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

, son of the preceding, by Anne, daughter of sir Thomas Dacres of Hertfordshire, was born in 1646, and educated with great care under the eye of his father. He became early attached to the study of antiquities, and as he had a very considerable estate settled upon him, he lived chiefly upon it, pursuing his studies and exercising old English hospitality. He was elected to represent his county in parliament as often as he chose to accept that honour, and his knowledge and integrity induced many of his neighbours to make him the arbitrator of their differences, which he readily undertook, and generally executed to the satisfaction of both parties. He married Louisa, daughter to sir John Carteret, of Hawnes in Bedfordshire but having by her no issue male, his father settled his estate on the male issue of sir Edward Atkyns, which settlement was the unfortunate cause of a law-suit between the father and son. Sir Robert differed in other respects from his father’s opinions, being more attached to the house of Stuart, yet he inherited both his prudence and his probity, and was equally esteemed and beloved by men of all parties. His design of writing “The History of Gloucestershire,” took its rise from an intention of the same sort in Dr. Parsons, chancellor of the diocese of Gloucester, who had been at great pains and trouble to collect the materials for such a work, in the compiling of which he was hindered by the infirm and declining state of his health. Sir Robert, however, did not live to see it published, which was done by his executors. It appeared in 1712, in one volume folio. It was very expensive to the undertaker, who printed it in a pompous manner, adorning it with variety of views and prospects of the seats of the gentry and nobility, with their arms and he has inserted some, which, in Mr. Gough’s opinion, very little deserve it. It were to be wished, says the same excellent antiquary, that more authorities had been given, and the charters and grants published in the original language. The transcripts of all these were collected by Parsons. The price of this work, which was five guineas, has been greatly raised by an accidental fire, Jan. 30, 1712-13, which destroyed most of the copies in the house of Mr. Bowyer, printer, in White Fryars. All the plates, except two or three, falling into the hands of Mr. Herbert, engraver of charts, he caused the lost ones to he supplied, and republished this book in 1768, correcting the literal errors, but without so much as restoring in their proper place several particulars pointed out in the original errata. Great part of this second edition was also destroyed by fire.

, a learned professor of the university of Helmstadt, was born in 1722, at Wernigerode. After having been educated at home, with great care, by his father, who was judge of that city, and counsellor to the count Stolberg of Wernigerode, he went in 1739 to the school of Closter-Bergen, near Magdeburgh, then superintended by Steinmez, and in 1741, took his leave of this school, in a Latin oration, “De societatibus hujus sevi notabilioribus.” He then went to Halle, and having early imbibed a taste for oriental languages and sacred philology, he attached himself particularly to the two Michaelis’s, father and son, who were then professors in that university. From Halle, he went to Leipsic, where he studied Arabic, Syriac, Chaldaic, Samaritan, Ethiopian, and rabbinical Hebrew. On his return to Halle in 1747, he maintained a thesis for his doctor’s degree, under the presidency of Michaelis the father, “On the antiquity of the Hebrew language” and then opened a course of lectures which were much admired. Notwithstanding this success, however, he left Halle, after a residence of two years, and settled at Helmstadt. Here he became a most popular teacher, his lectures being attended by an unusual number of students; and in 1754, the uniYersity secured his services by appointing him professor extraordinary of oriental languages. About this time, happening to meet with some works in which the study of the Armenian, Coptic, and Turkish languages was recommended, he had a great desire to add these to his stock, and not having been able to obtain the assistance of Jablonski for the Coptic, he determined to learn the others without a master. Having begun this task at his lisure hours, in 1756, he made such rapid progress as to be able to publish, before the conclusion of the year, the first two chapters of St. Matthew translated from the Turkish into Latin, with a critical preface on the history and utility of the Turkish language and the first four chapters of the same evangelist translated from the Armenian into Latin, with some considerations on the Armenian language. These two little works, which were published, the first at Bremen, and the other at Halle, were criticised with some severity, perhaps not unjust; but the zeal and industry of the author, although not altogether successful in these attempts, were still the subject of admiration, and were not unrewarded. In 1760 he obtained a pension and in 1763, lest he should accept of the offer of a professorship made to him by the university of Giessen, that of Helmstadt conferred on him the title of professor in ordinary of philosophy, with an augmentation of salary. His various works in the mean time amply confirmed their choice, and extended his reputation throughout Europe. Of his private life we have no further account, although it was prolonged for many years after this period, as he died of an apoplexy, March 7, 1796. His principal works are, 1. “Evangelium secundum Matthaeum ex versione Æthiopici interpretis in Bibliis polyglottis Anglicanis editum cum Graeco, c.” Halle, 1748, 4to, with a preface by Michaelis on the Ethiopian translation of the New Testament. 2. “Evangelium secundum Matthaeum ex versione Persica, &c.” Helmstadt, 17.50, 4to. 3. Persian translations of Mark, Luke, and John, 1751, 4to. published separately. 4. “Evangelium secundum Marcum ex versione Arabica, &c.” Lerngow, 1752, 4to. 5. “Novum Testamentum ex versione jEthiopica, &c. in Latinum,” Brunswick, 1753 55, 2 vols. 4to. 6. “Fragmenta Veteris Test, ex versione Æthiopici interpretis, et alia quaedam opuscula Æthiopica,” Wolfenb. 1755, 4to. 7. “Pseudo-critica Millio-Bengeliana,” Halle, 1767, 8vo, pointing out some inaccuracies in the variorum editions of the New Testament by these eminent critics. Bode is considered by his countrymen as a man of most extensive learning, but as destitute of elegance as a writer, either in Latin or German, and as unacquainted with the art of enlivening his subject.

But the assertion of sir John Hawkins, that Britton was the first who had a meeting that corresponded with the idea of a concert, is not correct: in the time of Charles I. and during the usurpation, at Oxford, meetings for the performance of Fancies in six and seven parts, which preceded sonatas and concerts, were very common. And in Charles the Second’s time, Banister, father and son, had concerts, first at taverns and public-houses, and afterwards at York-buildings. It is, perhaps, not a matter worthy of dispute; but we imagine that it would be difficult to prove that Handel ever played at the small-coal man’s concert. Handel was proud, and never had much respect for English composers. He had been caressed and patronised by princes and nobles so long, that he would as soon have gone into a coal-pit to play at a concert, as to the hovel of our vender of small-coal.

, a very learned man, was born of a noble family at Nortwick in Holland, 1545. He lost his parents when very young, and was sent to several schools; and to one at Paris among the rest, where he made a great progress in Greek and Latin. When he had finished his education, he returned to his own country, and married; and though he was scarcely grown up, he applied himself to affairs of state, and was soon made a curator of the banks and ditches, which post he held above twenty years, and then resigned it. But Dousa was not only a scholar and a statesman, but likewise a soldier; and he behaved himself so well in that capacity at the siege of Leyden in 1574, that the prince of Orange thought he could commit the government of the town to none so properly as to him. In 1575 the university was founded there, and Dousa made first curator of it; for which place he was well fitted, as well on account of his learning as by his other deserts. His learning was indeed prodigious and he had such a memory, that he could at once give an answer to any thing that was asked him, relating to ancient or modern history, or, in short, to any branch of literature. He was, says Melchior Adam, and, after him, Thuanus, a kind of living library; the Varro of Holland, and the oracle of the university of Leyden. His genius lay principally towards poetry, and his various productions in verse were numerous: he even composed the annals of his own country, which he had collected from the public archives, in verse, which was published at Leyden 1601, 4to, and reprinted in 1617 with a commentary by Grotius. He wrote also critical notes upon Horace, Sallust, Plautus, Petronius, Catullus, Tibullus, &c. His moral qualities are said to have been no less meritorious than his intellectual and literary; for he was modest, humane, benevolentj and affable. He was admitted into the supreme assembly of the nation, where he kept his seat, and discharged his office worthily, for the last thirteen years of his life. He died Oct. 12, 1604, and his funeral oration was made by Daniel Heinsius. Of his works, we have seen, 1. “Couiin. in Catullum, Tibullum, et Horatium,” Antwerp, 1580, 12mo. 2. “Libri tres Prascidaneorum in Petronium Arbitrmn,” Leyden, 1583, 8vo. 3. “Epodon ex puris lambis,” Ant. 1514, 8vo. 4. “Plautinae Explicationes,” Leyden, 1587, 16mo. 5. “Poemata,” ibid. 1607, 12mo. 6. “Odarum Britannicarum liber, ad Elizabetham reginam, et Jani Dousae filii Britannicorum carminum silva,” Leyden, 1586, 4to; and 7. lt Elegiarum libri duo, et Epigrammatum liber unus; cum Justi Lipsii aliorumque ad eundem carminibus," ibid. 1586, 4to. In some catalogues, however, the works of the father and son seem be confounded.

, was born 1730, and when a child, was of an amiable disposition, had an uncommon capacity for learning, and discovered, very early, a genius for poetry. After some years passed at a school at Romford, in Essex, under the care of his relation, the rev. Philip Fletcher, afterwards dean of Kildare, and younger brother to the bishop of that see, he was removed to a more eminent one at Felsted, in the same county. At this school he was stimulated by emulation to an exertion of his talents; and, by a close application, he became the first scholar, as well as captain of the school, and gained the highest reputation; and by the sweetness of his temper and manners, and by a disposition to friendship, he acquired and preserved the love of all his companions, and the esteem of his master and family. He has, on some particular occasions, been heard modestly to declare, that he was never punished, during hib whole residence at either school, for negligence in his lessons or exercise, or for any other misdemeanor. He was very early qualified for the university, and constantly improved himself, when at home, by his private studies, and the assistance or his father, happy in the companionship of such a son, who was always dutiful and affectionate to him; and the first literary characters of that time associated with a father and son, whose polished taste and amiable manners rendered them universally acceptable. He was entered, at the age of sixteen, at Bene‘t-college, Cambridge, where Mr. Castle, afterwards dean of Hereford, was then master: and he was recommended to that college by archbishop Herring, whom we have mentioned as his father’s particular friend. The archbishop baptised his son, and promised to patronize him, if educated for the church, and therefore sent him to the college where he had completed his own education. At the university he continued to rise in reputation as a scholar and a poet, and was always irreproachable in his moral character: he had the happiness of forming some connections there with men of genius an ’< virtue, which lasted through life; but the first and strongest attachment, in which he most delighted, end which reflected honour on his own merit, was the uninterrupted friendship, and constant correspondence, which com.uued to the last, with Mr. Greene, a very respectable clergyman of the diocese of Norwich, a man whose character for learning and abilities, goodness and virtue, justly gained him the esteem and love of all who had the happiness of his acquaintance, whose testimony is real praise, who acknowledged the worth of his valuable friend, “and loved his amiable and benevolent spirit.”

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

, an eminent naturalist, was the son of a burgomaster at Dirschaw, in Polish Prussia, where he was born Oct. 22, 1729. We learn nothing of his education until his fifteenth year, when he was admitted into the gymnasium of Joachimsthal at Berlin, where his application to the study of ancient and modern languages was incessant and successful. From 1748, when he went to the university of Halle, he studied theology, and continued his application to the learned languages, among which he comprehended the Oriental, and after three years he removed to Dantzic, and distinguished himself as a preacher, imitating the French rather than the Dutch manner; and in 1753 he obtained a settlement at Nassenhuben. In the following year he married his cousin, Elizabeth Nikolai. During his residence in this place he employed his leisure hours in the study of philosophy, geography, and the mathematics, still improving his acquaintance with the ancient and modern languages. With a small income, and increasing family, the difficulties he experienced induced him to accept the proposal of removing to Russia, in order to superintend the new colonies at Saratow, but not succeeding in this or any other scheme of a settlement in that country, he removed to London in 1766, with strong recommendations, but with very little money. After his arrival, he received from the government of Russia a present of 100 guineas; and he also made an addition to his stock by the translation of Kalm’s Travels and Osbeck’s Voyage. At this time lord Baltimore proposed to him a settlement in America, as superintendant of his extensive property in that country; but he preferred the place of teacher of the French, German, and natural history in the dissenting academy at Warrington. For the first department he was by no means well qualified, his extraordinary knowledge of languages being unaccompanied by a particle of taste, and his use of them being barbarous, though fluent; and his knowledge of natural history was of little value in his academical department. This situation, however, for these or other reasons which we never heard assigned, he soon abandoned; and returning to London, he was engaged, in 1772, to accompany captain Cook, as a naturalist, in his second voyage round the world. At this time he was forty-three years of age, and his son George, who went with him, was seventeen. Upon his return to England in 1775, the university of Oxford conferred upon him the degree of LL. D. At this time he was projecting, with the assistance of his son, a botanical work in Latin, containing the characters of many new genera of plants, which they had discovered in the course of their voyage. An account of the voyage having been published by his son in English and German, the father was supposed to have had a considerable share in it; and as he had entered into an engagement not to publish any thing separately from the authorized narrative, he thus incurred the displeasure of government, and gave offence to his friends. Independently of the violation of his engagement, he was also chargeable with having introduced into his work several reflections on the government which appointed, and some falsehoods respecting the navigators who conducted the expedition. The father and son, finding that, in consequence of these circumstances, their situation in London was become unpleasant, determined to quit EnglaiYd. Before the execution of their purpose, their condition became embarrassed and distressing; but Mr. Forster was invited, in 1780, to be professor of natural history at Halle, and inspector of the botanical garden and in the following year he obtained the degree of M. D. His health, however, began to decline and the death of his son George so deeply impressed his mind as to aggravate his other complaints. Towards the commencement of 1798, his case became desperate; and before the close of this year, viz. on the 9th of December, he died. Mr. Forster’s disposition was most unamiable, and extremely irritable and litigious; and his want of prudence involved him in perpetual difficulties. Yet these seem to have all been virtues in the eyes of the celebrated Kurt Sprengel of Halle, who thus embellishes his character, which we should not copy if it did not mention some particulars of his studies and works: “To a knowledge of books in all branches of science, seldom to be met with, he joined an uncommon fund of practical observations, of which he well knew how to avail himself. In natural history, in geography, both physical and moral, and in universal history, he was acquainted with a vast number of facts, of which he who draws his information from works only has not even a distant idea. This assertion is proved in the most striking manner by his ‘ Observations made in a Voyage round the World.’ Of this book it may be said, that no traveller ever gathered so rich a treasure on his tour. What person of any education can read and study this work, which is unparalleled in its kind, without discovering in it that species of instructive and pleasing information which most interests man, as such The uncommon pains which Forster took in his literary compositions, and his conscientious accuracy in historical disquisitions, are best evinced by his * History of Voyages and Discoveries in the North, 7 and likewise by his excellent archaeological dissertation ‘ On the Byssus of the Ancients.’ Researches such as these were his favourite employment, in which he was greatly assisted by his intimate acquaintance with the classics. Forster had a predilection for the sublime in natural history, and aimed at general views ratUer than detail. His favourite author, therefore, was Buffon, whom he used to recommend as a pattern of style, especially in his ‘ Epoques de la Nature,’ his description of the horse, camel, &c. He had enjoyed the friendship of that distinguished naturalist; and he likewise kept up an uninterrupted epistolary intercourse with Linna3us, till the death of the latter. Without being a stickler for the forms and ceremonies of any particular persuasion, he adored the eternal Author of all which exists in the great temple of nature, and venerated his wisdom and goodness with an ardour and a heart-felt conviction, that, in my opinion, alone constitute the criterion of true religion. He held in utter contempt aM those who, to gratify their passions, or imitate the prevailing fashion, made a jest of the most sacred and respectable feelings of mankind. His moral feelings were equally animated: he was attracted with irresistible force by whatever was true, good, or excellent. Great characters inspired him with an esteem which he sometimes expressed with incredible ardour.”

Having accepted this offer, he was employed, as formerly, on missions to Umbria, Milan, and other places, but now his tranquillity was disturbed by a domestic affair, in which he fancied he had been improperly treated;Alexander, his eldest son, who, in 1587, had married a rich heiress, niece to cardinal Canani, being weary of living under the subjection of his father, and disgusted, whether justly or not, with the treatment he met with from him, resolved to leave his house, and live apart with his wife. Guarino was so highly offended at their departure, that he immediately seized their income, on pretence of debts due to him for money expended at their marriage. His son, deprived of his income for nine months, at last applied to the duke of Ferrara to interpose his authority, which he did, commanding the chief judge to take cognizance of the affair, who immediately decided it in favour of Alexander. This sentence exasperated the father still more; so that, looking on it as a proof that the duke had no regard for him, he addressed a letter to him in the most respectful but strongest terms, to be dismissed the service; which the duke granted, though not without intimating some displeasure at Guarino, for shewing so little regard to the favours he had conferred on him. The treatment, however, which Tasso had suffered was a recent lesson for the poets who iiad the misfortune to be patronized by Alphonso, and Guarino immediately went into the service of the duke of Savoy, where he had some reason to expect a better lot; but here he did not remain many months; and during a year of repose in the country, he resumed his labours on his favourite pastoral, which at length was published in 1590, at Venice, 4to, and the same year at Ferrara, in 12mo. The great applause which he received from this poem, was followed by a most severe loss in the death of his wile, Dec. 25, 1590, at Padua. This misfortune appears to have greatly affected him. His two eldest sons had left him two of his daughters were married three others he had placed in convents and from being surrounded by a numerous family, he was now left with one boy only often years old. In this desolate state he appears to have entertained thoughts of going to Home and becoming an ecclesiastic. He was, however, diverted from this step by an invitation received in 1592 from the duke of Mantua, who sent him to Inspruck to negociate some affairs at the archduke’s court. But he afterwards was dismissed this service, as he had been that of Ferrara, by the solicitations of duke Alphonso; who, it is said, could not bear that a subject of his, of Guarino’s merit, should serve other princes. Thus persecuted, he went to Rome apparently with the design just mentioned, but was again prevented from executing it by a reconciliation with Alphonso, which brought him back to Ferrara in 1595. This reconciliation was obtained by his son Alexander, who was very much beloved at court. However, fresh quarrels between father and son soon broke out again, which were afterwards carried to a great height; and, great changes happening upon the death of Alphonso in 1597, Guarino thought himself ill used, and left Ferrara to go to Ferdinand de Medicis, grand duke of Tuscany, who expressed a great esteem for him.

, in Latin Larroquanus, whom Bayle styles one of the most illustrious ministers the reformed ever had in France, was born at Leirac, a small city of Guienne, near Agen, in 1619. He was hardly past his youth when he lost his father and mother, who were persons of rank and character. This misfortune was soon ifol lowed by the loss of his whole patrimony, although by what means is not known; but the effect was to animate him more strongly to his studies, and to add to polite literature, which he had already learned, the knowledge of philosophy, and above all, that of divinity. He made a considerable progress in these sciences, and was admitted a minister with great applause. Two years after he had been admitted in his office he was obliged to go to Paris to answer the cavils of those who intended to ruin his church, in which, although he was not successful, he met with such circumstances as proved favourable to him. He preached sometimes at Charenton, and was so well liked by the duchess de la Tremouille, that she appointed him minister of the church of Vitre, in Britany, and gave him afterwards a great many proofs of her esteem; nor was he less respected by the prince and princess of Tarente, and the duchess of Weimar. He served that church about twenty-seven years, and studied the ancient fathers with the utmost application. He gave very soon public proofs of the progress he had made in that study, for the answer he published to the motives which an opponent had alledged for his conversion to popery, abounded with passages quoted from the fathers, and the works which he published afterwards raised his reputation greatly. There was an intimate friendship between him and Messieurs Daille, father and son, which was kept up by a constant literary correspondence; and the journey he took to Paris procured him the acquaintance of several illustrious men of letters. The church of Charenton wished to have invited him in 1669, but his enemies had so prepossessed the court against him, that his majesty sent a prohibition to that church not to think of calling him, notwithstanding the deputy general of the reformed had offered to answer for Mods, de Larroque’s good behaviour. He was afterwards chosen to be both minister and professor of divinity at Saumur. The former he accepted, but refused the professorship of divinity, as it might interfere with the study of church history, to ttfhich he was very partial. The intendant of the province, however, forbad him to go to Saumur; and although the church complained of this unjust prohibition, and petitoned very zealously for the necessary permission, which she obtained, Larroquc did not think it proper to enter upon an employment against the will of the intendant. He continued therefore still at Vitré, where he did not suffer his pen to be idle. Three of the most considerable churches of the kingdom chose him at once, the church of Moutauban, that of Bourdeaux, and thut of Roan. He accepted the invitation of Roan, and there died, Jan. 31, 1684, having gained the reputation not only of a learned man, but also of an honest man, and a faithful pastor.

The books he wrote were very numerous, and very learned; one of which, in particular, had it been as well executed as planned, would have been very curious and entertaining. Its title is the following: “De Charlataneria eruditorum declamationes duae; cum notis variorum. Accessit epistola Sebastiani Stadelii ad Janum Philomusum, de circumforanea literatorum vanitate, Leipsic, 1715,” 8vo. It has been said that there never was a worse book with a better title. It has, however, been translated into French, and is entitled “De la Charlatanerie des par M. Mencken: avec des remarques critiques de differens auteurs, Hague,” 1721, in Bvo. Mencke’s design here was to expose the artifices used by false scholars to raise to themselves a name; but, as he glanced so evidently at certain considerable persons that they could not escape being known, some pains were taken to have his book seized and suppressed: which, however, as usual, made the fame of it spread the faster, and occasioned editions to be multiplied. In 1723 he published at Leipsic, “Bibliotheca Menckeniana,” &e. or, “A catalogue of all the books and manuscripts in all languages, which had been collected by Otto and John Mencke, father and son.” Mencke himself drew up this catalogue, which is digested in an excellent method, with a design to make his library, which was very magnificent and valuable, public: but in 1728 he thought proper to expose it to sale and for that purpose published catalogues, with the price of every book marked. Mencke had a considerable share in the “Dictionary of learned men,” printed at Leipsic, in German, in 1715, folio, the plan of which he had formed, and furnished the persons employed in it with the principal materials, and wrote the articles of the Italians and English. He continued the <c Acta eruditorum," as he had promised his father upon his death-bed, for twenty-five years, ancl published 33 volumes, including the supplements and the indexes.

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

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

, in Latin Santolius, a celebrated modern Latin poet, was born at Paris May 12, 1630, of a good family. He studied the belles lettres at the college of St. Barbe, and in that of Louis le Grand, under the learned Pere Cossart, and entering soon after among the regular canons of St. Victor, devoted himself wholly to poetry, commencing his caree/ by celebrating some great men of that time. He also was employed to write many of those inscriptions which may be seen on the public fountains and monuments of Paris, and this he did in a style at once clear, easy, and dignified. When some new hymns were wanted for the Paris breviary, he was requested by his brother Claude, Pelisson, and Bossuet, to compose them, which he accomplished with the greatest success and applause, in an elevated, perspicuous, and majestic style, suited to the dignity of the subject. The reputation which he gained by these'induced the order of Clugny to request some for their breviary. With this he complied, and in return they granted him letters of filiation, and a pension. Santeul was much esteemed by the literati of his time, and by many persons of rank, among whom were the two princes of Coiide 1 father and son, whose bounty he frequently experienced 44ud Louis XIV. who settled a pension upon him. He greatly offended the Jesuits, however, by his epitaph in praise of their enemy Arnauld. While SanteuPs Latin poems were always much admired by his countrymen, he seems to have enjoyed fully as much reputation, during his life-time, for his wit, and odditjes of character. La Bruyere, under the name of T/ieodes, has described him as, in one moment, good-humoured, tractable, easy, and complaisant, in another, harsh, violent, choleric, and capricious; as at once simple, ingenuous, credulous, sportive, and volatile; in short, a child with grey hairs, and as speaking like a fool, and thinking like a sage. He utters, adds La Bruyere, truths in a ridiculous manner, and sensible things in a siliy way; and we are surprised to find so much intellect shining through the clouds of buffoonery, contortions, and grimaces. He had great credit for his witticisms, many of which may be seen in the “Santoliana.” When the duke of Bourbon went to hold the states of Burgundy at Dijon, Santeul attended him, and died there, August 5, 1697, aged sixty-seven, as he was on the point of returning to Pans. His death was attributed to an inconsiderate trick played upon him by some one whom his oddity of character had encouraged to take liberties, and who put some Spanish snuff into his wine-glass, which brought on a complaint of the bowels that proved fatal in fourteen hours. Besides his Latin hymns, 12mo, he left a considerable number of Latin “Poems,” 1739, 3 vols. 12 mo.

, an eminent physician and naturalist, was the son of a very learned physician of the same mimes at Zurich, where he was born, August 2, 1672. His father dying in the prime of life, he appears to have been left to the care of his mother, and his maternal grandfather. He was educated at Zurich under the ablest professors, of whom he has left us a list, but Says that he might with great propriety add his own name to the on cber, as he went through the greater part of his studies with no other guide than his own judgment. In 1692 he commenced his travels, and remained some time at \ltdorf, attending the lectures of Wagenseil, Hoffman^ father and son, Sturm, &c. In 1693 he went to Utrecht, where he took his degree of doctor of physic in Jan. 1694, and Pi 1695 returned to Nuremberg and Altdorf to study mathematics under Sturm and Eimmart. To Sturm he addressed a learned letter on the generation of fossil shells, which iie attempted to explain on mathematical principles; but, discovering the fallacy of this, he adopted the theory of our Dr. Woodward, whose work on the subject of the natural history of the earth he translated into Latin, and published at Zurich in 1704. Returning to Zurich, before this period, he was appoint-, ed first physician of the city, with the reversion of the professorship of mathematics. He now began to write various dissertations on subjects of natural history, particularly that of Swisserland, and wrote a system of natural history in German, which he published in parts in the years 1705, 6, and 7, the whole forming three small 4to volumes. He published afterwards three more in 1716, 1717, and 1718, which complete the natural history of Swisserland, with the exception of the plants, of which he had formed an herbal of eighteen vast volumes in folio. His “Nova litteraria Helvetica” began in 1702, and were continued to 1715. In 1694 he began his tours on the Alps, which he repeated for many years, the result of which was published under the title of “Itinera Alpina,” one volume of which was published at London in 1708, 4to, and four at Leyden in 1713. In the course of these journeys, he improved the geography of his country, by a small map of Toggenbourg, and by his map of Swisserland in four large sheets. Amidst all these pursuits, his official duties, and his extensive literary correspondence, he found leisure to gratify his taste for medallic history, and translated Jobert’s work on that subject, which does not, however, appear to have been printed. In 1712, Leibnitz, being acquainted with his learning and fame, procured him an invitation from the czar, Peter the Great, to become his majesty’s physician, but the council of Zurich induced him to decline the offer, by an additional salary. Some time afterward, he obtained a canonry; but, according to Meister, his colleagues had no very profound respect for him, of which he gives the following ludicrous proof: A favourite crane belonging to Dr. Scheuchzer one day made her escape, and the doctor was obliged to climb the roof of the house to recover her, which he did at no small risk. The canons are said to have declared on this occasion, that they would have given a pension to the crane, if the doctor had broke his neck. It appears that this disrespect was mutual. They considered Scheuchzer as an intruder, and he despised their ignorance in condemning the Copernican system, and the theory of Swammerdam, as profane and pernicious. He appears to have had a considerable hand in the political and ecclesiastical affairs of Zurich, and had at one time a sharp controversy on religion with a Jesuit of Lucerne, whom Meister describes as the Don Quixote of the Romish church. In 1731 appeared his great work, “Physica sacra,” in 4 vols. folio, which was immediately republished in French at Amsterdam, in both instances enriched with a profusion of fine plates illustrative of the natural history of the Bible. This had been preceded by some lesser works on the same subject, which were now incorporated. He did not long survive this learned publication, dying at Zurich about the end of June 1733. He was a member of many learned societies, of our Royal Society, and of those of Berlin, Vienna, &c. and carried on a most extensive correspondence with the principal literati of Europe. He left a well-chosen and numerous library, a rich museum of natural history, and a collection of medals. Besides the works we have incidentally noticed, he published, 1. “Herbarium Diluvianum,” Zurich, 1709, reprinted and enlarged, at Leyden, 1723, folio. 2. “Piscium querelse et vindicise,” Zurich, 1708, 4to. 3. “Oratio cle Matheseos su in Theologia,” ibid. 1711, 4to. 4. “Museum Diluvianum,” ibid. 1716, 8vo.5. “Homo diluvii testis,” ibid. 1726, 4to. G. “De Helvetii aeribus, aquis, locis, specimen,” ibid. 1728, 4to. He also wrote in German, a treatise on the mineral waters of Swisserland, Zurich, 1732, 4to. In 1740, Klein published “.Sciagraphia lithologica curiosa, seu lapidum figuratorum nomenclator, olim a Jo. Jac. Scheuchzero conscriptus, auctus et illustratus,” 4to. Of his “Physica Sacra,” we have noticed the first edition published at Augsburgh, 1731—1735, four vols. folio, or rather eight volumes in four, the text of which is in German; this edition is valued on account of its having the first impressions of the plates. The Amsterdam edition, 1732 38, 8 vols. has, however, the advantage of being in French, a language more generally understood, and has the same plates. Scheuchzer had a brother, professor of natural philosophy at Zurich, who died in 1737, and is known to all botanists by his laborious and learned “Agrostographia,” so valuable for its minute descriptions of grasses. He had a son with whom we seem more interested, John Gaspak Scheuchzer, who was born at Zurich in 1702, and after studying at home came over to England, and received the degree of' M. D. at Cambridge, during the royal visit of George I. in 1728, and died at London April 13, 1729, only twenty-seven years old. He had much of the genius and learning of his family, and was a good antiquary, medallist, and natural historian. He translated into English Koempfec’s history of Japan, 1727, 2 vols. folio, and had begun a translation 1 of Koempfer’s travels in Muscovy, Persia, &c. but did not live to complete it. He wrote also a treatise on inoculation. Some part of the correspondence of this learned family is in the British Museum.

, father and son, were two poets of Ferrara, who both wrote in Latin. Their poems were printed together at Venice, 1513, 8vo, and consist of elegies and other compositions, in a pure and pleasing style. Titus died about 1502, at the age of eighty. Hercules, his son, was killed by a rival in 1508. Strozzi was also an illustrious name at Florence, which migrated with the Medici’s into France, and there rose to the highest military honours, as they had in their own country attained the greatest commercial rank. There have been several other writers of the name, of whom we shall notice only one, as most remarkable, Cyriac Strozzi, who was a profound student in the works of Aristotle, and therefore considered as a peripatetic philosopher. He was born at Florence in 1504. He travelled over a great part of the world, and pursued his studies wherever he went. He was a professor of Greek and of philosophy at Florence, Bologna, and Pisa, in all which places he was highly esteemed. He died in 1565, at the age of sixty-one. He added a ninth and a tenth book to the eight books of Aristotle’s politics, and wrote them both in Greek and Latin. He had so completely made himself master of the style and sentiments of his great model, that he has been thought, in some instances, to rival him. He had a sister, Laurentia, who wrote Latin poems. Considerable information may be found respecting the Strozzi in our authorities.

At last, weary of living in a continual state of dependence, he resolved to retire to Naples, and endeavour to recover his mother’s jointure, which had been seized upon by her relations when he went into exile with his father Bernardo. This appeared the only means to place him in the condition of life he so much desired. He applied to his friends, and having procured favourable, letters to the viceroy, he took leave of the duke of Mantua and repaired to Bergamo, where he stayed some time, and thence went to Naples. While here, dividing his time between his studies and the prosecution of his law-suit, the young count of Palena, by whom he was highly esteemed, persuaded him to take up his residence with him for some time; but in this affair he had not consulted the prince of Conca, his father, who, though he had a value for Tasso, yet could not approve of his son’s receiving into his house the only person that remained of a family once devoted to the prince of Salerno. A contention being likely to ensue, on this account, between the father and son, Tasso, with his usual goodness of disposition, to remove all occasion of dispute, withdrew from Naples, and retired to Bisaccio with his friend Manso, in whose company he lived some time with great tranquillity.

This small 12mo volume the author entitled “Museum Tradescantianum, or a collection of rarities, preserved at South Lambeth, near London, by John Tradescant,” 1656, dedicated to the college of physicians. It contains lists of his birds, quadrupeds, fish, shells, insects, minerals, fruits, artificial and miscellaneous curiosities, war instruments, habits, utensils, coins, and medals. These are followed by a catalogue, in English and Latin, of the plants of his garden, and a list of his benefactors. The reader may see a curious account of the remains of this garden, drawn up in 1749, by the late sir William Watson, and printed in the 46th volume of the Philosophical Transactions, and many other particulars in our authorities. Prefixed to the “Museum Tradescantianum” were the prints of both father and son, which, from the circumstance of being engraved by Hollar, has unfortunately rendered the book well known to the collectors of prints, by whom most of the copies have been plundered of the impressions.

According to these accounts he must have returned home about 1636, and not 1639, as some have asserted. It is said that he now appeared to be reformed from the extravagances of his opinions, and married Frances, daughter of sir Christopher Wray, of Ash by, in Lincolnshire. He was also by his father’s interest joined with sir William Russel in the office of treasurer of the navy, a place of great trust and profit. He represented Kingston-upon-Hull in the parliament chosen 1640, and for some time seemed well satisfied with the government; but, upon his father’s taking umbrage at the lord Strafford’s being created in 1639 baron Raby (which title he had promised himself, and which Strafford laid hold of, merely out of contempt to the Vanes), both father and son formed a resolution of revenge. For this purpose the latter, who had received the honour of knighthood in 1640, joined Pymand other declared enemies of the court; and contributed all that intelligence which ended in the ruin of the earl, and which fixed himself in the entire confidence of the enemies of the king and of StrafFord, so that nothing was concealed from him, though it is believed that he communicated his thoughts to very few.

The journalists of Trevoux have contrasted the different merits of Gerard and Isaac Vossius, by drawing a parallel between them, which very well illustrates the character of each, and may form a proper conclusion to this article. Nothing,“say they,” can be more opposite than the characters of this father and son; nothing more different than the make of their understandings. In the father, judgment prevails; in the son, imagination: the father labours slowly; the son goes on with ease: the father distrusts the bestfounded conjectures; the son loves nothing but conjectures, and those bold and daring: the father forms his opinions upon what he reads; the son conceives an opinion, and then reads: the father endeavours to penetrate the sense of the author he cites, and pays a proper deference to their authority, as to masters; the son imposes his own sense on these authors, and regards them as slaves, who ought to give testimony as he would have them: the father’s aim was to instruct; the son’s to parade and make a noise: truth was the father’s darling object; novelty the son’s. In the father, we admire vast erudition, orderly arranged and clearly expressed; in the son, a dazzling turn of style, singular thoughts, and a vivacity, which even pleases in a bad cause: the father has written good books; the son has written curious books. Their hearts also were as unlike and different as their heads. The father was a man of probity and regular in his manners; was unhappily born a Calvinist, yet had the service of religion always in his view , and approached as nearly to the true faith as mere reason could enable him. The son was a libertine both in principle and practice, made religion the object of his insults, and only studied to find out the weak sides of it: his indelicate and shameful notes upon Catullus, printed at the close of his life, shew also plainly enough what kind of man he was.“Of Gerard John Vossius’s other sons, who did not survive him, we may notice Dionysius Vossius, who was born at Dort, and became learned in the Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, Arabic, French, Italian, and Spanish languages. He wrote, among other small things,” Maimonides de Idololatria, cum Latina versione et notis,“printed at the end of his father’s work” de origine et progressu Idololatrire;“and some notes upon Cæsar’s Commentaries, to be found in the edition of Graevius, at Amsterdam, in 1697. Francis Vossius, another son, published a Latin poem in 1640, upon a naval victory gained by Van Tromp. Gerard, a third son, was the editor of Paterculus, the Elzevir of 1639, 12mo: and Matthew, a fourth son, published at Amsterdam, in 1635,” Annalium Hollandise Zelandiseque libri quinque," 4to.

, a very accomplished nobleman of the fifteenth century, was the son of sir Richard Wydeville, by Jaqueline of Luxembourg, duchess dowager of Bedford. He was born about 1442, and in his seventeenth year accompanied his father, who was now created lord Rivers, to Sandwich, where he had been sent to equip a strong squadron, in order to deprive Richard Nevil earl of Warwick, of his government of Calais but that nobleman contrived to surprize lord Rivers in port, and took him and all his ships, together with his son Anthony, to Calais, where they were for some time detained as prisoners. From this it appears that both father and son were engaged in the interest of the house of Lancaster, and in opposition to that of York. But king Edward IV. being raised to the throne, and afterwards espousing lady Elizabeth Gray, daughter to lord Rivers, and sister to Anthony Wycleville, the former attachment of the Wydeville’s to the Lancastrian interest was forgotten, and they began almost solely to engross the favour of king Edward.