his own opinion, in opposition to that of Mr, Edwards. In reply to this note our author published, in 1765 t “Epistola ad doctissimimi Robertum Lowthium, S. T. P., In qua nonnulla, quae ad nuperae siur de sacra Hebraeorum Poesi Prielectionum editionis calcem habet, expenduntur.” In this he indulged himself in some severity of language, which the subject did not merit, and which ought not to have been used towards such an antagonist as Dr. Loath. The doctor thought the “Epistola” of consequence enough to deserve a reply; and therefore he printed, in 1766, “A larger Confutation of bishop Hare’s System of Hebrew Metre in a letter to the reverend Dr. Edwards in answer to his Latin cpisile,” 8vo. Here the controversy ended and the general opinion of the learned world gave the preference to Dr. Lowth’s arguments.

, an English divine, whose writings, in the opinion of a recent biographer, deserve to be more extensively known than, it is apprehended, they now are, or ever have been, was the son of Mr. Ellis, steward to Dr. Barnaby Potter, bishop of Carlisle, and wasjborn in 1630, near Penrith in Cumberland. He became a servitor of Queen’s college, Oxford, under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Tully, in 1649, and was afterwards a tabarder; and when master of arts, became a fellow of the college.

, a learned Prussian divine, was born in 1692, at Saalfield, in Prussia, and was educated at the university of Konigsberg, where he became private tutor to some young nobleman, and was afterwards appointed chaplain of the army. In 1719, he published a work on the delivery of the law on Mount Sinai, and shortly after the first volume of his “Sacred Observations on the New Testament.” In the following year his Prussian majesty appointed him professor of theology and the oriental languages at Lingen, to which he repaired, after having first taken his degree of doctor at Utrecht. He was afterwards chosen a member of the academy of Berlin; and in 1742, he was appointed director of the class of the belles lettres in that academy; and when the society was renewed in 1744, he retained the same office, and contributed several valuable papers to their memoirs. He died of a fever, Octobers, 1750. His works are very numerous, and on various topics, but chiefly in theology. He published also, “A new description of the state of the Greek Christians in Turkey,” in which he received very important assistance from Athanasius Dorostamos, who came to Berlin to collect money for the Christian slaves in England.

, a divine and antiquary, descended from a very ancient family in the bishopric of Durham, was born at Newcastle upon Tyne, Jan. 1, 1673, and was the son of Mr. Ralph Elstob, a merchant of that place. Being intended for the church, he received his grammatical education, first at Newcastle, and afterwards at Eton after which he was admitted of Catharine-hall, in Cambridge but the air of the country not agreeing with him, he removed to Queen’s college, Oxford. Here his studious turn acquired him so much reputation, that in 1696 he was chosen fellow of University college, and was appointed joint tutor with Dr. C layering, afterwards bishop of Peterborough. At this college Mr. Elstob took the degree of master of arts, June 8, 1697. In 1701, he translated into Latin the Saxon homily of Lupus, with notes, for Dr. Jiickes. About the same time he translated into English sir John Cheke’s Latin version of Plutarch, “De Superstitione,” which is printed at the end of Strype’s Life of Cheke. The copy made use of by Mr. Elstob was a manuscript in University college, out of which Obadiah Walker, when master of that college, had cut several leaves, containing Cheke’s remarks against popery. In 1702, Mr. Elstob was appointed rector of the united parishes of St. Swithin and St. Mary Bothaw, London, where be continued to his death, and which appears to be the only eqclesiastical preferment he ever obtained. In 1703, he published, at Oxford, an edition of Ascham’s Latin Letters. He was the author, likewise, of an “Essay on the great affinity and mutual agreement between the two professions of Law and Divinity,” printed at London, with a preface, by Dr. Hickes. This book, in process of time, became so little known, that Mr. Philip Carteret Webbe insisted upon it that there was no such work, until convinced, by an abstract or view of it, which was sent to Mr. Pegge, from a copy in the library of St. John’s college, Cambridge. It is a thin octavo, and not very scarce. In 1704, Mr Elstob published two sermons; one, a thanksgiving sermon, from Psalm ciii. 10, for the victory at Hochstet; and, the other, from 1 Timothy i. 1, 2, on the anniversary of the queen’s accession. Besides the works already mentioned, our author, who was a great proficient in the Latin tongue, compiled an essay on its history and use collected materials for an account of Newcastle and, also, the various proper names formerly used in the north but what is become of these manuscripts is not known. In 1709, he published, in the Saxon language, with a Latin translation, the homily on St. Gregory’s day. Mr. Elstob bad formed several literary designs, the execution of which was prevented by his death, in 1714, when he was only forty-one years of age. The most considerable of his designs was an edition of the Saxon laws, with great additions, and a new Latin version by Somner, together with notes of various learned men, and a prefatory history of the origin and progress of the English laws, down to the conqueror, and to Magna Charta. This great plan was completed in 1721, by Dr. David Wilkins, who, in his preface, thus speaks concerning our author “Hoc Gulielmus Elstob, in literis Anglo-Saxonicis versatissimus præstare instituerat. Hinc Wheloci vestigia premens, Leges quas editio ejus exhibet, cum Mss. Cantabrigiensibus, Bodleiano, Roffensi, et Cottonianis contulerat, versioneque nova adornare proposuerat, ut sic Leges, antea jam publici juris factae, ejus opera et studio emendatiores prodiissent. Veruin morte immatura præreptus, propositum exequi non potuit.” Whilst Mr. Elstob was engaged in this design, Dr. Hickes recommended him to Mr. Harley, as a man whose modesty had made him an obscure person, and which would ever make him so, unless some kind patron of good learning should bring him into light. The doctor added his testimony to Mr. Elstob’s literature, his great diligence and application, and his capacity for the work he had undertaken. Mr. Harley so far attended to Dr. Hickes’s recommendation as to grant to Mr. Elstob the use of the books and manuscripts in his library, which our author acknowledged in a very humble letter. A specimen of Mr. Elstob’s design was actually printed at Oxford, in 1699, under the title of “Hormesta Pauli Orosii, &c. ad exemplar Junianum, &c.” He intended, also, a translation with notes, of Alfred’s Paraphrastic Version of Orosins; his transcript of which, with collations, was in Dr. Pegge’s hands. Another transcript, by Mr. Ballard, with a large preface on the use of Anglo-Saxon literature, was left by Dr. Charles Lyltelton, bishop of Carlisle, to the library of the Society of Antiquaries. Alfred’s Version of Orosius has since been given to the public, with an English translation, by the honourable Daines Barrington. In his publication, Mr. Barrington observes, that he has made use of Mr. Elstob’s transcript, and that he has adopted from it the whimsical title of Hormesta. When it is considered that Mr. Elstob died in early life, it will be regretted, by the lovers of antiquarian learning, that he was prevented from acquiring that name and value in the literary world, to which he would otherwise probably have arisen.

, a Lutheran divine, styled in the Bibl. German, one of the principal ornaments of the pity of Stade, descended from a noble family, originally of Guelderland, which they quitted to avoid the persecutions of the duke of Alva, and was born at Kensburgh in Hoistem, in 1684. He studied at Lubeck, Rostock, Leipsic, Jena, and Wirtemberg, at which last university he took his degree of master of arts. In 1717 he received an invitation to Stade, where he became pastor of the church of St. Cosmo and Damien, and where he died in the thirtysixth year of his age, June 10, 1721, much lamented as one who had given striking proofs of eminent talents, and whose studies, had they been prolonged, promised yet greater fruits. The authority quoted above gives the following list of his works, but without dates or size, &c. 1. “Dissertatio inauguralis de Jure Episcoporum in Gallia, a papa ad concilium provocandi.” 2. “De Melchisedeeo, contra Juriaeum et Halsium.” 3. “De Formula concordiiE in Dania non combusta, contra Gotfr. Arnoldum.” 4. “De recentiorum in Novum Foedus Critica.” 5. “Observationes philological super B. H. Witteri commentationem in Genesin.” 6. “Epistola Apologetica ad Witterum.” 7. “Vindiciae Diascepseos Hunnianae, adversus D. Strimesium.” 8. “De Fanaticorum Palinodia.” 9. “De Inscriptione Apocalypseos Johanneas. 10.” De Philosophumenis viris sanctis temere afflictis.“ll.”De Magis.“12.” Annotationes ad Matnr. Simonii libellum de literis pereuntibus.“13.” Controversies recentiores de Atheismo.“14.” Controversise recentiores de anima.“15.” Commentatio de reliquiis Papatus ecclesiae Lutheranse temere afflictis, &c.“To these may be added a new edition of Launoy” De varia Aristotelis fortuna in academia Parisiensi." He had also for some time been employed on a history of philosophy, and other literary undertakings, which his death interrupted.

, or Eliseus, as he calls himself in his “Miscellanea,” the son of a clergyman in Devonshire, was educated at Baliol-college, Oxford. In 1655, about the time when he took the degree of B. A. being then fellow of the college, he published a small volume of divine poems, and another in 1658. The same year he published “Miscellanea,” in Latin and English verse, and several short essays in Latin prose. This book was reprinted in 1662. In the preface, and again in the body of the work, he speaks with great sensibility of some persons who had decried his performances, and aspersed his character on account of some levities and follies of youth. In 1659 he succeeded his father in the rectory of East Allington, in Devonshire. His conduct appears to have been irreproachable after he entered into orders. By his writings he has given sufficient testimony of his parts, industry, and learning. The most remarkable of his numerous works, which are mentioned by Wood, is the pamphlet he published against Dr. Tillotson’s sermons on the incarnation; and the most estimable is his volume of Letters, &c. as some of them are written to eminent persons, particularly Dr. Sherlock and Dr. Bentley. There are also letters from Dr. Henry More, Dr. Barlow, and others, to Edmund Elys. He was living, and in studious retirement, in 1633, at which time he was a non-juror.

, a learned English divine, a great champion of Arianism, and memorable for his sufferings on that account, was descended of a substantial and reputable family, and born at Stamford, in Lincolnshire, May 27, 1663. His parents were frequenters of the established church, and particularly acquainted with Cumberland, then a minister at Stamford, afterwards bishop of Peterborough; but being inclined to the sentiments of the nonconformists, they chose to bring up their son to the ministry among them. For this purpose, after he had been at a private school four years, he was sent in 1678 to an, academy in Northamptonshire, where he continued four years more. He went in 1679 to Cambridge, and was admitted of Emanuel college; but soon returned to the academy. In August 1682, he removed to Mr. Doolittle’s school near London; and in December following made his first essay as a preacher at Mr. Doolittle’s meeting-house, near Cripplegate. In 1683, Mr. Emlyn became chaplain to the countess of Donegal, a lady of great quality and estate in the north of Ireland, but then living in Lincoln’sinn-fields. In 1684, Mr. Emlyn went over with the countess and the rest of her family to Belfast, in Ireland, where she was soon after married to sir William Kranklin, and lived in great state and splendour. Here our chaplain had a very liberal and handsome allowance, usually wore the habit of a clergyman, and was treated by sir VV illiam and the countess with every mark of civility. Sir William, who had a good estate in the ivest of England, offered him a considerable living there; but this offer he declined, not being satisfied with the terms of ministerial conformity, though at that time he had no scruples on the subject of the trinity constantly attended the service of the church both parts of the day and when in the evening he preached in the countess’s hall, he had the minister of the parish, Mr. Claude Gilbert, for a hearer, with whom he lived in great intimacy, and for whom he often officiated in the parish church. Indeed, without any subscription, he had from the bishop of the diocese a licence to preach facultatis exercende gratiá; insomuch that it was reported that he had entirely left the dissenters, and was gone over to the establishment. While Mr. Emlyn was in this station, he made a journey fo Dublin, where he preached once to the congregation of which Mr. Daniel Williams and Mr. Joseph Boyse were then pastors; and so acceptable were his services to the audience, that the people were afterwards induced to invite him thither. Towards the latter end of king James’s reign, the north of Ireland was thrown into such confusion and disorder, that the family of sir William Franklin and the countess of Donegal broke up; an event which was accelerated by some domestic differences. Mr. Emlyn, therefore, returned to London, where he arrived in December 1688. Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Daniel Williams had some time before retreated to the same place, having quitted the pastoral care of the congregation at Dublin, which he could never be persuaded to resume. When this determination was known, and Mr. Emlyn had not yet left Ireland, Mr. Boyse sounded him by letter, to know whether he was disposed to become Mr. Williams’s successor, and wished him to take Dublin in his way to England, but this he declined. In Mr. Emlyn’s journeyings between Ireland and London, he several times accepted of invitations to preach in the parish-churches of some towns through which he passed. At Liverpbol in particular, as he was standing at the door of his inn one Saturday evening, the minister of the place, concluding by his garb that he was a clergyman, requested him to give his parishioners a sermon the next day, which he accordingly did. What was very remarkable, when he passed that way again some time afterwards, the minister being dead, several of the people, who had heard him before, desired him to preach for them the next Sunday, which service he performed so much to their satisfaction, that they offered to use their interest with their patron to procure him the living; an offer with which his views of things did not permit him to comply. After Mr. Emlyn had returned to London, being out of employment, he was invited by sir Robert Rich, one of the lords of the admiralty, in May 1689, to his house near Beccles, in Suffolk, and was by him prevailed upon to officiate as minister to a dissenting congregation at Lowestoff in that county. This place he supplied for about a year and a half, but refused the invitation of becoming their pastor, having determined not to accept the pastoral care, where he was not likely to settle for life, or at least for a long continuance. Here also Vie cultivated a friendly correspondence with the parish-minister, frequently taking several of his people along with him to church, and accompanying the minister in collecting public charities; by which means a perfect harmony subsisted between the members of the establishment and the dissenters. During Mr. Emlyn’s residence at LowestofT, ho contractcJ a closu and intimate acquaintance with Mr. William Manning, a nonconformist minister at Peasenhall in that neighbourhood. Being both of them of an inquisitive temper, they frequently conferred together, and jointly examined into the principal points of religion, mutually communicating to each other their respective sentiments. This correspondence, notwithstanding the great distance to which they were afterwards separated, was carried on by letters as long as Mr. Manning lived. Dr. Sherlock’s “Vindication of the Trinity” having been published about this time, their thoughts were much turned to the consideration of that subject, the result of which was, that they began to differ from the received doctrine in that article. Mr. Manning embraced the Socinian opinion, and strove hard to bring Mr. Emlyn into the same way of thinking; but he could not be brought to doubt either of the pre-existence of Jesus as the Logos, or that by him God had created the material world. The interpretations which the Socinians gave of the scriptures appeared to our divine so forced and unnatural, that he could by no means accede to them; nor did he ever, in the succeeding part of his life, change his sentiments upon the subject. Nevertheless, upon occasion of his carrying a letter from Mr. Whiston to the prolocutor of the lower house of convocation, in 1711, he was reflected on as a Socinian preacher.

, a learned professor of Groningen, was born at Gretha, a village in East Friesland, Dec. 5, 1547. He was the son of Emmo Diken, a minister of that village, who had been Luther’s and Melancthon’s disciple; and at nine years of age was sent to study at Embden. He continued there till he was eighteen, and was then sent to Bremen, to improve under the famous John Molanus. Returning to his father, he did not go immediately to the university, but passed some time at Norden. Being turned of twenty-three, he was sent to Rostock, a flourishing university, where he heard the lectures of David Chytraeus, a celebrated divine and historian; and of Henry Bruce, an able mathematician and physician. The death of his father obliged him to return to East Friesland, after he had continued above two years at Rostock.; and his mother’s excessive grief upon this occasion hindered his taking a journey into France, as he had wished, and induced him to continue with her three years, after which he went to Geneva, where he staid two years. Being returned into his own country, he had the choice of two preferments, either to be a minister or the rector of a college: but, from a great degree of natural timidity, he could not venture to engage in the ministry, thoagh it was very much his inclination. He chose therefore to be rector of a college, which was that of Norden and was admitted into that post in 1579. He made his college flourish exceedingly but was turned out of his employment in 1587, through the zeal of some Lutherans, because he would not subscribe the confession of Augsburg. He was chosen the year after to be rector of the college of Leer, whose reputation he raised so high, that it surpassed that of Norden; which the Lutherans could never retrieve from the declining state into which it fell after Emmius was deposed. They had banished from Groningen several persons who followed Calvin’s reformation; and those of the exiles who retired to Leer, meeting with the same fate as Emmius, engaged in a particular friendship with him: so that, when the city of Groningen confederated with the United Provinces, and the magistrates resolved to restore their college, Emmius being recommended by several persons, they chose him to be the rector of that college, and gave him a full power to make or abrogate there such statutes as he should think proper.

His knowledge of history, and his memory, must have been extraordinary, if credit can be given to his biographers, who assert, that, without any preparation, he could answer all manner of questions concerning the history, both ancient and modern, of any country whatsoever, without the least mistake in the circumstances of times, places, and persons. He not only knew the actions, events and motives, but also understood the interest of the several nations, the form of their government, the inclinations of their princes, the means they employed to enlarge their dominions, their alliances, and their origin. He knew also the figure, situation, and magnitude of their cities tmd forts, the position of rivers and highways, the turnings and windings of mountains, &c. The author of his life has collected several encomiums, which Thuanus, Scaliger, Dousa, and others, have passed upon him, which are abundantly flattering, especially those of Scaliger, who styles Emmius’s History of Friesland “a divine history.” The magistrates of Groningen caused his picture to be placed in the town-house.

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

, of Oppyck, in Holland, was born there in the latter part of the sixteenth century, and acquired great reputation for his knowledge of the oriental languages. He was also an able lawyer and divine, and took his degree of doctor in the latter faculty. He studied the oriental languages under Drusius and Erpenius, and after having been professor of theology and Hebrew at Harderwich for eight years, was, in 1627, made professor of Hebrew at Leyden, on which occasion he delivered an harangue on the dignity and utility of the Hebrew language, and it was his constant endeavour to diffuse a knowledge of that language, and of the Arabic and jSyriac, among his countrymen, that they might be the better enabled to combat the objections of the Jews to the Christian religion. In 1639, count Maurice, governor of Bresil, appointed him his counsellor. He died in June 1648, very soon after he had begun a course of theology at Leyden. He lived in much intimacy with Lewis de Dieu, Daniel Heinsius, and the Buxtorfs, who speak very highly of him. He offered at one time to superintend the printing of a Talmudical dictionary in Holland, and endeavoured to bring the younger Buxtorf to Leyden, who had undertaken to defend the vowel points against Lewis Cappel. We also find him corresponding with our excellent archbishop Usher. Constantine’s works are, 1 “Coinmentarius ad codicem Babylouicum, seu Tractatus Thalmudicus de mensuris Templi,” Leyden, 1630, 4to. 2. “Versio et Notae ad Paraphrasin Joseph! Jachiadae in Danielem,” Amst. 1633, 4to. 3. “Itinerarium D. Benjaminis,” Heb. and Lat. Leyden, 8vo. 4. “Moysis Kimchi Grammatica Chaldaica,” ibid. 8vo. 5. “Confutatio Abarbanelis et Alscheichi in caput liii. Isaia-,” ibid. 1631, 8vo, and Franc. 1685. 6. “Commentarius in Tractatum Thaimudicum, qui dicitur Porta, de legibus Hebraeorum forensibus,” Heb. and Lat ibid. 1637, 4to. 7. “Commentariuf ad Betramum de Republica Hebrseorum,” 1641, 8vo.

, a dissenting divine of great learning and amiable character, was born at Sudbury, on March 29, O. S. 1741, of parents in a humble walk of life, but of very respectable characters. His amiable disposition and promising talents early recommended him to the rev. Mr. Hextall, the dissenting minister of that place, who took great care of his education, and infused into hi young mind that taste for elegance in composition, which ever afterwards distinguished him. In his seventeenth year, he was sent to the academy at Daventry, then under the direction of the rev. Dr. Ashworth, where he passed through the usual course of instruction preparatory to the office of the ministry; and with such success did he cultivate his talents, that, on leaving the academy, he was at once chosen, in 1763, minister of the congregation of Benri’s Garden, in Liverpool, where he passed seven of the happiest years of life, very generally beloved and esteemed. He manned, in 1767, the daughter of Mr. Holland, draper, in Liverpool, with whom he passed all the rest of his days in most cordial union. His literary reputation was extended, during his residence in this place, by the publication of two volumes of sermons, which were very well received, and were followed by “A Collection of Hymns and of Family Prayers.”

About 1770, he was invited to take a share in the conduct of the dissenting academy at Warrington, and also to occupy the place of minister to the congregation, there, both vacant by the death of the rev. Mr. Seddon. His acceptance of this honourable invitation was a source of a variety of mixed sensations and events to him, of which anxiety and vexation composed too large a share for his happiness. No assiduity on his part was wanting in the performance of his various duties but the diseases of the institution were radical and incurable and perhaps his gentleness of temper was ill adapted to contend with the difficulties in Blatter of discipline, which seem entailed on all dissenting academies, and which, in that situation, fell upon him, as the domestic resident, with peculiar weight. He always, however, possessed the respect and affection of the hestdisposed of the students; and there was no reason to suppose that any other person, in his place, could have prevented that dissolution which the academy underwent in 1783. During the period of his engagement there, his indefatigable industry was exerted in the composition of a number of works, mostly, indeed, of the class of useful compilations, but containing valuable displays ofhis powers of thinking and writing. The most considerable was his “Institutes of Natural Philosophy,” 1783, 4to, a clear and well-arranged compendium of the leading principles, theoretical and experimental, of the sciences comprized under that head. And it may be mentioned as an extraordinary proof of his diligence and power of comprehension, that, on a vacancy in the mathematical department of the academy, which the state of the institution rendered it impossible to supply by a new tutor, he prepared himself at a short warning to fill it up; and did till it with credit and utility, though this abstruse branch of science had never before been a particular object of his study. He continued at Warrington two years after the academy had broken up, taking a few private pupils. In 1785, receiving an invitation from the principal dissenting congregation at Norwich, he accepted it, and first fixed his residence at Thorpe, a pleasant village near the city, where he pursued his plan of taking a limited number of pupils to board in his house. He afterwards removed to Norwich itself, and at length, fatigued with the long cares of education, entirely ceased to receive boarders, and only gave private instructions to two or three select pupils a few hours in the morning. This too he at last discontinued, and devoted himself solely to the duties of his congregation, and the retired and independent occupations of literature. Yet, in a private way and small circle, few men had been more successful in education, of which many striking examples might be mentioned, and none more so than the members of his own family. Never, indeed, was a father more deservedly happy in his children; but the eldest, whom he had trained with uncommon care, and who had already, when just of age, advanced in his professional, career so far as to be chosen town-clerk of Nottingham, was most unfortunately snatched away by a fever, a few years since. This fatal event produced effects on the doctor’s health which alarmed his friends. The symptoms were those of angina pectoris, and they continued till the usual serenity of his mind was restored by time and employment. Some of the last years of his life were the most comfortable; employed only in occupations which, were agreeable to him, and which left him master of his own time witnessing the happy settlement of two of his daughters contracted in his living within the domestic privacy which he loved and connected with some of the most agreeable literary companions, and with a set of cordial and kind-hearted friends, he seemed fully to enjoy life as it flowed, and indulged himself in pleasing prospects for futurity. But an unsuspected and incurable disease was preparing a sad and sudden change; a schirrous contraction of the rectum, the symptoms of which were mistaken by himself for a common laxity of the bowels, brought on a total stoppage, which, after a week’s struggle, ended in death. Its gradual approach gave him opportunity to display all the tenderness, and more than the usual firmness of his nature. He died amidst the kind offices of mourning friends at Norwich, Nov. 3, 1797. Besides the literary performances already mentioned, Dr. Enfielcl completed in 1791, the laborious task of an abridgment of “Brucker’s History of Philosophy,” which he Comprized in two volumes, 4to. It may be truly said, that the tenets of philosophy and the lives of its professors were never before displayed in so pleasing a form, and with such clearness and elegance of language. Indeed it was his peculiar excellence to arrange and express other men’s ideas to the utmost advantage; but it has been objected that in this work he has been sometimes betrayed into inaccuracies by giving what he thought the sense of the ancients in cases where accuracy required their very words to be given. Yet a more useful or elegant work upon the subject has never appeared in our language, and in our present undertaking we have taken frequent opportunities to acknowledge our obligations to it. Among Dr. Enfield’s publications not noticed above, were his “Speaker,” a selection of pieces for the purpose of recital “Exercises on Elocution,” a sequel to the preceding “The Preacher’s Directory,” an arrangement of topics and texts “The English Preacher,” a collection of short sermons from various authors, 9 vols. 12mo; “Biographical Sermons on the principal characters in the Old and New Testament.” After his death a selection of his “Sermons” was published in 3 vols. 8vo, with a life by Dr. Aikin. As a divine, Dr. Enfield ranks among the Socinians, and his endeavours in these sermons are to reduce Christianity to a mere system of ethics.

The period in which Epicurus opened his school was peculiarly favourable to his design. In the room of the simplicity of the Socratic doctrine, nothing now remained but the subtlety and affectation of stoicism, the unnatural severity of the Cynics, or the debasing doctrine of indulgence taught and practised by the followers of Aristippns. The luxurious refinement which now prevailed in Athens, inclined the younger citizens to listen to a preceptor who smoothed the stern brow of philosophy, and, under the notion of pleasure, led them unawares to moderation and virtue. Hence his school became exceedingly popular, and disciples flocked into the garden, not only from different parts of Greece, but from Egypt and Asia. Those who were regularly admitted into this school lived upon such a footing of friendly attachment, that each individual cheerfully supplied the necessities of his brother. Cicero describes the friendship of the Epicurean fraternity as unequalled in the history of mankind. That he might prosecute his philosophical labours with the less interruption, Epicurus lived in a state of celibacy. In his own conduct he was exemplary for temperance and continence, and he inculcated upon his followers severity of manners, and the strict government of the passions, as the best means of passing a tranquil and happy life. Notwithstanding his regular manner of living, towards the close of his days, probably in consequence of intense application to study, his constitution became infirm, and he was afflicted with the stone. Perceiving from these marks of decay that his end was approaching, he wrote a will, in which he bequeathed his garden, and the buildings belonging to it, to Hermachus, and through him to the future professors of his philosophy. On the last day of his life he wrote to hi friend Hermachus, informing him that his disease had for fourteen days tormented him with anguish, which nothing could exceed; at the same time he adds, “All this is counterbalanced by the satisfaction of mind which I derive from the recollection of my discourses and discoveries.” The emperor Marcus Antoninus confirms this account, attesting that Epicurus in his sickness relied more upon the recollection of his excellent life than upon the aid of physicians, and instead of complaining of his pain, conversed with his friends upon those principles of philosophy which he had before maintained. At length, finding nature just exhausted, he ordered himself to be put into a warm bath, where, after refreshing himself with wine, and exhorting his friends not to forget his doctrines, he expired. His death happened in the second year of the 127th olympiad, or B.C. 271, and the seventy-third of hisage. He is said to have written a greater number of works from his own invention, than any other Grecian philosopher; but none are extant except a compendium of his doctrine, preserved by Laertius, and a few fragments dispersed among ancient authors. Not only did the immediate followers of Epicurus adorn the memory of their master with the highest honours, but many eminent writers, who have disapproved of his philosophy, have expressed great respect for his personal merit. Yet it cannot be denied that from the time when this philosopher appeared to the present day, an uninterrupted course of censure has fallen upon his memory; so that the name of his sect has almost become a proverbial expression for every thing corrupt in principle, and infamous in character. The charges brought against Epicurus are, that he superseded all religious principles, by dismissing the Gods from the care of the world; that if he acknowledged their existence, it was only in conformity to popular prejudice, since, according to his system, nothing exists in nature but material atoms; that he discovered great insolence and vanity in the disrespect with which he treated the memory of former philosdphers, and the characters and persons of his contemporaries; and that both the master and the whole fraternity were addicted to the vilest and most infamous vices. These accusations against the Epicurean school have been more or less confirmed by men distinguished for their wisdom and virtue, by Zeno, Cicero, Plutarch, Galen, and many of the Christian fathers. By what, therefore, are they to be repelled Brucker, who has examined this question with, his usual acuteness and erudition, observes, that with respect to the first charge, that of impiety, it certainly admits of no refutation. The doctrine of Epicurus concerning nature, not only militated against the superstitions of the Athenians, but against the agency of a supreme deity in the formation and government of the world; and his misconceptions with respect to mechanical motion, and the nature of divine happiness, ld him in his system to divest the Deity of some of his primary attributes. It does not indeed appear that he entirely denied the existence of superior powers. Cicero, who is unquestionably to be ranked among his opponents, relates, that Epicurus wrote books concerning piety, and the reverence due to the gods, expressed in terms which might have become a priest; and he charges him with inconsistency, in maintaining that the gods ought to be worshipped, whilst he asserted, that they had no concern in human affairs; herein admitting, that he revered the gods, but neither through hope nor fear, merely on account of the majesty and excellence of their nature. But if, with the utmost contempt for popular superstitions, Epicurus retained some belief in, and respect for, invisible natures, it is evident that his gods were destitute of many of the essential characters of divinity, and that his piety was of a kind very different from that which is inspired by just notions of Deity. Not to urge, that there is some reason to suspect, that what he taught concerning the gods might have been artfully designed to screen him from the odium and hazard which would have attended a direct avowal of atheism. The second charge against Epicurus, that of insolence and contempt towards other philosophers, seems scarcely compatible with the general air of gentleness and civility which appears in his character. If he claimed to himself the credit of his own system, he did no more than Zeno, Plato, and Aristotle, after availing themselves of every possible aid from former philosophers, had done before him. But, adds Brucker, calumny never appeared with greater effrontery, than in accusing Epicurus of intemperance and incontinence. That his character was distinguished by the contrary virtues appears not only from the numerous attestations brought by Laertius, but even from the confession of the most creditable opponents of his doctrine, particularly Cicero, Plutarch, and Seneca; and indeed this is sufficiently clear from the particulars which are related concerning his usual manner of living. But nothing can be a greater proof that his adversaries had little to allege against his innocence, than that they were obliged to have recourse to forgery. The infamous letters which Diotimus, or, according to Athcnucus, Theotimus, ascribed to him, were proved, in a public court, to have been fraudulently imposed upon the world, and the author of the imposition was punished. Whatever might be the case afterwards, therefore, there is little reason to doubt that, during the life of Epicurus, his garden was rather a school of temperance, than a scene of riot and debauchery.

, a Cretan philosopher and poet, of the city of Gnossus in Crete, flourished in that island, when Solon was in great reputation at Athens, in the sixth century B. C. Many fabulous stories are told of him, and it is not easy to separate the true from the false part of his history. He was supposed to have been the son of the nymph Balte. He was a man venerable for religious observances, and it was the general persuasion, all over Greece, that he was inspired by some heavenly genius; and that he was frequently favoured with divine revelations. He devoted himself wholly to poetry, and every thing connected with divine worship. He was the first who introduced the consecration of temples, and the purification of countries, cities, and likewise private houses. He had little esteem for the people of his own country. St. Paul, in his epistle to Titus, when speaking of the Cretans, cites one of his verses, where he says (according to our translation), “The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies;” which, however, Fenelon translates less obscurely in these words, “They were great liars, indolent, yet malignant brutes.”

Among the miracles told of him is the following: his father one day sent him to the country, in quest of a ewe. When returning, Epimenides went a little off the highway, and entered a cave directed to the south, in order to enjoy a little repose, and remained asleep there for fifty-seven years, and when he awoke, found himself fifty-seven years older, and every thing changed in proportion around him. An adventure so strange made a great deal of noise over the country; and every one regarded Epimenides as a favourite of the gods. Some of them would have done wiser, if they had made this fiction the foundation of a satiric rojnance; but it has been conjectured that he only disappeared from his family, and spent the fifty-seven years in travelling. It is also recorded of him that he had the power of sending his soul out of his body, and recalling it at pleasure. Perhaps, says Brucker, in his hours of pretended inspiration, he had the art of appearing totally insensible and entranced, which would easily be mistaken, by ignorant spectators, for a power of dismissing and re-­calling his spirit. If, however, the Cretans were notorious liars, and it is to them we are -indebted for the particulars of the life of Epimenides, the solution of these mysteries becomes. easy. He probably was a man of superior talents, who pretended to an intercourse with the gods, and to support his pretensions lived in retirement upon the spontaneous productions of the earth, and practised various arts of imposture. During a plague, the Athenians sent for him to perform a lustration, in consequence of which the plague ceased, and when the Athenians wished to reward him munificently, he demanded only a branch of the sacred olive, which grew in their citadel. Solon, in whose time this lustration was performed (B. C. 596), seems to have been no stranger to the true character of Epimenides; for we find that he greatly disapproved of the conduct of the Athenians in employing him to perform this ceremony. Soon after his return to Crete, he died, as Laertius says, at the age of 157 years, or, as the Cretans pretend, at the age of 299 years. The superstitious Cretans paid him divine honours, after his decease; and he has been reckoned by some the seventh wise man of Greece, to the exclusion of Periander from this number. Laertius enumerates a variety of pieces written by Epimenides, both in prose and verse. Among the former was a treatise “On Sacrifices,” and “An account of the Cretan Republic;” and among the latter “The Genealogy and Theogony of the Curetes and Corybantes,” in 5000 verses; “Of the building of the ship Argo, and Jason’s expedition to Colchis,” in 6500 verses “Of Minos and Rhadamanthus,” in 4000 verses and a treatise “Of Oracles and Responses,” mentioned by St. Jerome, from which St. Paul is said to have taken the quotation above-mentioned.

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

In 1515 he was at Basil; and this year Martin Dorpius, a divine of Louvain, instigated by the enemies of Erasmus, wrote against his “Praise of Folly;” to whom Erasmus replied with much mildness, as knowing that Dorpius, who was young and ductile, had been put upon it by others. He was the first adversary who attacked him openly, but Erasmus forgave him, and took him into his friendship (see Dorpius), which he would not easily have done, if he had not been good-natured, and, as he says of himself, “irasci facilis, tamen ut placabilis esset.” He wrote this year a very handsome letter to pope Leo X. in which he speaks of his edition of St. Jerome, which he had a mind to dedicate to him. Leo returned him a very obliging answer, and seems not to refuse the offer of Erasmus, which, however, did not take effect; for the work was dedicated to the archbishop of Canterbury. Not content with writing to him, Leo wrote also to Henry VIII. of England, and recommended Erasmus to him. The cardinal of St. George also pressed him much to come to Rome, and approved his design of dedicating St. Jerome to the pope: but he always declined going to Rome, as he himself declared many years after, or even to the imperial court, lest the pope or the emperor should command him to write against Luther and the new heresies. And therefore, when the pope’s nuncio to the English court had instructions to persuade Erasmus to throw himself at the pope’s feet, he did not think it safe to trust him; having reason to fear that the court of Rome would never forgive the freedoms he had already taken.

Erasmus received this year, 1518, a considerable present from Henry VIII. as also an offer of a handsome maintenance in England for the rest of his life; he thanked the king, but without either accepting or refusing the favour. A little time after, he wrote to cardinal Wolsey, for whom, however, he had no great affection; and after some compliments, heavily complained of the malice of certain calumniators and enemies of literature, who thwarted his designs of employing human learning to sacred purposes. “These wretches,” says he, “ascribe to Erasmus every thing that is odious; and confound the cause of literature with that of Luther and religion, though thejt have no connection with each other. As to Luther, he is perfectly a stranger to me, and I have read nothing of his, except two or three pages not that I despise him, but because my own pursuits will not give me leisure and yet, as I am informed, there are some who scruple not to affirm, that I have actually been his helper. If he has written well, the praise belongs npt to me nor the blame, if he has written, ill since in all his works there is not a line that came from me. His life and conversation are universally commended and it is no small prejudice in his favour, that his morals are unblameable, and that calumny itself can fasten no reproach on his life. If I had really had time to peruse his writings, I am not so conceited of my own abilities, as to pass a judgment upon the performances of so eminent a divine. I was once against Luther, purely for fear he should bring an odium upon literature, which is too much suspected of evil already,” &c. Thus he goes on to defend himself here, as he does in many other places of his writings; where we may always observe his reserve and caution not to condemn Luther, while he condemned openly enough the conduct and sentiments of Luther’s enemies. Though Erasmus addressed himself upon this occasion to Wolsey, yet it was impossible for the cardinal to be a sincere friend to him, because he was patronized by Warham, between whom and Wolsey there was no good understanding; and because the great praises which Erasmus frequently bestowed upon the archbishop would naturally be interpreted by the cardinal as so many slights upon himself. In his preface to Jerome, after observing of Warham, that he used to wear plain apparel, he relates, that once, when Henry VIII. and Charles V. had an interview, Wolsey took upon him to set forth an order that the clergy should appear splendidly dressed in silk and damask; and that Warham alone, despising the cardinal’s authority, appeared in his usual habit.

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

His fame, however, chiefly now rests on what he wrote in ecclesiastical controversy. When at Heidelberg, a dispute having arisen respecting the sacrament, chiefly founded on the question, “Whether the terms flesh and blood ought to be understood literally or metaphorically' he published a book” De crena Domini,“in which he contended for the metaphorical sense. He had indeed all his life paid so much attention to contested points of divinity, that he was reckoned as good a divine as a physician; and for this reason, in 1564, when a conference was held between the divines of the palatinate, and those of Wittemberg, respecting the real presence in the sacrament, Erastus was ordered by the elector Frederic to be present at it. The work, however, which excited most attention, in this country, at least, if not in his own, was his book on ecclesiastical excommunication, in which he denies the power of the church to excommunicate, exclude, absolve, censure, in short, to exert what is called discipline. Denying the power of the keys, he compared a pastor to a professor of any science who can merely instruct his students; he would have all ordinances of the gospel open and free to all, and all offences, whether of a civil or religious nature, to be referred to the civil magistrate, consequently the church with him was merely a creature of the state. Some of our first reformers adopted these sentiments so far as to maintain, that no one form of church government is prescribed in scripture as a rule for future ages, as Cranmer, Redmayn, Cox, &c. and archbishop Whitgift, in his controversy with Cartwright, delivers the same opinion. The Erastians formed a party in the assembly of divines in 1643, and the chief leaders of it were Dr. Lightfoot, Mr. Colman, Mr. Selden, and Mr. Whitlock; and in the house of cornmons there were, besides Selden and Whitlock, Oliver St. John, esq. sir Thomas Wicldrington, John Crew, esq. sir John Hipsley, and others. In the assembly, the Erastians did not except against the presbyterian government as a” political institution,“proper to be established by the civil magistrate, but they were against the claim of a” divine right.“Accordingly the clause of divine right was lost in the house of commons. It is almost needless to add, however, that after the restoration, these opinions, decayed, and we believe that at this time, there is no sect, however hostile in its opinions to the power of the established church, who has not, and does not assert a power of its own binding on all its members, in one shape or other. In Erastus’s life-time, he was opposed by Ursinus, his friend and colleague; and since has been answered by Hammond,” On the power of the Keys,“1647. But it is necessary to remark that what is called Erastus’s book on this subject was not published in his life-time. During that, indeed, he published his opinions in the form of theses, levelled at Caspar Olevianus and his colleagues, who wanted to introduce ecclesiastical discipline in the churches of the Palatinate; and Beza, who foresaw the mischiefs of this controversy, addressed himself both to Erastus and Olevianus, recommending peace. Having afterwards obtained a copy of the theses which Erastus had written, he determined to answer them; this excited Erastus to draw up a work in reply, but he declined printing it, lest he should disturb the peace of the churches. Six years after his death, however, it was published by one of his disciples, under the title” Explicatio questionis, utrum Excommunicatio, quatenus religionem intelligentes et amplexantes, a sacramentorum usu, propter admissum facinus arcet, mandato nitatur divino, an excogitata sit ab hominibus, &c.“Pesclavii (Puschlaw) apud Baocium Sultaceterum (fictitious names), 1589, 4to. By a letter of his in Goldast’s” Centuria Philologicarum Epistolarum,“it appears that Erastus pronounced his work unanswerable, but Beza very soon performed that task in his” Tractatus pius et moderatus," &c. Geneva, 1690, 4to, and to the general satisfaction of the divines of that period.

Another of his works was upon the subject of the eucharist, in answer to a famous book of Paschasius Radbertus, concerning the body and blood of Christ. Upon this head, Erigena had the good sense to oppose the doctrine of transubstantiation. While our author was employed in these discussions, an incident occurred, which drew upon him the displeasure of the Roman pontiff. Michael Balbus, the Greek emperor, had sent, in the year 824, a copy of the works of Dionysius, the philosopher, to the emperor Lewis the pious, as a most acceptable present. In France these treatises were esteemed to be an invaluable treasure; and therefore Charles the bald, who could not read Greek, was earnestly desirous of perusing them in a Latin translation. This desire was undoubtedly increased by an opinion which at that time universally prevailed, though without any proof, that Dionysius the Areopagite, or St. Denys, was the first Christian teacher, or apostle, in France. At the request of Charles, Scotus undertook the task of translating the works in question, the titles of which were, “On the celestial Monarchy;” “On the ecclesiastical Hierarchy;” “On divine Names;” and, “On mystic Theology.” These books were received with great eagerness by the western churches; but the translation having been made without the license of the sovereign pontiff, and containing many things contrary to the received faith of the church of Rome, the pope, Nicholas the first, was highly displeased, and wrote a threatening letter to the French king, requiring that Scotus should be banished from the university of Paris, and sent to Rome. Charles had too much affection and respect for our author to obey the pope’s order; but Erigena thought it advisable, for his safety, to retire from, Paris. According to some writers, it was upon this occasion that he returned to England. It was the translation of the works of the pretended Dionysius which revived the knowledge of Alexandrian Platonism in the west, and laid the foundation of the mystical system of theology, which afterwards so generally prevailed. Hence it was, that philosophical enthusiasm, born in the east, nourished by Plato, educated in Alexandria, matured in Asia, and adopted into the Greek church, found its way into the western church, and there produced innumerable mischiefs.

, was born at Tacnnstadt in Thuringia, Aug. 4, 1707, was educated at Witternberg and Leipsic, and became one of the most learned philologers of Germany. He studied theology as a profession; and in 1734 was chosen rector of St. Thomas’s school. In 1742 he was appointed professor extraordinary of ancient literature, in 1756 professor of eloquence, and in 1758 doctor and professor of divinity, the functions of all which offices he discharged with great assiduity and high reputation, and yet found leisure for his numerous original publications, and those excellent editions of the classics which have made his name familiar in the learned world. As a divine, he disliked the modern philosophical innovations in the study of theology, and was alike hostile to infidelity and superstition. He died, with the character of a man of consummate learning and irreproachable character, Sept. 11, 1781. Among his valuable editions of the classics are, 1. His “Homer,” Leipsic, 1759, 5 vols. 8vo, which may be ranked among the very best. It is formed on the basis of Clarke’s, containing his text and notes, and the various readings of a Leipsic manuscript, with those of the ancient editions. 2. “Callimachus,” Ley den, 1761, 2 vols. 8vo, containing, besides the preface, notes, and version of Ernesti, many grammatical and critical observations of Hemsterhusius and Ruhnkenius, and the whole of what is valuable in Gravius. 3. “Cicero,” of whose works he published three editions, the first at Leipsic, 1737, 5 vols. the others at Halle, 1758 and 1774, in 8 vols. 8vo. The second and third, which are the most correct, contain the famous “Clavis Ciceroniana,” which has been published separately. 4. “Tacitus,” Leipsic, 1752, 1772, 2 vols. 8vo, both valuable, although there are more errors and omissions than could have been wished; yet the preface, notes, and indexes are interesting and useful. 5. “Suetonius,” two editions, at Leipsic, 1748 and 1775, 8vo, but neither correct, or indeed at all valuable. 6. Aristophanes’ s Nubes,“Leipsic, 1788, a very useful edition, with the ancient scholia, and remarks by the editor and by Nagelius. 7. Xenophon’s” Memorabilia,“of which there have been several editions, 1737, 1742, 1755, &c. The best is that of Leipsic, 1772. Ernesti’s other works are, 8.” Initia doctrinse solidioris,“Leipsic, 1783, 8vo, the seventh edition. 9.” Institutio interpretis Novi Testamenti,“Leipsic, 1775, 8vo, the third edition, which Alberti of Leyden calls a” golden work.“10. An improved edition of Hederic’s Lexicon, 1754 and 1767. 11. A” Theological Library,“1760 1771, 11 vols. 8vo. 12.” Opuscula Oratoria, Orationes, Prolusiones et Elogia x “Leyden, 1762, 8vo. This contains thirteen very elegant and judicious academical discourses, pronounced on different occasions, with the same number of historical eloges. The subjects of the discourses are, 1. Of the study of the belles lettres. 2. That eloquence has its real source in the heart. 3. That we must conform to the laws of criticism in the study of divinity. 4. Of the revolutions of eloquence. 5. Of the conditions to be observed for studying and teaching philosophy with success. 6. Of the advantages of real learning. 7. The arts of peace and war. 8. A parallel between the Greek and Roman writers. 9. Of the name of on’s country. 10. Of joining the art of thinking to that of speaking. 11. Of the desire of praise and reputation. 12. Of popular philosophy and, 13. Of moral or practicable philosophy. These discourses are written in an easy flowing style, and in elegant Latinity. II.” Opusculorum oratoriorum, novum volumen,“Leipsic, 1791, 8vo: this and another volume published in 1794, forms a complete collection of Ernesti’s smaller tracts. 12.” Archaeologia literaria,“Leipsic, 1768, 8vo, to which we may add his excellent new edition, of which he lived to publish only 3 volumes, of” Fabricii Bibl. Graeca." His nephew, Augustus William Ernes n, was born in 1733, and died in 1801 at Leipsic, where he was professor of eloquence in that university from 1770, and well known by his edition of Livy, Quintilian, and other classics. To the university library there he bequeathed his very complete collection of the works of Camerarius; and to that of the Senate, his collection of the editions and Mss. of Cicero, to complete the Ciceronian collection already in it.

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

, a Scotch divine, was one of the younger of the thirty- three children of Ralph Erskine, of Shieltield, a family of considerable antiquity in the county of Merse, and descended from the noble family of Marr. He was born at Dryburgh, still the family-seat of the Buchan family, in 1624, where he received the rudiments of his education, and in 1650 took the degree of M. A. in the university of Edinburgh. He was ordained to the ministry by the presbyterians in England, to the Jiving of Cornhill, in Durham, but soon after was ejected by the act of uniformity, on which he returned to his own country; but the persecution carried on at that time in Scotland against the presbyterians, obliged Mr. Erskine to take refuge in Holland, whence the want of the common necessaries of life induced him again to return to his native country, where he was apprehended and committed prisoner to the Bass, a strong fort in the mouth of the Forth. There he continued near three years till, through the interest of the then earl of Marr, his kinsman, he was set at liberty but such was the violence of the times, that he was again driven from Scotland. In 1687, when king James’s toleration, was proclaimed, Mr. Erskine embraced it; and on the re-establishment of presbytery in 1690, he was appointed minister of Churnside in the county of Berwick. He died August 10, 1696, aged sixty-eight, much respected by all who knew him, and left behind him several manuscripts, elucidating difficult passages in scripture; but these having been written in Latin, none of them were ever published.

, brother of the above, was born at Monilaws in Northumberland, March 15, 1685, was educated along with his brother Ebenezer in the university of Edinburgh, and took the degree of A. M. 1704, after which he was licensed to preach as a probationer in 1709. But notwithstanding his popular abilities as a preacher, yet he did not obtain a settlement in the church till 1711, when he was ordained minister at Dunfermline in Fifeshire. There he continued till 1734, when, joining the st'ceders along with his brother Ebenezer, he was deposed by an order from the general assembly. Esteemed and beloved by his hearers, they built a meeting for him, and attended his ministry till his death, which happened Nov. 6, 1752, in the sixty-eighth year of his age. As a divine, few men were ever more esteemed in Scotland; and the character given of him by the late Mr. Hervey sets his abilities in the highest point of view. His works, in 2 vols. fol. were published in 1764, consisting principally of sermons, “The Gospel Sonnets,” and “A Paraphrase in verse of the Song of Solomon.”

, a German divine and philologer, was born at Nuremberg March 24, 1663. After studying at Altorf, where, in 1684, he took his degree of master of arts, and received the poetic crown, he went to Jena, and, as adjunct of the faculty of philosophy, taught the classics with great reputation. He afterwards travelled through Germany and Holland, and on his return assisted his father, who was pastor of the fauxbourg of Wehrd in Nuremberg. Having carried on a correspondence with the most eminent scholars of his time, and now acquired reputation by his works, he was invited by the celebrated Magliabechi to become librarian to the grand duke of Florence; and among other advantages, he was promised the unmolested exercise of his religion, which was the protestant; and he would probably have accepted so liberal an offer, if he had not at the same time,been appointed inspector of the schools at Altorf, on which charge he entered in 1691. Four years afterwards he was recalled to Nuremberg, as deacon of the church of St. Mary, and professor of eloquence, poetry, history, and the Greek languages in the college of St. Giles, to which office, in 1705, was added that of pastor of St. Clare. But these offices do not appear to have been profitable, if, as we are told, he found himself in such circumstances as to be obliged to sell a good part of his valuable and curious library. Here, however, he seems to have remained until his death, Sept. 24, 1722. Some of his philological dissertations were printed in 1700, in the “Syntagma secundnm dissertationum Philologicarum,” Rotterdam, 8vo. His “Epigenes sive commentarius in fragmenta Orphica” was published at Nuremberg in 1702, 4to. He also published a new edition, Utrecht, 1689, of the “Orphei Argonautica, hymni, et de lapidibus Poema,” with notes; and an edition of “Matthei Devarii de particulis Grrecae Linguae, liber singularis,” Amst. 1700, 12 mo. He translated into German Allix on the Truth of the Christian Religion, and on the coming of the Messiah; and count Marsigli’s Letter on Mineral Phosphorus. He wrote a life of himself, which was prefixed to some of his sermons printed after his decease.

, a French protestant divine in the seventeenth century, was born at Dauphine, and became minister of the French church in London, an office which he sustained during the reigns of James I. and Charles I. He published several s’mall tracts, which were afterwards collected and published at Geneva and the Hague, in three and in two volumes 12mo, about 1670. He also published a work, which he dedicated to Charles I. entitled “Erreurs Populaires en points generaux qui concernent Pintelligence de la Religion,” and in some of his works has a criticism on the catechism of Calvin, which was so much used in the schools at Geneva.

, a learned French divine, was born at Chalons-sur-Marne in 1511, of noble parents, became a doctor of the Sorbonne, and was rector of the university of Paris. He preached with considerable applause; but having in one of his sermons called the “Légende Doreée” the “Légende Ferrée,” it was concluded that he did not believe in the worship of the saints; especially from his doubting of certain facts related by the legendary writers in the “Golden Legend,” of which he ventured to speak thus disrespectfully. The faculty of Paris was about to pass a censure on him; but he explained himself in another discourse, and the transient storm was succeeded by a calm. The cardinal de Lorraine, who was well aware of his merit, employed him in several affairs of importance. D‘Espence attended him to Flanders in 1544, for the purpose of ratifying the peace between Charles V. and Francis I. His eminence took him afterwards to Rome in 1555, where he made so conspicuous a figure, that Paul IV. would have honoured him with the purple, in order to retain him. But his intention was set aside (says fatrjer, Berthier) as being apparently contrary to the interests of France. The imperialists requested the hat for three monks; and therefore the cardinal de Lorraine, who IV voured the design of getting D’Espence into the sacred college, relinquished the idea. “I rather chose,” says he in a letter to the king, “that he should not be there, than that three monks should get in; accordingly I entreated his holiness to think no more of it, and, by that means, I kept out the whole crew.” D'Espence, liking far less to live at Rome than at Paris, returned to France, and appeared with consequence at the assembly of the states of Orleans in 1560, and at the conference of Poissy in 1561, where he attached himself to the Calvinists, which gave much offence to his popish brethren. He died of the stone at Paris, Oct. 5, 1571, in the sixtieth year of his age. He was one of the most moderate and judicious doctors of the age in which he lived, and with all his attachment to popery, was the declared enemy of all violent measures, and disapproved of persecutions. He was well versed in the sciences, both ecclesiastical and profane. His works are almost all written in Latin, with an elegance scarcely known to the theologians of that period. The principal of them are, 1. “A treatise on Clandestine Marriages;” in which he proves that the sons of distinguished families cannot validiy contract marriage, without the consent of their relations. 2. “Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul to Timothy and Titus,” full of long digressions on the hierarchy and the ecclesiastical discipline. 3. Several controversial tracts, some in Latin and others in French. Ah his Latin works were collected at Paris in 1619, folio.

, a learned and orthodox Dutch divine, was born at Bommel, in the duchy of Guelderland, in February 1618, and after having been instructed in classical learning at home, was sent to Utrecht, where he studied under Antonius Emilius, who was at that time moderator of the university. He then went through a course of philosophy, mathematics, and theology, under the ablest professors, and in 1639 his name was put into the list of students who were candidates for the ministry. The following year he was admitted to his degree of M. A. In 1641 he was appointed pastor of the church of Nederlangbroeck. In 1645 he took his doctor’s degree in theology; and in 1651 was chosen minister of the church of Utrecht: two years after, he was appointed joint professor of divinity with Walter de Bruyn, and began his course of lectures, according to the usual mode, by a discourse “De tractatione verbi divini.” He died May 18, 1672, and an eulogium was pronounced on him by his quondam fellowstudent, John Voetius, as appears by one of Graevius’s letters in Burman’s “Sylloge,” vol. IV. p. 419. His works were, 1. “Triumphus Crucis, sive fides catholica de satisfactione Jesu Christi,” Amst. 1649, a work levelled at the Socinian opinions, especially those of Crellius. It was the reputation of this learned performance which first pointed him out as fit for the professor’s chair. 2. “De morah'tate Sabbathi,” 1658. 3. “Disquisitio de moralitate Sabbathi hebdomadalis,” 1665. 4. “Dissertationes de Decalogo et die Sabbathi adversus Abrahamum Heidanum,” Utrecht, 1666, 4to. 5. “Vindiciae quarti praecepti in Decalogo,” ibid. 1666, written in answer to Francis Barman, who defended the opinions of Cocceius. 6. “Defensio concilii Theologici Ultrajectini de Canonicatibus, Vicariatibns, &c.” 1658, 4to, which was answered by Desmarais, in his “Vindicirc de Canonicis,” printed at Groningen, 1660, 4to. 7. “Systema Theologicum,” Utrecht, 1659, 2 vols. 4to, in the preface to which he promises a system of practical divinity. 8. “Synopsis controversiarum Theologicarum, et index locorum totius sacrae Scripturoc,” Arnst. 1661, and Utrecht thrice reprinted, y. “Compendium Theologiae dogmaticum,” Utrecht, 1669, and 1685, 8vo. 10. “Apologia pro ministris in Anglia non conformistis.” The date of this is not in our authority, but the work must not be mistaken for one with a similar title, supposed by Hickman, mentioned in our account of Durell; (see Durell). 11. “Dissertatio de subjectione Christi ad legem divinam.” 12. “Doctrina de nostra redemptione per meritum Jesu Christi.” 13. “Instructio salutaris de Judaeis.” 14. “Refutatio vere catholica contra pontificios.” 15. “Oratio de celsitudine perseverantiie.” 16. “Oratio funebris in obitum Gualteri de Bruyn,” Utrecht, 1653. 17. “Oratio funebris in obitum Gisberti Voetii,” ibid. 1677, 4to. He published also in Dutch, a treatise on the tributemoney, from Matthew xvii. verse 24, &c. and various theological dissertations written as theses for disputation.

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

, a heretic of the second century, was the founder of the sect of Ophites or Serpentarians, one of whose dogmas was, “that the serpent by which our first parents were deceived, was either Christ himself or Sophia (wisdom) concealed under that form,” for which reason they paid a kind of divine honours to certain serpents kept for that purpose. In most points he adhered to the Oriental or Gnostic philosophy, of two opposite principles with the Æons, and other dreams of those sects. Origen did not consider the disciples of Euphrates as Christians, but as calumniators of Jesus Christ; but Dr. Lardner, in their defence, has proved that they believed in Jesus, as an excellent man, and the true Messiah.

, bishop of Nice, flourished in the beginning of the twelfth century, and was celebrated for his polemic writings in divinity, and his philosophical works. Anna Comnena says of him, that “he was a man wise in divine knowledge; and, in the profane disputations of the schools, superior to the best ornaments of the academy, and the porch.” His Greek commentaries on Aristotle’s latter analytics, and on his ethics, are still extant; the former published at Venice in 1534, the latter at the same place in 1536, and at Paris in 1543. A work against Chrysolanus on the Holy Ghost is said also to be extant in manuscript.

, originally a monk of the fifth century, and for his piety elected abbot of the convent near Constantinople to which he belonged, is said to have lived to an advanced age before he distinguished himself by any peculiar opinions. Then, through a violent desire to oppose the Nestorian heresy, which was supposed to divide the nature of Christ into two distinct persons, he became the leader of a new heresy, by absorbing the human nature of Christ entirely in the divine, and maintaining that the human body of Christ was only apparent. His doctrines were first noticed in a council assembled at Constantinople by Fluvianus, in the year 448, where they were condemned, and himself deposed from his dignity of abbot. Eutyches, however, had interest enough with the emperor Theodosius to procure another council at Ephesus, in the year 449, in which the former acts were reversed, Flavian and other bishops who had opposed Eutyches deposed, and every thing carried with such violence, that this council is generally named woJoj xwrrpun), the convention of robbers. A third council was necessary to settle these differences; and pope Leo the First, (called St. Leo, or Leo the Great) prevailed on Marcian, the successor of Theodosius, to cull one at Chalcedon, which met in the year 451, and was reckoned the fourth recumenical or general council. Six hundred and thirty bishops were present. Here Kutyches was condemned, though absent, and the following doctrine laid down in opposition to his heresy: “That in Christ two distinct natures were united in one person, without any change, mixture, or confusion.” Yet even after this decision, violent disputes and divisions subsisted for a considerable time. It is uncertain what became of Eutyches after the council of Ephesus; Leo certainly applied ta Marcian and to Pulcheria to have him deposed; but whether he succeeded or not, is unknown. Two supplications to Theodosius, one confession, and a fragment of another by Eutyches, are still extant.

, D. D. a dissenting minister of the baptist persuasion at Bristol, was the son, and successor in the ministry, of the rev. Hugh Evans, M. A. pastor of a congregation at Broadmead, in that city, where he was born, in 1737. Having gone through the usual course of studies at the dissenting academy^ Mile-end, London, he was admitted a preacher, and for some time exercised his function in the metropolis, but afterwards became assistant to his father in the congregation at Broadmead, Bristol. On his father’s death he succeeded him, and remained in that office for about thirty-two years, admired and beloved by his people, and not less esteemed as the superintendant of a seminary for the education of young men who were designed for the ministry. He was likewise a man of unwearied benevolence, and liberally promoted the establishment of schools for the instruction and clothing of destitute children at Broadmead, Downend, Mangotfield, &c. and himself set a bright example of personal charity and contributions, while he stirred up others to the performance of a similar duty. His publications having procured him considerable reputation as a divine and scholar, he received in 1789, the degree of D. D. from King’s-college, Aberdeen. He died of a paralytic affection, Aug. 9, 1791. Dr. Evans was twice married; first, in 1762, to miss Sarah Jeffries, the only daughter of the rev. Joseph Jeffries, of Taunton, in Somersetshire, by whom he had five children, one of whom, Joseph Jeffries Evans, esq. a merchant of London, died very lately. Mrs. Evans died in 1771; and in 1774, Dr. Evans married miss Sarah Hazle, of Bristol, who survived him. His publications are,1. “Sermons on the Scripture doctrine of the Son and Holy Spirit,” 1766, 12mo, in answer to a petulant attack on the doctrine of the Trinity by one Williams, who was, or pretended to be, a livery-servant. 2. “A collection of Hymns, adapted to public Worship,” 1769, 12mo. 3. “An address to the serious and candid professors of Christianity,” 1772, 12mo, 5th edit. 4. “Christ crucified; or the Scripture doctrine of the Atonement, in four discourses,” 1789, 12mo. 5. Seventeen occasional Sermons, and a few tracts on fugitive subjects.

, a Welch divine and poet, was born at Cynhavvdrew, in Cardiganshire, about 1730, and was entered of Jesus college, Oxford, about the beginning of 1751, where he probably took a bachelor’s degree, but left college after taking orders, and officiated as curate in several places, particularly Newick in Kent, Llanvair Talhaiarn in Denbighshire, and Towyn in Merion. He was at the same time an assiduous student of Welch literature, employing all his leisure hours in transcribing an cient manuscripts, of which labour he left behind him about an hundred volumes of various sizes. Having passed a great part of his life in such pursuits, without being able to procure the smallest promotion in the church, his fortitude deserted him, and, to chase away his vexations, he fell into that which increased them, a habit of drinking, which at times produced symptoms of derangement, and precluded his chance of obtaining any new friends. He inherited a small freehold in Cardiganshire, which he conveyed over to a younger brother to raise money to support himself at the university. Such a sacrifice to the laudable ambition of learning ought not to have gone unrewarded. Mr. Evans died at his birth-place in 1790. lu 1764 he published a 4to vol. “Dissertatio de Bardis,” or “Some Specimens of the Poetry of the ancient Welch Bards. Translated into English, with explanatory notes on the historical passages, and a short account of the men and places mentioned by the Bards; in order to give the curious some idea of the taste and sentiments of our ancestors, and their manner of writing,” 4to. Although these specimens appeared to considerable disadvantage in a translation, yet Mr. Evans’s Latin Dissertation proved his very intimate acquaintance with the subject, and that his researches into the history of his poetical countrymen had been profound and successful. His other works were an English poem called “The Love of our Country, with historical notes,” 1772, 4to, in which, with some not inelegant versification, there is rather too much of prejudice and personal complaint; several Welch compositions, printed in the “Diddanwch Tenluaidd,” and two volumes of Sermons by Tillotson and others, translated into Welch. All the manuscripts that Mr. Evans possessed at his death became the property of Paul Pan ton, esq. of Plas Gwyn, in Mona, in consideration of an annuity of twenty pounds, which that gentleman settled upon him.

, a dissenting divine of Wales, was born, in 1680, at Wrexham, in Denbighshire, descended from a race of clergymen of the establishment until his father, who was ejected for non-conformity from the living of Oswestry, in Shropshire, in 1662, and became the minister to an independent congregation at Wrexham. The son was educated with great care, and inducted to the different branches’ of literature necessary to qualify him for the office of the ministry, which he afterwards exercised in London, first as an assistant, and afterwards as successor to Dr. Daniel Williams. He was also one of the lecturers at tSalter’s hall meeting and belonged to what is called “The Merchant’s lecture.” Tn youth he was remarkably studious, and not only read over all the Christian writers of the first three centuries, but also the whole of Pool’s Synopsis, in five large folio volumes. He married a lady of family, and had a daughter supposed to be a considerable fortune; but he had been tempted to embark his property in the South-sea scheme, and the loss is supposed to have contributed to shorten his days. He died in 1730, in the fifty-first year of his age, highly esteemed by all who knew him. He had ever been eminent for piety, integrity, and public spirit; in his principles he was orthodox, but disposed to think well of and to honour those who differed from him, without any regard to the sentiments which they might hold. He received a diploma of D. D. from the universities of Edinburgh and Aberdeen. His “Practical Discourses concerning the Christian Temper,” are still in considerable estimation. The celebrated Dr. Watts characterized them as “the most complete summary of those duties which make up the Christian life,” and Dr. Doddridge, as the best practical pieces in our language. His other works are, “Sermons upon various subjects, preached to young people,” 1725, 12mo; “A Letter to Mr. Gumming, concerning the regard which ought to be had to Scripture consequences;” “A Second Letter,” in defence of the former, and about twenty occasional Sermons, printed separately. He was the editor also of the “Life of the rev. James Owen,” 1711, 12mo.

What Mr. Evanson meant by the authentic scriptures, he explained very freely in a volume published in 1792, which amply justifies our classing him among the most determined enemies of revealed religion, nor are we ashamed to class ourselves among “the superficial readers” (if that epithet must be applied) who “on the appearance of this publication, concluded that the author himself was an unbeliever, and that he was taking this method to undermine the principles of Christianity.” This work was entitled “The Dissonance of the four generally received Evangelists, and the evidence of their authenticity examined.” In this work the author undertakes to shew that a considerable part of the New Testament is a forgery, and has no claims whatever to the title of inspired writing. He therefore discards, as destitute of all authority, the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John the Epistles to the Romans, Ephesians, Colossians, and the Hebrews the Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude; and in the Book of Revelation, the Epistles to the Seven Churches of Asia. His very moderate desires are satisfied with one Gospel, and part of the Epistles, and he maintains that St. Luke’s history implies that neither Matthew nor any other apostle could have published any history previously to his own. But even St. Luke’s gospel is not entirely to his taste, for in it, as well as in the Acts, he is persuaded that there are manifest interpolations. This strange performance involved him in a controversy with Dr. Priestley, although of no long duration, and brought, we are told, “a considerable share of obloquy and persecution from persons of all parties.” Two instances, however, are all that are specified of this persecution first, he was expelled from a book-club in Suffolk, for which there was no remedy and secondly, he was pestered by anonymous letters, from the expence of which the post-office relieved him; and what is of more importance, we are told that “notwithstanding the apparent liberties this gentleman took with the scriptures, no man living was a firmer believer in the divine mission of Christ”

Mr. Evelyn’s next publication was the most important of all his works: 15. “Sylva; or, a dicourse of Foresttrees, and the propagation of timber in his majesty’s dominions 5 as it was delivered in the royal society the 15th of October, 1662, Upon occasion of certain queries propounded to that illustrious assembly by the honourable the principal officers and commissioners of the navy.” To which is annexed, “Pomona, or, an appendix concerning fruit-trees, in relation to cider, the making and several ways of ordering it: published by express order of the royal society,” Lond. 1664, fol. This was the first work written by the command, and published in virtue of an order, of the royal society, signed by the lord viscount Brouncker, their president, and dedicated to the king. The second edition of it was published in 1669, with a new dedication to king Charles II. dated from Sayes-court, Aug. 24; the first paragraph of which deserves the reader’s notice. “Sir, This second edition of Sylva, after more than a thousand copies had been bought up and dispersed of the first impression, in much less than two years space (which booksellers assure us is a very extraordinary thing in volumes of this bulk), conies now again to pay its homage to your serene majesty, to whose auspices alone it owes the favourable acceptance which it has received in the world. But it is not that alone which it presumes to tell your majesty, but to acquaint you that it has been the sole occasion for furnishing your almost exhausted dominions with more, I dare say, than two millions of timber-trees, besides infinite others, which have been propagated within the three nations at the instigation and by the direction of this work; and that the author of it is able, if need require, to make it out by a competent volume of letters and acknowledgments, which are come to his hands, from several persons of the most eminent quality, many of them illustrious, and divers of them unknoun to him, in justification of what he asserts; which he the rather preserves with the more care, because they are testimonials from so many honourable persons ‘of the benefit they have received from the endeavours of the royal society, which now-a-days passes through so many censures; but she has yet your majesty for her founder and patron, and is therefore the’ less concerned, since no man of worth can lightly speak ill of an assembly v.hich your majesty has thought fit to dignify by so signal a relation to it.” The third edition, with great additions and improvements, was published in 1G79; the fourth in 1705, and the fifth in 1729, both very incorrect. In 1776 a new edition of the “Sylva” was published in 4to, by Dr. Andrew Hunter, of York, a gentleman eminently qualified for the undertaking. Under the care of this gentleman the work appeared with every possible advantage; and was enriched by the judicious editor with ample and copious notes, and adorned with a set of fine engravings. A head of Mr. Evelyn is prefixed, drawn and engraved by Battolozzi. Dr. Hunter’s edition of the Sylva has been four times reprinted. The edition of 1812 contains the deceased editor’s last corrections . 16. “A parallel of the antient architecture with the modern, in a collection of ten principal authors who have written upon the five orders, viz. Palladio and Scammozzi, Serlio and Vignola D. Barbaro and Cataneo L. B. Alberti and Viola, Bullant and De Lorme compared with one another. The three Greek orders, Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian, comprise the first part of this treatise, and the two Latin, Tuscan and Composite, the latter written in French by Roland Freart, sieur de Chambray made English for the benefit, of builders to which is added, an account of architects and architecture^ in an historical and etymological explanation of certain terms, particularly affected by architects; with Leon Baptista Alberti’s treatise of statues,” London, 1664, folio. This work, as well as the former, is dedicated to king Charles II.; and the dedication dated from Sayes-court, August 20th, contains^some curious facts. After an apology for prefixing his royal name to a translation, our author proceeds thus: “I know none, indeed, to whom I could more aptly inscribe a discourse of building, than to so royal a builder, whose august attempts have already given so great a splendour to our imperial city, and so illustrious an example to the nation It is from this contemplation, sir, that after I had, by the commands of the royal society, endeavoured the improvement of timber and the planting of trees, I have advanced to that of building, as its proper and mutual consequent, not with a presumption to incite or instruct your majesty, which were a vanity unpardonable, but, by it, to take occasion of celebrating your majesty’s great example, who use your empire and authority so worthily, as fortune seems to have consulted her reason, when she poured her favours upon you; so as I never cast my eyes on that generous designation in the epigram, Ut donem pastor K tedificem, without immediate reflection on your majesty, who seem only to value those royal advantages you have above others, that you may oblige, and that you may build. And certainly, sir, your majesty has consulted the noblest way of establishing your greatness, and of perpetuating your memory, since, while stones can preserve inscriptions, your name will be famous to posterity; and, when those materials fail, the benefits that are engraven in our hearts will outlast those of marble. It will be no paradox, but a truth, to affirm, that your majesty has already built and repaired more in three or four years, notwithstanding the difficulties and the necessity of an extraordinary ceconomy for the public concernment, than all your enemies have destroyed in twenty, nay than all your majesty’s predecessors have advanced in an hundred, as I could easily make out, not only by what your majesty has so magnificently designed and carried on at that your ancient honour of Greenwich, under the conduct of your most industrious and worthy surveyor, but in those splendid apartments and other useful reformations for security and delight about your majesty’s palace at Whitehall the chargeable covering first, then paving and reformation of Westminster-hall care and preparation for rebuilding St. Paul’s, by the impiety and iniquity of the late confusions almost dilapidated; what her majesty the queen-mother has added to her palace at Somerset-house, in a structure becoming her royal grandeur, and the due veneration of all your majesty’s subjects, for the lioirnir she has done both this your native city, and the whole nation. Nor may I here omit, what I so much desire to transmit to posterity, those noble and profitable amoenities of your majesty’s plantations, wherein you most resemble the divine architect, because your majesty has proposed in it such a pattern to your subjects, as merit their imitation and protoundest acknowledgments, in one of the most worthy and kingly improvements tbat nature is capable of. 1 know not what they talk of former ages, and of the now contemporary princes with your majesty these things are visible and should I here descend to more particulars, which yet were not foreign to the subject of this discourse, I would provoke the whole world to produce me an example parallel with your majesty, for your exact judgment and marvellous ability in all that belongs to the naval architecture, both as to its proper terms and more solid use, in which your majesty is master of one of the most noble and profitable arts that can be wished, in a prince to whom God has designed the dominion of the ocean, which renders your majesty’s empire universal; where, by exercising your royal talent and knowledge that way, you can bring even the antipodes to meet, and the poles to kiss each other; for so likewise, not in a metaphorical but natural sense, your equal and prudent government of this nation has made it good, whilst your majesty has so prosperously guided this giddy bark, through such a storm, as no hand, save your majesty’s, could touch the helm, but at the price of their temerity.” There is also another dedication to sir John Denham, knight of the bath, superintendent and surveyor of all his majesty’s buildings and works, in which there are several matters of fact worth knowing, as indeed there are in all Mr. Evelyn’s dedications; for, though no man was naturally more civil, or more capable of making a compliment handsomely, yet his merit was always conspicuous in his good manners; and he never thought that the swelling sound of a well-turned period could atone for want of sense. It appears from the dedication of the second edition of the Sylva to king Charles II. that there was a second edition of this work also in the same year, viz. 1669, as there was a third in 1697, which was the last in the author’s life-time. In this third edition, which is very much improved, “the account of Architects and Architecture,” which is an original work of Mr. Evelyn’s, and a most excellent one of its kind, is dedicated to sir Christopher Wren, surveyor to his majesty’s buildings and works; and there is in it another of those incidental passages that concern the personal history of our author. Having said in the first paragraph, that, if the whole art of building were lost, it might be found again in the noble works of that great architect, which, though a very high, is no unjust compliment, more especially, continues our author, St. Paul’s church and the Monument; he then adds, “I have named St. Paul’s, and truly not without admiration, as oft as I recall to mind, as frequently I do, the sad and deplorable condition it was in, when, after it had been made a stable of horses and a den of thieves, you, with other gentlemen and myself, were, by the late king Charles, named commissioners to survey the dilapidations, and to make report to his majesty, in order to a speedy reparation. You will not, I am sure, forget the struggle we had with some who were for patching it up any how, so the steeple might stand, instead of new-building, which it altogether needed: when, to put an end to the contest, five days after (August 27, Sept. 1666), that dreadful conflagration happened, out of whose this phoenix is risen, and was by providence designed for you. The circumstance is too remarkable, that I could not pass it over without notice. I will now add no more, but beg your pardon for this confidence of mine, after I have acquainted you that the parallel to which this was annexed being out of print, I was importuned by the bookseller to add something to a new impression, but to which I was no way inclined; till, not long since, going to St. Paul’s, to contemplate that august pile, and the progress you have made, some of your chief workmen gratefully acknowledging the assistance it had afforded them, I took this opportunity of doing myself this honour.” The fourth edition of this work, printed long after our author’s death, viz. in 1733, was in folio, as well as the rest; to which is added “The Elements of Architecture,” by sir Henry Wotton, and some other things, of which, however, hints were met with in our author’s pieces. 17. “Mwrtyj/ov Tjjj AvaiMos; that is, another part of the mystery of Jesuitism, or the new heresy of the Jesuits, publicly maintained at Paris, in the college of Clermont, the twelfth of December, 1661, declared to all the bishops of France, according to the copy printed at Paris. Together with the imaginary heresy, in three letters; with divers other particulars relating to this abominable mystery never before published in English;” Lond. 1664, 8vo. This, indeed, has not our author’s name to it; but that it is really his, and that he had reasons for not owning it more publicly, appears from a letter from him to Mr. Boyle. 18. “Kalendarium Hortense, or the gardener’s almanac, directing what he is to do monthly throughout the year, and what fruits and flowers are in prime,” Lond. 1664, 8vo. The second edition of this book, which seems to have been in folio, and bound with the Sylva and Pomona, as it was in the third edition, was dedicated to Cowley, with great compliments from our author to that poet, to whom it had been communicated before; which occasioned Cowley’s addressing to John Evelyn, esq. his mixed essay in verse and prose, entitled “The Garden.” This passed through at least nine editions. The author made many additions as long as he lived and the best was that printed by way of appendix to the fourth and last edition of the Sylva in his life-time. 19. “The history of the three late famous impostors, viz. Padre Ottotnano, pretended son and heir to the late grand signior; Mahomet Bei, a pretended prince of the Ottoman family, but, in truth, a Wallachian counterfeit: and Sabbatai Sevi, the supposed Messiah of the Jews, in the year 1666; with a brief account of the ground and occasion of tjie present war between the Turk and the Venetian: together with the cause of the final extirpation, destruction, and exile, of the Jews out of the empire of Persia,” Lond. 1668, 8vo. This piece is dedicated to Henry earl of Arlington, and the dedication is subscribed J. E. and, if Mr. Wood had seen it, he would not have said, “I know nothing yet to the contrary but this may be a translation.” The nature and value of this little piece were much better known abroad: one of the best literary journals, “Act. Eruditorum Lipsiensiutn,” A. D. 1690, p. 605, having given, though at some distance of time, a very just character of it, with this very remarkable circumstance, that the pretended Mahomet Bei was at that very juncture in the city of Leipsic. There is added, at the end of this piece, an account of the extirpation of the Jews in Persia during the reign of Shah Abbas the second, which is not so large or perfect as the rest; of which circumstance the author gives a hint, and does not press any thing farther than he is supported by authorities. He mentions a person, who, the very year that the book was published, took upon him the title of brother to the famous count Serini, and that he had the misfortune to be shipwrecked in the west of England, by which he imposed upon persons of quality, till, by unluckily calling for drink upon the road in very audible English, he discovered the cheat. He farther remarks, with regard to Sabbatai Sevi, that he was the twenty-fifth false Messiah that had attempted to impose upon the Jews, even according to their own account. 20. “Public employment and an active life preferred to solitude, in a reply to a late ingenious essay of a contrary title,” Lond. 1667, in 8vo. This was written in answer to a discourse of sir George Mackenzie’s, preferring solitude to public employment, which was at the time of its publication much admired; and, as our author apprehended this might prove an encouragement to indolence and timidity, he therefore wrote against it. We have in the Transactions of the royal society a character of this, and thie piece before mentioned, which follows the account given of the second edition of the “Sylva,” Philosoph. Trans. No. 53; and the reader will find some ingenious strictures on “Public employment, &c.” in vol. 1. of the Censura Literaria, by one who knows well how to improve solitude. 21. “An idea of the perfection of painting, demonstrated from the principles of art, and by examples conformable to the observations which Pliny and Quintilian have made upon the most celebrated pieces of the ancient painters, paralleled with some works of the most famous modern painters, Leonardo da Vinci, Raphael, Julio Romano, and N. Poussin. Written in French by Roland Freart, Sieur de Cambray, and rendered English by J. E. esquire, fellow of the royal society;” Lond. 1668, 8vo, This translation is dedicated to Henry Howard, of Norfolk, heir apparent to that dukedom and the dedication is dated from Say es-court, June the 24th, 1668, 8vo. This piece, like most of Mr. Evelyn’s works, is now become exceeding scarce. In the preface he observes, that the reader will find in this discourse divers useful, remarks, especially where the author “treats of costume, which we, continues he, have interpreted decorum, as the nearest expression our language would bear to it. And I was glad our author had reproved it in so many instances, because it not only grows daily more licentious, but even ridiculous and intolerable. But it is hoped this may universally be reformed! when our modern workmen shall consider, that neither the exactness of their design, nor skilfulness in colouring, ha.s been able to defend their greatest predecessors from just reproaches, who have been faulty in this particular. I could exemplify in many others, whom our author has omitted; and there is none but takes notice what injury it has done the fame of some of our best reputed painters, and how indecorous it is to introduce circumstances, wholly improper to the usages and genius of the places where our histories are supposed to. have beeq acted.” Mr. Evelyn then remarks, that this was not only the fault of Bassano, who would be ever bringing in his wife, children, and servants, his dog and his cat, and very kitchen-stuff, after the Paduan mode; but of the great Titian himself, Georgipn, Tintoret, and the rest; as Paulo Veronese is observed also to have done, in his story of Pharaoh’s daughter drawing Moses out of the river, attended with a guard of Swisses. Malvogius likewise, in a picture then in the king’s gallery at Whitehall, not only represents our first parents with navels upon their bellies, but has placed an artificial stone fountain, carved with imagery, in the midst of his paradise. Nor does that excellent and learned painter, Rubens, escape without censure, not only for making most of his figures of the shapes of brawny Flemings, but for other sphalmata and circumstances of the like nature, though in some he has acquitted himself to admiration, in the due observation of costume, particularly in his crucifixes, &c. Raphael Urbino was, doubtless, one of the first who reformed these inadvertencies; but it was more conspicuous in his latter than in his former pieces. “As for Michael Angelo,” continues Mr. Evelyn, “though I heartily consent with our critic in reproving that almost idolatrous veneration of his works, who hath certainly prodigiously abused the art, not only in the table this discourse arraigns him for, but several more which I have seen; yet I conceive he might have omitted some of those embittered reproaches he has reviled him with, who doubtless was one of the greatest masters of his time, and however he might succeed as to the decorum, was hardly exceeded for what he performed in sculpture and the statuary art by many even of the ancients themselves, and haply by none of the moderns: witness his Moses, Christus in Gremio, and several other figures at Rome to say nothing of his talent in architecture, and the obligation the world has to his memory, for recovering many of its most useful ornaments and members out of the neglected fragments, which lay so long buried, and for vindicating that antique and magnificent manner of building from the trifling of Goths and barbarians.” He observes next, that the usual reproach of painting has been the want of judgment in perspective, and bringing more into history than is justifiable upon one aspect, without turning the eye to each figure in particular, and multiplying the points of sight, which is a point even monsieur Freart, for all the pains he has taken to magnify that celebrated Decision of Paris, has failed in. For the knowing in that art easily perceive, that even Raphael himself has not so exactly observed it, since, instead of one, as monsieur Freart takes it to be, and as indeed it ought to have been, there are no less than four or five; as du Bosse hath well observed in his treatise of “The converted painter,” where, by the way also, he judiciously numbers amongst the faults against costume, those landscapes, grotesque figures, &c. which we frequently find abroad especially for, in our country, we have few or none of those graceful supplements of steeples painted, horizontally and vertically on the vaults and ceilings of cupolas, since we have no examples for it from the ancients, who allowed no more than a frett to the most magnificent and costly of those which they erected. But, would you know whence this universal caution in most of their works proceeded, and that the best of our modern painters and architects have succeeded better than others of that profession, it must be considered, that they were learned men, good historians, and generally skilled in the best antiquities; such were Raphael, and doubtless his scholar Julio; and, if Polydore arrived not to the glory of letters, he yet attained to a rare habit of the ancient gusto, as may be interpreted from most of his designs and paintings. Leon Baptist Alberti was skilled in all the politer parts of learning to a prodigy, and has written several curious things in the Latin tongue. We know that, of later times, Rubens was a person universally learned, as may be seen in several Latin epistles of his to the greatest scholars of his age. And Nicholas Poussin, the Frenchman, who is so much celebrated and so deservedly, did, it seems, arrive to this by his indefatigable industry “as the present famous statuary, Bernini, now living,” says Mr. Evelyn, “has also done so universal a mastery, that, not many years since, he is reported to have built a theatre at Rome, for the adornment whereof he not only cut the figures and painted the scenes, but wrote the play, and composed the music, which was all in recitative. And I am persuaded, that all this is not yet by far so much as that miracle and ornament of our age and country, Dr. Christopher Wren, were able to perform, if he were so disposed, and so encouraged, because he is master of so many admirable advantages beyond them. I alledge these examples partly to incite, and partly to shew the dignity and vast comprehension of this rare art, and that for a man to arrive to its utmost perfection, he should be almost as universal as the orator in Cicero, and the architect in Vitruvius. But, certainly, some tincture in history, the optics and anatomy, are absolutely requisite, and more, iri the opinion of our author, than to be a steady designer, and skilled in the tempering and applying of colours, which, amongst most of our modern workmen, go now for the only accomplishments of a painter.”

The fame of this discovery soon spread over Flanders and into Italy; and when he grew old, but not till then, he imparted his secret to several painters, both Flemish and Italian. And it must be confessed the art of painting is very highly indebted to him for this foundation of the wonderful success with which succeeding ages have profited by this very useful discovery. As a painter he possessed very good talents, considering the early period of the art. He copied his heads generally from rtature; his figures are seldom well composed or drawn. But his power of producing richness of positive colours is surprising, and their durability no less so. He paid great attention evidently to nature, but saw her in an inferior style. He la-> boured his pictures very highly, particularly in the ornaments, which he bestowed with a lavish hand, but with alf the Gothic taste of the time and country in which he lived. In the gallery of the Louvre is a picture of the “Divine Being,” as he chose to call it, represented by an aged man with a long beard, crowned with the pope’s tiara, seated in a chair with golden circles of Latin inscriptions round his head, but without the least dignity of character, or evident action or intention. It is the very bathos of the art. At the earl of Pembroke’s, at Wilton house, is a small picture which does him more credit. -It represents the nativity of our Saviour, with the adoration of the shepherds, and the composition consists of four figures, besides the Saviour and four angels, and has in the back ground the anomaly of the angels at the sa.me time appearing to the shepherds. It is in oil, and the colours are most of them very pure, except those of the flesh. The garment of Joseph is very rich, being glazed thick with red lake, which is as fresh as if it were new. Almost all the draperies are Sg glazed with different colours, and are still very clear, except the virgin’s, which, instead of maintaining its blue colour, is become a blackish green. There is a want of harmony in the work, but it is more the effect of bad arrangement of the colours than the tones of them. The glory surrounding the heads of the virgin and child is of gold. We have been the more particular in stating these circumstances of this picture, because our readers will naturally be curious to know how far the original inventor of oil painting succeeded in his process, and they will see by this account that he went very far indeed, in what relates to the perfection of the vehicle he used, which, if he had happily been able to employ as well as he understood, the world would not have seen many better painters. He lived to practise his discovery for thirty-one years, dying in 1441, at the advanced age of seventy-one. Although in the preceding sketch we have principally followed the first authority in our references^ it must not remain unnoticed that the learned antiquary, Mr. Raspe, has proved, in the opinion of sir Joshua Reynolds beyond all contradiction, that the art of painting in oil was invented and practised many ages betbre Van Eyck was born.

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

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

, sirnamed from one of his works, the Hammer of Heretics, “Malleus Hereticorum,” was born in Suabia in 1479, and distinguished himself in the universities of Germany in the sixteenth century. In 1519 he was appointed vicar-general to the bishop of Constance; in 1526, Ferdinand king of the Romans, afterwards emperor, named him as his confessor, and in 1531, advanced him to the see of Vienna. He died in 1542, at the age of sixty-three. His works are comprised in three volumes folio, printed at Cologne in 1537—1541; but that for which he was most celebrated was entitled “Malleus Haereticorum,” in which he discusses many controversial points with considerable warmth, and was considered by those of his persuasion as a formidable enemy to the reformers. Luther having been one of his opponents, Erasmus said, when he was advanced to the episcopacy, “that Luther, poor as he was, found means to enrich his enemies.” He was impetuous in argument, and his enemies attributed to him many indiscreet expressions, the consequence of the anger he felt in being conquered in debate. There was another divine of the same names, and who lived about the same time, and distinguished himself by many controversial writings against the reformed religion, which are no longer remembered.

, a learned popish divine in the sixteenth century, was born at a village in the country of Liege, and studied philosophy and divinity under his brother Geoffry; such was his progress that he was soon preferred to teach those sciences at Louvain. While here Otho, cardinal of Augsburgh, engaged him in his service, and sent him to Rome where he. remained his agent for about six years under the pontificate of Pius V. On his return he was promoted to be counsellor to the dukes of Bavaria, and by their interest was farther advanced to the provostship of Ottingen, where probably he died, in 1581. His principal work was “Harmonia confessionis Augustinianae,” Cologn, 1573 and 1587, folio. He wrote also a “Catechism,” with notes and illustrations, Antwerp, 1600, 8vo and three “Latin tragedies,” which are said to be written in elegant language: 1. “Jeroboam rebellens,” Tngoldstadt, 1585. 2. “Religio patiens,” Cologn, 1566; and “Samson,” ibid. 1569. The two former, it must be observed, are ingeniously contrived to assimilate the heretics, that is those of the reformed religion, with the rebellious Israelites.

, professor of divinity in the university of Leipsic, was born at Amsterdam April 10, 1663. His father was a divine and pastor of the church of Meurs, but he had the misfortune to lose both parents when he was only five years old. His education then devolved upon his maternal grandfather, Francis Felbier, who appears to have done ample justice to him, and particularly introduced him to that intimate acquaintance with the French language for which he was afterwards distinguished. He began to be taught Latin in the public school of Amsterdam in 1673; “but in less than three months his grandfather died, and on his death-bed advised him to devote himself to the study of divinity, which was the wish and intention both of himself and of his parents. He accordingly pursued his classical studies with great assiduity; and in 1679, when in his sixteenth year, was much applauded for a discourse he pronounced, according to the custom of the school. His subject was that” justice elevates a nation.' 7 After this he remained two more years at Amsterdam, and studied philosophy and rhetoric under the ablest professors; and at his leisure hours David Sarphati Pina, a physician and rabbi, gave him lessons in the Hebrew, Chaldaic, and Syriac languages, and enabled him to read the works of the Jewish doctors. In Sept. 1681 he removed to Leyden, where for two years he studied philosophy, Greek and Roman antiquities, and ecclesiastical history and geography, under the celebrated masters of that day, De Voider, Theodore Ryckius, James Gronovius, and Frederic Spanheim; and went on also improving himself in the Oriental languages. Such was his proficiency in this last pursuit, that he already was able to carry on a correspondence with his master at Amsterdam, the above-mentioned Pina, in the Hebrew language, and he translated the gospels of St. Matthew and Mark into that language.

, a Lutheran divine, was born at Coslin, a town of Pomerania, in 15D3. In his youth, as his parents were poor, he contrived to defray the expences of his education by instructing a few pupils in what he had already learned, and having the charge of some of them to Rostock, he soon distinguished himself among the learned of that city. Having taken orders, he was chosen preacher at Coslin, and chaplain to the duke Bogislaus XI V. who five years after recommended him to a doctor’s degree at Gripswald. About this time the king of Sweden, Gustavus Adolphus, arriving in Germany, made him his confessor, and superintendant of his army; and after the battle of Lutzen, in which that prince lost his life, the duke Bogislaus recalled Fabricius, and made him superintendant of Upper Pomerania, in which office he was afterwards continued by queen Christina. He was also appointed minister of the principal church of Stettin, and professor of divinity. He died suddenly of an apoplectic stroke, Aug. 11, 165+. His principal writings are, 1. “Disputationes in Genesim, et in Kpistolam ad Romanes. 2.” Probatio visionum,“a work which involved him in disrepute with some of his brethren, and obliged him to publish in defence of it, 'J.” Invictir visionum probationes.“4.” JustaGustaviana." He published besides some pieces in German.

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

1. “Scriptorum recentiorum Decas,” Hamburgh, 1688, 4to, without his name. 2. “Defensio Decadis, &c.” 4to, without place or date. 3. tf Decas Decadum, sive plagiariorum et pseudonymorum centuria,“Leipsic, 1689, 4to. 4.” Grammatica Graeca Welleri,“ibid. 1689, 8vo, often reprinted, but Fabricius never put his name to it. 5.” Bibliotheca Latina, sive notitia auctorum veterum Latinorum, quorumcunque scripta ad nos pervenerunt,“Hamburgh, 1697, 8vo, afterwards enlarged in subsequent editions, the best of which is that of 1728, 2 vols. 4to. An edition of a part of this work has been more recently published by Ernesti, in 3 vols. 8vo, which is not free from errors. 6.” Vita Procli Philosophi Platonici scriptore Marino Neapolitano, quam alteraparte, de virtutibus Procli theoreticis ac theurgicis auctiorem et nunc demum integram primus edidit, &c.“Hamburgh, 1700, 4to, dedicated to Dr. Bentley. 7.” Codex Apocryphus N. T. collectus, castigatus, &c.“ibid. 1703, 8vo. 8.” Bibliotheca Graeca, sive Notitia Scriptorum Veterum Graecorum, quorumcunque Monumenta integra aut fragmenta edita extant: turn plerorumqtie ex Manuscripts ac Deperditis.“This consists of 14 vols. in 4to, and gives an exact account of the Greek authors, their different editions, and of all those who commented, or written notes upon them, and with the” Bibliotheca Latina,“exhibits a very complete history of Greek and Latin learning. Twelve volumes of a new edition of the” Bibliotheca Graeca“have been published by Hades, with great additions, and a new arrangement of the original matter. 9.” Centuria Fabriciorum scriptis clarorum, qui jam diem suum obierunt,“Hamburgh, 1700, 8vo, and” Fabriciorum centuria secunda,“ibid. 1727, 8vo. It was his intention to have added a third and fourth century, including the Fabri, Fabretti, Fabrotti, Le Fevre’s, &c. but a few names only were found after his death among his manuscripts. 10.” Memoriae Hamburgenses, sive Hamburgi et virorum de ecclesia, requepublica et scholastica Hamburgensi bene meritorum, elogia et vitae,“Hamburgh, 1710 1730, 7 vols. 11.” Codex pseudepigraphus Veteris Testamenti,“as a companion to his preceding account of the apocryphal writers of the New Testament times; ibid. 1713, 8vo, reprinted with additions in 1722. 12.” Menologiunj, sive libellusde mensibus, centum circiter populornm menses recensens, atque inter se conferens, cum triplice indice, gentium, mensium et scriptorum,“ibid. 1712, 8vo. 13.” Bibliographia Antiquaria, sive introductio in notitiam scriptorum, qui antiquitates Hebraicas, Graccas, Romanas et Christianas scriptis illustrarunt. Accedit Mauricii Senonensis de S. Missae ritibus carmen, nunc primum editum,“1713, 4to, and an enlarged edition, in which Mauricius’s poem is omitted, 1710, 4to. 14.” Mathematische Remonstration, &c.“Hamburgh, 1714, 8vo, a work in German against Sturmius, on the institution of the Lord’s Supper. J 5.” S. Hippolyti Opera, non antea collecta, et pars nunc primum a Mss. in lucem edita, Gr. et Lat. &c.“ibid. 1716 and 1718, 2 vols. fol. 16.” Bibliotheca Ecclesiastica,“ibid. 1718, fol. a very valuable collection of notices of ecclesiastical writers and their works from various biographers, beginning with Jerome, who goes to near the end of the fourth century, and concluding with Miraeus, who ends in 1650. 17.” Sexti Empirici Opera,“Gr. and, Lat. Leipsic, 1718, fol. 18.” Anselmi Bandurii Bibliotheca Nummaria,“Hamburgh, 1719, 4to. 19. S. Philastri de Hicresibus Liber, cum emendationibus et notis, additisque indicibus, ibid. 1721, 8vo. 20.” Delectus argumentorum et syllabus scriptorum, qui veritatem religionis Christianas adversus Atheos, Epiciireos, Deistas seu Naturalistas, Idolatras, Judaeos, et Mohammedanos lucubrat;onibus suis asseruerunt,“Hamb. 1725, 4to. This performance, very valuable in itself, is yet more so, on account of the Proemium and first chapters of Eusebius’s” Demonstratio Evangelica,“which are wanting in all the editions of that work, and were supposed to be lost; but which are here recovered by Fabricius, and prefixed to the” Delectus,“with a Latin translation by himself. 21.” Imp. Caes. Augusti temporum notatio, genus, et scriptorum fragmenta,“ibid. 1727, 4to. 22.” Centifolium Lutheranum, sive notitia literaria scriptorum omnis generis de B. D. Luthero, ej usque vita, scriptis et reformatione ecclesiae, &c. digesta,“ibid. 1728 and 1730, 2 parts or volumes, 8vo. 23. A German translation of Derham’s” Astro-theology,“and” Physico-theology,“1728, 1730, 8vo, by Weiner, to which Fabricius contributed notes, references, an analysis, preface, &c. 24.” Votum Davidicum (cor novum crea in me Deus) a centum quinquaginta amplius metaphrasibus expressum, carmine Hebraico, Graeco, Latino, Germanico, &c.“ibid. 1729, 4to. 25.” Conspectus Thesauri Literariae Italiae, premissam habens, praeter alia, notitiam diariorum Italiae literariorum, &c.“ibid, 1730, 8vo. Every Italian scholar acknowledges the utility of this volume. 26.” Hydrotheologise Sciagraphia,“in German, ibid, 1730, 4to. 27.” Salutaris Lux Evangelii, toti orbi per divinam gratiam exoriens: sive notitia historico-chronologica, literaria, et geographica, propagatorum per orbern totum Christianorum. Sacrorum,“Hamb. 1731, 4to. This work is very curious and interesting to the. historian as well as divine. It contains some epistles of the emperor Julian, never before published. 28.” Bibliotheca Mediae et infitnse Latinitatis,“printed in 5 vols. 8vo, 1734, reprinted at Padua, in 6 vols. 4to, 1754, a work equal, if not superior, to any of Fabricius’s great undertakings, and one of those, which, like his” Bibliotheca Graeca,“seems to set modern industry at defiance. 29.” Opusculorum Historico-critico-litterariorum sylloge quse sparsim viderant lucem, nunc recensita denuo et partim aucta," Hamburgh, 1738, 4to.

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

, a native of the West of England, who may be termed the inventor of circulating libraries, was, at the beginning of the last century, pastor of a congregation of protestant dissenters in Salisbury, where he had a number of pupils for near twenty years. Professing a creed very different from, the opinions of Calvin, as appears by his numerous publications, he incurred the displeasure of persons of that persuasion, and a controversy arose in which clergymen of the establishment and the dissenters had an equal share. It turned on the divine prescience, the freedom of the human will, the greatness of the divine love, and the doctrine of reprobation. Driven from a comfortable settlement to the great metropolis, where he acquired no new one as a teacher, Mr. Fancourt, about 1740 or 1745, established the first circulating library for gentlemen and ladies, at a subscription of a guinea a year for reading; but in 1748 extended it to a guinea in all, for the purchase of a better library, half to be paid at the time of subscribing, the other half at the delivery of a new catalogue then in the press, and twelve pence a quarter beside, to begin from Michaelmas 1754, to the librarian. Subscriptions were to be paid without further charge to the proprietors, but to pay only from the time of subscribing; out of which quarterly payments were to be deducted the rent of the rooms to receive the books, and accommodate subscribers, a salary to the librarian to keep an open account, and to circulate the books; a stock to buy new books and duplicates as there was occasion; the expence of providing catalogues, and drawing up writings for settling the trust. This trust was to be vested in twelve or thirteen persons chosen by ballot out of the body of proprietors; and the proposer, Mr. Fancourt himself, was to be the first librarian, and to continue so as long as he discharged his office with diligence and fidelity. Every single subscriptionentitled the subscriber to one book and one pamphlet at a time, to be changed ad libitum for others, and kept ad Libitum, if not wanted by other subscribers. Mr. Fancourt advertised himself also in these proposals as a teacher of Latin, to read, write, and speak it with fluency in a year’s time or less, at twelve guineas a year, one guinea a month, or twelve pence an hour, allowing five or six hours in a week. The great hypercritic of Mr. Fancourt’s design was the late Dr. C. Mortimer. Not to trace the poor librarian through every shifting of his quarters, he fixed at last at the corner of one of the streets in the Strand, where, encumbered with a helpless and sick wife, turned out of fashion, and outplanned by a variety of imitators, and entangled with a variety of plans, not one of which could extricate him from perplexities, this poor man, who may be said to have first circulated knowledge among us, sunk under a load of debt, unmerited reproach, and a failure of his faculties, brought on by the decay of age, precipitated by misfortunes. His library became the property of creditors, and he retired in humble poverty to Hoxton-square, where some of his brethren relieved his necessities till the close of his life, in his ninetieth year, June 8, 1768. As a preacher, though neither what is now called popular, nor pastor of a London congregation, he was occasionally called upon to fill up vacancies, and is said to have preached with a considerable degree of manly eloquence.

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

, a learned divine among the-protestant dissenters, was born in 17 14, at a village near Shrewsbury, where his parents resided, and being early designed for the dissenting ministry, received the first part of his grammatical learning in a school in Llanegrin, nearTowyn, Merionethshire, which had been founded by two of his progenitors. From tiiis place he was sent to perfect his classical education under the tuition of Dr. Owen of Warrington and in 1730, began his academical studies at Northampton, under the care of Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Doddridge, being one of the doctor’s earliest pupils. After Mr. Farmer had finished his academical course, he became chaplain to William Coward, esq. of Waltham-Stowe, Essex, and preacher in a meeting-house which had been lately erected by that gentleman, whose name is of great note^ among the dissenters, on account of the large bequests which he made for the education of young men for the ministry, and for other beneficent purposes. Mr. Coward was remarkable for the peculiarities and oddities of his temper; and in this respect many pleasant stories are related concerning him. Amongst his other whimsies, his house was shut up at an uncommon early hour, we believe at six in the winter, and seven in the summer; and whoever, whether a visitant or a stated resident, trespassed upon the time, was denied admission. Mr. Farmer having one evening been somewhat too late, was of course excluded. In this exigence he had recourse to a neighbouring family, that of William Snell, esq. a solicitor, in which he continued more than thirty years, during the lives of Mr. and Mrs. Snell, by whom he was treated more like an equal than an inferior. Here he enjoyed a long series of peaceful leisure, which he employed in collecting a large fund of sacred and profane literature, and in his duties as a pastor. His congregation, which, when he accepted the charge of it, was very small, gradually became one or the most wealthy dissenting societies in or near the city of" London.

Mr. Farmer’s first appearance as an author was in a discourse on the suppression of the rebellion of 1745. It was preached on the day of public thanksgiving appointed upon that occasion in 1746, and printed in the same year. This was the only sermon that we recollect his having ever committed to the press. His abilities, though they might have been usefully displayed in that way, led him to those novel opinions on which his temporary fame was founded. Iiv 1761, he published “An Inquiry into the nature and design of Christ’s Temptation in the Wilderness” the general intention of which is to show, that this part of the evangelical history is not only to be understood as a recital of visionary representations, but that the whole was a divine vision, premonitory of the labours and offices of our Lord’s future ministry. An interpretation so new and singular, could not pass unnoticed. In 1762 there appeared a pamphlet against the Inquiry, entitled “Christ’s Temptations, real facts: or, a Defence of the Evangelic History; shewing that our Lord’s temptations may be fairly and reasonably understood as a narrative of what was really transacted.” A second edition of Mr. Farmer’s treatise was soon called for; in which the subject received additional illustration from a considerable number of new notes. Besides this, he published in 1764, an appendix to the “Inquiry,” containing some farther observations on the point in debate, and an answer to objections. Another tract, the publication of which was occasioned by the “Inquiry,” was entitled “The Sovereignty of the Divine Administration vindicated, or a rational Account of our blessed Saviour’s remarkable Temptation in the Wilderness; the Possessed at Capernaum, the Demoniacs at Gadara, and the Destruction of the Swine: with free Remarks on several other important passages in the New Testament.” This was a posthumous piece, which had been written before Mr. Farmer’s work appeared, by Mr. Dixon, who had been a dissenting minister, first at Norwich, and afterwards at Bolton in Lancashire. Mr. Dixon proposes a figurative or allegorical interpretation of our Lord’s temptation. A third edition, with large additions, of Mr. Farmer’s “Inquiry” was published in 1776. In 1771, he published “A Dissertation on Miracles, designed to shew that they are arguments of a divine interposition, and absolute proofs of the mission and doctrine of a Prophet,” 8vo. Not long -after the appearance of the “Dissertation,” a notion was propagated, that Mr. Farmer had made considerable use of a treatise of Le Moine l s on the same subject, without acknowledging it; and it was asserted, that his book had the very same view with Mr. Le Moine’s, and was a copy of his work.Mr. Farmer therefore endeavoured to vindicate himself in a pamphlet, published in 1772, entitled “An Examination of the late rev. Mr. Le Moine’s Treatise on Miracles,” in which he enters into a particular discussion of that performance, and a defence of himself; but the accusation continued to be repeated, particularly by a writer in th? London Magazine.

As a minister Mr. Farmer received every mark of honour from the dissenters which it was in their power to bestow. For a great number of years he preached twice a day at Walthamstow: but, an associate being at length provided for him at that place, he became in 1761 afternoonpreacher to the congregation of Salters-hall, and some time after was chosen one of the Tuesday-lecturers at Salters-hall. He was also a trustee of the rev. Dr. Daniel Williams’ s various bequests; and he was likewise one of Mr. Coward’s trustees; in which capacity he became a dispenser of the large charities that had been left by the gentleman with whom he had been connected in early life. As Mr. Farmer advanced in years, he gradually remitted of his employments as a divine. He resigned first, in 1772, the being afternoon-preacher at Salters-hall; after which, in 1780, he gave up the Tuesday lectureship of the same place. In his pastoral relation at Walthamstow he continued a few years longer, when he quitted the pulpit entirely. In these several cases his resignations were accepted with peculiar regret. After he had ceased to be a preacher, it was his general custom to spend part of the winter at Bath. Early in 1785, Mr. Farmer was afflicted with almost a total failure of sight, which, however, was restored by the skill, first of Baron Wenzel, and afterwards of Mr. Wathen. Infirmities, however, growing upon him, he departed this life on the 6th of February, 1787, in the seventy-third year of his age, and was buried in Walthamstow church-yard, in the same grave with his friends Mr. and Mrs. Snell. On Sunday, the 18th, his funeral sermon was preached by Mr. Urvvick, of Clapham, whose discourse was printed. In his last will, besides providing handsomely for his relations, and remembering his servants, he left a hundred pounds to the fund for the widows of dissenting ministers, and forty pounds to the poor of Walthamstow parish. His regard to the family with which he had so long been connected, and to which he had been so peculiarly obliged, was testified by his bequeathing pecuniary legacies to every member of that family. Smaller legacies were left by him to others of his friends. His executors were William Snell, esq. of Clapham, and William Hood, esq. of Chancery-lane, barrister; the first the son, and the second one of the grandsons of Mr. Farmer’s great patron. To another grandson, the rev. Robert Jacomb, our author bequeathed his library, with the exception of such classic books as Mr. Snell might select; who also was a residuary legatee, in conjunction with his sister, Mrs. Hood. In this will he also made his request (for that is the term used), that his executors would burn his sermons and manuscripts, unless he should direct otherwise by a separate paper; and, in case they should not do it, the legacies of a hundred pounds each, which he had left them, were to be null and void. He had nearly completed a second volume on the demonology of the ancients; a curious dissertation on the story of Balaam, which he had transcribed for the press, and for the printing of which he had given his directions, and had made preparations for a second edition of his Treatise on Miracles, by which it would have been considerably enlarged, and highly improved; all which were destroyed, as, in the opinion of the executors, coming within the intent of his will. His biographer laments bitterly this undistinguishing destruction, which, indeed, seems rather too much to resemble what happened in Don Quixote’s library.

Dr. Farmer had now attained the utmost of his wishes; and although both an English and an Irish bishoprick were offered to him, he declined them, for which various reasons have been assigned. One is certainly erroneous. It has been said “that in early life he had felt the power of love, and had suffered such a disappointment as had sunk deep in his mind, and for a time threatened his understanding. From that period, though he retained his faculties entire, he acquired some peculiarities of manner, of which he was so far conscious, as to be sensible that they would hardly become the character of a bishop; being likewise strongly attached to dramatic entertainments (which, if we mistake net, the English bishops never witness), and delighting in clubs where he could have rational conversation without state or ceremony of any kind, he very wisely preferred his residentiaryship to the highest dignity in the church.” What is here said as to his habits being incompatible with the character of a bishop, cannot be denied; but these habits were partly natural, from indolence and a love of ease, and partly acquired by a seclusion from polished society. The lady to whom Dr. Farmer is said to have been attached, was the eldest daughter of sir Thomas’ Hatton, with whom he became acquainted while curate of Swavesey. Cole says, sir Thomas refused his consent, and this refusal appears to have been given in 1782, when Dr. Farmer was in his forty-seventh year, and if, as Cole affirms, the lady was then only twenty-seven or twenty-eight years of age, she must have been an infant when Dr. Farmer became acquainted with her father. The whole, however, may be only one of Cole’s gossiping stories; and whether so or not, Dr. Farmer, neither at this or any previous time, exhibited any symptoms of-“disappointed love.” It is more rational to suppose, with his last biographer (Mr. Nichols), that when he arrived at that situation, as to fortune, which gave him a claim to the object of his affections, he found, on mature reflection, that his habits of life were then too deeply rooted to be changed into those of domestic arrangements with any probable chance of perfect happiness to either party. As to his promotion to a bishopric, it may yet be added, that although few men have been more beloved by an extensive circle of friends than Dr. Farmer, there was not, perhaps, one of them who did not applaud his declining that station, or who did not think, with all their respect for him, that he would not have appeared to advantage in it. It is not as a Divine that Dr. Farmer was admired by his contemporaries, or can be known to posterity.

, an English Jesuit, was born in 1554, at Foston in Leicestershire, and entered a student in Merton college, in 1568, under the tuition of John Potts, whom Wood calls a noted philosopher. In 1570, Potts, who was a concealed papist, being detected, conducted his young pupil, whose parents were of that persuasion, to the Jesuits’ college at Louvain. In this seminary he continued till he had taken a bachelor of arts degree, and then went to Paris. From thence he travelled to Munich in Bavaria, where duke William allowed him a handsome salary to prosecute his studies, and Ivhere he took the degree of M. A. In 1575 he proceeded to Rome, and became a member of the English Jesuits’ college, of which he was soon after appointed divinityreader. He was much distinguished and favoured by several princes, and particularly by pope Gregory XIII. who, as a token of his affection and confidence, gave him a seal which empowered him to grant a pass to any of his countrymen travelling through the catholic dominions. In 1581 he was appointed president of the Jesuits’ college at Posna in Poland, in which country he spent the remainder of his life. He died at Ulna, in the province of Lithuania, Feb. 18, 1591, much regretted by his fraternity, amongst whom he had the character of a prudent, learned, and ^pious divine. His works are: 1. “.De Christi in terris ecclesia,” Posna, 1584, 4to. 2. “Contra Antonium Sadeelem Calv:­nistam, libri III.” 3. “Theses de variis fidei eontroversiis,” Posna, 1584, 1590. 4. “Doctrina catholica de Sanctorum Invocatione, &c.” ibid. 1584, 8vo. 5. “Apologia Libri sui de Invocatione, &c. contra Danielem Tossanum,” Colon. 1589, 8vo. 6. “Coenae Lutherana? et Calvinistee oppu<rnatio,” Posna, 1586, 4to. 7. “Apologia Thesium de CcBUtt Lutherana, &o.” ibid. 1590, 4to. 8. “Oratio de causis Haeresis, &c.” 9. “Tractatus de Controversiis inter ordinem Eccles. et Secularem in Polonia,” 1592, 4to.

, who, according to a tradition still current at Halifax, was a good divine, a good physician, and a good lawyer, was born at Southampton, and was prepared for the university, partly there and partly at Winchester-school. From this seminary he was elected probationer fellow of New-college, Oxford, in 1576, and two years afterwards was made complete fellow. On June 5, 1592, he proceeded LL. D. and, as Wood says, was made vicar of Halifax in Yorkshire, Jan. 4, 1593. In August 1608, according to Thoresby, but in March 1618, according to Wood, he was made warden or master of St. Mary Magdalen’s hospital at Ripon. In March 1616, he was collated to the prebend of Driffield, and to the chantership of the church of York. He was also chaplain to the archbishop, and residentiary. He appears to have spent much of his time in the discharge of the duties of the three learned professions. In an epistle to the reader, prefixed to a work we are about to mention, he gives as impediments to its progress, “preaching every Sabbath-day, lecturing every day in the week, exercising justice in the commonwealth, and practising physic and chirurgery.” Amidst all these engagements, however, he produced a large 4to volume, printed at London in 1619, entitled “Antiquitie triumphing over Noveltie; whereby it is proved, that Antiquitie is a true and certain note of the Christian catholicke church and veritie, against all new and upstart heresies, advancing themselves against the religious honour of Old Rome, &g.” This is dedicated to archbishop Matthews, and it appears that it was begun by the author, when he was sixty years old, at the desire, and carried on under the encouragement of the archbishop. Dr. Favour died March 10, 1623, probably at an advanced age, and was buried in Halifax church, where there is an inscription to his memory.

, a dissenting minister, was born at Sleaford in Lincolnshire, Aug. 16, 1715, and after a religious education at home, was placed under Dr. Doddridge at Northampton, where his conduct was exemplary, and his improvement rapid. In 1741, by Doddridge’s particular recommendation, he became a preacher at Taunton; and in 1745 removed to Kidderminster, where he officiated as the pastor of a large congregation of dissenters for thirty-five years, dying in Oct. 1780. He preached thrice every Sunday, besides weekly services, lectures, visits, &c. He also carried on an extensive correspondence with his brethren in various parts of the kingdom, and found leisure to prepare hfs various publications for the press. To enable him to accomplish all this, he was a rigid reconomist of his time, and was seldom in bed after five o'clock in the morning, to which habit, and a temperate mode of living, he used to ascribe his remarkable and almost uninterrupted health and spirits until a short time before his death, when he suffered severely from the stone. It is perhaps more remarkable, that he had no fire in his study in the depth of wiuter. His flow of spirits appears to have been rather immoderate, according to Mr. Orion’s account. “I am told that after preaching twice, and administering the Lord’s Supper, he was so lively in the evening that several of the people were in pain lest he should throw himself out of the pulpit 1” In his sentiments he was what is called a Baxterian, and drew upon himself, on spome occasions, the censures of the more orthodox part of his brethren, particularly by one of his pamphlets, “Candid reflexions on the different modes of explaining the Trinity.” His other works were small pious, tracts some funeral, and occasional sermons and abridgements of Baxter’s “Saints 1 everlasting Rest,” and of some other pieces by that divine. His personal character was so consistent and amiable, that his death was lamented by persons of all persuasions at Kidderminster.

, a learned controversial divine of the church of England, was born at Charlton upon Otmore, near Oxford, March 15, 1582. Fairclough was the name of his ancestors, so spelt by his grandfather, father, and eldest brother, and it appears that he was ordained by the same. Why he afterwards preferred Featley, which is a corruption of Fairclough (or, Faircliff, a place in Lancashire, where the family were originally seated), we know not, nor is it perhaps of much consequence. That the family were reduced, appears from the occupation of his father, who was cook to Dr. Laurence Humphrey, president of Magdalen, and served Corpus Christi college, Oxford, in the same capacity. He had interest enough, however, with his employers, to obtain a good education for the subject of this memoir, who was his second son, and whom we find mentioned first as a chorister of Magdalen college. After having made considerable progress in the school belonging to that college, where, even at twelve years old, his Latin and Greek exercises were noted for their excellence, he was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college, Dec. 13, 1594, and Sept. 20, 1602, when B. A. was chosen probationer fellow. He commenced M. A. at the usual time, and was always eminent for his academical exercises, nor was he less noted as a disputant and preacher. In 1607 he delivered an oration at the death of Dr. Reinold, president of Corpus, who had been one of his earliest patrons.

, nephew to the preceding, son of John Fairclough, was a native of Northamptonshire, and educated at All Souls’ college, Oxford, which he is said to have left after taking his first degree in arts, probably to become his uncle’s assistant at Lambeth or Acton. During the rebellion he went to St. Christopher’s in the West Indies, where he arrived in 1643, and had the honour of being the first preacher of the gospel in the infancy of that colony. It appears that he returned about the time of the restoration, and was appointed chaplain to the king, who also in August 1660 presented him to the precentorship of Lincoln, and in September following to the prebend of Milton Ross, in that cathedral. In 1662, he was created D. D. and had from the dean and chapter of Lincoln the vicarage of Edwinton in Nottinghamshire, worth about sixty pounds a year. He died at Lincoln in 1666, and was interred in a chapel in the cathedral. He published one or two of his uncle’s tracts, particularly “Dr. Featley revived, &c.” in which, as already noticed, there is a life of his uncle. Of his own were only published two occasional sermons, and “A divine antidote against the Plague, contained in Soliloquies and Prayers,” London, 1660.

, of Brisgaw, a celebrated Lutheran divine and historian, author of several learned works in Latin and in German, who was settled first at Dourlach, and afterwards at Rostock, was born in 1636, and died in 1716. Among his works are a “History of Cain and Abel,” with notes critical, philological, historical, and theological, published at Rostock, in 8vo a “Treatise on the Religion of the modern Greeks” another against the “Superstitions of the Mass,” &c.

a learned divine, was born in the parish of St. Clement Danes, London, 1594; elected student of Christ Church from Westminster school in 1601; took a master of arts degree in 1608, served the office of proctor in 1614, and the year following was admitted bachelor of divinity; and about that time became minister of Freshwater in the Isle of Wight. In May 1619, he was installed canon of Christ Church, and the same year proceeded doctor in divinity, being about that time domestic chaplain to James I. In 1626, he was made Margaret professor of divinity, and consequently had a prebend of Worcester, which was about that time annexed to the professorship. He was then a Calvinist, but at length, renouncing the opinions so called, he was, through Laud’s interest, made dean of Lichfield in 1637; and the year following, dean of Christ Church. In 1645, he was appointed vice-chancellor, which office he served also in 1647, in contempt of the parliamentary visitors, who at length ejected him from that and his deanery, and their minions were so exasperated at him for his loyalty to the king, and zeal for the church, that they actually sought his life: and being threatened to be murdered, he was forced to abscond. He died broken-hearted, Feb. 1, 1648-9; that being the very day he was made acquainted with the murder of his royal master king Charles. He was buried in the chancel of Sunning-well church, near Abingdon, in Berkshire (where he had been rector, and built the front of the parsonage-house) with only this short memorial, on a small lozenge of marble laid over his grave, “Depositum S. F. February 1648.” He was a public-spirited man, and had the character of a scholar. Wood, though he supposes there were more, only mentions these two Small productions of his; viz. “Primitiae; sive Oratio habita Oxoniae in Schola TheologiiE, 9 Nov. 1626,” and, “Concio Latina ad Baccalaureos die cinerum in Coloss. ii. 8.” They were both printed at Oxford in 1627. He contributed very largely to Christ Church college, completing most of the improvements begun by his predecessor, Dr. Duppa, and would have done more had not the rebellion prevented him.

, an eminently learned divine, was the son of the preceding, by Margaret his wife, daughter of Thomas Wyld, of Worcester, esq. and was born at Longworth in Berkshire, June 23, 1625. He was educated mostly at the free-school of Thame in Oxfordshire; and in 1636, when he was only eleven years of age, was admitted student of Christ Church in Oxford. In Oct. 1640 he took the degree of B. A. and that of M. A. in June 1643j about which time he was in arms for Charles I. within the garrison of Oxford, and afterwards became an ensign. In 1648 he was turned out of his place by the parliamentarian visitors, being then in holy orders; and from that time till the restoration of Charles II. lived in a retired and studious manner, partly in the lodgings, at Christ Church, of the famous physician Willis, who was his brother-in-law, and partly in his own house opposite Merton college, wherein he and others kept up the devotions and discipline of the church of England.

In 1666, 1667, 1668, and part of 1669, Dr. Fell was vice-chancellor of the university: during which time he used all possible means to restore the discipline and credit of the place; and such was his indefatigable spirit, that he succeeded beyond all expectation. Among his other injunctions was, that persons of all degrees should appear in their proper habits; he likewise looked narrowly to the due performance of the public exercises in the schools, and reformed several abuses that had crept in during a long period of relaxation. He frequently attended in person the disputations in the schools, the examinations for degrees, and the public lectures, and gave additional weight and stimulus to the due performance of these duties. In his own college he kept up the exercises with great strictness, and, aware of the importance of the best education to those who were destined for public life, it was his practice, several mornings in the week, to visit the chambers of the noblemen and gentlemen commoners, and examine their progress in study. No one in his time was more zealous in promoting learning in the university, or in raising its reputation by the noblest foundations. The Sheldonian theatre was built chiefly by his solicitation; and he likewise advanced the press and improving printing in Oxford, according to the public-spirited design of archbishop Laud. He was likewise an eager defender of the privileges of the university, especially while vice-chancellor. In 1675-6 he was advanced to the bishopric of Oxford, with leave to hold his deanery of Christ Church in commendarn, that he might continue his services to his college and the university: and he was no sooner settled in his see, than he began to rebuild the episcopal palace of Cuddesden in Oxfordshire. Holding also the mastership of St. Oswald’s hospital, at Worcester, he re-built that in a sumptuous manner, bestowing all the profits of his income there in augmenting and recovering its estates: and, part of the revenues of his bishopric arising from the impropriation of the dissolved prebend of Banbury, he liberally gave 500l. to repair that church. He likewise established daily prayers at St. Martin’s, or Carfax church, in Oxford, both morning and evening. In a word, he devoted almost his whole substance to works of piety and charity. Among his other benefactions to his college, it must not be forgot, that the best rectories belonging to it were bought with his money: and as he had been so bountiful a patron to it while he lived, and, in a manner, a second founder, so he left to it at his death an estate, for ten or more exhibitions for ever. It is said that he brought his body to an ill habit, and wasted his spirits, by too much zeal for the public, and by forming too many noble designs; and that all these things, together with the unhappy turn of religion which he dreaded under James II. contributed to shorten his life. He.died July 10, 1686, to the great loss of learning, of the whole university, and of the church of England: for he was, as Wood has observed of him, “the most zealous man of his time for the church of England; a great encourager and promoter of learning in the university, and of all public works belonging thereunto of great resolution and exemplary charity; of strict integrity; a learned divine; and excellently skilled in the Latin and Greek languages.” Wood relates one singularity of him, which is unquestionably a great and unaccountable failing, that he was not at all well-atfected to the royal society, and that the noted Stubbes attacked that body under his sanction and encouragement. He was buried in Christ Church cathedral; and over his tomb, which is a plain marble, is an elegant inscription, composed by Aldrich, his successor. He was never married.

, a learned divine, was born Feb. 3, 1679, in the parish of St. Martin’s-in-the-fields, Westminster, and was educated first at Cheneys in Buckinghamshire, then at Westminster school under Dr. Busby, and lastly at the Charter-house under Dr. Walker, to whom he was a private pupil. At a proper age he was admitted of Edmund hall, Oxford, of which Dr. Mill, the celebrated critic, was at that time principal, and his tutor was Mr. Thomas Mills, afterwards bishop of Waterford in Ireland. In June 1702, he took his master’s degree, and in December following was ordained deacon, in the royal chapel at Whitehall, by Dr. Lloyd, bishop of Worcester. In June 1704 he was admitted to priest’s orders by Dr. Compton, bishop of London. In 1705-6, he first appeared as an author, in a piece entitled “Remarks on the Colebrook Letter/' a subject the nature of which we have not been able to discover. In 1708 he had the care of the English church at Amsterdam, but did not long continue in that situation, returning to England in 1709. Soon after his return he was appointed domestic chaplain to the duke of Rutland, at Belvoir castle, and sustained that relation to three successive dukes, for which noble house he always preserved the warmest gratitude and affection. In the same year (July 11, 1709) Mr. Felton was admitted to the degree of B. D. being then a member of Queen’s college. Having been employed as tutor to John lord Roos, afterwards third duke of Rutland, he wrote for that young nobleman’s use, his” Dissertation on reading the Classics, and forming a just style," 1711, 12mo. A fourth edition of this was published in 1730, but the best is that of 1757. It was the most popular, and best known of all Dr. Felton’s works, although in the present improved state of criticism, it may appear with less advantage.

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

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

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

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

, a Lutheran divine, was born in the duciiy of Holstein, in 1672. After an useful elementary education, he studied philosophy and theology at Rostock and Wittemberg, where he was created doctor in philosophy, in 1692. In 1697, he was appointed pastor and superintendant of the diocese of Jessen, and afterwards became pastor of the church of St. Bartholomew at Zerbst, preacher to the court, confessor and ecclesiastical counsellor, and superintendant of the diocese of Zerhst, in Anhalt. In 1709 he was appointed professor of divinity, and assessor of the ecclesiastical consistory of that city. At the same time he preached once a week before the eJectress of Saxony, and was honoured with the post of ecclesiastical counsellor to the duie of Saxe-Gotha. His last appointment was that of confessor to the electress of Saxony, in. 1712, an office that he enjoyed but a few months, as he died in 1713, when only forty-one years of age. His works, enumerated by Moreri, are very numerous, and chiefly on theological subjects, but are now little known.

, a Franciscan friar, was born at Coutances in Lower Normandy, in 1541; and might have inherited a large estate, had he addicted himself to the military profession. Bayle thinks that he judged rightly of himself and his talents, and obtained a much greater reputation as a divine than as a soldier. It does not appear, however, that he attained any just eminence. Daille observes, that “he deserved his name Feu-ardent perfectly well: for that he was so transported with anger, hatred, and fury, as to be seldom in his right senses;” and he certainly was as fiery a zealot, and as bitter a persecutor, as the protestants ever had. He was one of the most seditious preachers who raised the disturbances against Henry III. and Henry IV. nor did he spare even the chief of the leaguers, when he thought him guilty of something that might prejudice the cause of the rebels. He wrote commentaries on some books of scripture, and translated some works of the fathers into French. He published at Pearls, in 1576j “The five books of Irenseus,” revised and corrected in several places from an ancient manuscript, with an addition of five entire chapters, which were in his manuscript 4t the end of the fifth book. He has added at the end of each chapter, such notes as he thought necessary for the better understanding of his author, which are for the most part useful and learned. The second edition, printed at Cologne in 1596, and again i 1630, and at Paris in 1639, is better than the first, as it contains the Greek passages of Irenseus, which were in Epiphanius, and some other ancient writers. Feuardent published also some books of controversy, which the catholics themselves own to have been written with too much passion. He died at Paris in 1610, and before his death is said to have attained a more calm and christian-like temper.

He was one of those, who, like Erasmus, though they did not outwardly depart from the church of Rome, and also disapproved in some things the conduct of those who established the reformation in Germany, yet at the bottom were inclined to a change. He took a journey to Strasburg, by the queen of Navarre’s order, to confer with Bucer and Capito concerning the reformation of the church. He published, so early as 1512, a translation of St. Paul’s epistles, with critical notes and a commentary, in which he frequently censures the Vulgate. He published in 1522 similar notes and commentary upon the other parts of the New Testament. Natalis Bedda, a divine of Paris, censured his divinity, as well as that of Erasmus; and the inquisitors of Rome under Clement VIIL put his commentary on the whole New Testament in the catalogue of prohibited books, till it should be corrected and purged from its errors. Father Simon has passed a judgment on this work of Faber' s, which he concludes by observing, that “he ought to be placed among the most able commentators of the age. But Erasmus, who wrote at the same time, and with infinitely more politeness, greatly lessened his reputation. The works of Faber are no longer read at Paris; whereas those of Erasmus are highly esteemed even at this day.”

As a philosopher, much cannot now be said in favour of Ficinus, and the high encomiums to which he appeared entitled in the fifteenth century, will not all bear the test of modern criticism. His works afford abundant proofs how deeply he was influenced by the reveries of judicial astrology. His principal want was vigour and accuracy of judgment, with which if he had been furnished, he would have avoided the superstitious attachment manifested by him to the “Platonismus Alexandrinus,” than which, Brucker observes, no philosophical reveries could possibly be more ridiculous; and he would have evinced more sagacity in detecting the sophisms of this sect. He was devoid also of the more splendid and exterior graces of a well cultivated understanding; his style is pronounced inelegant, and his language confused. He was a Platonist even in his correspondence, and some of his letters are enigmatical and mysterious. Brucker also accuses him of being of a timid and servile spirit, which would naturally lead him to accommodate his version to the judgment of his patron. He entertained the notion which prevailed among the Christian fathers, that the doctrine of Plato was, in some sort, of divine origin, and might be fairly construed into a perfect agreement with that of divine revelation. From these causes, Ficinus is very far from adhering with strictness to his author’s meaning; in many instances he rather expresses his own cpnceptions than those of Plato, and often gives his interpretation a bias towards the A lexandrian or Christian doctrine, for which he has no sufficient authority in the original. On the whole, Brucker is of opinion, that Ficinus was rather an industrious than a judicious translator, and that his version of Plato should be read with caution. The chief part of his works are contained in the Paris edition of 1641, in 2 vols, folio, amongst which those of most merit are the versions of Plato and Plotinus. Of some of his works there are very early editions, now of great rarity.

, an English divine, and laborious writer, was born of reputable parents, at Hunmanby near Scarborough in Yorkshire in 1671. In his education he was much encouraged by his uncle the rev. Mr. Fiddes of Brightwell in Oxfordshire, who was as a father to him. After being instructed at a private school at Wickham in that neighbourhood, he was admitted of Corpus Christi, and then of University college, in Oxford; where by his parts and address he gained many friends. He did not, however, continue there; but, after taking a bachelor of arts degree in 1693, returned to his relations, and married, in the same year, Mrs. Jane Anderson, a lady of good family and fortune. In 1694, he was ordained priest by Dr. Sharp, archbishop of York; and not long after, presented to the rectory of Halsham in that county, of about 90l. per annum. Halsham, being situated in a marsh, proved the occasion of much ill health to Fiddes and his family; and he had the misfortune, while there, to be suddenly so deprived of his speech, as never after to be able to utter words very articulately, unless his organs were strengthened with two or three glasses of wine, which, as he was a mun of great temperance, was to him an excess. His diocesan, however, dispensed with his residence upon his benefice for the future; on which he removed to Wickham, and continued there some months. Being no longer able to display his talents in preaching, which before were confessedly great, and having a numerous family, he resolved to devote himself entirely to writing. For this purpose, he went to London in 1712; and, by the favour of dean Swift, was introduced to the earl of Oxford, who received him kindly, and made him one of his chaplains. The dean had a great esteem for Fiddes, and recommended his cause with the warmth and sincerity of a friend. The queen soon after appointed him chaplain to the garrison at Hull, and would probably have provided handsomely for him, had not death prevented her. Losing his patrons upon the change of the ministry in 1714, he lost the above mentioned chaplainship; and the expences of his family i icreasing, as his ability to supply them lessened, he was obliged to apply himself to writing with greater assiduity than ever. Yet he continued in high esteem with contemporary writers, especially those of his own party; and was encouraged by some of the most eminent men of those times. By the generosity of his friend and relation Dr. Radcliffe, the degree of bachelor of divinity was conferred upon him by diploma, Feb. 1, 1713, and in 1718 he was honoured by the university of Oxford with that of doctor, in consideration of his abilities as a writer. He died at the house of his friend Anstis at Putney, in 1725, aged fifty ­four years, leaving behind him a' family consisting of a wife and six children. His eldest daughter was married to the rev. Mr. Barcroft, curate of St. George’s, Hanover-square, who abridged Taylor’s “Ductor Dubitantium.” Dr. Fiddes was buried in Fulham churchyard, "near the remains of bishop Compton, to whom he had been much obliged.

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

About 1610 the king bestowed on him the deanery of Gloucester, where he never resided long, but in order to preach four or 6ve times a year to a full auditory who respected and loved him. The greatest part of his time he spent at his parsonage, and the winter at Windsor, where his house in the cloister was the resort of all who were eminent for learning, to enjoy his conversation, and profit by his sentiments on ecclesiastical affairs, and on the parties and sects which divided the Christian world. Dr. Barlow, dean of Wells, and Dr. Crakenthorp were among his correspondents. He rejoiced when any man noted for learning was made prebendary of Windsor; and often visited sir Henry Savile at Eton college, and other eminent persons in that neighbourhood. He often preached before the king, who, the first time he heard him, said, “Is his name Field This is a field for God to dwell in” and Fuller, in the same punning age, calls him “that learned divine,whose memory swelleth like a field which the Lord hath blessed.” In the king’s progress through Hampshire, in 1609, the bishop of Winchester appointed him among those who were to preach before him; and in 1611, the king having a mind to hear the prebendaries of Winchester in their order, the dean wrote to him first, and he preached oftener than any of them, and to crowded audiences. The king, who delighted to discourse with him on points of divinity, proposed to send him into Germany to compose the differences between the Lutherans and Calvinists, but, for whatever reason, this appointment did not take place; and not long before his death, the king would have made him bishop of Salisbury, and gave him a promise of the see of Oxford on a vacancy. Bishop Hall tells us, that about the same time he was to have been made dean of Worcester. On Oct. 27, 1614, he lost his wife, who left him six sons and a daughter. After continuing a widower about two years, he married the only daughter of Dr. John King, prebendary of Windsor and Westminster, widow of Dr. John Spenser, some time president of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, but with her he lived not much above a month. She however bred up his only daughter, and married her to her eldest son, of which match there were three sons and five daughters. Dr. Field had reached the beginning of his fifty-sixth year, when, on Nov. 15, 1616, he died of an apoplexy, or some imposthume breaking inwardly, which suddenly deprived him of all sense and motion. He was buried in the outer chapel of St. George at Windsor, below the choir. Over his grave was laid a black marble slab, with his figure in brass, and under it an inscription on a plate of the same metal, recording the deaths of him and his first wife. His whole life was spent in the instruction of others, both by precept and example. He was a good and faithful pastor, an affectionate husband and parent, a good master and neighbour; charitable to the poor, moderate in his pursuits, never aiming at greatness for himself or his posterity; he left to his eldest son very little more than what descended to him from his ancestors. He had such a memory that he used to retain the substance of every book he read; but his judgment was still greater. Although he was able to penetrate into the most subtle and intricate disputes, he was more intent on composing than increasing controversies. He did not like disputes about the high points of predestination and reprobation, yet appears rather to have inclined to the Calvinistic views of these matters. When he first set about writing his books “Of the Church,” his old acquaintance Dr. Kettle dissuaded him, telling him that when once he was engaged in controversy, he would never live quietly, but be continually troubled with answers and replies. To this he said, “I will so write that they shall have no great mind to answer me;” which proved to be nearly the case, as his main arguments were never refuted. This work was published at London in 1606, folio, in four books, to which he added a fifth in 1610, folio, with an appendix containing a defence of each passage of the former books that were excepted against, or wrested to the maintenance of Romish errors. All these were reprinted at Oxford in 1628, folio. This second edition is charged hy the Scots in their “Canterburian’s Self-conviction,” 1641, folio, with additions made by bishop Laud. The purport and merit of this work has reminded some of the judicious Hooker, between whom and Dr. Field there was a great friendship. Dr. Field published also a sermon on St. Jude, v. 3, 1604, 4to, preached before the king at Windsor; and, a little before his death, had composed great part of a work entitled “A view of the Controversies in Religion, which in these last times have caused the lamentable divisions in the Christian world” but it was never completed, though the preface was written by the author, and is printed at large in the Life of him by his Son, together with some propositions laid down by him on election and reprobation. This Life was published from the original by John Le Neve, author of the “Monumenta Anglicana,” in 1617, 8vo, and from a copy of it interleaved with ms notes by the author, and by bishop Kennet, Mr. Gough, in whose possession it was, drew up a life for the new edition of the Biographia Britannica, which, with a very few omissions, we have here copied. It only remains to be mentioned that Dr. Field was nominated one of the fellows of Chelsea college in 1610, by king James, who, when he heard of his death, expressed his regret, and added, “I should have done more for that man” His son, who wrote his life, was the Rev. Nathaniel Field, rector of Stourton in the county of Wilts. Another son, Giles, lies buried, under a monumental inscription, against the east wall of New college Ante-chapel. He died in 1629, aged twenty-one.

, a nonconformist divine and physician, was born in 1617, in Suffolk, and educated at Cambridge, where he studied physic, and afterwards practised it with great success in New England, to which he fled, as he said, to enjoy liberty of conscience. When that, kowever, was restored about the latter end of the civil wars, he returned to England, was ordained, and became minister at Shalford, in Essex, where he continued till he was ejected, in 1662, by the act of uniformity. He afterwards resumed the practice of physic, but never neglected to preach when he had an opportunity, in which he appears to have been protected by his excellent and charitable character as a physician. He died in 1697, at the age of eighty. He was author of several works, the most known of which is his “Real Christian.” The others are of the controversial kind, with the Quakers, Antinomians, and Anabaptists, or concerning church government. He bad far more moderation as well as loyalty than many of his brethren, and even is said to have joined with a few like himself, during the usurpation, in praying for the exiled royal family.

, a poetical writer of queen Elizabeth’s reign, was the son of Alexander Fitzgeffrey, of a good family in Cornwall, and born in 1575. He became a commoner of Broadgate-ball, Oxford, in 1592, took the degrees in arts, and entered into orders. At length he became rector of St. Dominick, in his own county, where he was esteemed a grave and learned divine, as he was, while at the university, an excellent Latin poet. He died at his parsonage of St. Dominick, and was buried in the chancel of the church therein 1636. His works are, 1. “The Life and Death of Sir Francis Drake,” which being written in lofty verse, while he was A. B. he was then called “the high towering Falcon.” 2. “Affanias sive epigrammata lib. III. and Cenotaphia, lib. I.” Oxford, 1601, 8vo. 3. Several Sermcns. Wood has erroneously ascribed to him a collection of poetry, under the title of “Choice flowers and descriptions,” which belongs to Allot, but he appears to have been the author of a prose tract entitled “A curse for Corne-horders,” 1631, 4to, and a religious poem, called “The blessed Birth-day,” 1634, 4to; 1636, 1654, 8vo. An interesting account of some of his works may be seen in our authorities.

, falsely celebrated as an alchymist, under which supposition some forged works have been attributed to him (as, “A Philosophical Summary,” in verse, 1561, and a treatise “On the Transformation of Metals,” in 1621), was a native of Pontoise, towards the close of the fourteenth century, and exercised the profession of a notary at Paris. He began life without any fortune, but suddenly became rich, which occasioned the upposition that he had found the grand secret. He made, however, no other use of his riches than in relieving the distressed, founding hospitals, and repairing places of divine worship. To account for this sudden wealth in a more probable way, it has been said, that he bought up the debts owing to the Jews when they were expelled in 1394, and made great profits by the contracts, This, however, has been refuted, and the truth perhaps is, that he made his money by a profound knowledge of commerce, at a time when men in general were ignorant of its principles. He died at Paris, March 22, 1418. He and his wife Pernelle have been the subject of some curious inquiries at Paris, where they pretended to have found his alchemical apparatus. Paul Lucas, a thorough traveller, asserted that he had heard of him alive in India, long after his real decease. In the “Essais sur Paris,” by IVt,. St. Foix, there are many particulars of Flamel, also in the 44 Hermippus Redivivus,“London, 1749, second edit, anc) in the” Varieties of Literature," 1795, 8vo.

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

Notwithstanding his difference with the ministry, when a fast was appointed to be kept, Jan. 16, 1711-12, he was chosen by the house of lords to preach before them; but, by some means or other getting intelligence that he had censured the peace, they contrived to have the house adjourned beyond that day. This put it indeed out of his power to deliver his sentiments from the pulpit; yet he put the people in possession of them, by sending them from the press. Though without a name, from the spirit and language it was easily known whose sermon it was. It gave offence to some ministers of state, who now only waited for an opportunity to be revenged; and this opportunity the bishop soon gave them, by publishing, 8. “Four Sermons; viz. On the Death of queen Mary, 1694; on the Death of the duke of Gloucester, 1700; on the Death of king William, 1701; on the Queen’s accession to the throne, 1702. With a preface,” 1712, 8vo. This preface, bearing very hard upon those who had the management of public affairs, was made an object of attack, and, upon a motion made for that purpose in the house of commons, an order was made to burn it, which was accordingly done on the 12th of May. The bishop, knowing this to be the effect of party rage, was very little affected with it; but rather pleased to think that the very means they had used to suppress his book, was only a more effectual way of publishing and exciting the whole nation to read it. It was owing to this, certainly, that it was printed in the Spectator, No. 384, and thereby dispersed into several thousand hands. This same year, and indeed before his sermons, he published, but without his name, 9. “The Judgment of the Church of England in the case of LayBaptism, and of Dissenter’s Baptism; by which it appears that she hath not, by any public act of hers, made or declared Lay-Baptism to be invalid. The second edition. With an additional letter from Dr. John Cosin, afterwards bishop of Durham, to Mr. Cordel, who scrupled to communicate with the French Protestants upon some of the modern pretences,” 8vo. This piece was occasioned by the controversy about Lay-Baptism, which was then au object of public notkv. In 1713, he published without his name, 10. “The Life and Miracles of St. Wenefrede, together with her Litanies, with some historical observations made thereon.” In the preface, he declares the motives which induced him to bestow so much pains upon this life of St. Wenefrede; and these were, that the concourse of people to the well which goes by her name was very great that the papists made use of this to influence weak minds that they had lately reprinted a large life of this saint in English; that these considerations might justly affect any protestant divine, and th,at for certain reasons they affected him in particular. Upon the demise of the queen, and the Hanover succession, this prelate had as much reason to expect that his zeal and services should be rewarded, as any of his rank and function: but he did not make any display of his merit, either to the king or his ministers. However, upon the death of Moore, bishop of Ely, in 1714, Tenison, then archbishop of Canterbury, strenuously recommended Fleetwood to the vacant see; and he was accordingly, without the least application from himself directly or indirectly, nominated to it.

, son of the preceding, was born and partly educated in Scotland, but studied afterwards at the universities of Leyden and Utrecht, where he prosecuted all those branches of learning which were deemed necessary to qualify him for the ministerial profession. His first settlement was with the English church at Leyden, whence he afterwards removed to become minister of the Scotch church of Amsterdam. In the course of a few years, he came over to London, and became pastor of a Scotch church in Lothbury, London; urged, as it is said, to make the exchange by king William, who often advised with him on the concerns of his own country, and frequently received him at court. His great learning and talents procured him much respect abroad, and also in this country, where he was esteemed by churchmen and dissenters, as well as by those belonging to the Scotch presbytery. He was on terms of friendship with the archbishop of Canterbury; and was chosen one of the preachers of the lecture, instituted by the merchants of London, at Salters’­hall, every Tuesday. From his early years he was eminently devout; and he xvas firmly attached to the British monarchy and constitution. He died May 24, 1716. His works were numerous, consisting of various sermons, and tracts; particularly, 1. “The History of Hereditary Right.” 2. “The Mirror of Divine Love,” in which is a dramatic poem, called the “Monarchical Image, or Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream.” 3. “Theocraty, or Divine Government of Nations.” 4. “A practical discourse on the death of king William.” 5. “Christology, or a discourse concerning Christ.” 6. “The Rod of the Sword.” 7. “Speculum Davidicum Redivivum, or the Divine right of the Revolution evinced and applied,” and “Discourses on several subjects, viz. the Rise and Fall of Papacy,” c. published in 1701. In the dedication of this last mentioned work to lord Carmichael, principal secretary of state for Scotland, and chancellor of the college of Glasgow, Mr. Fleming mentions his being related to his lordship, and acknowledges his obligations for the offer of so considerable au office as that of principal of the college of Glasgow; which very honourable and beneficial situation he declined, being a dissenter from the church of Scotland. This work, some years ago, was very much the subject of public attention, from the remarkable coincidence between Fleming’s conjectural interpretation of a prophecy in the Revelations, which he supposed to relate to the humbling of the French monarchy, about 1794, and the calamitous events which, within a year of that very period, befel the unhappy Louis XVI. There being at that time a very numerous party in this and other countries, whose object was the humbling of every monarchy and established government, this lucky conjecture of Mr. Fleming’s encouraged the appearance of various prophets (at the head of whom was a lunatic, still in confinement), and their publications for a considerable time agitated the public mind, and produced, in some degree, what was intended, a damp on the spirits of the credulous, and a reluctance to support the war. This, however, like every other popular delusion, was not of long duration, and more recent events have given a happier direction to public sentiment.

Fleury, though a zealous divine of the Romish church, was by no means a bigot. He has the reputation of a philosopher as well as a divine, and a philosopher in practice as well as speculation. He is said to have taken an extreme delight in reading Plato; and, after the example of this great ancient, would often have private conferences with societies of the learned, which chiefly turned on the illustration of the scriptures. He was a great lover of solitude, yet was not reserved, but would speak his mind freely upon the most important and even delicate subjects. Constantly attentive to, and punctual in the discharge of his duty, he took no steps to be rich or great, cherished no principles of ambition, but preferred the glory of doing useful services to his country, to any honours which his uncommon talents and merit might justly have claimed.

Of his mental talents and literary acquirements, those who knew him before the infirmities of age came on, entertained a high opinion. Few persons possessed a' more., extensive and accurate acquaintance with English history. His memory was so retentive as to supersede recourse to written authorities; and it served him for the recital of dau s an i minute circumstances, which the most laborious researches can scarcely ascertain. This rendered him capable of communicating important information on various occasions, and he was often consulted by men of the first rank and character. In discussions of a political as well as literary kind, his knowledge was of considerable service; and it gave him access to many members of both houses of parliament, who availed themselves of hints and references with which he supplied them. In 1770 he was appointed one of the compilers of the “General Index to the Journals of the house of commons.” The interesting period of parliamentary proceedings from 1660 to 1697, comprehending vol. VIII, XI. was assigned to him. His plan was submitted to a committee of the house, soon after his appointment: and the execution of this elaborate work, begun in 1776, and completed in 1780, was much approved and liberally rewarded. He was frequently employed on making Indexes to inferior works; and among others that to the Rambler. Dr. Johnson, who sometimes founded his dislikes on very slender circumstances, on hearing Dr. Flexman’s name mentioned, exclaimed, “Let me hear no more of him, sir. That is the fellow who made the Index to my Ramblers, and set down the name of Milton thus; Milton, Mr. John.” Dr. Flexman was rather more creditably employed in superintending by far the best edition of Burnet’s “Own Times,” published in 1753, 4 vols. 8vo. His original works consist of a few occasional seripons and tracts. Among the latter are: 1. “The plan of divine worship in the churches of Dissenters justified,” 1754. 2. “Critical, historical, and political miscellanies; remarks on various authors, Potter, Seeker, Sherlock, &c.” 1752 1762. He wrote also the lives of the rev. S. Bourn, and of Dr. Chandler, prefixed to their respective works. In religious opinions he was a strenuous advocate for the pre-existent dignity of Christ, and the personality of the Holy Spirit. He maintained also the essential distinction between the soul and body, and the liberty of the human will, in opposition to Materialists and Necessarians. But whatever ardour he might show in maintaining his opinions, it was united with the most comprehensive charity and good will nor was his integrity less laudable.

So peculiar was this philosopher’s turn of mind, that there was nothing which ancient or modern times could afford, under the notion of occult wisdom, which he did not eagerly gather into his magazine of science. All the mysterious and incomprehensible dreams of the Cabbalists and Paracelsians, he compounded into a new mass of absurdity. In hopes of improving the medical and chemical arts, he devised a new system of physics, loaded with wonderful hypothesis, and mystical fictions. He supposed two universal principles, the northern or condensing power, and the southern, or rarefying power. Over these he placed innumerable intelligences and geniuses, and called together whole troops of spirits from the four winds, to whom he committed the charge of diseases. He applied his thermometer to discover the harmony between the macrocosm and the microcosm, or the world of nature and of man he introduced many marvellous fictions into natural philosophy and medicine he attempted to explain the Mosaic cosmogony, in a work entitled “Philosophia Mosaica,” wherein he speaks of three first principles, darkness, as the first matter; water, as the second matter; and the divine light, as the most central essence, creating, informing, vivifying all things of secondary principles, two active, cold and heat and two passive, moisture and dryness and describes the whole mystery of production and corruption, of regeneration and resurrection, with such vague conceptions and obscure language, as leaves the subject involved in impenetrable darkness. Some of his ideas, such as they were, appear to have been borrowed from the Cabbalists and Alexandrian Platonists. The reader will easily judge, what kind of light may be expected from the writings of Robert Fludd, when he is informed that he ascribes the magnetic virtue to the irradiation of angels. Fludd died at his house in Coleman-street, London, in 1637, and was sent to Bearsted for interment.

, a celebrated Portuguese Jesuit, was born about 1528, at Cortisada. He taught philosophy at Coimbra, and theology at Evora, where he took a doctor’s degree, 1570, held several important offices in his order, and laboured zealously fora reformation of manners in Portugal. He died November 4, 1599, at Lisbon, aged seventy-one, or, as others say, in 1619, He left various philosophical works and his “Metaphysics,” 4 torn. fol. claims the glory of having first invented the opinion of the Middle Science, which being afterwards adopted by Molina, excited a violent controversy between his followers and the Dominicans and Jansenists, who maintained the doctrine of St. Augustine relative to the divine prescience.

, an eminent protestant divine, born 1495, at Augsburg, was among the friends of Reuchelinus, Melanchton, and Luther, and taught Hebrew with reputation at Wittemberg, where he died December 8, 1556, leaving an excellent “Hebrew Dictionary,” Basil, 1564, fol. He must be, however, distinguished from another John Forster, a German divine, who died 1613, author of “De Interpretatione Scripturarum,” Wittemberg, 1608, 4to and “Commentaries on Exodus, Isaiah, and Jeremiah,” 3 vols. 4to and from Valentine Forster, who published a “History of the Law,” in Latin, with the “Lives of the most eminent Lawyers,” to 1580, the time in which he wrote.

, an English divine and scholar of eminence in the last ceatury, was born Feb. 3, 1717, at Stadscombe, in the parish of Plimstock, Devonshire, of which his father, Robert Forster, was then minister. His mother, Elizabeth, was daughter of the rev. John Tindal, vicar of Cornwood, in the same county, and sister of the rev. Nicolas Tindal, translator of Rapin’s History. His father, soon after the birth of this his eldest child, being chosen lecturer to St. Andrew’s church at Plymouth, went thitherto reside, and continued in the same place and office till his death. His son, the subject of this article, having received the rudiments of a grammatical education at home, in which he made an early progress, was put under the tuition of the rev. John Bedford, master of the grammar-school at Plymouth; and of this numerous seminary he had gained the first place before he was thirteen years old. In 1731-2 he was removed to Eton, and at the same time entered at Pembroke college, Oxford, in order to entitle him to an exhibition. After passing about sixteen months at Eton, while Dr. George was head-master, he went to college, and became a pupil of Dr. Radcliffe. On June 13, 1733, he was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi, where Dr. Burton was tutor. In 1729 he became fellow; and afterwards took the care of pupils himself as assistant to Mr. Paget, but was disappointed in his wishes of succeeding that gentleman as the college tutor, Mr. Patten being appointed by the president to that office. He was admitted to the degree of B. A. Oct. 13, 1735; to that f M. A. Feb. 10, 1738, and to that 'of B. D. April 9, 1746, as soon as his standing allowed, in order to preserve hie seniority in college. His degree of D. D. was deferred till 1750, the time of his leaving the university. In 1739 he received deacon’s orders from Dr. Wynne, bishop of Bath and Wells, and priest’s orders from Dr. Hoadly, bishop of Winchester.

, a German divine and historian, was born at Liege, of an ancient and distinguished family, in 1609; and in 1625 he entered the order of the Jesuits. His tutors, observing that his qualifications were peculiarly adapted to the duties of a preacher, took care to instruct him in the requisites for undertaking the office, and be became celebrated for his public services for more than thirty years, as well as for his extensive knowledge, which embraced every branch of science. He was successively appointed rector of the colleges at Huy and Tournay, and died of a pestilential disorder in the latter city, in 1668. He is known as an author by many theological pieces, particularly “Commentarii Historici et Morales ad libros I. et II. Machabxorum, ndditis liberioribus Excursibus,” in 2 vols. folio; and by his “Historia Leodiensis, per Episcoporum et Principum Seriem digesta ab origine populiusque ad Ferdinandi Bavari tenipora,” &c. in 3 vols. fol. This work, though not very ably executed, is said to throw much light on the history of the Low Countries.

, founder of the society of quakers, was born at Drayton, in Leicestershire, in 1624. His father was a weaver, who seems to have taken great pains in educating his son in the principles of piety and virtue. He was, at a proper age, apprenticed to a dealer in wool, and grazier, and being also employed in keeping sheep, he had many opportunities for contemplation and reflection. When he was about nineteen years of age he experienced much trouble and anxiety on observing the intemperance of some persons, professing to be religious, with whom he had gone to an inn for refreshment; and on the following night he was persuaded that a divine communication was made to him, urging him to forsake all, and devote his life to the duties of religion. He now quitted his relations, dressed himself in a leathern doublet, and wandered about from place to place. Being discovered in the metropolis, his friends persuaded him to return, and settle in some regular employment. But he did not remain with them many months; determining to embrace an itinerant mode of life. He fasted much and often, walked abroad in retired places, with no other companion but the bibje, and sometimes sat in the hollow of a tree for a day together, and walked in the fields by night, as if in a state of deep melancholy. He occasionally attended upon public teachers, but did not derive that benefit from them that he looked for: and hearing, as he supposed, a voice exclaiming, “There is one, even Christ Jesus, that canspeak to thy condition/' he forsook the usual outward means of religion; contending, that as God did not dwell in temples made with hands, so the people should receive the inward divine teaching of the Lord, and take that for their rule of life. About 1648 he felt himself called upon to propagate the opinions which he had embraced, and commenced public teacher in Manchester, and some of the neighbouring towns and villages, insisting on the certainty and efficacy of experiencing the coming of Christ in the heart, as a light to discover error, and the knowledge of one’s duty. He now made more extensive journeys, and travelled through the counties of Derby, Leicester, and Northampton, addressing the people in the market-places, and inveighing strongly against injustice, drunkenness, and the other prevalent vices of the age. About this time he apprehended that the Lord had forbidden him to take off his hat to any one; and required him to speak to the people in the language of thou and thee; that he must not bend his knee to earthly authorities; and that he must on no account take an oath. His peculiarities exposed him to much unjustifiable treatment, although it must be allowed that he sometimes provoked harsh usage by his intemperate zeal. At Derby the followers of Fox were first denominated” quakers,“as a term of reproach, either on account of the trembling accent used in the delivery of their speeches, or, because, when brought before the higher powers, they exhorted the magistrates and other persons present” to tremble at the name of the Lord." In 1655 Fox was sent prisoner to Cromwell, who contented himself with obtaining a written promise that he would not take up arms against him or the existing government; and having discussed various topics with mildness and candour, he ordered him to be set at liberty. Fox probably now felt himself bold in the cause, re-commenced his ministerial labours at London, and spent some time in vindicating his principles by means of the press, and in answering the books circulated against the society which he had founded, and which began to attract public notice in many parts of the kingdom. Notwithstanding the moderation of Cromwell towards Fox, he was perpetually subject to abuse and insult, and was frequently imprisoned and hardly used by magistrates in the country whither he felt himself bound to travel; and more than once he was obliged to solicit the interference of the Protector, to free him from the persecutions of subordinate officers. Once he wrote to Cromwell, soliciting his attention to the sufferings of his friends; and on hearing a rumour that he was about to assume the title of king, Fox solicited an audience, and remonstrated with him very freely upon the measure, as what must bring shame and ruin on himself and his posterity. He also addressed a paper to the heads and governors of the nation, on occasion of a fast appointed on. account of the persecutions of the protestants abroad, in which he embraced the opportunity that such appointment offered, of holding up, in proper colours, the impropriety and iniquity of persecution at home. The history of Fox, for several years previously to 1666, consists of details of his missions, and accounts of his repeated imprisonments. In this last-mentioned year he was liberated by order of the king, and he immediately set about forming the people who had embraced his doctrines into a compact and united body: monthly meetings were established, and other means adopted to provide for the various exigences to which they might be liable.

About 1669 he married Margaret, the widow of judge Fell, at whose house he had been entertained in his progress through Lancashire. The ceremony, on this occasion, was according to that simple form which is practised to this day among the people of his persuasion. He only acquainted their common friends of their intention; and having received their approbation, they took each other in marriage, by mutual public declarations to that intent, at a meeting appointed for the purpose at Bristol. After this Mr. Fox sailed for America, where he spent two years in making proselytes, and in confirming the faith and practice of those who had already joined in his cause. Soon after his return to England he was taken into custody, and thrown into Worcester gaol under the charge of having “held a meeting from all parts of the nation, for terrifying the king’s subjects.” After being acquitted, he went to Holland, and on his return a suit was instituted against him for refusing to pay tithes; his opponents were successful, and he was obliged to submit to the consequences. In 1684 Fox again visited the continent, and upon his return he found his health and spirits too much impaired by incessant fatigues, and almost perpetual persecutions, to contend any more with his enemies: he accordingly lived more retired; and in 1690 he died, in the sixty-seventh year of his age; having, however, performed the duties of a preacher till within a few days of his decease. His writings, exclusive of a few separate pieces, which were not printed a second time, were collected in 3 vols. folio; the first contains his “Journal;” the second a collection of his “Epistles;” the third, his “Doctrinal Pieces.” Fox was a man of good natural talents, and thoroughly conversant in the scriptures. The incessant zeal which he exhibited through life, affords abundant evidence of his piety, sincerity, and purity of intention; and his sufferings bear testimony to his fortitude, patience, and resignation to the Divine will. William Penn, speaking of him, says that “he had an extraordinary gift in opening the scriptures, but that, above all, he excelled in prayer. The reverence and solemnityof his address and behaviour, and the ferventness and fullness of his words, often struck strangers with admiration.” He also mentions, in terms of high commendation, his meekness, humility, and moderation; and he adds, that he was civil beyond all forms of breeding; in his behaviour very temperate, eating little, and sleeping less, though a bulky person.

, an eminent English divine and churchhistorian, was born at Boston in Lincolnshire, of honest and reputable parents in 1517, the very year that Luther began to oppose the errors of the church of Rome. His father dying when he was young, and his mother marrying again, he fell under the tutelage of a father-in-law, with whom he remained till the age of sixteen. He was then entered of Brazen Nose college in Oxford, where he had for his chamber-fellow, the celebrated dean Nowell, and perhaps the same tutor, Mr. John Hawarden or Harding, who was afterwards principaj of the college, and to whom Fox dedicated his work on the Eucharist. In May 1538, he took, the degree of bachelor of arts. He was soon distinguished for his uncommon abilities and learning; was chosen fellow of Magdalen college, and became master of arts in 1543. He discovered in his younger years a genius for poetry, and wrote in an elegant style several Latin comedies, the subjects of which were taken from the scriptures. We have a comedy of his, entitled, “De Christo Triumphante,” printed in 1551, and at Basil in 1556, 8vo; which was translated into English by Richard Day, son of John Day, the famous printer in the reign of queen Elizabeth, and published with this title, “Christ Jesus Triumphant, wherein is described the glorious triumph and conquest of Christ over sin, death, and the law,” &c. 1579; and in 1607, in 8vo. It was again published in the original in 1672, and dedicated to all schoolmasters, in order that it might be admitted into their respective schools, for the peculiar elegance of its style, by T. C. M. A. of Sidney-college, in Cambridge. The date of the first edition (1551), shows that Anthony Wood was mistaken in asserting that Fox wrote it at Basil, to which place he did not go until after the accession of queen Mary in 1553.

Fox was a man of great humanity and uncommon liberality. He was a most laborious student, and remarkably abstemious; a most learned, pious, and judicious divine, and ever opposed to all methods of severity in matters of religion. That he was not promoted was entirely owing to his retaining some opinions adverse to the habits and ceremonies of the church, which he had imbibed abroad. “Although,” says Fuller, “the richest mitre in England would have counted itself preferred by being placed upon his head, he contented himself with a prebend of Salisbury. How learnedly he wrote, how constantly he preached, how piously he lived, and how cheerfully he died, may be seen at large in the life prefixed to his book.” Wood and Strype are united in their praises of his talents and personal character; the former only, like his successor Collier, cannot forgive him for being “a severe Calvinist, and a bitter enemy to popery.” Of his liberality many anecdotes may be found in our authorities.

, a learned and pious German divine, and a great benefactor to his country, was born at Lubeck, March 12, O. S. 1663. His father, John Francke, was then one of the magistrates of Lubeck, and afterwards entered into the service of Ernest the Pious, duke of Saxe Gotha, as counsellor of the court and of justice. His mother, Anne Gloxin, was the daughter of one of the oldest burgomasters of Lubeck. Young Francke had the misfortune to lose his father in 1670, when he was between six and seven years old, and at this early age had shown such a pious disposition, that he was intended for the church, and with this view his mother placed him under the instructions of a private tutor. His proficiency in classical studies was such, th.'t at the age of fourteen he vvas considered as well qualified to go to the university. It was not, however, until 1679, that he went to that of Erfurt, and from thence to Kiel, where he st-idied some years under Kortholt and Morhoff. In 1682, he returned to Gotha, and visited Hamburgh in his way, where he remained two months to improve his knowledge of the Hebrew language, under Esdras Edzardi. In 1684 he went to Leipsic, and took his degree of M. A. in the following year. During his stay l;ere, he formed a society for literary conversation among his friends, which long subsisted under the name of “Collegium Philobiblicum,” their favourite topic being the study of the* Holy Scriptures. Some time after he went to Wittemberg, where he was received with great respect by the literati of that university, and thence to Luueburg, where he attended the divinity lectures of the celebratd Sandhagen. From Lunebourg he returned to Leipsic, and gave a course of lectures on the holy scriptures, practical as well as critical, which were frequented by above three hundred students. This success, with a more than common earnestness and seriousness in his method and address, occasioned some jealousy, and created him enemies likewise at Erfurt, whither, in 1690, he was invited to become pastor of St. Austin. The objection to him was that of pietism, and it increased with so much violence, that in 1691 he was deprived of his charge, and ordered to quit the city within two days. How little he deserved this treatment, had already appeared in some of his writings, and was more manifest afterwards in his conduct and services.

, a Lutheran divine, was born in 1564 at Plawen, in the circle of Voightland, and was educated at Francfort on the Oder. He then removed to Wittetnberg, where in 1598, he was appointed professor of history, and took his doctor’s degree in divinity. Three years after, he was invited to be superintendant at Kemsperg, and remained there until 1605, when he was chosen divinity professor at Wittemberg. He died suddenly ia 1628, of a second attack of apoplexy. Among his numerous works are, 1. “Syntagma controversiarum theologicarum.” 2. “Historia animalium,” Francfort, 1671, 12mo; but the first edition was published at Wittemberg, 1616, 8vo, under the title “Historia animal iura sacra.”“It was afterwards reprinted often with improvements, the last of which editions appeared at Francibrt, 1712, 4 vols. 4to. There is also an English translation of the original work, Lond. 1674, 8vo. 3.” Schola sacrificiorum patriarchalium sacra, hoc est, assertio satisfactionis a Domino nostro J. C. pro peccatis totius mundi prcestitse, in sacrificiorum veterum typis fundata?, et recentibus Arianis et Photinianis oppositae,“Wittemberg, 1654, 4to. This has been sometimes sold in two parts; the one entitled” Schola sacrificiorum,“and the other” Assertio satisfactionis,“but it is the same work. 4.” Tractatus theologrcus de interpretatione scripturarnm maxime legitima, duabus constans regulis, a Luthero ad papatns Komani destructionem in versione Biblioruni Germanica usitatis, et 152 exemplis elucidatus," Wittemberg, 1634, 4to. Of this there have been several editions. Frantzius is also the author of various dissertations and disputations on subjects of theological controversy.

, a celebrated English divine, and master of Pembroke-hal in Cambridge, wns born in London, and educated in St. John’s college, Cambridge, of which he was chosen fellow in 1564. He was a youth of great parts, and of a very high spirit. When a boy at school, he is said to have betrayed great anger and mortification on losing a literary contest for a silver pen, with the celebrated Edmund Campian, and as the latter was educated at Christ’s hospital, this incident seems to prove that t'ulke was of the same school. Before he became fellow of his college, he complied with the wishes of his father, by studying law at Clirtbrd’s-inn, but on his return to the university, his inclinations became averse to that pursuit, and he was unable to conquer them, although his father refused to support him any longer. Young Fulke, however, trusted to his industry and endowments, and soon became a distinguished scholar in mathematics, languages, and divinity. Having taken orders, his early intimacy with some of the puritan divines induced him t< preach in favour of some of their sentiments respecting the ecclesiastical habits and ceremonies. This occurred about 1565, and brought upon him the censure of the chancellor of the university, which, it is said, proceeded to expulsion. On this he took lodgings in the town of Cambridge, and subsisted for some time by reading lectures. His expulsion, however, if it really took place, which seems doubtful, did not lessen his general reputation, as in 1561) there was an intention to choose him master of St. John’s college, had not archbishop Parker interfered but about the same time he found a patron in the earl of Leicester, who was more indulgent to the puritans, and who received Mr. luilke into his house, as his chaplain. It was now also that he fell under the charge of being concerned in some unlawful marriages, and in such circumstances thought it his duty to resign his fellowship, but being honourably acquitted in an examination before the bishop of Ely, he was immediately re-elected by the college.