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

In 1619 he executed a design which he had long formed, of founding an hospital at Guildford, where, on the 5th of April, he was present when sir Nicholas Kempe laid the first stone. The archbishop endowed it with lands to the value of three hundred pounds per annum: one hundred of which was to be employed in setting the poor to work, and the remainder for the maintenance of a master, twelve brothers, and eight sisters, who were to have blue clothes, and gowns of the same colour, and half-a-crown a week each. Oct. 29, being the anniversary of the archbishop’s birth, is commemorated at Guildford; and the archbishop of Canterbury for the time being is visitor of the hospital. Towards the end of this year, the Elector Palatine accepted of the crown of Bohemia, which occasioned great disputes in king James’s councils. Some were desirous that his majesty should not interfere in this matter, foreseeing that it would produce a war in Germany; others were of opinion, that natural affection to his son and daughter, and a just concern for the Protestant interest, ought to engage him to support the new election. The latter was the archbishop’s sentiment; and not being able at that time to attend the privy council, he wrote his mind with great boldness and freedom to the secretary of state. The archbishop, now in a declining state of health, used in the summer to go to Hampshire for the sake of recreation; and, being invited by lord Zouch to hunt in his park at Branzill, he met there with the greatest misfortune that ever befel him; for he accidentally killed that nobleman’s keeper, by an arrow from a cross-bow, which he shot afc one of the deer. This accidentthrew him into a deep melancholy; and he ever afterwards kept a monthly fast on Tuesday, the day on which this fatal mischance happened. He also settled an annuity of 20l. on the widow. There were several persons who took advantage of this misfortune, to lessen him in the king’s favour; but his majesty said, “An angel might have miscarried in this sort.” But his enemies representing, that, having incurred an irregularity, he was thereby incapacitated for performing the offices of a primate, the king directed a commission to ten persons, to inquire into this matter. The points referred to their decision were, 1. Whether the archbishop was irregular by the fact of involuntary homiciue 2. Whether that act might tend to scandal in a churchman 3. How his grace should be restored, in case the commissioners should find him irregular All agreed, that it could not be otherwise done, than by restitution from the king; but they varied in the manner. The bishop of Winchester, the lord chief justice, and Dr. Steward, thought it should be done by the king, and by him alone. The lord keeper, and the bishops of London/ Rochester, Exeter, and St. David’s, were for a commission from the king directed to some bishops. Judge Doddridge and sir Henry Martin were desirous it should be done both ways, by way of caution. The king accordingly passed a pardon and dispensation; by which he acquitted the atchbishop of all irregularity, scandal, or infamation, and declared him capable of all the authority of a primate. From that time an increase of infirmities prevented his assistance at the council. But when, in the last illness of James I. his attendance was required, he was attentive to the charge till the 27th of March 1625, the day on which the king expired. Though very infirm, and afflicted with the gout, he assisted at the ceremony of the coronation of Charles I. whose favour, however, he did not long enjoy. His avowed enemy, the duke of Buckingham, soon found an opportunity to make him feel the weight of his displeasure. Dr. Sibthorp had in the Lent assizes 1627 preached before the judges a sermon at Northampton, to justify a loan which the king had demanded. This sermon, calculated to reconcile the people to an obnoxious measure, was transmitted to the archbishop with the king’s direction to license it; which he refused, and gave his reasons for it : and it was not licensed by the bishop of London, until after the passages deemed exceptionable had been erased. On July 5, lord Conway, who was then secretary of state, made him a visit; and intimated to him, that the king expected he should withdraw to Canterbury. The archbishop declined this proposal, because he had then a law-suit with that city; and desired that he might rather have leave to retire to his house at Ford, five miles beyond Canterbury. His request was granted; and, on Oct. 9 following, the king gave a commission to the bishops of London, Durham, Rochester, Oxford, and Bath and Wells, to execute the archiepiscopal authority; the cause assigned being, that the archbishop could not at that time in his own person attend those services which were otherwise proper for his cognizance and direction. The archbishop did not remain long in this situation; for, a parliament being absolutely necessary, he was recalled about Ciuistmas, and restored to his authority and jurisdiction. On his arrival at court he was received by the archbishop of York and the earl of Dorset, who conducted him to the king, and his regular attendance was from that time required. He sat in the succeeding parliament, and continued afterwards in the full exercise of his office. On the 24th of August 1628, the archbishop consecrated to the see of Chichester Dr. Richard Montague, who had before been active in supporting the pretence of irregularity which had been alleged against him. Laud, bishop of London, one of his former enemies, also assisted at the consecration. When the petition of right was discussed in parhament, the archbishop dehvercd the opinion of the House of Lords at a conference with the House of Commons, offering some propositions from the former, and received the thanks of sir Dudley Digges. Dr. Manwaring, having preached before the House of Commons two sermons, which he afterwards published, and in which he maintained the king’s authority in raising subsidies without the consent of parliament, was brought before the bar of the House of Lords, by impeachment of the Commons. Upon this occasion the archbishop, with the king’s consent, gave the doctor a severe admonition, in which he avowed his abhorrence of the principles maintained in the two discourses. The interest of bishop Laud being now very considerable at court, he drew up instructions, which, having the king’s name, were transmitted to the archbishop, under the title of “His majesty’s instructions to the most reverend father in God, George, lord archbishop of Canterbury, containing certain orders to be observed and put in execution by the several bishops in his province.” His grace communicated them to his suffragan bishops; but, to prove that he still intended to exercise his authority in his own diocese, he restored Mr. Palmer and Mr. Unday to their lectureships, after the dean and archdeacon of Canterbury had suspended them. In other respects he endeavoured to soften their rigour, as they were contrived to enforce the particular notions of a prevailing party in the church, which the archbishop thought too hard for those who made the fundamentals of religion their study, and were not so zealous for forms. His conduct in this and other respects made his presence unwelcome at court; so that, upon the birth of the prince of Wales, afterwards Charles H. Laud had the honour to baptize him, as dean of the chapel. It appears, ho.vever, from almost the last public act of his life, that Abbot was not so regardless of the ceremonial parts of religious duty in the church of England as his enemies have represented him; for he issued an order, dated the 3d of July 1633, requiring the parishioners of Crayford in Kent to receive the sacrament on their knees, at the steps ascending to the communion table. On the 5th of August, in the same year, he died at Croydon, worn out with cares and infirmities, at the age of 71, and was according to his own direction buried in the chapel of Our Lady, within the church dedicated to the Holy Trinity at Guildford. A stately monument was erected over the grave, with the effigies of the archbishop in his robes. He shewed himself, in most circumstances of his life, a man of great moderation to all parties; and was desirous that the clergy should attract the esteem of the laity by the sanctity of their manners, rather than claim it as due to their function. His notions and principles, however, not suiting the humour of some writers, have drawn upon him many severe reflections. Heylin asserts, “That marks of his benefactions we find none in places of his breeding and preferment;” an aspersion which is totally groundless. Dr. Wellwood has done more justice to the merit and abilities of our prelate: “Archbishop Abbot,” says he, “was a person of wonderful temper and moderation; and in all his conduct shewed an unwillingness to stretch the act of uniformity beyond what was absolutely necessary for the peace of the church, or the prerogative of the crown, any farther than conduced to the good of the state. Being not well turned for a court, though otherwise of considerable learning and genteel education, he either could not, or would not, stoop to the humour of the times; and now and then, by an unseasonable stiffness, gave occasion to his enemies to represent him as not well inclined to the prerogative, or too much addicted to a popular interest; and therefore not fit to be employed in matters of government.”

At this time Egypt had yielded to the arms of Saladin, who was marching against Palestine for the purpose of wresting that country from the hands of the Christians; yet towards Egypt Abdollatiph was irresistibly impelled by that literary curiosity which so strongly marked his character. The defeat, however, of the Saracens by the English king Richard, had plunged the Sultan into melancholy, and prevented our traveller from being admitted into his presence; but the favours which he received evinced the munificence of Saladin, and he pursued his purpose, visiting Cairo, where his talents procured him a welcome reception. From this he withdrew, in order to present himself before the Sultan, who, having concluded a. truce with the Franks, then resided in Jerusalem. Here he was received by Saladin with every expression of esteem, and Saladin granted him a liberal pension, which was increased by his son and successor, till the unnatural ambition of his uncle forced him from the throne of Egypt 9-nd of Syria; and thus our traveller was compelled to resort again to Damascus, after a short abode at Jerusalem; where his oral lectures, and his written treatises, were equally the objects of general admiration. At Damascus he distinguished himself chiefly by his medical skill and knowledge; but nothing could detain him from travelling in pursuit of higher improvement, and on this account, he left Damascus, and after having visited Aleppo, resided several years in Greece. With the same view he travelled through Syria, Armenia, and Asia Minor, still adding to the number of his works, many of which he dedicated to the princes whose courts he visited. After this, sentiments of devotion induced him to undertake a pilgrimage to Mecca; but he first determined to pay a visit to his native pountry, and had scarcely reached Bagdad, when he was suddenly attacked by a distemper, of which he died, A. D, 1223, in the 63d year of his age.

, khan of the Tartars, worthy of a place in this Dictionary, as well on account of his literary talents as from the circumstance of his being the only Tartar historian with whom the nations of Europe are acquainted. He was born in the city of Urgens, capital of the country of Kharasm, in the year of the hegira 1014, answering to the year 1605 of the Christian sera. He was the fourth, in order of birth, of seven brothers, and descended in a direct line, both on nis father’s and his mother’s side, though By different branches, from Zingis khan. His youth was marked by misfortunes, which contributed not a little to form his character, and to fit him for the government. of his states when he came to the sovereignty of the country of Kharasm, which happened in the year of the hegira 1054. He reigned 20 years; and, by his conduct and courage, rendered himself formidable to all his neighbours, A short time before his death, he resigned the throne to his son Anuscha Mohammed Bayatur khan, in order to devote the remainder of his life to the service of God. It was in his retreat that he wrote the famous “Genealogical History of the Tartar’s;” but, being attacked by the mortal disease that put an end to his life in the year 1074 of the hegira, corresponding to 1663 of our sera, before he could complete it, when dying he charged his son and successor to give it the finishing hand, which he did accordingly two years afterwards. As a specimen of the style and manner of this historian, the reader will not be displeased to see the preface to that work, which, in English, is as follows; “There is but one God; and before him none other did ever exist, as after him no other will be. He formed seven heavens, seven worlds, and eighteen creations. By him, Mohammed, the friend of God, was sent, in quality of his prophet, to all mankind. It is under his auspices that I, Abulgasi Bayatur khan, have taken in hand to write this book. My father, Ariep Mohammed khan, descended in a direct line from Zingis khan, and was, before me, sovereign prince of the country of Kharasm. I shall treat in this book of the house of Zingis khan, and of its origin; of the places where it was established, of the kingdoms and provinces it conquered, and to what it arrived at last. It is true that, before me, many writers, both Turks and Persians, have employed their pens on this subject; and! have in my own possession 18 books of these several authors, some of which are tolerably well composed. But, perceiving that there was much to correct in many places of these books, and, in other places, a number of things to be added, I thought it necessary to have a more accurate history: and, especially as our countries are very barren in learned writers, I find myself obliged to undertake this work myself; and, notwithstanding that, before me, no khan has thought proper to take this trouble upon him, the reader will do me the justice to be persuaded that it is not from a principle of vanity that I set up for an author, but that it is necessity alone that prompts me to meddle in this matter that, if I were desirous of glorying in any thing, it could, at most, be only in that conduct and wisdom which I hold as the gift of God, and not from myself. For, on one hand, I understand the art of war as well as any prince in the world, knowing how to give battle equally well with few troops as with numerous armies, and to range both my cavalry and my infantry to the best advantage. On the other hand, I have a particular talent at writing books in all sorts of languages, and I know not whether any one could easily be found of greater ability than myself in this species of literature, except, indeed, in the cities of Persia and India; but, in all the neighbouring provinces of which we have any knowledge, I may venture to flatter myself that there is nobody that surpasses me either in the art of war or in the science of good writing; and as to the countries that are unknown to me, I care nothing about them. Since the flight of our holy prophet, till the day that I began to write this book, there have elapsed 1074 years [1663 of the Christian aera]. I call it A Genealogical History of the Tartars; and I have divided it into nine parts, in conformity with other writers, who universally hold this number in particular regard.”

, an eminent lawyer, who first collected the various opinions and decisions of his predecessors, in the Roman law, into one body, was born at Florence, in 1151, or, according to some writers, in 1182. He was the scholar of Azzo, and soon became more celebrated than his master. Yet it is thought that he did not begin the study of law before he was forty years old. When professor at Bologna, he resigned his office in order to complete a work on the explanation of the laws, which he had long meditated, and in which he was now in danger of being anticipated by Odefroy. By dint of perseverance for seven years, he accumulated the vast collection known by the title of the “Great Gloss,” or the “Continued Gloss” of Accursius. He may be considered as the first of glossators, and as the last, since no one has attempted the same, unless his son Cervot, whose work is not in much esteem; but he was deficient in a proper knowledge of the Greek and Roman historians, and the science of coins, inscriptions, and antiquities, which are frequently necessary in the explanation of the Roman law. On this account, he was as much undervalued by the learned lawyers of the fourteenth and sixteenth centuries, as praised by those of the twelfth and thirteenth, who named him the Idol of Lawyers. They even established it as a principle, that the authority of the Glosses should be universally received, and that they should rally round this perpetual standard of truth. The different studies pursued in the ages of Accursius’ friends and enemies, will account for their different opinions of his merits; the one consisted of accumulated learning, interpretation, and commentary, the other approached nearer to nature and facts, by adding the study of antiquities, and of the Greek and Latin historians. Another reason probably was, that Accursius, who has been careless in his mode of quotation, became blamed for many opinions which belong to Irnerius, Hugolinus, Martinus Bulgarus, Aldericus, Pileus, &c. and others his predecessors, whose sentiments he has not accurately distinguished. The best edition of his great work is that of Denis Godefroi, Lyons, 1589, 6 vols. fol, Of his private life we have no important materials. He lived in splendour at a magnificent palace at Bologna, or at his villa in the country; and died in his 78th year, in 1229. Those who fix his death in 1260 confound him with one of his sons of the same name. All his family, without exception, studied the law; and he had a daughter, a lady of great learning, who gave public lectures ou the Roman law in the university of Bologna. Bayle doubts this; but it is confirmed by Pancirollus, Fravenlobius, and Paul Freyer. The tomb of Accursius, in the church of the Cordeliers at Bologna, is remarkable only for the simplicity of his epitaph “Sepnlchrum Accursii glossatoris legum, et Francisci ejus filii.”

In Accorso’s time, it was the fashion with many Latin writers to make use of obsolete words. This he endeavoured to ridicule, and with considerable success, in a dialogue entitled “Osco, Volsco, Romanaque eloquentia interlocutoribus, dialogus ludis Romanis actus, &c.” 1531, 8vo, without place, or the name of the author; but La Monnoie thinks it must have been printed before, as it is quoted by Tori in his “Champ-Fleuri,” which appeared in 1529. At the end of this volume is a small work, entitled “Volusii Metiani, jurisconsulti antiqui distributio. Item vocabula ac notae partium in rebus pecimiariis, pondere, numero, et mensura.” The Dialogue was reprinted at Rome, 1574, 4to, with the author’s name, and with the title of “Osci et Volsci Dialogas ludis Romanis actus a Mariangelo Accursio.” There is another 4to edition, without date or name of the author. In the imperial library of Paris are two editions, both of Cologne, 1598. It appears by the dedication of the fable Testudo, that Accorso was employed on a history of the house of Brandenbourg; but this, and his other works, were lost on the death of his son Casimir, who was a man of letters, and had intended to publish all his father’s works. Toppi, in his Biblioteca Napolet. among other inaccuracies, attributes to Accorso a work entitled “De Typographies artis Inventore, ac de libro primum omnium impresso;” but the mistake seems to have arisen from a few manuscript notices on the subject, written by our author in a copy of Donatus’ grammar, a very early printed book.

His son Francis, born at Berlin in 1753, a member of several academies, has furnished many dissertations for the Literary Journal of Berlin, and other Memoirs of learned societies. Senebier in his literary history of Geneva gives a list of all his pieces, and a collection of them was published in German, in two volumes.

, a physician and medical writer of considerable note in Germany, and professor of medicine at Altdorf, in Franconia, was born in 1756, at Zeulenrode, in Upper Saxony. His father was a physician, and initiated his son in that science at a very early age. When scarcely fifteen, he prescribed with success to many of his friends daring a dangerous epidemic which prevailed at Otterndorf. He afterwards finished his studies at Jena and Gottingen, under Baldinger, and became a very excellent classical scholar under the celebrated Heyne. After having practised medicine in his own country for some years, and distinguished himself by various translations of Italian, French, and English works, as well as by his original compositions, he was appointed to the professorship at Altdorf. He was also a member of various medical societies; and his practice is said to have been as successful, as his theory of disease was sound. He died at Altdorf in 1801. His principal works are: 1. “Institutiones Historiae Medicinse,” Nuremberg, 17.'J2, 8vo. 2. “A Manual of Military Medicine,” 2 vols. 8vo, Leipsic, 1794—95, in German. 3. “The Life of J. Conr. Dippel,” Leipsic, 1781, 8vo; also in German. For Hades’ edition of Fabricius’ Bibl. Græca, he furnished the lives of Hippocrates, Galen, Theophrastus, Dioscorides, and Aretams.; which are said to be well executed.

, one of the writers in the Byzantine history, was born at Constantinople in the year 1220, and brought up at the court of the emperor John Ducas, at Nice. He studied mathematics, poetry, and rhetoric under Theodorus Exapterygus, and learned logic of Nicephorus Blemmidas. In his one-and-twentieth year, he maintained a learned dispute with Nicholas the physician, concerning the eclipse of tLe sun, before the emperor John. He was at length appointed great logothete, and employed in the most important affairs of the empire. John Ducas sent him ambassador to Larissa, to establish a peace with Michael of Epirus. He was also constituted judge by this emperor, to try Michael Comnenus on a suspicion of being engaged in a conspiracy. Theodorus Lascaris, the son of John, whom he had taught logic, appointed him governor of all the western provinces of his empire. When he held this government, in the year 1255, being engaged in a war with Michael Angelus, he was taken prisoner by him. In 1260, he gained his liberty by means of the emperor Palasologus, who sent him ambassador to Constantine prince of Bulgaria. After his return, he applied himself wholly to the instruction of youth, in which employment he acquitted himself with great honour for many years; but being at last weary of the fatigue, he resigned it to Holobolus. In 1272, he sat as one of the judges upon the cause of John Vecchus, patriarch of Constantinople. The year following he was sent to pope Gregory, to settle a peace and re-union between the two churches, which was accordingly concluded; and he swore to it, in the emperor’s name, at the second council of Lyons, in 1274. He was sent ambassador to John prince of Bulgaria in 1382, and died soon after his return. His principal work is his “Historia Byzantina,” Gr. Lat. Paris, fol. 1651. This history, which he was well qualified to write, as he took an active part in public aifajrs, contains the history of about fifty-eight years; i.e. from 1203, when Baldwin, earl of Flanders, was crowned emperor, to 1261, when M. Palseologus put himself in the place of Baldwin II. A manuscript translation of it, by sir William Petty, was in Mr. Ames’s collection. The original was found in the east by Douza, and first published in 1614; but the Paris edition is superior, and now very scarce. His theological writings were never printed. His son Coustantine succeeded him as grand logothete, and was called by the Greeks, the younger Metaphrastes, from his having written the lives of some of the saints in the manner of Simeon Metaphrastes. There is little else in his history that is interesting.

, D. D. a dissenting clergyman, of considerable learning, was born at Northampton, June 9, 1729, and was educated under Dr. Doddridge, whose manner in the pulpit he closely followed for many years. After being admitted to preach, he removed in 1750, to Spaldwick in Huntingdonshire; where, in 1752, he married miss Reymes of Norwich, a lady who died in 1811, at a very advanced age. A few weeks after his marriage, he was called to be minister of a congregation of dissenters at Market Harborough, Leicestershire. His receiving this appointment was owing to a singular occurrence in the history of popular elections. Two candidates had appeared who divided the congregation so equally that a compromise was impossible, unless by each party giving up their favourite, and electing a third candidate, if one could be found agreeable to all. At this crisis Mr. Addington was recommended, and unanimously chosen. In this place he remained about thirty years, and became highly popular to his increasing congregation by the pious discharge of his pastoral duties, and by his conciliatory manners. In, 1758 he opened his house for the reception of pupils to fill up a vacancy in the neighbourhood of Harborough, occasioned by the rev. Mr. Aikin’s removal to Warrington. This scheme succeeded; and for many years he devoted nine hours each day to the instruction of his pupils, and compiled several books for their improvement; as, 1. “A system of Arithmetic,” 2 vols. 8vo. 2. “The Rudiments of the Greek tongue,” 1761, 12mo. 3. “Eusebes to Philetus; or Letters from a Father to his Son, on a devout temper and life,” 1761, 12mo. 4. “Maxims religious and prudential, with a Sermon to young People,” 12mo. 5. “The Youth’s Geographical Grammar,” 1770, 8vo. 6. “Dissertation on the religious knowledge of the ancient Jews and Patriarchs; to which is annexed a specimen of a Greek and English Concordance,” 1757, 4to; which he had a design of completing, if his health and time had perrnitted. He published also, partly in the country, and partly in London, some occasional funeral and other sermons; two tracts on infant baptism; a collection of psalm tunes, and another of anthems; and his most popular work, “The Life of St. Paul the Apostle,” 1784, 8vo. At length, in 1781 he received an invitation to become pastor of the congregation in Miles’s-lane, Cannon-street; and soon after his removal thither was chosen tutor of a new dissenting academy at Mile-end, where he resided until his growing infirmities, occasioned by several paralytic strokes, obliged him to relinquish the charge. He continued, however, in the care of his congregation till within a few months of his decease, when, from the same cause, he was compelled to discontinue his public services. He died Feb. 6, 1796, at his house in the Minories. In London he was neither so successful or popular as in the country; and his quitting Harborough after so long a residence appears to have displeased his friends, without adding to his usefulness among his new connections.

, born near Stockholm in 1671, studied with great applause in the university of Upsal, and then made the tour of Holland, England, and France. On his return Charles XII. gave him the place of a gentleman of his chamber. Adlerfeldt accompanied this prince both in his victories and his defeats, and profited by the access he had to this monarch, in the compilation of his history. It is written with all the exactitude that might be expected from an eye-witness. This Swedish officer was killed by a cannon ball at the battle of Pulto.va, in 1709. It is on this famous day that his memoirs conclude. A French translation of them was made by his son, and printed in 4 vols. 12mo, at Amsterdam in 1740. The continuation, giving an account of the fatal battle, was written by a Swedish officer.

In 1148 Eugenius sent him legate to Denmark and Norway; where, by his fervent preaching and diligent instructions, he converted those barbarous nations to the Christian faith; and we are told, that he erected the church of Upsal into an archiepiscopal see. On his return to Rome, he was received by the pope and cardinals with great marks of honour: and pope Anastatius, who succeeded Eugenius, happening to die at this time, Nicholas was unanimously chosen to the holy see, in November, 1154, and took the name of Adrian. When the news of his promotion reached England, Henry II. sent Robert, abbot of St. Alban’s, and three bishops, to Rome, to congratulate him on his election; upon which occasion Adrian granted to the monastery of St. Alban’s, the privilege of being exempt front all episcopal jurisdiction except that of Rome. Next year, king Henry having solicited the pope’s consent that he might undertake the conquest of Ireland, Adrian very readily complied, and sent him a bull for that purpose, of which the following is a translation: “Adrian, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to his most dear son in Christ, the illustrious king of England, sendeth greeting and apostolical benediction. Your magnificence is very careful to spread your glorious name in the world, and to merit an immortal crown in heaven, whilst, as a good catholic prince, you form a design of extending the bounds of the church, of instructing ignorant and barbarous people in the Christian faith, and of reforming the licentious and immoral; and the more effectually to put this design in execution, you desire the advice and assistance of the holy see. We are confident, that, by the blessing of God, the success will answer the wisdom and discretion of the undertaking. You have advertised us, dear son, of your intended expedition into Ireland, to reduce that people to the obedience of the Christian faith; and that you are willing to pay for every house a yearly acknowledgment of one penny to St. Peter, promising to maintain the rights of those churches in the fullest manner. We therefore, being willing to assist you in this pious and laudable design, and consenting to your petition, do grant you full liberty to make a descent upon that island, in order to enlarge the borders of the church, to check the progress of immorality, and to promote the spiritual happiness of the natives: and we command the people of that country to receire and acknowledge you as their sovereign lord; provided the rights of the churches be inviolably preserved, and the Peter pence duly paid: for indeed it is certain (and your highness acknowledges it) that all the islands, which are enlightened by Christ, the sun of righteousness, and have embraced the doctrines of Christianity, are unquestionably St. Peter’s right, and belong to the holy Roman church. If, therefore, you resolve to put your designs in execution, be careful to reform the manners of that people; and commit the government of the churches to able and virtuous persons, that the Christian religion may grow and flourish, and the honour of God and the preservation of souls be effectually promoted; so shall you deserve an everlasting reward in heaven, and leave a glorious name to all posterity.” His indulgence to this prince was so great, that he even consented to absolve him from the oath he had taken not to set aside any part of his father’s will. The reason of this was, that Geoffry Plantagenet, earl of Anjou, had by the empress Maud, three sons, Henry, Geoffry, and William. This prince, being sensible that his ovrn dominions would of course descend to his eldest son Henry, and that the kingdom of England and duchy of Normandy would likewise fall to him in right of his mother, thought fit to devise the earldom of Anjou to his second son Geoffry; and to render this the more valid, he exacted an oath of the bishops and nobility, not to suffer his corpse to be buried till his son Henry had sworn to fulfil every part of his will. When Henry came to attend his father’s funeral, the oath was tendered to him; but for some time he refused to swear to a writing, with the contents of which he was unacquainted. Howerer, being reproached with the scandal of letting his father lie unburied, he at last took the oath with great reluctance. But after his accession to the throne, upon a complaint to pope Adrian that the oath was forced upon him, he procured a dispensation from his holiness, absolving him from the obligation he had laid himself under: and in consequence thereof, he dispossessed his brother Geoffry of the dominions of Anjou, allowing him only a yearly pension for his maintenance.

, bishop of Bath and Wells in the reigns of Henry VII. and VIII. was descended of an obscure family at Cornetto, a small town in Tuscany; but soon distinguished himself by his learning and abilities, and procured several employments at the court of Rome. In 1448 he was appointed nuncio extraordinary to Scotland, by pope Innocent VIII. to quiet the troubles in that kingdom; but, upon his arrival in England, being informed that his presence was not necessary in Scotland, the contests there having been ended by a battle, he applied himself to execute some other commissions with which he was charged, particularly to collect the pope’s tribute, or Peter-pence, his holiness having appointed him his treasurer for that purpose. He continued some months in England, during which time he got so far into the good graces of Morton, archbishop of Canterbury, that he recommended him to the king; who appointed him his agent for English affairs at Rome; and, as a recompense for his faithful services, promoted him first to the bishoprick of Hereford, and afterwards to that of Bath and Wells. He was enthroned at Wells by his proxy Polydore Vergil, at that time the pope’s sub-collector in England, and afterwards appointed by Adrian archdeacon of Wells. Adrian let out his bishoprick to farmers, and afterwards to cardinal Wolsey, himself residing at Rome, where he built a magnificent palace, on the front of which he had the name of his benefactor Henry VII. inscribed: he left it after his decease to that prince and his successors. Alexander VI, who succeeded Innocent VIII, appointed Adrian his principal secretary, and vicar-general in spirituals and temporals; and the same pope created him a cardinal-priest, with the title of St. Chrysogonus, the 31st of May, 1503. Soon after his creation, he narrowly escaped being poisoned at a feast, to which he was invited with some other cardinals, by the pope and his son Caesar Borgia.

, professor of history in the university of Utrecht, was born Dec. 20, 1589, at Aix-laChapelle, whither his father John Meles (Latinized by his son into Æmilius) had fled on account of his attachment to the Protestant religion. He studied first at Aix-la-Chapelle, and afterwards at Juliers under Kunius, and at Dort under Adrian Marcellus, and Gerard Vossius. At Leyden, he attended the lectures of Baudius, and spent four years in visiting the foreign universities. On his return, in 1615, he succeeded Vossius as rector of the college at Dort. At Utrecht he was, some years after, appointed professor of history; the subjects of the lectures which he gave for above twenty-six years, were taken from Tacitus. He was a firm supporter of the Cartesian philosophy, and refused to have any hand in the proceedings of the university of Utrecht against Des Cartes. He died Nov. 10, 1660. His only publication was a “Collection of Latin Orations and Poems,” 1651, 12mo.

, an eminent lawyer, the grandson of Matthew Afflitto, counsellor-royal in 1409 under Ladislaus, was born at Naples about 1430. Being attached to the study of law from his youth, he made great progress, and acquired so much reputation, that he was promoted to the council of state by king Ferdinand I. and shared the confidence of that prince and of his son, afterwards Alphonsus II. He was afterwards appointed president of the royal chamber, and was employed in public transactions of the greatest importance under five successive kings of Naples. To the knowledge displayed in his works, he joined the strictest probity and most amiable manners. Camerario, lieutenant of the royal chamber, and an eminent feudal lawyer, gives him the character of the most learned and excellent man of his own or the preceding age; nor are Ferron and Fontanella more sparing of their praises. Pancirollus only considers him as rather laborious than acute in his writings. Notwithstanding the distractions of the times in which he lived, and his numerous labours, he reached the age of eighty, and died in 1510. He was interred in the conventual church of Monte-Vergine in Naples, under a monument representing St. Eustachius, from whom his family derived their origin. He was twice married, and from his second wife, Diana Carmignana, are descended the Afflittos, barons of Rocca-Gloriosa.

, or Egelnoth, or Æthelnoth, in Latin Achelnotus, archbishop of Canterbury in the reign of Canute the Great, succeeded to that see in the year 1020. This prelate, surnamed the Good, was son of earl Agilmer, and, at the time of his election, dean of Canterbury. After his promotion he went to Rome, and received his pall from pope Benedict VIII. In his way thither, as he passed through Pavia, he purchased, for an hundred talents of silver and one of gold, St. Augustine’s arm, which was kept there as a relic; and sent it over to England, as a present to Leofric, earl of Coventry. Upon his return, he is said to have raised the see of Coventry to its former lustre. He was much in favour with king Canute, and employed his interest with that monarch to good purposes. It was by his advice the king sent over large sums of money for the support of the foreign churches: and Malmsbury observes, that this prince was prompted to acts of piety, and restrained from excesses, by the regard he had for the archbishop. King Canute being dead, Agelnoth refused to crown his son Harold, alleging that the late king had enjoined him to set the crown upon none but the issue of queen Emma; that he had given the king a promise upon this head, and that he was resolved to be true to his engagement. Having declared himself with this freedom, he iaid the crown upon the altar, with an imprecation against those bishops who should venture to perform the ceremony. Harold, who was greatly chagrined at this disappointment, endeavoured, both by menaces and large offers, to prevail upon the archbishop, but in vain: and whether he was afterwards crowned by any other person is uncertain. Agelnoth, after he had held the see of Canterbury seventeen years, died Oct. 29, 1038. Three works have been attributed to him “A panegyric on the blessed Virgin Mary;” “A letter to Earl Leofric, concerning St, Augustine;” and “Letters to several persons.”

, a sculptor of Rhodes, who flourished probably in the fifth century B. C. is renowned for having executed, in concert with his son Athenodorus and Polydoros, that stupendous monument of Grecian art, the Laocoon.' It is supposed that this is the same groupe which decorated the baths of Titus in the time of Pliny, to whom we owe our knowledge of the names of the artists. It has been astonishingly preserved ever since to exhibit the perfection of the Greek artists in the imitation of nature and passion. It was discovered in the sixteenth century, in the baths of Titus, and in the very spot where, according to Pliny, it had attracted admiration in his time. The only circumstance which suggests a doubt on this subject is, that Pliny represents the groupe to have been formed of one solid block, whereas the present is evidently composed of several; but it is probable that time has rendered the fissures between the pieces more visible than when Pliny saw it. Julius II. bestowed a very liberal reward on Felix de Fredis who discovered the Laocoon, and it remained in Rome until the arrival of the French army, when that and other celebrated monuments of art were removed to the museum at Paris. Borghini and Winkelraan place the Laocoon and its sculptors in the most brilliant sera of the art in Greece; but of this some doubts have been entertained. Lessing, in his ingenious dissertation on poetry and painting, of which the Laocoon is both the title and the subject, endeavours to prove that the statue was made after the sublime passage in Virgil, in which Laocoon’s story is given; and from a consideration of the exquisite finishing of this groupe, compared with the works of the Grecian artists, he is of opinion that it was executed under the Caesars. Be this as it may, the Laocoon has immortalised the names of Agesander, Athenodorus, and Polydorus.

, an eminent divine of a very ancient family in Cumberland (whose name was de Aguilon, corruptly Aglionby), the son of Edward Aglionby, esq. and Elizabeth Musgrave of Crookdayke, was admitted a student of Queen’s College, Oxford, in 1583. Being elected fellow, he went into orders, and became an eloquent and learned preacher. Afterwards he travelled abroad, and was introduced to the acquaintance of the famous cardinal Bellarmin. On his return he was made chaplain in ordinary to Queen Elizabeth, and in 1600 took the degree of D. D. About that time he obtained the rectory of Islip, near Oxford, and in 1601 was elected principal of St. Edmund’s hall. He was likewise chaplain in ordinary to king James I. and, according to Wood, had a considerable share in the translation of the New Testament ordered by the king in 1604. The Biog. Brit, says, that Wood mentions no authority for this assertion; but Wood, in his Annals, gives his name among the other Oxford divines who were to translate the Gospels, Acts, and Apocalypse. Dr. Aglionby died at Islip, Feb. 6, 1609-10, aged fortythree, and was buried in the chancel of the parish church. He was eminent for his learning, deeply read in the Fathers, and a distinguished critic in the languages. His son George Aglionby was eighth dean of Canterbury, byappointment of Charles I. but was never installed, nor reaped any advantage by it, as the parliament had then (1642) seized on the profits of those capitular bodies, which were within the power of their arms, and he survived his nomination but a few months, dying at Oxford Nov. 1643, aged forty. From this family probably descended William Aglionby, a gentleman of polite learning, who was envoy from Queen Anne to the Swiss Cantons, and author of a book entitled “Painting illustrated, in three dialogues, with the lives of the most eminent painters from Cimabue to Raphael,” Lond. 1685, 4to. In Macky’s Characters (really written by Mr. Davis, an officer in the customs) he is thus spoken of “He has abundance of wit, and understands most of the languages well knows how to tell a story to the best advantage; but has an affected manner of conversation is thin, splenetic, and tawny complexioned, turned of sixty years old;” to which Swift added in manuscript, “He had been a Papist.” In a collection of letters published some years ago, there are several from Dr. William Aglionby, F. R. S. dated from 1685 to 1691, principally written from different parts of the continent, and probably by the same person, who is styled Doctor in Swift’s Works.

Vespasian dying about this time, Titus his son, knowing Agricola’s great merit, continued him in the government. In the spring he marched towards the north, where he made some new conquests, and ordered forts to be built for the Romans to winter in. He spent the following winter in endeavouring to bring the Britons to conform to the Romish eustoms. He thought the best way of diverting them from rising and taking arms, was to soften their rough manners by the more refined amusements of Rome; and soon after, the country was adorned with magnificent temples, porticoes, baths, and other fine public and private edifices. The British nobles had their sons educated in learning, and they who before had the utmost aversion to the Roman language, now made it their study. They wore likewise the Roman habit; and, as Tacitus observes, they were brought to consider those things as signs of politeness, which were only so many badges of slavery. In his third campaign he advanced as far as the river Tweed; and in his fourth he subdued the nations between the Tweed and the firths of Edinburgh and Dumbarton, into which the Clyde and the Tay discharge themselves. Here he built castles and fortresses, in order to shut up the nations which were yet unconquered. In his fifth campaign he marched beyond the firths, where he subdued some nations, and fixed garrisons along the western coasts over-against Ireland, designing to make a descent upon that island, having had perfect information of its state from a chief who had been banished from thence. In his sixth campaign he passed the firth of Forth, ordering his fleet, the first which the Romans ever had upon those seas, to row along the coasts, and take a view of the northern parts. He was advancing farther northwards, when he was informed that the northern nations were marching against him with a formidable army, which he routed. In the following spring the Britons raised an army of thirty thousand men, commanded by Galgacus, who endeavoured to rouse their patriotism by an admirable speech which may be seen in Tacitus, and which seems adapted to the case of every nation about to lose its liberties by the invasion of a powerful enemy. Agricola on this occasion likewise addressed his soldiers in a very eloquent harangue, which was so prevailing, that the Britons were routed, with the loss of ten thousand killed; whereas but three hundred and forty of the Romans were killed. Domitian, being informed of this victory, grew jealous of the conqueror, and recalled him under pretence of making him governor of Syria. His death was suspected to have been occasioned by poison given him by that emperor; and, as Tacitus remarks, happened very seasonably for him, as he did not live to witness the calamities brought upon his country by the cruelty of Domitian. He died Aug. 23, A. D. 93, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. It is scarcely needful to remind our readers that his life was affectionately written by his son-in-law Tacitus, who gives him a very high character, but not more than is warranted by contemporary authority; at least we are acquainted with no documents that can detract from it.

, professor of logic and metaphysics at GreifewaJd, was born in that town, Feb. 19, 1710, and died there, March 1, 1791, after having enjoyed considerable fame, from his learning, zeal, benevolence, and love of truth. His father was a poor shoe-maker, but by extreme ceconomy his son was enabled to pursue his studies at Greifswald, and afterwards at the university of Jena. He became the founder of the society or order of the Abelites, the object of which was the promotion of candour and sincerity. His favourite maxim was, “Give every thing on which you are immediately engaged, be it ever so trifling, all the attention of which you are capable.” He thought he had discovered that want of attention is the source of lukewarmness in the cause of virtue, and the great promoter of vice; and imputed his attachment to the duties of his office and of religion, to his constant observance of the above rule. His principal works are: 1. “Brontotheologie,” or pious meditations on the phenomena of thunder and lightning, Greifswald, 1745, 8vo; translated into Dutch 1747. 2. “Reflexions on the Augsburgh Confession,” eight parts in Z vols. 1742 50, 4to, which may be considered as a continuation of Reinbeck’s large work on the same subject. 3. Some “Sermons” and “Philosophical Dissertations.” In those which he published in 1734 and 1740, on the immortality of the soul, and the freedom of God, he introduced some opinions, which on more mature consideration he thought inconsistent with the truth, and published a confutation of them.

, an eminent botanist, was born m 1731, at a small village near Hamilton, in Lanarkshire. He had been early initiated in horticulture; and in 1754, coming for employment to the southern parts of the kingdom, he attracted, in the following year, the notice of Mr. Philip Miller, author of the Gardener’s Dictionary, who was at that time superintendant of the botanical garden at Chelsea. The instructions which he received from that eminent gardener, it is said, laid the foundation of his futnre fortune. His attention to his profession procured for him a recommendation to the late princess dowager of Wales, and his present majesty. In 1759, he consequently was appointed to superintend the botanical garden at Kew, an opportunity for the exertion of his talents which was not neglected. The most curious plants were collected from every part of the world, and his skill in the cultivation of them was evinced by his attention to the various soils and degrees of warmth or cold which were necessary for their growth. The borders in the garden were enlarged for the more free circulation of the air where it was required, and the stoves were improved for the reception of plants, and, as near as it was thought possible, adapted to the climates from which they were produced. His professional abilities were not unnoticed by the most eminent botanists of the time; and in 1764 he became acquainted with sir Joseph Banks, when, equally honourable to both, a friendship commenced which subsisted for life. In 1783, Mr. Haverfield, having been advanced to a higher station, was succeeded by Mr. Aiton, in the more lucrative office of superintending the pleasure and kitchen gardens at Kew, with which he was permitted to retain his former post. His labours proved that his majesty’s favours were not injudiciously bestowed; forin 1789 he published an ample catalogue of the plants at Kew, with the title of “Hortus Kewensis,” 3 vols. 8vo. In this catalogue was given an account of the several foreign plants which had been introduced into the English gardens at different times. The whole impression of this elaborate performance was sold within two years, and a second and improved edition was published by his son William Townsend Aiton in 1810. Though active and temperate, Mr. Aiton had for some time been afflicted with a complaint which is thought by the faculty to be incurable. It was that of a scirrhous liver, nor was it to be surmounted by the aid of medicine, though every possible assistance was liberally bestowed. He died on February 1st, 1793, in the 63d year of his age, having left behind him a wife, two sons, and three daughters. He had been distinguished by the friendship of those who were most celebrated for their botanical science. The late earl of Bute, sir Joseph Banks, the late Dr. Solander, and Mr. Dryander, were the friends to whom he always was inclined to declare his acknowledgements for their kindness, and to the three latter for the assistance which they afforded hint in completing the “Hortus Kewensis.” He was assiduous in his employment, easy in his temper, and faithful to his duty. As a friend, a husband, and a father, his character was exemplary. On his burial in the church-yard at Kew, his pall was supported by those who knew and esteemed him; by sir Joseph Banks, the Rev. Dr. Goodenough, Mr. Dryander, Dr. Pitcairn, Mr. Dundas of Richmond, and Mr. Zoffany. The king, attentive to his faithful servants, demonstrated his kindness to Mr. Aiton, by appointing his eldest son to his father’s places. There is a portrait of our author in the library at sir Joseph Banks’ s, Soho square, which is thought a good likeness. He holds in his hand a plant called, in compliment to him, Aitonia, by the celebrated Thunberg.

, a celebrated painter, born at Bologna, March 17, 1578. His father was a silk merchant, and intended to bring up his son to that business; but Albano having a strong inclination to painting, when his father died, devoted himself entirely to that art, though then but twelve years of age. He first studied under Denys Calvart; Guido Rheni being at the same tune under this master, with whom Albano contracted very great friendship. Calvart drew but one profile for Albano, and afterwards left him entirely to the care of Guido; under whom he made great improvement. He followed Guido to the school of the Caraccis, but a little after their friendship for each other began to cool; which was owing perhaps to the pride of Albano, who could not bear to see Guido surpass him, or to the jealousy of Guido at finding Albano make so swift a progress. They certainly endeavoured to eclipse one another; for when Guido had set up a beautiful altar-piece, Albano would oppose to it some fine picture of his: and yet they continued to speak of each other with the highest esteem. Albano, after having greatly improved himself under the Caraccis, went to Rome, where he continued many years, and married in that city; but his wife dying in childbed, at the earnest request of his relations, he returned to Bologna, where he entered again into the state of matrimony. His second wife (Doralice) was well descended, but had very little fortune; which he perfectly disregarded, so strongly was he captivated with her beauty and good sense. Besides the satisfaction of possessing an accomplished wife, he reaped likewise the advantage of having a most beautiful model; so that he had now no occasion for any other woman to sit to him for Venus, the Graces, Nymphs, and other deities, whom he took a particular delight in representing. His wife answered this purpose admirably well; for, besides her bloom of youth, and the beauty of her person, he discovered in her so much modesty, so many graces and perfections, so well adapted to painting, that it was impossible for him to find a more finished woman. She afterwards brought him several boys, all extremely beautiful and finely proportioned; and she and her children were the originals of his most agreeable and graceful compositions. It was from them too that the famous sculptors Flamand and Algardi modelled their little cupids.

, the son of Garsia, a celebrated physician of the twelfth century, became one of the professors of Salerno, where he studied. His reputation soon extended throughout the whole kingdom of Naples, and even to Sicily, to which he was invited by the emperor Henry VI. then afflicted with a dangerous complaint. Alcadinus cured him, and was appointed his physician in ordinary, an office which he continued to hold under his son Frederic II. For this prince, when young, he composed a series of Latin epigrams, in elegiac verse, entitled “De Balneis Puteolanis,” which were first printed in a collection under the title of “De Balneis omnibus quae extant apud Graecos et Arabes,” Venice, 1553, fol. with a small work “De Balneis Puteolorum, Bajorum et Pithecusarum,” which was printed in 8vo, Naples, 1591, and often reprinted in similar collections. Alcadinus left also two other treatises. 1. “De triumphis Henrici imperatoris.” 2. “De his quae a Frederico II. imperatore, prseclare et fortiter gesta sunt.” The time of his death is not ascertained.

, successively bishop of Rochester, Worcester, and Ely, in the latter end of the fifteenth century, was born at Beverley in Yorkshire, and educated at the University of Cambridge, where he took the degree of doctor of laws. In 146 1, he was collated to the church of St. Margaret’s, New Fish-street, London, by Thomas Kemp, bishop of that diocese, and in the same year was advanced to the deanry of St. Stephen’s college, Westminster. In 1462 he was appointed master of the rolls. Six years after, he obtained two prebends; one in the church of Sarum, and the other in that of St. Paul’s, London. In 1470, he was made a privy counsellor, and one of the ambassadors to the king of Castille; and next year, he was, together with others, a commissioner to treat with the commissioners of the king of Scotland. About the same time, he was appointed by Edward IV. to be of the privy council to his son Edward, prince of Wales, He was also in 1471 promoted to the bishopric of Rocheser; and in 1472, constituted lord high chancellor of England, in which office he does not appear to have continued longer than ten months. In 1476,. he was translated to jhe see of Worcester, and appointed lord president of Wales. During his being bishop of Worcester, he very elegantly enlarged the church of Westbury. He was in disgrace with the Protector Richard duke of York, and was removed from his office of preceptor to Edward V. on account of his attachment to that young prince. Soon after the accession of Henry VII. he had again, for a short time, the custody of the great seal. At length, in 1486, he was raised to the bishopric of Ely, and according to A. Wood, he was made president of the council of king Edward IV. in the same year, which is a palpable mistake, as Henry VII. came to the crown in 1485. Bishop Alcock, in 1488, preached a sermon at St. Mary’s church at Cambridge, which lasted from one o'clock in the afternoon till past three.

, a Roman cardinal, and one of the most determined enemies to the reformation, was the son of Francis Aleander, a physician at Motta in the duchy of Concordia, and descended from the ancient counts of Laodno. He was born in 1480, and at thirteen years of age went to Venice for education, which was interrupted by a dangerous illness; but on his recovery, he went for some time to the academy at Pordenoue, and afterwards again to Venice. Returning to his native place, Motta, he had the courage to attack and prove the ignorance of the public teacher of that place, and was elected in his room. Such was his growing reputation afterwards, both at Venice and Padua, that Alexander VI. determined to invite him to Rome, and appoint him secretary to his son Caesar Borgia, butanother illness obliged Aleander to return to Venice, after he had set out; and the pope dying soon afterwards, he returned to his studies, and in his twenty-fourth year was reputed one of the most learned men of his age. He knew Latin, Greek, and some of the oriental languages intimately. About this time Aldus Manutius dedicated to him Homer’s Iliad, as to a man whose acquirements were superior to those of any person with whom he was acquainted. At Venice, Aleander formed an intimacy with Erasmus, and assisted him in the new edition of his Adagia, which was printed at the Aldine press in 1508, and is the most correct. Erasmus for some time kept up this intimacy, but took a different part in the progress of the reformation; and although he speaks respectt'uJly of Aleander’s learning, frequently alludes to his want of veracity and principle, accusations of which Luther has borne the blame almost exclusively in all the popish accounts of ALeander.

, a Flemish Jesuit, born at Brussels the 22d of January 1592, was trained in polite literature in his own country. He went afterwards to Spain, and entered into the service of the duke of Ossuna, whom he attended to Sicily, when the duke went there as viceroy. Alegambe, being inclined to a religious life, took the habit of a Jesuit at Palermo, the 7th of September 1613, where he went through his probation, and read his course of philosophy. He pursued the study of divinity at Rome, whence he was sent to Austria, to teach philosophy in the university of Gratz. Havhig discharged th duties of this function to the satisfaction of his superiors, he was chosen professor of school-divinity, and promoted in form to the doctorship in 1629. About this time the prince of Eggemberg, who was in high favour with the emperor Ferdinand II. having resolved that his son should travel, and being desirous he should be attended by some learned and prudent Jesuit, Alegambe was judged a proper person; and he accordingly travelled with him five years, visiting Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy. In 1638, the young prince with whom he travelled, being appointed by the emperor Ferdinand III. ambassador of obedience to the pope, invited Alegambe to go with him, who accordingly accompanied him to Rome, in quality of his confessor. After he had discharged this office, the general of the Jesuits retained him as secretary of the Latin dispatches for Germany. Alegambe, having spent four years in the discharge of this laborious office, was obliged to resign it, the continual application to writing having considerably weakened his sight. He was now appointed president of spiritual affairs in the professed house, and had the office also of hearing confessions in the church, in which capacity he acquitted himself with reputation. He died of the dropsy, at Rome, the 6th of September 1652. He is now principally known by hi 1. “Bibliotheca scriptorum societatis Jesu,” Antwerpise, 1643, fol. 2. “Vita P. Joannis Cardin. Lusitani, ex societate Jesu,” Romae, 1649, 12mo. 3. “Heroes et victims charitatis societatis Jesu,” Romse, 1658, 4to; continued by Nadasi from 1647 to 1657. These “victims” were such as lost their lives in attending persons who died of the plague. 4. “Mortes illustres et gesta eorum de societate Jesu, qui in odium fidei ab hsreticis vel aliis occisi sunt,” Romse, 1657, fol.

At fifteen years of age, Alexander was delivered to the tuition of Aristotle. He discovered very early a mighty spirit, and symptoms of that vast and immoderate ambition which was afterwards to make him the scourge of mankind and the pest of the world. One day, when it was told him that Philip had gained a battle, instead of rejoicing, he looked much chagrined, and said, that “if his father went on at this rate, there would be nothing left for him to do.” Upon Philip’s shewing some wonder, that Alexander did not engage in the Olympic games, “Give me,” said the youth, “kings for my antagonists, and I will present myself at once.” The taming and managing of the famous Bucephalus is always mentioned among the exploits of his early age. This remarkable horse was brought from Thessaly, and purchased at a very great price; but upon trial he was found so wild and vicious, that neither Philip nor any of his courtiers could mount or manage him; and he was upon the point of being sent back as useless, when Alexander, expressing his grief that so noble a creature should be rejected, merely because nobody had the dexterity to manage him, was at length permitted to try what he could do. Alexander, we are told, had perceived, that the frolicksome spirit and wildness of Bucephalus proceeded solely from the fright which the animal had taken at his own shadow: turning his head, therefore, directly to the sun, and gently approaching him with address and skill, he threw himself upon him; and though Philip at first was extremely distressed and alarmed for his son, yet when he saw him safe, and perfectly master of his steed, he received him with tears of joy, saying, “O, my son thou must seek elsewhere a kingdom, for Macedonia cannot contain thee.” One more instance of this very high spirit may suffice. When Philip had repudiated Olympias for infidelity to his bed, the young prince felt a most lively resentment on the occasion; yet, being invited by his father to the nuptials with his new uife, he did not refuse to go. In the midst of the entertainment, Attalus, a favourite of Philip, had the imprudence to say, that the Macedonians must implore the gods to grant the king a lawful successor. “What, you scoundrel do you then take me for a bastard r” says Alexander; and threw a cup that instant at his head. Philip, intoxicated with wine, and believing his son to be the author of the quarrel, rushed violently towards him with his sword; but, slipping with his foot, fell prostrate upon the floor; upon which Alexander said insultingly, “See, Macedonians, wnat a general you have for the conquest of Asia, who cannot take a single step without falling;” for Philip had just before been named for this expedition in a common assembly of the Greeks, and was preparing for it, when he was murdered by Pausanius at a feast.

The character of this hero is so familiar, that it is almost needless to draw it. It was equally composed of very great virtues and very great vices. He had no mediocrity in any thing but his stature: in his other properties, whether good or bad, he was all extremes. His ambition rose even to madness. His father was not at all mistaken in supposing the bounds of Macedon too small for his son: for how could Macedon bound the ambition of a man, who reckoned the whole world too small a dominion He wept at hearing the philosopher Anaxarchus say, that there was an infinite number of worlds: his tears were owing to his despair of conquering them all, since he had not yet been able to conquer one. Livy, in a short digression, has attempted to inquire into the events which might have happened, if Alexander, after the conquest of Asia, had brought his arms into Italy Doubtless things might have taken a very different turn with him; and all the grand projects, which succeeded so well against an effeminate Persian monarch, might easily have miscarried if he had had to do with hardy Roman armies. And yet the vast aims of this mighty conqueror, if seen under another point of view, may appear to have been confined within a very narrow compass; since, as we are told, the utmost wish of that great heart, for which the whole earth was not enough, was, after all, to be praised by the Athenians. It is related, that the difficulties which he encountered in order to pass the Hydaspes, forced him to cry out, “O Athenians, could you believe to what dangers I expose myself for the sake of being celebrated by you?” But Bayle affirms, that this was quite consistent with the vast unbounded extent of his ambition, as he wanted to make all future time his own, and be an object of admiration to the latest posterity; yet did not expect this from the conquest of worlds, but from books. And he was right, continues that author, “for if Greece had not furnished him with good writers, he would long ago have been as much forgotten as the kings who reigned in Macedon before Amphitryon.”

, a learned ecclesiastical writer of the 17th century, born at Roan in Normandy, Jan. 19, 1639. After finishing his studies at Roan, he entered into the order of Dominican friars, and was professed there in 1655. Soon after he went to Paris, to go through a course of philosophy and divinity in the great convent, where he so distinguished himself, that he was appointed to teach philosophy there, which he did for twelve years. This however did not so much engage his attention as to make him neglect preaching, which is the chief business of the order he professed. His sermons were elegant and solid: but as he had not that ease and fluency of speech requisite in a preacher, he soon forsook the pulpit; and his superiors being of opinion that he should apply himself wholly to the study of the scriptures and ecclesiastical history, he followed their advice, and was created a doctor of the Sorbonne in 1675. Mr. Colbert shewed him many marks of his esteem; and being determined to omit nothing to complete the education of his son, afterwards archbishop of Roan, he formed an assembly of the most learned persons, whose conferences upon, ecclesiastical history might be of advantage to him. Father Alexander was invited to this assembly, where he exerted himself with so much genius and ability, that he gained the particular friendship of young Colbert, who shewed him the utmost regard as long as he lived. These conferences gave rise to Alexander’s design of writing an ecclesiastical history; for, being desired to reduce what was material in these conferences to writing, he did it with so much accuracy, that the learned men who composed this assembly advised him to undertake a complete body of church-history. This he executed with great assiduity, collecting and digesting the materials himself, and writing even the tables with his own hand. His first work is that wherein he endeavours to prove, against Ai. de Launoi, that St. Thomas Aquinas is the real author of the Sum, ascribed to him: it was printed in Paris 1675, in 8vo. The year following he published the first volume of a large work in Latin, upon the principal points of ecclesiastical history: this contains 26 volumes in 8vo. The first volume treats of the history of the first ages of the church, and relates the persecutions which it suffered, the succession of popes, the heresies which arose, the councils which condemned them, the writers in favour of Christianity, and the kings and emperors who reigned during the first century: to this are subjoined dissertations upon such points as have been the occasion of dispute in history, chronology, criticism, or doctrine. The history of the second century, with some dissertations, was published in two volumes in the year 1677. The third century came out in 1678; in this he treats largely of public penance, and examines into the origin and progress of the famous dispute between pope Stephen and St. Cyprian, concerning the rebaptizing of those who had been baptized by heretics; and he has added three dissertations, wherein he has collected what relates to the life, manners, errors, and Defenders of St. Cyprian. The history of the fourth century is so very extensive, that Alexander has found matter for three volumes and forty-five dissertations; they were printed at Paris in 1679. In the three following years he published his history of the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries; and that of the eleventh and twelfth centuries in 1683; in these volumes are several Dissertations against Mr. Daille; and in some of them he treats of the disputes between the princes and popes in. such a manner, that a decree from Rome was issued out Against his writings in 1684. However, he published the same year the history of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, in which he continued to defend the rights of kings against the pretensions of that court. He at last completed his work in 1686, by publishing four volumes, which contained the history of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Jn 1689 he published a work, in the same method, upon the Old Testament, in six volumes 8vo. In 1678 he published three dissertations: the first concerning the superiority of bishops over presbyters, against Blondel; the second concerning the celibacy of the clergy, and reconciling the history of Paphnutius with the canon of the council of Nice; and the third concerning the Vulgate. The same year he printed a dissertation concerning sacramental confession, against Mr. Daille“, in 8vo. In 1682 he wrote an apology for his dissertation upon the Vulgate, against Claudius Frassen. He published likewise about this time, or some time before, three dissertations in defence of St. Thomas Aquinas; the first against Henschenius and Papebroch, to shew that the office of the holy sacrament was written by him; the second was in form of a dialogue between a Dominican and a Franciscan, to con fute the common opinion that Alexander of Hales was St. Thomas Aquinas’s master: and that the latter borrowed his” Secunda Secundse“from the former: the third is a panegyric upon Aquinas. In 1693 he published his” Theologia dogmatica,“in five books, or” Positive and Moral Divinity, according to the order of the catechism of the council of Trent.“This Latin work, consisting of ten octavo volumes, was printed at Paris and at Venice in 1698; in 1701 he added another volume; and they were all printed together at Paris, in two volumes folio, in 1703, with a collection of Latin letters, which had been printed separately. In 1703 he published tf A commentary upon the four Gospels,” in folio; and in 1710, he published another at Roan, upon St. Paul’s and the seven canonical epistles. He wrote also a commentary upon the prophets Jsaiah, Jeremiah, and Baruch, which was never printed. The following works are also enumerated by his biographers. 1. “Statuta facultatis artium Thomistiæe collegio Parisiensi fratrum prsedicatorum instituta,” Paris, 1683, 12mo. 2. “Institutio concionatorum tripartita, seu praecepta et regula ad praedicatores informandos, cum ideis seu rudimentis concionum per totum annum.” 3. “Abre‘ge’ de la foy et de la morale de l‘eglise, tiree de l’ecriture sainte,” Paris, 1676, 12rno. 4. “Eclaircissement des prétendues difficultés proposeés a mons. l'archevêque de Rouen, sur plusieurs points importans de la morale de Jesus Christ,” 1697, 12mo. 5. “A Letter to a Doctor of Sorbonne, upon the dispute concerning Probability, and the Errors of a Thesis in Divinity maintained by the Jesuits in their college at Lyons, the 26th of August,” printed at Mons, 1697, 12mo. 6. “A second letter upon the same subject,” 1697, 12mo. 7. “An apology for the Dominican Missionaries in China, or an Answer to a book of father Tellier the Jesuit, entitled a Defence of the new Christians; and to an Explanation published by father Gobien, of the same society, concerning the honours which the Chinese pay to Confucius and to the dead,” printed at Cologn, 1699, 12mo. 8. “Documenta controversiarum missionariorum apostolicorum imperii Sinici de cultu praejiertim Confueii philosophi et progenitoruin defunctorum spectantia, ac apologiam Dominica norum missiones Sinicae ministrorum adversus Hr. Pp. le Tellier et le Gobien societatis Jesu confirmantia.” 9. “A Treatise on the conformity between the Chinese ceremonies and the Greek and Roman idolatry, in order to confirm the apology of the Dominican Missionaries in China,” 1700, 12 mo. Translated into Italian, and printed at Cologn, 8vo. He wrote likewise seven letters to the Jesuits Le Comte and Dez, upon the same subject. In 1706 he was made a provincial for the province ofParis. Towards the latter part of his life, he was afflicted with the loss of his sight, a most inexpressible misfortune to one whose whole pleasure was in study; yet he bore it with great patience and resignation. He died at Paris, merely of a decay of nature, August 21, 1724, in the 86th year of his age. His piety, humility, and disinterestedness rendered him the object of general esteem; and he was honoured with thfe friendship of the most learned prelates of France. His opinion was always considered as of great weight upon the most important subjects which were debated in the Sorbonne. He was likewise highly valued at Rome: the learned cardinals N orris and Aguirre distinguished him upon several occasions.

, an English poet, once of some fame, who lived in the reign of Charles I. He received his education at Sidney college in Cambridge; and going to London, became assistant to Thomas Farnaby the famous grammarian, athis great school in Goldsmith’s rents, in the parish of St. Giles’s, Cripplegate. In 1631, he published two poems on the famous victories of Cressi and Poictiers, obtained by the English in France, under king Edward III. and his martial son the Black Prince; they are written in stanzas of six lines. Leaving Mr. Farnaby, he went into the family of Edward Sherburne, esq. to be tutor to his son, who succeeded his father as clerk of the ordnance, and was also commissary-general of the artillery to king Charles I. at the battle of Edgehill. His next production was a poem in honour of king Henry VII. and that important battle which gained him the crown of England: it was published in IbliS, under the title of “The Historic of that wise and fortunate prince Henrie, of that name the seventh, king of England; with that famed battle fought between the said king Henry and Richard III. named Crook-back, upon Red more near Bosworth.” There are several poetical eulogiums prefixed to this piece, amongst which is one by Edward Sherburne, his pupil. Besides these three poems, there are in print some little copies of commendatory verses ascribed to him, and prefixed to the works of other writers, particularly before the earliest editions of Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays. la 1639 he published the History of Eurialus and Lucretia, which was a translation; the story is to be found among the Latin epistles of Æneas Sylvius. The year after he is said to have died, and to have been buried in the parish of St. Andrew’s, Holborn.

In private life, Alfred was the most amiable man in his dominions; of so equal a temper, that after he had once taken the crown, he never suffered any sadness or unbecoming gaiety to enter his mind; but appeared always of a palm, yet cheerful disposition, familiar to his friends, just, even to his enemies, kind and tender to all. He was a remarkable oeconomist of his time; and Asserius has given us an account of the method he took for dividing and keeping an account of it. He caused six wax-candles to b made, each of twelve inches long, and of as many ounces weight on the candies the inches were regularly marked; and having found that one of them burnt just four hours, he committed them to the care of the keepers of his chapel, who from time to time gave him notice how the hours went; but as in windy weather the candles wer wasted by the impression of the air on the flame, to remedy this inconvenience he invented lanthorns, there being then no glass in his dominions . When Alfred came to the crown, learning was at a very low ebb in his kingdom f; but by his example and encouragement, he used his utmost endeavours to excite a love for letters amongst his subjects. He himself was a scholar; and had he not been illustrious as a king, would have been famous as an author . When we consider the qualifications of this prince, and the 'many virtues he possessed, we need noj; wonder that he died universally lamented, which happened after a reign of above 28 years, and on the 28th of October, A. D. 900, as some writers inform us; though there is a disagreement in this particular, even amongst our best historians. He was buried in the cathedral of Winchester; but the canons of that church pretending they were disturbed by his ghost, his son and successor Edward caused his body to be removed to the new monastery, which was left unfinished at his death. Here it remained till the dissolution of monasteries, when Dr. Richard Fox, bishop of Winchester, caused the bones of all our Saxon kings to be collected and put into chests of lead, with inscriptions upon each of them, shewing whose bones they contained; these chests he took care to have placed on the top of a wall of exquisite workmanship, built by him to inclose the presbytery of the cathedral. Here they remained undisturbed until the cathedral was pillaged by the parliamentary soldiers, under sir William Waller, during the rebellion in 1642, when the chests were thrown down, and most of their contents dispersed.

, a learned Dutch antiquary, was born in 1654, and amidst the duties of his office as first commissioner of convoys and licences, found leisure to publish many curious works. His first, in 1699, was a “Dissertation on Tournaments,” in which he treats of the ceremonies used at the court of Holland ti the days of chivalry. The third edition, published in 1740, by Peter van der Schelling, his son-in-law, had the addition of a dissertation on the origin, progress, and decline, of tournaments and single combats. Alkemade was afterwards editor of the metrical chronicle of Melis Sitoke, Leyden, 1699, fol. containing a history of Holland to 1337, with engraved portraits of all the counts of Holland. In 1700, he published “Muntspiegel der Graven van Holland,” &c. Delft, fol. a chronological series of coins struck under the reigns of the counts from Floris III. to Philip II. His next work was a treatise on modes of Burial, Delft, 1713, 8vo. This, he modestly says, is only an attempt which may perhaps excite others to investigate the subject more fully. But his principal work, and that which is most esteemed by his countrymen, was published in 1732, under the title of “Nedenandsche Displechtigheden,” 3 vols. 8va, a work not only extremely curious for its illustration of the ancient manners of the Dutch, but for the number of its beautiful engravings. His son-in-law assisted in completing and preparing this work for the press. After publishing some other works of less note, he concluded his literary labours by a description of the town of Brill, and died in 1737, at the advanced age of eighty-three.

From hence he sailed with his fleet for Melinda, but by tempestuous weather was driven three leagues beyond; from thence they proceeded to the island of Anchidive, where he built a fort, and sent some of his ships out to cruize. Here he received deputies from the king of Onor, to treat of peace, and also the submission of a piratical chief, of the name of Timoia; but a circumstance soon happened to shew the former was not sincere, and the viceroy saited to Onor, and burned some ships i:i the harbour. A day or two after, he sent his son to burn the other ships, when a smart action ensued, and the Portugueze were obliged to retreat. Almeida sailed next day to Cananor, where he found it necessary to build a strong fort to protect his countrymen against the Arabians, who, jealous of the Portugueze, did them every injury in their power. While Almeida remained here, he had the happiness to receive an embassy from the king of Narsinga, offering friendship, and his daughter as a wife for John the son of Emanuel. He had also a visit from the king of Cananor, from whom he obtained liberty to build his fort. From this place he dispatched his son on an expedition to Caulan.

On the arrival of Cugna with a reinforcement from Portugal, and on receiving intelligence of several Arabian ships richly laden being in the port of Panama (about 50 miles off) escorted by a fleet of ships of war of Calicut, he resolved to attack them in the harbour. He sailed for that purpose with 12 ships of war. On his passage he was informed that the ships were not yet afloat, but lay in the docks, under cover of a rampart, and a strong garrison of 4000 men. Almeida had only 700, and with these he resolved to attack the enemy. He attempted to land and burn the ships; and after a violent conflict succeeded. This was a strong proof of the superiority of the Portugueze at this time in war, for the enemy fought with desperate, courage, there being many among them who had taken an oath to conquer or die. These devotees had all their heads shaven, and were destroyed to a man. Almeida, having made good his landing, advanced to the city, and set it on fire, being fearful of the consequences of permitting his men to plunder it. The men murmured at being deprived of such a rich booty, but this the viceroy disregarded; and to keep them employed, dispatched his son with a squadron to cruize against the Arabians, who in an engagement with the enemy’s fleet lost his life. Almeida, who had often shewn that he possessed great fortitude, now gave a striking proof of it; and to those who lamented the death of young Almeida with too much sorrow, he said, “That he had never wished a long, but a glorious life for his son; and for his part, he thanked God for honouring him with so glorious a death.”

While he commanded in India, Albuquerque was making conquests for his country to the northward, but as he did not act under Almeida’s instructions, the latter was offended, and even wrote to some of the enemy’s chiefs, that Albuquerque acted without his orders. Notwithstand-. ing this, the exploits of the latter drew the attention of the court of Portugal, and he was appointed to supersede Almeida in his viceroyship. When the order for the viceroy’s return was brought, he was employed in fitting out a fleet to revenge the death of his son. This furnished him with an excuse for not delivering up his government; and he sailed on an expedition to Dabul, landed there, defeated the enemy, and made a most dreadful slaughter, not sparing even the infants. The next day the city was given up to be plundered, and afterwards burned. Thi& was the fate of many other places on these shores. He then cruized along the coast until he fell in with the enemy’s fleet, and engaged and totally defeated it, killing 4000 men. The sultan had taken great pains in fitting out this fleet, and it is supposed had engaged Europeans of several nations to act on board it, as books in the Italian, German, French, and Spanish languages were found on board the captured ships. This victory procured a peace.

, an English nonconformist of considerable note, was a native of Northamptonshire, and educated at St. John’s 'college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of master of arts. He afterwards received deacon’s orders from a bishop, and settled at Oakham in Rutlandshire, as assistant to the master of the free school. Being a man who possessed a lively pleasant wit, he fell into gay company, but was reclaimed by the admonition of the rev. Mr. King, a Puritan minister at or near Oakham, whose daughter he afterwards married; and becoming a convert to his principles, he received ordination in the presbyterian way, not being satisfied with that of the bishop, which extended only to deacon’s orders, and he was no longer willing to conform to the church by applying for those of a priest. He settled at Wilby, in the county of Northampton, whence he was ejected in 1662, for nonconformity. After which he ventured to preach sometimes at Oakham and at Wellingborough, where he lived; and was once committed to prison for six months, for praying with a sick person. The book he wrote against Dr. Sherlock, in a humorous style, made him first known to the world, and induced Mr. Cawton, an eminent nonconformist in Westminster, to recommend him to his congregation, as his successor. On receiving this invitation, he quitted Northampton, and came to London, where he preached constantly, and wrote several pieces, which were extremely well received by the public. His living in the neighbourhood of the court exposed him to many inconveniences, but he had the good fortune to escape imprisonment and fines, by the ignorance of the informers, who did not know his Christian name, which he studiously concealed; and even Anthony Wood, who calls him Benjamin, did not know it. His sufferings, however, ended with the reign of Charles II. at least in the beginning of the next reign, when his son, engaging in treasonable practices, was frequently pardoned by king James. After this, Mr. Alsop went frequently to court, and is generally supposed to have been the person who drew up the Preshy terians’ very fulsome address to that prince, for his general indulgence; a measure, however, which was condemned by the majority of nonconformists. After the revolution, Mr. Alsop gave very public testimonies of his affection for the government, but on all occasions spoke in the highest terms of respect and gratitude of king James, and retained a VI.Tv high sense of his clemency, in sparing his only son. The remainder of his life he spent in the exercise of the ministry, preaching once every Lord’s clay; besides which he had a Thursday lecture, and was one of the lecturers at Pinner’s hall. He lived to he a very old man, preserved his spirits to the last, and died May 8, 1703. On grave subjects he wrote with a becoming; seriousness but where wit might be shewn, he displayed it to considerable advantage. His funeral sermon was preached by Mr. Slater, and his memory will always be remembered by his own learned and elegant writings; the most remarkable of which are: 1. “Antisozzo,” in vindication of some great truths opposed by Dr. Sherlock, in whose treatise “Concerning the knowledge of Jesus Christ,” he thought he discovered a tendency towards Socinianism, and therefore entitled this work, which was published in 1675, “Antisozzo,” from the Italian name of Socinus. Sherlock and he had been pupils under the same tutor in the university. Dr. South allowed Alsop’s merit in this contest of wit, but Wood undervalues his talent. 2. “Melius Inquirendum,” in answer to Dr. Goodman’s Compassionate Inquiry, 1679, 8vo. 3. “The Mischief of Impositions;” in answer to Dr. Stillingfleet’s Mischief of Separation, 1680. 4. “Duty and interest united in praise and prayer for Kings.” 5. “Practical godliness the ornament of Religion,” 1696; and several sermons.

, an ingenious physician and botanist, was the son of Mr. Alston, of Eddlewood, a gentleman of small estate in the west of Scotland, and allied to the noble family of Hamilton, who, after having studied physic, and travelled with several gentlemen, declined the practice of his profession, and retired to his patrimony. His son Charles was born in 1683, and at the time of his father’s death was studying at the university of Glasgow. On this event, the duchess of Hamilton took him under her patronage, and recommended to him the profession of the law, but his inclination for botany and the study of medicine superseded all other schemes; and from the year 1716, he entirely devoted himself to medicine. In that year he went over to Leyden, and studied under Boerhaave for three years; and having here formed an acquaintance with the celebrated Dr. Alexander Monro, the first of that name, on their return they projected the revival of medical lectures and studies at Edinburgh. For this purpose they associated themselves with Drs. Rutherford, Sinclair, and Plummer, and laid the foundation of that high character, as a medical school, which Edinburgh has so long enjoyed. Dr. Alston’s department was botany and the materia medica, which he continued to teach with unwearied assiduity until his death, Nov. 22, 1760, in the seventy-seventh year of his age.

, of the fourth century, was an architect in the service of Julian the apostate, who com?­mitted to his care the rebuilding the temple of Jerusalem, which he was forced to abandon, by fires which issued from under the earth, and rendered the place inaccessible. Eight years after, he found himself involved in an accusar tion of magic, and with a great many others condemned without proof and banished, after his goods had been confiscated. His son Hierocles, condemned to death on the same accusation, made his escape when they were leading him to execution; and the news of this happy circumstance softened the affliction of Alvpius in his banishment. He is the reputed author of a geographical work published by Godefroy, at Geneva, in Gr. and Lat. 1628, 4to, but there is no good atithority for attributing it to him.

, the son of Gregory Amaseo, Latin professor at Venice, was one of the most celebrated Italian scholars of the sixteenth century. He was born at Udina in 1489, and educated at first by his father and uncle, but finished his studies at Padua, and in 1508 had begun to teach the belles lettres there, when the war, occasioned by the league at Cambray, obliged him to leave the place. He then went to Bologna, continued to teach, and married, and had children, and was so much respected that the city admitted him as a citizen, an honour which his ancestors had also enjoyed. In 1530, he was appointed first secretary to the senate, and was chosen by pope Clement VII. to pronounce before him and Charles V. a Latin harangue on the subject of the peace concluded at Bologna between the two sovereigns. This he accordingly performed, with great applause, in the church of St. Petrona, before a numerous audience of the first rank. He continued to teach at Bologna, with increasing popularity, until 1543, when he was invited to Rome by pope Paul III. and his nephew cardinal Alexander Farnese. The pope employed him in many political missions to the court of the emperor, those of the German princes, and that of the king of Poland; and in 1550, after the death of his wife, pope Julius III. appointed him secretary of the briefs, a place which he did not long enjoy, as he died in 1552. He wrote Latin translations of “Xenophon’s Cyrus,” Bologna, 1533, fol. and of “Pausanias,” Rome, 1547, 4to; and a volume entitled “Orationes,” consisting of eighteen Latin speeches on various occasions, Bonon. 1580, 4to. His contemporaries bestow the highest praises on his learning and eloAlienee. His son Pompilio had perhaps less reputation, but he too distinguished himself as Greek professor at Bologna, where he died in 1584. He translated two fragments of Polybius, Bologna, 1543, and wrote a history of his own time in Latin, which has not been published.

In 1732, on the change of the administration usually called that of lord North, the command of the army, and the lieutenant-generalship of ordnance, were put into other hands. In 1787, he received another patent of peerage, as baron Amherst, of Montreal, with remainder to his nephew, William Pitt Amherst. On the staff being reestablished, he was, Jan. 22, 1793, again appointed to the command of the army in Great Britain, although at that time, general Conway, the duke of Gloucester, sir George Howard, the duke of Argyle, the hon. John Fitz-­william, and sir Charles Montagu, were his seniors. On the 10th of February 1795, the command of the army being given to the duke of York, an offer of earldom, and the rank of field marshal, were made to lord Amherst, who then declined accepting them, but on the 30th July 1796, accepted the rank of field-marshal. His increasing age and infirmities, had, however, rendered him unfit for public business nearly two years before this period, and he now retired to his seat at Montreal in Kent, where he August 3, 1797, in the eighty-first year of his age. and was interred in the family vault in Seven Oaks church, on the 10th. Lord Amherst had been twice married; first, to Jane, only daughter of Thomas Dallison, of Manton, in Lincolnshire, esq. who died Jan. 7, 1765; and secondly, to Elizabeth, eldest daughter of general George Gary, brother to viscount Falkland, who survived him; but by neither had he any issue. His two brothers had distinguished themselves in the service of their country; John, an admiral of the blue, died Feb. 12, 1778 and William, already mentioned, a lieutenant-general in the army, died May 13, 1781. His son inherits lord Amherst’s title and estate.

, a Swiss physician, born at Schaffhausen in 1669, applied himself particularly to the teaching of those to speak who were born deaf, and acquired great reputation for this talent both in France and Holland, as well as in his own country. He published the method he had employed, in two small tracts, which are curious, and much sought after: one under the title of “Surdus loquens,” Harlemii, 1692, 8vo; the other, “De Loquela,” Amst. 1700, 12mo; which last, translated into French, is inserted in Deschamps’ “Cours d'education des sourds et muets,” 1779, 12tno. Amman also published a good edition of the works of Ccelius Aurelianus, 1709, 4to, with Janson D'Almeloveen’s notes. He died at Marmund, in Holland, in 1724. His son, John, born in 1707, was also a physician, but particularly skilled in Botany, on which he gave lectures at Petersburgh, where he was elected a member of the academy of sciences. He was also a member of the Royal Society of London. Being desirous of extending the knowledge of those plants which Gmelin and other travellers had discovered in the different countries of Asiatic Russia, he published “Stirpium rariorum in imperio Rutheno sponte provenientinm icones et descriptiones,” Petersburgh, 1739, 4to, which would have been followed by another volume, if the author had not died in the prime of life, in 1740.

, a native of Cappadocia, bishop of Iconium in the fourth century, was the friend of St. Gregory Nazianzen and St. Basil. He assisted at the first general council of Constantinople in the year 381, and presided at the council of Sidae. In the year 383, he contrived the following method of persuading the emperor to prohibit the assemblies of the Arians: observing that Theodosius encouraged the Arians, he went to his palace, and approaching Arcadius, his son, caressed him as if he had been an infant, but did not treat him with the customary respect. Theodosius, enraged at an affront offered to himself in the person of his son, ordered the bishop to be thrust out of the palace, when, turning to Theodosius, he cried, “My lord, you cannot bear that your son should be injured, and are displeased at those who do not treat him with respect; can you then doubt, that the God of the universe also abhors those who blaspheme his son?” Theodosius, upon this, called back the bishop, begged his pardon, and soon after published severe laws against the assemblies of the Arians. St. Amphilochius died about the year 394. Very few of his works remain. Jerome mentions but one, concerning the “Divinity of the Holy Spirit,” which is not extant. The principal is an Iambic poem of considerable length, in which is inserted a catalogue of the books, of the Old and New Testament. Cave and Dupin say that it was the production of Gregory Nazianzen, but Combesis and Tillemont contend for its belonging to Amphilochius. The fragments which remain of his other works are in the Bibl. Patrum, and there is a letter of his concerning synods, published by Cotelerius. Father Combesis published all he could collect, in 1644, fol. Greek and Latin, but he has inserted some pieces on very doubtful authority.

, a peripatetic philosopher, of the fifteenth century, and a native of Trebizond, was at first in great esteem at the court of the emperor David his master, and signalized himself by writing in favour of the Greeks against the decisions of the council of Florence; but at last forfeited, by his apostacy, all the reputation he had gained. He was one of those who accompanied the emperor Davicl to Constantinople, whither that prince was carried by order of Mahomet II. after the reduction of Trebizond, in 1461, and there, seduced by the promises of the Sultan, he renounced the Christian religion, and embraced Mahometism, together with his children, one of which, under the name of Mehemet-Beg, translated many hooks of the Christians into Arabic, by the order of Mahomet II. That prince honoured Amyrutzes with considerable employments in the seraglio, and used sometimes to-discourse with him and his son about points of learning and religion. By the manner Allatius expresses himself, it would appear that this philosopher had borne the employ^ ment of protovestiarius in the court of the emperor of Trebizond, but this emperor was not the first prince that shewed a particular value for Amyrutzes, as he had been greatly esteemed at the court of Constantinople long before. He was one of the learned men, with whom the emperor John Paleologus advised about his journey into Italy, and he attended him in that journey. Of his death we haveno account, and Bayle seems to think there were two of the name.

, an eminent divine, of the reformed church at Metz, was born March 17, 1617. He studied from the ninth or tenth year of his age in the Jesuits’ college, then the only one at Metz where there was an opportunity of being instructed in polite literature. In this college he gave such proofs of genius, that the heads of the society left nothing unattempted in order to draw him over to their religion and party, but he continued firm against their attacks, and that he might be the more enabled to withstand them, took the resolution of studying divinity, in which he was so indefatigable, that his father was often obliged to interpose his authority to interrupt his continual application, lest it suould injure his health. He went to Geneva in the year 1633, and performed his course of philosophy there under Mr. du Pattr, and his divinity studies under Spanheim, Diodati, and Tronchin, who had a great esteem for him. He left Geneva in April 1641, and offered himself to the synod of Charenton, in order to take upon him the office of a minister. His abilities were greatly admired by the examiners, and his modesty by the ministers of Paris; and the whole assembly was so highly satisfied with him, that they gave him one of the most considerable churches, which was unprovided for, that of Meaux, where he exercised his ministry till the year 1653, and became extremely popular, raising an extensive reputation by his learning, eloquence, and virtue, and was even highly respected by those of the Roman catholic communion. He displayed his talents with still greater reputation and success in his own country, where he was minister from the year 1653, till the revocation of the edict of Nantes in 1685. He retired to Francfort after that fatal blow; and having preached in the French church at Hanau, the whole assembly was so edified by it, that they immediately called together the heads of the families, in order to propose that he might be desired to accept of the office of minister among them. The proposition was agreed to; and they sent deputies who prevailed on him, and he began the exercise of his ministry in that church about the end of the year 1685. It was now that several persons who had quitted the French church, for some disgust, returned to it again. The professors of divinity, and the German and Dutch ministers, attended frequently upon his sermons. The count of Hanau himself, who had never before been seen in that church, came thither to hear Mr. Ancillon. His auditors came from the neighbouring parts, and even from Francfort, and people, who understood nothing of French, flocked together with great eagerness, and said, that they loved to see him speak; a degree of popularity which excited the jealousy of two other ministers, who at length rendered his situation so uneasy that he was induced to abandon voluntarily a place from which they could not force him. If he had chosen to rely upon the voice of the people, he might have still retained his situation, but it was his opinion that a faithful pastor ought not to establish his own interests upon any division between a congregation and its ministers, and as through his whole life he had been averse to parties, and had remonstrated often against cabals and factions, he would not take advantage of the disposition which the people were in towards him, nor permit them to act. Having therefore attempted every method which charity suggested without success, he resolved to quit Hanau, where he had to wrangle without intermission, and where his patience, which had supported several great trials, might possibly he at last overcome; and for these reasons he left it privately. He would now have returned to Francfort to settle, but in consideration of his numerous family, he preferred Berlin, where he received a kind reception from the elector of Brandenbourg. He was also made minister of Berlin, and had the pleasure of seeing his eldest son made judge and director of the French who were in that city, and his other son rewarded with a pension, and entertained at the university of Francfort upon the Oder, and at last minister in ordinary of the capital. He had likewise the satisfaction of seeing his brother made judge of all the French in the states of Brandenbourg, and Mr. Cayart, his son-in-law, engineer to his electoral highness. He enjoyed these circumstances undisturbed, till his death at Berlin, September 3, 1692, aged seventy-five years. His marriage was contracted in a very singular way: The principal heads of families of the church of Meaux seeing how much their minister distinguished himself, and hearing him sometimes saying, that he would go to Metz to see his father and relations, whom he had not seen for several years, were apprehensive lest they should lose him. They thought of a thousand expedients in order to fix him with them for a long time; and the surest way in their opinion was to marry him to some rich lady of merit, who had an estate in that country or near it. One of them recollected he had heard, that Mr. Ancillon having preached one Sunday in the morning at Charenton, he was universally applauded; and that Mr. Macaire especially, a venerable old gentleman, of very exemplary virtue and piety, and possessed of a considerable estate at Paris and about Meaux, had given him a thousand blessings and commendations, and said aloud to those who sat near him in the church, that he had but one daughter, who was an only child, and very dear to him; but if that gentleman, speaking of Mr. Ancillon, should come and ask her in marriage, he would give her with all his heart. Upon this, they went to ask him, whether he still continued in that favourable opinion of him; he replied, that he did; and accompanied that answer with new expressions of his esteem and affection for Mr. Ancillon; so that the marriage was concluded in the year 1649, and proved a very happy one, although there was a great disparity of years, the young lady being only fourteen.

His writings are but few, 1. “Relation fidele de tout ce qui s’est passe dans la conference publique avec M. Bedacier, eveque d'Aost,” Sedan, 1657, 4to. This dispute which he carried on with M. Bedacier, is concerning traditions, and was managed on the part of our author with great success, but they had agreed not to print it, and it would have remained unknown, had not a spurious account appeared, in which it was stated that Anciilon had been defeated. 2. “Apologie de Luther, de Zuingle, de Calvin, et de Beze,” Hanau, 1666, which is part of an answer he had prepared against cardinal de Richelieu. 3. “Vie de Guil. Farel,” or the idea of a faithful minister of Christ, printed in 1691, Amst. 12mo, from a most erroneous copy. He published also one fast sermon, 1676, entitled “The Tears of St. Paul.” But the work which contains the most faithful picture of his learning, principles, and talents, in conversation, was published by his son, the subject of the next article, at Basil, 1698, 3 vols. 12mo, entitled “Melange critique de Litterature, recueilli des conversations de feu M. Ancillon.” There was likewise a new edition of it published at Amsterdam in 1702, in one volume 12mo, which was disowned by the editor, because there were several things inserted in ic, which were injurious to his father’s memory, and his own character. This collection of Ancillon was formed from what he heard his father speak of in conversation, and he has digested it under proper heads. It contains a great number of useful and curious remarks, although not wholly free from mistakes, some of the sentiments having been conveyed to the editor by persons who probably did not remember them exactly.

, a young man of extraordinary talents, was born at Weston, a village near Aylesbury, in Buckinghamshire, in Nov. 1760. His father was a peasant of the lower order, who died when his son was young, leaving him to the care of providence: from his mother and an elder brother he received some little instruction, and particularly by the latter he was taught the rudiments of arithmetic. His chief occupation, however, was in the field, where his family were obliged to procure a subsistence, and here, like his predecessor in early fortune, James Ferguson, he became enamoured of mathematical science, and devoted what hours he could spare to this study, although with disadvantages which in most men would have prevented the attempt, or interrupted the progress. Yet such was his application, that in 1777, he transmitted to the London Magazine the solution of some problems which had appeared in that work, and he had the satisfaction to see his letter admitted. As he had signed this letter with his name, and dated it from Weston, it happened to fall under the inspection of Mr. Bonnycastle, the well-known author of various mathematical and astronomical works, and now mathematical master to the Royal Academy, Woolwich, who was not less pleased than surprised at this attempt of a young man from the sama county with himself, of whom he had never heard. Mr. Bonnycastle, accordingly, on his next visit in Buckinghamshire, procured an interview with the young genius, whom he found threshing in a barn, the walls of which were covered with triangles and parallelograms. Such was young Anderson’s bashfulness, however, that Mr. Bonnycastle could not draw him into conversation, until he won hfs heart by the loan of Simpson’s Fluxions, and two or threeother books.

, of Pistoia, an Italian comedian of the sixteenth century, deserves some notice on account of his wife, a woman of considerable talents, and his son, whose history is in one respect connected with that of our immortal Milton. This Francis appears to have been a species of buffoon stroller. In 1609, he published a work entitled “Le Bravure del capitan Spavento, Venice,” 4to, which consists of dialogues between the captain and his man Trappola. Prefixed to it is a serious lamentation over the death of his wife, the subject of our next article. He afterwards published other dialogues in prose, “Ragionamenti fantastici posti in forma di dialoghi rappresentativi,” Venice, 1612, 4to. He also is the author of two dramatic pieces, “L'Alterazza di Narciso,” Venice, 1611, 12mo; and “L'Ingannata Proserpina,” ibid, same year. He was remarkable for the powers of memory, and spoke, with great facility, French, Spanish, Sclavonian, modern Greek, and even the Turkish language. He was living in 1616, as appears by the date of his edition of his wife’s works, and it is thought that he died soon after that publication.

, or more properly Andrea Pisano, an eminent sculptor and architect, was born at Pisa in 1270, at a time when Arnolfo di Lapo, John de Pisa, and others, following the designs of Cimabue and Giotto, had renounced the Gothic style, and were introducing those purer models, which promised a revolution in architecture, sculpture, and painting. Andrea, entering into their ideas, had some peculiar circumstances in his favour, as at that time his countrymen, who were powerful at sea, traded with Greece, and brought thence ancient statues, bas-reliefs, and valuable marbles, which they employed in the ornament or construction of their public edifices, particularly the cathedral and the Campo Santo. By studying these, Andrea acquired a portion of that taste which was afterwards so conspicuous in Donatelio, Brunelleschi, and Ghiberti. His first attempts were so favourably received, that he was invited to Florence to execute, from the designs of Giotto, the sculptures on the facade of St. Marie del Fiore, the most magnificent edifice of that time. He began with the statue of Boniface VIII. the protector of the Florentines, which he followed by those of St. Peter, St. Paul, and other saints. In 1586, when it was determined to repair this facade upon a more modern plan, these were all removed, and when that design was not approved of, they were put up in the church and in other places, and some were deposited in the Poggio imperiale, a country-house belonging to the grand dukes of Tuscany. There was also a Madona and two angels in the church of the Misericordia, which are said to have been executed by Andrea at the same time. On the death of Arnolfo di Lapo, the republic of Florence employed Andrea in all the great works constructing in their territories. As an engineer, he built the fortifications round Florence, and the strong castle of Scarperia. During more peaceable times, he employed himself in making figures in bronze; and the Florentines, who were ambitious of rivalling the magnificence of the ancients in their temples, employed him to execute the sculpture of the gates of the baptistery, from designs by Giotto. These gates were accordingly covered with basreliefs, representing the whole history of John the Baptist. The composition is excellent, and the attitudes of the figures natural and expressive, although with some degree of stiffness, but the minute parts are executed with great skill. These gates, which were begun in 1331, were finished, polished, and gilt in eight years, and at first were placed at the principal entrance, but they were afterwards removed to one of the side entrances, where they now are, and the admirable gates of Laurent Ghiberti substituted in their room. Andrea also executed in bronze the tabernacle of San Giovanni, the has reliefs, and statues belonging to the campanile of St. Marie del Fiore, and many others. At Venice, his works are, the sculpture oa the façade of the church of St. Mark; the model of the baptistery of Pistoia, executed in 1337; and the tomb of Cino d'Angibolgi; and he was employed in many fortifications by Gaultier de Brienne, duke of Athens, during his usurpation at Florence; but Andrea did not suffer by the duke’s disgrace in 1343; and the Florentines, who looked only to his merit, admitted him a citizen of Florence, where he died in 1345, and was buried in St. Marie del Fiore. His son Nino, also a sculptor of considerable note, erected a monument to his memory.

The character of bishop Andrews, both in public and private life, was in every respect great and singular. His contemporaries and biographers celebrate, in particular, his ardent zeal and piety, demonstrated not only in his private and secret devotions between God and himself, in which those, who attended him, perceived, that he daily spent many hours; but likewise in his public prayers with his family in his chapel, wherein he behaved so humbly, devoutlv, and reverently, that it could not but excite others to follow his example. His charity was remarkable even before he came to great preferments; for, while he continued in a private station of life, he relieved his poor parishioners, and assisted the prisoners, besides his constant Sunday alms at his parish of St. Giles, Cdpplegate. But when his fortune increased, his charity increased in proportion, and he released many prisoners of all sorts, who were detained either for small debts or the keeper’s fees. In all his charities, he gave strict charge to his servants, whom he intrusted with the distribution of them, that they should not acknowledge whence this relief came; but directed, that the acquittance, which they took from the persons who received such relief, should be taken in the name of a benefactor unknown. Other large sums he bestowed yearly, and oftener, in clothing the poor and naked, in relieving the necessitous, and assisting families in the time of the infection, besides his alms to poor housekeepers at his gate. So that his private alms in his last six years, over and above his public, amounted to above thirteen hundred pounds. He left in his will four thousand pounds to purchase two hundred pounds per annum in land for ever, to be distributed by fifjy pounds quarterly in the following manner: To aged poor men, fifty pounds; to poor widows, the wives of one husband, fifty pounds; to the binding of poor orphans apprentices, fifty pounds; and to the relief of poor prisoners, fifty pounds. Besides he left to be distributed immediately alter his decease among maid-servants of a good character, and who had served one master or mistress seven years, two hundred pounds; and a great part of his estate, after his funeral and legacies were discharged, among his poor servants. To this virtue of his we may add his hospitality. From the first time of his preferment to the last moments of his life, he was always most liberal in the. entertainment of persons who deserved respect, especially scholars and strangers, his table being constantly furnished with provisions and attendance answerable. He shewed himself so generous in his entertainments, and so gravely facetious, that his guests would often profess, that they never came to any man’s table, where they received more satisfaction in all respects. He was at a prodigious expence in entertaining all sorts of people in Scotland, when he attended king James thither; and it cost him three thousand pounds in the space of three days, when that king came to visit him at Farnham castle, the principal seat belonging to the bishopric of Winchester. He was unblemished both in his ordinary transactions, and in the discharge of his spiritual and temporal offices. He was always careful to keep in good repair the houses of all his ecclesiastical preferments, particularly the vicaragehouse of St. Giles, Cripplegate, the prebend’s and dean’s houses of Westminster, and the residentiary' s house of St. Paul’s. He spent four hundred and twenty pounds upon the palaces belonging to the bishopric of Chichester; above two thousand four hundred and forty pounds upon that of Ely; and two thousand pounds upon those of Winchester, besides a pension of four hundred pounds per annum from which he freed that see at his own charge. With regard to his pastoral and episcopal charge, he was the most exact in the execution of it, promoting, as far as he could judge, none but men of character and abilities to the livings and preferments within his gift. For which purpose he took care beforehand to enquire what promising young men there were in the university; and directed his chaplains to inform him of such persons, whom he encouraged in the most liberal manner. He used to send for men of eminent learning, who wanted preferment, though they had no dependance upon him, nor interest in him, and entertain them in his house, and confer preferment upon them, and likewise defray their charges of a dispensation or faculty, and even of their journey. If we consider him in those temporal affairs, with which he was intrusted, we shall find him no less faithful and just. He disposed of very considerable sums, which were sent him to be distributed among poor scholars and others at his discretion, with the utmost care, and exactly agreeable to the donor’s intent. Of his integrity in managing those places, in, which he was intrusted for others jointly with himself, Pembroke-hall, and the church of Westminster, were sufficient evidences. For when he became master of the former, he found it in debt, having then but a small endowment; but by his care he left above eleven hundred pounds in the treasury of that college. And when h dean of the latter, he left it free from all debts and encroachments; and took such care of the school, that the scholars were much improved not only by his direction and superintendance, but even by his personal labours among them. And as by virtue of his deanery of Westminster, his mastership of Pembroke-hall, and his bishopric of Ely, the election of scholars into Westminster-school, and from thence into the two universities, and of many scholars and fellows into Pembroke-hall, some in Peter-house, and some in Jesus college, were in his power and disposal, he was always so just, that he waved all letters from great personages for insufficient scholars, and divested himself of all partiality, and chose only such as he thought had most merit. Being likewise often desired to assist at the election of scholars from the Free -schools of Merchant Taylors, St. Paul’s, and the Mercer’s, and perceiving favour and interest sometimes overbalancing merit with those to whom the choice belonged, and that divers good scholars were omitted, and others preferred, he frequently took care of such as were neglected, and sent them to the university, where he bestowed preferment upon them. Nor was he less distinguished for his fidelity in that great place of trust, the almonership. He never would suffer any part of what arose to him from that place to be mingled with his own rents or revenues, and was extremely exact in disposing of it. When he found a surplus over and above the ordinary charges, he distributed it in the relief of the indigent and distressed; though it was in his power to have applied this to his own use (his patent being sine compute), and no person could have questioned him concerning it. He gave a great many noble instances of his gratitude to those who had befriended him when young. He bestowed upon Dr. Ward, son to his first schoolmaster, the living of Waltham in Hampshire. He shewed the greatest regard for Mr. Mulcaster, his other school-master, in all companies, and always placed him at the upper end of his table, and after his death caused his picture (though he had but few others in his house) to be set over his study door. Besides these external marks of gratitude he supplied his necessities privately in a very liberal manner, and left his son a valuable legacy. He inquired very carefully after the kindred of Dr. Watts, who, as already noticed, had sent him to Pembroke-hall, and having found out one, he conferred upon him preferments in that college. Nor did he forget his patron Dr. Watts in his will; for he ordered there, that out of the scholarships of his foundation, the two fellowships, which himself had founded in that college, should be supplied, if the candidates should be fit for them. To omit the legacies which he left to the parish of St. Giles, Cripplegate, St. Martin, Ludgate, where he had lived, St. Andrew’s, Holborn, St. Saviour’s, Southwark, Allhallows, Barking, where he was born, and others; he gave to Pembroke-hall one thousand pounds to purchase lands for two fellowships, and for other uses in that college, expressed in his will; besides three hundred such folio books of his own as were not in the library there, with several other valuable gifts. His humanity extended to every person who conversed with him; so that he was admired not only by the men of learning and others in this kingdom, but even by foreigners of the greatest eminence, particularly Casaubon, Cluverius, Vossius, who corresponded with him by letters, Grotius, Peter du Moulin, Barclay, the author of the Argenis, and Erpenius, to whom he offered an annual stipend to read lectures at Cambridge in the oriental tongues, the professors of which he encouraged very liberally, and particularly Mr. Bedvvell, to whom he gave the vicarage of Tottenham in Middlesex. His modesty was so remarkable, that though the whole Christian world admired his profound learning, and particularly his knowledge of the eastern languages, Greek, Latin, and many modern languages, he was so far from being elated with the opinion of it, that he often complained of his defects; and when he was preferred to the bishopric of Chichester, and urged his own insufficiency for such a charge, he caused these words of St. Paul, Et ad hac quis idoneus? i. e. “And who is sufficient for these things?” to be engraven about his episcopal seal. One instance of his modesty mixed with his humanity may be added, that after his chaplains had preached in his chapel before him, he would sometimes privately request them, that he might have a sight of their notes, and encourage them in the kindest terms imaginable.

, a native of the island of Crete, and physician to the emperor Nero, A. D. 65, has been handed down to posterity, as the inventor of a medicine named theriaca, which is now deemed of little use. It however set aside the mithridate, which till then had been held in great esteem. Andromachus wrote the description of his antidote in elegiac verse, which he dedicated to Nero. His son, of the same name, wrote this description in prose. Damocrates turned it into Iambic verse in a poem, which he wrote upon Antidotes. Galen informs us that Andromachus the father wrote a treatise “De Medicamentis compositis ad affectus externos,” and that he was a man of great learning and eloquence. Erotion dedicated his Lexicon to him, and some writers say he was a good astrologer. He was the first who bore the tide of archiater.

, surnamed Bois-Regard,a French physician and medical writer, was born at Lyons in 1658, and came to Paris without any provision, but defrayed the expences of his philosophical studies in the college of the Grassins by teaching a few pupils. He was at length a professor in that college; and, in 1687, became first known to the literary world by a translation of Pacatus’ panegyric on Theodosius the Great. Quitting theology, however, to which he had hitherto applied, he turned to the study of medicine, received his doctor’s degree at Rheims, and in 1697 was admitted of the faculty at Paris. Some share of merit, and a turn for intrigue, contributed greatly to his success, and he became professor of the Royal College, censor, and a contributor to the Journal des Savants; and, although there were strong prejudices against him on account of the manner in which he contrived to rise; and his satirical humour, which spared neither friend or foe, he was in 1724, chosen dean of the faculty. His first measures in this office were entitled to praise; convinced of the superiority of talent which the practice of physic requires, he reserved to the faculty that right of inspecting the practice of surgery, which they had always enjoyed, and made a law that no surgeon should perform the operation of lithotomy, unless in the presence of a physician. After this he wished to domineer over the faculty itself, and endeavoured to appoint his friend Helvetius to be first physician to the king, and protector of the faculty. But these and other ambitious attempts were defeated in 1726, when it was decided, that all the decrees of the faculty should be signed by a majority, and not be liable to any alteration by the dean. After this he was perpetually engaged in disputes with some of the members, particularly Hecquet, Lemery, and Petit, and many abusive pamphlets arose from these contests. Andry, however, was not re-elected dean, and had only to comfort himself Vy some libels against his successor Geoffroy, for which, and his general turbulent character, cardinal* Fleury would no longer listen to him, but took the part of the university and the faculty. Andry died May 13, 1742, aged eighty-four. His works were very numerous, and many of them valuable: 1. “Traite de la generation des Vers dans le corps de I'homme,” 1710, often reprinted, and translated into most languages. It was severely attacked by Lemery in the Journal de Trevoux, in revenge for Andry’s attack on his. “Traite des Aliments;” and by Valisnieri, who fixed on him the nickname of Homo venniculosus, as he pretended to find worms at the bottom of every disorder. Andry answered these attacks in a publication entitled “Eclaircissements sur le livre de generation, &c.” 2. “Remarques de medicine sur differents sujets, principalement sur ce qui regard e la Saignee et la Purgation,” Paris, 1710, 12mo. 3. “Le Regime du Careme,” Paris, 1710, 12mo, reprinted 1713, 2 vols. and afterwards in three, in answer to the opinions of Hecqnet. 4. “Thé de l'Europe, ou les proprietes de la veronique,” Paris, 1712, 12mo. 5. “Examen de difFerents points d' Anatomic, &c,” Paris, 1723, 8vo, a violent attack on Petit’s excellent treatise on the diseases of the bones. 6. “Remarques de chemie touchant la preparation de certains remedes,” Paris, 1735, 12mo, another professional and personal attack on Malouin’s “Chimie medicale.” 7. “Cleon a Eudoxe, touchant la pre-eminence de la Medicine sur la Chirurgie.” Paris, 1738, 12mo. 8. “Orthopedic; ou l'art de prevenir et de corriger, dans les enfants, les Difformites du corps,” Paris, 1741, 2 vols. He published also some theses, and his son-in-law, Dionis, published a treatise on the plague, which he drew up by order of the regent.

, abbot of Centula, or St. Riquier, in the ninth century, was descended from a noble family of Neustria. He was educated at the court of Charlemagne, where he studied the languages with that prince and the other courtiers, under the learned Alcuinus, who afterwards considered him as his son. Charlemagne, having caused his son Ppin to be crowned king of Itaiy, made Angilbert that prince’s first minister: he then went with him into Italy, and returned some years after to France, when Charlemagne gave him his daughter Bertha in marriage; but some historians say that this marriage was rendered necessary by the lady’s being delivered previously of twins. Whatever truth may be in this, Angilbert, being now sonin-law to Charlemagne, was made duke or governor of the coast of France from the Scheldt to the Seine, and the kin? also made him his secretary and prime minister; but Alcuinus, abbot of Corbie, prevailed on him to become a monk in the monastery of Centula, or St. Riquier, with the consent both of his wife and the king. Notwithstanding his love of solitude, he was frequently obliged to leave the monastery, and attend to the affairs of the church and state, and was three times sent to the court of Rome; he also accompanied Charlemagne thither, in the year 800, when that prince was crowned in that city emperor of the West. He died on the 18th of February 814. Angilbert had such a taste for poetry, that Charlemagne called him his Homer. There are but few of his works remaining, except a history of his monastery, which Mabillon has inserted in his “Annales de l'ordre de St. Benoit.” As to the “Histoire de premieres expeditions de Charlemagne pendant sa jeunesse et avant son regne,” 1741, 8vo, with the title of Homer, given him by Charlemagne, either because he delighted in that poet, or because he was himself a poet; it is in fact a romance written by Dufresne de Francheville.

, the natural son of Charles IX. and Maria Touchet, was born April 28, 1575, and distinguished himself by his bravery during the reign of five kings. Being intended from his infancy for the order of Malta, he was, in 1587, presented to the abbey of Chaise-Dieu, and, in 1589, was made grand prior of France. Catherine de Medicis having bequeathed him the estates of Auvergne and Lauraguais, he quitted the order of Malta, with a dispensation to marry; and accordingly in 1591, married Charlotte, daughter of the constable Henry of Montmorenci. In 1606, Margaret de Valois applied to parliament, and set aside the will of Catherine of Medicis, and the estates were given to the dauphin, afterwards Louis XIII. Charles, however, continued to take the title of count d' Auvergne, until 1619, when the king bestowed on him the duchy of Angouleme. He was one of the first to acknowledge Henry IV. at St. Cloud, and obtained great reputation for his services in the battles of Arques, Ivry, &c. In 1602, being implicated in Biron’s conspiracy, he was sent to the Bastille, but obtained his pardon. Being, however, afterwards convicted of a treasonable attempt in concert with the marchioness de Verneuil, his uterine sister, he was arrested a second time in 1604, and next year condemned to lose his head, which Henry IV. commuted for perpetual imprisonment; but in 1616, we find him again at large, and, in 1617, at the siege of Soissons. Being appointed colonel of the light cavalry of France, and created a knight by order of the king, he was, in 1620, sent as the principal of an embassy to the emperor Ferdinand II. the result of which was printed in 1667, under the title of “Ambassade de M. le due d‘Angouleme, &c.” fol. The narrative is somewhat dry, but it contains many particulars of considerable interest in the history of that time. In 1628, the duke opened the famous and cruel siege of Rochelle, where he had the chief command until the arrival of the king. He also bore a part in the war of Languedoc, Germany, and Flanders. He died at Paris, Sept 24, 1650. Francoise de Nargonne, whom he married for his second wife, in 1644, died one hundred and forty-one years after her father-in-law Charles IX. on the 10th of August 1715, aged ninety-two. The duke d’Angouleme wrote, 1. “Memoires tres-particuliers du duc d‘Angouleme, pour servir à l’histoire des regnes de Henri III. et Henri IV.” 1662, 12mo. Bineau, the editor of this work, has added to it a journal of the negoeiations for the peace of Vervins, in 1598. The duke’s memoirs also form the first volume of the “Memoires particuliers pour servir a. l'Histoire de France,” 1756, 4 vols. 12mo, and the third volume of “Pieces fugitives pour servir, &c.” published by the marquis d'Aubais et Menard, 1759, 3 vols. 4to. 2. “Les harangues prononcees en l‘assemblie da M. M. les princes Protestants d’Allemagne,” 1620, 8vo. 3. “Le generale et fidele relation de tout ce qui s’est passé en l'Isle de Re, &c.” 1627, 8vo. 4. A translation of Diego de Torres’ history of the kingdoms of Morocco, Fee, &c. Besides these, Bouthillier, bishop of Troyes in the beginning of the eighteenth century, had a folio volume of manuscript letters, written by the duke d‘Angouleme, from 1633 to 1643, and another collection by his son, Louis Emmanuel de Valois, count d’Alais, and, after his father’s death, duke d'Angouleme, who died in 1653.

, or according to his epitaph, which Bayle follows, Nannius (John), commonly called Annius of Viterbo, where he was born about 1432, was a Dominican friar, and highly respected among his brethren for his extensive knowledge of Greek, Latin, and the oriental languages. He was also a zealous preacher, and his reputation having reached Rome, he was invited thither, and received with great respect by the members of the sacred college, and the popes Sixtus IV. and Alexander VI. This last conferred upon him in 1499, the honourable situation of master of the sacred palace, vacant by the promotion of Paul Moneglia to the bishopric of Chios. Annius, however, had some difficulty in preserving the favour of characters so profligate as Alexander, and his son Caesar Borgia; but the duchess de Valentinois, wife to Caesar, and as virtuous as he was abandoned, rendered Annius every service in her power. Her husband, probably on this account, and tired with the advice and remonstrances presented to him either by her or by Annius, determined to get rid of the latter, and, it is thought, procured him to be poisoned. Whatever may be in this report, Annius died Nov. 13, 1502, in his seventieth year.

, abbot of Lobies, an old Benedictine motiastery upon the Sambre, in the diocese of Cambray, lived in the ninth century. Pithseus, Antonius, Augustinus, Valerius, Andreas, and others, being too implicit in following Trithemius, have made this Ansegisus and another of that name, archbishop of Sens, the same persons. Our Ansegisus of Lobies was in great esteem with the bishops and princes of his time, and his learning and conduct deserved it. In the year 827, he made a collection of the capitularies of Charlemagne, and Lewis his son, entitled “Capitula seu Edita Caroli Magni & Ludovici pii Imperatorum.” We have several editions of this work one printed in 1588, by Pithaeus, with additions, and notes of his own upon it: it was afterwards printed at Mentz in 1602, and by Sirmundus at Paris in 164-0, to which he added a collection of the capitularies of Charles the Bald. Lastly, in 1676, Baluzius furnished a new edition of all these ancient capitularies, with remarks upon them, two volumes in folio. But Baluzius’s impression differs considerably from those before him; for, besides a great many different readings, there are the 39th, 52d, 67th, 68th, 74th, and 79th chapters of the first book wanting: there are likewise added, the 89th and 90th chapters of the third book; and also the 76th and 77th chapters of the fourth book, which yet, as Le Cointe observes, are the same with the 29th and 24th chapters. There are three appendixes annexed to the four books in the Capitularies, the first of which, in the old editions, consists of 33 chapters, but in the Baluzian there are 35. The second, in the old editions, has 36 chapters, but the Baluzian impression reaches to 38. The third appendix contains 10 chapters; with these appendixes, several constitutions of the emperors Lotharius and Charles the Bald are mixed. He died in the year 834.

His other publications vrere, “An Elegy on the death of the marquis of Tavistock,” 1767. “The Patriot,” 1763, a censure on die encouragement given -to prize-fighters: “An Election Ball,” 1776, at first written in the Somersetshire dialect. “A C. W. Bampfylde, arm. Epistola,” 1777. “Envy,” 1778. “Charity,'” 1779. In 1786 he was induced to revise and republish these and other smaller occasional pieces; but he afterwards wrote several pieces, which have been collected by his son, in a splendid edition of his entire works, published in 1808, and prefaced by an elegant memoir of his life, to which the present sketch is highly indebted. His last publication was in Latin, written at Cheltenham, in the summer of 1803, and in the 79th year of his age, an Alcaic ode, addressed to Dr. Jenner, in consequence of his very important discovery of the Vaccine inoculation. He died in 1805, in his eighty-first year, and was interred in Walcot church in the city of Bath, where he had resided for many years. His son has delineated his character with filial affection, but at the same time with an elegant discrimination, and, as his surviving friends acknowledge, with a steady adherence to truth. As a poet, if he does not rank with those who are distinguished by the highest efforts of the art, he may be allowed an enviable place among those who have devoted their talents to the delineation of manners, and who have ennobled the finer affections, and added strength to taste and morals.

, a learned heraldic writer, was of a Cornish family, seated at St. Neot’s, being son of John Anstis of that place, esq. by Mary, daughter and coheir of George Smith. He was born September 28th or 29th, 1669, admitted at Exeter College in Oxford in 1685, and three years afterwards entered of the Middle Temple. As a gentleman of good fortune, he became well known in his county, and the borough of St. Germain returned him one of their members in the first parliament called by queen Anne. Opposing what was called the Whig interest, he distinguished himself by his voting against the bill for occasional conformity: for which his name appeared amongst the “Tackers” in the prints of that time. He was appointed in 1703 deputy-general to the auditors of imprest, but he never executed this office; and in the second year of queen Anne’s reign, one of the principal commissioners of prizes. His love of, and great knowledge in the science of arms so strongly recommended him, that April 2, 1714, the queen gave him a reversionary patent for the place of Garter. Probably this passage in a ms letter to the lord treasurer, dated March 14, 1711-12, relates to his having the grant. He says, “I have a certain information it would be ended forthwith, if the lord treasurer would honour me by speaking to her majesty at this time, which, in behalf of the duke of Norfolk, I most earnestly desire, and humbly beg your lordship’s assistance therein. If it be delayed for some days, I shall then be back as far as the delivery of my petition. I am obliged to attend this morning at the exchequer, about the tin affair, and thereby prevented from waiting upon your lordship.” If it does relate to the reversionary patent, it is evident that he long wished, and with difficulty obtained it. In the last parliament of Anne he was returned a member for Dunheved, or Launceston, and he sat in the first parliament of George I. He fell under the suspicion of government, as favouring a design to restore the Stuarts, was imprisoned, and at this critical time Garter’s place became vacant, by the death of the venerable sir Henry St. George. He immediately claimed the office, but his grant was disregarded; and, October 26,1715, sir John Vanbrugh, Clarenceux, had the appointment. Unawed by power, fearless of danger, and confident in innocence, he first freed himself from all criminality in having conspired against the succession of the illustrious house of Brunswick, and then prosecuted his claim to the office of garter, pleading the right of the late queen to give him the place. It was argued, that in a contest about the right of nomination in the reign of Charles II. the sovereign gave it up, only retaining the confirmation of the earl marshal’s choice: Mr. Anstis urged, that Charles only waved his claim. The matter came to a hearing April 4, 1717, and the competitors claimed under their different grants; but the controversy did not end until April 20, 1718, when the right being acknowledged to be in Mr. Anstis, he was created Garter. He had, for some time previous to this decision in his favour, resided in the college, and by degrees gained the good opinion and favour of the government. He even obtained a patent under the great seal, giving the office of garter to him, and his son John Anstis junior, esq. and to the survivor of them: this passed June 8, 1727, only two days before the death of George I. He died at his seat, at Mortlake in Surrey, on Sunday, March 4, 1744-5, and was buried the 23d of that month, in a vault in the parish church of Dulo in Cornwall. In him, it is said, were joined the learning of Camden and the industry, without the inaccuracy, of sir William Dugdale. He was certainly a most indefatigable and able officer at arms; and though he lived to the age of seventy-six, yet there is room to wonder at the extent of his productions, especially as he was a person of great consequence, and busied with many avocations out of the college. In 1706, he published a “Letter concerning the honour of Earl Marshal,” 8vo. “The form of the Installation of the Garter” 1720, 8vo. “The Register of the most noble Order of the Garter, usually called the Black-Book, with a specimen of the Lives of the Knights Companions,” 1724, 2 vols. folio. “Observations introductory to an historical Essay on the Knighthood of the Bath,” 1725, 4to, intended as an introduction to the history of that order, for which it is there said the Society of Antiquaries had begun to collect materials. His “Aspilogia,” a discourse on seals in England, with beautiful draughts, nearly fit for publication, from which Mr. Drake read an abstract to the Society in 1735-6, and two folip volumes of Sepulchral Monuments, Stone Circles, Crosses, and Castles, in the three kingdoms, from which there are extracts in the Archa?ologia, vol. XIII. were purchased, with many other curious papers, at the sale of Mr. Anstis’s library of Mss. in 1768, by Thomas Astle, esq. F. R. and A. S. Besides these he left five large folio volumes on the “Office, &c. of Garter King at Arms, of Heralds and Pursuivants, in this and other kingdoms, both royal, princely, and such as belonged to our nobility,” now in the pos session of George Nayler, esq. York herald, and genealogist of the Order of the Bath, &c. “Memoirs of the Families of Talbot, Carew, Granvile, and Courtney.” “The Antiquities of Cornwall.” “Collections, relative to the parish of Coliton, in Devonshire,” respecting the tithes, owing to a dispute which his son, the Rev. George Anstis, the vicar, then had with the parishioners, in the court of exchequer in 1742. The late Dr. Ducarel possessed it. “Collections relative, to All Souls’ college, in Oxford.” These were very considerable, and purchased by the colllege. Sixty-four pages of his Latin Answer to “the Case of Founders’ Kinsmen,” were printed in 4to, with many coats of arms. His “Curia Militaris, or treatise on the Court of Chivalry, in three books:” it is supposed that no more than the preface and contents were ever published. Mr. Reed had those parts; the whole, however, was printed in 1702, 8vo; probably only for private friends. Mr. Prior mentions this Garter in an epigram:

In the year 170 Antoninus made vast preparations against the Gennans, and carried on the war with great vigour. During this war, in the year 174, a very extraordinary event is said to have happened, which, according to Dion Cassius, was as follows: Antoninus’s army being blocked up by the Quadi in a very disadvantageous place, where there was no possibility of procuring water; and in this situation, being worn out with, fatigue and wounds, oppressed With heat and thirst, and incapable of retiring or engaging the enemy, instantly the sky was covered with clouds, and there fell a vast quantity of rain. The Roman army were about to quench their thirst, when the enemy came upon them with such fury, that they must certainly have been defeated, had it not been for a shower of hail, accompanied with a storm of thunder and lightning, which fell upon the enemy, without the least annoyance to the Romans, who by this means gained the victory. In the year 175 Antoninus made a treaty with several nations of Germany. Soon after, Aviclius Cassius, governor of Syria, revolted from the emperor: this insurrection, however, was suppressed by the death of Cassius, who was killed by a centurion named Anthony. Antoninus behaved with great lenity towards those who had been engaged for Cassius; he would not put to death, nor imprison, nor even sit in judgment himself upon any of the senators engaged in this revolt; but he referred them to the senate, fixing a day for their appearance, as if it had been only a civil affair. He wrote also to the senate, desiring them to act with indulgence rather than severity; not to shed the blood of any senator or noble, or of any other person whatsoever, but to allow this honour to his reign, that even under the misfortune of a rebellion, none had lost their lives, except in the first heat of the tumult: “And I wish,” said he, “that I could even recal to life many of those who have been killed; for revenge in a prince hardly ever pleases, since, even when just, it is considered too severe.” In the year 176 Antoninus visited Syria and Egypt; the kings of those countries, and ambassadors also from Parthia, came to visit him. He staid several days at Smyrna, and after he had settled the affairs of the east, went to Athens, on which city he conferred several honours, and appointed public professors there. From thence he returned to Rome with his son Commodus, whom he chose consul for the year following, though he was then but sixteen years of age, having obtained a dispensation for that purpose. On the 27th of Sept. the same year, he gave him the title of imperator; and on the 23d of Dec. he entered Rome in triumph, with Commodus, on account of the victories gained over the Germans. Dion Cassius tells us that he remitted all the debts which were due to himself and the public treasury during forty-six years, from the time that Adrian had granted the same favour, and burnt all the writings relating to those debts. He applied himself likewise to correct many enormities, and introduced several excellent regulations. He moderated the expences laid out on gladiators; nor would he suffer them to fight but with swords which were blunted like foils, so that their skill might be shewn without any danger of their lives. He endeavoured to clear up many obscurities in the laws, and mitigated, by new decrees, the severity of the old laws. He was the first, according to Capitolinus (Vit. Anton, cap. xxvii.) who appointed the names of all the children, born of Roman, citizens, to be registered within thirty days after their birth; and this gave him occasion to establish public registers in the provinces. He renewed the law made by Nerva, that no suit should be carried on against the dead, but within five years after their decease. He made a decree, that all the senators should have at least a fourth part of their estate in Italy. Capitolinus gives an account of several other regulations which he established. In the year 171 he left Rome with his son Commodus, in order to go against the Marcomanni, and other barbarous nations; and the year following gained a considerable victory over them: he would, in all probability, have entirely subdued them in a very short time, had he not been taken with an. illness, which carried him off on the 17th of March 180, in the fifty-ninth year of his age, and nineteenth of his reign. The whole empire regretted the loss of so valuable a prince, and paid the greatest regard to his memory; he was ranked amongst the gods, and every person almost had a statue of him in their houses. His book of “Meditations” has been much admired. It is written in Greek, and consists of twelve books; there have been several editions of it in Greek and Latin, two of which were printed before the year 1635, when the learned Meric Casaubon, prebendary of Canterbury, published a second edition of his translation of this work into English, dedicated to Laud, archbishop of Canterbury. It was also translated, in a very inelegant style, by Jeremy Collier. There was an edition afterwards printed at Glasgow, which is more correct; but the best is that published by the rev. R. Graves, 1792, 8vo. Of the learned Gataker’s two editions, Cambridge, 1652, 4to, Gr. and Lat. and London, 1697, the former is preferred. It is perhaps unnecessary to remark, that the valuable “Itinerary,” called Antoninus’s, does not belong to this, or any emperor of the name.

He left two sons, Marcus and Caius, of whom Bayle says, that they “were more worthy to be the father and uncle of Antonius the triumvir, than sons of the great man who gave them life.” The elder Marcus, surnamed Creticus, never raised himself beyond the prsetorship, but executed that office with a prodigious extent of authority, having the same commission which Pompey had afterwards, for importing corn and exterminating the pirates, which gave him the whole command of the seas. He committed great extortions in the provinces, particularly in Sicily. He invaded Crete without any declaration of war, on purpose to enslave it; and with such an assurance of victory, that he carried with him more fetters than arms. But he met with the fate that he deserved: for the Cretans totally routed him in a naval engagement, and returned triumphant into their ports, with the bodies of their enemies hanging on their masts. He died soon after this disgrace, infamous in his character, “nor in any respect a better man,” says Asconius, “than his son.”

Upon the death of Caesar, Anthony was alarmed, and hid himself during the night under the disguise of a slave; but, hearing that the conspirators were retired to the Capitol, he assembled the senate as consul, to deliberate upon, the present situation of the commonwealth. Here Cicero moved for a decree of a general amnesty, or act of oblivion, for all that was passed; to which they unanimously agreed. Anthony dissembled well; seemed to be all goodness; talked of nothing but healing measures; and, as a proof of his sincerity, moved, that the conspirators should be invited to take part in their deliberations, and sent his son as an hostage for their safety. Upon this they all came down from the Capitol; and to crown the joy of the day, Brutus supped with Lepidus, as Cassius did with Anthony. Anthony is said to have askad Cassius, during supper, “whether he still wore a dagger under his gown?” “Yes,” replied Cassius, “and a very large one, in case you invade the sovereign power.”

Upon the defeat of Brutus and Cassius by Octavius and Anthony at Philippi, which was owing chiefly to the military skill and bravery of the latter, Anthony obtained the sovereign dominion; and here he presents us with a most uncommon picture of human nature, when we consider how he was roused at once by Caesar’s death from the midst of pleasure and debauch, formed the true plan of his interest, and pursued it with a most surprising vigour and address, till, after many and almost insuperable difficulties, he accomplished at length what he all along aimed at. After the battle at Philippi, Anthony went into Asia, where he had the most splendid court that ever was seen. The kings and princes of Asia came to his levee, and acknowledged no other sovereign in the east but him. Queens and princesses, knowing him doubtless to be a man of gallantry, strove who should win his heart; and the famous Cleopatra of Egypt succeeded. The rest of Anthony’s history, his most luxurious and effeminate manner of living with this princess, and his ignominious death (for such it may be justly called), are all minutely and copiously reluted in the article of Cleopatra, to which we refer the reader. We shall only add a short account of Marcus Ju-' nius Antonius, his son by Fulvia.

, a celebrated French musician, was born at Paris, July 4, 1694, where he died June 15, 1772. He was so remarkable for early genius, that at the age of six he performed on the harpsichord before Louis XIV; at eight years old the celebrated Bernier declared he could teach him nothing more; and at twelve he was made organist at the church of Petit St. Antoine. Sometime after, he obtained a triumph highly flattering to a person of his profession, by successfully contending for the place of organist at the church of St. Paul, against Rameau, who at that time wished to be established in Paris. Wonders are told of the powers of execution and taste which Aquino displayed, and it is said that Handel visited France on purpose to hear him. He is celebrated also for his simple and amiable manners, and his attachment to religion. Two only of his works have been engraved, the one a collection of pieces for the harpsichord, and the other some carrols with variations; but he left to his son a considerable number of manuscript performances.

, a learned rabbi of Carpentras, whose proper name was Mardocai, or Mardocheus, was expelled from the synagogue of Avignon, in 16 10, on account of attachment to Christianity. On this he went to the kingdom of Naples, and was baptised at Aquino, from which he took his name; but when he came to France he gave it the French termination, Aquin. At Paris he devoted himself principally to teaching Hebrew, and Louis XIII. appointed him professor in the lioyal college, and Hebrew interpreter, which honourable station he held until his death in 1650, at which time he was preparing a new version of the New Testament, with notes on St. Paul’s epistles. Le Jay also employed him in correcting the Hebrew and Chaldee parts of his Polyglot. His principal printed works are, 1. “Dictionarium Hebrao-ChalclaoTalmudico-RabbinicunV' Paris, 1629, fol. 2.” Racines de la langue sainte,“Paris, 1620, fol. 3.” Explication des treize moyens dont se servaient les rabbins pour entendre le Pentateuque, recueillis du Talmud.“4.” An Italian translation of the Apophthegms of the ancient Jewish doctors.“5.” Lacrimae in obitum illust. cardinal de Berulle,“his patron. 6.” Examen mundL“7.” Discours du Tabernacle et du Camp des Israelites,“Paris, 1623, 4to. 8.” Voces primitiae seu radices Gnecac," Paris, 1620, 16mo, and others. Louis D‘Aquin, his son, who became as great an adept as his father in the Oriental tongues, left behind him several rabbinical works. Antoine D’Aquin, first physician to Louis XIV. who died in 1696, at Vichi, was son of the last-mentioned Louis.

was descended of a most ancient and honourable family, seated at Parkhall, in Warwickshire. He was born' in 1532, and his father dying when he was an infant of two years old, he became, before he inherited the estate of the family, the ward of sir George Throkmorton, of Coughton, whose daughter Mary he afterwards married. In all probability, it was his engagement with this family, and being bred in it, that made him so firm a papist as he was. However, succeeding his grandfather, Thomas Arden, esq. in 1562, in the familyestate, he married Mary (Throkmorton), and settled in the country, his religion impeding his preferment, and his temper inclining him to a retired life. His being a near neighbour to the great earl of Leicester, occasioned his having some altercations with him, who affected to rule all things in that county, and some persons, though of good families, and possessed of considerable estates, thought it no discredit to wear that nobleman’s livery, which Mr. Arden disdained. In the course of this fatal quarrel, excessive insolence on one side produced some warm expressions on the other; insomuch that Mr. Arden npenly taxed the earl with his conversing criminally with the countess of Essex in that earl’s lite-time; and also inveighed against his pride, as a thing more inexcusable in a nobleman newly created. These taunts having exasperated that minister, he projected, or at least forwarded, his destruction. Mr. Arden had married one of his daughters to John Somerville, esq. a young gentleman of an old family and good fortune, in the same county, but who was a man of a hot rash temper, and by many thought a little insane. He was drawn in a strange manner to plot (if it may be so called) against the queen’s life; and thus the treason is alleged to have been transacted. In the Whitsun-holidays, 1583, he with his wife was at Mr. Arden’s, where Hugh Hall, his father-in-law’s priest, persuaded him that queen Elizabeth being an incorrigible heretic, and growing daily from bad to worse, it would be doing God and his country good service to take her life away. When the holidays were over, he returned to his own house with his wife, where he grew melancholy and irresolute. Upon this his wife wrote to Hall, her father’s priest, to come and strengthen his purpose. Hall excused his coming, but wrote at large, to encourage Somerville to prosecute what he had undertaken. This letter induced Somerville to set out for London, but he proceeded no farther than Warwick, where, drawing his sword and wounding some protestaats, he was instantly seized. While he was going to Warwick, his wife went over to her father’s, and shewed him and her mother Hall’s treasonable letter, which her father threw into the fire; so that only the hearsay of this letter could be alleged against him and his wife, by Hall who wrote it, who was tried and condemned with them. On Somerville’s apprehension, he said somewhat of his father and mother-in-law, and immediately orders were sent into Warwickshire for their being seized and imprisoned. October 30, 1583, Mr. Somerville was committed to the Tower for high-treason. November 4, Hall, the priest, was committed also; and on the seventh of the same month, Mr. Arden. On the sixteenth, Mary the wife of Mr. Arden, Margaret their daughter, wife to Mr. Somerville, and Elizabeth, the sister of Mr. Somerville, were committed. On the twenty-third Mr. Arden was racked in the Tower, and the next day Hugh Hall the priest was tortured likewise. By these methods some kind of evidence being brought out, on the sixteenth of December Edward Arden, esq. and Mary his wife, John Somerville, esq. and Hugh Hall the priest, were tried and convicted of high-treason at Guildhall, London; chiefly on Hall’s confession, who yet received sentence with the rest. On the nineteenth of December, Mr. Arden and his son-in-law, Somerville, were removed from the Tower to Newgate, for a night’s time only. In this space Somerville was strangled by his own hands, as it was given out; but, as the world believed, by such as desired to remove him silently. The next day, being December 20, 1583, Edward Arden was executed at Smithfield with the general pity of all spectators. He died with the same high spirit he had shewn throughout his life. After professing his innocence, he owned himself a papist, and one who died for his religion, and want of flexibility, though under colour of conspiring against the state. He strenuously insisted, that Somerville was murdered, to prevent his shaming his prosecutors; and having thus extenuated things to such as heard him, he patiently submitted to an ignominious death. His execution was according to the rigour of the law, his head being set (as Somerville’s also was) upon London-bridge, and his quarters upon the city gates; but the body of his son-in-law was interred in Moornelds. Mrs. Arden was pardoned; but the queen gave the estate which fell to her, by her and her husband’s attainder, to Mr. Darcy. Hugh Hall, the priest, likewise was pardoned; but Leicester, doubting his secrecy, would have engaged chancellor Hatton to send him abroad; which he refusing, new rumours, little to that proud earl’s honour, flew about. Holinshed, Stowe, and other writers, treat Mr. Arden as a traitor fairly convicted; but Camden. was too honest to write thus, and it may be probable, that he died for being a firm Englishman, rather than a bad subject. His son and heir Robert Arden, esq. being bred in one of the inns of court, proved a very wise and fortunate person: insomuch that by various suits he wrung from Edward Darcy, esq. the grantee, most of his father’s estates, and by marrying Elizabeth, daughter of Reginald Corbet, esq. one of the justices of the king’s bench, he restored the credit and splendour of this ancient family, and was so happy as to see Henry Arden, esq. his eldest son, knighted by king James, and married to Dorothy the daughter of Basil Fielding of Kewnham, esq. whose son became earl of Denbigh. On this account, the last editor of the Biographia Britannica remarks, that the conduct of lord Burleigh in Mr. Arden’s fate is somewhat equivocal. If that great man. was convinced of Mr. Arden’s innocence, it was totally unworthy of his character to charge him with having been a traitor. It is more 'honourable, therefore, to lord Burleigh’s reputation, and more agreeable to probability, to suppose that he believed Mr. Arden to be guilty, at least in a certain degree, of evil designs against the queen. Indeed, Arden was so bigoted a papist, that it is not unlikely but that by some imprudent words, if not by actions, he might furnish a pretence for the accusations brought against him. We can scarcely otherwise imagine how it would have been possible for the government to have proceeded to such extremities. We do not mean, by these remarks, to vindicate the severity with which this unfortunate gentleman was treated; and are sensible that, during queen Elizabeth’s reign, there was solid foundation for the jealousy and dread which were entertained of the Roman catholics.

, an Italian printer, and one of the most learned and laborious editors of his time, was born at Bologna about the end of the year 1685. His family, then one of the most ancient in that city, was originally of Florence. After having begun his studies at Bologna, he went to Florence, and became acquainted with many of the literati of that city, particularly the celebrated Magliabechi. From Florence he went to Lucca, and then to Leghorn, where he meant to embark for France, but the death of one of his uncles rendered it necessary for him to return to his own country. He first projected an edition of the works, already in print, or in manuscript, of Ulysses Aldrovandi, with additions, notes, and corrections, and engaged several learned persons to assist him, but death having removed the greater part of them in a few years, he was obliged to give up the undertaking. He then published a collection of the poems of Carlantonio Bedori, a Bolognese gentleman, at Bologna, 1715, 4to. Two years after, having been elected one of the magistrates of that city, known by the title of the tribunes of the people, when he came to resign his office, he made an eloquent address on the duties of the office, which his successors ordered to be registered among their acts. His next and most important undertaking was an edition of that immense historical collection, entitled “Scriptores Rerum Italicarum.” The learned Muratori having imparted to him the design he had conceived of collecting and publishing the ancient Italian historians, acknowledged at the same time that he had been obliged to abandon the plan from the impossibility of finding a press adequate to such an extensive undertaking, the art of printing, once so highly cultivated in Italy, having now greatly degenerated. Argellati being of opinion that Milan was the only place where a trial might be made with effect, to revive useful printing, immediately went thither, and communicated Muratori’s plan to count Charles Archinto, the patron of letters, and his own particular patron. Archinto formed a society of noblemen of Milan, called the Palatine Society, who undertook to defray the expence of the edition, sixteen of the members subscribing four thousand crowns each. Argellati then took every necessary step to establish a printing-office suited to this liberal patronage, and the “Scriptores Rerum Italicarum” was the first work printed, in which Argellati bore a considerable part, collecting and furnishing Muratori with most of the manuscripts, notices, and dedications of the first volumes. He superintended at the same time, the printing of other works, particularly an edition of Sigonius, 1738/6 vols. fol. The emperor Charles VI. to whom it was dedicated, and who had repaid him for the dedication of the first volume of the Italian historians, by the title of imperial secretary, and a pension of three hundred crowns, now doubled this pension. Argellati continued to publish, with incredible labour and dispatch, various editions of works of importance, as “Opere inedite di Ludovico Castelvetro,” 1727, 4to. “Grazioli, De antiquis Mediolani aedificiis,” 1736, fol. “Thesaurus novus veterum Inscriptionum,” by Muratori, 1739, fol. But we are more particularly indebted to him for, 1. “Bibliotheca scriptorum Mediolanensium,” Milan, 1745, 2 vols. fol. 2. “Biblioteca de' Volgarizzatori Italiani,” Milan, 5 vols. 4to, 1767, besides which he contributed a great number of essays and letters to various collections. He died at Milan Jan. 5, 1755, after having had the misfortune to lose his son, the subject of the following article.

was one of the first of those learned persons who fled into Italy upon the taking of Constantinople by Mahomet II. in 1453, and contributed to the revival of Greek learning in the west. Cosmo de Medicis, duke of Tuscany, made him professor of Greek at Florence, and appointed him preceptor to his son Peter, and to his grandson Lorenzo. He had several illustrious pupils at Florence, to whom he read lectures in the Greek language and philosophy; and amongst the rest Angelas Politianus^ Acciaioli, and Reuchlinus. In 1456, he went into France, to ask the assistance of Charles VII. in behalf of some friends and relations, whom he wanted to redeem from Turkish slavery. He continued many years in his professorship at Florence; but, the plague at length obliging him to quit it, he went to Rome, where he publicly read lectures upon the Greek text of Aristotle. He died of an autumnal fever, which was brought on by an intemperate eating of melons, in the 70th year of his age, and (as is believed) soon after his settlement in Rome; but the time of his death is uncertain, yet it must have been after 1478, because he survived Theodorus Gaza, who died in that year. He was allowed to be very learned, but learning does not seem to have civilized or softened his manners, for he is represented as having been very capricious and very morose. He affirmed, that Cicero understood neither the Greek language nor philosophy, and is supposed to have conceived this peculiar prejudice against Cicero for saying, that the Greek was a language veibonim inops t poor and scanty in words. He was also a notorious epicure, and spent all his salaries, though very considerable, in the luxuries of the table. He was not so serious about his latter end, but that he bequeathed his debts in form to his richer friends, almost in the very act of dying. He translated several pieces of Aristotle into Latin, which language he also understood very well.

Ludovico was the first-born of his father’s children, and is reported to have surpassed the rest in the endowments of the mind; giving, from his tender years, uncommon presage of a future genius. Being yet in hn rudiments, he composed a kind of tragedv from the story of Pyramus and Thisbe, which he caused to be represented by his brothers and sisters. He applied himself very early to the study of the Latin, in which he made greater progress than almost any one of his age; and, in the very beginning of his studies, he composed and recited an elegfuit Latin oration, which gave the highest expectations of him. Tito Strozza, a man of great learning and consummate knowledge, took particular delight to hear him, and to propose, difticult questions for his solution; often encouraging a dispute, on literary subjects, between him and Hercules his son, a youth whose age and studies agreed with Ariosto. But his father Niculo, having little taste for literature, was desirous, that, as his eldest-born, he should pursue some lucrative profession, and sent him to Padua, to study the civil law, under Angelo Castrinse and 11 Ma'mo; in which employment he spent five years, highly disagreeable to one of his disposition; which circumstance he laments in one of his satires addressed to Bembo. But although Ariosto durst not openly di’sobey his father, he could not so far conquer his inclinations as to desist from perusing trench and Spanish romances, with which languages h6 was well acquainted, having translated two or three of these authors himself into his native tongue; and availed himself, in his future works, of every beauty that occurred in these wild productions of imagination. Nicolo, atlnst, perceiving the aversion his son had to the profession of the law, and the little progress he made therein, permitted him to obey the strong propensity of genius, and is said to have been, in a great degree, influenced by Pandolfo Ariosto, a youth of excellent endowments, and a near kinsman to Ludovico.

Several writers have affirmed, that he was solemnly crowned with laurel by the victorious Charles Y. in the city of Mantua, in 1532, for his Orlando Furioso; and this circumstance has been as positively denied by others. Mazzuchelii, in his life of Ariosto, has considered the arguments on both sides; and observes, that the silence of those authors on the subject, who certainly would not have passed over such an event, may justly render the whole suspected; that, among others, surely little attention can be paid to the authority of one writer, who relates that Ariosto had scarcely received the laurel crown, when, transported with joy, and inspired as it were with a poetical phrensy, he ran. through the city apparently as mad as his own Orlando. P'ornari speaks of the coronation; but Pigna and Garafolo make no mention of it. II siu;nore Dottore Barotti thus examines the supposed fact: “Many have doubted of the coronation by Charles, and writers, who speak of it, do not agree upon the time or place: some say that the ceremony was performed at Mantua, and others at Bologna; some, that it happened in 1530, and others, in 1532; but, surely it could not be in 1530, as the complete edition of the poem, with the praises of the emperor, was not published till 1532. In a manuscript book, delivered down for the hand-writing of his son Virginio, are these words: ‘E una baia che fosse coronato.’ But, in a public instrument between his son Virginio and his brother, in October 1542, we read as follows: ‘ Cum annis decursis animam egerit magnificus et Laureatus D. Ludovicus Areostus, &c.’ both which, the manuscript book and instrument, are in my possession. In a letter of Galasso Ariosto it is said, that Ariosto had scarce published the last edition of his work when he fell ill, and died after eight months. The publication was in October 1532, and it is difficult to suppose that he could be crowned in November, the time mentioned. Yet the epitaph, caused to be engraved by his nephew’s son Ludovico, sets forth the coronation. If Pigna and Garafolo affirm that he fell ill in December, it may be understood that he then took to his bed; and as to the medal of Ariosto crowned, nothing can be proved front that.” To this Mazzuchelli adds, that We may refer to the declaration of Franco, who asserts that he was not crowned; and concludes the argument, by opposing to all these, the authority of the exact Apostolo Zeno, who observes, that Franco petulantly denies that Ariosto was crowned poet, though, besides other testimonies, we have the exclusive privilege granted him by Charles V. The fact upon the whole appears doubtful.

, a celebrated grammarian, who flourished 160 years B. C. was born in Samothracia, but chose Alexandria for the place of his residence. He was highly esteemed by Ptolemy Philometor, who intrusted him with the education of his son. He applied himself much to criticism, and made a revisal of Homer’s poems with great exactness, but without the equity or impartiality of critic cism, for such verses as he did not like he treated as spurious. He marked these with the figure of a dart, uStbixe: whence othieiv was used for to condemn in general. Some have said, that he'never would publish any thing, for fear of giving the world an opportunity of retorting upon him; but others assure us that he published several works. Cicero and Horace have used his name to express a very rigid critic, and it is employed to this day for the same purpose, but not without opprobrium, derived partly from himself, and perhaps yet more from the manner of modern verbal critics. Growing dropsical, he found no other remedy than to starve himself to death. Suidas relates, that he died in Cyprus, aged seventy-two. Villoison, in his edition of the Iliad, has afforded the moderns an opportunity of appreciating the value of Aristarchus’ s criticisms on Homer, as well as those of the first editors of that immortal bard.

, surnamed The Just, one of the most virtuous characters in ancient history, was the son of Lysimachus, and a native of Athens. He was educated in the principles of Lycurgus, the Lacedemonian legislator, and had Themistocles for his rival. These two celebrated men, although brought up from their infancy together, discovered very different qualities as they advanced in life. Aristides was all candour and concern for the public good: Themistocles was artful, deceitful, and ambitious. Aristides wished to remove such a character from any share in the government, but the intrigues of his enemy prevailed so far as to procure the banishment of Aristides about the year 483 B. C. The practice of ostracism was employed on this occasion, and it is said that a citizen who did not know Aristides came to him, and asked him to write the name of Aristides on his shell. Surprised at this, he asked the man, if Aristides had ever injured him, “Not at all,” replied the other, “but I am weary of hearing him perpetually called The Just” Aristides immediately wrote his name on the shell, and gave it to the man; The Athenians, however, soon repented having banished such a patriot, and recalled him, upon which he went to Themistocles, to engage him to act in concert for the welfare of the state, and his old enemy received this offer with a better grace than his character promised. Aristides persuaded the Greeks to unite against the Persians, and displayed his personal courage at the battles of Marathon, Salamis, and Platsea. He besides established a military chest for the support of the war, and the equity with which he levied taxes for this purpose made his administration be termed the golden age. He died so poor that the republic found it necessary to defray the expences of his funeral, and provide for his son and daughters. The time of his death is not known. Themistocles, Cimpn, and Pericles, filled Athens with superb buildings, vast porticoes, and rich statues, but Aristides adorned it by his virtues. Such is the testimony of Plato, and of impartial posterity. The name of Just was frequently confirmed to him during his life-time, and he appears by every testimony to have been a man of great and inflexible integrity. Plutarch hints at the only blemish in his character, when he informs us that the enmity between him and Themistocles began first in a love affair.

, of Cyrene in Africa, disciple of Socrates, founder of the Cyrenaic sect, quitted Libya, the seat of his family, that he might go and hear Socrates at Athens; but he differed widely from the plan of wisdom laid down by that great man. The basis of his doctrine was, that pleasure is the sovereign good of man, and he made no distinction between the pleasures of the soul and those of the senses. He admitted of no certain knowledge, but that which we owe to the inward sentiment. “We have,” said he, “distinct ideas of pleasure and pain; but that which causes the sensations of it is unknown, because we are perpetually deceived by the outward senses. The same person judges differently of an outward object, according as he is differently affected. Of two persons who taste of the same dish, the one shall find it insipid, and the other agreeable. Consequently there is nothing certain in outward things, but only in what touches us internally. Of the different internal sentiments, some are agreeable, others disagreeable, while others again are indifferent. Nature abhors those which cause pain, and seeks the sovereign' good in those which occasion pleasure.” Aristippus, however, did not reject virtue; but regarded it only as a good, inasmuch as it produces pleasure. He held that it was not to be sought after for itself, but only upon account of the pleasures and advantages it may procure. In consonance with his principles, he denied himself nothing that could render life agreeable; and, as he was of a pliant and insinuating temper, and his philosophy easy and accommodating, he had a great number of followers. The nobles were fond of him; Dionysius the tyrant courted him, and at his court he covered the cloak of the philosopher with the mantle of the courtier. He danced and drank with him, regulated the banquets; and the cooks took his orders for the preparation and the delicacy of the viands. His conversation was rendered agreeable by continued flashes of wit. Dionysius the tyrant having asked him, how it happened that the philosophers were always besieging the doors of the great, whereas they never went to the philosophers?“It is,” replied Aristippus, “because the philosophers know their wants, and the great are ignorant of theirs.” According to others, his answer was more concise: “Because the pnysicians usually go to the sick.” One day that prince gave him the choice of three courtesans. The philosopher took them allthree, saying: “That Paris did not fare the better for having pronounced in favour of one goddess against two others.” He then conducted them to the door of his house, and there took leave of them. Being rallied one day on his intercourse with the wanton Lais: “It is true,” said he, “that I possess her, but she possesses not me.” On being reproached with living in too much splendour, he said, “If indulgence in good living were blameable, would such great feasts be made on the festivals of the gods?” “If Aristippus could be content to live upon vegetables (said Diogenes the cynic to him), he would not stoop so low as to pay his court to princes.” “If he who condemns me (replied Aristippus) was qualified to pay his court to princes, he would not be obliged to be content with vegetables.” On being asked, “What philosophy had taught him?” “To live well with all the world, and to fear nothing.” In what respect are philosophers superior to other men?“In this,” said he, “that though there were 110 laws, they would live as they do.” On being rallied, he used gently to withdraw. One day, however, he by whom he was attacked pursued him, and asked him why he went away?“Because, as you have a right to throw jests at me, I have also a right not to stay till they reach me.” It was one of his maxims, that it was better to be poor than ignorant, because the poor man Wants only to be assisted with a little money, whereas the ignorant man wants to be humanized. One bragging that he had read a great deal, Aristippus told him that it was no sign of good health to eat more than one can digest. It is said that he was the first who took payment of his disciples. Having asked 50 drachmas of a father for the instruction of his son: “How, fifty drachmas!” exclaimed the man, “I can buy a slave for that money.” “Well,” replied the philosopher, (who could assume the cynic as well as the courtier) “buy one, and then thou wilt have two.” Aristippus flourished about the year 400 B. C. He died at Gyrene, on his return from the court of Syracuse. He composed books of history and ethics, which have not reached our times. One on ancient luxury, mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, is certainly not his. He left a daughter named Arete, whom he carefully instructed in all the parts of philosophy, who was of extraordinary virtue as well as beauty, and obtained a place among the class of philosophers.

, the chief of the peripatetic philosophers, and one of the most illustrious characters of ancient Greece, was born in the first year of the ninety-ninth olympiad, or 384 years before the Christian sera, at Stagyra, a town of Thrace, whence he is usually called the Stagyrite. His father was a physician, named Nicomachus: his mother’s name was Phaestias. He received the first rudiments of learning from Proxenus, of Atarna in Mysia, and at the age of 17 went to Athens, and studied in the school of Plato, where his acuteness and proficiency so attracted the notice of his master, that he used to call him “The mind of the school;” and said, when Aristotle happened to be absent, “Intellect is not here.” His works, indeed, prove that he had an extensive acquaintance with books; and Strabo says, he was the first person who formed a library. At this academy he continued until the death of Plato, whose memory he honoured by a monument, an oration, and elegies, which contradicts the report of his having had a difference with Plato, and erecting a school in opposition to him, as related by Aristoxenus. At the time of the death of Plato, Aristotle was in his thirty-seventh year; and when Speusippus, the nephew of Plato, succeeded him in the academy, our philosopher was so much displeased, that he left Athens, and paid a visit to Hermias, king of the Atarnenses, who had been his fellow-disciple, and now received him with every expression of regard. Here he remained three years, prosecuting his philosophical researches; and when Hermias was taken prisoner and put to death, he placed a statue of him in the temple at Delphos, and married his sister, who was now reduced to poverty and distress, by the revolution which had dethroned her brother. After these events, Aristotle removed to Mitelene, where, after he had resided two years, he received a respectful letter from Philip, king of Macedon, who had heard of his great fame, requesting him to undertake the education of his son, Alexander, then in his fifteenth year. Aristotle accepted the charge, and in 343 B. C. went to reside in the court of Philip.

Dr. Kurd (late bishop of Worcester) patronized his son (Dr. William Arnald), a fellow of St. John’s college, who, by his favour and recommendation, became sub-preceptor to the prince of Wales and duke of York in 1776, and afterwards canon of Windsor, and prsecentor of Lichfield. He died in 1802, after having been for twenty years confined through insanity. He was much respected by his friends before this awful visitation, and they paid him every affectionate attention which his situation could admit.

, a learned critic, was born at Franeker, Sept. 16, 1711, of a family who were French refugees. His father, Honort; d'Arnaud, was chosen, in 1728, pastor of the French church at Franeker, and was living in 1763. His son, the subject of this article, published, at the age of twelve, some very elegant and harmonious Greek and Latin poems, and went afterwards to study at the university of Franeker, under the celebrated Wesseling and Hemsterhuis. Encouraged by the latter, he publisaed in 1728, “Specimen Animad. criticarum ad aliquot scriptores Greecos, &c.” 8vo. Harling. The authors are, Anacreon, Callimachus, Æschylus, Herodotus, Xenophon, and the grammarian Hephestion. Two years after he produced another volume of criticisms, under the title of “Lectionum Grsecarum libriduo, &c.” 8vo, Hague, 1730, treating principally of Hesychius, Aratus, Theon, Appian, and Apollonius Rhodius. In 1732, appeared his learned dissertation, “De Diis adsessoribus et conjunctis,” 8vo, Hague. About the same time he went to Leyden to examine the library there for materials towards an edition of Sophocles, which he was preparing, but never completed. On his return to Franeker, his friend Hemsterhuis advised him to study law; his own inclination was to divinity, but a disorder in his chest rendered it improbable that he could have sustained the exertion of preaching. Abraham Weiling was his tutor in law studies, and under him he defended a thesis, Oct. 9, 1734, “De jure servorum apud Romanos,” and discovered so much talent and erudition, that in the month of June, next year, he was appointed law reader. In 1738, his “Variarum conjecturarum libri duo” were published at Franeker, 4to. They consist of disquisitions and questions on civil law. The second edition of 1744, Leu warden, contains his thesis above mentioned, and a second on a curious subject, “De iis qui prætii pariicipandi caussa semet venundari patiuntur.” In 1739, on Weiling’s leaving the university of Franeker for that of Leyden, d'Arnaud was appointed professor in his room, but died before he could take possession, June 1, 1740, scarcely twenty-nine years of age. Besides the works already enumerated, from the pen of this extraordinary young man, there are several lesser pieces by him in the 4th, 5th, and 6th vols. of the “Miscellaneæ Observat.” of Amsterdam; and he left in manuscript a dissertation on the family of Scievola, “Vitæ Scævolarum,” which was published by H. J. Arntzenius, at Utrecht, 1767, 8vo. His funeral eulogium was pronounced by Hemsterhuis, and is in the collection entitled, “T. Hemsterhusii et Valckenarii Orationes,” Leyden, 1784, 8vo.

, a Lutheran divine, and ecclesiastical antiquary, was born at Gustro,n, in 1626, and succeeded his brother Christian (the subject of the article before the last) as the logic professor at Rostock in 1633. He was afterwards appointed almoner to Gustavus Adolphus, duke of Mecklenburgh, and died in 1685, after having published a great many writings, philosophical, historical, and controversial. The greater part are enumerated by Niceron, vol. XLIII. Those most celebrated in his time, were: 1. “Lexicon antiquitatum Ecclesiasticarum,” Greifswaki, 1667, 1669, 4to. 2. “Genealogia Scaligerorum,” Copenhagen, 1648. 3. “Trutina statuum Europae Ducis de Rohan,” Gustron, 1665, 8vo, often reprinted. 4. “Laniena Sabaudica,” Rostock, 1655, 4to. 5. “Exercit. de Claudii Salmasii erroribus in theologia,” Wittembero-, 1651, 4to. 6. “Observat. ad Franc. Vavassoris librum de forma Christi,” Rostock, 1666, 8vo. 7. Some Latin poems, and a Latin translation of the History of Wailenstein from the Italian of Gualdi, with notes, ibid. 1669. [For his Son, Charles Arndt, see next entry]

, an eminent English musician, was the son of Thomas Arne, upholsterer, of Kingstreet, Covent-garden, at whose house the Indian kings lodged in the reign of queen Anne, as mentioned in the Spectator, No. 50, and who had been before pleasantly depicted by Addison, in the Tatler, Nos. 155 and 160, as a crazy politician. He sent this son, who was born May 28, 1710, to Eton school, and intended him for the profession of the law; but even at Eton his love for music interrupted his studies and after he left that school, such was his passion for his favourite pursuit, that he used to avail himself of the privilege of a servant, by borrowing a livery, and going into the upper gallei'y of the opera, which was then appropriated to domestics. At home he had contrived to secrete a spinet in his room, upon which, after muffling the strings with a handkerchief, he used to practise in the night while the rest of the family were asleep, His father, who knew nothing of this, bound him to a three years’ clerkship, during which this young votary of Apollo dedicated every moment he could obtain fairly, or otherwise, to the study of music. Besides practising on the spinet, and studying composition, by himself, he contrived to acquire some instructions on the violin, of Festing, a performer of much fame at that time; and upon this instrument he had made so considerable a progress, that soon after he quitted his legal master, his father accidentally calling at a gentleman’s house in the neighbourhood, was astonished to find a large party, and a concert, at which his son played the first fiddle. His father was at first much irritated at this disappointment of his hopes, but was soon prevailed upon to let his son follow the bent of his inclinations; and the young man was no sooner at liberty to play aloud in his father’s house, than he bewitched the whole family. In particular, he cultivated the voice of one of his sisters, who was fond of music, by giving her such instruct tions as enabled her to become a favourite public performer. For her and for a younger brother, who performed the character of the page, he set to music Addison’s opera of Rosamond, which was performed at Lincoln’s Inn Fields, ten nights successively, and with great applause.

, a learned philologist, was born at Wesel, in 1702, the son of Henry Arntzenius, who had been successively director of the schools of Wesel, Arnheim, and Utrecht, and died in 1728. Our author studied law, but devoted himself more to classical literature. At Utrecht he was the pupil of Drakenborch and Duker, and at Leyden, of Burmann and Havercamp, and he had scarcely completed the ordinary course of education, when the reputation he had acquired procured him the offer of director of the lesser schools of Nimeguen; but before accepting this, he took the degree of doctor of laws at Utrecht, and published his thesis, on that occasion, July 1726, “De nuptiis inter fratrem et sororem,” Nimeguen. In 1728, he was appointed professor of history and rhetoric in the Atheneum of Nimeguen: and in 1742, he succeeded Burmann in his professor’s chair at Franeker. He died in 1759. His works are, 1. “Dissertationes de colore et tinclura comarum et de civitate Romana Apostoli Pauli,” Utrecht, 1725, 8vo. 2. “Oratio de delectu scriptorum qui juventuti in scholis prcelegendi sunt,” Nimeguen, 1726, 4to. 3. “Oratio de causis corrupts Eloquentise,” ibid. 1728, 4to. 4. An edition of “Aurelius Victor,” 1733, 4to, with the entire notes of Domim'cus Machaneus, Elias Vinctus, Andreas Scottus, and Janus Gruterus, and the excerpta of Sylburgius, and of Anna, daughter of Tanaquil Faber. 5. An edition of “Plinii Panegyricus,” enriched by excerpta from many manuscripts, and the learned conjectures of Heinsius and Perizonius. Its only fault, Ernesti says, is in defending too pertinaciously the common readings. 6. An edition of the “Panegyricus of Pacatus,” Amst. 1753, 4to. His Latin poems and orations were published after his death by his son John Henry, 1762, 8vo.

, bishop of Constantinople, was called to the metropolitan see, from a private monastic life, in 1255, by the emperor Theodore Lascaris who, a little before his death, constituted him one of the guardians of his son John, an infant in the sixth year of his age. Arsenius was renowned for piety and simplicity but these afforded no security against the ambition and perfidy of the age. Michael Palseologus usurped the sovereignty and Arsenius at length, with reluctance, overpowered by the influence of the nobility, consented to place the diadem on his head, with this express condition, that he should resign the empire to the royal infant when he came to maturity. But after he had made this concession, he found his pupil treated with great disregard, and, probably repenting of what he had done, he retired from his see to a monastery. Sometime after, by a sudden revolution, Palaeologus recovered Constantinople from the Latins and amidst his successes, found it necessary to his reputation to recall the bishop, and he accordingly fixed him in the metropolitan see such was the ascendancy of Arsenius’s character. Palaeologus, however, still dreaded the youth, whom he had so deeply injured and, to prevent him from recovering his throne, he had recourse to the barbarous policy of putting out his eyes. Arsenius hearing this, excommunicated the emperor, who then exhibited some appearance of repentance. But the bishop refused to admit him into the church, and Palaeologus meanly accused him of certain crimes before an assembly, over which he had absolute sway. Arsenius was accordingly condemned, and banished to a small island of the Propontis. Conscious of his integrity, he bore his sufferings with serenity and requesting that an account might be taken of the treasures of the church, he shewed that three pieces of gold, which he had earned by transcribing psalms, were the whole of his property. The emperor, after all this, solicited him to repeal his ecclesiastical censures, but he persisted in his refusal and, it is supposed, died in his obscure retreat. Gibbon, with his usual suspicions respecting the piety and virtue of an ecclesiastic, endeavours to lessen the character of this patriarch.

, celebrated for a superstitious treatise upon Dreams, was born at Ephesus, but took the surname of Daldianus in this book, out of respect to the country of his mother, and he styled himself the Ephesian in his other performances. He lived under the emperor Antoninus Pius, as himself informs us, when he tells us that he knew a wrestler, who, having dreamed he had lost his sight, carried the prize in the games celebrated by command of that emperor. He not only bought up all that had been written concerning the explication of dreams, which amounted to many volumes, but likewise spent many years in travelling, in order to contract an acquaintance with the tribe of fortune-tellers he also carried on an extensive correspondence with all persons of this description in Greece, Italy, and the most populous islands, collecting at the same time all reports of dreams, and the events which are said to have followed them. He despised the reproaches of those supercilious persons, wlho treat the foretellers of events as cheats, impostors, and jugglers, and frequented much the company of those diviners for several years. He was the more assiduous in his study and search after the interpretation of dreams, being moved thereto, as he fancied, by the advice, or, in some measure, by the command of Apollo. The work which he wrote on dreams consists of five books the three first were dedicated to one Cassius Maximus, and the two last to his son, whom he took a good deal of pains to instruct in the nature and interpretation of dreams. The work was first printed in Greek, at Venice, 1518, 8vo; and Regaltius published an edition at Paris, Greek and Latin, in 1603, 4to, and added some notes. Artemidorus wrote also a treatise upon Auguries, and another upon Chiromancy, but they are not extant. Contemptible as his work is, it contains some curious particulars respecting ancient rites and customs. Bayle remarks, what may indeed be said of all works of the kind, that there is not one dream which Artemidorus has explained in a particular manner, but what will admit of a very different explication, and this with the same degree of probability, and founded upon as reasonable principles as those upon which Artemidorus proceeds.

His body was brought over to England, accompanied by his manuscripts, which underwent a strict examination but as nothing of his is now to be found in the State-paper office, it is probable that the whole was lost by neglect, or wilfully destroyed. He was interred on the 12th of May following, in Westminster abbey, in a vault which, in 1722, had been prepared by his directions. There is no memorial over his grave nor could there well be any, unless his friends would have consented (which it is most probable they refused to do) that the words implying him to have died bishop of Rochester should have been omitted on his tomb. The funeral was performed in a very private manner, attended only by his son-in-law Mr. Morice, and his two chaplains, Dr. Savage and Mr. Moore. Upon the urn which contained his bowels was inscribed,

, was a celebrated Roman knight, to whom Cicero wrote a great number of letters, which contain the general history of the times. These are still extant, divided into seventeen books but it is the excellence of Atticus’s private character which has procured him a place in most collections of this description. He was a man of such prudence, that, without departing from his neutrality, he preserved the esteem and affection of all parties. He sent money to the younger Marius, who had been declared an enemy to the commonwealth yet was so much in favour with Sylla, that this Roman general would always have had him with him. He kept himself quiet at Rome during the war between Caesar and Pompey, without giving offence to the one or the other, and he sent money to Brutus, while he was doing kind offices to An­%ony. Afterwards, in the cruel divisions which arose between Antony and Augustus, he contrived to preserve the friendship of both, difficult as it must have been in the case of two such antagonists. The strict friendship he had with Cicero., did not hinder him from being intimate with Hortensius and he was the cause (as Nepos, his biographer, tells us) that these two rivals not only ceased from mutual reproaches, but even lived together upon very good terms. The contests between the parties of Cinna and Marius induced him to go to Athens young, where he continued a long time, and became such a favourite with the Athenians, that the day he left them was a day of mourning. He never attempted to raise himself above the rank of life in which he was born, which was that of knight, although he might have obtained the highest posts in the republic but he chose to renounce all pretensions to them, because, in the then prevailing corruption, he could neither gain nor discharge them according to the laws, and as a man of integrity; no inconsiderable proof of his virtue, notwithstanding he has been charged with avarice and political duplicity. He did not marry till he was fifty-three, and had only a daughter, who was married to Agrippa from which marriage came a daughter, whom Augustus betrothed to Tiberius almost as soon as she was born. He reached the age of seventy-seven years, almost without knowing bodily illness but when his last sickness, which was slight for three months, at length became painful, he sent for Agrippa, his son-in-law, and two other persons, and declared to them a resolution to put an end to his life, by abstinence from food. Agrippa remonstrated with tears, but all in vain. After two days abstinence, the fever left him, and the disease abated but Atticus persisted, and died three days after. This happened in the year of Rome 721.

Many curious anecdotes are reported of his freedoms with the king. Before he returned to the court, he sent one of his pages to announce to the sovereign that he was upon the road. The king asked him from whence he came? The page said, “Yes, yes;” and to every question that was put to him, still returned “Yes, yes.” On the king’s asking him why he continued to answer his questions in that manner, he replied, “Sire, I said yes yes, because kings drive away from their presence all persons who will not make use of those words to every thing which their sovereigns require of them.” While equerry to the king, and lying one night with the Sieur de la Force in the guard chamber, he whispered in his companion’s ear, “Certainly our master is the most covetous, and most ungrateful mortal upon earth.” Receiving no answer, he repeated the accusation, but la Force, being scarcely awake, did not hear him distinctly, and asked, “What do you say, D'Aubigne?” “Cannot you hear him?” said the king, who was awake, “he tells you I am the most covetous and most ungrateful mortal on earth.” “Sleep on, sire,” replied D'Aubigne, “I have a good deal more to say yet.” The next day, Aubigne tells us in his memoirs, the king did not look unkindly on him, but still gave him nothing. After, however, sometimes pleasing and sometimes displeasing the king and court by these freedoms, he again found it necessary to retire, and passed the rest of his days at Geneva, where he died in 1630, in the 80th year of his age. It was here probably, where he was received with great respect and honour, that he employed his pen on those various works which entitle him to a distinguished place in the republic of letters. These were his universal history, entitled “Histoire Universelle depuis 1550 jusq'en 1601, avec un histoire abregée de la mort de Henry IV.” 3 vols. folio, printed at St. Jean d'Angeli, although the title page says Maille, 1616—18—20, and reprinted in 1626, with additions and corrections. The first edition is in most request by the curious, as having some strokes of satire in it which are omitted in the other. His style is not uniform, and he often departs from the dignity of history to indulge in a jocose garrulity, accompanied with impassioned coarse passages, which are, however, highly characteristic of the writer. The first volume was burnt by order of the parliament of Paris, on account of the freedoms he had taken with the royal personages, particularly Henry III. The first and second parts of this history, which contain the wars of the prince of Condé and of the admiral Coligny, the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and the first transactions of the League, are given rather in a succinct form, but the third, which continues the detail until the peace of Henry the Great, is the most full and most correct. He wrote also some “Tragedies,” 1616, 4to and 8vo; “A collection of Poetical pieces,” printed at Geneva, 1630, 8vo; a very satirical piece entitled “La Confession de Sancy;” and in 1731, was printed “Baron de Foeneste,” 12mo, said to be his, which is a more gross composition. In the same year his Memoirs, written by himself, were printed, and have been translated into English. His son, Constant D'Aubigne, a most profligate character, was the father of madame de Maintenon.

, president in the election, or court of assessors of Orleans, was a learned lawyer, and esteemed an excellent Latin poet in the sixteenth century. He studied at Bologna under Alciat, and on his return to France, wrote the greater part of his poems. The elogium on Venice induced that republic to bestow upon him the order of St. Mark, with the chain of gold of the order. Henry III. of France also granted him letters of nobility, and permitted him to add to his arms two fleur-de-lis of gold. Notwithstanding these honours, he continued to act as assessor at Orleans for the space of fifty years. He died Dec. 24, 1598, aged about eighty years. “He wrote” Roma, poema,“Paris, 1555, 4to. 2.” Venetia, poema- r Venice, 1583, 4to. 3. “Partenope,” Paris, 1585. These three werepublished together at Hanau, according to Bayle or Hanover, according to Moreri, in 1603. He wrote other poems which would have probably been published by his son, had he lived longer but he died five days after his father.

, an ingenious English musician, was born probably at Newcastle, where he exercised his profession during the whole of his life. In 1736, July 12, he was appointed organist of St. John’s church in that town, which he resigned for the church of St. Nicholas in October following. In 1748, when the organ of St. John’s required repair, which would amount to 160l. Mr. Avison offered to give 100l. if the parish would raise the other 60l. upon condition that they appointed him organist, with a salary of 20l. and allow him to supply the place by a sufficient deputy. This appears to have been agreed upon, and the place was supplied by his son Charles. In 1752 he published “An essay on Musical Expression,” London, 12mo. In this essay, written with neatness and even elegance of style, he treats of the power and force of music, and the analogies between it and painting of musical composition, as consisting of harmony, air, and expression and of musical expression so far as it relates to the performer. To the second edition, which appeared in 1753^ was added, an ingenious and learned letter to the author, concerning the music of the ancients, now known to be written by Dr. Jortin. Mr. Avison’s treatise was very favourably received, but some were dissatisfied with his sentiments on the excellencies and defects of certain eminent musicians, and particularly his preference of Marcello and Geminiani, or at least, the latter, to Handel. In the same year, therefore, was published, “Remarks on Mr. Avison’s essay, &c. wherein the characters of several great masters, both ancient and modern, are rescued from the misrepresentations of the above author and their real merit ascertained and vindicated. In a letter, from a gentleman to his friend in the country.” In this tract, which was written by Dr. Hayes, professor of music at Oxford, Mr. Avison is treated with very little ceremony, and accused of being ignorant, or neglectful of our ancient English musicians, and of having spoke too coldly of the merits of Handel. It is also insinuated that he was obliged to abler pens for the style and matter of his essay. This last was probably true, as both Dr. Brown and Mr. Mason are supposed to have assisted him, but in what proportions cannot now be ascertained. Mr. Avison wrote a reply to Dr. Hayes, nearly in the same uncourtly style, which was republished in the third edition of his essay in 1775. Avison had been a disciple of Geminiani, who, as well as Giardini, had a great esteem for him, and visited him at Newcastle, where the latter played for his benefit. Whenever Geminiani affected to hold Handel’s compositions cheap, it was usual with him to say, “Charley Avison shall make a better piece of music in a month’s time.” Avison died at Newcastle, May 10, 1770, and was succeeded in the church of St. Nicholas, by his son Edward, who himself died in 1776, and in the church of St. John, by his son Charles, who resigned in 1777. Avison assisted in the. publication of Marcello’s music to the psalms adapted to English words. Of his own composition there are extant five collections of concertos for violins, forty-four in number; and two sets of sonatas for the harpsichord, and two violins, a species of composition little known in England till his time. The music of Avison is light and elegant, but wants originality, a consequence of his too close attachment to the style of Geminiani.

, son to the senator Isychius, and brother to Apollinaris, bishop of Valentia, was promoted in the beginning of the sixth century to the archbishopric of Vienna, which his father had also held for some years. His principal object was the refutation and conversion of the Arians, and during his conferences, for this purpose with the Arian bishops before Goudeband king of Burgundy, who was an Arian, he converted his son Sigismorid. Cave thinks he converted the king himself, and when he found him concealing his principles, urged him to a public profession of them. He wrote also in defence of pope Symmachus, and died in the year 523. His principal works were Letters, Sermons, and Poems his Letters, 87 in number, contain many curious particulars of the civil and ecclesiastical history of the times. Of his Homilies, one only is extant on Rogation day, in which he gives the origin of the days so called. In all his works, his style is harsh, obscure, and intricate. His poems were printed at Francfort in 1507, and at Paris and Lyons in 1508, 1509, and 1536 but his whole works were published at Paris by father Sirmond, in 1643, fol. and since that Luc d'Achery published in his Spicilegium, the conference with the Arian bishops.

On the 6th of April, in the same year, there was a dreadful earthquake and in the dead of the night of the 1 st of May, it was felt again, which, as it exceedingly terrified the people, so the bishop, that he might turn their concern to a proper object, and at the same time exhibit to them reasonable grounds of comfort, composed certain prayers to be made use of in the public service. In 1581, the bishop had an angry contest with the lord Rich, who kept one Wright a puritan minister in his house, and would have compelled the bishop to license him to preach in his diocese but on a hearing before the ecclesiastical commissioners, Wright was committed to the Fleet, and others who had interfered in this affair, to other prisons. This increased the number of his enemies, of whom he had not a few before, who daily suggested that he was a violent man, and sought to vest too great a power in churchmen and these representations had such effect, that sometimes messages were sent to him, to abate somewhat of the rigour of his proceedings. His lordship, however, still supported the ecclesiastical commission, by his presence and authority; and though a milder course might have made him more popular, yet he thought it better to suffer himself, than that the church should. He began, however, to have many doubts concerning the treasurer, from whose hands his reproofs usually came but upqn the winding up of his cause before the council about felling of woods, he saw clearly, that he had no friend equal to the treasurer, who, though he endeavoured by his admonitions to prevent his falling into difficulties, yet generously exerted his utmost power to help him out of them, so far as was consistent with equity, and the good of the common weal. From this time forward, therefore, thebishop applied chiefly to the treasurer, for any favours he expected from court, particularly with regard to the business of his translation. He became exceedingly solicitous to be removed from London, either to Winchester or Ely; but, though he had many fair promises, his interest was insufficient, and in the mean time new informations, some with little, many with no cause at all, were exhibited against him, and gave him not a little uneasiness, although, on a thorough examination, his conduct escaped the censure of his superiors. In 1583 he performed his triennial visitation, and having discovered many scandalous corruptions in the ecclesiastical courts, especially in the business of commuting penances, he honestly represented what came to his knowledge to the privy council. About this time also he suspended certain ministers, accused of nonconformity and it appears, that upon a thorough examination of the matter, his lordship did impartial justice, in restoring one Mr. Giffard, whom he had twice suspended, when those who had charged him were able to make nothing out. In this year also he committed Mr. Thomas Cartwright, the celebrated Puritan minister, who had written against the hierarchy. Yet for this his lordship incurred the queen’s displeasure and a little after was informed that he stood accused to her majesty, for impairing the revenues of his bishopric, of which he purged himself, by exhibiting a state of the bishopric as it then stood, compared with the condition it was in when he became bishop. Other difficulties. he met with, on account of the share he had in executing her majesty’s ecclesiastical commission, from which there were Continual appeals to the privy council, where the lords who favoured the Puritans, did not fail to object to the bishop’s conduct, which contributed not a little to irritate his warm temper. In 1585 he composed a prayer to be used on account of the rainy unseasonable weather, which he recommended to private families, as well as directed to be read with the public prayers. He also used his interest to quiet the murmurs of the common people in London, against the crowds of strangers who fled hither, to avoid the persecutions raised against them, for embracing the Protestant religion. In the summer of the year 1586, the, bishop went his next triennial visitation, and at Maiden in Essex, narrowly escaped an outrageous insult, intended against him by some disaffected persons. In 1587, the bishop entered into a new scene of trouble, on account of one Mr. Robert Cawdry, schoolmaster, whom the lord Burleigh had presented to the living of South LufFenhara in Rutlandshire, where, after preaching sixteen years, he was convened before the ecclesiastical commission, and at length, the bishop sitting as judge, deprived. Cawdry would not submit to the sentence upon which the matter was re-examined by the ecclesiastical commission, at Lambeth, where to deprivation, degradation was added. Cawdry, however, still refusing to submit, made new and warm representations to the lord Burleigh, who favoured him as much as with justice he could but after near five years contest, the bishop’s and archbishop’s sentences were supported, both by the civil and common lawyers. In 1588, his lordship restored one Mr. Henry Smith, a very eloquent and much admired preacher, whom he had suspended for contemptuous expressions against the book of Common Prayer, which Smith denied. In 1589, he expressed his dislike of certain libels against the king of Spain, giving it as his reason, that on so glorious a victory, it was better to thank God, than insult men, especially princes. That year also he visited his diocese, though he was grown old and very infirm, and suspended one Dyke at St. Alban’s, though he had been recommended by the lord treasurer. In 1591 he caused the above-mentioned Mr. Cartwright to be brought before him out of the Fleet, and expostulated with him roundly, on the disturbance he had given the church. In 1592, he strongly solicited in favour of Dr. Bullingham, and Dr. Cole, that they might be preferred to bishoprics, but without success, which his lordship foresaw. For he observed when he applied for them, that he was not so happy as to do rmieh good for his friends yet he added, he would never be wanting in shewing his good will, both to them and to the church. About this time, casting his eye on Dr. Bancroft, a rising and very active man, he endeavoured to obtain leave to resign his bishopric to him, as a man every way fit for such a charge but in this also he was disappointed, which it seems lay heavy at his heart for even on his death-bed, he expressed his earnest desire that Bancroft might succeed him. In 1592, the bishop assisted at his son’s visitation, as archdeacon of London, and exerted himself with as much zeal and spirit as he had ever shewn in his life. His great age, and great labours, however, weighed him down by degrees, and he died June 3, 1594, and his body being brought from his palace at Fulham, was interred in St. Paul’s cathedral before St. George’s chapel, under a fair stone of grey marble, with an inscription which was demolished by the republicans in Cromwell’s time. Bishop Aylmer married Judith Bure&, or Buers, of a very good family in Suffolk, by whom he had a very numerous offspring, viz. seven sons, and two or three daughters. As to the personal qualities of the bishop, they were, as those of most men are, good and bad, the former, perhaps, too much magnified by his friends, as the latter were by his enemies. He was solidly and extensively learned in all things that became either a great churchman, or a polite man, to know. He was very well versed in the three learned languages, had read much history, was a good logician, and very well skilled in the civil law. As a divine, he had studied, and understood the scripture thoroughly could preach, not only rhetorically but pathetically and in the course of his life-time, never buried his talent . He was in his heart, from the conviction of his head, a Protestant, and opposed Popery warmly, from a just sense of its errors, which he had the courage to combat openly in the days of queen Mary, and the honesty to suppress in the reign of queen Elizabeth. With all this, and indeed with a temper occasionally soured and irritable, he was a good-natured, facetious man, one extremely diligent and painful in the several employments he went through of too generous a temper to be corrupted, and of much too stout a one to be brow-beaten. He was a magnificent man in his house, as appears by his household, which consisted of fourscore persons, to whom he was a liberal and kind master. After his fatigues he was wot to refresh himself, either with conversation or at bowls. As to his failings, his temper was without doubt warm, his expressions sometimes too blunt, and his zeal not guided by wisdom. His enemies charged him with an exorbitant love of power, which displayed itself in various extraordinary acts of severity, with covetousness, which prompted him to spoil his see, and injure a private man; with intemperate heat against Puritans, with a slight regard of the Lord’s day, and with indecencies in ordinary speech some of which charges must be allowed a foundation, while on the other hand they appear to have been greatly exaggerated. But upon the whole there must have been many errors in a conduct which his superiors so often reproved. At the time of his decease he left seven sons, and either two or three daughters. His sons were, first, Samuel, who was bred to the law. He was stiled, of Claydon-hall in the county of Suffolk, and was high-sheriff of that county in the reign of king Charles I. and by two wives left a numerous posterity. His second, Theophilus, a most worthy divine, archdeacon of London, rector of Much-Hadham in Hertfordshire, and doctor of divinity. He was chaplain to king James, an able and zealous preacher, and, like his father, zealous against the Puritans, but so charitable, that he left his own family in indifferent circumstances. He lived a true pattern of Christian piety, and died heroically, closing his own eyelids, and with these words in his mouth, “Let my people know that their pastor died undaunted, and not afraid of death I bless my God, I have no fear, no doubt, no reluctancy, but a sure confidence in the sin-overcoming itierits of Jesus Christ.” This happened January 1625. He was buried in his own parish church, and the excellent primate Usher preached his funeral sermon, no inconsiderable proof of his merit. His third, John, who for some eminent service was knighted, and styled sir John Aylmer, of Rigby in the county of Lincoln, knt. Fourth, fifth, and sixth, Zachary, Nathaniel, and Edmund, of whom we know nothing particularly, except that Zachary and Edmund were the warmest friends that age produced. When Edmund lay sick, Zachary continued with him night and day till his death, and when a person came to measure the body, in order to make a coffin, Zachary would be measured also, and in a very short space took possession of the coffin made for him at the same time with that of his deceased brother. These gentlemen seem to have been divines. His seventh, Tobel, i.e. God is good. Archbishop Whitgift was his godfather, and the reason he was thus named, was his mother’s being overturned in a coach, without receiving any hurt, when she was big with child. He wrote himself Tobel Aylmer, of Writtle, in the county of Essex, gentleman. He married a gentleman’s daughter in that county, and had by her several children. As to the bishop’s daughters, Judith, the eldest, married William Lynch, of the county of Kent, esq. the second, Elizabeth, married sir John Foliot of Perton, in the county of Worcester, knt. Either a third daughter, or else lady Foliot, took for her second husband Mr. Squire, a clergyman, a man of wit, but very debauched, and a great spendthrift, though he had large preferments. He made a very unkind husband to his wife, which her father, the bishop, so much resented, that, as Martin MarPrelate phrasss it, “He went to buffets with his son-inlaw, for a bloody-nose .” This Squire died poor, lerving a son named John, who was well educated, and provided for as a clergyman, at the ex pence, and by the procurement of his uncle, Dr. Theophilus Aylmer, which he repaid with the utmost gratitude. To all his children our bishop, by his will, bearing date the 22d of April, 1594, bequeathed large legacies, as also some to his grand-children, appointing his two sons, Samuel and Theophilus, his executors, with Dr. Richard Vaughan, who was also his relation.

, in Latin Ærodius, lieutenant-criminal in the presidial of Angers, was born there in 1536. He studied Latin and philosophy at Paris, and law at Toulouse from thence he went to Bourges for the advantage of the public lectures of Duarenus, Cujas, and Doneau, three of the most excellent civilians of that age. Having taken the degree of bachelor at Bourges, he returned to his own country, where he read public lectures upon the civil law, and pleaded several causes. He returned to Paris some time after, and became one of the most famous advocates in the parliament. He published there, in 1563, “The Declamations of Quintilian,” which he corrected in a variety of places, and illustrated with notes. The year following he published, in the same city, a treatise “ coneerning the power of Redemption,” written by Francis Grimaudet, the king’s advocate at Angers, and wrote a preface to it concerning “the nature, variety, and change of Laws.” In 1567 he published “Decretorum Rerumve apud diversos populos et omni antiquitate judicatarum libri duo accedit tractatus de origine et auctoritate rerum judicatarum,” which he much enlarged in the subsequent editions. He left Paris the year following, in order to take upon him the office of lieutenant-criminal in his own country, and performed it in such a manner as to acquire the name of “the rock of the accused.” Some other writings came from his pen, political or controversial, but that which acquired most fame among foreigners was his treatise “De Patrio Jure,” on the power of fathers, written in French and Latin, and occasioned by his son having been seduced by the Jesuits. His father, for the purposes of education, had put him under their tuition, but perceiving that he had a lively genius, a strong memory, and other excellent qualifications, he very earnestly desired both the provincial of that order, and the rector of the college, not to solicit him to enter into their society, which they readily promised, but soon broke their word and, though he made the greatest interest, and even prevailed on the king of France and the pope to take his part, he could never recover him from their snares. The young man answered his father’s book, but his superiors were ashamed to publish it, and employed Richeome, the provincial of the Jesuits at Paris, to answer it, but even this they did not venture to publish. Peter Ayrault died July 21, 1601. His son not until 1644.

, a very useful contributor to the literary history of his country, was the son of George Ayscough of Nottingham, a respectable tradesman, who unfortunately launched into speculations which impaired his fortune. His son Samuel, after receiving a school education, assisted his father in the business of a farm for some time, and afterwards was reduced to work as a labouring miller for the maintenance of his father and sister. While at this humble occupation, which did not procure the very moderate advantage he expected, an old schoolfellow and friend, hearing of his distress, about 1770, sent for him to London, and obtained for him at first the office of an overlooker of some paviours in the street. Soon after, however, he assisted in the shop of Mr. Rivington, bookseller, of St. Paul’s Church-yard, and then obtained an employment in the British Museum, at a small weekly stipend. Here he discovered a degree of knowledge, which, if not profound, was highly useful, in arranging and cataloguing books and Mss. and his services soon recommended him to an increase of salary, and to some extra employment in regulating the libraries of private gentlemen, the profits of which he shared with his father, whom he sent for to town, and maintained comfortably until his death, Nov. 18, 1783.

, a younger son of Samuel Backhouse of Swallowfield in Berkshire, esq. (who died in 1626), was born in that county in 1593, became a commoner of Christ church, Oxford, in 1610, in his seventeenth year, left it without a degree, and attached himself to the study of chemistry and astrology then so much in vogue. He adopted the celebrated Ash mole as his son, and imparted to him those absurd secrets which were to produce wonders. Mr, Backhouse died May 30, 1662, and was buried in Swallowfield church. He published a translation from the French of “The pleasant Fountain of Knowledge,” 1644-, 8vo this was written by John de la Fountainein 1413; “The Complaint of Nature,” and “The Golden Fleece,” a translation from Solomon Trismosin, master to Paracelsus. Mr. Aubrey speaks of this gentleman in his Collection of Hermetic Philosophy, chap. XII.

, lord keeper of the great seal in the reign of queen Elizabeth, descended from an ancient and honourable family in Suffolk. His rather was Robert Bacon of Drinkstxm in that county, esq. and his mother was Isabel, the daughter of John Gage of Pakenhain in the said county, esq. Nicholas, their second son, was born in 1510, at Chislehurst in Kent. After having received the first rudiments of learning, probably at home, or in the neighbourhood, he was sent when very young to Corpus Christi college in Cambridge, where having improved in all branches of useful knowledge, he went to France, in order to give the last polish to his education. On his return he settled in Gray VInn, and applied himself with such assiduity to the study of the law, that on the dissolution of the monastery of St. Edmund’s-Bury in Suffolk, he had a grant from king Henry VIII. in the thirty-­sixth year of his reign, of the manors of Redgrave, Botesdale, and Gillingham, with the park of Redgrave, and six acres of land in Worthanf, as also the tithes of Redgrave to hold in capite by knight’s service, a proof of the estimation in which he was held by his majesty. In the thirtyeighth of the same king, he was promoted to the office of attorney in the court of wards, a place both of honour and profit, and his patent was renewed in the first year of Edward VI. and in 1552, which was the last year of his reign, Mr. Bacon was elected treasurer of Gray’s-Inn. His great moderation and consummate prudence, preserved him through the dangerous reign of queen Mary. In the very dawn of that of Elizabeth he was knighted, and the great seal of England being taken from Nicholas Heath, archbishop of York, was delivered to sir Nicholas Bacon, on the 22d of December 1558, with the title of lord keeper. He was also of the privy council to her majesty, who had much regard to his advice. The parliament met Jan. 23, but was prorogued on account of the queen’s indisposition to the 25th, when the lord keeper opened the session with a most eloquent and solid speech. Some of the queen’s counsellors thought it necessary that the attainder of the queen’s mother should be taken off; but the lord keeper thought the crown purged all defects, and in compliance with his advice, two laws were made, one for recognizing the queen’s title, the other for restoring her in blood as heir to her mother. The principal business of this session was the settlement of religion, in which no man had a greater share than the keeper, and he acted with such prudence as never to incur the hatred of any party. On this account he was, together with the archbishop of York, appointed moderator in a dispute between eight Protestant divines, and eight Popish bishops and the latter behaving very unfairly in the opinion of both the moderators, and desiring, to avoid a fair disputation, to go away, the lord keeper put that question to each of them, and when all except one insisted on going, his lordship dismissed them with this memorandum, “For that ye would not that we should hear you, perhaps you may shortly hear of us” and accordingly for this contempt, the bishops of Winchester and Lincoln were committed to the tower, and the rest were bound to appear before the council, and not to quit the cities of London and Westminster without leave. The whole business of the session, than which there was none of greater importance during that reign, was chiefly managed by his lordship, according to his wise maxim, “Let us stay a little, that we may have done the sooner.” From this time he stood as high in the favour of the queen as any of her ministers, and maintained a cordial interest with other great men, particularly with those eminent persons, who had married into the same family with himself, viz. Cecil, Hobby, Rowlet, and Killigrew. By their assistance he preserved his credit at court, though he sometimes differed in opinion from the mighty favourite Leicester, who yet once bad fair his ruin, when certain intrigues were carried on respecting the succession. Some statesmen, and particularly the earl of Leicester, pretended to favour the title of the queen of Scots, but others were more inclined to the house of Suffolk. The queen sometimes affected a neutrality, and sometimes shewed a tenderness for the title of the Scottish queen. In 1564, when these disputes were at the height, Mr. John Hales, clerk of the Hanaper, published a treatise which seems to have been written a considerable time before, in favour of the Suffolk line, and against the title of the queen of Scots. This book was complained of by the bishop of Ross, ambassador from the queen of Scots, and Ross being warmly supported by the earl of Leicester, Hales was committed to prison, and so strict an inquiry made after all who had expressed any favour for this piece, that at last the lord-keeper came to be suspected, which drew upon him the queen’s displeasure, and he was forbidden the court, removed from his seat at council, and prohibited from meddling with any affairs but those of the chancery nay, Camden says he was confined . At last, however, Cecil, who is suspected to have had some share in the above treatise, with much difficulty restored him to the queen’s good opinion, as appears by her setting him at the head of that commission, granted in the year 1568, for hearing the difference between the queen of Scots, and her rebellious subjects; and in 1571, we find him again acting in the like capacity, though very little was done before the commissioners at either time, which was what queen Elizabeth chiefly desired, and the covering her inclination with a decent appearance of justice, was perhaps not a little owing to the address of the lord-keeper. Afterwards he continued at the head of her majesty’s councils, and had a great hand in preventing, by his moderation, some violent measures afterwards proposed. The share, however, that he had in the business of the duke of Norfolk, and his great care for promoting the Protestant religion, created him many bitter enemies among the Papists both at home and abroad, who though they were able to do him no great hurt, yet published some libels, particularly “A Detection of certain practices, &c.” printed in Scotland, about 1570, and “A treatise of Treason,” both which gave him considerable uneasiness, although the queen expressed her opinion, by a proclamation, ordering them to be burnt. As a statesman, he was remarkable for a clear head, and acute understanding; and while it was thought of some other great men that they seemed wiser than they were, yet the common voice of the nation pronounced, that sir Nicholas Bacon was wiser than he seemed. His great skill lay in balancing factions, and it is thought he taught the queen that secret, the more necessary to her because the last of her family, and consequently without many of the usual supports of princes. In the chancery he distinguished himself by a very moderate use of power, and the respect he shewed to the common law. At his own request, an act of parliament was made, to settle and establish the power of a lord -keeper, though he might probably have taken away all need of this, by procuring the title of lord chancellor: but according to his motto, which was Mediocra firma, he he was content to be safe, and did not desire to be great*. In that court, and in the star-chamber, he made use, on proper occasions, of set speeches, in which he was peculiarly happy, and gained the reputation of a witty and a weighty speaker. His great parts and great preferment were far from raising him in his own opinion, as appears from the modest answer he gave* queen Elizabeth, when she told him his house at Redgrave was too little for him, “Not so, madam,” returned he, “but your majesty has made me too great for my house.” Yet to shew his respect for her majesty’s judgment, he afterwards added wings to this house. His modesty in this respect was so much the greater, since he had a great passion for building, and a very fine taste, as appeared by his house and gardens at Gorhambury near St. Alban’s, now the seat of lord viscount Grimston. Towards the latter end of his life, he became very corpulent, which made queen Elizabeth say merrily, that “sir Nicholas’s soul lodged well. To himself, however, his bulk was very inconvenient after walking from Westminster-hall to the star-chamber, which was but a very little way, he was usually so much out of breath, that the lawyers forbore speaking at the bar till he recocovered himself, and gave them notice by knocking” with his staff. After having held the great seal more than twenty years, this able statesman and faithful counsellor was suddenly removed from this life, as Mallett informs us, by the following accident “He was under the hands of his barber, and the weather being sultry, had ordered a window before him to be thrown open. As he was become very corpulent, he presently fell asleep, in the cur­* After he had been some monthsact of parliament, which declares, in office, as keeper of the great seal,” That the common law always was, he began to doubt to what degree his that the keeper of the great seal always authority extended, which seems to had, as of right belonging to his office, have been owing to the general terms the same authority, jurisdiction, excused upon the delivery of the great cution of laws, and all other customs, Heal, of which we have various in- as the lord chancellor of England lawstances in Rymer’s Foedera. Upon fully used.“What the true reason this, he first applied himself to the was that made his lordship so uneasy, queen, from whom he procured a pa- is not perhaps known to posterity. tent, bearing date at Westminster, the But sir Henry Spelman has observed, 14th of April, in the first year of her that for the benefit of that wise counreign, whereby she declares him te seller sir Nicholas Bacon, the authobare as full powers as if he were rity of the keeper of the great seal hancellor of England, and ratifies all was by this law declared to be in all that he had already done. This, how- respects the same with that of th ever, did not fully satisfy him but chancellor, four years afterwards he procured an rent of fresh air that was blowing in upon him, and awaked after some time distempered all over. c Why,‘ said he to the servant, < did you suffer me to sleep thus exposed’ The fellow replied, ‘ That he durst not presume to disturb him.’ * Then,‘ said the lord keeper, * by your civility I lose my life,’ and so removed into his bed-chamber, where he died a few days after.” But this story seems doubtful, for all writers agree, that sir Nicholas Bacon died Feb. 20, 1579, when the weather could not be very sultry. On the 9th of March following he was buried with great solemnity, under a sumptuous monument erected by himself in St. Paul’s church, with an inscription written by the celebrated Buchanan. Camden’s character of him is just and plain “Vir praepinguis, ingenio acerrimo, singulari prudentia, summa eloquentia, tenaci memoria, et sacris conciliis alterum columen” i. e. A man of a gross body, but most quick wit, singular prudence, supreme eloquence, happy memory, and for judgment the other pillar of the state. His son’s pharacter of him is more striking. He was “a plain man, direct and constant, without all finesse and doubleness and one that was of a mind that a man, in his private proceedings and estate, and in the proceedings of state, should rest upon the soundness and strength of his own courses, and not upon practice to circumvent others, according to the sentence of Solomon, * Vir prudens advertit ad gressus suos stultus autem divertit ad dolos’ insomuch that the bishop of Ross, a subtle and observing man, said of him, that he could fasten no words upon him, and that it was impossible to come within him, because he offered no play; and the queen mother of France, a very politic princess, said of him, that he should have been of the council of Spain, because he despised the occurrents, and rested upon the first plot.” Nor is Puttenham’s short account to be overlooked “I have come to the lord keeper, and found him sitting in his gallery alone, with the works of Quintilian before him. Indeed he was a most eloquent man, of rare wisdom and learning, as ever I knew England to breed, and one that joyed as much in learned men and 0'.;d wits, from whose lippes Ihave seen to proceed more i;rave and natural eloquence than from all the orators of Oxford and Cambridge.”

Bishop Tanner has enrolled sir Nicholas Bacon among the writers of this country, on account of the following pieces, preserved in different manuscript collections. “An oration to the queen, exhorting her to Marriage;” “a speech to the lord mayor of London” “a speech to the serjeant called to a judge” “an oration touching the queen’s Marriage and Succession to the Crown” “his speech to the queen, when she made him lord keeper” “his speech in the star-chamber, 1568” “his speech to sir Thomas Gargrave, elected speaker for the commons house of parliament;” “his speech at the council table, concerning aid required by the Scots to expel the French out of Scotland” “his speech concerning an Interview between queen Elizabeth and the Scottish queen, 1572;” “his speech to the lords and commons in parliament, in the beginning” “his speech to Mr. Bell when he was called to be judge.” All these are in the Norwich manuscripts of More, 228 and are, we suppose, at present, in the public library of Cambridge. “Several speeches of lord keeper sir Nicholas Bacon, from 1558 to 1571 inclusive,” in Mr. Ralph Thoresby’s collection “a discourse upon certain points touching the Inheritance of the Crown, conceived by sir Anthony Brown, and answered by sir Nicholas Bacon,” published in 1723. “Three letters to Dr. Parker,” in Corpus Christi college, Cambridge mentioned by Strype, in his life of the archbishop. One of these, entitled “a letter of Mr. Nicholas Bacon, counsellor at law, to Parker, dean of Stoke college, in answer to certain cases put to him relating to the said college,” Mr. Strype has published at length. Holinshed, at the end of his second volume, p. 1589, ranks sir Nicholas Bacon in the catalogue of those who have written something concerning the history of England. Mr. Masters refers to a comment of sir Nicholas’s on the twelve minor prophets, dedicated to his son Anthony. And Mr. Strype has printed an excellent letter of advice, which was written by the lord keeper, a little before his death, to the queen, on the situation of her affairs. Many of his apophthegms are among those of lord Verulam, and many of his speeches are in the Parliamentary History.

, king’s advocate in the exchequer of Paris, flourished about the close of the sixteenth century, and was profoundly skilled in the municipal and civil law. He wrote many treatises on different branches of these laws, which were first published in 1608, and again in 1688, with the commentaries of Claude de Ferrieres, A third, and improved edition was printed at Lyons, 1744, 2 vols. fol. He died in April 1597, of grief for the death of his son-in-law, Charpentier, a professor of medicine in the university of Paris, who was executed for being concerned in the league, or insurrection against the succession of Henry IV.

, or in Latin, Jodocus Badius Ascensius, an eminent French printer, was born in 1462, at Assche, a village in the territory of Brussels, from which he derived the name Ascensius. He first studied at Ghent, then at Brussels, and lastly at Ferrara in Italy. He made great progress in the languages, and principally in the Greek, which he learned at Lyons and at Paris. He printed a great many books, and usually in the frontispiece had a printing press as his mark. He is also the author of some books, among which are <c Sylva moralis contra vitia“” Psalterium B. Mariae versibus“” Epigrammatum Lib. I“* f Navicula stultarum mulierum” “VitaThomce a Kempis” “De Grammatica” “De conscribendis Epistolis.” He wrote also commentaries on Horace, Virgil, Juvenal, Lucan, Sallust, Valerius Maximus, Quintilian, Aulus Gellius, and soiue parts of Cicero’s works. At Paris he taught Greek, and' explained the poets at Lyons. His high reputation in these studies induced Treschel, the famous printer, to engage him as corrector of his press, not only secured his valuable services by taking him as a partner in the business, but also gave him his daughter Thalia in marriage, who was also a learned lady. After the death of his father-in-law, in 1500, he was engaged by Gagnin, the royal librarian, to visit Paris, where he removed with his family, and established an excellent printing office, by the name of Praelum Ascensianum, from which many good editions issued, although his type was not so much admired as that of the Stephens’s. He died in 1535. His son Conrad Badius settled at Geneva, having embraced Calvinism, and was both a printer and an author. Two of his daughters were married to eminent printers, one to Michel Yascosan, and the other to Robert Stephens.

, a senator of Venice, who died an 1580, has left various treatises on the civil law, which were printed at Venice in 1593, and reprinted at Boulogne in 1744. His son Peter Badoaro, was also celebrated for his knowledge of law, and died in 1591. His “Orationi Civili,” were published in 1593, if this be not, as we suspect, a production of the father. Frederick Badoaro, of the same family, was distinguished for his learning, and talents as a negociator. He was Venetian ambassador at the court of Charles V. and Philip II. and was the founder, of the academy known by the name of Delia Fama, at Venice. He died in 1593. From the three concurring events under this year, it is probable, there are some mistakes in this account, which we have taken from the Diet. Hist.

, son of Eric Basngius, a divine, was born at Helsingborg in Sweden, in 1633, and studied first at Stregne,s in Sudermania, and afterwards at UpsaL Colonel Sylver Sparre, hearing of his good character and abilities, appointed him tutor to his son, with whom Bsengius travelled into Denmark, Germany, and the Netherlands, and visited eleven universities. On his return to his own country, he was called to the theological chair of Abo in Finland, when only in his thirty-second year. In 1682, Charles IX. king of Sweden, appointed him to the bishopric of Wyburgh in Carelia. Baengius introduced many useful regulations in his diocese, particularly with respect to schools, and established a printing-office. He died in 1696. He wrote a commentary, in Latin, on the epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, which was printed at Abo in 1671, 4to the “.Life of St. Anscharius” a work on the ecclesiastical history of Sweden a treatise on the sacraments a Lutheran catechism several disputations, and funeral orations, and a sacred chronology.

, bishop of Copenhagen, was born at Lunden in 1646. His father Olaus Bagger taught theology in the school of Lunden, but sent his son to Copenhagen for education. He afterwards travelled to Germany, the Netherlands, and England, studying under the most able masters in divinity and the oriental languages, and then returned to Copenhagen. When Lunden became a part of the Swedish dominions, the king established an academy there, and Bagger was appointed to teach the oriental languages. He had scarcely begun to give lessons, however, when by the advice of his friends of Copenhagen, he solicited and obtained, in 1674, the office of first pastor of the church of the Holy Virgin in that metropolis. In 1675, after the usual disputation, he got the degree of doctor, and on the death of John Wandalin, bishop of Zealand or Copenhagen, he was appointed to succeed him, at the very early age of twenty-nine. His promotion is said to have been in part owing to his wife Margaret Schumacher, the widow of Jacob Fabri, his predecessor, in the church of the Holy Virgin at Copenhagen, and to the brother of this lady, the count de Griffenfeld, who had great interest at court. Bagger, however, filled this high office with reputation, as well as that of dean of theology, which is attached to the bishopric of Copenhagen. He revised the ecclesiastical rites which Christian V. had passed into a law, as well as the liturgy, epistles, and gospels, collects, &c. to which he prefixed a preface. He also composed and published several discourses, very learned and eloquent, some in Latin, and others in the Danish tongue. He died in 1693, at the age of 47. By his second wife, he left a son Christian Bagger, who became an eminent lawyer, and in 1737 rose to be grand bailly of Bergen, and a counsellor of justice.

In 1676, he received holy orders, and passed his examinations with high approbation. Monnoye, one of his biographers, mentions a circumstance very creditable to his superiors, that, although they were satisfied with his learning, they would not have admitted him into orders, if they had not discovered that he was superior to the vanity which sometimes accompanies a reputation for learning. The bishop of Beauvais now gave him the vicarage of Lardieres, which netted only 30l. yearly, yet with this pittance, Baillet, who maintained a brother, and a servant, contrived to indulge his humanity to the poor, and his passion for books, to purchase which he used to go once a year to Paris. His domestic establishment was upon the most temperate scale, no drink but water, and no meat, but brown bread, and sometimes a little bacon, and a few herbs from his garden boiled in water with salt, and whitened with a little milk. The cares of his parish, however, so much interrupted his favourite studies that he petitioned, and obtained another living, the only duties of which were singing at church, and explaining the catechism. A higher and more grateful promotion now awaited him, as in 1680, he was made librarian to M. Lamoignon, not the first president of the parliament, as Niceron says, for he was then dead, but his son, who at that time was advocate-general. To this place he was recommended by M. Hermant, a doctor of the Sorbonne, who told Lamoignon that Baillet was the proper person for him, if he could excuse his awkwardness. Lamoignon answered that he wanted a man of learning, and did not regard his outward appearance. To Baillet such an appointment was so gratifying that for some time he could scarcely believe M. Hermant to be serious. When he found it confirmed, however, he entered upon his new office with alacrity, and one of his first employments was to draw up an index of the library, which extended to thirty-five folio volumes, under two divisions, subjects and author’s names. The Latin preface to the index of subjects, when published, was severely, but not very justly censured by M. Menage, as to its style. After this, he completed four volumes of his celebrated work “Jugemens des Savans,” and gave them to the bookseller with no other reserve than that of a few copies for presents. The success of the work was very great, and the bookseller urged him to finish the five volumes that were, to follow. He did not, however, accomplish the whole of his design, which was to consist of six parts. I. In the first he was to treat of those printers, who had distinguished themselves by their learning, ability, accuracy, and fidelity. Of critics, that is, of those who acquaint us with authors, and their books, and in general those, who give an account of the state of literature, and of all that belongs to the republic of letters. Of philologists, and all those who treat of polite literature. Of grammarians and translators of all kinds. II. Poets, ancient and modern writers of romances and tales in prose rhetoricians, orators, and writers of letters, either in Latin, or in any of the modern languages. III. Historians, geographers, and chronologists of all sorts. IV. Philosophers, physicians, and mathematicians. V. Authors upon the civil and canon law, poJitics, and ethics. VI. Writers on divinity particularly the fathers, school-divinity heretics, &c. He published, however, only the first of these divisions, and half of the second, under the title of “Jugemens des Savans sur les principaux ouvrages des Auteurs,” Paris, 1685, 12mo. It is, in fact, a collection of the opinions of others, with seldom those of the author, yet it attracted the attention of the literary world, and excited the hostility of some critics, particularly M. Menage, to whom, indeed, Baillet had given a previous provocation, by treating him rather disrespectfully. The first attack was by father Commire, in a short poem entitled “Asinus in Parnasso,” the Ass on Parnassus, followed afterwards by “Asinus ad Lyram,” and “Asinus Judex,” all in defence of Menage and the poets and an anonymous poet wrote “Asinus Pictor.” It does not appear, however, that these injured the sale of the work; and in 1686, the five other volumes, upon the poets, were published, with a preface, in which the author vindicates himself with ability. M. Menage now published his “Anti-Baillet,” in which he endeavoured to point out Baillet' s errors and another author attacked him in “Reflexions sur le Jugemens des Savans, [envoy 6ez a l'auteur par un Academicien,” 1691, with Hague on the title, but really in France, and, according to Niceron, written by father Le Tellier, a Jesuit, all of which order resented Baillet' s partiality to the gentlemen of Port Royal. The editor of the Amsterdam edition of the “Jugemens,” attributes this letter to another Jesuit, a young man not named. Of these censures some are undoubtedly just, but others the cavils of caprice and hypercriticism.

, an eminent Presbyterian divine of the seventeenth century, was born at Glasgow in the year 1599. His father, Mr. Thomas Baillie, was a citizen of that place, and son to Baillie of Jerviston. Our Robert Baillie was educated in the university of his native city where, having taken his degrees in arts, he turned his thoughts to the study of divinity and, receiving orders from archbishop Law, he was chosen regent of philosophy at Glasgow. While he was in this station, he had, for some years, the care of the education of Lord Montgomery, who, at length, carried him with him to Kilwinning; to which church he was presented by the earl of Eglintoun. Here he lived in the strictest friendship with that noble family, and the people connected with it; as he did also with his ordinary the archbishop of Glasgow, with whom he kept up an epistolary correspondence. In 1633, he declined, from modesty, the offer of a church in Edinburgh. Being requested in 1637, by his friend the archbishop, to preach a sermon before the assembly at Edinburgh, in recommendation of the canon and service book, he refused to do it; and wrote a handsome letter to the archbishop, assigning the reasons of his refusal. In 1638 he was chosen by the presbytery of Irvine, a member of the famous assembly at Glasgow, which was a prelude to the civil war. Though Mr. Baillie is said to have behaved in this assembly with great moderation, it is evident that he was by no means deficient in his zeal against prelacy and Arminianism. In 1640 he was sent by the covenanting lords to London, to draw up an accusation against archbishop Laud, for his obtrusions on the church of Scotland. While he was in England, he wrote the presbytery a regular account of public affairs, with a journal of the trial of the earl of Strafford. Not long after, on his return, he was appointed joint professor of divinity with Mr. David Dickson, in the university of Glasgow, and his reputation was become so great, that he had before this received invitations from the other three universities, all of which he refused. He continued in his professorship till the Restoration but his discharge of the duties of it was interrupted for a considerable time, by his residence in England for, in 1643, he was chosen one of the commissioners of the church of Scotland to the assembly of divines at Westminster. Though he never spoke in the debates of the assembly, he appears to have been an useful member, and entirely concurred in the principles and views of its leaders. Mr. Baillie returned again to his own country in the latter end of 1646. When, after the execution of Charles I. Charles II. was proclaimed in Scotland, our professor was one of the divines appointed by the general assembly to wait on the king at the Hague; upon which occasion, March 27, 1649, he made a speech in the royal presence, expressing in the strongest terms his abhorrence of the murder of the late king and, in his sentiments upon this event, it appears that the Presbyterian divines of that period, both at home and abroad, almost universally agreed. After the restoration of Charles II. Mr. Baillie, Jan. 23, 1661, by the interest of the earl of Lauderdale, with whom he was a great favourite, was made principal of the university of Glasgow, upon the removal of Mr. Patrick Gillespie, who had been patronised by Cromwell. It is said by several writers, that Mr. Baillie had the offer of a bishopric, which he absolutely refused. Though he was very loyal, and most sincerely rejoiced in his majesty’s restoration, he began, a little before his death, to be extremely anxious for the fate of Presbytery. His health failed him in the spring of 1662. During his illness he was visited by the new-made archbishop of Glasgow, to whom he is said to have addressed himself in the following words “Mr, Andrews (I will not call you my lord), king Charles would have made me one of these lords but I do not find in the New Testament, that Christ has any lords in his house.” Notwithstanding this common-place objection to the hierarchy, he treated the archbishop very courteously. Mr. Baillie died in July 1662, being 63 years f age. By his first wife, who was Lilias Fleming, of the family of Cardarroch, in the parish of Cadder, near Glasgow, he had many children, five of whom survived him, viz. one son, and four daughters. The posterity of his son, Mr. Henry Baillie, who was a preacher, but never accepted of any charge, still inherit the estate of Carnbrae, in the county of Lanerk, an ancient seat of the Baillies. Mr. Baillie’s character ha% been drawn to great advantage, not only by Mr. Woodrow, but by an historian of the opposite party. His works, which were very learned, and acquired him reputation in his own time, are 1. “Opus Historicum et Chronologicum,” Amsterdam, 1668, fol. 2. “A Defence of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland, against Mr. Maxwell, bishop of Ross.” 3. “A Parallel betwixt the Scottish Service-Book and the Romish Missal, Breviary,” &c. 4. “The Canterburian Self-Conviction.” 5. “Queries anent the Service-Book.” 6. “Antidote against Arminianism.” 7. “A treatise on Scottish Episcopacy.” 8. “Laudensium.” 9. “Dissuasive against the Errors of the Times, with a Supplement.” 10. “A Reply to the Modest Enquirer,” with some other tracts, and several sermons upon public occasions but his “Opus Historicum et Chronologicum,” was his capital production. The rest of his writings, being chiefly on controversial and temporary subjects, can, at present, be of little or no value. But his memory is perhaps yet more preserved by a very recent publication, “Letters and Journals, carefully transcribed by Robert Aiken containing an impartial account of public transactions, civil, ecclesiastical, and military, both in England and Scotland, from 1637 to 1662 a period, perhaps, the most remarkable that is to be met with in the British History. With an Account of the Author’s life, prefixed and a Glossary annexed,” Edinburgh, 1775, 2 vols. 8vo. The chief correspondents of Mr. Baillie were, Mr. William Spang, minister first to the Scotch Staple at Campvere, and afterwards to the English Congregation in- Middleburgh in Zealand, who was his cousin -german Mr. David Dickson, professor of Divinity, first at Glasgow, then at Edinburgh and Messrs, Robert Ramsay and George Young, who were ministers in Glasgow. There are, in this collection, letters to several other persons but Mr. Spang was the gentleman with whom Mr. Baillie principally corresponded. The journals contain a history of the general assembly at Glasgow, in 1638; an account of the earl of Stafford’s trial the transactions of the general assembly and parliament, in 1641 and the proceedings of thegeneral assembly, in 1643.

, or Ballonius, an eminent French physician and writer, was born about 1538, of a considerable family in Perche, and studied at Paris, where he received his doctor’s degree, in 1570, and during the course of his licentiate, was so able and victorious in the disputations, as to be named the Scourge of Bachelors. he was dean of the faculty in 1580, and his high reputation influenced Henry the Great to choose him first physician for his son, the dauphin, in 1601 But he preferred the sweets of domestic life to the honours of the court, and employed such leisure as his practice allowed, in writing several treatises on medical subjects, and was not more distinguished for knowledge in his profession, than for true piety and extensive charity. He died in 1616, His works were published after his death 1. “Consiliorum Medicinalium lib. II.” Paris, 1635, 4to, edited by his nephew Thevart. 2. “Consiliorum Med. lib. tertius,” ibid. 1649, 4to. 3. “Epidemiorum et Ephemeridum lib. II.” ibid. 1640, 4to, and in 1734, dedicated to sir Hans Sloane. 4. “Adversaria Medicinalia,” 4to, ibid, or, according to Haller, the same as “Paradigimata et historic morborum ob raritatem observatione dignissimse,” ibid. 1648, 4to. 5. “Definition tun Medicarum liber,” ibid. 1639, 4to. 6. “Commentarius in libellum Theophrasti de Vertigine,” ibid. 1640, 4to. 7. “De Convulsionibus libellus,” ibid. 1640, 4to. 8. “De Virginum et Mulierium morbis,” ibid. 1643, 4to. 9. “Opuscula Medica,” ibid. 1643, 4to. 10. “Liber de Rheumatismo et Pleuritide dorsali,” ibid. 1642, 4to. Of all these, and other works by him, a complete edition was published at Geneva, 1762, 4 vols. 4 to.

Mr. Baker was a constant and useful attendant at the meetings of the royal and antiquary societies, and in both was frequently chosen one of the council. He was peculiarly attentive to all the new improvements which were made in natural science, and very solicitous for the prosecution of them. Several of his communications are printed in the Philosophical Transactions and, besides the papers written by himself, he was the means, by his extensive correspondence, of conveying to the society the intelligence and observations of other inquisitive and philosophical men. His correspondence was not confined to his own country. To him we are obliged for a true history of the coccus polonicus, transmitted by Dr. Wolfe. It is to Mr. Baker’s communications that we owe the larger alpine strawberry, of late so much cultivated and approved of in England. The seeds of it were sent in a letter from professor Bruns of Turin to our philosopher, who gave them to several of his friends^ by whose care they furnished an abundant increase. The seeds likewise of the true rhubarb, or rheum palmatum, now to be met with in almost every garden in this country, were first transmitted to Mr. Baker by Dr. Mounsey, physician to the empress of Russia. These, like the former, were distributed to his various acquaintance, and some of the seeds vegetated very kindly. It is apprehended that all the plants of the rhubarb now in Great Britain were propagated from this source. Two or three of Mr. Baker’s papers, which relate to antiquities, may be found in the Philosophical Transactions. The society for the encouragement of arts, manufactures, and commerce, is under singular obligations to our worthy naturalist. As he was one of the earliest members of it, so he contributed in no small degree to its rise and establishment. At its first institution, he officiated for some time gratis, as secretary. He was many years chairman ^of the committee of accounts and he took an active part in the general deliberations of the society. In his attendance he was almost unfailing, and there were few questions of any moment upon which he did not deliver his opinion. Though, fronl the lowness of his voice, his manner of speaking was not powerful, it was clear, sensible, and convincing; what he said, being usually much to the purpose, and always proceeding from the best intentions, had often the good effect of contributing to bring the society to rational determinations, when many of the members seemed to have lost themselves in the intricacies of debate. He drew up a short account of the original of this society, and of the concern he himself had in forming it; which was read before the society of antiquaries, and would be a pleasing present to the public. Mr*. Baker was a poetical writer in the early part of his life. His “Invocation of Health” got abroad without his knowledge; but was reprinted by himself in his “Original Poems, serious and humourous,” Part the first, 8vo, 1725. The second part came out iri 1726. He was the author, likewise, of “The Universe^ a poem, intended to restrain the pride of man,” which has been several times reprinted. His account of the water polype, which was originally published in the Philosophical Transactions, was afterwards enlarged into a separate treatise, and hath gone through several editions. In 1728 he began, and for five years conducted the “Universal Spectator,” a periodical paper, under the assumed name of Henry Stonecastle a selection of these papers was afterwards printed in 4 vols. 12mo. In 1737 he published “Medulla Poetarum Romanorum,” 2 vols. 8vo, a selection from the Roman poets, with translations. But his principal publications are, “The Microscope made easy,” and “Employment for the Microscope.” The first of these, which was originally published in 1742, or 1743, has gone through six editions. The second edition of the other, which, to say the least of it, is equally pleasing and instructive, appearedin 1764. These treatises, and especially the latter, contain the most curious and important of the observations and experiments which Mr. Baker either laid before the royal society, or published separately. It has been said of Mr. Baker, “that he was a philosopher in little things.” If it was intended by this language to lessen his reputation, there is no propriety in the stricture. He was an intelligent, upright and benevolent man, much respected by those who knew him best. His friends were the friends of science and virtue and it will always be remembered by his contemporaries, that no one was more ready than himself to assist those with whom he was conversant in their various researches and endeavours for the advancement of knowledge and the benefit of society. His eldest son, David Erskine Baker, was a young man of genius and learning, and, like his father, a philosopher, an antiquary, and a poet. Being very partial to mathematical and geometrical studies, the duke of Montague, then master of the ordnance, placed him in the drawing-room in the Tower, to qualify him for the royal engineers. In a letter to Dr. Doddridge, dated 1747, his father speaks of him in these terms: “He has been somewhat forwarder than boys usually are, from a constant conversation with men. At twelve years old he had translated the whole twenty-four books of Telemachus from the French before he was fifteen, he translated from the Italian, and published, a treatise on physic, of Dr. Cocchi, of Florence, concerning the diet and doctrines of Pythagoras and last year, before he was seventeen, he likewise published a treatise of sir Isaac Newton’s Metaphysics, compared with those of Dr. Leibnitz, from the French of M. Voltaire. He is a pretty good master of the Latin, understands some Greek, is reckoned no bad mathematician for his years, and knows a great deal of natural history, both from reading and observation, so that, by the grace of God, I hope he will become a virtuous and useful man.” In another letter he mentions a singular commission given to his son, that of making drawings of all the machines, designs, and operations employed in the grand fire- works to be exhibited on occasion of the peace of 1748. It is to be regretted, however, that his father’s expectations were disappointed by a reverse of conduct in this son, occasioned by his turn for dramatic performances, and his marrying the daughter of a Mr. Clendon, a clerical empiric, who had, like himself, a similar turn. In consequence of this unhappy taste, he repeatedly engaged with the lowest strolling companies, in spite of every effort of his father to reclaim him. The public was, however, indebted to him for “The Companion to the Playhouse,” 1764, 2 vols. 12mo; a work which, though imperfect, had considerable merit, and shewed that he possessed a very extensive knowledge of our dramatic authors and which has since (under the title of “Biographia Dramatica”) been considerably improved, first in 1782, by the late Mr. Isaac Reed, 2 vols. 8vo, and more recently, in 1812, enlarged and improved by Mr. Stephen Jones, so as to form 4 vols. 8vo. He died Feb. 16, 1767. Mr. Baker’s other son, Henry, followed the profession of a lawyer, and occasionally appeared as a poet and miscellaneous writer. In 1756 he published te Essays Pastoral and Elegiac,“2 vols. 8vo, and left ready for the press an arranged collection of all the statutes relating to bankruptcy, with cases, precedents, &c. entitled” The Clerk to the Commission," a work which is supposed to have been published under another title in 1768.

, a very ingenious and learned antiquary, was descended from a family ancient and wellesteemed, distinguished by its loyalty and affection for the crown. His grandfather, sir George Baker, knt. to whom our author erected a monument in the great church at Hull, almost ruined his family by his exertions for Charles I. Being recorder of Newcastle, he kept that town, 1639, against the Scots (as they themselves wrote to the parliament) with a “noble opposition.” He borrowed large sums upon his own credit, and sent the money to the king, or laid it out in his service. His father was George Baker, esq. of Crook, in the parish of Lanchester, in the county of Durham, who married Margaret, daughter of Thomas Forster of Edderston, in the county of Northumberland, csq. Mr. Baker was born at Crook, September 14, 1656. He was educated at the free-school at Durham, under Mr. Battersby, many years master, and thence removed with his elder brother George, to St. John’s college, Cambridge, and admitted, the former as pensioner, the latter as fellow-commoner, under the tuition of Mr. Sanderson, July 9, 1674. He proceeded, B. A. 1677; M. A. 1681; was elected fellow, March 1680; ordained deacon by bishop Compton of London, December 20, 1685; priest by bishop Barlow of Lincoln, December 19, 1686. Dr. Watson, tutor of the college, who was nominated, but not yet consecrated, bishop of St. David’s, offered to take him for his chaplain, which he declined, probably on the prospect of a like offer from Crew, lord bishop of Durham, which he soon after accepted. His lordship collated him to the rectory of Long- Newton in his diocese, and the same county, June 1687; and, as Dr. Grey was informed by some of the bishop’s family, intended to have given him that of Sedgefieid, worth six or seven hundred pounds ayear, with a golden prebend, had he not incurred his displeasure, and left his family, for refusing to read king James the Second’s declaration for liberty of conscience. Mr. Baker himself gives the following account of this affair: “When the king’s declaration was appointed to be read, the most condescending thing the bishop ever did was coming to my chambers (remote from his) to prevail with me to read it in his chapel at Auckland, which I could not do, having wrote to my curate not to read it at my living at Long-Newton. But he did prevail with the curate at Auckland to read it in his church, when the bishop was present to countenance the performance. When all was over, the bishop (as penance I presume) ordered me to go to the dean to require him to make a return to court of the names of all such as did not read it, which I did, though I was one of the number.” But this bishop, who disgraced Mr. Baker for this refusal, and was excepted out of king William’s pardon, took the oaths to that king, and kept his bishopric till his death. Mr. Baker resigned Long-Newton August 1, 1690, refusing to take the oaths; and retired to his fellowship at St. John’s, in which he was protected till January 20, 1717, when, with one-and-twenty others, he was dispossessed of it. This hurt him most of all, not for the profit he received from it but that some whom he thought his sincerest friends came so readily into the new measures. particularly Dr. Robert Jenkin the master, who wrote a defence of the profession of Dr. Lake, bishop of Chichester, concerning the new oaths and passive obedience, and resigned his precentorship of Chichester, and vicarage of Waterbeach, in the county of Cambridge. Mr. Baker could not persuade himself but he might have shewn the same indulgence to his scruples on that occasion, as he had done before while himself was of that way of thinking. Of all his sufferings none therefore gave him so much uneasiness. In a letter from Dr. Jenkin, addressed to Mr. Baker, fellow of St. John’s, he made the following remark on the superscription “I was so then I little thought it should be by him that I am now no fellow; but God is just, and I am a sinner.” After the passing the registering act, 1723, he was desired to register his annuity of forty pounds, which the last act required before it was amended and explained. Though this annuity left him by his father for his fortune, with twenty pounds per annum out of his collieries by his elder brother from the day of his death, August 1699, for the remaining part of the lease, which determined at Whitsuntide 1723, was now his whole subsistence, he could not be prevailed on to secure himself against the act, but wrote thus in answer to his friend “I thank you for your kind concern for me; and yet I was very well apprized of the late act, but do not think it worth while at this age, and under these infirmities, to give myself and friends so much trouble about it. I do not think that any living besides myself knows surely that my annuity is charged upon any part of my cousin Baker’s estate or if they do, I can hardly believe that any one, for so poor and uncertain a reward, will turn informer or if any one be found so poorly mean and base, I am so much acquainted with the hardships of the world, that I can bear it. I doubt not I shall live under the severest treatment of my enemies or, if I cannot live, I am sure I shall die, and that’s comfort enough to me. If a conveyance will secure us against the act, I am willing to make such a conveyance to them, not fraudulent or in trust, but in as full and absolute a manner as words can make it and if that shall be thought good security, I desire you will have such a conveyance drawn and sent me by the post, and I'll sign it and leave it with any friend you shall appoint till it can be sent to you.” He retained a lively resentment of his deprivations and wrote himself in all his books, as well as in those which he gave to the college library, “socius ejectus,” and in some “ejectus rector.” He continued to reside in the college as commoner-master till his death, which happened July 2, 1740, of a paralytic stroke, being found on the floor of his chamber. In the afternoon of June 29, being alone in his chamber, he was struck with a slight apoplectic fit, which abating a little, he recovered his senses, and knew all about him, who were his nephew Burton, Drs. Bedford and Heberden. He seemed perfectly satisfied and resigned and when Dr. Bedford desired him to take some medicine then ordered, he declined it, saying, he would only take his usual sustenance, which his bedmaker knew the times and quantities of giving he was thankful for the affection and care his friends shewed him, but, hoping the time of his dissolution was at hand, would by no means endeavour to retard it. His disorder increased, and the third day from this seizure he departed. He was buried in St. John’s outer chapel, near the monument of Mr. Ash ton, who founded his fellowship. No memorial has yet been erected over him, he having forbidden it in his will. Being appointed one of the executors of his elder brother’s will, by which a large sum was bequeathed to pious uses, he prevailed on the other two executors, who were his other brother Francis and the hon. Charles Montague, to layout 1310l. of the money upon an estate to be settled upon St. John’s college for six exhibitioners. Mr. Masters gives a singular instance f his unbiassed integrity in the disposal of these exhibitions. His friend Mr. Williams, rector of Doddington, had applied to Mr. Baker for one of them for his son, and received the following answer

, an artist, was born at Antwerp, in 15GO, and was a disciple of Adam Van Oort; but he quitted that master, to acquire a better taste of design and composition, by pursuing his studies at Rome, where he resided for a considerable time. He copied the antiques, he attended to the works of the most memorable modern artists and at his return to his own country, the visible improvement of his taste recommended him to the favour and esteem of the ablest judges of the art. He distinguished himself by a good manner of designing, and his works are admitted into the cabinets of the curious, among those of the principal painters. He particularly excelled in the naked, and gave to his figures truth, roundness, and correctness of outline. Several fine portraits of his hand are at the Hague among which there is one adorned with allegorical figures of Widom and Justice. All the historical subjects painted by Van Balen have merit. His designs of the Deluge, of Moses striking the Rock, and the drowning of Pharaoh, are grand and noble compositions. Houbraken observes, that Van Balen, with great judgment, hath introduced the Israelites in a clear light in the back ground, but the Egyptians in a strong shadow in the fore ground, which had a very fine effect the figures being well designed, the attitudes and draperies well chosen, and the number of the figures being very considerable. Of this master’s hand also the Judgment of Paris is accounted a masterly performance in which the figure of Venus is so elegantly designed, so full of life, and so round, that it seems to stand forth from the surface. The landscapes and back grounds of the pictures composed by Van Balen, were generally painted by the Velvet Brueghel. Van Balen was the first master of Vandyck. He died in 1672. His son, John Van Balen, was born at Antwerp, in 1611, and derived his knowledge of the art, and his fine taste of drawing and design, from his father but, as soon as he had made a competent progress, he travelled to Rome, and lived for several years in that and other cities of Italy. There he acquired a good taste for design, though he was sometimes incorrect his particular merit was shewn in naked figures of boys, cupidfi, nymphs bathing or hunting, of which subjects he painted a considerable number, and he procured both praise and riches by his landscapes and histories. His pictures were well handled, his trees touched wiih spirit, and his herbage and verdure looked natural and lively. The carnations of his figures were clear and fresh, his colouring in general was transparent, and the airs of his heads were in the manner of Albano.

, an eminent divine of the church of England in the last century, was born on the 12th of August 1686, at Sheffield in Yorkshire. His father, Thomas JBalguy, who died in 1696, was master of the free grammarschool in that place, and from him he received the first rudiments of his grammatical education. After his father’s death he was put under the instruction of Mr. Daubuz, author of a commentary on the Revelations, who succeeded to the mastership of the same school, Sept. 23, 1696, for whom he always professed a great respect. In 1702 he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, under the care of Dr. Edmondson and of Dr. Lambert, afterwards master of that college. He frequent^ lamented, in the succeeding part of his life, that he had wasted nearly two years of his residence there in reading romances. But, at the end of that tinie happening to meet with Livy, he went through him with great delight, and afterwards applied himself to serious studies. In 1705-6, he was admitted to the degree of B. A. and to that of M. A. in 1726. Soon after he had taken his bachelor’s degree, he quitted the university, and was engaged, for a while, in teaching the free school at Sheffield, but whether he was chosen master, oxonly employed during a vacancy, does not appear. On the 15th of July 1708, he was taken into the family of Mr. Banks, as private tutor to his son, Joseph Banks, esq. air terwards of Reresby in the county of Lincoln, and grandfather of the present sir Joseph Banks, K. B. so eminently distinguished for his skill in natural history, and the expences, labours, and voyages, he has undergone to promote that part of science. Mr. Balguy, in 1710, was admitted to deacon’s orders, and in 1711 to priest’s by Dr. Sharp, archbishop of York. By Mr. Banks’ s means, he was introduced to the acquaintance of Mr. Bright of Badsworth, in the county of York, and was by him recommended to his father, sir Henry Liddel, of llavensworth castle, who in 1711 took Mr. Balguy into his family, and bestowed upon him the donative of Lamesly and Tanfield in that county. For the first four years after he had obtained thissmall preferment, he did not intermit one week without composing a new sermon and desfrous that so excellent an example should be followed by his son, he destroyed almost his whole stock, and committed, at one time, two hundred and fifty to the flames. In July 1715, he married Sarah, daughter of Christopher and Sarah Broomhead of Sheffield. She was born in 1686, and by her he had only a son, the late Dr. Thomas Balguy, archdeacon of Winchester. After his marriage he left sir Henry Liddel' s family, and lived at a house not far distant, called Cox close, where he enjoyed, for many years, the friendship of George Liddel, esq. member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, a younger son of sir Henry, who usually resided at Raven sworth castle. The first occasion of Mr. Balguy’s appearance as an author, was afforded by the Bangorian controversy. In 1718 he published, without his name, “Silvius’s examination of certain doctrines lately taught and defended by the. llev. Mr. Stebbing;” and, in the following year, “Silvius’s letter to the Rev. Dr, Sherlock.” Both of these performances were written in vindication of bishop Hoadly. Mr. Stehbing having written against these pamphlets, Mr. Balguy, in 1720, again appeared from the press, in the cause of the-bishop, in a tract entitled “Silvius’s defence of a dialogue between a Papist and a Protestant, in answer to the Rev. Mr. Stebbing; to which are added several remarks and observations upon that author’s manner of writing.” This also being answered by Mr. Stebbing, Mr. Balguy had prepared a farther defence but Dr. Hoadly prevailed Upon him to suppress it, on account of the public’s having grown weary of the controversy, and the unwillingness of the booksellers to venture upon any new works relating to it, at their own risk, For a different reason the bishop persuaded him, though with difficulty, to abstain from printing another piece which he had written, called “A letter to Dr. Clarke/' of whom, through his whole life, he was a great admirer. In 1726 he published” A letter to a deist cocerning the beauty and excellence of Moral Virtue, and the support and improvement which it receives from the Christian revelation.“In this treatise he has attacked, with the greatest politeness, and with equal strength of reason, some of the principles advanced by lord Shaftesbury, in his” Inquiry concerning Virtue.“On the 25th of January, 1727-8, Mr. Balguy was collated, by bishop Hoadly, to a prebend in the church of Salisbury, among the advantages of which preferment was the right of presenting to four livings, and of presenting alternately to two others. The best of them did not fall in his life-time. But two small livings were disposed of by him one to the Rev. Christopher Robinson, who married his wife’s sister; the other to his own son. In 1727 or 1728, he preached an assize sermon at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, the subject of which was party spirit. It was printed by order of the judges, and either inscribed or dedicated to Dr. Talbot, bishop of Durham.” The foundation of Moral Goodness, or a farther inquiry into the original of our idea of Virtue,“was published by him in 1728, This performance, which is written in a very masterly and candid manner, was in, answer to Mr. Hutcheson’s” Inquiry into the original of our ideas of Beauty and Virtue“and its design is to shew that moral goodness does not depend solely upon instincts and affections, but is grounded on the unalterable reason of things. Mr. Balguy acquired, about this time, the friendship of Dr. Talbot, bishop of Durham, for which he was chiefly indebted to Dr. llundle, afterwards bishop of Derry though something, perhaps, might be due to his acquaintance with Dr. Benson, Dr. Seeker, and Dr. Butler. Through the assistance of his friends in the chapter of Durham, supported by the good offices of bishop Talbot, he obtained, on the 12th of August 1729, the vicarage of North-AJlerton in Yorkshire, at that time worth only 270l. a year, on which preferment he continued to his death. This was, in some measure, his own fault, for he neglected all the usual methods of recommending himself to his superiors. He had many invitations from Dr. Blackburne, archbishop of York, and Dr. Chandler, bishop of Durham but he constantly refused to accept of them. In the same year he published ”The second part of the foundation of Moral Goodness illustrating and enforcing the principles and reasonings contained in the former being an answer to certain remarks communicated by a gentleman to the author.“The writer of these remarks was lord Darcy. His next publication was” Divine Rectitude or, a brief inquiry concerning the Moral Perfections of the Deity, particularly in respect of Creation and Providence.“A question then much agitated was, concerning the first spring of action in the Deity. This is asserted by our author to be rectitude, while Mr. Grove contended that it is wisdom, and Mr. Bayes, a dissenting minister of Tunbridge, that it is benevolence. The difference between Mr. Grove and Mr. Balguy was chiefly verbal but they both differed materially from Mr. Bayes, as they supposed that God might have ends in view, distinct from, and sometimes interfering with the happiness of his creatures. The essay on divine rectitude was followed by” A second letter to a deist, concerning a late book, entitled ‘ Christianity as old as the Creation,’ more particularly that chapter which relates to Dr. Clarke.“To this succeeded” The law of Truth, or the obligations of reason essential to all religion to which are prefixed some remarks supplemental to a late tract entitled “Divine Rectitude.” All the treatises that have been mentioned (excepting the assize sermon, and the pieces which were written in the Bangorian controversy) were collected, after having gone through several separate editions, by Mr. Balguy, into one volume, and published with a dedication to bishop Hoadly. This dedication was reprinted in the late edition of the works of that prelate, together with two letters of the bishop relating to it, one to Mr. Balguy, and the other to lady Sundon. The greatest regard for our author is expressed by Dr. Hoadly in both these letters, and he acknowledges the pleasure it gave him to receive the sincere praises of a man whom he so highly esteemed. In 1741 appeared Mr. Balguy’s “Essay on Redemption,” in which he explains the doctrine of the atonement in a manner similar to that of Dr. Taylor of Norwich, but Hoadly was of opinion he had not succeeded. This, and his volume of sermons, iittluding six which had been published before, were the last pieces committed by him to the press . A posthumous volume was afterwards printed, which contained almost the whole of the sermons he left behind him. Mr, Balguy may justly he reckoned among the divines and writers who rank with Clarke and Hoadly, in maintaining what they term the cause of rational religion and Christian liberty. His tracts will be allowed to be masterly in their kind, by those who may not entireJy agree with the philosophical principles advanced in them and his sermons have long been held in esteem, as some of the best in the English language. He was remarkable for his moderation to dissenters of every denomination, not excepting even Roman Catholics, though no man had a greater abhorrence of popery. Among the Presbyterians and Quakers he had a number of friends, whom he loved and valued, and with several of them he kept up a correspondence of letters as well as visits. Among other dissenters of note, he was acquainted with the late lord Barrington, and Philips Glover, esq. of Lincolnshire, author of an “Inquiry concerning Virtue and Happiness,” published after his decease in 1751. With the last gentleman Mr. Balguy had a philosophical correspondence. Having always had a weakly constitution, his want of health induced him, in the decline of life, to withdraw almost totally from company, excepting what he found at Harrogate, a place which he constantly frequented every season, and where at last he died, on the 21st of September, 1748, in the sixtythird year of his age. With regard co the letter to Dr. Clarke, which Hoadiy prevented him from publishing, we have the following information from a note in the Biographia Britannica. “From two letters of bishop Hoadly to Mr. Balguy, it appears that both the bishop and Dr. Clarke were exceedingly fearful of any thing’s being published which might be prejudicial to the doctor’s interest so that he could not then (1720) have come to the resolution which he afterwards formed, of declining farther preferment, rather than repeat his subscription to the thirty-nine articles. The solicitude of Dr. Hoadly and Dr. Clarke to prevent Mr. Balguy’s intended publication, was the more remarkable, as it did not relate to the Trinity, or to any obnoxious point in theology; but to the natural immortality of the soul, and such philosophical questions as might have been deemed of an innocent and indifferent nature.”

, a learned French writer, was born in 1631, at Tulles, in the province of Guienne, where he began his education, and finished it at Toulouse, obtaining a scholarship in the college of St. Martial. In 1656, Peter de Marca, archbishop of Toulouse, invited him to Paris, which he accepted, and in a little time gained the esteem and entire ron-adence of this prelate. But upon his death, in June 1662, Baluze, looking out for another patron, was agreeably prevented by M. le Tellier, afterwards chancellor of France, who having an intention to engage him in the service of abbe le Tellier his son, afterwards archbishop of Rheims, made him several considerable presents. Some obstacles, however, having happened to prevent his continuance in this family, and Mr. Colbert having offered to make Baluze his library-keeper, he accepted the office with the consent of M. le Tellier. He continued in, this employment till some time after the death of M. Colbert when, not being so well treated by the archbishop of Rouen, he declined being any longer librarian. The excellent collection, however, of manuscripts, and many other books, which are to be found in that library, was formed by his care and advice.

In 1670 he was appointed professor of canon-law in the royal college, with this mark of respect, that the professorship was instituted by the king on his account. In 1668 the abbé Faget had published several works of cle Marca and having, in his life prefixed, asserted, that the archbishop, at his death, had ordered Baluze to give up all his papers in his possession to the president de Marca his son, this raised the resentment of Baluze, who vindicated himself in several severe letters, which he wrote against the abbe“Faget. In 1693 he published his” Lives of the popes of Avignon" with which the king was so much pleased, that he gave him a pension, and appointed him director of the royal college. But he soon felt the uncertainty of courtly favours, for, having attached himself to the cardinal Bouillon, who had engaged him to write the history of his family, he became involved in his disgrace, and received a lettre de cachet, ordering him to retire to Lyons. The only favour he could obtain was, to be first sent to Roan, then to Tours, and afterwards to Orleans. Upon the peace he was recalled, but never employed again as a professor or director of the royal college, nor could he recover his pension. He lived now at a considerable distance from Paris, and was above eighty years of age, yet still continued his application to his studies, and was engaged in publishing St. Cyprian’s works, when he was carried off by death, on the 28th of July 1718. Baluze is to be ranked among those benefactors to literature who have employed their time and knowledge in collecting from all parts ancient manuscripts, and illustrating them with notes. He was extremely versed in this species of learning, and was perfectly acquainted with profane as well as ecclesiastical history, and the canon Jaw, both ancient and modern. He kept a correspondence v.ith all the men of learning in France, and other countries. His conversation was easy and agreeable, and even in his old age he retained great vivacity. He shewed, however, somewhat of caprice in his last will, by appointing n woman, no way related to him, his sole legatee, and leaving nothing to his family and servants.

, doctor and professor of divinity in the university of Copenhagen, was born in 1600, and was educated first in the college of Ottensee in the isle of Funen, and then at Copenhagen. Caspar Brochmand, professor of divinity and bishop of Selande, made him tutor to his son and he was preceptor at the same time to Christian Friis, eldest son to the chancellor of Denmark. After he had continued in that employment above five years, he obtained a pension from the king, and went to Rostoch, from whence he returned to Copenhagen, when the emperor’s troops drew near to the Baltic sea. He finished his course of divinity under professor Brochmand, and afterwards went to Franeker, where he learned rabbinical and Chaldee learning under Sixtinus Amama, by whom he was greatly esteemed. He studied afterwards at Wittemberg, and received there, in 1630, a letter from the rector and academical council of Copenhagen, with an offer of the professorship in Hebrew, which he accepted, on condition that he should be permitted to employ the revenue of that place in studying for some years the Arabic and Syriac tongues under Gabriel Sionita. He discharged the professorship with great advantage to students till 1652, when he was raised to the professorship of divinity, vacant by the death of Mr. Brochmand. He was promoted to the doctorship in the same faculty in 1653, in the presence of the king and queen. In 1656 he was* appointed librarian of the academy. He died Oct. 27, 1661, of an illness of only six days, leaving a widow atid fourteen children. He was the author of several learned works on the Hebrew language and criticism, among which are, “Observationes Philologicce,” Copenhagen, 1640, 8vo a treatise on the origin of diversity of Languages, and on the excellence of the Hebrew, 1634, 8vo; and a “Hebrew Lexicon,” 1641, 4to.

, a very extraordinary German scholar, and whom Baillet, if he had lived in his time, would have placed at the head of his “Enfans Celebres,” was born at Schwoback, in the margravate of Brandenburg- Anspach, the 19th of January 1721. His father Francis had quitted France, for the sake of professing the religion of Calvin, and was then pastor of the Calvinist church of Schwoback. He took upon himself the care of his son’s education, and taught him languages without study, and almost without his perceiving that he was learning them, by only introducing words of different languages as it were casually into conversation with him. By this means, when he was but four years old, he spoke every day French to his mother, Latin to his father, and German to the maid, without the least perplexity to himself, or the least confusion of one language with another.

In June 1484, having again retired to Padua, to avoid the plague then raging at Venice, he undertook, at the earnest request of several of the students, to expound some of the Grecian poets and orators, particularly Theocritus and Demosthenes. He had already borne two important offices in the republic, and was exulted to the dignity of senator in 1484, in the thirtieth year of his age. In the same year he opened, at his own house at Venice, a private school of philosophy, delivering his lectures at an early hour in the morning, and although he meant to admit only a few friends, his audience speedily increased, and he continued this employment until June 1485, when he was appointed on an embassy to congratulate the archduke Maximilian, who had recently been elected king of the Romans. On this occasion, Maximilian, whom he addressed in a complimentary oration, conferred on him order of knighthood. In 1488, the senate again interrupted his favourite studies, by appointing him ambassador to Ludovico Sforza, duke of Milan, an office which his grandfather and father had both formerly filled. At Milan, his house became the general resort of the learned, and he contrived, amidst his public labours, to resume his criticisms on Aristotle and Dioscorides. In 1490, he returned to his native city, and about a year after, was appointed ambassador in ordinary to pope Innocent VIII. who conferred the patriarchate upon Hermolaus, and he accepted it, notwithstanding he knew that the republic of Venice had made an express law forbidding all the ministers they sent to Rome to accept of any benefice. Hermolaus excused himself by saying the pope forced him to accept of the prelacy but this availed nothing with the council of ten, who signified to him that he must renounce the patriarchate, and if he refused to comply, that Zachary Barbarus his father should be degraded from all his dignities^ and his estate confiscated. Zachary was a man much advanced in years, and filled one of the chief posts in the commonwealth. He employed all the interest in his power to gain the consent of the republic to his son’s being patriarch but his endeavours proved ineffectual, and Hernaolaus was condemned by the Venetians to perpetual exile.

, a learned and eminent Civilian, was born in Aberdeenshire, in 1541, and descended from one of the best families in Scotland. He was in favour with Mary queen of Scots but, after that princess was dethroned, and detained in captivity in England, finding that he had no prospect of making his fortune in the court of her son James, he resolved to retire into France, which. he did about 1573. He was then more than thirty years of age, and went to Bourges, in order to study law. He there took his doctor’s degree in that faculty, and had applied himself so closely to his books, that he was qualified to fill a chair. Edmund Hay, the Jesuit, who was his countryman, and is said to have been related to him, procured him accordingly a professorship in civil law in the university of Pontamousson, by his interest with the duke of Lorrain, who had lately founded that seminary. And the duke not only conferred upon Barclay the first professorship, but also appointed him counsellor of state, and master of requests. In 1581, Barclay married Anne de Malleville, a young lady of Lorrain, by whom he had his son John, who afterwards became a writer of considerable note, and whom the Jesuits endeavoured to prevail on to enter into their society. But Barclay opposing their scheme, the Jesuits resented it so highly, and did him so many ill offices with the duke, that he was obliged to leave Lorrain. He then went to London, where king James I. is said to have offered him a place in his council, with a considerable pension but he declined these offers, because it was made a necessary condition of his accepting them, that he should embrace the protestant religion. In 1604, he returned into France, and accepted the professorship of the civil law, which was offered him by the university of Angers. He taught there with reputation, and is said to have been fond of making a splendid appearance in his character of professor. But he did not hold this office long, dying in 1606. He was buried in the church of the Franciscans. He appears to have been much prejudiced against the Protestants and was a zealous advocate for passive obedience, and the divine right of kings, as appears from his writings, of which the following are “the principal, 1.” De Reguo et llegali Potestate ad versus Buchananum, Brutum, Boucherium, et reliquos Monarchoniachos,“Paris, 1600, dedicated to Henry IV. 2.” De Potestate Papse, quatenus in Reges et Principes seculares Jus et Imperium habeat,“Franco!'. 1609, 1613, 1621, Hannovias, 1612, in 8vo, and Lond. in English, 1611, in 4to, Mussiponti, 1610, 8vo, and Parisiis, 1600, 4to. In this he proves that the pope has no power, direct or indirect, over sovereigns in temporals, and that they who allow him, any such power, whatever they may intend, do very great prejudice to the Roman catholic religion. 3.” A commentary upon the Title of the Pandects de Rebus creditis et de Jure] urando,“Paris, 1605, 8vo. 4.” Prcemetia in vitam Agricolse," Paris, 1599, 2 vols. 8vo. This last is said to be an excellent commentary on Tacitus. There are two letters from him to Lipsius in Burman’s Sylloges Epistolarum, and four from Lipsius to him.

, son of the preceding, was born at Pontamousson, Jan. 28, 1582. He was educated at the college of the Jesuits in his native place, and when only nineteen years old, published notes on the Thebais of Statins. The Jesuits, as already noticed in his father’s life, remarked his genius for literature, and attempted to win. him to their order, but his father looked on that attempt as a breach of trust. Hence there arose a quarrel between him and the Jesuits, who at that time were in high credit with the duke of Lorraine. He therefore quitted Lorraine in disgust, and conducted his son to London. This was in 1603, just after the accession of his native sovereign to the English throne. In 1604 young Barclay presented to the king a poetical panegyric, as a new year’s gift, and soon after dedicated to him the first part of the Latin satire entitled “Euphormion.” “I had no sooner left school,” says Barclay in his Apology prefixed, “than the juvenile desire of fame incited me to attack the whole world, rather with a view of promoting my own reputation, than of dishonouring individuals,” a candid and singular confession, but which, in the opinion of his biographer, he ought to have made before he had learnt that his satires disgusted the public. In the dedication to Euphormion he intimated his wish to enter into the service of king James, and professed himself alike ready in that service, “to convert his sword into a pen, or his pen into a sword.” To excel was his ruling passion and youthful self-sufficiency led him to hope that he might, excel in every department but his flatteries, and even his confidence, availed not. His father was conscientiously attached to the church of Rome, and his son professed the same.

During the course of three years residence in England, Barclay received no token of the royal liberality. Sunk in indigence, he only wished to be indemnified for his English journies, and to have his charges defrayed into France. At length, he was relieved from those urgent distresses by his patron Salisbury. Of these circumstances we are informed by some allegorical and obscure verses written by Barclay at that sad season. (Delit. Poet. Scot. I. 92 100.) Never did dependent offer incense to a patron more liberally than he did. Burleigh, he admits, was a wise man, but, he adds, “that the wisdom of Burleigh bore the like proportion to that of his son, as the waters of the Thames do to the ocean.” In 1610 he published his Apology for Euphormion, the severity of which satire had excited enemies against him in every quarter of Europe. In this year also he, published his father’s work, “De Potestate Papse,” and when it was attacked by cardinal Bellarmin, be published a treatise entitled “J. Barclaii Pietas, sive, publics pro regibus ac principibus, et privates pro Gulielmo Earclaio parente vindici*, adversus Roberti Bellarmini tractatum, de Potestate summi Pontificis ia rebus temporal!­bus,” Paris, 4to. In 1614 he published his “Icon animarum,” perhaps the best, although not the most renowned of his compositions. It is a delineation of the genius and manners of the European nations, with remarks, moral and philosophical, on the various tempers of men. Mr. Malone observes, as a curious circumstance, that in this work, Barclay has suggested an expedition against the Turkish empire, similar in the most material circumstances to that undertaken in 1798 by the French republic, (particularly in the number of the troops employed) though it was proposed to be directed against a different part of the Turkish dominions from that which was assailed by the French, In 1615, invited, as it is said, by pope Paul V. Barclay determined to fix his residence under the immediate power of a pontiff whose political conduct he had reprobated, and of a court whose maxims he had censured with extraordinary freedom. About the end of that year he quitted England, but not clandestinely, as his enemies reported, and having hastily passed through France, he settled at Rome with his family, in the beginning of the year 1616. In the “Paraenesis,” or “Exhortation to the Sectaries,” he mentions two reasons which induced him to quit England, and take up his abode in Italy. His first was, lest his children, by remaining in England, should have been perverted from the faith. But he could have obviated that danger, by removing into France, in which country he had for his friends Du Vair (president of the parliament of Provence, afterwards keeper of the great seals, and lastly, bishop of Lisieux), and M. Peiresc. His second reason was more singular he perceived that his “Pietas,” or vindication of his father, was pleasing to heretics, and that it disgusted many persons of the Romish communion. He repented of having written it: he then found that it contained erroneous propositions, and he wished to settle in Italy that he might have leisure and freedom to refute them.

, the celebrated apologist for the Quakers, and one of the ablest writers of that sect, was born at Gordonstown, in the shire of Murray, Scotland, in 1648, of an ancient and very honourable family. The troubles in Scotland induced his father, colonel Barclay, to send him while a youth to Paris, under the care of his uncle, principal of the Scots college who, taking advantage of the tender age of his nephew, drew him over to the Romish religion. His father, being informed of this, sent for him in 1664. Robert, though now only sixteen, had gained a perfect knowledge of the French and Latin tongues, and had also improved himself in most other parts of knowle_dge. Several writers amongst the quakers have asserted that colonel Barclay had embraced their doctrine before his son’s return from France, but Robert himself has tixed it to the year 1666. Our author soon after became also a proselyte to that sect, and in a short time distinguished himself greatly by his zeal for their doctrines. His rirst treatise in defence of them appeared at Aberdeen, 1670. It was written in so sensible a manner, that it greatly raised the credit of the quakers. The title runs thus “Truth cleared of calumnies, 'wherein a hook entitled, A dialogue between a Quaker and a stable Christian (printed at Aberdeen, and, upon good ground, judged to be writ by William Mitchel, a preacher near by it, or at least that he had a chief hand in it), is examined, and the disingenuity of the author in his representing the Quakers is discovered here is also their case truly stated, cleared, demonstrated, and the objections of their opposers answered according to truth, scripture, and right reason to which are subjoined queries to the inhabitants of Aberdeen, which might (as far as the title tells us) also be of use to such as are of the same mind with them elsewhere in the nation.” The preface to this performance is dated from the author’s house at Ury, the 19th of the second month, 1670. In a piece he published in 1672, he tells us that he had been commanded by God to pass through the streets of Aberdeen in sackcloth and ashes, and to preach the necessity of faith and repentance to the inhabitants he accordingly performed it, being, as he declared, in the greatest agonies of mind till he had fulfilled this command. In 1675, he published a regular and systematical discourse, explaining the tenets of the quakers; which was well received. This was called “A Catechism and Confession of Faith, &c.” Many of those who opposed the religion of the quakers, having endeavoured to confound them with another sect called the ranters, our author, in order to shewr the difference between those pi his persuasion and this other sect, wrote a very sensible and instructive work called “The Anarchy of the Ranters and other Libertines, &e.” In 1676, his famous < e Apology“for the Quakers was published in Latin at Amsterdam, 4to. His” Theses theologies,“which are the foundation of this work, had been published some time before. He translated his Apology into English, and published it in 1678. The title in the English edition runs thus” An apology for the true Christian divinity as the same is held forth and preached by the people called in scorn Quakers being a full explanation and vindication of their principles and doctrines, by many arguments deduced from scripture and right reason, and the testimonies of famous authors both ancient and modern, with a full answer to the strongest objections usually made against them presented to the king: written and published in Latin for the information of strangers, by Robert Barclay; and now put into our own language for the benefit of his countrymen.“This work is addressed to Charles II. and the manner in which he expresses himself to his majesty is very remarkable. Amongst many other extraordinary passages, we meet with the following:” There is no king in the world, who can so experimentally testify of God’s providence and goodness; neither is there any who rules so many free people, so many true Christians which thing renders thy government more honourable, thyself more considerable, than the accession of many nations rilled with slavish aud superstitious souls. Thou hast tasted of prosperity and adversity thou knowest what it is to be banished thy native country, to be over-ruled as well as to rule and sit upon the throne and being oppressed, thou hast reason to know how hateful the oppressor is both to God and man if, after all those warnings and advertisements, thou dost not turn unto the Lord with all thy heart, but forget him who remembered thee in thy distress, and give up thyself to follow lust and vanity, surely, great will be thy condemnation.“These pieces of his, though they greatly raised his reputation amongst persons of sense and learning, yet they brought him into various disputes, and one particularly with some considerable members of the university of Aberdeen an account of which was afterwards published, entitled” A true and faithful account of the most material passages of a dispute between some students- of divinity (so called) of the university of Aberdeen, aud the people called Quakers, held in Aberdeen in Scotland, in Alexander Harper his close (or yard) before some hundred of witnesses, upon the 14th day of the second month, called April, 1675, there being John Lesly, Alexander Sherreff, and Paul Gellie master of arts, opponents and defendants upon the Quakers’ part, Robert Barclay and George Keith praeses for moderating the meeting, chosen by them, Andrew Thompson advocate; and by the quakers, Alexander Skein, some time a magistrate of the city published for preventing misreports by Alexander Skein, John Skein, Alexander Harper, Thomas Merser, and John Cowie to which is added, Robert Barclay’s offer to the preachers of Aberdeen, renewed and reinforced.“It appears also that he suffered imprisonment for his principles, which he bore with the greatest meekness. In 1677, he wrote a large treatise on” universal love.“Nor were his talents entirely confined to this abstracted kind of writing, as appears from his letter to the public ministers of Nimeguen. In 1679, a treatise of his was published in answer to John Brown he wrote also the same year a vindication of his Anarchy of the Ranters. His last tract was published in 1686, and entitled” The possibility and necessity of the inward and immediate Revelation of the Spirit of God towards the foundation and ground of true faith, proved in a letter written in Latin to a person of quality in Holland, and now also put into English.' 7 He did great service to his sect by his writings over all. Europe. He travelled also with the famous IVlr. Penn through the greatest part of England, Holland, and Germany, and was every where received with great respect. When he returned to his native country, he spent the remainder of his life in a quiet and retired manner. He died at his own house at Ury, on the 3d of October 1690, in the forty-second year of his age, leaving seven children, all of whom were alive in October 1740, fifty years after their father’s death, and the last survivor, Mr. David Barclay, a merchant of London, died in March 1769, in his eighty-eighth year, a gentleman still remembered for having had the singular honour of receiving at his house in Cheapside, three successive kings, George I. II. and III. when at their accession they favoured the city with their presence. From his windows they witnessed the procession, previous to dining with the lord-mayor and citizens at Guildhall on the lord-mayor’s day.

, dean of Canterbury, was the sixth son of Robert Bargrave, of Bridge, in Kent, esq. by Joan, the daughter or John Gilbert, of Sandwich, esq. and was born in 1586. He was entered early at Clare-hall, in Cambridge, of which society he was probably a fellow, where he took his degrees in arts. He was incorporated M. A. at Oxford, in 16*11, and in 1612 he undertook the office of taxor in the university of Cambridge. In March 1614-15, when king James visited Cambridge, Bargrave was one of those who performed a part in the celebrated comedy of “Ignoramus,” written by Ruggle, his fellowcollegian, in order to entertain his majesty. He was at this time a beneficed clergyman, having been inducted to the rectory of Eythorne, in Kent, in October preceding. He became soon afterwards minister of St. Margaret’s, Westminster, and chaplain to Charles prince of Wales, whom he served in the same quality after his accession to the throne. In his church of St. Margaret’s, he often preached before the house of commons, and with much approbation. In 1622, at which time he was D. D. he was promoted by the crown to the fifth prebend in the church of Canterbury. In Feb. 1623, in a sermon before the house of commons, he inveighed with honest warmth against the influence of popery, bad counsellors, and corruption, which displeased king James, but Charles I. soon after his accession, nominated him to the deanery of Canterbury. Other promotions followed, some of which he exchanged, and in 1629 he was commissioned by archbishop Abbot, together with archdeacon Kingsley, to enforce the instructions from the king concerning the regularity of lecturers in the diocese, and the due attendance at divine worship. When the rebellion broke out, he shared the sufferings of the rest of the loyal clergy, and, jn 1641 was fined a thousand pounds by the house of commons, for being a member of a convocation of the clergy in the preceding year. In 1642, when the parliamentary colonel Sandys came to Canterbury, he and his troops treated the dean and his family with the most brutal behaviour, without regard to age or sex his son was then sent prisoner to Dover, and himself to the Fleet prison, London. It does not appear, however, that the dean was either examined or called before the house, nor did his confinement last above three weeks, yet what he bad suffered so much affected him, that he died in January following, (1643). It is worthy of notice, although shocking to relate, that this Sandys owed his escape from an* ignominious death, when he was indicted at Maidstone for a rape, to the interest of dean Bargrave. The dean had been a great traveller, and his connexions ii> foreign countries were such as prove his discernment as well as testify his merit. He attended sir Henry Wotton in one of his embassies, as his chaplain, and sir Henry appointed him one of the supervisors of his will, with a legacy of books: during his residence at Venice, he enjoyed the intimate acquaintance of the celebrated father Paul, who once said to him that he thought the hierarchy of the church of England the most excellent piece of discipline in the whole Christian world. Bargrave was a firm defender of our civil and religious rights. He published only three sermons, printed at London in 1624 and 1627. He was interred in the dean’s chapel, Canterbury, and a monument was erected in the same place by Dr. John Bargrave, in 1679.

, was born in 1690 in Hildesheim, and obtained the place of sub-librarian of the royal library of Hanover. He was particularly eminent for historical and diplomatic researches, and was the first who collected materials to form a diplomatic library. His first publication was “Succincta Notitia Scriptorum rerum Brunsvicensium ac Luneburgensium, cum recensione legum atque constitutionurn terrarum Brunsvico-Luneburgica'rum,” Hanover, 1729, 8vo. But his chief work was his “Clavis diplomatica, specimina veterum scripturarum tradens, &c.” Hanover, 1737, 4to, of which was published a much enlarged and improved edition in 1754, 4to, with a life of the author, by his son Daniel. Baring died in 1753.

, esq. the descendant of an ancient and respectable family at Lyndon in Rutlandshire, was the son of Samuel Barker, esq. of Lyndon, by a daughter of the celebrated Whiston, who often acknowledges the assistance he received from his son-in-law in his ecclesiastical researches. Mr. Samuel Barker was long employed in preparing a Hebrew grammar, which he probably did not live to finish, but in 1761 was published “Poesis vetus He^ braica restitutus. Accedunt quasdam de carmine Anacre^ ontis. De accentibus Graecis. De Scriptura vetere lonica, De literis consonantibus et vocalibus, et de pronuntiatione >inguae Hebraicoe,” 4to. He was then dead. His son, the subject of the present article, was the author of several tracts on religious and philosophical subjects among the former were, “The duty, circumstance, and benefits of Baptism, determined by evidence,” 1771, 8vo “The Messiah, being the prophecies concerning him methodized, with their accomplishment,” 1780, 8vo “The nature and circumstances of the Demoniacs in the Gospel,” 1780, 8vo. In some of these he is said to depart from the received opinions of the church. Of his philosophical works, which have done him far more credit, we may notice his meteorological journals, which were for many years published in the Philosophical Transactions, where likewise he wrote, 1. “An account of a Meteor seen in Rutland,” 1756. 2. “On the return of the Comet expected in 1757 or 1755, ibid. 1759. 3.” On the mutations of the Stars,“ibid. 1761. 4.” Account of a remarkable Halo,“ib. 1762, 5.” Observations on the quantity of rain fallen at Lyndon for several years, with observations for determining the latitude of Stamford,“ib. 1771. He published also separately,” Account of the discoveries respecting Comets," 1757, 4to. This contains a table of the Parabola, much valued by competent judges, and reprinted by sir Henry Englefield, in his excellent treatise on the same subject. Mr. Barker, by a course of uninterrupted abstemiousness, particularly from animal food, which he was under the necessity of leaving off in his infancy, prolonged his life and faculties to an unusual period, dying at Lyndon, Dec. 29th, 1809, in his eighty-eighth year. It ought to have been noticed, that he drew up the history of the parish of Lyndon, one of the few parts given to the public of a new edition of Wright’s history and antiquities of Rutland.

, an eminent citizen and alderman of London of the last century, and many years one of its representatives in parliament, will not probably be thought undeserving of a lengthened notice, in these days of political delusion and imposture. He was born at Heading, in Berkshire, in 1685. His parents, who were of the people called Quakers, put him to a school at Wandsworth, in Surrey, which was solely appropriated to the education of persons of that profession. From this school, the master of which was of the same religious principles, young Barnard is said to have derived very iittle advantage in point of classical and polite literature. This loss, however, his native good sense, and love of knowledge, soon led him to supply, as far as possible, by carefully reading, in our own tongue, the best writers of Greece and Rome. By these means, though he could not be fully sensible of the elegance of the classic authors, which was, for the most part, lost in the translations of them, he became well acquainted with every remarkable sect, character, and action, in profane history. Such were the integrity and candour of his mind, when he was a boy, that his playmates used to choose him for their chancellor, in the disputes which they had with each other, and readily submitted to his decisions. When in the fifteenth year of his age, his father, who appears to have been settled in London, and had long been afflicted with bad health, determined to take him into his comptinghouse and, from observing his natural turn, assiduity, and talents, scrupled not to commit to his care the management of a great business in the wine trade, nor was he disappointed in the early confidence which he placed in his son. At this time our young gentleman took peculiar pleasure in the study of figures, which he pursued with such success, that his judgment was afterwards highly valued in affairs which required profound skill in calculation, and his knowledge as an able financier became undisputed. In the midst of these pursuits and engagements, he did not neglect the subject of religion. Some scruples having arisen in his mind with regard to the principles wherein he had been educated, he determined to apply himself to the devout study of the Bible, which he firmly believed to be the sole repository of divine truth. The result of his inquiries was, that he found himself called upon, by the dictates of his conscience, to make the painful sacrifice of openly renouncing the distinguishing tenets of his revered parents. For this purpose, he was introduced to doctor Compton, then bishop of London and, after several conferences with that prelate, was baptized by him, in his chapel at Fulham, 1703. Mr. Barnard was under nineteen years of age when he quitted the society of the Quakers; and from that time he continued, till his death, a member of the established church, an admirer of her liturgy, and an ornament to her communion. There was a peculiarity of character in the early part of his life, which deserves to be noticed. When he was a youth himself, he never chose to associate with those of his own age. Being convinced that he could derive no improvement from an acquaintance with them, he sought out companions among men distinguished by their knowledge, learning, and religion; and such men received, with open arms, a young person who discovered so much good sense and discernment.

Sir John Barnard left one son, and two daughters. His son John Barnard, esq. of Berkeley square, well known for his taste in the polite arts, and for his admirable collection of pictures, died about 1784. Of sir John Barnard’s daughters, the eldest was married to Thomas Hankey, esq. afterwards sir Thomas Hankey, knt. and the youngest to the honourable Henry Temple, esq. the second lord viscount Palmerston.

, ancient professor and dean of the faculty of medicine at Paris, the place of his birth, died July 29, 1758, at about the age of 72. He had a great share in the Pharmacopoeia of Paris, for 1732, 4to; and in 1739, gave an academical dissertation in Latin on chocolate, “An senibus Chocolate potas?” which has been often reprinted. His son, of the same name, war also dean of the faculty at Paris, where he died in 1787, at the age of eighty. He was long a surgeon in the armies of Italy and Germany, and published some medical works. There was a Theodore Baron before these, probably their ancestor, who, in 1609, published a curious work entitled “De operationis meiendi triplici lacsione et curatione,” of which Haller gives a brief analysis.

, was born July 1647, at Paris. He applied himself to studying the Scriptures and councils, and conceived so great a contempt for scholastic divinity, as to give up the design he had entertained of being a doctor of the Sorbonne. He was curate of Flamingrie, in the diocese of Laon, 1680; but imbibing the tenets of the Protestants, and fearing lest he should be arrested for the opinions which he propagated in his sermons and discourses, he went to Paris, 1688, and afterwards took refuge at Geneva, where he married, 1690. He at first taught French to the foreign nobility; but was afterwards declared a citizen, and admitted into one of the first classes of the college at Geneva, in which city he died May 1723. His best works are those which he published in France before his retiring to Geneva, they are, “Un traite de l'Egalite des deux sexes,” 1673, 12mo. “Traite de l‘ Education des Dames, pour laconduite de l’esprit dans les sciences et dans les mceurs,” 12mo. “De Texcellence des Hommes contre l'Egalite des Sexes,” 12mo. “Rapports de la Langue Latine a la Franchise,” 12mo. John James de la Barre, his son, was author of “Pensees philosophiques et theologiques,” 1714 et 1717, 2 vols 8vo. They are theses.

, first lord viscount Harrington, a nobleman of considerable learning, and author of several books, was the youngest son of Benjamin Shute, merchant (youngest son of Francis Sbute, of Upton, in the county of Leicester, esq.) by a daughter of the Kev. Jos. Caryl, author of the commentary on Job. He was born at Theobalds in Hertfordshire, in 1678, and received part of his education at Utrecht, as appears from a Latin oration which he delivered at that university, and published there in 1698, in 4to, under the following title “Oratio de studio Philosophise conjungendo cum studio Juris Roman!; habita in inclyta Academia Trajectina Kalendis Junii, 1698, a Johanne Shute, Anglo, Ph. D. et L. A. M.” He published also three other academical exercises; viz. 1. “Exercitatio Physica, de Ventis,” Utrecht, 1696, 4to. 2. “Dissertatio Philosophica, de Theocratia morali,” Utrecht, 1697. 3, “Dissertatio Philosophica Inauguralis, de Theocratia civili,” Utrecht, 1697. The second of these tracts has been cited, with great commendation, by two eminent writers on the civil law, Cocceius and Heineccius. After his return to England, he applied himself to the study of the law in the Inner Temple. In 1701 he published, but without his name, “An essay upon the interest of England, in respect to Protestants dissenting from the Established Church,” 4to. This was reprinted two years after, with considerable alterations and enlargements, and with the title of “The interest of England considered,” &c. Some time after this he published another piece in. 4to, entitled “The rights of Protestant Dissenters,” in two parts. During the prosecution of his studies in the law, he was applied to by queen Anne’s whig ministry, at the instigation of lord Sorners, to engage the Presbyterians in Scotland to favour the important measure then in agitation, of an union of the two kingdoms. Flattered at the age of twenty-four, by an application which shewed the opinion entertained of his abilities, and influenced by the greatest lawyer and statesman of the age, he readily sacrificed the opening prospects of his profession, and undertook the arduous employment. The happy execution of it was rewarded, in 1708, by the place of commissioner of the customs, from which he was removed by the Tory administration in 1711, for his avowed opposition to their principles and conduct. How high Mr. Shute’s character stood in the estimation even of those who differed most widely from him in religious and political sentiments, apyears from the testimony borne to it by Dr. Swift, who writes thus to archbishop Kitig, in a letter dated London, Nov. 30, 1708. “One Mr. Shute is named for secretary to lord Wharton. He is a young man, but reckoned the shrewdest head in England, and the person in whom the Presbyterians chiefly confide; and if money be necessary towards the good work, it is reckoned he can command as far as 100,000l. from the body of the dissenters here. As to his principles, he is a moderate man, frequenting the church and the meeting indifferently.” In the reign of queen Anne, John Wildman, of Becket, in the county of Berks, esq. adopted him for his son, after the Roman custom, and settled his large estate upon him, though he was no relation, and said to have been but slightly acquainted with him. Some years after, he had another considerable estate left him by Francis Harrington, of Tofts, esq. who had married his tirst cousin, and died without issue. This occasioned him to procure an act of parliament, pursuant to the deed of settlement, to assume the name and bear the arms of Barrington. On the accession of king George he was chosen member of parliament for the town of Berwick-upon-Tvveed. July 5, 1717, he had a reversionary grant of the office of master of the rolls in Ireland, which. he surrendered Dec. 10, 1731. King George was also pleased, by privy seal, dated at St. James’s, June 10, and by patent at Dublin, July 1, 1720, to create him baron Barrington of Newcastle, and viscount Barrington of Ardglass. In 1722 he was again returned to parliament as member for the town of Berwick; but in 1723, the house of commons, taking into consideration the affair of the Harburgh lottery, a very severe and unmerited censure of expulsion was passed upon his lordship, as sub-governor of the Harburgh company, under the prince of Wales.

In 1725 he published in 2 vols. 8vo, his “Miscellanea Sacra: or, anew method of considering so much of the history of the Apostles as is contained in scripture; in an abstract of their history, an abstract of that abstract, and four critical essays.” In this work the noble author has traced, with great care and judgment, the methods taken by the apostles, and first preachers of the gospel, for propagating Christianity; and explained with great distinctness the several gifts of the spirit, by which they were enabled to disciiarge that office. These he improved into an argument for the truth of the Christian religion; which is said to have staggered the infidelity of Mr. Anthony Collins. In 1725 he published, in 8vo, “An Essay on the several dispensations of God to mankind, in the order in which they lie in the Bible; or, a short system of the religion of nature and scriptwre,” &c. He was also author of several other tracts, of which the principal were, 1. “.A Dissuasive from Jacobitism; shewing in general what the nation is to expect from a popish king; and, in particular, from the Pretender.” The fourth edition of this was printed in 8vo, in 1713. 2. “A Letter from a Layman, in communion with the church of England, though dissenting from her in some points, to the right rev. the bishop of ———, with a postscript, shewing how far the bill to prevent the growth of schism is inconsistent with the act of toleration, and the other laws of this realm.” The second edition of this was printed in 1714, 4to. 3. “The Layman’s Letter to the bishop of Bangor.” The second edition of this was published in 1716, 4to. 4. “An account of the late proceedings of the Dissenting-ministers at Salters’-hall; occasioned by the differences amongst their brethren in the country: with some thoughts concerning imposition of human forms for articles of faith;” in a letter to the rev. Dr. Gale, 1719, 8vo. 5. “A Discourse of natural and revealed Religion, and the relation they bear to each other,” 1732, 8vo. 6. “Reflections on the 12th query, contained in a paper, entitled Reasons offered against pushing for the repeal of the corporation and test-acts, and on the animadversions on the answer to it,” 1733, 8vo. A new edition of his “Miscellanea Sacra” was published in 1770, 3 vols. 8vo, under the revision of his son, the present learned and munificent bishop of Durham. Lord Barrington sometimes spoke in parliament, but appears not to have been a frequent speaker. He died at his seat at Becket in Berkshire, after a short illness, Dec. 4, 1734, in the 6Gth year of his age. He generally attended divine worship among the dissenters, and for many years received the sacrament at Pinner’s-hall, when Dr. Jeremiah Hunt, an eminent and learned non-conformist divine, was pastor of the congregation. He had formerly been an attendant on Mr. Thomas Bradbury, but quitted that gentleman on account of his zeal for imposing unscriptural terms upon the article of the Trinity. His lordship was a disciple and friend of Mr. Locke, had a high value for the sacred writings, and was eminently skilled in them. As a writer in theology, he contributed much to the diffusing of that spirit of free scriptural criticism, which has since obtained among all denominations of Christians. As his attention was much turned to the study of divinity, he had a strong sense of the importance of what is called free inquiry in matters of religion. In his writings, whenever he thought what he advanced was doubtful, or that his arguments were not strictly conclusive, though they might have great weight, he expressed himself with a becoming diffidence. He was remarkable for the politeness of his manners, and the gracefulness of his address. The only virulent attack we have seen against his lordship, occurs in lord Orford’s works, vol. I. p. 543, which from its contemptuous and sneering notice of the Barrington family, and especially the present worthy prelate, may be safely left to" its influence on the mind of any unprejudiced reader.

, usually called Giraldus Cambren­sis, or Girald of Wales, was born at the castle of Mainaper, near Pembroke, in 1146. By his mother he was descended from the princes of South Wales and his father, William Barry, was one of the chief men of that principality. Being a younger brother, and intended for the cburch, he was sent to St. David’s, and educated in the family of the bishop of that see, who was his uncle. He acknowledges in his history of his own life and actions, that in his early youth he was too negligent and playful; but his uncle and his masters remonstrated with him so sharply, that he became diligent, and soon excelled his school-fellows. When about twenty years of age, he was sent to the university of Paris, where he continued for three years, acquiring great fame by his skill in rhetoric, and on his return he entered into holy orders, and obtained several benefices in England and Wales. Finding that the Welch were very reluctant in paying tidies of wool and cheese, he applied to Richard, archbishop of Canterburv, and was appointed his legate in Wales for rectifying that disorder, and for other purposes. He executed this commission with great spirit, excommunicating all without distinction, who neglected to pay. He also informed against the old archdeacon of Brechin for being married, and procured him to be deprived of his archdeaconry, which was bestowed on this officious legate. In otherwise discharging the duties of this new office, he acted with great vigour, which involved him in many quarXels; but, according to his own account, he was always in the right, and always victorious. On his uncle’s death, he was elected by the chapter of St. David’s, bishop of that see, but he declined accepting it, owing to the informality of not applying to the king for his licence, although in reality he knew that the king, Henry II. would never have confirmed such an election, and did in fact express his displeasure at it, in consequence of which another person was chosen. Girald, however, was not reconciled to the disappointment, and determined to get rid of his chagrin by travelling, and studying for some time longer at Paris. Here he pursued the civil and canon law, and with his usual vanity he boasts what a prodigious fame he acquired, especially in the knowledge of papal constitutions, or decretals, as they are called. In 1179, he was elected professor of the canon law in the university of Paris; but rejected the honour, expecting more solid advantages in his own country. In 1180, he returned home through Flanders and England, and in his way stopped at Canterbury, where he emphatically describes (what may be well allowed him) the great luxury of the monks of that place. At length he got home, where he found the whole country in a flame, the canons and archdeacons of Menevia having joined with the inhabitants in driving out the bishop of that see, the administration of which was committed to our author, by the archbishop of Canterbury. Under this authority he governed the see of St. David’s for three or four years, and made wonderful reformations in it. The abdicated bishop, whose name was Peter, did not acquiesce in the conduct of his clergy, but by letters suspended and excommunicated the canons and archdeacons, uncited and unheard: and at length, Girald, not having power to redress them, resigned his charge to the archbishop, who absolved the excommunicated. Bishop Peter imputed his disgrace, or at least the continuance of it, to Girald; great contests arose, and appeals were made to Rome: but at length they were reconciled, and the bishop restored. About the year 1184, king Henry II. invited Girald to court, and made him his chaplain, and at times he attended the king for several years, and was very useful to him in keeping matters quiet in Wales’. Yet though the king approved of his services, and in private often coinmended his prudence and fidelity, he never could be prevailed on to promote him to any ecclesiastical benefices, on account of the relation he bore to prince Rhees, and other grandees of Wales. In 1185, the king sent him to Ireland with his son John, in quality of secretary and privy-counsellor to the young prince: but the expedition did not meet with success, because earl John made use only of youthful counsels, and shewed no favour to the old adventurers, who were men experienced in the affairs of Ireland. While Girald thus employed himself in Ireland, the two bishoprics of Ferns and Leighlin fell vacant, which earl John offered to unite, and confer on him; but he rejected the promotion, and employed himself in collecting materials for writing his Topography and history of the conquest of Ireland, which he compiled and published a few years after. In the spring of the year 1186, John Comyn, archbishop of Dublin, convened a synod of his clergy, in Christ-church of that city, at which Girald was one of the preachers, but by the account of it in his life, it appears to have been a turbulent assembly. Having obtained great fame in Ireland, as he tells us himself, between Easter and Whitsuntide 1187, he returned to Wales, and employed all his time in writing and revising his Topography, to which, when he had put, the last hand, he took a journey to Oxford, and repeated it in a public audience of the university; and as it consisted of three distinctions, he repeated one every day of three successively; and in order to captivate the people, and secure their applause, the first day he entertained all the poor of the town, the next day the doctors and scholars of fame and reputation, and the third day the scholars of the lower rank, the soldiers, townsmen, and burgesses. In the year 1188, he accompanied Baldwin, archbishop of Canterbury, in a journey through the rough and mountainous parts of Wales, in order to preach up to the people the necessity of taking the cross, and engaging in an expedition in defence of the Holy Land. Here our author shews the vast success his eloquence met with, in persuading the greatest part of the country to engage in this adventure, when the archbishop was able to do nothing. Girald himself took the cross at this time, and it afforded him the opportunity of writing his “Itinerarium Cambriae.” The same year he went over into France, in the retinue of king Henry If, which he did by the advice of the archbishop of Canterbury, and Ranulph de Glanville, chief-justice of England; but the king dying the year after, he was sent back by Richard I. to preserve the peace of Wales, and was even joined with the bishop of Ely, as one of the regents of the kingdom. After refusing one or two bishoprics, in hopes to succeed to St. David’s, which was his favourite object, this latter became vacant in 1198, and he was unanimously elected by the chapter. Yet here again he was disappointed, owing to the opposition of Hubert archbishop of Canterbury, and was involved in a contest, which lasted five years, during which he took three journies to Rome, and was at last defeated. Soon after this, he retired from the world, and spent the last seventeen years of his life in study, composing many of his writings. He was unquestionably a man of genius and learning, but as a historian, full of credulity and fable; and as a man, one of the most vain upon record. Ware, and the editor of the Biog. Britannica, have given a long list of his manuscript works, which are in the Cotton and Harleian libraries in the British museum, the archbishop’s library at Lambeth, the Bodleian, Oxford, and the public library and Bene't college library, Cambridge. Those printed are: 1. “Topographia Hibernioe,” Francfort, 1602, and in Holinshed, 2. “Historia Vaticinalis, de expugnatione Hiberniae,” Francfort, 1602, both published by Camden. 3. “Itinerarium Cambriae,” published with annotations by David Powel, 1585, 8vo. 4. “De laudibus Carnbrorum,” also published by Powel. 5. “Gemma Ecclesiastica,” Mentz, 1549, under the title of “Gemma animoe,” without the author’s name. 6. “Liber secundus de descriptione Wallise,” published by Wharton, in Anglia Sacra, part II. p, 447. Camden every where quotes Giraldus as an author of undoubted credit and reputation.

, a very learned and voluminous writer, was born at Custrin in Brandenburg, June 22, 1587. His father was professor of civil law at Franc fort upon the Oder, councillor to the elector of Brandenburg, and his chancellor at Custrin. Having discovered in his son very early marks of genius, he provided him with proper masters; but:ie enjoyed only a little time the pleasure of seeing the fruits of his care, for he died in 1597. Mr. Baiilet has inserted Caspar in his “Enfans celebres;” where he tells us, that, at twelve years of age, he translated David’s psalms into Latin verse of every measure, and published several Latin poems. Upon the death of his father he was sent to Gotha, then to Eisenach, and afterwards, according to custom, went through the different universities in Germany. When he had finished his studies, he began his travels; he visited Italy, France, Spain, England, and Holland, improving himself by the conversation and works of the learned in every country. He studied the modern as well as ancient languages, and his translations from the Spanish and French shew that he was not content with a superficial knowledge. Upon his return to Germany, to took up his residence at Leipsic, where he led a retired life, his passion for study having made him renounce all sort of employment; so that as he devoted his whole time to books, we need he the less surprised at the vast number which he published.

, an author of some merit on the subject of education, was born at Hamburgh in 1723. His father appears to have been a person of a rigid temper, and so frequent in correcting his son with severity, as to drive him from home for a time, during which the boy served as a domestic in the house of a land-surveyor at Holstein. Being, however, persuaded to return, he was placed at the public school at Hamburgh, where he made himself respected by his talents, and the aid he was enabled to give to his indolent schoolfellows. When advanced to the higher class, he attended the lectures of professors Richey and Reimarus, from whose instructions, particularly those of Reimarus, he derived great improvement: but he afterwards allowed that he did not pay a regular attention to the sciences, and passed much of his time with indolent and dissolute companions. He had little disposition for study, and remained for some time undetermined in the choice of a profession. His father was ambitious that he should be a clergyman, and the means being provided, he went to Leipsic in 1744, to prosecute his studies particularly in theology. Here he continued for two years, attending the lectures of professor Crusius, who had begun to philosophize on religion; and these lectures, with the writings of Wolf, to which he also applied, induced a sceptical disposition, which more or less prevailed in all his writings and opinions during his life. In 1749, he was appointed private tutor to the son of a gentleman at Hoistein, and this situation gave him an opportunity of bringing to the test of experience, the plan of an improved method of education, which he had, for some time, in contemplation. The attempt succeeded to his wishes, and his pupil, who was only seven years old, when put under him, and could merely read the German language, became able in the space of three years, not only to read Latin authors, but to translate from the German into that language, and also to speak and write it with a degree of fluency. The young gentleman had also made considerable progress in the principles of religion and morals, in history, geography, and arithmetic.

, one of the chief leaders of the Egyptian Gnostics, flourished in the second century. These Gnostics blended the Christian doctrine with both the Oriental and the Egyptian philosophy. They did not acknowledge an eternal principle of darkness or evil. They maintained that our Saviour consisted of two persons, Jesus the son of Joseph and Mary, and Christ, the son of God, who entered into him at his baptism, and went out of him when he was apprehended by the Jews some, if not all of them, allowed the reality of his human body. Basilides, who had the ambition to be the founder of a sect, contrived the following modification of the heresy of the Gnostics. He pretended that God, from his own essence, had produced seven angels, or jEons. Two of these, called “power” and “wisdom,” engendered the angels of the highest order, who having formed heaven for their own residence, produced other angels of a subordinate nature, and these again produced others, till three hundred and sixty-five different orders or ranks were successively formed; all of which had one Abraxas for their common head. The lowest order living on the confines of the eternal, malignant, and self-animated matter, created this world, and the inhabitants thereof. God added rational souls to men, and subjected them to the government of angels. At length the angels fell off from their allegiance to God, and into terrible contests among themselves. He who governed the Jewish nation was the most turbulent of all. In pity, therefore, to mankind, who groaned under their oppression and discordant influence, God sent forth his son Christ, a principal JEon, to enter into the man Jesus, and by him restore the knowledge of God, and destroy the dominion of the angels, particularly of him who governed the Jews. Alarmed at this, the god of the Jews caused apprehend and crucify the man Jesus, but could not hurt the Æou who dwelt in him. Such souls as obey Jesus Christ shall at death be delivered from matter, and ascend to the supreme God: but disobedient souls shall successively pass into new bodies, till they at last become obedient.

, a learned divine of the seventeenth century, was born in 1607, in the island of Jersey, according to Wood, which an annotator on the Biog. Britannica contradicts without informing us of the place of his nativity. Grey, in his ms notes, says he was born at Rouen, in Normandy, but quotes no authority, nor do we know in what school or university he received his education. For some time, he was master of the college or free-school at Guernsey, and became chaplain to Thomas Morton bishop of Durham, who gave him the rectory of Stanhope, and the vicarage of EgglesclifF, b.oth in the county of Durham. In July 1640, he had the degree of doctor of divinity conferred upon him at Cambridge, by mandate; and was incorporated in the same at Oxford, the November following, about which time he was made chaplain in ordinary to king Charles I.; Dec. 12, 1643, he was installed into the seventh prebend of Durham, to which he was collated by his generous patron bishop Morton. The next year, August 24, he was also collated to the archdeaconry of Northumberland, with the rectory of Howiek annexed. But he did not long enjoy these great preferments, as in the beginning of the civil wars, being sequestered and plundered, he repaired to king Charles at Oxford, before whom, and his parliament, he frequently preached. In 1646, he had a licence granted him under the public seal of the university, to preach the word of God throughout England. Upon the surrender of the Oxford garrison to the parliament, he resolved with all the zeal of a missionary to propagate the doctrine of the EngJish church in the East, among the Greeks, Arabians, &c. Leaving therefore his family in England, he went first to Zante, an island near the Morea, where he made some stay; and had good success in spreading among the Greek inhabitants the doctrine of the English church, the substance of which he imparted to several of them, in a vulgar Greek translation of our church-catechism. The success of this attempt was so remarkable, that it drew persecution upon him from the Latins, as they are called, or those members of the Romish church, throughout the East, who perform their service in Latin. On this he went into the Morea, where the metropolitan of Achaia prevailed upon him to preach twice in Greek, at a meeting of some of his bishops and clergy, which was well received. At his departure, he left with him a copy of the catechism above mentioned. From thence, after he had passed through Apulia, Naples, and Sicily again (in which last, at Messina, he officiated for some weeks on board a ship) he embarked for Syria; and, after some months stay at Aleppo, where he had frequent conversation with the patriarch of Antioch, then resident there, he left a copy of our church-catechism, translated into Arabic, the native language of that place. From Aleppo he went in 1652 to Jerusalem, and so travelled over all Palestine. At Jerusalem he received much honour, both from the Greek Christians and Latins. The Greek patriarch (the better to express his desire of communion with the church of England, declared by the doctor to him) gave him his bull, or patriarchal seal, in a blank, which is their way of credence, and shewed him other instances of respect, while the Latins received him courteously into their convent, though he did openly profess himself a priest of the church of England. After some disputes about the validity of our English ordinations, they procured him entrance into the temple of the sepulchre, at the rate of a priest, that is half of the sum paid by a layman; and, at his departure from Jerusalem, the pope’s vicar gave him his diploma in parchment, under his own hand and public seal, styling him, a priest of the church of England, and doctor of divinity, which title occasioned some surprise, especially to the French ambassador at Constantinople. Returning to Aleppo, he passed over the Euphrates and went into Mesopotamia, where he intended to send the church-catechism in Turkish, to some of their bishops, who were mostly Armenians. This Turkish translation was procured by the care of sir Thomas Bendyshe, the English ambassador at Constantinople. After his return from Mesopotamia, he wintered at Aleppo, where he received several courtesies from the consul, Mr. Henry Riley. In the beginning of 1653, he departed from Aleppo, and came to Constantinople by land, being six hundred miles, without any person with him, that could speak any of the European languages. Yet, by the help of some Arabic he had picked up at Aleppo, he performed that journey in the company of twenty Turks, who used him courteously, because he acted as physician to them and their friends: a study (as he says) to which the iniquity of the times and the opportunity of Padua drove him. After his arrival at Constantinople, the French Protestants there desired him to be their minister, and though he declared to them his resolution to officiate according to the English liturgy (a translation whereof, for want of a printed copy, cost him no little labour) yet they orderly submitted to it, and promised to settle on him, in three responsible men’s hands, a competent stipend: and all this, as they told him, with the express consent of the French ambassador, but still under the roof and protection of the English ambassador. Before he quitted the Eastern parts, he intended to pass into Egypt, in order to take a survey of the churches of the Cophties, and confer with the patriarch of Alexandria, as he had done already with the other three patriarchs, partly to acquire the knowledge of those churches, and partly to publish and give them a true notion of the church of England; but whether he accomplished his design, is not certain. He went next into Transilvania, where he was entertained for seven years by George Ragotzi the Second, prince of that country; who honoured him with the divinity-chair in his new founded university of Alba Julia (or Weissenburg) and endowed him, though a mere stranger to him, with a very ample salary. During his travels he collated the several confessions of faith of the different sorts of Christians, Greeks, Armenians, Jacobites, Maronites, &c. which he kept by him in their own languages. His constant design and endeavour, whilst he remained in the East, was, to persuade the Christians of the several denominations there, to a canonical reformation of some errors; and to dispose and incline them to a communion or unity with the church of England, but his pious intentions were afterwards defeated by the artifices of court of France. Upon the restoration of king Charles II. Dr. Easier was recalled by his majesty to England, in a letter written to prince Ragotzi. But this unfortunate prince dying 'soon after, of the wounds he received in a battle with the Turks at Gyala, the care of his solemn obsequies was committed to the doctor by his relict, princess Sophia, and he was detained a year longer from England. At length returning in 1661 9 he was restored to his preferments and dignities; and made chaplain in ordinary to king Charles II. After quietly enjoying his large revenues for several years, he died on the 12th of Oct. 1676, in the 69th year of his age-, and was buried in the yard belonging to the cathedral of Durham, where a tomb was erected over his grave, with an inscription. His character appears to have been that of a learned, active, and industrious man; a zealous supporter of the church of England; and a loyal subject. His son, John Basire, esq. who had been receiver general for the four western counties, died ou the 2d of June 1722, in the 77th year of his age.

, eldest son of the above, was born in 1610, and became minister of Bayeux, and was called to suffer persecution in his old age, being thrown into the prison at Havre de Grace, when he was seventyfive years of age. On the revocation of the edict of Nantz he was set at liberty, and took refuge in Holland, where he probably passed the remainder of his clays in quiet. He died at Zutphen in 1691. His son, Samuel Basnage de Flotmanvllle, succeeded him in his congregation at Bayeux, but was forced to leave France in 1685, and retire to Zutphen, with the reputation of being one of the ablest of the French reformed clergy. He wrote “Exercitations on Baronius,” beginning where Casaubon left off; but changing his purpose, he turned his work into the shape of Ecclesiastical Annals, published in 1706, under the title of ' Annales politico-ecclesiastici," 3 vols. fol. and coming down to the reign of Phocas. This work is, undoubtedly, useful, but has been superseded by that of James Basnage, of whom we are soon to speak. Anthony died in 1721.

, esq. a gentleman of a good family, and a writer in the fifteenth century, was chamberlain, or gentleman of the privy chamber, to king Henry V. on whom he was a constant attendant and an eye-witness of most of his glorious actions both at home and abroad; all which he particularly described. Beginning at his tenderest years, he gave a full and exact account of Henry’s several expeditions into France; his glorious victories, large conquests, and illustrious triumphs in that kingdom; his advantageous and honourable peace with Charles VI. his marriage with the princess Catherine, his coronation at Paris: and, finally, his death, and the coronation of king Henry VI. his son and successor. These several remarkable events Peter Basset comprized in one volume, which he entitled “The Actes of king Henry V.” This book was never printed; and was said to be extant in manuscript in the college of heralds, and perhaps in some other places but upon the closest examination it appears that he is originally quoted only by Edward Hall, in his Chronicle, and perhaps by Bale. What has been quoted out of his writings, either by Mr. Thomas Goodwin in his “History of the reign of Henry the Fifth,” or by other historians within that period, is visibly borrowed from Hall. Dr. Nicolson mentions Basset only upon the authority of Pits, who Had taken his account from Bale.

, an eminent nonconformist divine of the seventeenth century, was born in November 1625, and after a suitable school education, was sent to Cambridge, where he was admitted of Emanuel college, from which he removed to King’s, in 1644. He commenced bachelor of arts in 1647, and applying himself to the study of divinity, became a distinguished preacher among the Presbyterians. He was afterwards appointed vicar of St. Dunstan’s in the West, London; and joined with several other divines in preaching a morning exercise at Cripplegate church. At this exercise Dr. Tillotson preached, in September 1661, the first sermon which was ever printed by him. Upon the restoration of Charles II. Mr. Bates was made one of his majesty’s chaplains; and, in the November following, was admitted to the degree of doctor in divinity in the university of Cambridge, by royal mandate. The king’s letter to this purpose was dated on the 9th of that month. About the same time, he was offered the deanery of Lichfield and Coventry, which he refused; and it is said that he might afterwards have been raised to any bishopric in the kingdom, if he would have conformed to the established church. Dr. Bates was one of the commissioners at the Savoy conference in 1660, for reviewing the public liturgy, and was concerned in drawing up the exceptions against the Common Prayer. He was, likewise, chosen on the part of the Presbyterian minfoters, together with Dr. Jacomb and Mr. Baxter, to manage the dispute with Dr. Pearson, afterwards bishop of Chester, Dr. Gunning, afterwards bishop of Ely, and Dr. Sparrow, afterwards bishop of Ely. In 1665, he took the oath required of the nonconformists by the act commonly called the Five Mile Act, and which had passed in the parliament held that year at Oxford, on account of the plague being in London. When, about January 1667-8, a treaty was proposed by sir Orlando Bridgman, lord keeper of the great seal, and countenanced by the lord chief baron Hale, for a comprehension of such of the dissenters as could be brought into the communion of the church, and for a toleration of the rest, Dr. Bates was one of the divines who, on the Presbyterian side, were engaged in drawing up a scheme of the alterations and concessions desired by that party. He was concerned, likewise, in another fruitless attempt of the same kind, which was made in 1674. His good character recommended him to the esteem and acquaintance of lord keeper Bridgman, lord chancellor Finch, and his son, the earl of Nottingham. Dr. Tillotson had such an opinion of his learning and temper, that it became the ground of a friendship between them, which continued to the death of that excellent prelate, and Dr. Bates, with great liberality, used his interest with the archbishop, in procuring a pardon for Nathaniel lord Crewe, bishop of Durham, who, for his conduct in the ecclesiastical commission, had been excepted out of the act of indemnity, which passed in 1690. When the dissenters presented their address to king William and queen Mary, on their accession to the throne, the two speeches to their majesties were delivered hy Dr. Bates, who was much respected by that monarch; and queen Mary often entertained herself in her closet with his writings. His residence, during the latter part of his life, was at Hackney, where he preached to a respectable society of Protestant dissenters, in an ancient irregular edifice in Mare-street, which was pulled down in 1773. He was also one of the Tuesday lecturers at Salter’s hall. He died at Hackney, July 14, 1699, in the 74th year of his age. After his death, his works, which had been separately printed, were collected into one volume fol. besides which a posthumous piece of his appeared in 8vo, containing some “Sermons on the everlasting rest of the Saints.” He wrote, likewise, in conjunction with Mr. Howe, a prefatory epistle to Mr. Chaffy’s treatise of the Sabbath, on its being reprinted; and another before lord Stair’s vindication of the Divine Attributes. Dr. Bates is universally understood to have been the politest writer among the nonconformists of the seventeenth century. It is reported, that when his library came to be disposed of, it was found to contain a great number of romances; but, adds his biographer, it should be remembered that the romances of that period, though absurd in several respects, had a tendency to invigorate

, was born at Schweinfurt, Sept. 30, 1605; his father, Leonard Bausch, a physician in that place, acquired some fame about the beginning of the seventeenth century, by his commentary on two of the books of Hippocrates, which was published at Madrid, 1694, fol. His son was early inclined to his father’s profession, and after studying medicine in Germany, went to Italy, and lastly, took his doctor’s degree at Altdorf, in 1630. He practised afterwards at Schweinfurt, and employed all his leisure time in botanical and chemical pursuits, accumulating a valuable library, and a rich museum of natural history. In 1652 he founded a society called “Collegium Curiosorum naturae,” of which he was the first president. He died at Schweinfurt, Nov. 17, 1665. He was the author of 1. “Schediasmata bina curiosa de lapide hcematite et cetite,” Leipsic, 1665, 8vo, with a dissertation on the blood prefixed. 2. “Schediasma curiosum de unicornu fossili,” Breslaw, 1666, 8vo. 3. “Schediasma posthumum, de cceruleo et chryocolla,” Jena, 1668, 8vo.

, a very ingenious metaphysician and natural philosopher, was born in 1686, or 1687, at Old Aberdeen, in Scotland, of which city his father was a merchant, and educated in king’s college there. His principal employment was that of a private tutor to young gentlemen; and among other of his pupils were lord Grey, lord Blantyre, and Mr. Hay of Drummeizier. About 1724, he married the daughter of Mr. Mebane, a clergyman in the shire of Berwick. A few years after he published in 4to, “An Enquiry into the nature of the human Soul, wherein its immateriality is evinced from the principles of reason and philosophy;” without date. In 1741, he went abroad with Mr. Hay, and resided some years at Utrecht; having there also lord Blantyre under his care. He made excursions from thence into Flanders, France, and Germany; his wife and 'family residing in the mean time chiefly at Berwick upon Tweed. He returned to Scotland in 1747, and resided till his death at Whittingham, in the shire of East Lothian. He drew up, for the use of his pupils, and his son, a piece entitled “Matho: sive, Cosmotheoria puerilis, Dialogus. In quo prima elementa de mundi ordine et ornatu proponuntur, &c.” This was afterwards greatly enlarged, and published in English, in two volumes, 8vo. In 1750 was published, “An Appendix to his Enquiry into the nature of the human Soul” wherein he endeavours to remove some difficulties, which had been started against his notions of the “vis inertias” of matter, by Maclaurin, in his “Account of Sir Isaac Newton’s Philosophical Discoveries.” To this piece Mr. Baxter prefixed a dedication to Mr. John Wilkes, afterwards so well known in the political world, with whom he had commenced an acquaintance abroad. He died this year, April the 23d, after suffering for some months under, a complication of disorders, of which the gout was the chief, and was buried in the family vault of Mr. Hay, at Whittingham.

In 1701 Mr. Baxter’s celebrated edition of Horace made its appearance, of which it is said that a second edition was finished by him a few days before his death, and published by his son John, but not until 1725. In it there were some corrections, alterations, and additions introduced. Dr. Harwood bestows the highest praise on it, as “by far the best edition of Horace ever published.” He adds, “I have read it many times through, and know its singular worth, England has not produced a more elegant or judicious crU tic than Baxter.” Gesner, entertaining the same sentiments, when he was requested to give an edition of made Baxter’s labours the foundation of his own, and published his edition, thus improved in 1752, and again in 1772, the latter still move improved by a collation of some Mss. and some very early editions which do not appear to have been consulted by Baxter. On the appearance of this last edition, Dr. Lowth, the late learned bishop of London, pronounced it the best edition of Horace ever yet delivered to the world. In 1788, Zeunius republished it, preserving all Baxter’s and Gesner’s observations, adding a few of his own, and availing himself of the labours of Jani and Wieland. Of this a very elegant edition was published in 1797, by Mr. Payne, of Pall Mall, printed by Mundell of Glasgow, in 8vo. But what can we say to the uncertainties of criticism? Harles and Mitscherlich. do not concur with Dr. Harwood in his opinion of Baxter’s edition of 1725, and they both under-rate his labours, Harles blaming him for his “ribaldry and abuse of Bentley.” Baxter was certainly irritated against Bentley, probably on account of some remarks introduced by Bentley into his edition of Horace, which had been published in the interval between 1701 and the time of his death. Gesner makes all the apology that can now be offered: he thinks that Baxter might feel Bentley' s contempt, than whom no man could deal out contempt more severely, or Baxter might himself be affected with somewhat of the irritability of age.

, engraver, and letter-founder, was born at Troyes, in 1525, son of Guilleaume le Be, a noble bourgeois, and Magdalen de St. Aubin. Being brought up in the house of Robert Stephens, whom his father supplied with paper, he got an insight into the composition of the types of that famous printing-house. He afterwards, by order of Francis I. made those beautiful oriental types which Robert Stephens used; and Philip II. employed him to prepare those with which his Bible of Antwerp was printed. In 1545 le B6 took a journey to Venice, and there cut for Mark Anthony Justiniani, who had raised a Hebrew printing-house, the punches necessary to the casting of the founts to be employed in that establishment. Being returned to Paris, he there practised his art till 1598, the year of his decease. Casaubon speaks of him highly to his credit in his preface to the Opuscula of Scaliger. Henry le Be, his son, was a printer at Paris, where he gave in 1581, a quarto edition of the “Institutiones Clenardi Gr.” This book, which was of great utility to the authors of the “Methode Grecque” of Port-royal, is a master-piece in printing. His sons and his grandsons signalised themselves in the same art. The last of them died in 1685.

, LL. D. an eminent philosopher, critic, and poet, was born at Laurencekirk, in the county of Kincardine, Scotland, on the 25th day of October, 1735. His father, who was a farmer of no considerable rank, is said to have had a turn for reading and fur versifying; but, as he died in 1742, when his son was only seven years of age, could have had no great share in forming his mind. James was sent early to the only school his birth-place afforded, where he passed his time under the instructions of a tutor named Milne, whoin he used to represent as a “good grammarian, and tolerably skilled in the Latin language, but destitute of taste, as well as of some other qualifications essential to a good teacher.” He is said to have preferred Ovid as a school-author, whom Mr. Beattie afterwards gladly exchanged for Virgil. Virgil he had been accustomed to read with great delight in Ogi ivy’s and Dryden'g translations, as he did Homer in that of Pope; and these, with Thomson’s Seasons, and Milton’s Paradise Lost, of all which he was very early fond, probably gave him that taste for poetry which he afterwards cultivated with so much success. He was already, according to his biographer, inclined to making verses, and among his schoolfellows went by the name of The Poet.

“The death of his only surviving child completely unhinged the mind of Dr. Beattie, the first symptom of which, ere many days had elapsed, was a temporary but almost total loss of memory respecting his son. Many times he could not recollect what had become of him; and after searching in every room of the house, he would say to his niece, Mrs. Glen me, * You may think it strange, but I must ask you if I have a son, and where he is?‘ She then felt herself under the painful necessity of bringing to his recollection his son Montagu’s sufferings, which always restored him to reason. And he would often, with many tears, express his thankfulness that he had no child, saying, * How could I have borne to see their elegant minds mangled with madness!’ When he looked for the last time on the dead body of his son, he said, * I have now done with the world:' and he ever after seemed to act as if he thought so.”

, the foundress of Christ’s and St. John’s colleges in Cambridge, was the only daughter and heir of John Beaufort, duke of Somerset (grandson of John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster), and of Margaret Beauchamp his wife. She was born at Bletshoe in Bedfordshire) in 1441. About the fifteenth year of her age, being a rich heiress, the great duke of Suffolk, minister to Henry the Vlth. solicited her in marriage for his son; while the king wooed her for his half-brother Edmund, then earl of Richmond. On so nice a point the good young lady advised with an elder gentlewoman; who, thinking it too great a decision to take upon herself, recommended her to St. Nicholas, the patron of virgins. She followed her instructions, and poured forth her supplications and prayers with such effect, that one morning, whether sleeping or waking she could not tell, there appeared unto her somebody in the habit of a bishop, and desired she would accept of Edmund for her husband. Whereupon she married Edmund earl of Richmond; and by him had an only son, who was afterwards king Henry the VI 1th. Edmund died, Nov. 3, 1456, leaving Henry his son and heir but fifteen weeks old: after which Margaret married sir Henry Stafford, knight, second son to the duke of Buckingham, by whom she had no issue. Soon after the death of sir Henry Stafford, which happened about 1482, she was married again to Thomas lord Stanley, who was created earl of Derby, Oct. 27, 1485, which was the first year of her son’s reign; and this noble lord died also before her in 1504.

, D. D. master of Peter-house, Cambridge, and king’s professor of divinity, was a descendant of the ancient family of Beaumont in Leicestershire. His father, who died in 16 53, had been a woollen manufacturer at Hadleigh in Suffolk, where our author, his eldest son, was born March 13, 1615. His father, who discovered in him a turn for letters, placed him at the grammar school of his native place, where he made uncommon proficiency in classical learning, and in his sixteenth year was removed to Peterhouse in Cambridge, and distinguished himself, not more by his literary acquirements than by his pious and orderly deportment, acquiring the high esteem of Dr. Cosins, then master of that college, and afterwards bishop of Durham. After taking his degree of A. B. he was elected fellow, and afterwards tutor and moderator. In 1643, as he adhered loyally to his sovereign, he was obliged to leave the university, then in possession of the usurping powers, and being ejected from his fellowship, he retired to Hadleigh, where he associated with some other persons of his own sentiments, chiefly his former pupils and the sons of his friend and patron bishop Wren; and here he appears to have amused himself in writing his “Psyche,” which was begun in April 1647, finished before the end of March 1648, and published the same year; an allegorical poem, displaying the “Intercourse between Christ and the Soul,” which was much admired in his time, but has not preserved its popularity. Pope is reported to have said of it, that “there are in it a great many flowers well worth gathering, and a man who has the art of stealing wisely will find his account in reading it.” His biographer, however, confesses that he has generally preferred the effusions of fancy to the corrections of judgment, and is often florid and affected, obscure and perplexed. His Latin poems, although perhaps superior in style, are yet below the purity of the Augustan age. All his poetical efforts were the amusement of his leisure hours during the rebellion, by which he lost, besides his fellowship, some preferments which bishop Wren had bestowed on him, as the rectory of Kelshall in Hertfordshire in 1643, that of Elm with the chapel of Emneth in 1646, and the seventh canonry and prebend in the cathedral of Ely in 1647. And so zealous was bishop Wren for his interest and happiness, that he took him into his house as his domestic chaplain, and married him to his step-daughter in 1650. With her Mr. Beaumont retired to Tatingston-place, where they lived in a private manner until the restoration. On that event he took possession of his former livings, and was also admitted into the first list of his majesty’s chaplains, and by his majesty’s mandamus was created D. D. in 1660. In 1661 he removed, at bishop Wren’s desire, to Ely, where he had the misfortune to lose his wife in 1662. In April of that year, on the resignation of Dr. Pearson, master of Jesus’ college, Cambridge, the bishop of Ely appointed him successor, and in 1663, on the death of Dr. Hale, master of Peterhouse, he was removed to the headship of that college, which he governed with great care and liberality. The same year he was instituted to the rectory of Teversham near Cambridge, and in 1664 to that of Barley in Hertfordshire, where he alternately resided in the vacation months every summer, feeding the poor, instructing the ignorant, and faithfully discharging his pastoral charge. In 1665 he was drawn into a controversy with Dr. Henry More, who had advanced some doctrines in his “Mystery of Godliness,” which our author thought subversive of our constitution in church and state, and productive of manyevils to the Christian religion; Dr. More replied to this charge, but Dr. Beaumont received the thanks of the university for his services on this occasion. In 1670 he was elected to the divinity chair. In the course of his leetures, which he read for twenty-nine years, he went through the two epistles to the Romans and Colossians, with a view to explain the difficulties and controversies occasioned by some passages hi them. In 1689, when the Comprehension was attempted, in order to unite the church and dissenters, he was one of the commissioners appointed for that purpose, but never took his place at the board, convinced of the little probability that such a scheme should succeed. He continued to discharge the several duties of his office, even when advanced to his eighty-fourth year, and preached before the university in turn, Nov. 5, 1699; but a high fever came on the same evening, which, with the addition of the gout in his stomach, proved fatal on the 23d of the same month. His biographer sums up his character in these words “He was religious without bigotry, devout without superstition, learned without pedantry, judicious without censoriousness, eloquent without vanity, charitable without ostentation, generous without profusion, friendly without dissimulation, courteous without flattery, prudent without cunning, and humble without meanness.” Mr. Cole informs us, that in 1662 he obtained, from the vicechancellor of Cambridge, a dispensation to eat flesh in Lent, as fish did not agree with his constitution; probably this was among the last instances of such a scruple in the Protestant church. His “Psyche” was reprinted, with many of the author’s corrections, and the addition of four cantos, in 1702, by his son Charles Beaumont, A.M. of Peterhouse, who informs us that his father left all his works, critical and polemical, to the college, strictly forbidding the printing of any of them. In 1749 was published his lesser “Poems in English and Latin, with an appendix, containing some dissertations and remarks on the Epistle to the Colossians,” 4to. To this is prefixed an account of his life, from which the present sketch has been taken.

, an accurate military geographer, the descendant of an ancient family, was born at Aix in Issart in 1697, and at the age of nineteen went to Paris, where he studied geography under the celebrated Sanson, geographer to the king. His progress was so rapid, and his reputation so high, that at the age of twenty-five he was honoured with the same title. A perpetual almanac which he invented, and with which Louis XV. was much pleased, procured him the patronage of that prince, for whom he drew a great number of plans and charts. But his principal reputation rests on his topographical plans of the military kind, particularly his “Description topographique et militaire des campagnes de Flandre, depuis 1690 jusqu'en 1694,” Paris, 1756, 3 vols. folio, drawn up from the memoirs of Vaultier and the marshal Luxembourg. He had also the honour of contributing to the education of the dauphin, for which a pension was conferred on him in 1756, and, as he had talents of the political kind, he was not unfrequently employed in negociations by cardinal de Fleury and Amelot. He died at Paris, Feb. 11, 1771. His son, the chevalier de Beaurain, who appears to have inherited his father’s talents as a military draftsman, published “Cartes des campagnes de grande Conde” en Flandre," Paris, fol. 1774; and in 1781, those of Turenne, with the descriptions of Grimoard, compiled from Turenne’s original papers, the correspondence of Louis XIV. that of his ministers, and several other authentic memoirs, a most splendid folio, enriched with a great number of charts and plans, executed with uncommon fidelity, precision, and. minuteness, so as to describe every motion of the armies in the most distinct manner.

, was born at Bologna in 1502, of a noble family. Having gone through a course of study at Padua, he applied himself to business, without however entirely quitting literature. He attachedhimself to cardinal Pole, whom he followed in the legation to Spain, and was soon appointed himself to those of Venice and Augsburg, after having assisted at the council of Trent, and the archbishopric of Ragusa was the reward of his labours. Cosmo I. grand duke of Tuscany, having entrusted him in 1563 with the education of his son, prince Ferdinand, he gave up his archbishopric, in the hope that was held out to him of obtaining that of Pisa; but, being deceived in his expectations, he was obliged to content himself with the provostship of the cathedral of Prato, where he ended his days in 1572. His principal works are: “The life of cardinal Pole,” in Italian, translated by Duditius into Latin, and thence by Maucroix into French; and that of Petrarch, in Italian, more exact than any that had appeared before. This prelate was in correspondence with almost all the learned, his contemporaries, Sadolet, Bembo, the Manuciuses, Varchi, &c. It remains to be noticed that his life of cardinal Pole was published in 1766, in English, by the Rev. Benjamin Pye, LL. B. Of this, and other lives of that celebrated cardinal, notice will be taken in his article.

In 1169, endeavours were again used to accommodate matters, but they proved ineffectual. The archbishop refused to comply, because Henry would not give him the customary salute, or kiss of peace, which his majesty would have granted, had he not once swore in a passion never to salute the archbishop on the cheek; but he declared that he would bear him no ill will for the omission of this ceremony. Henry became at length so irritated against this prelate, that he ordered all his English subjects to take an oath, whereby they renounced the authority of Becket and pope Alexander: most of the laity complied with this order, but few of the clergy acquiesced. The following year king Henry, upon his return to England, ordered his son, prince Henry, to be crowned at Westminster, and the ceremony was performed by the archbishop of York: this office belonged to the see of Canterbury; and Becket complained of it to the pope, who suspended the archbishop of York, and excommunicated the bishops who assisted him.

The bishop was very moderate in his sentiments, and in. his methods of enforcing them; he loved to bring men into the communion of the church of England, but he did not like compelling them; and it was his opinion, that Protestants would agree well enough if they could be brought to understand each other. These principles induced him to promote Mr. Drury’s design, of endeavouring to reconcile the Lutherans to the Calvinists, a project which had beea encouraged by many other worthy persons, and towards which he subscribed twenty pounds a year, to defray the expences of Mr. Drury’s negociations. The bishop himself, it must be mentioned, was a Calvinist, which Burnet thinks was the cause of his having so little preferment in England. He gave another instance, not only of his charity towards, but his ability in, reconciling those of other communions, to the churches of England and Ireland. There were some Lutherans at Dublin, who, for not coming to church and taking the sacrament, were cited into the archbishop’s consistory, upon which they desired time to write to their divines in Germany, which was given them, and when their answers came, they contained some exceptions to the doctrine of the church, as not explaining the presence of Christ in the sacrament, suitable to their sentiments; to which bishop Bedell gave so full and clear, and withal so moderate and charitable, an answer, as entirely satisfied their objections, insomuch that those divines advised their countrymen to join in communion with the church, which they accordingly did. In this mild and prudent way our prelate conducted his charge, with great reputation to himself, and with the general approbation of all good men, who were perfectly pleased with his doctrine, and edified by his example. When the bloody rebellion broke out in October 1641, the bishop did not at first feel the violence of its effects; for even those rebels, who in their conduct testified so little of humanity, professed a great veneration for him, and openly declared he should be the last Englishman they would drive out of Ireland. His was the only English house in the county of Cavan that was unviolated, notwithstanding that it, and its out-buildings, the church, and the church-yard, were filled with people who fled to him for shelter, whom, by his preaching and prayers, he encouraged to expect and endure the worst with patience. In the mean time, Dr. Swiney, the Popish titular bishop of Kilmore, came to Cavan, and pretended great concern and kindness for bishop Bedell. Our prelate had converted his brother, and kept him in his house till he could otherwise provide for him; and Dr. Swiney desired likewise to lodge in his house, assuring him in the strongest terms of his protection. But this bishop Bedell declined, in a very civil and well-written Latin letter, urging the smallness of his house, the great number of people that had taken shelter with him, the sickness of some of his company, and of his son in particular, but above all, the difference in their ways of worship, which could not but be attended with great inconveniency. This had some effect for a time; but about the middle of December, the rebels, pursuant, to orders they had received from their council of state at Kilkenny, required him to dismiss the people that were with him, which he absolutely refused to do, declaring that he would share the same fate with the rest. They signified to him upon this, that they had orders to remove him; to which he answered, in the words of David, “Here I am, the Lord do unto me as seemeth good to him; the will of the Lord be done.” Upon this they seized him, his two sons, and Mr. Clogy, who had married his step-daughter, and carried them prisoners to the castle of Cloughboughter, surrounded by a deep water, were they put them all but the bishop in irons. They did not suffer any of them to carry any thing with them; and the moment the bishop was gone, Dr. Swiney took possession of his house and all that belonged to it, and said mass in the church the Sunday following. After some time the rebels abated of their severity, took the irons off the prisoners, and suffered them to be as much at their ease as they could be in so wretched a place; for the winter was very rigorous, and the castle being old and ruinous, they would have been exposed to all the severity of the weather, if it had not been for an honest carpenter who was imprisoned there before them, and who made use of a few old boards he found there, to mend a part of the roof, the better to defend them from the snow and sleet. While thus confined, the bishop, his sons, and Mr Clogy, preached and prayed continually to their small and afflicted congregation, and upon Christmas day his lordship administered the sacrament to them. It is very remarkable, that.rude and barbarous as the Irish were, they gave them no disturbance in the performance of divine service, and often told the bishop they had no personal quarrel to him, but that the sole cause of their confining him was, his being an Englishman. After being kept in this manner for three weeks, the bishop, his two sons, and Mr. Clogy, were exchanged for two of the O'Rourkes; but though it was agreed that they should be safely conducted to Dublin, yet the rebels would never suffer them to be carried out of the country, but sent them to the house of Dennis Sheridan, an Irish minister, and convert to the Protestant religion, to which though he steadily adhered, and relieved many who fled to him for protection, yet the Irish suffered him to live quietly among them, on account of the great family from which he was descended. While our prelate remained there, and enjoyed some degree of health, he every Sunday read the prayers and lessons, and preached himself, though there were three ministers with him. The last Sunday he officiated was the 30th of Jan. and the day following he was taken ill. On the second day it appeared that his disease was an ague; and on the fourth, apprehending a speedy change, he called for his sons and his sons’ wives, spoke to them a considerable time, gave them much spiritual advice, and blessed them, after which he spoke little, but slumbered out most of his time, only by intervals he seemed to awake a little, and was then very cheerful. At length, on the 7th of February, 1641, about midnight, he breathed his last, in the seventy-first year of his age, his death being chiefly occasioned by his late imprisonment, and the weight of sorrows which lay upon his mind. The only care now remaining to his friends was, to see him buried according to his desire; and since that could not be obtained but by the new intruding bishop’s leave, Mr. Clogy and Mr. Sheridan went to ask it, and Mr. Dillon was prevailed with by his wife, to go and second their desire. They found the bishop in a state of beastly intoxication, and a melancholy change in that house, which was before a house of prayer. The bishop, when he was awakened out of his drunkenness, excepted a little to their request, and said the church-yard was holy ground, and was no more to be defiled with heretics’ bodies; yet he consented to it at last. Accordingly, February L>, he was buried next his wife’s coffin. The Irish did him unusual honours at his burial, for the chief of the rebels gathered their forces together, and with them accompanied his body from Mr. Sheridan’s house to the church-yard of Kilmore in great solemnity, and they desired Mr. Clogy to bury him according to the office prescribed by the church. But though the gentlemen were so civil as to offer it, yet it was not thought advisable to provoke the rabble so much, as perhaps that might have done; so it was passed over. But the Irish discharged a volley of shot at his interment, and cried out in Latin, “Requiescat in pace ultimus Anglorum,” ‘ May the last of the English rest in peace;’ for they had often said, that as they esteemed him the best of the English bishops, so he should be the last that should be left among them. What came from Edmund Farilly, a Popish priest, at the interment of the bishop, is too remarkable, and is too well attested, to be passed over, who cried out, “O sit anima mea cum Bedello,” ‘ I would to God my soul were with Bedell’s.’ Our prelate had long before prepared for death, as appears by his will, dated the 15th of February, 1640, in which there are several legacies, that shew he had recollected all the memorable passages of his life before he made it, and seriously considered the several blessings which God had bestowed upon him. He married a lady of the ancient and honourable family of L‘Estrange, who was the widow of the recorder of St. Edmundsbury, a woman exemplary in her life, humble and modest in her behaviour, and singular in many excellent qualities, particularly in an extraordinary reverence to him. She bore him three sons and a daughter. One of the sons and the daughter died young; only William and Ambrose survived, for whom he made no provision, but a benefice of eighty pounds a-year for the eldest and worthy son of such a father, and an estate of sixty pounds a-year for the youngest, who did not take to learning. This was the only purchase he made. His wife died three years before the rebellion broke out, and he preached her funeral sermon himself, with such a mixture both of tenderness and moderation, that he drew tears from all his auditors. He was an enemy to burying in the church, thinking that there was both superstition and pride in it, and believing it was a great annoyance to the living, to have so much of the steam of dead bodies rising about them. One of the canons in his synod was against burying in churches, and he often wished that burying’ places were removed out of all towns. He chose the least frequented place of the church-yard of Kilmore for his wife to lie in, and by his will ordered, that he should be placed next to her, with this inscription:

The character given of this amiable prelate in Burnet’s life, drawn up partly by Burnet, and partly by his son-inlaw Mr. Clogy, is highly interesting. Bishop Bedell was tall and graceful, and had something in his looks and carriage that created a veneration for him. His deportment was grave without affectation; his apparel decent with simplicity he wore no silks, but plain stuffs and had a long and broad beard, and grey and venerable hair. His strength continued firm to the last, so that the week before his last sickness, he walked as vigorously ad nimbly as any of the company, and leaped over a broad ditch, insomuch that his sons, who were amazed at it, had enough to do to follow him. He never used spectacles. By a fall in his childhood he had unhappily contracted a deafness in his left ear. He had great strength and health of body, excepting that a few years before his death he had some severe fits of the stone, occasioned by his sedentary life, which he bore with wonderful patience. The remedy he used for it was to dig in the garden (in which he much delighted) until he heated himself, and that mitigated the pain. His judgment and memory remained with him to the last. He always preached without notes, but often wrote down his meditations after he had preached them. He shewed no other learning in his sermons but in clearing the difficulties of his text, by comparing the originals with the most ancient versions.

, a German physician of note, was born at Hildesheim in Lower Saxony, Aug. 26, 1660. After studying medicine he was admitted to the degree of doctor at Helmstadt in 1684. In 1712, he was appointed court-physician to the duke of Brunswick Lunenburgh. He published many essays and dissertations in the Memoirs of the German Imperial academy, of which he was a member, and other works separately, both in German and Latin. The principal of these, are, 1. “De constitutione artis medicae,” Helmstadt, 1696, 8vo. 2, “The Legal Physician,” in German, ibid. 8vo, containing several medico-legal questions, and the history of sudden deaths, with the appearances on dissection. 3. “Selecta medica de medicinæ natura et certitudine,” Francfort and Leipsic, 1708, an inquiry into the history of medicine, its sects, c. 4. “Selecta Disetetica, seu de recta ac convoniente ad sanitatem vivendi ratione tractatus,” Francfort, 1710, 4to, in which he treats of air, food, exercise, sleep, and whatever may conduce to health of the causes of diseases the use of mineral waters, &c. Behrens died Oct. 4, 1736. His life was published by J. M. Gl-tsener, at Ilildesheim in the same year. His son and grandson were both physicians and medical writers. The former published, 1. “Trias casuum memorabilium medicorum,” Guelpherbiti (Wolfenbuttel), 1727, 4to. 2. “De imaginario quodam miraculo in gravi oculorum rnorbo, &c.” Brunopolis (Brunswick), 1734, 4to. 3. “De felicitate medicorum aucta in terris Brunsvicensis,” ibid. 1747, 4to.

, an artist, was born at Ravensburgh in Suabia, in 1665, and was taught the first rudiments of his art by his father, who was a mathematician, and practised painting only for his amusement, and explained the principles of it to his son. By an assiduous practice for some years, Beisch proved a good artist, and was employed at the court of Munich, to paint the battles which the elector Maximilian Emanuel had fought in Hungary. While the elector was absent on some of his expeditions, Beisch embraced that opportunity to visit Italy, and took the most effectual methods for his improvement, by studying and copying those celebrated spots which have always claimed general admiration. He had three different manners: his first, before his journey to Italy, was true, but too dark; his second had more clearness and more truth; and his last, still more clear, was likewise weaker than all. The scenes of his landscapes, however, are agreeably chosen, and very picturesque: his touch is light, tender, and full of spirit; and his style of composition frequently resembled that of Gaspar Poussin, or Salvator Rosa. Solimene, a superior artist, did not disdain to copy some of Beisch' s landscapes. This artist died in 1748, aged eighty-three.

His son Charles Andrew, who died by his own hand, in 1782, was in 1741 appointed professor extraordinary of philosophy at Leipsic, and in 1756 professor of poetry, and librarian to the university, with the title of counsellor of state. He wrote “De vera origine et epocha Hunnorum,” 1757, 4to, and was editor of the “Acta eruditorum” from 1754 to 1781.

His father led a miserable life, hardly allowing his son necessaries, and dilapidated his house, while at the same time he had five hundred horses of his own breeding, many above thirty years old, unbroke. On his death his son succeeded to his estate, of about 1500l. a-year, which he did not long enjoy, dying of a consumption, on the road to Bath, August, 1745. He left the reversion, after the death of his sister, with his books and medals, to Trinitycollege, under the direction of the late vice-master, Dr. Walker; but his sister marrying, the entail was cut off, He was buried in the family burying-place, in St. Mary'g chapel in Outwell-church. The registers of the Spalding society abound with proofs of Mr. Bell’s taste and knowledge in ancient coins, both Greek and Roman, besides many other interesting discoveries. He published proposals, elegantly printed, for the following work, at 5s. the first subscription, “Tabulae Augustae, sive Imperatorum Romanorum, Augustorum, Csesarum, Tyrannorum, et illustrium virorum a Cn. Pompeio Magno ad Heraclium Aug. series chronologica. Ex historicis, nummis, et mannoribus collegit Beaupreius Bell, A.M. Cantabrigian, typis academicis 1734,” which was in great forwardness in 1733, and on which Mr. Johnson communicated his observations. Mr. Bell conceived that coins might be distinguished by the hydrostatical balance, and supposed the flower on the Rhodian coins to be the lotus, but Mr. Johnson the balaustrum, or pomegranate flower. He sent the late unhappy Dr. Dodd notes concerning the life and writings of Callimachus, with a drawing of his head, to be engraved by Vertue, and prefixed to his translation of that poet. He made a cast of the profile of Dr. Stukeley, prefixed to his “Itinerarium,” and an elegant bust of Alexander Gordon, after the original given by him to sir Andrew Fountaine’s niece. He communicated to the Spalding society an account of Outwell church, and the Haultoft family arms, in a border engrailed Sable a lozenge Ermine, quartering Fincham, in a chapel at the east end of the north aile. He collected a series of nexus literarum, or abbreviations. He had a portrait of sir Thomas Gresham, by Hilliard, when young, in a close green silk doublet, hat, and plaited ruff, 1540 or 1545, formerly belonging to sir Marmaduke Gresham, bart. then to Mr. Philip, filazer, by whose widow, a niece to sir Marmaduke, it came to sir Anthony Oldfield, and so to Maurice Johnson. He addressed verses on “Color est connata lucis proprietas,” to sir Isaac Newton, who returned him a present of his “Philosophy,” sumptuously bound by Brindley.

, an eminent engraver, was born at Florence in 1610. His father was a goldsmith, and instructed his son in the same business; but while, for the purposes of his trade, he was learning to draw, some of Callot’s prints, which he had accidentally seen, gave a turn to his disposition, and he prevailed on his father to allow him to learn engraving. His first master, Canta Gallina, had also been the master of Callot, and our young pupil, after contenting himself for some time with an imitation of Callot, struck out a manner of his own, equally, if not more remarkable for freedom and spirit. In 1642 he went to Paris, where he formed an acquaintance with Israel Sylvestre, then newly returned from Rome, and was much employed by the uncle of that artist. Some time after, cardinal Richelieu engaged him to go to Arras, to make drawings of the siege, &c. of that town by the royal army, which he engraved at his return. From a considerable residence at Paris he returned to Florence, where the grand duke gave him a pension, and appointed him to instruct his son, the prince Cosmo, in the art of design; but his progress in his profession had been for some time much impeded by continual head-aches, which at last terminated his life in 1664. Without entering into the dispute so frequently agitated, respecting the comparative merits of De la Bella and Callot, it may be affirmed that De la Bella drew very correctly, and with great taste. His works manifest much genius and fertility of invention. The fire and animation which appears in them compensates for their lightness; and some degree of slightness seems pardonable in an artist who is said to have engraved no less than fourteen hundred plates.

, a French poet, born in 1528, at Nogent le llotrtm, lived in the family of Renatus of Lorraine, marquis of Elbeuf, general of the French gallies, and attended him in his expedition to Italy in 1557. This prince highly esteemed Belleau for his courage; and having also a high opinion of his genius and abilities, entrusted him with the education of his son Charles of Lorraine. Belleau was one of the seven poets of his time, who were denominated the French Pleiades. He wrote several pieces, and translated the odes of Anacreon into the French language; but in this he is thought not to have preserved all the natural beauties of the original. His pastoral pieces are in greatest esteem, and were so successful, that Ronsard styled him the painter of nature. He wrote also an excellent poem on the nature and difference of precious stones, which by some has been reputed his best performance; and hence it was said of him, that he had erected for himself a monument of precious stones. Belleau died at Paris, March 6, 1577. His poems were collected and published at Rouen, 1604, 2 vols. 12mo, with the exception, we believe, of a macaronic poem he wrote and published (without date) entitled “Dictamen metrificum de bello Huguenotico.”

, a French surgeon, was born at Paris in 1654, and after studying medicine and surgery, became surgeon-major to the French army in Italy, and afterwards first surgeon to the duchess dowager of Savoy. His practice was extensive and successful, and he had also cultivated polite literature with considerable enthusiasm. He is now, however, principally known by a work, which was long very popular, under the title of“Le Chirurgien de l'hospital,” Paris, 1695, 1705, and translated into English and most of the continental languages. There were five editions at least of the Dutch translation. In 1725 the author published a second volume at Paris, in which he advances many facts and experiments relative to the effects of mercury, of which Bianchi, professor of anatomy at Turin, availed himself in his Latin dissertation on the use of that mineral, and is said to have claimed discoveries which were really made by Belloste. The latter, however, appears to have been somewhat of a quack, as we are told that he bequeathed to his son the secret of compounding those mercurial pills, of which he speaks so often in his “Hospital Surgeon.”

, in Lat. Petrus Bembus, one of the restorers of polite literature in Italy, was born at Venice in 1470, of an ancient and honourable family. His father, Bernardo, who died in 1518, was an accomplished scholar, and distinguished statesman, who maintained a friendly intercourse with many illustrious and learned persons of the age, and is honourably spoken of by various writers. On one of his embassies to Florence he carried his son, then in his eighth year, to improve him in the Italian language, which was supposed to be spoken and written in that city with the greatest purity. Atter two years, he returned home with his father, and was placed under the tuition of Joannes Alexander Urticius, and continued to apply to his studies with great assiduity, acquiring in particular a critical knowledge of the Latin tongue. Being solicitous of acquiring a knowledge also of the Greek, the study of which was at that time confined to very few, he resolved to undertake a voyage to Messina, and avail himself of the instructions of the celebrated Constantino Lascaris. Accordingly he set out in 1492, accompanied by Agnolo Gabrielii, a young Venetian of distinction, his friend and fellow-student, and profited greatly by the instructions of Lascaris. During this residence in Sicily, which lasted more than two years, he composed a work in Latin, entitled “P. Bembi de vEtna ad Angelum Chabrielem liber,” which was published the same year in which he returned, 1495, 4to, and is said to have been the first publication from the Aldine press “in literis rotundis.” His compositions both in Latin and Italian soon began to extend his reputation, not only through the different states of Italy, but also to distant countries. His father, flattered with the approbation bestowed on his son, was desirous of employing his talents in the service of his country in some public station, and for some time Bembo occasionally pleaded as an advocate with success and applause, until being disappointed in obtaining a place which was given to a rival much inferior in merit, he discovered that reluctance for public life, which, in obedience to his father, he had but imperfectly concealed, and determined to devote his whole attention to literature, as connected with the profession of the church. About this time, it is said, that his resolution was confirmed by accidentally going into a church when the officiating priest was reading a portion of the evangelical history, and had just come to the words, “Peter, follow me,” which Bembo looked upon as a divine admonition. There is nothing in his character, however, that can give much credibility to this story, which, it ought to be mentioned, some say occurred long after, when he was hesitating whether he should accept the office of cardinal.

His death was accelerated by an accident which he met with while riding on horseback. In passing through a small postern, he received a bruise on his side, which brought on a slow fever. He was sensible of his approaching dissolution, and conversed cheerfully with his friends on that subject. He died Jan. 20, 1547, aged seventy-six years and eight months, and was interred in the church of S. Maria ella Minerva at Rome, behind the great altar, and between the tombs of Leo X. and Clement VII. with an inscription by his son Torquato.

, also a landscape painter, and probably an ancestor of the preceding, was born at Utrecht in 1630, and was one of the best scholars of Herman Sachtleven, or Zaftleven. For improvement he afterwards visited Rome, and sketched every beautiful scene that occurred to him as he travelled in the neighbourhood of Rome, and particularly about Tivoli, by wnich means he furnished himself with excellent materials for his future compositions. He then settled at Nuremberg, where his principal works were long to be seen, and where he died Nov. 10, 1708. His colouring is lively and natural, if not sometimes a little too green; but his figures, and the boats, barges, and other vessels, which he always introduces on the rivers, or stationed near the banks, are well designed, and touched with spirit. His trees, indeed, are somewhat stiff and formal; but in general his pictures have a pleasing effect, as the distances are conducted with judgment, and every part handled in a masterly manner. The lights and shadows of his landscapes are distributed with singular skill; and his skies are usually clear, warm, and natural. His son John George, who died in 1723, was also an artist of some eminence, especially for his battle-pieces.

, knt. grandfather to the preceding, and second son of sir Richard Bennet, was created on the 6th of July, 1589, doctor of laws by the university of Oxford, having been one of the proctors there. He was afterwards vicar-general in spirituals to the archbishop of York, and prebendary of Langtoft in the church of York. In the 24th of ELz. bearing the title of doctor of laws, he was in commission with the lord-keeper Egerton, the lord-treasurer Buckhurst, and several other noblemen, for the suppression of heresy. He was also in that reign returned to parliament for the city of York, and was a leading member of the house of commons, as appears from several of his speeches in Townshend’s collections. He received the honour of knighthood from king James before his coronation, on the 23d of July 1603, at Whitehall, and was made in that reign chancellor to queen Anne (consort of king James), judge of the prerogative court of Canterbury, and chancellor to the archbishop of York. In the beginning of 1617, he was sent ambassador to Brussels to question the archduke, in behalf of his master the king of Great Britain, concerning a libel written and published, as it was supposed, by Erycius Puteanus, but he neither apprehended the author, nor suppressed the book, until he was solicited by the king’s agent there: he only interdicted it, and suffered the author to fly out of his dominions. In 1620, sir John Bennet being entitled judge of the prerogative court of Canterbury, was in a special commission with the archbishop of Canterbury, and other noblemen, to put in execution the laws against all heresies, great errors in matters of faith and religioH, &c. and the same year bearing the title of chancellor to the archbishop of York, he was commissioned with the archbishop of York, and others, to execute all manner of ecclesiastical jurisdiction within the province of York. He died in the parish of Christ church in London, in the beginning of 1627, having had issue by Anne his wife, daughter of Christopher Weekes of Salisbury, in the county of Wilts, esq. sir John lien net, his son and heir; sir Thomas Bennet, knt. second son, doctor of the civil law, and master in chancery; and Matthew, third son, who died unmarried. His eldest son, sir John Bennet of Dawley, received the honour of knighthood in the life-time of his father, at Theobalds, on the 15th of June, 1616. He married Dorothy, daughter of sir John Crofts of Saxham, in the county of Norfolk, knt. by whom he had issue six sons, the second of whom was afterwards created earl of Arlington. This account drawn up also by Dr. Campbell as a note to his life of Arlington, partakes of the partiality of that account by suppressing that in 1621, certain mal-practices were detected in the judicial conduct of sir John, and he was committed to the custody of the sheriffs of London, and afterwards to prison, fined 20,000l. and deprived of his offices. In consequence of this, according to Mr. Lodge, he died in indigence and obscurity, in the parish of Christ church, in Surrey, not in London, at the time mentioned above; but another account says that he was merely required to find security to that amount for his appearance to answer to the charges brought against him. If the fine was imposed, we may conclude it was remitted; for in a letter from lord Bacon to king James, we read these words, “Your majesty hath pardoned the like (corruption) to sir John Bennet, between whose case and mine (not being partial to myself, but speaking out of the general opinion), there was as much difference, I will not say, as between black and white, but as between black and grey or ash-coloured.”

, canon of Christ-church, Oxford, and king’s professor of divinity in that university, was born in the college at Ely, July 23, 1707. His father, Mr. Samuel Bentham, was a very worthy clergyman, and vicar of Witchford, a small living near that city; who having a numerous family, his son Edward, on the recommendation of Dr. Smalridge, dean of Christ-church, was sent in 1717 to the school of that college. Having there received the rudiments of classical education, he was in Lent term 1723, when nearly 16 years of age, admitted of the university of Oxford, and placed at Corpus-Christi college under his relation Dr. John Burton. In this situation, his serious and regular deportment, and his great proficiency in all kinds of academical learning, recommended him to the notice of several eminent men; and, among others, to the favour of Dr. Tanner, canon of Christ-church, by whose death he was disappointed of a nomination to a studentship in that society. At CorpusChristi college he formed a strict friendship with Robert Hoblyn, esq. of Nanswydden in Cornwall, afterwards representative for the city of Bristol, whose character, as a scholar and a member of parliament, rendered him deservedly esteemed by the lovers of literature and of their country. In company with this gentleman and another intimate friend, Dr. Ratcliff, afterwards master of Pembroke college, Mr. Bentham made, at different times, the tour of part of France, and other countries. Having taken the degree of B. A. he was invited by Dr. Cotes, principal of Magdalen-hall, to be his vice-principal; and was accordingly admitted to that society, March 6, 1730. Here he continued only a short time, for, on the 23d of April in the year following, he was elected fellow of Oriel college. In act term, 1732, he proceeded to the degree of M. A. and, about the same time, was appointed tutor in the college; in which capacity he discharged his duty, in the most laborious and conscientious manner, for more than twenty years. March 26, 1743, Mr. Bentham took the degree of B. D.; and April 22, in the same year, was collated to the prebend of Hundreton, in the cathedral church of Hereford. July 8, 1749, he proceeded to the degree of D. D.; and in April 1754 was promoted to the fifth stall in that cathedral. Here he continued the same active and useful course of life for which he had always been distinguished. He served the offices of sub-dean and treasurer, for himself and others, above twelve years. The affairs of the treasury, which Dr. Bentham found in great confusion, he entirely new modelled, and put into a train of business in which they have continued ever since, to the great ease of his successors, and benefit of the society. 80 intent was he upon the regulation and management of the concerns of the college, that he refused several preferments which were offered him, from a conscientious persuasion that the avocations they would produce were incompatible with the proper discharge of the offices he had voluntarily undertaken. Being appointed by the king to fill the divinity chair, vacant by the death of Dr. Fanshavve, Dr. Bentham was, with much reluctance, and after having repeatedly declined it, persuaded, by archbishop Seeker and his other learned friends, to accept of it; and, on the 9th of May, 1763, he was removed to the 8th stall in the cathedral. His unwillingness to appear in this station was increased by the business he had to transact in his former situation, and which he was afraid would be impeded by the accession of new duties: not to say that a life spent in his laborious and sedentary manner had produced some unfavourable effects on his constitution, and rendered a greater attention than he had hitherto shewn to private ease and health, absolutely necessary. Besides, as the duties, when properly discharged, were great and interesting, so the station itself was of that elevated and public nature to which his ambition never inclined him: 66 latere maluit atque prodesse.“The diffidence he had of his abilities had ever taught him to suspect his own sufficiency; and his inauguratory lecture breathed the same spirit, the text of which was,” Who is sufficient for these things?" But whatever objections Dr. Bentham might have to the professorship before he entered upon it, when once he had accepted of it, he never suffered them to discourage him in the least from exerting hi* most sincere endeavours to render it both useful and honourable to the university. He set himself immediately to draw out a course of lectures for the benefit of young students in divinity, which he constantly read at his house at Christ-church, gratis-^ three times a week during term-time, till his decease. The course took up a year; and he not only exhibited in it a complete system of divinity, but recommended proper books, some of which he generously distributed to his auditors. His intense application to the pursuit of the plan he had laid clown, together with those concerns in which his affection for his friends, and his zeal for the public good in every shape, involved him, proved more than a counterbalance for all the advantages of health and vigour that a strict and uniform temperance could procure. Jt is certain that he sunk under the rigorous exercise of that conduct he had proposed to himself: for though 6-; years are a considerable proportion in the strongest men’s lives, yet his remarkable abstemiousness and self-denial, added to a disposition of body naturally strong, promised, in the ordinary course of things, a longer period. Dr. Bentham was a very early riser, and had transacted half a day’s business before many others begin their day. His countenance was uncommonly mild and engaging, being strongly characteristic of the piety and benevolence of his mind; and at the same time it by no means wanted expression, but, upon proper occasions, could assume a very becoming and affecting authority. In his attendance upon the public duties of religion, he was exceedingly strict and constant; not suffering himself ever to be diverted from it by any motives, either of interest or pleasure. Whilst he was thus diligent in the discharge of his own duty, he was not severe upon those who were not equally so in theirs. He could scarcely ever be prevailed upon to deliver his opinion upon subjects that were to the disadvantage of other men; and when he could not avoid doing it, his sentiments were expressed with the utmost delicacy and candour. No one was more ready to discover, commend, and reward every meritorious endeavour. Of himself he never was he? rd to speak and if his own merits were touched upon in the slightest manner, he felt a real uneasiness. Though he was not fond of the formalities of visiting, he entered into the spirit of friendly society and intercourse with great pleasure. His constant engagements, indeed, of one kind or other, left him not much time to be devoted to company; and the greater part of his leisure hours he spent in the enjoyment of domestic pleasures, for which his amiable and peaceable disposition seemed most calculated.

Till within the last half-year of his life, in which he declined very fast, Dr. Bentham was scarcely ever out of order; and he was never prevented from discharging his duty, excepting by weakness that occasionally attacked his eyes, and which had been brought on by too free an use of them when he was young. That part of his last illness which confined him, was only from the 23d of July to the first of August. Even death itself found him engaged in the same laborious application which he had always directed to the glory of the supreme being, and the benefit of mankind; and it was not till he was absolutely forbidden by his physicians, that he gave over a particular cotrrse cf reading, that had been undertaken by him with a view of making remarks on Mr. Gibbon’s Roman History. Thus he died in the faithful discharge of the duties of religion. That serenity of mind and meekness of disposition, which he had manifested on every former occasion, shone forth in a more especial manner in his latter moments; and, together with the consciousness of a whole life spent in the divine service, exhibited a scene of true Christian triumph. After a few days illness, in which he suffered a considerable degree of pain without repining, a quiet sigh put a period to his temporal existence, on the first of August 1776, when he had entered into the 69th year of his age. His remains were deposited in the west end of the great aile in the cathedral of Christ-church, Oxford. Dr. Bentham resided, the principal part of the year, so regularly at Oxford, that he never missed a term from his matriculation to his death. In the summer he generally made a tour of some part of the kingdom with his family; and, for the last thirty years of his life, seldom failed in carrying them to meet all his brothers and sisters at Ely, amongst whom the greatest harmony and affection ever prevailed. Dr. Bentham married Elizabeth, second daughter of Thomas Bates, esq. of Alton, in Hampshire, by whom he had three children, two of whom, with his widow, survived him, but she died in 1790, and his son, Thomas, rector of Swanton Newarsh, in Norfolk, died in 1803. Dr. Bentharn’s publications were as follows: 1. “The connection between Irreligion and Immorality; a Sermon preached at St. Mary’s in Oxford, at the assizes, March the 1st, 1743-4,” 1744, 8vo. 2, “An Introduction to Moral Philosophy,” 1745, and 1746, 8vo. To this tract is annexed a table of reference to English Discourses and Sermons upon moral subjects, ranged according to the order of the introduction; and a table of several of the principal Writers in moral philosophy. 3. “A Letter to a young gentleman,” 1748, 8vo. 4. “A Letter to a fellow of a college; beingthe sequel of a Letter to a young gentleman of Oxford,” 1740, 8vo. 5. “Advice to a young man of rank upon coming to the university.” 6. “A Sermon preached before the honourable House of Commons, at St. Margaret’s Westminster, on Tuesday, January 30, 1749-50,” 1750, 4to. 7. “Reflections on Logic,” 3vo; a second edition came out in 1755. Our author having been charged, in the Biographia Britannica, under the article Locke, with a design of excluding from the schools that great man’s Essay on the Human Understanding, he subjoined, in 1760, a short, but satisfactory, vindication of himself, to the remaining copies of the Reflections. 8. " Ti> ILxXaiwv, &c. Ewmxpioi.“” Funeral Eulogies upon Military Men from Thucydides, Plato, Lysias, Xenophon. In the original Greek. To which are added, extracts from Cicero. With Observations and Notes in English,“8vo. The second edition, with additions, appeared in 1768. The impression is beautiful, and the notes and observations shew Dr. Bentham’s great acquaintance with classic antiquity, and the Greek language. 9.” De Studiis Theologicts Proelectio,“1764. 10.” Reflections upon the study of Divinity. To which are subjoined, heads of acourse of Lectures,“1771, 8vo. This tract contains many judicious observations; and the heads of a course of Lectures exhibit, perhaps, as complete a plan of theological studies as was ever delivered. 11.” De Vita et Moribus Johannis Burtoni, S. T. P. Etonensis. Epistola Edvardi Bentham, S. T. P. R. ad reverendum admodum Robertum Lowth, S. T. P. Episcopum Oxoniensem.“12.” A Sermon preached in the parish church of Christ Church, London, on Thursday, April the 30th, 1772: being the time of the yearly meeting of the children educated in the charity-schools in and about the cities of London and Westminster,“4to. 13.” An introduction to Logic, scholastic and rational,“1773, 8vo. The Specimen Logicoe Ciceronianse annexed, displays Cicero’s close attention to the study of logic, and our author’s intimate knowledge of Cicero. 14.” De Tumultibus Americanis deque eorum concitatoribus seniljs meditatio." This was occasioned by some members of parliament having censured the university of Oxford for addressing the king in favour of the American war. Dr. Bentham, like many other wise and good men, did not imagine that the contest would turn out to be so formidable as it afterwards appeared. He takes occasion, in the course of the pamphlet, to pay a high compliment to his friend Dr. Tucker.

Henry, his son, second earl, was created duke of Portland, 1716, and having incurred great loss of fortune by the South Sea bubble, went over as governor to Jamaica, 1722, and died there 1726, aged forty-five. William his son, second duke, who died in 1762, married lady Margaret Cavendish Harley, only child of the second earl of Oxford, and heiress to the vast estates of the Cavendishes, formerly dukes of Newcastle. This lady, after the duke’s death, lived with splendid hospitality at Bulstrode, which was the resort not only of persons of the highest rank, but of those most distinguished for talents and eminence in the literary world. To her, posterity will ever be indebted, for securing to the public the inestimable treasures of learning contained in the noble manuscript library of her father and grandfather, earls of Oxford, now deposited in the British museum, by the authority of parliament, under the guardianship of the most distinguished persons of the realm, easy of access, and consequently of real use to the philosopher, the statesman, the historian, and the scholar. She died July 17, 1785, and the following year her own museum, collected at vast expence to herself', and increased by some valuable presents from her friends, was disposed of by auction, by the late Mr. Alderman Skinner. The sale lasted thirty-seven days. Among the books was the fine Missal, known by the name of the Bedford Missal, of which Mr. Gough published an account, as will be noticed in his life. This splendid volume was purchased by, and is now in the very curious and valuable library of James Edwards, esq. of Harrow-on-the-hill.

, one of the best Italian poets of the sixteenth century, was born at Bologna in 1506, of one of the most illustrious families of that city and of all Italy. His father, Hannibal II. being obliged, by pope Julius II. to leave his country, of which his ancestors had been masters from the commencement of the fifteenth century, and to go to Milan, he took his son with him, then an infant. Seven years after, he settled with his whole family at Ferrara, under the protection of the princes of the house of Este, to whom he was nearly related. His son here made rapid progress in his studies, and became distinguished at the court of duke Alphonso I. He was accomplished in music, singing, and the sports and exercises of manly youth; and to all this he added a solidity of judgment which procured him to be employed by the dukes of Ferrara in state-affairs of importance. He was employed on one of these negociations when he died, Nov. 6, 1573. His works, which were printed at first separately, and inserted in many of the collections, were published together under the title of “Opere poetiche del sig. Ercole Bentivoglio,” Paris, 1719, 12mo. They consist of sonnets, stanzas, eclogues, satires, which for easy elegance of style are inferior only to those of Ariosto; five epistles or capitoli, in the manner of Berni, and two comedies of great merit. Of these last there was a French translation by Fabre, printed at Oxford, 1731, 8vo.

, regius professor of divinity, and master of Trinity college, Cambridge, a very eminent critic of*he last age, was born January 27, 1661-2, at Oulton, in the parish of Wakefield, in the West Riding of Yorkshire. His ancestors, who were of some consideration, possessed an estate, and had a seat at Hepenstall, in the parish of Halifax. His grandfather, James Bentley, was a captain in king Charles I.'s army, at the time of the civil wars, and being involved in the fate of his party, had his house plundered, his estate confiscated, and was himself carried prisoner to Pomfret castle, where he died. Thomas Bentley, the son of James, and father of Dr. Bentley, married the daughter of Richard Willis of Oulton, who had been a major in the royal army. This lady, who was a woman of exceeding good understanding, taught her son Richard his accidence. To his grandfather Willis, who was left his guardian, he was, in part, indebted for his education; and having gone through the grammar-school at Wakefield with singular reputation, both for his proficiency and his exact and regular behaviour, he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. Johnson, on the 24th of May, 1676, being then only four months above fourteen years of age. On the 22d of March, 1681-2, he stood candidate for a fellowship, and would have been unanimously elected, had he not been excluded by the statutes, on account of his being too young for priest’s orders. He was then a junior bachelor, and but little more than nineteen years old. It was soon after this that he became a schoolmaster at Spalding. But that he did not continue Jong in this situation is certain from a letter of his grandfather Willis’s, still preserved in the family, from which it appears that he was with Dr. Stillingfleet, at the deanery of St. Paul’s, on the 25th of April, 1683. He had been recommended by his college to the dean, as preceptor to his son and Dr. Stillingfleet gave Mr. Bentley his choice, whether he would carry his pupil to Cambridge or Oxford. He fixed upon the latter university, on account of the Bodleian library, to the consulting of the manuscripts of which he applied with the closest attention. Being now of age, he made over a small estate, which he derived from his family, to his elder brother, and immediately laid out the money he obtained for it in the purchase of books. It is recorded of him, that having, at a very early age, made surprising progress in the learned languages, his capacity for critical learning soon began to display itself. Before the age of twenty-four, he had written with his own hand a sort of Hexapla, a thick volume in 4to, in the first column of which was every word of the Hebrew bible, alphabetically disposed, and in five other columns all the various interpretations of those words, in the Chalclee, Syriac, Vulgate Latin, Septuagint, and Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodosian, that occur in the whole Bible. This he made for his own private use, to know the Hebrew, not from the late rabbins, but the ancient versions, when, excepting Arabic, Persic, and Ethiopic, he must then have read over the whole Polyglott. He had also at that time made, for his own private use, another volume in 4 to, of the various lections and emendations of the Hebrew text, drawn out of those ancient versions, which, though done at such an early age, would have made a second part to the famous Capellus’s “Critica Sacra.”

The count having signed this engagement, instead of being set at liberty, was re-conducted to his prison, and there confined till 4th December 1769, when, about two hours after midnight, an officer with seven soldiers came to him and he was thrown upon a sledge to which two horses were harnessed, and immediately driven away with the greatest swiftness. The darkness of the night prevented the count from discerning the objects around him but on the approach of day-light he perceived that major Wynblath, Vassili Panow, Hippolitus Stephanow, Asaph Baturin, Ivan Sopronow, and several other prisoners, were the companions of his misfortunes and after suffering from the brutality of their conductor a series of hardships, in passing through Tobolzk, the capital of Siberia, the city of Tara, the town and river of Tomsky, the villages of Jakutzk and Judorua, they embarked in the harbour of Ochoczk, on the 26th October 1770, and arrived at Kamschatka on the 3d December following. The ensuing day they were conducted before Mr. Nilow, the governor; when it was intimated to them that they should be set at liberty on the following day, and provided with subsistence for three days, after which they must depend upon themselves for their maintenance that each person should receive from the chancery a musket and a lance, with one pound of powder, four pounds of lead, a hatchet, several knives and other instruments, and carpenter’s tools, with which they might build cabins in any situations they chose, at the distance of one league from the town but that they should be bound to pay in furs, during the first year, each one hundred roubles, in return for these advantages; that every one must work at the corvee one day in the week for the service of government, and not absent themselves from their huts for twenty-four hours without the governor’s permission and after some other equally harsh terms, it was added, that their lives being granted to them for no other purpose than to implore the mercy of God, and the remission of their sins, they could be employed only in the meanest works to gain their daily subsistence. Under these regulations the exiles settled the places of their habitations, built miserable huts to shelter, themselves from the inclemency of the weather, formed themselves into a congress, and after choosing the count de Benyowsky their chief or captain, they swore with great solemnity mutual friendship and eternal fidelity. Among the number of unhappy wretches who had long groaned under the miseries of banishment, was a Mr. Crustiew, who had acquired considerable ascendancy over his fellow-sufferers; and to obtain the particular confidence and esteem of this man was the first object of the count’s attention in which he sogn succeeded,. The pains and perils incident to the situation to which these men were reduced, were borne for some time in murmuring sufferance, until the accidental finding an old copy of Anson’s Voyage inspired them with an idea of making an escape from Kamschatka to the Marian islands; and the count, Mr. Panow, Baturin, Stephanow, Solmanow, majors Wynblath, Crustiew, and one Wasili, an old and faithful servant of the count’s, who had followed his master into exile, formed a confederacy for this purpose. While these transactions were secretly passing, the fame of count Benyowsky’s rank and abilities reached the ear of the governor and as he spoke several languages, he was after some time admitted familiarly into the house, and at length appointed to superintend the education of his son. and his three daughters. “One day,” says the count, ft while I was exercising my office of language-master, the youngest of the three daughters, whose name was Aphanasia, who was sixteen years of age, proposed many questions concerning my thoughts in my present situation^ which convinced me that her father had given them some information concerning my birth and misfortunes. I therefore gave them an account of my adventures, at which my scholars appeared to be highly affected, but the youngest wept very much. She was a beautiful girl, and her sensibility created much emotion in my mind but, alas, I was an exile" The merits of the count, however, soon surmounted the disadvantages of his situation, in the generous mind of miss Nilow, and the increasing intimacy and confidence which he daily gained in the family, joined to the advantages of a fine person and most insinuating address, soon converted the feelings of admiration into the flame of love; and on the llth of January 1771, madame Nilow, the mother, consented that her daughter should do the honours of an entertainment then in contemplation, and be publicly declared his future spouse. But the count, though he had cultivated and obtained the affections of his fair pupil, had acted more from policy than passion, and, intending to use her interest rather as a means of effectuating the meditated escape of himself and his companions, than as any serious object of matrimonial union, contrived to suspend the nuptials, by persuading the governor to make an excursion from Kamschatka to the neighbouring islands, with a view or under pretence of establishing a new colony. During these transactions the exiles were secretly at work; and in order to conceal their design from all suspicion, Mr. Crustiew and Mr. Panow were on the 30th of March deputed to wait on the governor with five and twenty of their associates, to request that he would be pleased to receive the title of Protector of the new colony; and the embassy was not only favourably received, but orders were given to prepare every thing that might be necessary for the execution of the project. At this crisis, however, an accident occurred which had nearly overturned the success of the scheme; and as it tends to discover the disposition of the count, we shall relate it in his own words.

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

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

Having continued some years at Edinburgh, Mr. Berkenhout went to the university of Leyden, where he took the degree of doctor of physic, in 1765, as we learn from his “Dissertatio medica inauguralis de Podagra,” dedicated to his relation baron de Bielfeldt. Returning to England, Dr. Berkenhout settled at Isleworth in Middlesex, and in 1766, published his “Pharmacopoeia Medici,” 12mo, the third edition of which was printed in 1782. In 1769, he published “Outlines of the Natural History of Great Britain and Ireland,” vol. I.; vol. II. appeared in 1770, and vol. III. in 1771. The encouragement this work met with afforded at least a proof that something of the kind was wanted. The three volumes were reprinted together in. 1773, and in 1788 were again published in 2 vols. 8vo, under the title of “Synopsis of the Natural History of Great Britain, &c.” In 1771, he published “Dr. Cadogan’s dissertation on the Gout, examined and refuted” and in 1777, “Biographia Literaria, or a Biographical History of Literature; containing the lives of English, Scotch, and Irish authors, from the dawn of letters in these kingdoms to the present time, chronologically and classically arranged,” 4to, vol.1, the only volume which appeared. The lives are very short, and the author frequently introduces sentiments hostile to religious establishments and doctrines, which could not be very acceptable to English readers. The dates and facts, however, are given with great accuracy, and in many of the lives he profited by the assistance of George Steevens, esq. the celebrated commentator on Shakspeare. This was followed by “A treatise on Hysterical Diseases, translated from the French.” In 1778, he was sent by government with certain commissioners to treat with America, but neither the commissioners nor their secretary were suffered by the congress to proceed further than New- York. Dr. Berkenhout, however, found means to penetrate as far as Philadelphia, where the congress was then assembled. He appears to have remained in that city for some time without molestation but at last on suspicion that he was sent by lord North for the pui'pose of tampering with some of their leading members, he was seized and committed to prison. How long he remained a state prisoner, or by what means he obtained his liberty, we are not informed but we find from the public prints, that he rejoined the commissioners at New York, and returned with them to England. For this temporary sacrifice of the emoluments of his profession, and in consideration of political services, he obtained a pension. In 1780, he published his “Lucubrations on Ways and Means, inscribed to lord North,” proposing certain taxes, some of which were adopted by that minister, and some afterwards by Mr. Pitt. Dr. Berkenhout’s friends at that time appear to have taken some pains to point him out as an inventor of taxes. His next work was “An essay en the Bite of a -Mad Dog, in which the claim to infallibility of the principal preservative remedies against the Hydrophobia is examined.” In the year following Dr. Berkenhout published his “Symptomatology” a book which is too universally known to require any recommendation. In 1788, appeared “First lines of the theory and practice of Philosophical Chemistry,” dedicated to Mr. Eden, afterwards lord Auckland, whom the doctor accompanied to America. Of this book it is sufficient to say, that it exhibits a satisfactory display of the present state of chemistry. His last publication was “Letters on Education, to his son at Oxford,” 1791, 2 vols. 12mo but in 1779, he published a continuation of Dr. Campbell’s “Lives of the Admirals,” 4 vols. 8vo and once printed “Proposals for a history of Middlesex, including London,” 4 vols. fol. which, as the design dropt, were never circulated. There is also reason to suppose him the author of certain humorous publications, in prose and verse, to which he did not think fit to prefix his name, and of a translation from the Swedish language, of the celebrated count Tessin’s letters to the late king of Sweden. It is dedicated to the prince of Wales, his present majesty of Great Britain and was, we believe, Mr. Berkenhout’s first publication. He died the 3d of April 1791, aged 60.

, a learned Dutch physician, was born in 1718, at Berlin, where his father, Gabriel Bernard, was a minister of the reformed church. His son came to Holland to study physic and determined to remain there. Having an extraordinary fondness for the study of Greek, in which he had made great progress, he wished to render this knowledge subservient to his profession, and with that view projected a new edition of the lesser Greek physicians, whose works were become very scarce and dear. He began first at Leyden, in 1743, with Demetrius Pepagomenus on the gout; and next year published an introduction to anatomy by an anonymous author, and a nomenclature of the parts of the human body by Hypatius, both in one volume. In 1745, he published Palladius on fevers, and an inedited Chemical glossary, with some extracts, likewise inedited from the different poetical chemists. The same year appeared his edition of Psellus on the virtues of stones. In 1749, he published Synesius on fevers, hitherto inedited, and wrote, in the ninth volume of Dorville’s “Miscellaneae Observationes Novae,” an account of the variations of a manuscript copy of the lexicons or glossaries of Erotian, and Galen. In 1754, when Neaulme, the Dutch bookseller, designed a new edition of Longus’s romance, Bernard read the proofs, and introduced some important corrections of the text. As he did not put his name to this edition, Messrs. Boden, Dutens, and Villoison, who were also editors of Longus after him, knew no other way of referring to him than as the “Paris editor,” being deceived hy Neaulrne’s dating the work from Paris, instead of Amsterdam, where it was printed. In 1757, he superintended an edition of Thomas Magister, but his professional engagements not allowing him sufficient leisure, the preface was written by Oudendorp. From this time, Bernard having ceased to write, and having retired to Arnheim, was completely forgot until, says the editor of the Biog. Universelle, his death was announced by Saxius in 1790 but this seems a mistake. Saxius gives an account of him, as of some other living authoi’s, but leaves his death blank. Bernard, however, to contradict such a rumour, or, as his biographer expresses himself, in order to “show some signs of life,” published a Greek fragment on the dropsy. It was his purpose next to publish Theophilus Nonnus, “De curatione morborum.” This work, on which he had bestowed the labour of many years, and which is one of his best editions, was published at Gotha in 1794, a year after his death. A short time before this event, he sent to the society of arts and sciences at Utrecht, remarks on some Greek authors, which appeared in the first volume of the “Acta Litteraria” of that society. In 1795, Dr. Gruner published various letters and pieces of criticism, which Bernard, who was his intimate friend, had sent to him, under the title of “Bernardi Reliquiae medico-criticae.” Several very learned and curious letters from Bernard were also published in Reiske’s Memoirs, Leipsic, 1783.

, usually called major Bernardi, an adventurer of whom there is a very prolix, but not very interesting account in the Biographia Britannica, was born at Evesham, in 1657, and was descended from an honourable family which had flourished at Lucca in Italy, from the year 1097. His grandfather Philip, a count of the Roman empire, lived in England as resident from Genoa twenty-eight years, and married a native of this country. His father Francis succeeded to this office but, taking disgust at some measures adopted by the senate of Genoa, resigned, and retiring to Evesham, amused himself with gardening, on which he spent a considerable sum of money, and set a good example in that science to the town. John, his son, the subject of this article, of a spirited and restless temper, having received some harsh usage from his father, at the age of thirteen ran away to avoid his severity, and perhaps without any determinate purpose. He retained, notwithstanding, several friends, and was for some time supported by them, but their friendship appears to have gone little farther for soon after he enlisted as a common soldier in the service of the prince of Orange. In this station he showed uncommon talents and bravery, and in a short time obtained a captain’s commission in the service of the States. In April 1677, he married a Dutch lady of good family, with whom he enjoyed much conjugal happiness for eleven years. The English regiments in the Dutch service being recalled by James II. very few of them, but among those few was Bernard!, would obey the summons, and of course, he could not sign the association, into which the prince of Orange wished the regiments to enter. He thus lost his favour, and having no other alternative, and probably wishing for no other, he followed the abdicated James II. into Ireland who, soon after, sent him on some commission into Scotland, from whence, as the ruin of his master now became inevitable, he once more retired to Holland. Venturing, however, to appear in London in 1695, he was committed to Newgate March 25, 1696, on suspicion of being an abettor of the plot to assassinate king William, and although sufficient evidence could not be brought to prove the fact, he was sentenced and continued in prison by the express decree of six successive parliaments, with five other persons, where he remained for more than forty years. As this was a circumstance wholly without a precedent, it has been supposed that there must have been something in his character particularly dangerous, to induce four sovereigns and six parliaments to protract his confinement, without either legally condemning or pardoning him.

, who was born Feb. 8, 1582, at Hallstadt, in Austria, became rector of the college, and professor of history at Strasburgh, where he died Feb. 3, 1640. He was esteemed one of the best critics of his time, and had particularly studied the works of Thucydides, Tacitus, Suetonius, and Sallust. Niceron (vol. XXVII) has a large catalogue of his writings, of which the principal are: 1. “Hypobolimaea D. Maria? Deiparoe Camera, seu Idolum Lauretanum, &c. dejectum,” Strasburgh, 1619, 4to. 2. “De jure eligendi reges et principes,” ibid. 1627, 4to. He edited an edition of Tacitus, 1638, 4to, and one of Pliny the younger, with a selection of notes, 1635, 4to. He likewise translated Galileo from the Latin. Bernegger corresponded with Kepler and Grotius, and their letters were published under the titles “Epistolae mutuas H. Grotii et Matt. Berneggeri,” Strasburgh, 1667, 12mo; and “Epistolae Joannis Kepleri, &c.” ibid. 1672, 12mo. Freinshem was his nephew. His “Observationes miscellanei” on history, &c. were published by his son in 1669, 8vo.

, called the Cavalier Ber­NiN, and by some styled the modern Michael Angelo, because he united the knowledge and practice of painting, statuary, and architecture, owes his extensive reputation prinqipally to his excellence in the latter, branch. His father Peter Bernini, left Tuscany when young, and went to Rome to study painting and sculpture. Having acquired considerable skill in both, he removed to Naples, and practised with great success. There in, 15.98, his son, the subject of this memoir, was born, and from his earliest years discovered a surprising capacity for the fine arts, having at the age of eight executed a head in marble, which was considered as a prodigy. His father, desirous of cultivating so promising a genius, brought him to Rome, and imparted to him a taste for the great masters, which he never altogether lost, although in the sequel he did not follow their track. The pope expressed a desire to see this extraordinary child who had astonished the artists, and when introduced, asked him if he knew how to sketch a head, “Whose head” said Bernini. “You know then how to draw any let it be that of St. Paul,” replied the pope.' The boy performed the task before him in about half an hour, and the pope, enchanted with the specimen, recommended him warmly to cardinal Barberini, that celebrated patron of the arts. “Direct his studies,” added his holiness, “and he will become the Michael Angelo of the age.” About the same time, happening to be in St. Peter’s church, with Annibal Carrache, and some other celebrated artists, Carrache, looking to the cupola, said it would be very desirable to find a man of genius great enough to form and erect two objects in the middle, and at the end of that temple, which should correspond to its dimensions.“The young Bernini instantly exclaimed with enthusiasm,” Would I were that man," little thinking that one day he was to fulfil Carrache’s wish.

Although he had refused to come to France, Louis XIV. was still desirous to avail himself of his talents, as well as to pay him a compliment, by consulting him on the restoration of the Louvre. His minister, Colbert, accordingly sent him the plans of that palace, and requested him to put upon paper “some of those admirable thoughts which were so familiar to him.” Bernini immediately made a sketch for the new building, which afforded so much satisfaction to the king, that he wrote to inform him of the very great desire he had to see, and become acquainted, with so illustrious a character, provided this did not interfere with his engagements to the pope, or his personal convenience. Such condescension our artist could no longer resist; and although now in his sixty-eighth year, departed from Rome, in 1665, with one of his sons, two of his pupils, and a numerous suite. No artist ever travelled with so much pomp or pleasure. All the princes through whose dominions he passed loaded him with presents. In France he was received and complimented by the magistrates at the gates of each city, and that even at Lyons, where it was customary to restrict such a compliment to princes of the blood only. As he approached Paris, the king’s maitre d'hotel was sent to meet him, with instructions to do the honours of receiving him and conducting him every where. This gentleman, M. de Chautelon, was so sensible of the importance of his commission, that he wrote a joutnal of all his proceedings while in company with Bernini, a curious work still preserved in manuscript. On his arrival, our artist was conducted to a hotel prepared for him, and where Colbert visited him as representative of the king, to whom he was afterwards introduced at St. Germains, received with great honour, had a long conversation with the king, and, as well as his son, was admitted to the minister’s table.

Bernini, however, was not wholly reconciled to his errand here. The“great work for which he came was not carried on after his designs, and he is said to have met with some disgust, which inclined him to return to Rome. Accordingly, on pretence that the pope required his presence, he took leave of the king, who made him a present of ten thousand crowns, and settled a pension on him of two thousand, and another of four hundred on his son. The expenses of his return were also defrayed by his majesty, who, with a view to immortalize the visit, caused a medal to be struck, with a portrait of the artist, and on the reverse the muses of his art, with this inscription,” Singularis in singulis, in omnibus unicus." Before his departure, Bernini engaged to make an equestrian statue of Louis XIV. in marble, and of colossal proportion, which he finished in four years but whether from its having no resemblance of the king, or from some fault found with the composition, it was, soon after its arrival, changed into Curtius leaping into the gulph, and is now in the gardens at Versailles.

On his return to Rome, he was received with the greatest demonstrations of joy, and the pope appointed his son canon of St. Maria Maggiore, and gave him several benefices. Cardinal Rospigliosi having become pope by the title of Clement IX. Bernini was admitted into his favour, and employed in several works, particularly the embellishment of the bridge of St. Angelo, and when he had attained his seventieth year, he executed one of his masterpieces, the tomb of Alexander VII. At the age of eighty, he made a beautiful demi-figure in bas-relief, for Christina queen of Sweden, of our Saviour. Being even after this engaged on some architectural works, particularly the repairs of the old palace of the chancery, he applied himself with so much zeal and ardour, as to injure his health. He became restless and weak, and at length totally exhausted, dying Nov. 28, 1680, in the eighty-second year of his age. He was interred in the church of St. Maria Maggiore, with great pomp. By his will, he left to the pope a large painting of our Saviour, executed by himself when he practised that art formerly; and to the queen of Sweden, the piece of sculpture we have just mentioned, which her majesty had refused before, thinking she could not afford to pay for it. He left to his children a statue of Truth, and a fortune of 400,000 Roman crowns.

In 1714 was published his treatise on “the management of Ships;” and in 1730, his memoir on “the elliptical figure of the Planets” gained the prize of the academy of sciences. The same academy also divided the prize, for their question concerning the inclination of the planetary orbits, between our author and his son Daniel. John Bernoulli was a member of most of the academies of Europe, and received as a foreign associate of that of Paris in 1699. After a long life spent in constant study and improvement of all the brances of the mathematics, he died full of honours the first of January 1748, in the 8 1st year of his age. Of five sons which he had, three pursued the same sciences with himself. One of these died before him the two others, Nicolas and Daniel, he lived to see become eminent and much respected in the same sciences. The writings of this great man were dispersed through the periodical memoirs of several academies, as well as in many separate treatises. And the whole of them were carefully collected and published at Lausanne and Geneva, 1742, in 4 vols. 4to; but this is still not quite perfect without his correspondence with Leibnitz, published under the title, “Gul. Leibnitii et Johan. Bernouillii commercium philosophicum et mathematicum,” Lausanne & Geneva, 1745, 2 vols. 4to.

, an eminent French marine clock-maker, a member of the institute, of the royal society of London, and of the legion of honour, was born March 19, 1727, at Plancemont in Neufchatel. His father, who was an architect and justiciary, had destined him for the church; but the youth having had an opportunity, when only sixteen years of age, to examine the mechanism of a clock, became so fond of that study as to attend to nothing else. His father then very wisely encouraged an enthusiasm so promising, and after having employed an able workman to instruct his son in the elements of clockmaking, consented that he should go to Paris to perfect his knowledge of the art. He accordingly came to Paris in 1745, and there constructed his first specimens of marine clocks, which soon were universally approved and adopted. Bjerthoud and Peter Leroi were rival makers of these longitudinal clocks, and came very near each other, although by different methods, in the construction of them but Berthoud’s superior experience made the preference be

The fortune, which he inherited from his ancestors, was a very considerable one; and though he did not manage it with such care, as if he desired much to improve it, yet he left it in a very fair condition. He was a man of great honour, and spent his youth and the vigour of his age in military actions and commands abroad. And though he indulged himself in great liberties, yet he still preserved a very great interest in his country; as appears by the supplies, which he and his son brought to the king’s army, the companies of his own regiment of foot being commanded by the principal knights and gentlemen of Lincolnshire, who engaged themselves in the service principally out of their personal affection to him. He was of a very generous nature, and punctual in what he undertook, and in exacting what was due to him which made him bear the restriction so heavily, which was put upon him by the commission granted to prince Rupert, who was general of the horse, in which commission there was a clause exempting him from receiving orders from any but the king himself; and by the king’s preferring the prince’s opinion in all matters relating to the war before his. Nor did he conceal his resentment for the day before the battle, he said to some friends, with whom he had used freedom, that he did not look upon himself as general; and therefore he was resolved, when the day of battle should come, that he would be at the head of his regiment as a private colonel, where he would die. He was carried out of the field to the next village; and if he could then have procured surgeons, it was thought his wound would not have proved mortal. As soon as the other army was composed by the coming on of the night, the earl of Essex about midnight sent sir William Balfour, and some other officers, to see him, and designed himself to visit him. They found him upon a little straw in a poor house, where they had laid him in his blood, w.hich had run from him in great abundance. He said, he was sorry to see so many gentlemen, some whereof were his old friends, engaged in so foul a rebellion wishing them to tell the earl of Essex, that he ought to throw himself at the king’s feet to beg his pardon which if he did not speedily do, his memory would be odious to the nation. He continued his discourse with such vehemence, that the officers by degrees withdrew themselves, and prevented the visit, which the earl of Essex intended him, who only sent him the best surgeons; but in the very opening of his wounds he died, before the morning, by the loss of blood. He had very many friends, and very few enemies, and died generally lamented. His body was interred at Edenham in Lincolnshire.

, an eminent French anatomist, was born at Tremblay in Britanny, Sept. 21, 1712. At the age of three he was left an orphan, yet learned Latin almost without a master, and was sent afterwards to Rennes to complete his education. He then went to Paris, and studied medicine with such success, that, in 1737, he took his doctor’s degree at Rheims, and in 1741 was admitted a regent member of the faculty of Paris. About the end of that year he accepted the place of physician to the prince of Moldavia, but after two years returned to France. The academy of sciences which had in his absence chosen him a corresponding member, now, in 1744, admitted him to the honour of being an associate without the intermediate rank of adjunct. The fatigues, however, which he had encountered in Moldavia, and his assiduous application to anatomical studies, had at this time impaired his health, and, joined to a nervous temperament, threw him into a state of mental debility which interrupted his studies for three years. He was afterwards recommended to travel, and it was not until the year 1750 that he recovered his health and spirits, and was enabled to resume his studies at Gahard, a retired spot near Rennes. There also he employed some part of his time in the education of his children, and his reputation brought him extensive practice. On Feb. 21, 1781, he was seized with a complaint in his breast, which carried him off in four days. Before and after his long illness, he had furnished several valuable papers to the memoirs of the academy of sciences, particularly three on the circulation in the foetus. His principal publications were, 1. “Traite d'Osteologie,” 1754, 4 vols. 12mo, a very popular work at that time, and still deserving of perusal. It was intended as the first part of a general course of anatomy. 2. “Lettre au D sur le nouveau systeme de la Voix,” Hague, 1745, 8vo. This being answered by Ferrein, or his pupil Montagnat, our author, without putting his name to it, defended his doctrine in “Lettres sur le nouveau systeme de la Voix, et sur les arteres lymphatiques,” 1748. 3. “Consultation sur la legitimite' des naissances tardives,” 1764 and 1765, 8vo. His chief argument here seems to be the simple position that if there are early births, there may also be late births. 4. “Memoire sur les consequences relatives a la pratique, deduites de la structure des os parietaux,” inserted in the Journal de Medicine, 1756. He left in manuscript Memoirs on Moldavia, which his son Rene Joseph, an eminent physician of Paris, intends to publish.

, an Italian physician, and a man of learning and skill, yet perhaps less known for these qualities, than for his literary disputes, was born at Castel Fiorentino Dec. 28, 1658. After studying at Sienna and Pisa a complete course, not only of medicine, but mathematics, astronomy, belles-lettres, &c. he was, in 1678, created doctor in philosophy and medicine, and then settled at Florence, where after very successful practice for many years, he died Dec. 10, 1726. His first publication was entitled “La Medicina difesa contra la calunnie degli nomini volgari e dalle opposizioni del dotti, divisa in due dialoghi,” Lucca, 1699, 4to. and ibid. 1709. In the second of these dialogues he pays high compliments to three physicians belonging to the court of Tuscany, but omits Moneglia, the fourth, which brought on a controversy between Bertini and him and some time afterwards he was involved in two other disputes with his brethren, by which neither party gained much credit. His son Joseph Maria Xavier, who died in 1756, was also a physician, and of far more celebrity as a practitioner but he published only a discourse pronounced in 1744, on the medical use of mercury in general, which at that time excited the attention of the learned in no small degree. It was entitled “Dell' uso esterno e interno del Mercurio, discorso, &c.” 4to.

, king’s advocate at Fontenaye-le-Comte, and an able French antiquary, was born at Coulonges-lesRoyaux in Poitou, in 1572, and died in 1644. In 1614, he distinguished himself in the assembly of the states by opposing the receiving of the council of Trent, but he was better known by his assiduous attention to the antiquities of France and his works published after his death by his son and Peter Dupuis his friend, justly entitle him to be considered as an accurate and judicious historian. These are, 1. “Histoire des comtes de Poitou et dues de Guienne,” Paris, 1647, fol. This was the result of forty years research, and the extraordinary light he has been able to throw upon circumstances before in comparative obscurity, may form a sufficient apology for some few mistakes. 2. “Des eveques de Poitiers, avec les preuves,” 1647, 4to. This is a collection of useful documents, but without any arrangement, and evidently left unfinished by the author. He wrote also some pieces of less note, such as a “Cornmen taire sur llonsard,” something of which kind was attempted by many of his contemporaries.

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

, a very celebrated French physician, and whose labours have greatly promoted the study of physiology, was born Nov. 11, 1771, at Thoirette. His father was also a physician, and had probably initiated him in medical knowledge, which he studied at Lyons, where Petit, then surgeon of the Hotel-Dieu in that city, under whom he was taught anatomy and surgery, had such an opinion of his talents, that he made him his assistant, although then only in his twentieth year. When Lyons was besieged in 1793, he made his escape, and arrived at Paris about the end of that year. There, without any recommendations from friends, he resumed his studies and became one of the pupils of the celebrated Dussault, who discovering his uncommon talents, invited him to his house, treated him as his son, and found in him a most able assistant. Of this generous protector, however, he was deprived by death in 1795, and became in his turn the support of Dussault’s widow and children. He first completed the fourth volume of Dussault’s “Journal de Chirurgie.” In 1797 he published his “CEuvres chirurgicales,” 2 vols. 8vo. In the same year he hegan to give lectures on anatomy and operative surgery, to which, in 1798, he added a course of physiology, v.hich produced his “Traite des Membranes,” 1800, 8vo, and “Recherches physiologiques sur la vie et sur la mort,” 1800, 8vo, in both which he advances some of those original opinions which attracted the attention of the faculty both at home and abroad, and paved the way for the higher fame he acquired by his “Anatomic generale appliquee a la physiologic et a la medicine,” Paris, 1801, 4 vols. 8vo, one of the ablest works n the subject which France has produced. The year preceding, although only twenty-eight years old, he was appointed physician to the Hotel Dieu, and had begun a nevr treatise on descriptive anatomy, when the world was deprived of his labours, by a premature death, the consequence of a putrid fever, July 22, 1802. He was deeply regretted for his talents and virtues.

In 1654 the parliament published a general act of oblivion, when Biddle was restored to his liberty. This he improved among those friends he had gained in London, in meeting together every Sunday for expounding the Scripture, and discoursing thereupon; by which means his opinions concerning the unity of God, Christ his only son, and his holy spirit, were so propagated, that the presbyterian ministers became highly offended. The same year he published his “Twofold scripture catechism,” which was ably answered by Dr. Owen in his “Vindicise Evangelicae,” Oxford, 1655; but a copy coming into the hands of some of the members of Cromwell’s parliament, meeting Sept. 3, 1654, a complaint was made against it in the house of commons. Upon this, the author being brought to the bar, and asked “Whether he wrote that book?” answered by asking, “Whether it seemed reasonable, that one brought before a judgment seat as a criminal, should accuse himself?” After some debates and resolutions, he was, Dec. 13, committed close prisoner to the Gatehouse. A bill likewise was ordered to be brought in for punishing him but, after about six months imprisonment, he obtained his liberty at the court of king’s bench, by due course of law. About a year after, another no less formidable danger overtook him, by his engaging in a dispute with one Griffin, an anabaptist teacher. Many of Griffin’s congregation having embraced Biddle' s opinions concerning the Trinity, he thought the best way to stop the spreading of such errors would be openly to confute his tenets. For this purpose he challenges Biddle to a public disputation at his meeting in the Stone chapel in St. Paul’s cathedral, on this question, “Whether Jesus Christ be the most high, or almighty God?” Biddle would have declined the dispute, but was obliged to accept of it and the two antagonists having met amidst a ifumerous audience, Griffin repeats the question, asking “if any man there did deny that Christ was God most high” to which Biddle resolutely answered, “I do deny it” and by this open profession gave his adversaries the opportunity of a positive and clear accusation, which they soon laid hold of. But Griffin being baffled, the disputation was deferred till another day, when Biddle was to take his turn of proving the negative of the question. Meanwhile, Griffin and his party, not thinking themselves a match for our author, accused him of fresh blasphemies, and procured an order from the protector to apprehend him, July the 3d (being the day before the intended second disputation), and to commit him to the Compter. He was afterwards sent to Newgate, and ordered to be tried for his life the next sessions, on the ordinance against blasphemy. However, the protector not chusing to have him either condemned or absolved, took him out of the hands of the law, and detained him in prison; till at length, being wearied with receiving petitions for and against him, he banished him to St. Mary’s castle, in the isle of Scilly y where he was sent Oct. 1655. During this exile, he employed himself in studying several intricate matters, particularly the Revelation of St. John, and after his return to London, published an essay towards explaining it. In 1658, the protector, through the intercession of many friends, suffered a writ of habeas corpus to be granted out of the king’s bench, whereby the prisoner was brought back, and, nothing being laid to his charge, was set at liberty. Upon his return to London, he became pastor of an independent meeting but did not continue long in town for, Cromwell dying Sept. 3, 1658, his son Richard called a parliament, consisting chiefly of presbyterians, whom, of all men, Biddle most dreaded he therefore retired privately into the country. This parliament being soon dissolved, he returned to his former employment till the restoration of king Charles the Second, when the liberty of dissenters was taken away, and their meetings punished as seditious. Biddle then restrained himself from public to more private assemblies, but, June 1, 1662, he was seized in his lodging, where he and some few of his friends had met for divine worship, and was, with them, carried before a justice of peace, who committed them all to prison, where they lay till the recorder took security for their answering to the charge brought against them at the next session. But the court not being then able to find a statute whereon to form, any criminal indictment, they were referred to the session following, and proceeded against at common law; each of the hearers was fined 20l. Biddle, 100l., and to lie in prison till paid. By his confinement, however, he contracted a disease which put an end to his life, Sept. 22, 1662, in the 47th year of his age. He was buried in the cemetery near Old Bethlem, in Moorfields and a monument was erected over his grave, with an inscription. His life was published in Latin at London, 1682, by Mr. Farrington, of the Inner Temple, who gives him a high character for piety and morals, and by the Rev. Joshua Toulmin, in 1789, 8vo, who styles him the Father of the English Unitarians.

, an ingenious artist, was born at Liere, in Brabant, in 1594, and at first learned the rudiments of the art from Wouter Abts, afterwards became the disciple of Rodolph Schoof, a painter of considerable reputation at that time at Paris, and when he had practised under that master for a sufficient time to form his hand, he sought to obtain still greater improvement by travelling to Rome and there he spent six years in studying the works of the best masters, devoting his whole time to his profession. His industry was then rewarded with proportionable success; for he found encouragement among the most honourable persons at Rome, and in every part of Italy. His penciling was so exceedingly neat, and his touch and colouring so very delicate, that he was frequently employed to paint on jasper, agate, porphyry, and other precious materials, His master-piece is St. Eloi, in the principal church at Liere. The time of his death is Mot known his son, Cornelius de Bie, wrote the lives of the painters, &c. under the title “Guide Cabinet, &c.” in Flemish verse, with their portraits.

, garter principal king at arms, was born in 1711, the son of Richard Bigland, of Kendal, in Westmoreland, the descendant of a family originally seated at Bigland, Lancashire. The subject of this brief notice, after going through all the offices in the College of Arms, and executing also the office of registrar, to which he was appointed in 1763, became the head of it in 1780, but enjoyed his elevation a very short time, dying in James-street, Bedford-row, March 27, 1784. He was buried with his parents at Stepney. He was deservedly esteemed and regretted, as a man of much skill in heraldry and other branches of antiquities. The great collections he had made for a history of Gloucestershire were intended to have been arranged and given by him to the public, and have since been partly published by his son Richard Bigland, of Frocester, esq. under the title of “Historical, monumental, and genealogical collections, relative to the county of Gloucester,” &c. fol. 1792, to which a second volume will probably be added by Mr. Nichols.

, and not de la Vigne, as he is generally called by writers who have occasion to name him [for it is thus he gives his own name in his “Roman des Oiseaux”], was born of a noble family of the diocese of Bayeux, about 1428. He was chaplain to king John, and followed that prince into England after the battle of Poletiers. Being at Rochefort in 1459, he began a poem on the chace, entitled “Le Roman des Oiseaux,” which he finished on his return to France. This he did at the command of the king for the instruction of his son Philip duke of Burgundy. The abbé Goujet attributes this poem to Gaston de Foix, from its being printed at the end of the “Miroir de la Chasse” by that prince, but greatly different from the manuscripts. Gaston’s work printed by Trepperel at Paris, fol. without a date, and again in 1520, consists of two parts, the first Gaston’s, and the second by Bigne. Bigne is supposed, from some passages in his work, to have been alive in 1475. The personages in this poem, or romance, are allegorical, and dispute which species of the chace has the pre-eminence, appealing to the king, who, after having advised with his counsellors, wisdom, reason, and truth, (not very usually called in) sends away the disputants perfectly satisfied. The style is easy, and the author’s quaintness will be agreeable to the lovers of early poetry.

Upon his return from his travels, he applied himself to the practice of the bar with great success. His father procured for him the post of advocate general in the grand council; which office he discharged with such reputation, that the king nominated him some time after counsellor of state, and at last advocate general in the parliament. In 1641 he resolved to confine himself entirely to his business in the council of state, and therefore resigned his place of advocate-general to Mr. Briquet his son -in- law,. The year following he was appointed the king’s librarian. His sonin-law dying in 1645, he was obliged to resume his post of advocate- general, in order to preserve it for his son. He had also a considerable share in the ordinance of the year 1639; and he discharged with great integrity various commissions with which he was intrusted at different times. Queen Anne of Austria, during her regency, sent for him to council upon the most important occasions. He adjusted the differences between Mr. d‘Avaux and Mr. Servien, plenipotentiaries at Minister and he had a share, with M. de Brienne and d’ Emery, in making the treaty of alliance with the states of Holland in 1649. He was appointed, in 1651, to regulate the great affair of the succession of Mantua; and in 1654, to conclude the treaty with the Hans Towns. Mr. Bignon died, aged 66, on the 7th of April, 1656, of an asthma, with which he waa seized the autumn before. In 1757, the abbé Perau published Bignon’s life, two parts, 12mo. His grandson, John Paul Bignon, was librarian to the king, a man of great erudition, and a writer of great powers of invention, if he could compose, as we are told he did, four panegyrics on St. Louis, all different, two of which were pronounced the same day, one at the French academy, and the other at the academy of inscriptions. He wrote also “Vie de Francois Levesque,” 1684, 12mo; and “Les Aventures d‘Abdalla, fils d’Hanif.” 1713, 2 vols. 12mo. often reprinted. He had also a hand in the medallic history of the jreign of Louis XIV. and the Journal des Savans. He warmly patronized Tournefort, who named a plant after him Bignonia. He died May 14, 1743.

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

Mr. Bingham died at Pimpern, beloved and regretted, Oct. 11, 1800, aged eighty-five, and was buried in the chancel of Pimpern church, wh'ere on a marble monument is engraved a classical and characteristic epitaph by his son, the rev. Peregrine Bingham, rector of Radclive, Bucks. As an author, Mr. Bingham acquired a considerable share of fame in his life-time by his “Vindication of the Doctrine and Liturgy of the Church of England.” occasioned by Mr. Theophilus Lindsey’s Apology for quitting his living, 1774, 8vo and his essay on the “Millenium,” entitled “T %iMa eln” “Dissertationes Apocalypticae” “Paul at Athens,” an essay a “Commentary on Solomon’s Song,” and some sermons, all which were published by his son above-mentioned in 2 vols. 1804, 8vo, with Memoirs of the author, in which it is said, that Mr. Bingham united the profoundest erudition with the most consummate piety, and had a perfect knowledge of the Hebrew tongue, an intimate acquaintance with the earliest fathers of the church, and an accurate skill in classic literature, and in history ancient and modern, sacred and profane. His opinions, however, on some points, differed much from those of his brethren particularly in contending that Mahomet and his religion are the sole objects of the prophecies of Daniel and St. John, which so many able divines have uniformly applied to papal Home. Upon this account, when the Warburtonian lecture was offered him in 1781, he declined preaching it, because the object of the founder was to prove the truth of Christianity from the completion of the prophecies which relate to the Christian church, especially the apostacy of papal Rome. Mr. Bingham conceived that the church of Rome is a part, though a corrupt part, of the Christian church, and which, agreeing with us in fundamentals, may be still capable of reformation. In his sentiments on the Millenium, he restricts that state to the enjoyment of uninterrupted peace by the church for a determined time, and therefore neither admits that the Millenium is already past, which Hammond and a few more thought, nor that it will be, what the majority of writers have described, the literal reigning of the saints on earth, with Christ, for a thousand years.

, a late valuable historical and biographical writer, was born in the parish of St. John’s Clerkenwell, on the 23d of November, 1705. His parents were both of them quakers, and his father, Joseph Birch, was a coffee-mill maker by trade. Mr. Joseph Birch endeavoured to bring up his son Thomas to his own business; but so ardent was the youth’s passion for reading, that he solicited his father to be indulged in his inclination, promising, in that case, to provide for himself. The first school he went to was at Hemel-hempsted in Hertfordshire, kept by John Owen, a rigid quaker, for whom Mr. Birch afterwards officiated, some little while, as an usher, but at present he made very little progress. The next school in which he received his education was taught by one Welby, who lived near Turnbull-street, Clerkenwell, a man who never had above eight or ten scholars at a time, whom he professed to instruct in the Latin tongue in the short space of a year and a half, and had great success with Mr. Birch, who afterwards lived with him as an usher; as he also afterwards was to Mr. Besse, the famous quaker in George’s court near St. John’s lane, who published the posthumous works of Claridge. It is farther said, that he went to Ireland with dean Smedley; but in what year he passed over to that country, and how long he resided with the dean, cannot now be ascertained. In his removals as an usher, he always took care to get into a still better school, and where he might have the greatest opportunity of studying the most valuable books, in which he was indefatigable, and stole many hours from sleep to increase his stock of knowledge. By this unremitting diligence, though he had not the happiness of an university education, he soon became qualified to take holy orders in the church of England; and as his early connections were of a different kind, his being ordained was a matter of no small surprise to his old acquaintance. In 1728, he married the daughter of one Mr. Cox, a clergyman to whom he was afterwards curate and in this union he was singularly happy but his felicity was of a short duration, Mrs. Birch dying in less than twelve months after their marriage. The disorder which carried her off was a consumption accelerated by childbearing, and almost in the very article of her death she wrote to her husband the following letter:

, one of the most eminent chemical philosophers of the last century, was born in France, on the banks of the Garonne, in 1728. His father, Mr. John Black, was a native of Belfast, in Ireland, but of a Scotch family, which had been some time settled there. Mr. Black resided most commonly at Bourdeaux, where he carried on the wine trade. He married a daughter of Mr. Robert Gordon of the family of Halhead, in Aberdeenshire, who was also engaged in the same trade at Bourdeaux. Mr. Black was a gentleman of the most amiable manners, candid and liberal in his sentiments, and of no common information. He enjoyed the particular intimacy and friendship of the celebrated president Montesquieu, who most likely acquired his knowledge of the constitution of Britain, for which he was known to have a strong partiality, from the information communicated by Mr. Black. Long before Mr. Black retired from business, his son Joseph was sent to Belfast, that he might have the education of a British subject. He was then twelve years of age, and six years after, in the year 1746, he was sent to continue his education in the university of Glasgow. Being required by his father to make choice of a profession, he preferred that of medicine, as most suited to the general bent of his studies.

In 1804, his son, the Rev. F. Blackburne, published in 7 vols. 8vo, his “Works, Theological and Miscellaneous, including some pieces not before printed,” with some account of the life and writings of the author, by himself, and completed by his son. At the conclusion of this interesting memoir, we find a character of Mr. Blackburne drawn up with candour and affection. From this we shall extract a few passages, but without deciding whether in every respect the same conclusions can be drawn from an attentive consideration of his labours and opinions. It is certain that some of his admirers have wished him possessed of more steadiness and consistency than his works show.

, father to the preceding, and a considerable writer in the last century, was descended from a very ancient and honourable family, and born December 15, 1602, at his father, sir Thomas Pope Blount’s, seat at Tittenhanger, in Hertfordshire. He received the first tincture of letters in the free-school of St. Alban’s, where he manifested an unusual quickness of parts, and having qualified himself for the university, was removed to Trinity-college, in Oxford, and entered a gentleman commoner there in 1616, before he was full fourteen years of age. Some years he spent in that learned society, with great reputation and universal respect, not so much on account of his family, by which he was nearly related to the founder, sir Thomas Pope, as from his personal merit. For in his youth he was of a cheerful disposition, a sprightly wit, an easy address, and frank and entertaining in conversation, charmed all who were of his acquaintance, and was justly esteemed as promising a genius as any in the university. In the year 1618 he took the degree of B.A. and soon after left Oxford for Gray’s-inn, where for some time he applied himself to the study of the law, and set out on his travels in the spring of the year 1634, being then lately become of age. He made first the tour of France, part of Spain and Italy, and then passing to Venice, he there contracted an acquaintance with a Janizary, with whom he resolved to pass into the Turkish dominions. With this view he embarked on the 7th of May, 1634, on board a Venetian galley, in which he sailed to Spalatro, and thence continued his journey by land to Constantinople. There he was very kindly received by sir Peter Wich, then our ambassador at the Port. His stay at Constantinople was short, because, having an earnest desire to see Grand Cairo, and meeting with a sudden opportunity, he readily embraced it, and after a peregrination of near two years, returned safely into England, where, in 1636, he printed an account of his travels, London, 1636, 4to, which soon after came to a second edition, and in 1638 to a third, in the same size. It was then printed in 12mo, and reached many editions the title of the eighth runs thus “A Voyage into the Levant, being a brief relation of a Journey lately performed from England by the way of Venice, into Dalmatia, Sclavonia, Bosnia, Hungary, Macedonia, Thessaly, Thrace, Rhodes, and Egypt, unto Grand Cairo; with particular observations concerning the modern condition of the Turks, and other people under that empire. By sir Henry Blount, knight.” This book made him known to the world, and so much noticed, that shortly after, king Charles I. who desired to fill his court with men of parts, appointed him one of the band of pensioners, then composed of gentlemen of the first families in the kingdom. In 1638, his father, sir Thomas Pope Blount, died, and left him the ancient seat of Blount’s hall, in Staffordshire, and a very considerable fortune. On the 21st of March in the succeeding year, the king conferred on him the honour of knighthood. At the first breaking out of the civil war, he, following the example of the elder branches of his illustrious family, who were eminently loyal, attended the king at York, at Oxford, and other places, was present at the battle of Edgehill, and had there (according to a tradition in the family) the honour of taking care of the young princes. Afterwards he quitted his majesty’s service, and returned to London, where he was questioned for his adhering to the king but he being now grown a very wary and dexterous speaker, so well excused himself, by alleging his duty on account of his post, that he escaped all censure, and was thenceforward well received. It appears, however, that he had not the courage to be faithful, or that Ije had seriously repented his loyalty to the king, for he complied with the usurping government so implicitly, that in 1651 he was named on a committee of twenty persons, for inspecting the practice of the law, and remedying its abuses. He declared himself very warmly against tithes, and would willingly have reduced the income of parish ministers to one hundred pounds a year. A man of this opinion must have been very acceptable at that time. His next appearance, however, was more to his credit. He sat with Dr. Hichard Zouch, Dr. William Clarke, Dr. William Turner, civilians, and with several other eminent persons in the court of king’s (then called the upper) bench, in Westminster hall, on the 5th of July, 1654, by virtue of a commission from Oliver Cromwell, for trying Don Pantalion Saa, brother to the Portuguese ambassador, for murder, of which, being found guilty, he was, much to the honour of the justice of this nation, by sentence of that court, adjudged to suffer death, and was executed accordingly, Jn, the same year, by the death of his elder brother Thomas Pope Blount, esq. the estate of Tittenhanger descended to him. His great reputation for general knowledge and uncommon sagacity was the reason that his name was inserted in the list of twenty-one commissioners appointed, November 1, 1655, to consider of the trade and navigation of the commonwealth, and how it might be best encouraged and promoted, in which station he did his country eminent service. But whatever his compliances with the forms of government set up between 1650 and 1660, he was received into favour and confidence on the ling’s restoration, and appointed high sheriff of the county of Hertford, in 1661. He lived after that as an English gentleman, satisfied with the honours he had acquired, and the large estate he possessed, and having passed upwards uf twenty years in this independent state, be died on the 9th of October, 1682, when he wanted but four months of four-score, and was two days afterwards interred in the vault of his family, at Ridge in Hertfordshire. As to what appears from his writings, he seems to have had strong parts, a lively imagination, and, in consequence of these, some very singular opinions. His style was manly, flowing, and less affected than could be expected, considering the times in, and the subjects on, which he wrote. A Latin fragment, published by his son, in his “Oracles of Reason,” better explains his sentiments than all the rest of his works, and demonstrates that he was a man of an irregular way of thinking.

, a German horticulturist, who came to England about the middle of the seventeenth century, was appointed first superintendant of the physic-garden at Oxford, founded in 1632 by Henry earl of Danby. Some writers call him doctor, and some professor of botany, but he was neither, nor was there any professor, properly so called, before Dillenius. The “Catalogus -Plantarum” in this garden, published at Oxford in 1648, 12mo, was drawn up by Bobart, and is a very favourable proof of his zeal and diligence. Under his care and that of his son, the garden at Oxford continued to flourish for many years. The old man, according to Wood, lived in the gardenhouse, and died there Feb. 4, 1679, aged eighty-one. Mr. Granger relates an anecdote that “on rejoicing days old Bobart used to have his beard tagged with silver.” He left two sons, Jacob and Tillemant, who were both employed in the physi-garden. Jacob, who seems to have been a man of some learning, published the second volume of Morison’s “Oxford history of Plants,” 1699, fol. Of him too, an anecdote is told which implies somewhat of a humourous disposition. He had transformed a dead rat into the feigned figure of a dragon, which imposed upon the learned so far, that “several fine copies of verses were wrote on so rare a subject.” Bobart afterwards owned the cheat but it was preserved for some years, as a master-piece of art. Dr. Pulteney thinks Bobart was alive in 1704; but he appears to have lived considerably longer, as Dr. Abel Evans dedicated “Vertumnus,” a poetical epistle, to him in 1713. A descendant of this family, Tillemant Bobart, is still well known to all who wish for civil treatment and a safe carriage on the road to Oxford.

, an artist who flourished about 1496-, is among the Cremonese, what Griilandajo, Mantegna, Vannucci, Francia, arc in their respective schools the best modern among the ancients, and the best ancient among the moderns. He was the master of Garofalo before his journey to Rome in 1500. The birth of the Madonna with other histories of her life, and that of the Saviour in the frieze of the Dnotno at Cremona, are works of Boccaccino. The style is partly original, partly approaches that of Pietro Perugino less co-ordinate in composition, less agreeable in the airs of the heads, weaker in chiaroscuro hut richer in drapery, more varied in colour, more spirited in attitudes, and perhaps not less harmonious or pleasing in landscape and architecture. His great defect is the short and stumpy appearance which an immoderate load of drapery often gives to his figures. It is probable that he was at Rome, as Vasari pretends that he there reviled the works of Michael Angelo and what followed, as related by the same historian, admits of too much doubt to deserve attention. He died, according to Vasari, in 1518, aged fifty-eight. His son, Ca.Millo Boccaccino, was born at Cremona, in 1511, where he received the first instructions in the art of painting from his father and for some time he was obliged to conform himself to the -style and manner of his instructor. But he determined to quit that hard dry manner of colouring, to which he had been accustomed, and by degrees assumed a style of colour equally remarkable for its suavity and strength. The best remaining specimens of his art are in the church of St. Sigismondo, at Cremona; where, among the Four Evangelists, the figure of St. John, bent upwards in contrast with the arched vault, in boldness of foreshortening and truth of perspective, emulates the style of Correggio. He died very young, at a time when there was a great expectation of his arriving at very high perfection, in 1546.

, a satirical wit, was born at Loretto in 1556, the son of an architect of a Roman family, about the beginning of the seventeenth century. The method he took to indulge his turn for satire, or rather plot of his publications, was the idea that Apollo, holding his courts Oh Parnassus, heard the complaints of the wholeworld, and gave judgment as the case required. He was received into the academies of Italy, where he gained great applause by his political discourses, and his elegant criticisms. The cardinals Borghese and Cajetan having declared themselves his patrons, he published his “News from Parnassus/' and” Apollo’s Secretary,“a continuation which being well received, he proceeded further, and printed his” Pietra di Paragone“wherein he attacks the court of Spain, setting forth their designs against the liberty of Italy, and inveighing particularly against themfor the tyranny they exercised in the kingdom of Naples. The Spaniards complained of him in form, and were determined at any rate to be revenged. Boccalini was frightened, and retired to Venice. Some time after he was murdered in a surprising manner. He lodged with one of his friends, who having got up early one morning, left Boccalini in bed; when a minute after four armed men entered his chamber, and gave him so many blows with bags full of sand that they left him for dead so that his friend, upon his return, found him unable to utter one word. Great search was made at Venice for the authors of this murder and though they were never discovered, yet it was universally believed that they were set to work. by the court of Spain. This story, however, has been called in question by Mazzuchelli, and seems indeed highly improbable at least it can by no means stand upon its present foundation. His attacking the court of Spain in his” Pietra di Paragone,“is said to have been the cause of his murder but another cause, if he really was murdered, must be sought, for he died, by whatever means, Nov. 10, 1613, and the” Pietra“was not published until two years after that event. It appears likewise from one of his letters, that he had kept the manuscript a profound secret, communicating it only to one confidential frienc!, to whom the above letter was written. Besides, the register of the parish in which he died, mentions that on Nov. 10, 1613, the signor Trajan Boccalini died at the age of fiftyseven, of a cholic accompanied with a fever. Apostolo Zeno, vrho mentions this circumstance in his notes on Fontanini’s” Italian Library,“adds, that in a speech publicly delivered at Venice in 1<320, in defence of Trissino, whom. Boccalini had attacked, ample mention rs made of him, who had then been dead seven years, and in terms of severe censure; but not a word was said of his assassination, which could not have then been a secret, nor could there be any reason for concealing it. If indeed he suffered in the manner reported, it formed an exact counterpart of what he records to have happened to Euclid the mathematician. Euclid had demonstrated, as a mathematical problem, that all the lines both of princes’” and private men’s thoughts meet in one centre namely, to pick money out of other men’s pockets and put it into their own and for this he was attacked by some of his hearers who beat him with sand-bags and perhaps, as a foundation for the story, some of Boccalini’s readers may have said that he ought to have been punished in the same manner. Boccal'mi’s works are: 1. “Itagguagli di Parnaso, centuria prima,” Venice, 1612, 4to. “Centuria secxinda,” ibid. 1613, 4to, neither published long enough before his death to have excited much general odium. These two parts were afterwards frequently reprinted in one volume. There is unquestionably in this work, much to make it popular, and mnch to excite hostility. His notions on government, liberty, &c. were too free for his age and country and his treatment of literary characters is frequently captious and unjust, yet the work upon the whole is amusing, and original in its plan. A third part was published by Jerome Briani, of Modena, at Venice, 165O, 8vo, and die whole was translated and published in English, tinder the inspection of Hughes the poet, 1705, lol. 2. “Pietra del Paragone politico,” Cosmopoli (Amsterdam), 1615, 4to, and often, reprinted in various sizes; that of Amsterdam, 1653, 24mo, is reckoned the best. It has been translated into Latin, French, and English, first in 1626, 4to, and afterwards in Hughes’s edition and into German. This “political touchstone” bears hard on the Spanish monarchy, and may be considered as a supplement to his “News from Parnassus.” 3. “Commentari sopra Cornelio Tacito,” Geneva, 1669, 4to, Cosmopoli (Amsterdam), 1677, 4to, and afterwards in a collection published under the title “La Bilancia politica di tutte le opere di Trajano Boccalini,” &c. with notes and observations by the chevalier Louis du May, at Castellana, 167S, 3 vols. 4to. The first two volumes of this scarce work contain the Tacitus, on which the annotator, not content with being very free in his religious opinions, takes some extraordinary liberties with the text, and therefore they were soon inserted in the Index Expurgatorius. They contain, however, many curious facts which tend to illustrate the political affairs of the time. The third volume is filled with political and historical letters, collected hy Gregorio Leti but although these are signed with Boccalini’s name, they are supposed to have been written by his son, and by the editor Leti, a man not very scrupulous in impositions of this kind. 6. “La Segretaria d'Apollo,” Amst. 1653, 24mo, a sort of continuation of the “Ragguagli,” very much in Boccalini’s manner, but most probably we owe it to the success of his acknowledged works.

, or Bochius, a Latin poet, was born at Brussels July 27, 1555, and became so eminent for his poetry, as to be called the Belgic Virgil. Having attached himself to cardinal Radzevil, he studied theology for some time, under the tuition of Bellarmin, afterwards the celebrated cardinal. He then travelled in Italy, Poland, Livonia, Russia, and other countries. The only memorable event that his biographers have recorded of these travels, is, that in his way to Moscow his feet were frozen, and he was thinking of submitting to amputation, when the place where he stopped happening to be surprized by the enemy, he recovered his feet in a most surprising manner, and escaped the danger of losing either them or his liberty. On his return home, he devoted his time to his literary pursuits, especially poetry, and died Jan. 13, 1609. He has left the following pieces 1. “De Belgii principatu.” 2. “Parodia heroica Psahnorum Davidicorum.” 3. “Observationes physicae, ethicae, politics, et historical, in Psalmos.” 4. “Vita Davidis.” 5. “Orationes.” 6. “Poe'mata, &.C.” these poetical pieces, consisting of epigrams, elegies, &c. were collected and printed at Cologne, in 1615, with the addition of some poems by his son, a promising youth, who died in Calabria. It must not be omitted that Booh wrote the verses under the cuts of Verstegan’s absurd book against queen Elizabeth, entitled “Theatrum crudelitatum Hereticorum nostri temporis,” a sort of popish martyrology.

After near five years residence in Holland, he obtained leave to return to England to look after his private affairs, but was shortly after remanded back to the Hague. About a year after he came into England again, to communicate some private discoveries to the queen and presently returned to the States for the execution of those councils he had secretly proposed. At length, having succeeded in all his negociations, he obtained his final recal in 1597. After his return, finding his advancement at court obstructed by the jealousies and intrigues of the great men, he retired from the court and all public business, and never could be prevailed with to return and accept of any new employment. His own account of his treatment at this time is too amusing and characteristic to be omitted “I cannot chuse,” says he, “in making report of the principal accidents that have befallen unto me in the course of my life, but record among the rest, that from the very first day 1 had no man more to triend, among the lords of the council, than was the lord treasurer Burleigh for when occasion had been ottered of declaring his conceit, as touching my service, he would always tell the queen (which I received from herself, and some other ear-witnesses) that there was not any man in England so meet as myself to undergo the office of the secretary; and since, his son the present lord treasurer hath signified unto me in private conference, that, when his father first intended to advance him to that place, his purpose was withal to make me his colleague. But the case stood thus in my behalf: Before such time as I returned from the Provinces United, which was in the year 1597, and likewise after my return, the earl of Essex did use me so kindly, both by letters and messages, and other great tokens of his inward favour to me, that, alihough I had no meaning but to settle in my mind my chiefest dependance upon the lord Burleigh, as one that I reputed to be both the best able, and therewithal the most willing, to work my advancement with the queen; yet I know not how the earl, who sought by all devices to divert her love and liking both from the father and the son (but from the son in special), to withdraw my affection from the one and the other, and to win me altogether to depend upon himself, did so often take occasion to entertain the queen with some prodigal speephes of my sufficiency for a secretary, which were ever accompanied with words of disgrace against the present lord treasurer, as neither she herself (of whose favour before I was thoroughly assured) took any great pleasure to prefer me the sooner (for she hated his ambition, and would give little countenance to any of his followers); and both the lord Burleigh and his son waxed jealous of my courses, as if underhand 1 had been induced, by the cunning and kindness of the earl of Essex, to oppose myself against their dealings. And though in very truth they had no solid ground at all of the least alteration in my disposition towards either of them both (for I did greatly respect their persons and places, with a settled resolution to do them any service, as also in my heart I detested to be of any faction whatsoever) yet the now lord treasurer, upon occasion of some talk that I have since had with him of the earl and his actions, hath freely confessed of his own accord to me, that his daily provocations were so bitter and sharp against him, and his comparisons so odious, when he put us in a balance, as he thought thereupon, he had very great reason to use his best means to put any man out of love of raising his fortune, whom the earl with sucn violence, to his extreme prejudice, had endeavoured to dignify. And this, as he affirmed, was all the motive -he had to set himself against me, in whatsoever might redound to the bettering of my state, or increasing my credit and countenance with the queen. When I” had thoroughly now bethought me, first in the earl, of the slender holdfast he had in the queen; of an endless opposition of the chiefest of our statesmen like still to wait upon him; of his perilous, feeble, and uncertain advice, as well in his own, as in all the causes of his friends; and when moreover for myself I had fully considered how very untowardly these two counsellors were affected unto me, (upon whom before in cogitation I had framed all the fabric of my future prosperity); how ill it did concur with my natural disposition, to become, or to be counted a stickler or partaker in any public faction how well I was able, by God’s good blessing, to live of myself, if I could be content with a competent livelihood; how short a time of farther life I was then to expect by the common course of nature when I had, I say, in this manner represented to my thoughts my particular estate, together with the earl’s, I resolved thereupon to possess my soul in peace all the residue of my days; to take my full farewell of state employments; to satisfy my mind with that mediocrity of worldly living that I had of mine own and so to retire me from the court, which was the epilogue and end of all my actions, and endeavours of any important note, till I came to the age of sixty three. Now although after this, by her majesty’s directions, I was often called to the court by the now lord treasurer, then secretary, and required by him, as also divers times since, by order from the king, to serve as an ambassador in France, to go a commissioner from his highness for concluding the truce between Spain and the Provinces, and to negotiate in other very honourable employments yet I would not be removed from my former final resolution insomuch as at length to reduce me the sooner to return to the court, I had an offer made me by the present lord treasurer (for in process of time he saw, as he himself was pleased to tell me more than once, that all my dealing was upright, fair, and direct) that in case I myself were willing unto it, he would make me his associate in the secretary’s office And to the intent I might believe that he intended it bonafide, he would get me out of hand to be sworn of the council. And for the better enabling of my state to maintain such a dignity, whatsoever 1 would ask that might be fit for him to deal in, and for me to enjoy, he woul'd presently solic.t the king to give it passage. All which persuasions notwithstanding, albeit I was often assaulted by him, in regard of my years, and for that I felt myself subject to many indispositions, besides some other reasons, which I reserve unto myself, I have continued still at home my retired course of life, which is now methinks to me as the greatest preferment that the state can afford.“Mr. Camden mentions the affair of sir Thomas’s disappointment in regard to the office of secretary in these words” It raised in him (the earl of Essex) a greater and more apparent discontent, that sir Robert Cecil was chosen secretary in his absence whereas he had some time before recommended sir Thomas Bodley, on the score of his great wisdom and experience in the affairs of the Low Countries, and had run very high in his commendations; but with so much bitterness, and so little reason, disparaged Cecil, that the queen (who had by this time a mean opinion of Essex’s recommendations) was the more inclinable to refuse to make Bodley secretary; neither would she let the lord treasurer join him in commission with his son; both which honours were designed him, till Essex, by too profuse and lavish praises, had rendered him suspected as a creature of his own."

Thus rebuked, he remained silent for seven years but finding that the directors of the electoral laboratory had recommended him to a great many persons of the court as a good chemist, he lifted up his head, and boldly opposed Richterus and, taking up his pen again, was resolved to redeem the time he had lost; insomuch that in the remaining five years of his life he wrote ahove twenty books, the last of which, entitled “A table of his principles, or a key of his writings,” was published in 1624. He did not long survive it; for, betimes in the morning, Nov. 18 of that year, he called one of his sons, and asked him, “if he also heard that excellent music” To which being answered in the negative, he ordered the door to be set open, that the music might be the better heard. He asked afterwards what o'clock it was and being told it had struck two, he said, “It is not yet my time, my time is three hours hence.” In the interim he was heard to speak these words, “O thou strong God of hosts, deliver me according to thy will O thou crucified Lord Jesus, have mercy upon me, and receive me into thy kingdom.” When it was near six o'clock, he took leave of his wife and sons, and blessed them, and said, “Now I go hence to paradise” then bidding his son turn him, he immediately expired in a deep sigh.

, the most learned and almost the only Latin philosopher of his time, descended from an ancient and noble family, inauy of his ancestors having been senators and consuls, was born at Rome in the year 455. Though deprived of his father the year he was born by the cruelty of Valeutinian III. who caused him to be put to death, his relations took all proper care of his education, and inspired him with an early taste for philosophy and the belles-lettres. They sent him afterwards to Athens, where he remained eighteen years, and made surprising progress in every branch of literature, particularly philosophy and mathematics, in which Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, and Ptolemy, were his favourite authors. During this course of education, he was not less distinguished for probity and humanity, than for genius and learning. On his return to Rome, he attracted the public attention, as one born to promote the happiness of society. The most eminent men in the city sought his friendship, foreseeing that his merit would soon advance him to the first employments of the state. His alliance, too, was consequently courted by many, but Elpis, descended from one of the most considerable families of Messina, was the lady on whom Boethius fixed his choice. This lady was learned, highly accomplished, and virtuous. She bore him two sons, Patricius and Hypatius. Boethius, as was expected, obtained the highest honour hiscountry could bestow. He was made consul in the year 487, at the age of thirty-two. Odoacer, king of the Heruli, reigned at that time in Italy, who, after having put to death Orestes, and deposed his son Augustulus, the last emperor of the West, assumed the title of king of that country. Two years after Boethius’s advancement to the dignity of consul, Theodoric, king of the Goths, invaded Italy and, having conquered Odoacer and put him to death, he in a short time made himself master of that country, and fixed the seat of his government at Ravenna, as Odoacer and several of the later western emperors had done before him. The Romans and the inhabitants of Italy were pleased with the government of Theodoric, because he wisely ruled them by the same laws, the same polity, and the same magistrates they were accustomed to under the emperors. In the eighth year of this prince’s reign, Boethius had the singular felicity of beholding his two sons, Patricius and Hypatius, raised to the consular dignity. During their continuance in office, Theodoric came to Rome, where he had been long expected, and was received by the senate and people with the greatest demonstrations of joy. Boethius made him an eloquent panegyric in the senate; which the king answered in the most obliging terms, declaring that he should ever have the greatest respect for that august assembly, and would never encroach upon any of their privileges.

Dr. Bolton was a very tall man, very thin, very brown. He understood well, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Spanish, Italian, and French. Mr. Whiston, jun. says that it was a long time before he could prevail on himself to subscribe to the thirty-nine articles for preferment; but at last, as articles of peace, and so far as authorised by scripture, he did; for it was generally supposed he did not approve of all the Athauasian doctrine. There is nothing of this, however, to be deduced from his works, and he appears to have accepted his preferments when offered. He married Mrs. Holmes, a widow-lady, with whom he lived about twenty-five years in great domestic happiness, but left no children by her. Besides the several performances already mentioned, he wrote and printed a “Visitation sermon” in 1741; and under his inspection, Mr. David Henry, then printer at Reading, abridged “Twenty Discourses” from Abp. Tillotson’s works, to which Dr. Bolton is said to have prefixed a preface, and added a sermon of his own, but the sermon on Sincerity is supposed to have been abridged by Mr. Wray, his son-in-law. Mr. Wray, now rector of Darley, in Derbyshire, published “A Sermon occasioned by the death of Robert Bolton, LL. D. &c.” 1764, with an affectionate tribute to his memory.

, a distinguished Latin scholar and poet, was born at Perugia in 1555, became a disciple of the celebrated Muretus, and afterwards principal teacher of the schools of Perugia. He appears next to have been professor of eloquence at Bononia, keeper of the Ambrosian library, and professor of rhetoric at Pisa, where he had the misfortune to lose his sight. During his career of teaching, his father, who was a poor shoemaker, having lost his wife, had an inclination to join the society of the Jesuits, and lest he should be rejected for his ignorance of Latin, became one of his son’s scholars, and made very considerable proficiency. Bonciarius died Jan. 9, 1616, leaving many works, which are very scarce, except his Latin Grammar, which, being adopted in the schools, was frequently reprinted. His “Epistolse” were first printed in 1603, 8vo, and reprinted 1604, at Marpurg, of which last edition Freytag gives an analytical account. They are written in an elegant style. His Latin poems are among the “Carmina Poetarum Italorum,” Florence, 1719, vol. II.

, a man celebrated for piety and virtue, was born at Genoa, Nov. 14, 1653, being the son of Samuel Bonnell, merchant, who resided some time at Genoa, and of Rebecca, daughter of Thomas Sayer, near Norwich, esq. His grandfather was Daniel Bonnell of London, merchant, and his great-grandfather, Thomas Bonnell, a gentleman of good family near Ipres in Flanders, who, to avoid the duke of Alva’s persecution, removed with his family into England, and settled at Norwich, of which, before his death, he was chosen mayor. Samuel Bonnell, father of James Bonnell, being bred up under that eminent merchant, sir William Courteen, knt. applied himself to the Italian trade, at Leghorn and Genoa, with such success, that about 1649, he was worth at least 10,000l. and his credit much greater than his fortune. But both were soon impaired by several accidents, by great losses at sea, and particularly by his zeal for kingCharles II. during his exile, and the rest of the royal family, whom he privately supplied with large sums of money. About 1655, he removed with his family into England; and, at the restoration, on account of the services he had done the royal family, and as a compensation for the large sums he had advanced them (which, it seems, were never repaid otherwise) there was granted him a patent to be accomptant-general of the revenue of Ireland, a place worth about 800l. a year, his son’s life being included in the patent with his own. But this he was not long possessed of, for he died in 1664, leaving his son and one daughter.

, an eminent natural philosopher, was born at Geneva, on the 13th of March, 1720. His ancestors, who were compelled to emigrate from France, in 1572, after the dreadful slaughter of St. Bartholomew’s day, established themselves at Geneva, where his grandfather was advanced to the magistracy. His father, who preferred the station of a private citizen, paid unremitted attention to the education of his son, which the latter recompensed, at a very early period, by the amiableness of his disposition, and the rapid progress he made in general literature. When about sixteen years of age, he applied himself, with great eagerness, to the perusal of “Le Spectacle de la Nature,” and this work made such a deep impression on his mind, that it may be said to have directed the taste and the studies of his future life. What that publication had commenced, was confirmed by the work of La Pluche; but having accidentally seen the treatise of Reaumur upon insects, he was in a transport of joy. He was very impatient to procure the book, but, as the only copy in Geneva belonged to a public library, and as the librarian was reluctant to entrust it in the hands of a youth, it was with the utmost difficulty that he could obtain his end. By the possession of this treasure, our assiduous youth was enabled to make several new and curious experiments, which he communicated to Reaumur himself; and the high applause he gained, from so great a naturalist, added fresh vigour to his assiduity.

He was afterwards set at liberty, upon giving bail; and being member of parliament for Chester, he was the first of the twelve members sent by the house of commons, in May 1660, to carry to king Charles II. the answer of that house to his majesty’s letter, as appears by the journals of the house of commons, May 7, 1660. And on the 13th of July following, the house of commons ordered, that the sum of ten thousand pounds should be conferred on him, as a mark of respect for his eminent services, and great sufferings for the public. In this resolution the lords afterwards concurred. It appears, that the first motion was for twenty thousand pounds, which the house of commons was about to agree to, had not sir George Booth himself, in his place, requested of the house, that it might be no more than ten; declaring, that what he had done was purely with intention of serving his king and country, as became him in duty to do, without view of any reward. After the restoration, his services were also considered as so meritorious, that the king gave him liberty to propose six gentlemen to receive the honour of knighthood, and two others to have the dignity of baronet conferred on them. He was also himself created baron Delamer of Dunham-Massey; and on the 30th of July, 1660, he was appointed custos rotulorum for the county of Cheshire, but on the 30th of May, 1673, he resigned this office to Henry, his son and heir. “After this,” says Collins, “he not being studious to please the court in those measures which were taken in some parts of that reign, both he and his family were soon afterwards disregarded by the king, and ill used by his successor king James the Second.” His lordship died at Dunham-Massey, in the 63d year of his age, on the 8th of August, 1684, and was buried in a very splendid manner at Bowdon, in the burial-vault of the family. He was twice married: his first wife was the lady Catherine Clinton, daughter and co-heir to Theophilus earl of Lincoln, who died in child-bed in 1643, by whom he had issue one daughter, Vere, who Belied unmarried at Canonbury-house, in 1717, in the seventy-fourth year of her age, and was buried in Islington church. His second wife was the lady Elizabeth Grey, eldest daughter of Henry earl of Stamford, by whom he had issue seven sons and five daughters. His eldest son, William, died young, and he was succeeded in his honours and estate by his second son, Henry, who is the subject of the following article.

Alexander VI. had five children by his mistress Vanozza; Francis and Cæsar, already mentioned, two other sons, and a daughter named Lucretia. Francis was a gentleman of good disposition and probity, and in every respect opposite to his brother Cæsar; but Cæsar seems to have possessed abilities superior to those of Francis: which made a certain historian say, “that Cæsar was great among the wicked, and Francis good among the great.” Cæsar however was the mother’s favourite, as having a temper and principles more conformable to hers: for which reason, at the time when Alexander was undetermined on which of these brothers he should bestow the cardinal’s cap, Vanozza declared herself in favour of Cæsar, who was accordingly made a cardinal in the second year of Alexander’s pontificate. From this time he acted in concert with his father, and was an useful instrument in executing all the schemes of that wicked pope, as he had no scruples of honour or humanity, nor was there any thing too atrocious for him to perpetrate, to promote his insatiable ambition. This is said to have even incited him to the murder of his elder brother Francis, duke of Gandia. All the secular dignities, which then were much more coveted than the ecclesiastical, were heaped upon Francis, which obstructed Cæsar’s projects so entirely, that he was resolved at all adventures to remove him. TJjfle story is, that in 1497, hiring assassins, he caused him to be murdered, and thrown into the Tiber; where his body was found some days after, full of wounds and extremely mangled. The pope was afflicted to the last degree; for though he made use of Cæsar as the abler, he loved Francis as the better man. He caused therefore strict inquiry to be made after the murderers; upon which Vanozza, who for that and other reasons was justly suspected to be privy to the affair, went privately to the pope, and used all the arguments she could, to dissuade him from searching any further. Some say, that she went so far as to assure his holiness, that if he did not desist, the same person who took away his son’s life would not spare his own. The whole of this story, however, appears doubtful; nor, indeed, is there any positive proof that Borgia was even privy to his brother’s death. Gordon, only, has asserted it with accompanying proofs, but the latter -appear to be historic fictions. It cannot be necessary to add to Cesar’s crimes. He now, however, succeeded to his brother’s fortunes and honours, began to be tired of ecclesiastical matters, and grew quite sick of the cardinalate, and therefore determined to throw it off as soon as possible, that he might have the greater scope for practising the excesses, to which his natural ambition and cruelty prompted him: for cruel as well as ambitious he was in the highest degree. Numbers he caused to be taken off by poison or the sword; and it is recorded, that assassins were constantly kept in pay by him at Rome, for the sake of removing all who were either obnoxious or inconvenient to him. Getting rid of the cardinalate, he was soon after made duke of Valentinois by Lewis XII. of France: with whom he entered into a league for the conquest of the Milanese. From this time he experienced various turns of fortune, being sometimes prosperous, sometimes unfortunate. He very narrowly escaped dying of poison in 1503; for, having con-, certed with the pope a design of poisoning nine newly created cardinals at once (or, as some say, only one cardinal), in order to possess their effects, the poisoned wine destined for the purpose was by mistake brought to themselves and drank. The pope died of it; but Cæsar, by the vigour of his youth, and the force of antidotes, after many struggles, recovered. He only recovered, however, to outlive his fortune and grandeur, to see himself depressed, and his enemies exalted; for he was soon after divested of all his acquisitions, and sent a prisoner to Spain, in order to free Italy from an incendiary, and the Italian princes from those dangers which his turbulent and restless spirit made them fear, even though he was unarmed. From Spain he escaped to Navarre to king John his brother-in-law, where he met with a very friendly reception. From hence he designed to go into France; and there, with the assistance of Lewis, to try if he could once more re-establish his fortune, but Lewis refused to receive him, not only because he and Spain had concluded a truce, but because they were also at enmity with the king of Navarre. The French king also, in order to gratify Spain, had confiscated Cæsar’s duchy of Valentinois, and taken away the yearly pension which he had from France. So that this fallen tyrant, in a poor and abandoned condition, without revenue or territory, was forced to be dependent upon his brother-in-law, who was then at war with his subjects. Borgia served as a volunteer in that war; and, while the armies were engaged in battle, and fighting under the walls of Viana, was wounded, and died in consequence, March 12, 1507. On his death-bed he is said to have exclaimed, “I had provided in the course of my life for every thing but death; and now, alas! I am to die, though completely unprepared for it.” Cæsar Borgia took these words for his device, “Aut Cæsar aut nihil;” which gave occasion to the following epigrams: