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

, bishop of Caria, in the 8th century, attached himself to the party of the learned Photins, during the disputes which at that time disturbed the church at Constantinople. He undertook, with Zachary, bishop of Chalcedon, an embassy to the emperor Lewis L to present to him a book which Photius had written against pope Nicholas, and to endeavour to persuade him to shake off the pope’s yoke. On his journey he was recalled by Basil, who had usurped the empire; and soon afterwards, finding it no longer safe to support the interest of Photius, he prudently abandoned it, and, before the council of Constantinople, entreated pardon, which was granted, and he restored to his place in the council. Forty-two treatises, written by him against Jews, Mahometans, and heretics, were collected by Gretser, and published in 4to, at Ingolstadt, 1606. Andrew Arnold published another treatise by him “De Unione et Incarnatione,” Paris, 1685, 8vo, the manuscript of which, it is said, he found in the Bodleian library.

, patriarch of Constantinople, succeeded Gennadius in that see in the year 471. He maintained that his see ought to have the pre-eminence over those of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem; and, to compass this design, prevailed on the Emperor Leo to restore and confirm all the privileges which the churches once enjoyed, and especially that of Constantinople. He was afterwards excommunicated by pope Felix III.; and in return he erased the pope’s name out of the sacred diptics, or the list of those bishops whose names were mentioned in the public prayers: but, being supported by the emperor of the east, he enjoyed his bishoprick quietly till his death, which happened in the year 488. There are two letters of his extant in vol. 4 of the Councils; one to Peter the Fuller, or Petrus Fullo, in Gr. and Lat. the other to pope Simplicius, in Lat. respecting 1 the state of the church of Alexandria. Cave entertains a higher opinion of Acacius, than the Editors of the General Dictionary; but the account in the latter is the more copious.

, bishop of Bercea in Syria, in the fourth and beginning of the fifth century, was at the council of Constantinople, held in the year 381, in which were present 150 bishops. He was the friend of Epiphanius Flavianus, and the enemy of John Chrysostom, bishop of Constantinople, whom he caused to be deposed. He also, when 110 years of age, wrote to the emperor Theodosius the younger, to advise him to confirm the sentence pronounced against Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, who had been deposed in a conventicle of schismatics. Notwithstanding these rigorous proceedings, Theodoret assures us that he was eminent both for his wisdom and the sanctity of his life. He died about the year 432.

was of an illustrious family, being descended on the father’s side from Justin, nephew to Justinian emperor of Constantinople, and also from the dukes of Athens, Bohemia, and Corinth. His ancestors bad enjoyect very honourable posts in the kingdom of Naples, and had also been viceroys of Sicily, and generals. Some of them had filled very high employments in the republic of Florence, had been ambassadors to several powers of Europe, were related to all the princes of the Morea and adjacent islands, raised to the dignity orcardinal; and had erected several splendid Carthusian monasteries in Florence, Naples, &c. Our author, the son of Neri Acciaioli and Lena Strozzi, was born at Florence in 1428. His first preceptors were James Ammanati, afterwards cardinal of Pavia, and Leonard d'Arezzo. He afterwards studied Greek under Argyropilus, and became one of the first Greek scholars of his time. He was one of the celebrated literary parties at which Lorenzo de Me.lici presided. Excelling in rhetoric, philosophy, and mathematics, he would have attained a very high rank in the republic of letters, if his weak state of health, and the part he took in the affairs of his country, had not interrupted his studies. He filled several employments in the state, and gave universal satisfaction. In 1475 he was gonfalonier, or ensign of the republic, and died in 1478 at Milan, when on his way to Paris as ambassador from the Florentines. This circumstance was a subject of the sincerest grief to the Florentines, who well knew how to appreciate the virtues of their fellow-citizens, and omitted no opportunity of inciting the patriotism of the living, by the honours they bestowed on the memory of the dead. A sumptuous funeral was decreed to his remains, which were brought to Florence for that purpose. Lorenzo de Medici and three other eminent citizens were appointed curators of his children, and the daughters had considerable portions assigned them from the public treasury. The celebrated Angelo Politian wrote his epitaph, and Christopher Landino pronounced the funeral oration. His works are: 1. “Expositio super libros Ethicorum Aristotelis, in novam traductionem Argyropili,” Florence, 1478, fol. 2. “In Aristotelis libros octp Politicorum commentarii,” Venice, 1566, 8vo. 3. In the Latin translation of Plutarch, he translated the lives of Alcibiades and Demetrius, and added to the same collection those of Hannibal and Scipio from his own pen, with a life of Charlemagne. 4. “The Latin history of Florence, by Leonard d'Arezzo, translated into Italian,” Venice, 1473, fol. and often reprinted. He left some other works, orations, letters, and miscellanies, both in prose and verse, which have not been committed to the press.

, 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.

. The name Actuarius was given to all the court physicians of Constantinople, although the subject of this article is the only one known by it. His father’s name was Zacharias. Authors are not agreed as to the time in which he lived. Wolfgang Justus places him in the eleventh century; Moreau in the twelfth; Fabricius in the thirteenth, and Lambecius in the fourteenth. He was the first Greek author who recommended the use of cassia, senna, manna, and other mild purgatives, and the first who mentions distilled waters. He is reckoned superior to the Arabian physicians, but inferior to the great physicians of his nation. He wrote 1. A work on “Therapeutics,” in six books, of which there is no Greek edition; but a Latin translation by Henry Mathisius of Bruges, entitled “Methodi Medendi libri Sex,” Venice, 4to, 1554; Paris, 1566, 8vo. The work was composed by Actuarius for the use of an ambassador in the north. 2. Two books on “Animal Spirits,” of which Goupil published a Greek edition, Paris, 1557, 8vo, with a Latin version by Mathisius. This was reprinted by Fischer, Gr. and Lat. Leipsic, 1774, 8vo, with the addition of two books of Actuarius on regimen. 3. Seven books “On Urines,” of which there is no Greek edition; but Ambrose Levon de Nole published a Latin version, 1519, 4to. and this was revised by Goupil, illustrated with notes, and reprinted under the title “De Urinis Hbri septem.” Paris, 1548, 8vo; Basil, 1558, 8vo; Utrecht, 1670, 8vo. 4. A Treatise on the “composition of Medicines,” with the commentaries of John Ruellius; but this is little more than the fifth and sixth books of the Therapeutics. The medical writings of our author were collected and printed, Paris, 1526, 8vo; and again in 1556. In 1567, Henry Stephens published an edition of the whole of his works, fol. translated by different authors amongf the “Medicae artis Principes.” We have also “Actuarii opera,” Paris, 8vo; Leyden, 1556, 3 vols. 12mo. There are some of his works in many libraries which remain in manuscript.

, deacon of the church of Constantinople, in the sixth century, or about 527, presented the emperor Justinian, on his accession to the throne, with a work in seventy-two chapters, which has been called “Charta Regia,” and contains excellent advice on the duties of a Christian prince. This work was long esteemed, and procured the author a place among the best writers of his age. It was first printed, Gr. et Lat. at Venice, 1509, 8vo; and is often printed in the same volume with various editions of Æsop’s fables. The most correct edition is that of Banduri, in a collection entitled “Imperium Orientale,” Paris, 1711, 2 vols. fol. The last edition was published at Leipsic, 1733, 8vo, Gr. et Lat by Graebelius, with notes; but those not of much importance. Louis XIII. in his youth translated it into French, and this was printed in, 1612, 8vo, and often since.

, a rabbi, was born in Africa, in a village near Fez, in 1013. When in his seventy-fifth year, he was involved in a quarrel, which obliged him to go to Spain, where he resided at Cordova. He contributed very much to the reputation of the academy of that place by his learning and works. He died at Lucena in 1103, at the age of ninety. His principal work is an abridgment of the Talmud, so highly esteemed by the Jews, that they study it more than the original, and call it the little Talmud. It has gone through many editions, some with the text only, but mostly with notes. The first and most rare edition is that of Constantinople, 1509; but the most complete, perhaps, is that published by Sabioneta, Venice, 1552.

, 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.

, a lady of extraordinary talents in an age of barbarism, was the daughter of the emperor Alexius Comnenus I. and after his death in 1118, conspired to dethrone his brother John, and place the crown on the head of her husband Nicephorus Briennius; but while she displayed the spirit and intrigue of the most politic of the male sex, her designs were baffled by the want of vigour, and the effeminacy of her husband. She applied herself, however, to such studies as could be prosecuted in that age, and associated much with the learned men of Constantinople, whose fame she endeavoured to rival by the “Alexiad.” or “The life of the emperor Alexius Comnenus,” her father, which she wrote in a style that was much admired. It is divided into fifteen books; and, making some allowance for the flattering portrait given of her father, her frequent digressions, and inaccuracy as to dates, contains a very curious assemblage of facts, and many spirited remarks on the Roman pontiff, whose pretensions to spiritual sovereignty she treats with very little respect; nor does she ever mention the French nation but as a barbarous people, whose name would Hefile the beauty and elegance of history. The president Cousin, however, published a very correct and elegant French translation of the life of Alexius, which is in the 4th volume of the Byzantine historians. There was also an edition printed at the Louvre, with the learned notes of David Hoeschelius, 1651, fol. Her husband died in 1137; but the time of her own death has not been ascertained.

, a learned Greek, a native of Constantinople, came into Italy about the middle of the fifteenth century, but being unfavourably treated by cardinal Bessarion whom he visited, he returned to the island of Crete, and wrote some books; one of them entitled “Iowa, or the Violet-bed,” a collection of apophthegms, has not been published, but of his collection of proverbs, an epitome was published at Basil, 1538, in 8vo, and afterwards the whole in Gr. and Lat. by Pontinus, Leyden, 16.19, 4to, and at tho same place, by P. Paulinus, 1653, 4to. The epitome published at Basil is a very rare book, but a copy is in the British Museum.

There have been various editions of the existing writings of Archimedes. The whole of these works, together with the commentary of Eutocius, were found in their original Greek language, on the taking of Constantinople, from whence they were brought into Italy; and here they were foundry that excellent mathematician John Muller, otherwise called Regiomontanus, who brought them into Germany; where they were, with that commentary, published long after, viz. in 1544, at Basil, most beautifully printed in folio, Gr. & Lat. by Hervagius, under the care of Thomas Gechauff Venatorius. A Latin translation was published at Paris, 1557, by Pascalius Hamellius. Another edition of the whole, in Greek and Latin, was published at Paris, 1615, fol. by David Rivaltus, illustrated with new demonstrations and commentaries; a life of the author is prefixed: and at the end of the volume is added some account, by way of restoration, of the author’s other works, which have been lost. In 1675, Dr. Isaac Barrow published a neat edition of the works, in Latin, at London, 4to; illustrated, and succinctly demonstrated in a new method. But the most complete of any, is the magnificent edition, in folio, printed at the Clarendon press, in Oxford, in 1792. This edition was prepared ready for the press by the learned Joseph Torelli, of Verona, who was discouraged by the prospect of the expence that was likely to attend the publication. He had finished it some time before his death; and, while he was demurring in regard to the mode of publishing it, he was induced by the advice and recommendation of the late earl Stanhope, whose zeal in the cause of science reflects distinguished honour on his name and memory, to commence a treaty with the curators of the Clarendon press at Oxford. Torelli, unwilling to give up the charge of superintending the publication, still hesitated, and died before the transaction was completed. The treaty was again renewed by Alberto Albertini, the executor of the learned editor’s will, who entrusted the work to the university of Oxford. Ah th papers which Torelli had prepared with a view to. this edition, Alhertini presented to the university, and transmitted, at the original cost, all the engravings of figures that were necessary for the completion of it. John Strange, esq. the British resident at Venice, was very active in conducting and terminating the business. The arrangement of the papers, the correction of the press, and the whole superintewdance of the edition, were committed by the university to Mr. (now Dr.) Abraham Robertson, of Christ church, a gentleman in every respect qualified for the trust reposed in him. The Latin translation of this edition is a new one. Torelli also wrote a preface, a commentary on some of the pieces, and notes on the whole. An account of the life and writings of Torelli is prefixed by Clement Sibiliati; of this a sketch will be given in its proper place. At the end a large appendix is added, in two parts: the first being a commentary on Archimedes’s paper upon “Bodies that flow on fluids,” by Dr. Robertson; and the latter is a large collection of various readings in the ms works of Archimedes, found in the library of the last king of France, and of another at Florence, as collated with the Basil edition above mentioned.

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.

, 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.

, patriarch of Constantinople in the beginning of the fifth century, was born at Sebastia, now Soustia, a city of Armenia. He was first educated by the Macedonian monks in the principles of their sect, but when arrived at riper years, he embraced the faith of the Catholic church. In the year 406, being then a priest, he was chosen to succeed St. Chrysostom, who had been deprived of the see of Constantinople, but met with much obstruction from the friends of Chrysostom, and from all the bishops of the East, who considered Chrysostom as unjustly deprived, and refused to communicate with the new patriarch. Atticus, upon this, procured an edict from the emperor to compel them, but finding this produced no other effect than schism and confusion, after the death of Chrysostom he ordered his name to be put in the Diptychs, or ecclesiastical tables, in which were inserted the names of persons who had died in the peace and communion of the church, and those names were read at the altar during divine service. He also wrote to St. Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, earnestly intreating him to do the same, but Cyril answered that he should by that step appear to condemn those who had deposed Chrysostom. Both these letters are extant in Nicephorus Calixtus’s Ecclesiastical History. There is another letter of his extant to Calliopius, by which he appears to have been a man of moderate principles towards those who differed from him in opinion. There are likewise some fragments of a homily on the birth of Christ, in the general collection of the Councils, and a fragment of a letter of his to Eupsychius, quoted by Theodoret. Writers differ much in their estimate of his general character and learning.

, an eminent scholar of the Greek church, who flourished about the end of the twelfth century, was chancellor and library keeper of the church of Constantinople, and provost of that of Blachern. He was also nominated patriarch of Antioch, but never was installed, and was flattered by the emperor Isaac Comnenus, with the hope of being advanced to the patriarchal see of Constantinople, which he never attained. He composed several valuable works, the chief of which are 1. “Cornmentarius in Canones Ss. Apostolorum, &c.” Paris, 1620, fol. but a far better edition, by Beveridge, Oxf. 1672, in his Pandects o*f Canons. 2. “Commentarius in Photii Nomocanonem,” Paris, 1615, 4to. 3. “Collectio ecclesiasticarum Constitutionum,” printed in Justelli Bibliotheca Juris Canon, vol. II. 4. “Responsa ad varias questiones Jus Canonicum spectantes,” in Leunclavius’ Jus Gr. Rom. lib. 2. 5. “Responsa ad interrogationes Murci patriarchs Alexandria!,” Gr. et Lat. ibid. 6. “Meditata, sive responsa ad varios casus,” ibid. &c. The time of Balsamon’s death is not ascertained, but he was certainly alive in 1203, when Constantinople was taken by the Latins. Baronius and other adherents to the church of Rome speak with disrespect of Balsamon, but Dupin, with his usual candour.

, a celebrated antiquary, was born at Ragusa, a small republic situated in Dalmatia, on the coast of the Adriatic, and entered when young into the Benedictine order, in Meleda or Melita, an island not far from Ragusa. After taking the vows at Naples, he travelled over part of Italy, and intended to have settled at Florence, a place favourable for literary pursuits. During this journey his musical Skill, particularly on the organ, procured him a favourable reception at the different convents in his way, and enabled him to travel agreeably and without expense. On his arrival at Florence, although still ft very young man, he was found so able a linguist, that he was appointed to teach the learned languages in various religious houses of his order. The celebrated Montfaucon happening to visit Florence in 1700, he employed Banduri to examine the manuscripts which he wished to consult for a new edition of the works of St. Chrysostom, and conceived such an opinion of him as to recommend him to Cosmo II. grand duke of Tuscany, who then had a design of restoring the fame of the university of Pisa. But representing, at the same time, that it would be advantageous for so young a man to pass some years at Paris, in the abbey of St. Germain, for farther improvement, the grand duke consented, and Banduri arrived at Paris about the end of 1702, and was lodged in the abbey, where his patron Cosmo supplied him with every thing necessary and useful. His first studies here, agreeably to his original design, were turned to divinity, and ecclesiastial history, and in May 1705, he published the prospectus of an edition of the works of Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople, with prefaces, dissertations, and notes. This he intended to be followed by an edition of Thfodoriis of IVIopsuesta’s commentary on the minor prophets, and other ancient commentators. Happcning, however, in the course of his researches, to meet with several documents relative to the antiquities of Constantinople, he was advised to publish them, along with ethers already published and this gave rise to his most celebrated work, “Imperium Orientale, sive Antiquitatis Constantinopolitanae,” &c. Paris, 1711, 2 vols. folio. This work, which forms a valuable, and indeed necessary, supplement to Du Gauge’s works on the same subject, is divided into four parts, and illustrated with commentaries, geographical and topographical tables, medals, &c. Casiniir Oudin made a feeble attack on the merit of this work, but without acquiring any credit. In preparing this work Banduri discovered Du Gangers defects in the medallic history, and therefore began to collect all the medals of the Roman emperors to the last Palaeologus, or the taking of Constantinople, which he published at Paris, under the title “Numismata Imperatorum Romanorum, cum Bibliotheca nummaria, sive auctorum qui de re nummaria scripserunt,” 2 vols. folio, 1718, reprinted by John Albert Fabricius at Hamburgh in 1719, 4to. In both these works Banduri was assisted by the abbe Lama, of Naples, and yet more by M. de la Barre, who was his associate in the academy of the belles lettres. In 1715 he was elected an honorary academician, and was very assiduous in his attendance on that learned body. In 1723 he announced his new edition of Nicephorus and Theodorus of Mopsuesta, as being ready for publication in 4 vols. folio, but they never appeared. In 1724 he was appointed librarian to the duke of Orleans, with apartments in the palace, and there he died of an attack of the gout, Jan. 14, 1743, aged about seventy-two or seventy-three years. His eloge, by M.Freret, is inserted in the Memoirs of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, vol. XVI.

, a native of Aveiro in Portugal, one of the restorers of learning in Spain, in the end of the fifteenth century, was the son of Ferdinand Barbosa, and of Catherine Figuera, who took great pains with his education-. After studying for some time in the Spanish universities, he went into Italy, and at Florence studied under the celebrated Politian. Here he made great progress in the languages, particularly the Greek, which he had an opportunity of acquiring more perfectly from those Greeks, who, at the taking of Constantinople, came into Italy. About the year 1494, Barbosa returned to Spain in order to teach Greek, which had long been forgotten in that country. After teaching it at Salamanca, with Antony of Lebrixa, for twenty years, he was invited to the court of Portugal, to be preceptor to the two young princes Alphonsus and Henry, who were afterwards cardinals, and the latter, king of Portugal in 1578. He remained in this employment for seven years, and afterwards went home, and died of a very advanced age in 1540. Barbosa, with Lebrixa and Resendius, contributed very successfully to the restoration of classical and polite literature in Spain. His works are, 1. “In Aratoris presbyter! poema de Apostolorum rebus gestis commentarium,” Salamanca, 1515, fol. 2. “De Prosodia, relectio, seu de re poetica, ac recte scribendi ratione” and with it, “ Epometria, sive relectio alia,” Salamanca, 4to. 3. “QuodJibeticae questiones,” a work mentioned by Valerius Andreas, but unknown to Antonio. 4. “Epigrammatum li^ bellus,” 8vo.

, a monk of the order of St. Basil, in the fourteenth century, was in 1339 sent by the Greek emperor Andronicus the younger, as ambassador to Philip king of France, and Robert king t)f Sicily, to solicit assistance against the Mahometan power; and as there was little prospect that this would be granted without a previous union between the Greek and Latin churches, he was also instructed to treat of this measure. These two princes gave him letters to pope Benedict XII. to whom he proposed the assembling of a general council; but as he desired, in the mean time, that a reinforcement might be sent to the Greek emperor, the pope replied that the procession of the Holy Ghost was a point already settled, and therefore did not require a new council, and as for the assistance required, it could not be granted unless the Greek church would shew more sincerity in its wishes for a junction. Barlaam, at his return from Constantinople, had a controversy with the monks called Quietists, who were charged with reviving the Messalian heterodoxy. These monks pretended to see the light which appeared upon Mount Tabor at our Saviour’s transfiguration. They asserted this light to be uncreated and incorruptible, though not part of the divine essence and held other strange opinions, which induced Barlaani to accuse Palamas and his disciples of this sect, to the emperor and to the patriarch of Constantinople, on which a council was called in that city in 1340, but BarJaain failed in maintaining his charges, and was himself censured. Barlaam beinp; thus condemned in the east, retired to the west, joined himself to the Latins, and was made bishop of Hieracium or Gerace in Calabria, where he died about 1348. As he changed from the Greeks to the Latins, his writings will be found to be both for and against the latter. Against them he wrote a treatise on the pope’s primacy, printed first in Gr. and Lat. at Oxford, 1592, 4to, by Lloyd, and afterwards at Hainault, 1608, 8vo, with notes by Sahnasius, who again reprinted it, along with his own treatise of the primacy of the pope, Amsterdam, 1645. Barlaam wrote also a treatise of the procession of the Holy Ghost, containing eighteen articles, of which Ailatius gives the titles. For the Latins he wrote a discourse of the union of the two churches, and five letters, published by Bzovius, Canisius, and in the Bibl. Patrnm separately also at Strasburgh, 1572; and a treatise on arithmetic and algebra from his pen was published at Paris, 1600.

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

, was born at Rheims in 1691, and was member of the academy of belles-lettres at Paris, He died in that city Oct. 8, 1785, at the age of ninetyfour, at that time the father of French literature, and perhaps the oldest author in Europe. His great tranquillity of mind, and the gentleness of his disposition, procured him the enjoyment of a long and pleasant old age. In his youth he passed some time in Holland, and was a writer in the Journal de l'Europe. On his return he was much caressed by the learned, and in his latter days had a pension of 2000 livres granted, without any application, by the last king of France. At ninety-two his health was robust, his memory extensive, and he composed and wrote with facility. His works are, 1. “A treatise on the Authority of the Popes,” 1720, 4 vols. 12mo. 2.“History of the Pagan Philosophy,” 1724, 12mo, a learned performance, published in 1754 under the title of “The*ologie pa'ienne.” 3. “General History of Sicily,” 1745, 2 vols. 4to. 4. “Porphyry on Abstinence from Meats,” 1747, 12mo. 5. “History of the Revolutions of Constantinople,” 3 vols. 12mo, 1750. 6. “Life of Grotius,” 1754, 2 vols. 12mo. 7. “Life of Erasmus,” 1757, 2 vols. 12mo. 8. Life of Bossuet,“1761, 12mo. 9.” Life of cardinal du Perron," 1768, 12mo. The historical works of M. de Burigny are esteemed for the accuracy and abundance of the facts they contain. But he is a cold narrator; has but little force and expression in his portraits, and is sometimes rather prolix in his details. His Life of Grotius is a very valuable work, and was published in English in 1754, 8vo. For that of Erasmus, Dr. Jortin may be consulted.

, Lord Baltimore, a descendant of the preceding, and eldest son of Charles, the sixth lord, was born in 1731, and succeeded to the title on the death of his father in 1751, and also to the proprietorship of Maryland. After returning from his travels he married lady Diana Egerton, youngest daughter of the duke of Bridgwater. In 1768 he was indicted at the Kingston assizes for a rape, but acquitted. He went soon after to reside on the continent, and died at Naples, Sept. 14, 1771, without issue by marriage, leaving his fortune to his sister, Mrs. Eden. In 1767, he published “A Tour to the East in the years 1763 and 1764, with remarks on the city of 'Constantinople and the Turks. Also select pieces of Oriental wit, poetry, and wisdom,” Lond. 1767. This book abounds with quotations from the Roman classics, many of which his lordship has translated into very indifferent prose. He also published, but in a confined way, a collection, the title of which is “Gaudia Poetica, Latina, Anglica, et Gallica, Lingua composita, anuo 1769. Augustse Litteris Spathianis, 1770.” It is dedicated, in Latin, to Lin­Ikeiis, and consists of various pieces in Latin, French, and English, prose and verse, of very little merit. A copy, the only one said to be known in this country , was sold at Mr. Isaac Reed’s sale, who likewise had another performance of his lordship’s, equally rare, and valued only for its rarity, entitled “Coelestes et Inferi,” Venetiis, 1771, 4to. The former was sold for 6l. 10s. and the latter for half a guinea.

, emp.eror of Constantinople, and a celebrated Byzantine historian, was born at Constantinople about the year 1295, of a very ancient and noble family; his father being governor of Peloponnesus, and his mother a near relation of the emperor’s. He was bred to letters and to arms, and afterwards to the highest offices of statej in which he acquitted himself in such a manner as to gain the favour of both court and city. He was made prelect of the bedchamber to the emperor Andronicus the elder, but lost his favour about 1320, by addicting himself too much to the interest of his grandson Andronicus. In 1328, when the grandson seized the empire, he loaded Cantacuzenus with wealth and honours; made him generalissimo of his forces; did nothing without consulting him; and fain would have joined him with himself in the government, which Cantacuzenus refused. In 1341 Andronicus died, and left to Cantacuzenus the care of the empire, till his son John Paleologus, who was then but nine years of age, should be fit to take it upon himself: which trust he discharged very diligently and faithfully. But the empress dowager, the patriarch of Constantinople, and some of the nobles, soon growing jealous and envious of Cantacuzenus, formed a party against him, and declared him a traitor: upon which a great portion of the nobility and army besought him to take the empire upon himself, and accordingly he was crowned at Hadrianopolis in May 1342. A civil war raged for five years, and Cantacuzenus was conqueror, who, however, came to the following terms of peace with John Paleologus; viz. that himself should be crowned, and that John should he a partner uith him in the empire, though not upon an equal footing, till he should arrive at years sufficient. He gave him also his daughter Helen, to whom he had formerly been engaged, for a wife; and the nuptials were celebrated in May 1347. But suspicions and enmities soon arising between the new emperors, the war broke out again, and lasted till John took Constantinople in 1355. A few days after that city was taken, Cantacuzenus, unwilling to continue a civil war any longer, abdicated his share of the empire, and retired to a monastery, where he took the habit of a monk, with the new name of Joasaphus, and spent the remainder of his life in study and writing. His wife retired also at the same time to a nunnery, where she changed her own name Irene for the new one of Eugenia.

, an eminent Italian nobleman, was descended from an illustrious and ancient family, and born in his own villa at Casatico, in the durhy of Mantua, Dec. 6, 1478. Oncoming to a proper age, he had masters appointed him, under whom he acquired a, knowledge of the Greek and Latin tongues; in the latter of which he was instructed by Demetrius Chalcondylas, of Constantinople, who then resided at Milan; and in the former, by George Merula. He likewise applied himself to the study of painting, sculpture, and architecture, as appears from the book he wrote in favour of those arts; and he made so great a progress in them, that Raphael Urbino and Michael Angela, though incomparable artists, never thought their works perfect, unless they had the approbation of Castiglione.

The squadron of Spiridof was soon joined by that of Elphinston, a native of England, vice-admiral in the Russian service, and the Turks, though possessing a superior navy, were compelled to shelter themselves in the narrow bay of Tschesme, near Lemnos, where some of them ran aground, and the others were so pressed for room, that it was impossible for them to act. The Russians, perceiving their disadvantageous situation, sent among them some fire-ships, commanded by British officers, and destroyed their whole fleet. This war,however, was not terminated till 1774, when the grand vizir, being invested on all sides by the Russian armies, was reduced to the necessity of si^ninjr a peace, by which were secured the independence of the Crimea, the free navigation of the Russians on the Euxine, and through the Dardanelles, with the stipulation that they should never have more than one armed vessel in the seas of Constantinople, and a cession to them of that tract of land that lies on the Euxine between the Bog and the Danube. Russia, retaining Azof, Togaurok, Kertsch, and Kinburn, restored the rest of her conquests. These terms were undoubtedly favourable to Russia, but various circumstances at home rendered peace peculiarly desirable. The disordered state of the finances, the ravages of the plague, and a spirit of revolt in certain provinces, and above all, the rebellion of Pugatshef, afforded ample employment to the empress’s resources. This Pugatshef was a Cossack, and from some resemblance of features to Peter III. was encouraged to assume his name, and raise a revolt, which for some time threatened serious consequences, but about the end of 1774 it was terminated by the capture of Pugatshef, who was put to death.

, a very learned divine, was born at Pickwell, in Leicestershire, of which parish his father was rector, Dec. 30, 1637. On the 9th of May, 1653, he was admitted into St. JohnVcollege, in Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1656, and that of M. A. in 1660. In August 1662, he was admitted to the vicarage of Islington, in Middlesex-, and some time after became chaplain in ordinary to king Charles 11. He took the degree of D. D. in 1672, and on the 16th of September, 1679, was collated by the archbishop of Canterbury to the rectory of Allhallows the Great, in Thames-street, London. In July 1681, he was incorporated D. D. at Oxford, and in November 1684, he was installed canon of Windsor, upon the death of Mr. John Rosewell; about which time, as Mr. Wood tells us r he became rector of Hasely, in Oxfordshire; but that seems to be a mistake, as the rectory of Hasely is annexed to the deanery of Windsor. He resigned his rectory of Allhallows in 1689, and the vicarage of Islington in 1691; but on the 19th of November before, namely, in 1690, he was admitted to the vicarage of Isleworth, in Middlesex, which being a quiet and retired place, probably suited best his most studious temper. He published: 1. “Primitive Christianity; or the Religion of the ancient Christians in the first ages of the Gospel,” London, 1672, reprinted several times since. 2. “Tabulae Ecclesiastics,” tables of the ecclesiastical writers, Lond. 1674, reprinted at Hamburgh, in 1676, without his knowledge. 3. “Antiquitates Apostolicae: or the history of the lives, acts, and martyrdoms of the holy apostles of our Saviour, and the two evangelists, St. Mark and St. Luke. To which is added an introductory Discourse concerning the three great dispensations of the church, Patriarchal, Mosaical, and Evangelical. Being a continuation of `Antiquitates Christianas,' or the Life and Death of Holy Jesus,” written by Jeremy Taylor, afterward bishop of Down and Connor, Lond. 1676, fol. 4. “Apostolici, or the History of the lives, acts, deaths, and martyrdomsof those who were contemporaries with or immediately succeeded the Apostles as also of the most eminent of the primitive fathers for the first three hundred years. To which is added, a Chronology of the three first ages of the Church,” Lond. 1677, fol. 5. “A Sermon preached before the right honourable the lordmayor, aldermen, and citizens of London, at St. Mary-leBuw, on the fifth of November, M.DC.LXXX.” London, 1680, 4to. 6. “A Dissertation concerning the Government of the Ancient Church, by bishops, metropolitans, and patriarchs. More particularly concerning the ancient power and jurisdiction of the bishops of Rome, and the encroachments of that upon other sees, especially the see of Constantinople;” Lond. 1683, 8vo. 7. “Ecclesiastic!, or the History of the lives, acts, deaths, and writings of the most eminent Fathers of the Church that flourished in the fourth century. Wherein, among other things, an account is given of the rise, growth, and progress of Arianism, and all other sects of that age descending from it. Together with an Introduction, containing an historical account of the state of Paganism under the first Christian emperor,” Lond. 1682, fol. 8. “A Sermon preached before the king at Whitehall, on Sunday, January 18, 1684-5, on Psalm iv. 7. Publisheo 1 by his majesties special command,” Lond. 1685, 4to. 9. “Chartopbylax Ecclesiasticus,” Lond. 1685, 8vo. This is aii improvement of the “Tabulae Ecclesiastics,” above-mentioned, and a kind of abridgment of the “Historia Literaria,” and contams a short account of most of the ecclesiastical writers from the birth of Christ to 1517. 1O. “Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Historia Literaria i. e. A Literary History of Ecclesiastical Writers, in two parts,” fol. the first printed at Lond. 1688; and the second in 1698. 11. “A Serious Exhortation, with some important advices relating to the late cases about Conformity, recommended to the present dissenters from the Church of England.” It is the twenty-second in the “London Cases.” This very learned person died at Windsor, on the 4th of August, 1713, and was buried in Islington church, where a monument was erected to his memory. He was an excellent pud universal scholar, an elegant and polite writer, and a florid and very eloquent preacher. He was thoroughly acquainted with the history and constitution of the Christian church. His works, particularly his Lives of the apostles, Lives of the fathers, and Primitive Christianity, evince his great knowledge of antiquity, and are justly esteemed the best books written upon those important subjects. Yet the “Historia Literaria” is perhaps the work on which his fume will now be thought principally to depend. This very useful work was reprinted at Geneva, in 1705 and 1720, but the best edition is that printed at the Clarendon press, by subscription, in 2 vols. fol, 1740— 1743, which contains the author’s last corrections and additions, and additions by other hands. What share Mr. Henry Wharton had in this work will be noticed in our life of that writer. From a manuscript letter of Cave’s in our possession, it appears that he had much reason to complain of Wharton. During the last twelve years of his life Cave had repeatedly revised this history, and made alterations and additions equal to one third part of the work, all which were carefully incorporated in the new edition. The copy thus improved, he left in the hands of his executors, the lord chief justice Reeve, and the rev. Dr. Jones, canon of Windsor, but they both dying soon after the work went to press, Dr. Daniel Waterland undertook the care of it. The venerable Dr. Watson, bishop of Llandaff, observes, that “Casimiri Oudini Commentarius de Scriptoribus Ecclesix, &c.” Leipsic, 1722, 3 vols. fol. is a kind of supplement to Cave’s “Historia Literaria,” and other works of the same kind.

, a Grecian monk, who lived in the eleventh century, wrote annals, or an abridged history, from the beginning of the world to the reign of Isaac Comnenus, emperor of Constantinople, who succeeded Michael IV. in 1057. This work is no more than an extract from several historians, and chiefly from Georgius Syncellus, whose chronology he has followed from the creation to the reign of Dioclesian. Theophanes is another historian he has made use of from Dioclesian to Michael Curopalates. The next he borrows from is Thracesius Scylitzes from Curopalates to his own time. This compilation, although not executed with much judgment, was probably once in request. It was translated into Latin by Xylander, Basil, 1566, and was again printed at Paris in 1647, 2 vols. folio, with the Latin version of Xylander, and the notes of father Goar, a Dominican.

, a native of Athens, of the fifteenth century, and the scholar of Theodore Gaza, was one of those Greeks who about the time of the taking of Constantinople went into the west. At the invitation of Lorenzo de Medici, he became professor of the Greek language at Florence in 1479; where he had for his rival Angelus Politianus, to whom Laurence had committed the tuition of one of his sons. After the death of Laurence, Chalcondyles was invited to Milan by Lewis Sfortia; which invitation he accepted, either because he was tired of contending with Politian, or because he was hurt with Politian’s acknowledged superiority in Latin learning. Such is the usually-received account, which rests only on the authority of Paul Jovius, who was always hostile to the character of Politian; but Mr. Roscoe in his life of Lorenzo has proved that the story is without foundation. At Milan, however, Chalcondyles taught Greek a long time with great reputation; and did not die before 1510, when there is reason to think he was above 80 years of age. Among the learned Greeks whom pope Nicolas V. sent to Rome to translate the Greek authors into Latin, Chalcondyles was one; from which we may collect, that he probably travelled into the west before the taking of Constantinople in 1453, since Nicolas died in 1455. He published a grammar, of which we shall presently take notice; and under his inspection and care was first published at Florence, in 1499, the Greek Lexicon of Suidas. Pierius Valerianus, in his book “De infelicitate literatorum,” says, that Chalcondyles, though a deserving man in his moral as well as literary character, led nevertheless a very unhappy life; and reckons perpetual banishment from his country among the chief of his misfortunes. Others have mentioned domestic evils that have attended him. The particulars of his life are very imperfectly given. Dr. Hody has probably collected all that now can be found, but he has merely given the notices from various authors, without attempting a regular narrative. Some have thought that he was at one time a printer, and that he printed the folio Homer of Florence, which goes by his name, and which was executed in 1488; but this report no doubt arose from the care he took in correcting the press, as the printers’ names are given in that rare edition. The “domestic evils” above alluded to have a better foundation, as he was unhappy in his wife, whose chastity was suspected, and in his sons: Theophilus, the eldest, who taught Greek at Paris, was assassinated in the streets in a riotous squabble; and two others, Saleucus and Basil, both of promising talents, died young.

, was also a native of Athens, who flourished in the latter part of the fifteenth century, but nothing farther is known of his history, and his name is perpetuated only by his work “De Origine et' rebus gestis Turcoman,” Paris, 1650, fol. containing, in ten books, a history of the Turks from 1298 to 1462. He describes the ruin of the empire of Constantinople, and at the end are the “Annales Sultanorum,” translated into Latin by Leunclavius. There is a French translation of it by Blaise de Vignere, 1660, 2 vols. fol. continued by Mezerai and others. It is esteemed a work of considerable authority.

He was ordained deacon by Meletius, in the year 381, and now began to compose and publish many of his works. Five years after, he was ordained a priest by Flavian, in which office he acquitted himself with so much reputation, that, upon the death of Nectarius, bishop of Constantinople, in the year 397, he was unanimously chosen to fill that see. The emperor Arcadius, however, was obliged to employ all his authority, and even to use some stratagem, before he could seduce Chrysostom from his native Antioch, where he was held in so much admiration and esteem. He sent in the mean time, a mandate to Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, to consecrate Chrysostom bishop of Constantinople; which was done in the year 398, notwithstanding the secret and envious attempts of Theophilus to prevent it. But Chrysostom was no sooner at the head of the church of Constantinople, than that zeal and ardour, for which he was afterwards famous, was employed in endeavouring to effect a general reformation of manners. With this disposition, he begun with the clergy, and next attacked the laity, but especially the courtiers, whom he soon made his enemies; and his preaching is said to have been eminently successful among the lower classes. Nor was his zeal confined altogether within the precincts of Constantinople; it extended to foreign parts, as appears from his causing to be demolished some temples and statues in Phoenicia; but all writers are agreed that his temper, even in his best duties, was violent, and afforde'd his enemies many advantages.

The only manuscript copy of this epistle, which exists in the world, as far as we know, is in the British Museum, written on vellum, and bound up with the Alexandrian Bible. It is said to have been written by Thecla, a woman of rank, in the fourth century, which shows how highly it was esteemed as far down as. the council of Nice. When Cyril, patriarch of Alexandria, was translated to the patriarchate of Constantinople, in the seventeenth century, he brought with him out of Egypt a valuable collection of manuscripts, and among them this copy of the Bible and Clemens’s Epistle, which he generously sent as a most valuable present to king Charles I. by sir Thomas Roe, at that time his majesty’s ambassador at the Porte. The first edition of it was printed at Oxford, by P. Junius, Gr. and Lat. 1633, 4to, again by Dr. Fell, Gr. and Laf. ibid. 1677, and at London, 1687, 8vo, by Paul Colornesius; but the best is said to be that by Wotton, Gr. and Lat. Cambridge, 1718, 8vo. The first English translation was by William Burton in 1647, and afterwards by abp. Wake, a fourth edition of which was printed in 1737, with the epistles of the other apostolic fathers. We know of no other English translation, unless a very scarce and beautifully printed one, by an anonymous author, Aberdeen, 1768, 12mo, more literal than Wake’s, and with a very sensible preface. Other writings are attributed to Clemens, particularly a second epistle, but none of them are considered as genuine.

, one of the curopalates, or officers who had the care of the imperial palace of Constantinople, appears to have flourished in the latter part of the fifteenth century, and wrote a treatise concerning the origin of that city in the Greek language, and another concerning the officers of the palace, and those of the great church in that city. These works were translated into the Latin by George Douza and Francis Junius, and printed in Greek and Latin at Paris, in 1615. His Antiquities of Constantinople were published by Goar, at the royal press, in 1648, fol.

, in Latin Angelus Colotius, an elegant Italian scholar, descended of an ancient and noble family, was born at Jesi, in 1467. He obtained in his youth the honour of knighthood, which was conferred upon him by the hands of Andreas Palaeologus Despota, when, then a refugee at Rome, he was recognized as the legitimate heir to the imperial diadem of Constantinople. Colocci was a disciple of Georgius Valla, under whom he made great progress in philosophy, but particularly in polite literature. For political reasons, which are detailed J>y Ubaldinus, in his life of this illustrious scholar, the family of Colocci were obliged, in the pontificate of Innocent VIII. to abandon the city of Rome where they had taken up their residence. Angelo, in consequence, repaired to Naples, where he became a member of the Pontana academy, under the assumed name of Angelus Colotius Bassus, and acquired an intimacy with the most eminent poets and wits of his time. Six years afterwards, Raving been permitted to return to his country, he divided his time betwixt his literary pursuits and the official duties entrusted to him by his countrymen, who sent him as ambassador to Alexander VI. in 1498. He then took up his residence at Rome, where his hause became an elegant and liberal resort for men of learning and genius, and where the academy of Rome, which after the death of Pomponius Laetus had fallen into decay, was again revived under his care. Here also his extensive gardens, which, in addition to the most captivating scenery resulting from a happy combination of nature and art, were adorned with a profusion of statues, inscriptions, and other elegant remains of classic antiquity, revived Uie magnificence and amenity of the celebrated gardens of Saliust, of which they were supposed to occupy the actual site. On such objects, and on the patronage of learning and learned men, he employed his riches. The senate of Rome, struck with his liberality, bestowed on him the title of patrician, which extended to his family; and he was held in the highest estimation by the popes Leo X. Clement VII. and Paul III. Leo, independently of 4000 crowns with which he rewarded him for some verses in his praise, made him his secretary, and gave him the reversion of the bishopric of Nocera in 1521, Colocci having at that time survived two wives. This gift was afterwards confirmed to him by Clement VII. who also appointed him governor of Ascoli. These favours, however, were insufficient to secure him when Rome was sacked in 1527. On that occasion, his house was burnt, his gardens pillaged, and he was obliged to pay a large sum for his life and liberty. He then went for some time to his country, and on coming back to Rome, his first care was to invite together the members of the academy who had been dispersed. In 1537 he took possession of the bishopric of Nocera, and died at Rome in 1549. His Latin and Italian poems were published in 1772, but our authority does not mention where or in what shape. Most of them had, however, previously appeared in his life by Ubaldinus, Rome, 1673, 8vo.

After Constantine had settled the affairs of Rome, he went to Milan, where he celebrated the marriage of his sister with the emperor of the East, Licinius. In this town it was that these two emperors issued out the first edict in favour of the Christian religion, by which they granted liberty of conscience to all their subjects: and a second soon after, by which they permitted the Christians to hold religious assemblies in public, and ordered all the places, where they had been accustomed to assemble, to be given up to them. A war broke out in 314, between Constantine and Licinius, which subjected the Christians to a persecution from the latter; but after a battle or two, in which neither had any reason to triumph, a peace ensued, and things returned to their usual course. Constantine now applied himself entirely to regulate and adjust the affairs of the church. He called councils, heard disputes and settled them, and made laws in favour of the Christians. In 324, another war broke out between these two emperors; the result of which was, that Constantine at length overcame Licinius, and put him to death. He was now sole master of the empire, without any controul, so that the Christians had every thing to hope, and apparently nothing to fear: nor were they disappointed. But the misfortune was, that the Christians were no sooner secure against the assaults of enemies from without, but they fell to quarrelling among themselves. The dispute between Arius and Alexander was agitated at this time; and so very fiercely, that Constantino was forced to call the council of Nice to put an end to it. He assisted at it himself, exhorted the bishops to peace, and would not hear the accusations they had to offer against each other. He banished Arius and the bishops of his party, ordering at the same time his books to be burnt; and made the rest submit to the decision of the council. He had founded innumerable churches throughout the empire, and ordered them to be furnished and adorned with every thing that was necessary. He went afterwards to Jerusalem, to try if he could discover the sepulchre of Jesus Christ; and caused a most magnificent church to be built at Bethlehem. About this time he gave the name of Constantinople to the town of Byzantium, and endowed it with- all the privileges of ancient Rome. After this he laboured more abundantly than ever he had done yet, in aggrandizing the church, and publishing laws against heretics. He wrote to the king of Persia in favour of the Christians, destroyed the heathen temples, built a great many churches, and caused innumerable copies of the Bible to be made. In short, he did so much for religion, that he might be called the head of the church, in things which concerned its exterior policy. The orthodox Christians have nevertheless complained of him a little for listening to the adversaries of Atbanasius, and consenting, as he did, to banish him: yet he would not suffer Arius or his doctrines to be re-established, but religiously and constantly adhered to the decision of the council of Nice.

What became of the notes and observations he made in his long peregrinations, is unknown. The following only, which he sent to his friends in England, were printed in his absence: 1. “Letters from Asmere, the court of the great mogul, to several persons of quality in England, concerning the emperor and his country of East-India,” 1616, 4to, in the title of which is our author’s picture, riding on an elephant. 2. “A Letter to his mother Gertrude, dated from Agra in East India, containing the speech that he spoke to the great mogul in the Persian lauguage.” 3. “Certain Observations from the mogul’s court and East India.” 4. “Travels to, and observations in, Constantinople and other places in the way thither, and in his journey thence to Aleppo, Damascus, and Jerusalem.” 5. “His oration, Purus, Putus Coryatus; quintessence of Coryate; spoken extempore, when Mr. llugg dubbed him a knight on the ruins of Troy, by the name of Thomas Coryate the first English knight of Troy.” 6. “Observations of Constantinople abridged.” All these are to be found in the “Pilgrimages” of Sam Purchas. 7. “Diverse Latin and Greek epistles to learned men beyond the seas;” some of which are in his “Crudities.” Among his persecutors was Taylor the Water-poet, who frequently endeavours to raise a laugh at his expence. To Coryate’s works may be added a copy of verses, in the Somersetshire dialect, printed in Guidott’s “Collection of Treatises on the Bath Waters,” 1725, 8vo.

, president of the Mint, one of the forty members of the French academy, was born Aug. 12, 1627, at Paris. He was intended for the ecclesiastical profession, and admitted bachelor of the Sorbonne; but, quitting that situation afterwards, was received advocate, married, and attended the bar till 1657, when he was appointed president of the Mint. He assisted in the “Journal des Savans” from 1687 to 1702. President Cousin was well acquainted with ecclesiastical antiquity, and learned Hebrew at the age of 70, that he might spend his last years in reading the Scripture in the original. He died. February 26, 1707, at Paris, aged 80. He founded six scholarships at the college of Laon, and left his library to the abbey of St. Victor, with 20,000 livres; the interest to be employed in augmenting that library. His works are, “The Roman History of Xiphilin,” &c. 4to, or 2 vols. 12mo, a French translation of the “Ecclesiastical Histories of Eusebius, Socrates, Sozomenus, and Theodoret,” 4 vols. 4to, or 6 vols. 12 mo: there are often hut five, because the History of Constantine has been taken out, and added to that of Constantinople. A translation of the authors of the “Byzantine History,” 1672—1674, in 8 vols. 4to, or 11 12mo and some other works. These translations are written in very good French.

But what affords the most memorable instance of Cyril’s fiery zeal, is his quarrel with Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople. Nestorius had urged in some of his homilies, that the virgin Mary ought not to be called the mother of God; and these homilies coming to Egypt, raised no small disturbances among the monks there. Cyril wrote a pastoral letter to the monks, in which he maintained, that she was indeed the mother of God, and therefore ought to be called so. As soon as Nestorius heard of this letter, he openly declared Cyril his enemy, and refused to have any iurther commerce with him. Cyril upon this, wrote Nestorius a very civil letter, without approving his doctrine; which Nestorius answered as civilly, without retracting it. The affair was laid at length before pope Celestine; after which Cyril, supported by the pontiff’s authority, began, to issue forth anathemas against Nestorius and his doctrine, and the quarrel rose to such a pitch, that it was necessary to convene a general council at Ephesus, in order to put an end to it: where some bishops of the East, who were assembled on the part of Nestorius, gave Cyril so warm an opposition, that they got him deprived of his bishopric, and thrown into prison. But he was soon set at liberty and restored, and gained a complete victory over Nestorius, who was deposed from his see of Constantinople in the year 431 Cyril returned to Alexandria, where he died in the year 444. His works are voluminous, and have been often printed. They consist of the commentaries upon the Pentateuch, called “Glaphyra, &c.” Isaiah, the 12 lesser prophets, and St. John’s gospel; 17 books on the adoration and worship of God in spirit and truth, composed in form of a dialogue; dialogues on the holy and consubstantial trinity, and on the incarnation; a discourse of the orthodox faith; homilies, letters, and apologies. John Aubert, canon of Laon, published the best edition in Greek and Latin, 1638, 6 vols. fol. which are bound in seven, because vol. 5th consists of two parts. St. Cyril’s style is diffuse and singular; his writings contain much subtilty, metaphysical reasoning, and all the niceties of logic. St. Isidore, of Pelusium, accuses him of acting with too much zeal and heat during the disputes in which he was engaged; but the catholic writers think that he atoned for that fault by his piety and innocent life.

, a famous patriarch of Alexandria, afterwards of Constantinople, was born November 12, 1572, in the island of Candia. He studied at Venice and Padua, and was pupil to the celebrated Margunius, bishop of Cythera. Cyril went afterwards into Germany, embraced the doctrine of the reformed religion, and attempted to introduce it into Greece; but the Greeks opposed it, and he wrote a confession of faith, in which he defended his principles. Having been archimandrite, he was raised to the patriarchate of Alexandria, and, some time after, elected to that of Constantinople, 1621; but, continuing firm in his connections with the protestants, he was deposed, and confined in the island of Rhodes. Some time after, however, he was restored to his dignity, at the solicitation of the English ambassador; but in 1638 he was carried from Constantinople and put to death near the Black Sea, by order of the grand signior, in the most cruel manner. He had a mind much superior to the slavish condition of his country, and laboured to promote the interests of genuine Christianity, amidst much opposition and danger. He had collected a very excellent library, rich in Greek Mss. a specimen of which, the celebrated Codex Alexandrinus, one of the most ancient and valuable manuscripts in the world, he presented to king Charles I. by his ambassador sir Thomas Roe. The fate of his other Mss. was peculiarly lamented. In order to secure them, the Dutch resident at Constantinople sent them by a ship bound for Holland, which was wrecked in sight of land, and all her cargo lost.

, of Antioch, priest of that church, and afterwards bishop of Tarsus in the fourth century, was disciple of Sylvanus, and master of St. John Chrysostom, of St. Basil, and of St. Athanasius, who all bestow great praises on his virtues and his zeal for the faith: praises which were confirmed by the first council of Constantinople. St. Cyril, on the contrary, calls him the enemy of the glory of Jesus Christ, and regards him as the fore-runner of Nestorins. Diodorus was one of the first commentators who adhered to the literal sense of Scripture, without expatiating in the fields of allegory; but only some fragments of his writings are come down to us, in the “Catena patrum Grrccorum.” His contemporaries and immediate successors differ very essentially as to his real character, as may be seen in our authorities.

, was a Greek historian, concerning the life of whom it is only known that he was employed inseveral negotiations. He wrote a history, which is still extant, of the Grecian empire, from the reign of the elder Andronicus, to the fall of that empire. Ducas is preferred to Chalcondylas, though he writes in a barbarous style, because he relates facts not to be found elsewhere, and was an attentive witness of what passed. His work was printed at the Louvre, in 1649, folio, under the care of Ismael Bouillaud, who accompanied it with a Latin version and learned notes. The president Cousin translated it afterwards into French, and it concludes the 8th volume of his History of Constantinople, printed at Paris, in 1672 and 1674, 4to; and reprinted in Holland, 16S5, 12mo.

, the founder of a sect of heretics in the fourth century, was a native of Arabissus in Armenia Minor, and patriarch of Antioch, to which he was advanced in the year 356, and of Constantinople, to which he was promoted in the year 359, and which he retained till his death in the year 370. He was a great defender of the Arian doctrine, though represented as somewhat fluctuating and unsteady in his principles, and was a bitter persecutor of the catholics. Of his works no remains are extant, except some fragments of a treatise “De Incarnatione Dei verbi;” to which Cave has referred. The Eudoxians adhered to the errors of the Arians and Eunomians, maintaining that the Son was created out of nothing that he had a will distinct and different from that of the Father, &c.

, the patriarch of Alexandria, a man of learning and piety, succeeded John IV. in that office in the year 581. He exerted himself with great effect against the heresies of his time, and wrote an able exposition of the orthodox faith, in a letter which he addressed to Eutychius, patriarch of Constantinople. He wrote also against the Novatians; but of his works there are only a few fragments remaining. He is said to have died in the year 608.

. Of the bishops of this name who lived in the fourth or fifth centuries, the following only seem deterving of brief notice. They were in general polemics, and their lives were spent in contrdversy, for or against the Arian doctrines. Of these, Eusebius, bishop of Berytus and Nicometftfl in the fourth century, adopted the errors of Arius, persecuted St. Athanasius, was assiduous about the emperor Constantino till his death, and gained Constantius and all the imperial family to his party. Eusebius usurped the see of Constantinople, after procuring the banishment of Paul, the legal bishop, and died in the year 342.

, a learned critic of the twelfth century, was born at Constantinople. He was at first master of the rhetoricians (rhetorum magister), and afterwards deacon of the great church, under the patriarchate of Lucas Chrysobergus, who arrived at that dignity in 1155, and appears to have conferred many favours on Eustatius. Having been, elected bishop of Myra in Lycia, he had accepted the office, and was about to be consecrated, when the emperor Emanuel Comnenus sent a cong6 d'eLre to the synod, enjoining them to choose him archbishop of Thessalonica. In this he displayed great prudence, knowledge of business, and extensive learning, as appears by his works. In 1180 he was one of the prelates who remonstrated against the order of Emanuel Comnenus to erase from the Greek catechism, a censure of what is said of God by Mahomet in the Alcoran. Five years after, we find Eusebius displaying his spirit and regard for his flock in a remarkable manner. Andronicus Comnenus, cousin-german of the emperor Emanuel, had usurped the throne, fey causing Alexis, the son and successor of Emanuel, to be strangled in 1183. This act of barbarity procured Andronicus many enemies, and among the rest Alexis Comnenus, the nephew of Emanuel, to whom he had been cup-bearer, and who was afterwards banished to Scythia by him. Alexis went then to Sicily, to the court of William II. surnamed the Good, and excited him to declare war against the empire of Constantinople. The king of Sicily, who appears to have wanted little persuasion on this occasion, raised an army, passed the straights, and took the city of Duras. He then went by sea to Thessalonica, which he besieged both by sea and land. Eustatkius would not for a moment quit his flock amidst so many dangers, but shut himself up in the city, endured the hardships ofthe siege, with the greatest fortitude, and exhorted his people to bear with Christian patience the chastisements of the Almighty. The city was at last taken by the cowardice of the governor, and was pillaged, the churches themselves not being spared, and the inhabitants were treated with the utmost cruelty by the conquerors. Eustathius, not fearing their power, addressed himself with so much spirit and eloquence to the Sicilian commanders, as to obtain a considerable alleviation of the sufferings of the inhabitants, from which they were entirely delivered the following year. Nicetas attributes this in a great measure to the prayers of their archbishop. The time of his death is unknown, but he appears to have been alive in 1194.

There was another Eustratius, a priest of Constantinople, whose time is not exactly known, but conjectured to be the sixth century. Photius has given a character of his writings, and an account of a work by him on the state of the dead, and a life of the patriarch Eutychius.

a Greek monk of Constantinople, was in favour with the emperor Alexis Comnenus, whom he survived, the emperor dying in 1118. At the command of Alexis, he composed his great work, entitled “Panoplia dogmatica Orthodoxos fidei,” or, the whole armour of the doctrine of the orthodox faith, against heretics of all kinds; which has lately been rendered famous by being cited in the dispute concerning 1 John v. 7. It was printed at Leyden, 1556, 8vo, and reprinted at Tergovist in Wallnchia, 1710. He wrote besides nine other works on various theological subjects, which are enumerated by Fabricius, in his Biblioth. Graec. \. v. c. 11 the principal are a commentary on the four Gospels and the Psalms, and on Solomon’s Song these commentaries are literal, moral, and allegorical but in the use of allegory, he is more rational than most of the authors of the thirteenth century. In some of his works he very highly praises Alexis for his theological knowledge and excellence in disputation It is not known at what time he died. We have mentioned him above as the supposed author of a funeral oration on the Greek commentator Eustathius. There is also a Georgius Zigabenus mentioned by Fabricius.

, a monk at the latter end of the fourth century, surnamed Ponticus from the place of his nativity, not far from the Pontus Euxinus, was at first lecturer of the congregation at Caesarea, afterwards deacon, and lastly made archdeacon of Constantinople, by Gregory Nazianzen, by whom he had been instructed in the Scriptures; but was obliged to fly that country in the year 385, on account of some suspicions thrown out against him by a person of consequence concerning his wife; upon this, he devoted himself to the monastic life at Jerusalem, and afterwards in Syria, where be espoused the tenets of Origen, and propagated others which afterwards led to the Pelagian heresy. He wrote, 1. “Orationes, sive preces centum.” 2. “Gnosticus, sive de iis, qui cognitionis munere donati sunt, in anachoretarum usnm, sive elementarium, lib. ii.” 3. “Περὶ διαφόρον λογισμῶν,” which tractate is usually ascribed to Evagrius Scholasticus, but without foundation. 4. “Monachus, sive de vita activa.” 5. “Anthirrticus adversus tentantes daeniones,” &c. All these are found in the “Bibl. Patrum,” and in Cotelerius’s “Monum. Eccl. Gnjec.” He died A.D. 399.

, a very learned lawyer and scholar, was born in 1580, at Aix in Provence, whither his father, a native of Nismes in Languedoc, had retired during the civil wars. After making very distinguished progress in Greek and Latin, the belles lettres, and jurisprudence, he was admitted doctor of laws in 1606, and then became an advocate in the parliament of Aix. Among the many friends of distinction to whom his talents recommended him, were M. de Peiresc, a counsellor of that parliament, and William de Vair, first president. By the interest of this last-mentioned gentleman, he was promoted to the law-professorship at Aix, which office he filled until 1617, when Du Vair being made keeper of the seals, invited him to Paris. On Du Vair’s death in 1621, Fabrot resumed his office in the university of Aix, where he was appointed second professor in 1632, and first professor in 1638. At this time he was absent, having the preceding year gone to Paris to print his notes on the institutes of Theophilus, an ancient jurist. This work he dedicated to the chancellor Seguier, who requested him to remain in Paris, and undertake the translation of 1 the Basilics, or Constitutions of the Eastern emperors, and gave him a pension of 2000 livres. This work, and his editions of some of the historians of Constantinople, which he published afterwards, procured him from the king the office of counsellor of the parliamentof Provence, but the intervention of the civil wars rendered this appointment null. During his stay at Paris, however, several of the French universities were ambitious to add him to the number of their teachers, particularly Valence and Bourges, offers which his engagements prevented his accepting. His death is said to have been hastened by the rigour of his application in preparing his new edition of Cujas; but his life had already been lengthened beyond the usual period, as he was in his seventy-ninth year when he died, Jan. 16, 1659. His works are: 1. “Antiquite’s de la ville de Marseille,” Lyons, 1615 and 1632, 8vo. This is a translation from the Latin ms. of Raymond de Soliers. 2. “Ad tit. Codicis Theodosiani de Paganis, Sacrificiis, et Templis notae,” Paris, 1618, 4to. 3. “Exercitationes duae de tempore humani partus et de numero puerperii,” Aix, 1628, 8vo; Geneva, 1629, 4to, with a treatise by Carranza, on natural and legitimate birth. 4. “Car. Ann. Fabroti Exercitationes XII. Accedunt leges XIV. quae in libris digestarum deerant, Gr. et Lat. mine primum ex Basilicis editnc,” Paris, 1639, 4to. 5. rt Thcophili Antecessoris InstituiK-iies,“Gr. et Lat. Paris, 1638 and 1657, 4to. 6.” Inatiuuiones Justiniani, cum notis Jacobi Cujacii,“ibid. I, 12mo. 7.” Epistolae de Mutuo, cum responsionc Claudii Salmasii ad ^gidium Menagium,“Leyden, 1645, 8vo. 8.” Replicatio adversus C. Salmasii refutationem,“&c. Paris, 1647, 4to. 9.” Basilicorum libri sexaginta,“Gr. et Lat. ibid. 1647, 7 vols. folio. The whole of the translation of this elaborate collection of the laws and constitutions of the Eastern emperors, was performed by Fabrot, except books 38, 39, and 60, which had been translated by Cujas, whose version he adopted. 10.” Nicetae Acominati Choniatoe Historia,“ibid. 1647, fol. 11.” Georgii Cedreni Compendium historiarum,“Gr. et Lat. ibid. 1647, 2 vols. fol. 12.” Theophylacti Simocattse Hist, libri octo,“ibid. 1647, fol. 13.” Anastasii Bibliothecarii Hist. Ecclesiastica,“ibid. 1649, fol. 14.” Laonici Chalcondyla? Hist. de origine ac rebus gestis Turcarum, libri decem,“ibid. 1650. fol. 15.” Praelectio in tit. Decret. Gregorii IX. de vitaet honestate Clericorum,“ibid. 1651, 4to. 16.” Constantini Manassis Breviarium Historicum,“Gr. et Lat. ibid, 1655, fol. 17.” Cujacii Opera omnia,“ibid. 1658, 10 vols. fol. 15.” J. P. de Maurize Juris Canonici Selecta,“ibid. 1659, 4to. 19.” Notae in T. Balsamonis collectionem constitutionum Ecclesiasticarum." This is inserted in the second volume of Justel and VoePs Bibliotheca of Canon law. Ruhnkenius published a supplementary volume to his edition of Cujas at Leyden in 1765.

, bishop of Hermianum in Asia, is noticed by ecclesiastic writers as having been present at the council of Constantinople, held by pope Vigilius in the year 547, where he was a strenuous defender of the writings called The Three Chapters,“which the council of Chalcedon had pronounced orthodox. The works so named were, 1. The writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia. 2. The books which Theodoret of Cyrus wrote, against the twelve anathemas published by Cyril against the Nestorians. 3. The letter which Ibas of Edessa had written to Maris, a Persian, concerning the council of Ephesus, and the condemnation of Nestorius. The question of condemning these writings, had been raised by Theodore bishop of Csesarea, for the sake of weakening the authority of the council of Chalcedon, and crushing the Nestorians. The emperor Justinian listened to this prelate, published an edict against The Three Chapters in the year 544, and in the council of Constantinople above-mentioned, forced the pope Vigilius to accede to the same sentence. Vigilius, agitated between the contending parties, changed his opinion and conduct four times; but Facundus remained firm, and was banished for his perseverance. He wrote twelve books on the subject, addressed to Justinian, which are still extant, and one against Mutianus, but^in fatft^ against Vigilius; both published with notes, by P. Sirmond, in 1629. There is also an” Epistola Catholics fidei pro defensione trium capitulorum," added to the edition of 1675. His style is animated, but he is frequently deficient in moderation.

, patriarch of Antioch, in the fourth century, was a man of illustrious birth, and still superior virtues, and was placed on the patriarchal throne during the life of Paulinus. This election being confirmed by the council of Constantinople in the year 382, was the origin of a schism, which was terminated by the prudence of Flavian, and the death of his rival, Paulinus. After this, he evinced his zeal for orthodoxy by prosecuting the Arians, and he expelled the Messalian heretics from his diocese. When the inhabitants of Antioch, vexed at a new tax imposed to celebrate the tenth year of the emperor’s reign, had proceeded to various acts of outrage, particularly against the statues of the emperor and empress, Flavian interceded with Theodosius for them, and obtained their pardon by his eloquence. This happened in the year 387. He died in the year 404, after having been patriarch thirteen years. He wrote some epistles and homilies, of which fragments only remain.

, patriarch of Constantinople in the fifth cen tury, succeeded Proclus in that dignity, in the year 447; and although Chrysaphius, favourite of the younger Theodosius, wished to drive him from his see, Flavian despised his menaces. In his time arose the Eutychian heresy, which he condemned in a synod held ut Constantinople. But the partizans of Eutyches condemned and deposed Flavian in the year 449, in the council called “Latrocinium Ephesinnm,” or “Conventus Latronum,” the “Assembly of Robbers.” Dioscurus bishop ol Alexandria, was placed at the head of this council by Tlicodosius, who carried matters with such violence, that Flavian was personally mal-treated, publicly scourged, and banished to Hypacpa, in Lydia, where he died soon after, in consequence of this scandalous usage. Before his death he appealed to Leo, and this appeal produced another council, in which Eutyches was condemned, and the savage Dioscorus deposed. Flavian was the author of “Two Letters” to pope Leo, which are printed in the fourth volume of the “Collectio Conciliorum,” and of a “Declaration of Faith delivered to the emperor Theodosius.”

, commonly called Du Cange, a learned Frenchman, was descended from a good family, and born at Amiens in 1610. After being taught polite literature in the Jesuits college there, he went to study the Jaw at Orleans, and was sworn advocate to the parliament of Paris in 1631. He practised some time at the bar, but without intending to make it the business of his life. He then returned to Amiens, where be devoted himself to study, and ran through all sorts of learning, languages and philosophy, law, physic, divinity, and history. In 1668, he went and settled at Paris; and soon after a proposal was laid before Colbert, to collect all the authors who at different times had written the history of France, and to form a body out of them. This minister liking the proposal, and believing Du Fresne the best qualified for the undertaking, furnished him with memoirs and manuscripts for this purpose. Du Fresne wrought upon these materials, and drew up a large preface, containing the names of the authors, their character and manner, the time in which they lived, and the order in which they ought to be arranged. Being informed from the minister that his plan was not approved, and that he must adopt another, and convinced that if he followed the order prescribed, the whole work would be spoiled, he frankly told his employers that since he had not been happy enough to please those in authority, his advice was, that they should look out some of the best hands in the kingdom; and at the same time he returned them all their memoirs. (See Bouquet). Being thus disengaged from a tedious and laborious undertaking, he finished his Glossary of low Latin, or “Glossarium Mediæ et infimæ Latinitatis,” which was received with general commendation; and though Hadrian Valesius, in his preface to the Valesiana, notes everal mistakes in it, it is nevertheless a very excellent and useful work. It was afterwards enlarged by the addition of more volumes; and the edition of Paris, by Carpentier, in 1733, makes no less than six in folio; to which Carpentier afterwards added four of supplement. Both have been since excellently abridged, consolidated, and improved, in 6 vols. 8vo, published at Halle, 1772 1784. His next performance was a “Greek Glossary of the middle age,” consisting of curious passages and remarks, most of which are drawn from manuscripts very little known. This work is in 2 vols. folio. He was the author and editor also of several other performances. He drew a genealogical map of the kings of France. He wrote the history of Constantinople under the French emperors, which was printed at the Louvre, and dedicated to the king. H published an historical tract concerning John Baptist’s head, some relics of which are supposed to be at Amiens. He published, lastly, editions of Cinnamus, Nicephorus, Anna Commena, Zonaras, and the Alexandrian Chronicon, with learned dissertations and notes.

, so called from the trade of a fuller, which he exercised in his monastic state, intruded himself into the see of Antioch, in the fifth century, and after having been several times deposed and condemned on account of the bitterness of his opposition to the council of Chalcedon, was at last fixed in it, in the year 482, by the authority of the emperor Zeno, and the favour of Acacius, bishop of Constantinople, Among the innovations which he introduced to excite discord in the church, was an alteration in the famous hymn which the Greeks called Tris-agion. After the words “O God most holy, &c.” he ordered the following phrase to be added in the eastern churches, “who has suffered for us upon the cross.” His design in this was to raise a new sect, and also to fix more deeply in the minds of the people, the doctrine of one nature in Christ, to which he was zealously attached. His adversaries, and especially Fcelix, the Roman pontiff, interpreted this addition in a quite different manner, and charged him with maintaining, that all the three persons of the Godhead were crucified and hence his followers were called Theopaschites. To put an end to the controversy, the emperor Zeno published in the year 482 the “Henoticon,” or decree of onion, which was designed to reconcile the parties, and Fullo signed it; but the effects of the contest disturbed the church for a long time after his death, which happened in the year 486.

bishop of Rome, elevated to that see in the year 492, was successor to Felix II. He was engaged, as his predecessor had been, in the disputes between the eastern and western churches; and particularly contended with Euphemius, patriarch of Constantinople, about the name of Acacius, which the latter refused to expunge from the sacred list. He is said to have assembled a /council of seventy bishops at Rome, in the year 494, where a decree was passed onthe subject of canonical and apo-' cryphal books but the existence of the decree, if not of the council, is doubted by Cave, for very strong reasons. He died Nov. 19, 046. Several works of his are extant, among which are, 1. Epistles. 2. A volume on the power of Anathema. 3. Against some Romans who continued to celebrate the Lupercalia. 4. Against the Pelagian heresy. 5. A book against Eutyches and Nestorius, all which are in the “Bibl. Patrum,” or in the “Collectio Conciliorum.” Dupin seems to have a very indifferent opinion of his writings, and there is little in his life that can be interesting unless in its connection with the history of the papal struggles for power.

, one of the Byzantine historians, flourished about the year 940, and, by order of Constantine Porphyrogenitus wrote a history of Constantinople, in four books, from Leo the Armenian, to Basilius the Macedonian, the most complete ms. of which was in the library of St. Paul, at Leipsic. Kuster Olearius, Bergler, and several other learned men, had proposed to publish this history, but declining it, it was printed at Venice in 17:53, by Pasquali, in the 23d volume of his edition of the Byzantine historians, in such a manner, that Menckenius heavily laments the fate of the author, who, after the efforts of so many most learned men, “fell at last,” he says, “into the impure hands of the Venetians, whence he came forth disfigured in the most miserable manner.” Bergler’s copy, the same which was in the library of St. Paul, was afterwards the property of Saxius, but what became of it after his death we have not learned.

, patriarch of Constantinople, who succeeded Anatolius in the year 458, is recorded for having very diligently restored the discipline of his see, which he found greatly impaired, and for making many good regulations. He wrote a commentary on Daniel, and many homilies; but none of his works are extant except a circular epistle against simony, inserted in vol. IV. of the “Collect. Concil.” and a fragment of a work against the anathemas of Cyril. His character is that of an eloquent and able theologian. He died in the year 471.

, a distinguished scholar and traveller, was born 1490, at Albi. After travelling over France, and into Italy, he spent some time, at his return, with George d'Armagnac, bishop of Rhodes, afterwards cardinal, who was his patron; and, at this prelate’s request, wrote his 16 books on the nature of animals, “De vi et natura Animalium,” Lyons, 1533, 4to, extracted from Ælian, Porphyry, Heliodorus, and Oppian to which he has added his own observations, and a book of the fish found at Marseilles. He dedicated this work to Francis I. and entreated him, in the dedication, to send some learned men into foreign countries, at his own expence. Francis approved this plan, and the author was sent to the Levant some time after but, receiving nothing from the king during his stay there, he was obliged, at the king’s death, 1547, to enlist himself in the service of Soliman II. for a maintenance. In 1550, however, he returned to France with M. d‘Aramont, ambassador from that kingdom to the Porte; he went afterwards to cardinal d’Armagnac at Rome, being entrusted with the affairs between France and the holy see, and died in that city in 1555. Besides his work above mentioned, he left “Elephanti descriptio,” 8vo; “De Bosphoro Thracio,” 24to; “De Topographia Constantinouoleos,” 24to; and in Banduri’s Imperium Orientate, editions of Demetrius of Constantinople in “Rei Accipitrariae Auctores,” 1612, 4toj of Tbeodpret’s “Commentary on the Twelve minor Prophets;” and of the “Hist, of Ferdinand, king of Arragon,” by Laurentius Valla.

, was one of the Byzantine historians, but biographers are not agreed as to the period when he lived. Some years ago, professor Walchius published in the Gottingen Transactions an inquiry into this subject, but was obliged to confess that he could arrive at no probable conclusion. Some place Glycas in the twelfth, and some in the fifteenth century. No ancient record or writer mentions even his name, and all that is known of him has been gleaned from his works. It appears that he was a native of Constantinople; but passed a great part of his life in Sicily. Some have thought he was a monk, but this is uncertain, nor do we know whether he lived in public life, or in retirement. His letters, however, show that he was a grammarian, and was acquainted with theology, history sacred and profane, and other branches of knowledge; and such was his reputation that he was frequently consulted by monks, bishops, and the most celebrated doctors of his time. His “Annals,” by which only he is now known, contain an account of the patriarchs, kings, and emperors, and, in a word, a sort of history of the world as far as the emperor Alexis Comnenus, who died in 1118, including many remarks on divinity, philosophy, physic, astronomy, &c. Leunclavius first translated this work into Latin, and the whole was published by father Labbe, Paris, 1660, fol. Some of his letters have been published in the “Deliciae eruditorum,” Florence, 1736, and other collections.

In the year 595, he refused to send the empress Constantia any relics of St. Paul, which she had requested, desiring to look at the body of that apostle. On this occasion he relates several miraculous punishments for such a rash attempt, all as simply devised as those in his< Dialogues." The same year he warmly opposed John patriarch of Constantinople, for assuming the title of oecumenical or universal, which he himself disclaimed, as having Do right to reduce the other bishops to be his substitutes; and afterwards forbad his nuncio there to communicate with that patriarch, till he should renounce the title. His humility, however, did not keep him from resenting an affront put upon his understanding, as he thought, by the emperor, for proposing terms of peace to the Lombards, who besieged Rome this year: the same year he executed the famous mission into England; and as Brunehaut, queen of France, had been very serviceable in it, he wrote a letter of thanks to her on the occasion. The princess is represented as a profligate woman, but very liberal to the ecclesiastics; founding churches and convents, and even sueing t9 the pope for relics. This was a kind of piety which particularly pleased Gregory; and accordingly, he wrote to the queen several letters, highly commending her conduct in that respect, and carried his complaisance so far as to declare the French happy above all other nations in having such a sovereign. In the year 598, at the request of the Christian people at Caprita, a small island at the bottom of the gulph of Venice, he ordered another bishop to be ordained for that place, in the room of the present prelate, who adhered to the Istrian schism. This was done contrary to the orders of the emperor Maurice, against taking any violent measures with schismatics.

In the year 599, he wrote a letter to Serenus bishop of Marseilles, commending his zeal in breaking some images which the people had been observed to worship, and throwing them out of the church; and the same year a circular letter to the principal bishops of Gaul, condemning simoniacal ordinations, and the promotions of laymen to bishoprics he likewise forbad clerks in holy orders to live with women, except such as are allowed by the canons and recommended the frequent holding assemblies to regulate the affairs of the church. The same year he re-r fused, on account of some foreseen opposition, to take cognizance of a crime alleged against the primate of Byzacena, a province in Africa. About the same time he wrote an important letter to the bishop of Syracuse, concerning ceremonies, in which he says, “That the church of Rome followed that of Constantinople, in the use of ceremonies; and declares that see to be undoubtedly subject to Rome, as was constantly testified by the emperor and the bishop of that city.” He had already this year reformed the office of the church, which is one of the most remarkable actions of his pontificate. In this reform, as it is called, he introduced several new customs and superstitions; amongst the rest, purgatory. He ordered pagan temples to be consecrated by sprinkling holy water, and an annual feast to be kept, since called wakes in England, on that day; with the view of gaining the pagans in England to the church-service. Besides other less important ceremonies, added to the public forms of prayer, he made it his chief care to reform the psalmody, of which he was excessively fond. Of this kind he composed the “Ainiphone ,” andnch tiines as hest suited the psalms, the hymns, the prayers, the verses, the canticles, the lessons, the epistles and gospels, the prefaces, and the Lor-i’s prayer. He likewise instituted an academy of chanters for all the clerks, as far as the deacons exclusively: he gave them lessons himself, and the bed, in which he continued to chant amidst his last illness, was preserved with great Generation in the palace of St. John Lateran for a long time, together with the whip with which he used to threaten the young clerks and singing hoys, when they sang out of tune. He was so rigid in regard to the chastity of ecclesiastics, that he was unwilling to admit a man into the priesthood who was not strictly free from defilement by any commerce with women. The candidates for orders were according to his commands questioned particularly on that subject. Widowers were excepted, if they had observed a state of continency for some considerable tiifie.

The dispute about the title of Universal Bishop and the equality of the two sons of Rome and Constantinople still subsisting, and the emperor Maurice having declared for the latter, our pope saw the murder of him and his family without any concern by Phocas. This usurper having sent his picture to Rome in the year C03, Gregory received it with great respect, and placed it with that of the empress his consort (Leontia) in the oratory of St. Csesarius in the palace; and soon after congratulated Phocas’s accession to the throne. There are still extant, written upon this occasion, by the holy pontiff, three letters^ wherein he expresses his joy, and returns thanks to Godj for that execrable parricide’s accession to the crown, as the greatest blessing that could befall the empire; and he praises God, that, after suffering under a heavy galling yoke, his subjects begin once more to enjoy the sweets of liberty under his empire flatteries unworthy a man of honour, and especially a pope and for which his historian, Maimbourg, condemns them. But Gregory thought himself in conscience obliged to assert the superiority of his see above that of Constantinople, and he exerted himself much to secure it. In general he had the pre-eminence of the holy see much at heart; accordingly this same year, one Stephen, a Spanish bishop, having complained to him of an unjust deprivation of his bishopric, the pope sent a delegate to judge the matter upon the spot, giving him a memorial of his instructions, in which among other particulars he orders thus: “If it be said, that bishop Stephen, had neither metropolitan nor patriarch, you must answer, that he ought to be tried, as he requested, by the holy see, which is the chief of all churches.” It was in the same spirit of preserving the dignity of his pontificate, that he resolved to repair the celebrated churches of St. Peter and St. Paul; with which view, he gave orders this year to the subdeacon Sabinian (afterwards his successor in the popedom), to fell all the timber necessary for that purpose in the country of the Brutii, and send it to Rome: he wrote several other letters on this occasion, which are striking proofs of his zeal for carrying on the repairs of old churches, although he built no new ones.

By these breaches in the family, Nazianzen was sufficiently weaned from the place of his nativity; and, though he was not able to procure a successor to" his father, he resolved to throw up his charge, and accordingly retired to Seleucia, famous for the temple of St. Thercla, the virginmartyr; where, in a monastery of devout virgins dedicated to that saint, he continued a long time, and did not return till the death of St. Basil, whom he deeply regretted he could not attend at his last hours, being himself confined by sickness. About this time he was summoned to a council at Antioch, holden anno 378, to consider the emperor’s late edict for tolerating the catholics, in order to suppress Arianism; and, being ordered by the council to fix himself for that purpose at Constantinople, he presently repaired thither. Here he found the catholic interest at the lowest ebb; the Arians, favoured by Valens, had possessed themselves of all the churches, and proceeded to such extremities that scarcely any of the orthodox dared avow their faith. He first preached in his lodgings to those that repaired thither, and the congregation soon growing numerous, the house was immediately consecrated by Nazianzen, under the name of the church of Anastasia, or the resurrection; because the catholic faith, which in that city had been hitherto oppressed, here seemed to have its resurrection. The opposition to his measures but increased his fame, together with the number of his auditors, and even drew admirers and followers from foreign parts; among whom St. Jerom, lately ordained presbyter, came on purpose to put himself under his tutelage and discipline; an honour in which Jerom glories on every occasion. As the catholics grew more considerable, they chose him for their bishop, and the choice was confirmed by Meletus of Antioch, and Peter who succeeded Athanasius at Alexandria; but he was opposed by the Arians, who consecrating Maximus, a famous cynic philosopher and Christian, gave him a great deal of trouble. The Arian bishop, however, was at length forced to retire, and his successor Demophilus was deposed by the emperor Theodosius, who directed an edict to the people of Constantinople, February 27, 380, re-establishing the orthodox faith; and afterward coming thither in person, he treated Nazianzen with all possible kindness and respect, and appointed a day for his instalment in the see.

Theodosius being highly solicitous about the peace of the church, summoned a council to meet at Constantinople in May anno 382. This is called the second general council, in which the Nicene Creed was ratified; and, because the article concerning the Holy Ghost was but barely mentioned, which was become one of the principal controversies of the age, and for the determination of which the council had been chiefly summoned, the fathers now drew up an explanatory creed, composed, as it is said, by Gregory of Nyssen, and is the same which in our liturgy is called the Nicene Creed. The see of Constantinople was also now placed next in precedence to that of Rome. Our author carried a great sway in that council, where all things went on smoothly, till at last they fell into disturbances on the following occasion.

There had been a schism for some time in the church of Antioch, occasioned by the ordination of two bishops to that see; and one of those, named Melitus, happening to die before the end of the council, Nazianzen proposed to continue the other, named Paulinus, then grown old, for his life. But a strong party being made for one Flavianus, presbyter of the church, these last carried it; and, not content with that, resolved to deprive their grand opposer of his seat at Constantinople. To prevent this he made a formal resignation to the emperor, and went to his paternal estate at Nazmnzum, resolving never to episcopize any more; insomuch, that though, at his return, he found the see of Nazianzum still vacant, and over-run with the heresy of Apollinarius, yet he pertinaciously resisted all intreaties that were made to take that charge upon him. And, when he was summoned to the re-assembling of the council the following year, he refused to give his attendance, and even did not stick to censure all such meetings as factious, and governed by pride and ambition. In the mean time, in defence of his conduct, he wrote letters to the Roman praetorian prefect, and the consul; assuring them, that, though he had withdrawn himself from public affairs, it was not, as some imagined, from any discontent for the loss of the great place he had quitted; and that he would not abandon the common interests of religion; that his retirement was a matter of choice more than necessity, in which he took as great pleasure as a man that has been tossed in a long storm at sea does in a safe and quiet harbour. And, indeed, being now freed from all external cares, he entirely gave himself up to solitude and contemplation, and the exercise of a strict and devout life. At vacant hours he refreshed the weariness of his old age with poetry, which he generally employed upon divine subjects, and serious reflections upon the former passages of his life; an account of which he drew up in iambics, whence no inconsiderable part of his memoir is derived. Thus he passed the remainder of his days till his death in the year 389. He made a will, by which, except a few legacies to some relations, he bequeathed his whole estate to the poor of the diocese of Nazianzum. In this spirit, during the three years that he enjoyed the rich bishopric of Constantinople, he never touched any part of the revenues, but gaVe it all to the poor, to whom he was extremely liberal.

He went not long after to Arabia; and, having dispatched the affairs of the Arabian churches, he proceeded to Jerusalem, having engaged to confer with the bishops of those parts, and to assist in their reformation. Upon his arrival, finding the place overrun with vice, schism, and faction, some shunning his communion, and others setting up altars in opposition to him, he soon grew weary of it, and returned with a heavy heart to Antioch: and being on this occasion consulted afterwards, whether it was an essential part of religion to make pilgrimages to Jerusalem (which, it seems, was the opinion of the monastic disciplinarians at that time), he declared himself freely in the negative. After this, he was summoned to the great council at Constantinople, where he made no inconsiderable figure, his advice being chiefly relied on in the most important cases; and particularly the composition of the creed, called by us the Nicene creed, was committed to his care. He composed a great many other pieces, commentaries on different parts of the scriptures; sermons; lives, and letters. There is a good edition of his works by Fronton du Due, 1615, 2 vols. fol. and another of 1638, 3 vols. fol. more ample, but not so correct. They are, however, in less estimation than the works of almost any of the fathers. He lived to a great age, and was alive when St. Jerom wrote his “Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers” in the year 392; and two years after was present at the synod of Constantinople, on adjusting the controversy between Agapius and Bagadius, as appears by the acts of that council. He died March 9, 396. He was a married man, and lived with his wife Theosebia, even after he was bishop. Gregory Nazianzen, in a consolatory letter to his sister on her death, gives her extraordinary commendations.

, a French historian, was born in 1701 at Lous-le-Saunier in Fi'unche-comte, and entered the congregation of the oratory, which he afterwards quitted, and came to Paris, and passed his days in literary labours. He died here in 1771. His principal works are, 1. A continuation of “Echard’s Roman History,” from Constantine to the taking of Constantinople by Mahomet II. 10 vols. 12mo, which Voltaire has thought proper to undervalue; but others say that in point or style and accuracy, it may rank among the best productions of the kind from the French press. 2. “Histoire des empires et des republiques,” 1733, &c. 12 vols. 12mo, of which it is said, that, if compared with Rollin’s, it is less agreeable and elegant: but it proves that Guy on drew his materials from the original sources of the ancients; whilst, on the contrary, RolJin has often copied the moderns. 3. “Histoire des Amazones ancienneset modernes,” Paris, 1740, 2 vols. 12mo, a curious, and in many respects an original work. 4. “Histoire des Indes,” 3 vols. 12mo, inferior in every respect. 5. “Oracle des nouveaux philosophes,” not so remarkable for style, as for an able confutation of the new philosophy of his time, and the uneasiness it gave Voltaire. 6. “Bibliotheque ecclesiastique,” 1772, 8 vols. 12mo, &C.

March 1698, he was appointed regius professor of Greek in the university of Oxford; and instituted to the archdeaconry of Oxford in 1704. In 1701, he bore a part in the controversy about the convocation, and published upon that occasion, “A History of English Councils and Convocations, and of the Clergy’s sitting in Parliament, in which is also comprehended the History of Parliaments, with an account of our ancient laws.” He died Jan. 20, 1706, and was buried in the chapel belonging to Wadham-college, where he had received his education, and to which he had been a benefactor: for, in order to encourage the study of the Greek and Hebrew languages, of which he was so great a master himself, he founded in that college ten scholarships of ten pounds each; now increased to fifteen pounds each; and appointed that four of the scholars should apply themselves to the study of the Hebrew, and six to the study of the Greek language. He left behind him in ms. a valuable work formed from the lectures which he had read in the course of his professorship, containing an account of those learned Grecians who retired to Italy before and after the taking of Constantinople by the Turks,' and restored the Greek tongue and learning in these western parts of the world. This was published in 1742, by Dr. S. Jebb, under this title, “De Graecis illustribus linguae Groecae literarumque humaniorum instauratoribus, eorum vitis, scriptis, et elogiis libri duo. E Codicibus potissimum Mss. aliisque authenticis ejusdem aevi monimentis deprompsit Hiimfredus Hodius, S. T. P. baud ita pridem Regius Professor et Archidiaconus Oxon.” Prefixed is an account in Latin of the author’s life, extracted chiefly from a manuscript one written by himself in English.

, a Roman emperor, commonly, although perfcaps not very justly, styled the Apostate, was the younger son of Constantius, brother of Constantine the Great. He was the first fruit of a second marriage of his father with Basilina, after the birth of Gallus, whom he had by Galla his first consort. He was born Nov. 6, in the year 331, at Constantinople; and, according to the medals of him, named Fiavius Claudius Julianus. During the life of Constantine, he received the first rudiments of his education at the court of Constantinople; but, upon the death of this emperor, all his relations being suspected of criminal actions, Julian’s father was obliged to seek his safety by flight; and his son Julian’s escape was entirely owing to Marc, bishop of Arethusa, without whose care he had inevitably perished in the persecution of his family. As soon as the storm was over, and Constantius, the son of Constantine, quietly seated on the imperial throne, he sent young Julian to Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, who was related to him by his mother’s side, and who educated him in the Christian faith; but at the same time employed an eunuch called Mardonius, who was a pagan, to teach him grammar, while Eulolius, a Christian of doubtful character, was his master in rhetoric. Julian made a very quick progress in learning; and, being sent afterwards to Athens to complete his education, he became the darling of that nursery of polite literature, and particularly commenced an acquaintance with St. Basil and Gregory of Nazianzen. This last, however, observed something in him which rendered his sincerity in the Christian faith suspected: and it is certain, that, notwithstanding all the care of his preceptor Eusebius, this young prince was entirely perverted by Maximus, an Ephesian philosopher and magician. His cousin Constantius the emperor was advertised of his conduct; and Julian, to prevent the effects, and save his life, professed himself a monk, and took the habit, but, under this character in public, he secretly embraced paganism. Some time before, his brother Gallus and he had taken orders, and executed the office of reader in the church; but the religious sentiments of the two brothers were widely different.

The empire being now in the full enjoyment of profound peace and tranquillity, Justinian made the best use of it, by collecting the immense variety and number of the Roman laws into one body. To this end, he selected ten of the most able lawyers in the empire; who, revising the Gregorian, Theodosian, and Hermogenian codes, compiled out of them one body, called “The Code,” to which the emperorgave his own name. This may be called the statute law, as consisting of the rescripts of the emperors: but the compilation of the other part was a much more difficult task. It was made up of the decisions of the judges and other magistrates, together with the authoritative opinions of the most eminent lawyers; all which lay scattered, without any order, in above 2000 volumes. These, however, after the labour of ten years, chiefly by Tribonian, an eminent lawyer, were reduced to the number of 50; and the whole design was completed in the year 533, and the name of “Digests,” or “Pandects,” given to it. Besides these, for the use chiefly of young students in the law, Justinian ordered four books of “Institutes” to be drawn up, by Tribonian, Dorotheus, and Theophilus, containing an abstract or abridgement of the text of all the laws: and, lastly, the laws of modern date, posterior to that of the former, were thrown into one volume in the year 541, called the “Noveilx,” or “New Code.” This most important transaction in the state has rendered Justinian’s name immortal. His conduct in ecclesiastical affairs was rash and inconsiderate. On one occasion, when Theodotus, king of Italy, had obliged pope Agapetus to go to Constantinople, in order to submit and make peace with the emperor, Justinian received him very graciously, but enjoined him to communicate with Anthenius, patriarch of Constantinople. That patriarch being deemed a heretic at Rome, the pontiff refused to obey the command; and, when the emperor threatened to punish his disobedience with banishment, he answered, without any emotion, “I thought I was come before a Christian prince, but I find a Diocletian.” The result was, that the hardiness and resolution of the pope brought the emperor to a submission. Accordingly Anthenius was deprived, and an orthodox prelate put into his place.

While at Amsterdam, by the advice of his uncle, he learned the art of drawing geographical charts. He also began to study jurisprudence, and after visiting Ley den, and other principal cities in the Netherlands, arrived at Paris in September 1646. Here he resided a year with cardinal Barberini, who showed him every kindness in consideration of his relationship to Holstein; and partly by his means, and Holstein’s letters of recommendation, Lambecius was admitted into considerable familiarity, notwithstanding his youth, with many of the most learned men of the time. Having obtained access to the libraries, he availed himself of this opportunity to examine some manuscripts of importance, and in consequence published his “Prodromus lucubrationum criticorum in Auli Gellii Noctes Atticas, una cum dissertatione de vita et nomine A. Gellii,” Paris, 1647, 8vo. Gronovius reprinted this in his edition of Gellius, 1706, 4to. Lambecius also collected materials, while at Paris, for an edition of the antiquities of Constantinople, which did not, however, appear until 1655, when it was printed at Paris, under the title “Syntagma originum et antiquitatum Constantinopolitarum,” &c. Gr. et Lat. fol.

, surnamed The Great, a doctor of the church, and one of the most eminent popes who have filled the Roman see, was born in Tuscany, or rather at Rome. He made himself very useful to the church under pope St. Celestine, and Sixtus III. and was concerned in all important affairs while but a deacon. The Roman clergy recalled him from Gaul, whither he was gone to reconcile Albums and Ætius, generals of the army, and raised him to the papal chair Sept. 1, 440. He condemned the Manicheans, in a council held at Rome in the year 444, and completely extirpated the remains of the Pelagian heresy in Italy: “Let those Pelagians,” said he, “who return to the church, declare by a clear and public profession, that they condemn the authors of their heresy, that they detest that part of their doctrine which the universal church has beheld with horror, and that they receive all such decrees of the councils as have been passed for exterminating the Pelagian heresy, and are confirmed by the authority of the apostolical see, acknowledging by a clear and full declaration, signed by their hand, that they admit these decrees, and approve them in every thing,” Leo also condemned the Priscillianists, and annulled all the proceedings in the council of Ephesus, which was called “the band of Ephesian robbers,” in the year 449. He presided by his legates at the general council of Chalcedon, in the year 451, but opposed the canon made there in favour of the church of Constantinople, which gave it the second rank, to the prejudice of that at Alexandria. The letter which Leo had written to Flavian us on the mystery of the Incarnation, was received with acclamations in this council, and the errors of Eutyches and Dioscorus condemned. The following year he went to meet Attila, king of the Huns, who was advancing to Rome, and addressed him with so much eloquence that he was prevailed upon to return home. Genseric having taken Rome, in the year 455, Leo obtained from that barbarous prince, that his soldiers should not set fire to the city, and saved the three grand churches (which Constantine had enriched with magnificent gifts) from being plundered. He was a strict observer of ecclesiastical discipline. He died November 3, in the year 461, at Rome. Never has the Romish church appeared with more true grandeur, or less pomp, than in this pontiff’s time; no pope was ever more honoured, esteemed, and respected; no pope ever displayed more humility, wisdom, mildness, and charity. Leo left ninety-six: “Sermons,” on the principal festivals throughout the year, and one hundred and forty-one Letters, which may be found in the library of the fathers. The best edition of his works is that by Pere Quesnel, Lyons, 1700, fol. They have been printed at Rome, by father Cacciaci, 3 vols. fol. and at Venice, by Messrs. Ballarimi, 3 vols. fol. but these editions have not sunk the credit of Quesnel’s. P. Maimbourg has written a history of his pontificate, 4to, or 2 vols. 12mo.

emperor of the East, surnamed The Wise, and the Philosopher, succeeded his father Basilius the Macedonian, March 1, 886. He drove Photius from the see of Constantinople, fought with success against the Hungarians and Bulgarians, and died June 11, 911, leaving one son> Constantine Porphyrogeneta. This emperor was surnamed The Philosopher, from his attachment to learning, and not from his manners, which were very irregular. He was fond of writing sermons, and there are several of his composing in the library of the fathers. The following works are also attributed to him; a treatise on Tactics, a useful work for those who would acquire a knowledge of the lower empire it was printed in German by Bourscheid, at Vienna, and in French by M. de Maiserrti, 1770, 2 vols. 8vo “Novelise Constitutiones,” in which several of the novels introduced by Justinian are abolished; “Opus Basilicon,” where all the laws contained in Justinian’s works are new modelled. This system of law was adopted by the Greeks afterwards. In Constantine Manasses, printed at the Louvre, may be found “Leonis sapientis oracula.”

, a celebrated sophist of antiquity, was born of an ancient and noble family at Antioch, on the Orontes, in the year 314. Suidas calls his father “Phasganius” but this was the name of one of his uncles; the other, who was the elder, was named Panolbius. His great-grandfather, who excelled in the art of divination, had published some pieces in Latin, which occasioned his being supposed by some, but falsely, to be an Italian. His maternal and paternal grandfathers were eminent in rank and in eloquence; the latter, with his brother Brasidas, was put to death by the order of Dioclesian, in the year 303, after the tumult of the tyrant Eugenius. Libanius, the second of his father’s three sons, in the fifteenth year of his age, wishing to devote himself entirely to literature, complains that he met with some “shadoxvs of sophists.” Then, assisted by a proper master, he began to read the ancient writers at Antioch; and thence, with Jasion, a Cappadocian, went to Athens, and residing there for more than four years, became intimately acquainted with Crispinus of Heraclea, who, he says, “enriched him afterwards with books at Nicomedia, and went, but seldom, to the schools of Diophantus.” At Constantinople he ingratiated himself with Nicocles of Lacedosmon (a grammarian, who was master to the emperor Julian), and the sophist Bermarchius. Returning to Athens, and soliciting the office of a professor, which the proconsul had before intended for him when he was twenty- five years of age, a certain Cappadocian happened to be preferred to him. But being encouraged by Dionysius, a Sicilian who had been prefect of Syria, some specimens of his eloquence, that were published at Constantinople, made him so generally known and applauded, that he collected more than eighty disciples, the two sophists, who then filled the chair there, raging in vain, and Bermarchius ineffectually opposing him in rival orations, and, when he could not excel him, having recourse to the frigid calumny of magic. At length, about the year 346, being expelled the city by his competitors, the prefect Limenius concurring, he repaired to Nice, and soon after to Nicomedia, the Athens of Bithynia, where his excellence in speaking began to be more and more approved by all; and Julian, if not a hearer, was a reader and admirer of his orations. In the dame'city, he says, “he was particularly delighted with the friendship of Aristaenetus;” and the five years which he passed there, he styles “the spring or any thing else that can be conceived pleasanter than spring, of his whole life.” Being invited again to Constantinople, and afterwards returning to Nicomedia, being also tired of Constantinople, where he found Phoenix and Xenobius, rival sophists, though he was patronised by Strategius, who succeeded Domitian as prefect of the East, not daring on account of his rivals to occupy the Athenian chair, he obtained permission from Gallus Cassar to visit for four months, his native city Antioch, where, after Gallus was killed, in the year 354, he fixed his residence for the remainder of his life, and initiated many in the sacred rites of eloquence. He was also much beloved by the emperor Julian, who heard his discourses with pleasure, received him with kindness, and imitated him in his writings. Honoured by that prince with the rank of quaestor, and with several epistles of which six only are extant, the‘ last written by the emperor during’ his fatal expedition against the Persians, he the more lamented his death in the flower of Ms age, as from him he had promised himself a certain and lasting support both in the worship of idols and in his own studies. There was afterwards a report, that Liba­Ihus, with the younger Jamblichus, the master of Proclus, inquired by divination who would be the successor of Valens, and ia consequence with difficulty escaped his cruelty, Irenaeus attesting the innocence of Libanius. In like manner he happily escaped another calumny, by the favour of duke Lupicinus, when he was accused by his enemy Fidelis, or Fidustius, of having written an eulogium on the tyrant Procopius. He was not, however, totally neglected by Valens, whom he not only celebrated in an oration, but obtained from him a confirmation of the law against entirely, excluding illegitimate children from the inheritance of their paternal estates, which he solicited from the emperor, no doubt for a private reason, since, as Eunapius informs us, he kept a mistress, and was never married. The remainder of his life he passed as before mentioned, at Antioch, to an advanced age, amidst various wrongs and oppressions from his rivals and the times, which he copiously relates in his life, though, tired of the manners of that city, be had thoughts, in his old age, of changing his abode, as he tells Eusebius. He continued there, however, and on various occasions was very serviceable to the city, either by appeasing seditions, and calming the disturbed minds of the citizens, or by reconciling to them the emperors Julian and Theodosius. That Libanius lived even to the reign of Arcadius, that is, beyond the seventieth year of his age, the learned collect from his oration on Lucian, and the testimony of Cedrenus; and of the same opinion is Godfrey Olearius, a man not more respectable for his exquisite knowledge of sacred and polite literature than for his judgment and probity, in his’ ms prelections, in which, when he was professor of both languages in the university of his own country, he has given an account of the life of this sophist.

, an eminent English grammarian, was born at Odiham, in Hampshire, about 1468. After a good foundation of school-learning, he was sent to Magdalen -college, Oxford, and admitted a demy there at the age of eighteen. Having taken the degree of B. A. he quitted the university, and went, for religion’s sake, to Jerusalem, as Pits, and after him Wood, Tanner, and others have asserted; but Bale, from whom Pits copied, gives no such reason for Lily’s journey. It is indeed most probable, that he travelled eastward with an intention to acquire some knowledge of the Greek language, especially as he continued five years in the island of Rhodes with no other design. At Rhodes he found several learned men who had taken refuge there, under the protection of the knights, after the taking of Constantinople; and here he became acquainted with the domestic life and familiar conversation of the Greeks. He went thence to Rome; and improved himself farther in the Latin and Greek tongues under John Sulpitius and Pomponius Sabinus. On his arival in England, in 1509, he settled in London, and taught a private grammar-school, being the first teacher of Greek in the metropolis. In this he had so much success and reputation, that he was appointed first-master of St. Paul’s school. by the founder, Dr. Culet, in 1510. This laborious and useful employment he filled for the space of twelve years; and in that time educated a great many youths, some of whom proved the greatest men in the nation, as Thomas Lupset, sir Anthony Denny, sir William Paget, sir Edward North, John Leland, &c. He died of the plague at London in February 1523, aged 54, and was buried in the north yard of St. Paul’s. He is highly praised by Erasmus for his uncommon knowledge in the languages, and admirable skill in the instruction of youth. He was very intimate with sir Thomas More, to whose Latin translations of several Greek epigrams are prefixed some done by Lily, printed with this title, “Progymnasmata Thorns Mori & Gulielmi Lilii, Sodalium,” Basil, 1518, by Frobenius; and again in 1673, ibid. Lily, by his wife Agnes, had two sons; and a daughter, who was married to his usher John Rightwise, who succeeded his father-in-law in the mastership of St. Paul’s school, and died in 1532.

, was an ancient heretic of the church of Constantinople, whom the Arians made bishop of that see in the year 342, at the same time that the orthodox contended for Paul. This occasioned a contest, which rose at length to such a height, that arms were taken up, and many lives lost. The emperor Constantius, however, put an end to the dispute, by banishing Paul, and ratifying the nomination of Macedonius; who, after much opposition, which ended at the death of Paul, became peaceably and quietly settled in his see, and might have remained so had he been of a temper to be long peaceable and quiet in any situation: he soon fell into disgrace with Constantius, for acting the part of a tyrant, rather than a bishop. What made him still more disliked by the emperor, was his causing the body of Constantine to be translated from the temple of the Apostles to that of Acacius the martyr. This also raised great tumults and confusion among the people, some highly approving, others loudly condemning, the procedure of Macedonius and the parties again taking up arms, a great number on both sides were slain. Macedonius, however, notwithstanding the emperor’s displeasure, which he had incurred by his seditious and turbulent practices, contrived to support himself by his party, which he had lately increased by taking in the Semi-Arians; till at length, imprudently offending two of his bishops, they procured his deposition by the council of Constantinople, in the year 359. He was so enraged at this, as to resolve to revenge the insult by broaching a new heresy. He began to teach, therefore, that the Holy Spirit had no resemblance to either the Father or the Son, but was only a mere creature, one of God’s ministers, and somewhat more excellent than the angels. The disaffected bishops subscribed at once to this opinion; and to the Arians it could not be unacceptable. According to St. Jerome, even the Donatists of Africa joined with them: for he says, that Douatus of Carthage wrote a treatise upon the Holy Ghost, agreeable to the doctrine of the Arians; and the outward shew of piety, which the Macedonians observed, drew over to their party many others. One Maratorus, who had been formerly a treasurer, having amassed vast riches, forsook his secular life, devoted himself entirely to the service of the poor and sick, became a monk; and at last adopted the Macedonian heresy, which he disseminated very extensively. In this he succeeded in most cases by his riches; which, being freely and properly distributed, were found of more force in effecting conversions than all his arguments: and from this man, as Socrates relates, the Macedonians were called Maratorians. They were also called Pneumatomachi, or persons who were enemies of the Holy Ghost. The report of the Macedonian heresy being spread over Egypt, the bishop Serapion advertised Athanasius of it, who then was leading a monastic life, and lay hid in the desert and this celebrated saint was the hrst who confuted it.

, the eleventh sultan of the Turks, born at Adrianople, the 24th of March, 1430, is to be remembered chiefly by us, for taking Constantinople in 1453, and thereby driving many learned Greeks into the West, which was a great cause of the restoration of learning in Europe, as the Greek literature was then introduced here. He was one of the greatest men upon record, with regard to the qualities necessary to a conqueror: and he conquered two empires, twelve kingdoms, and two hundred considerable cities. He was very ambitious of the title of Great, which the Turks cave him, and even the Christians have not disputed it with him; for he was the first of the Ottoman emperors, whom tue Western nations dignified with the title of Grand Seignior, or Great Turk, which posterity has preserved to his descendants. Italy had suffered greater calamities, but she had never felt a terror equal to that which this sultan’s victories imprinted. The inhabitants seemed already condemned to wear the turban; it is certain that pope Sixtus IV. represented to himself Rome as already involved in the dreadful fate of Constantinople; and thought of nothing but escaping into Provence, and once more transferring the holy see to Avignon. Accordingly, the news of Mahomet’s death, which happened the ad of Mav, 1481, was received at Rome with the greitest joy that ever was beheld there. Sixtus caused all the churches to be thrown open, made the trades-peopld leave off their work, ordered a feast of three days, with. public prayers and processions, commanded a discharge of the whole artillery of the castle of St. Angelo all that time, and put a stop to his journey to Avignon. Some authors have written that tbis sultan was an atheist, and derided all religions, without excepting that of his prophet, whom he treated as no better than a leader of banditti. This is possible enough; and there are many circumstances which make it credible It is certain he engaged in war, not to promote Mahometism, but to gratify his own ambition: he preferred his own interest to that of the faith he professed; and to this it was owing that he tolerated the Greek church, and even shewed wonderful civility to the patriarch of Constantinople. His epitaph deserves to be noted; the inscription consisted only of nine or ten Turkish words, thus translated: “I proposed to myself the conquest of Rhodes and proud Italy.”

Lorenzo distinguished himself beyond any of his predecessors in the encouragement of literature and the arts: and his own productions are distinguished by a vigour of imagination, an accuracy of judgment, and an elegance of style, which afforded the first great example of improvement, and entitle him, almost exclusively, to the honourable appellation of the “restorer of Italian literature.” His compositions are sonnets, canzoni, and other lyric pieces, some longer works in stanzas, some comic satires, and jocose carnival songs, and various sacred poems, the latter as serious as many of the former are licentious. Some of these pieces, especially those of the lighter kind, in which he imitated the rustic dialect, became extremely popular. His regard to literature, in general, was testified by the extraordinary attention which he paid to the augmentation of the Laurentian library. Although the ancestors of Lorenzo laid the foundation of the immense collection of Mss. contained in this library, he may claim the honour of having raised the superstructure. If there was any pursuit in which he engaged more ardently and persevered in more diligently than the rest, it was that of enlarging his collection of books and antiquities: for this purpose he employed the services of learned men, in different parts of Italy, and especially of his intimate friend and companion Poiitian, who took several journeys in order to discover and purchase the valuable remains of antiquity. “I wish,” said Lorenzo to him as he was proceeding on one of these expeditions, “that the diligence of Picus and yourself would afford me such opportunities of purchasing books that I should be obliged even to pledge my furniture to possess them.” Two journeys, undertaken at the instance of Lorenzo, into the east, by John Lascar, produced a great number of rare and valuable works. On his return from his second expedition, he brought with him two hundred copies, many of which he had procured from a monastery at mount Athos; but this treasure did not arrive till after the death of Lorenzo, who, in his last moments, expressed to Politian and Picus his regret that he could not live to complete the collection which he was forming for their accommodation. On the discovery of the invaluable art of printing, Lorenzo was solicitous to avail himself of its advantages in procuring editions of the best works of antiquity corrected by the ablest scholars, whose labours were rewarded b5 T his munificence. When the capture of Constantinople by the Turks caused the dispersion of many learned Greeks, he took advantage of the circumstance, to promote the study of the Greek language in Italy. It was now at Florence that this tongue was inculcated under the sanction of a public institution, either by native Greeks, or learned Italians, who were their powerful competitors, whose services were procured by the diligence of Lorenzo de Medici, and repaid by his bounty. “Hence,” says Mr. Roscoe, “succeeding scholars have been profuse of their acknowledgments to their great patron, who first formed that establishment, from which, to use their own classical figure, as from the Trojan horse, so many illustrious champions have sprung, and by means of which the knowledge of the Greek tongue was extended, not only through all Italy, but through France, Spain, Germany, and England; from all which countries numerous pupils attended at Florence, who diffused the learning they had there acquired throughout the rest of Europe.”

, of Constantinople, was one of the most learned Grecians in the fourteenth century. He held considerable offices under the emperor Andronicus the Elder, but in the reign of his successor, was banished, and his goods confiscated. He was afterwards recalled, and died in 1332, in a monastery which he had founded. He was called a living Library, from his great erudition; and left several valuable works, the principal among which are, “An Abridgement of the Roman History, from Julius Caesar to Constantine the Great,” 1628, 4to “The Sacred History,” in two books,“translated by Herve, Paris, 1555, 4to” The History of Constantinople“and” A Paraphrase on Aristotle’s Physics.“In 1790, was published” Specimina operum Theod. Metochitae, cum praefatione et nods primum vulgata ab Jano Bloch," Haunise, in 8vo.

, the patriarch of Alexandria in the seventeenth century, was sent into England by Cyrillus Lucar, to be instructed in the doctrine and discipline of our church, and to learn the English and Latin languages. For these purposes he applied to archbishop Abbot, who procured him admission into Baliol college, Oxford, where he remained until 1622, at which time he was chancellor to the patriarch of Constantinople; but on his return to his own country, was chosen patriarch of Alexandria. On his way home, and while in Germany, he drew up “A Confession of Faith of the Greek Church,” printed at Helmstadt, Gr. and Lat. in 1661. It inclines chiefly to the protestant doctrines; but catholic writers have declared themselves satisfied with some parts of it. The time of his death is not known, but he is said to have been living in 1640.

, a senator of Venice, descended from James Morosini, of a very illustrious family, was born in the year 1558. He received an excellent education, and rose through the different degrees of nobility to a place in the council of ten. He was accomplished in every branch of polite literature, and in 1598 succeeded to the office of historian of the republic, and was employed in continuing Paruta’s History of Venice, which he brought down to 1615. He died in 1618, but as he had not quite finished his work, it was not published until 1623. It has been ranked among the best performances of that age. He also published, in Latin, a volume of “Opuscula and Epistles” and a narrative in Italian of “Expeditions to the Holy Land, and the Acquisition of Constantinople by the Venetian Republic.” His brother Paul, likewise a Venetian senator, was appointed to the same post of public historian, and gave an entire history of the republic from its origin to the year 1487, in 1637, which was published in the Italian language.

Having now procured a great number of manuscripts, which was one great object of his travels, he returned to Vienna, and for some time read lectures; after which he went to Buda, on the invitation of Matthias king of Hungary, who was a patron of learned men, and had founded a rich and noble library there, from the purchase of the Greek books found on the sacking of Constantinople, and others brought from Athens, or wherever else they could be met with through the whole Turkish dominions. But a war breaking out in this country, he retired to Nuremberg, which he preferred, because the artists there were dextrous in fabricating his astronomical machines, and he could from thence easily transmit his letters by the merchants into foreign countries. Being now well versed in all parts of learning, and made the utmost proficiency in mathematics, he determined to occupy himself in publishing the best of the ancient authors, as well as his own lucubrations. For this purpose he set up a printing-house, and formed a nomenclature of the books he intended to publish, which still remains.

, from whom the sect of the Nestorians derive their name, was born in Germanica, a city of Syria, in the fifth century. He was educated and baptized at Antioch, and soon after the latter ceremony withdrew himself to a monastery in the suburbs of that city. When he had received the order of priesthood, and began to preach, he acquired so much celebrity by his eloquence and unspotted life, that in the year 429 the emperor Theodosius appointed him to the bishopric of Constantinople, at that time the second see in the Christian church. He had not been long in this office before he began to manifest an extraordinary zeal for the extirpation of heretics, and not above five days after his consecration, attempted to demolish the church in which the Arians secretly held their assemblies. In this attempt he succeeded so far, that the Brians, grown desperate, set fire to the church themselves, and with it burnt some adjoining houses. This fire excited great commotions in the city, and Nestorius was ever afterwards called an incendiary. From the Arians he turned against the Novatians, but was interrupted in this attack by the emperor. He then began to persecute those Christians of Asia, Lydia, and Caria, who celebrated the feast of Easter upon the 14th day of the moon; and for this unimportant deviation from the catholic practice, many of these people were murdered by his agents at Miletum and at Sardis. The time, however, was now come when he was to suffer by a similar spirit, for holding the opinion that “the virgin Mary cannot with propriety be called the mother of God.” The people being accustomed to hear this expression, were much inflamed against their bishop, as if his meaning had been that Jesus was a mere man. For this he was condemned in the council of Ephesus, deprived of his see, banished to Tarsus in the year 435, whence he led a wandering life, until death, in the year 439, released him from farther persecution. He appears to have been unjustly condemned, as he maintained in express terms, that the Word was united to the human nature in Jesus Christ in the most strict and intimate sense possible; that these two natures, in this state of union, make but one Christ, and one person; that the properties of the Divine and human natures may both be attributed to this person; and that Jesus Christ may be said to have been born of a virgin, to have suffered and died: but he never would admit that God could be said to have been born, to have suffered, or to have died. He was not, however, heard in his own defence, nor allowed to explain his doctrine. The zealous Cyril of Alexandria (see Cyril) was one of his greatest enemies, and Barsumas, bishop of Nisibis^ one of the chief promoters of his doctrines, and the co-founder of the sect. In the tenth century the Nestorians in Chaldsea, whence they are sometimes called Chaldaeans, extended their spiritual conquest beyond mount Imaus, and introduced the Christian religion into Tartary, properly so called, and especially into that country called Karit, and bordering on the northern part of China. The prince f that country, whom the Nestorians converted to the Christian faith, assumed, according to the vulgar tradition, the name of John, after his baptism, to which he added the surname of Presbyter, from a principle of modesty; whence it is said, his successors were each of them called Prester John, until the time of Jenghis Khan. But Mosheim observes, that the famous Prester John did not begin to reign in that part of Asia before the conclusion of the eleventh century. The Nestorians formed so considerable a body of Christians, that the missionaries of Rome were industrious in their endeavours to reduce them under the papal yoke. Innocent IV. in 1246, and Nicolas IV. in 1278, used their utmost efforts for this purpose, but without success. Till the time of pope Julius III. the Nestorians acknowledged but one patriarch, who resided first at Bagdat, and afterwards at Mousul; but a division arising among them in 1551, the patriarchate became divided, at least for a time, and a new patriarch was consecrated by that pope, whose successors fixed their residence in the city of Ormus, in the mountainous part of Persia, where they still continue distinguished by the name of Simeon; and so far down as the seventeenth century, these patriarchs persevered in their communion with the church of Rome, but seem at present to have withdrawn themselves from it. The great Nestorian pontiffs, who form the opposite party, and look with a hostile eye on this little patriarch, have, since 1559, been distinguished by the general denomination of Elias, and reside constantly in the city of Mousul. Their spiritual dominion is very extensive, takes in a great part of Asia, and comprehends also within its circuit the Arabian Nestorians, and also the Christians of St. Thomas, who dwell along the coast of Malabar. It is observed, to the honour of the Nestorians, that of all the Christian societies established in the East, they have been the most careful and successful in avoiding a multitude of superstitious opinions and practices that have infected the Greek and Latin churches* About the middle of the seventeenth century the Romish missionaries gained over to their communion a small number of Nestorians, whom they formed into a congregation or church, the patriarchs or bishops of which reside in the city of Amida, or Diarbekir, and all assume the denomination of Joseph. Nevertheless, the Nestorians in general persevere, to our own times, in their refusal to enter into the communion of the Romish church, notwithstanding the earnest entreaties and alluring offers that have been made by the pope’s legate to conquer their inflexible constancy.

, a Greek historian, was born about the close of the thirteenth century, and flourished in the fourteenth, under the emperors Andronicus, John Palacologus, and John Cantacuzenus. He was a great favourite of the elder Andronicus, who made him librarian of the church of Constantinople, and sent him ambassador to the prince of Servia. He accompanied Andronicus in his misfortunes, and attended at his death; after which he repaired to the court of the younger Andronicus, where he appears to have been well received; and it is certain, that, by his influence over the Greeks, that church was prevailed on to reject any conference with the legates of pope John XXII. But, in the dispute which arose between Barlaam and Palamos, happening to take the part of the former, he maintained it so zealously in the council that was held at Constantinople in 1351, that he was cast into prison, and continued there till the return of John Palseologus, who released him; after which he held a disputation with Palamos, in the presence of that emperor. He compiled the Byzantine history in a barbarous style, and very inaccurately, from 1204, when Constantinople was taken by the French, to the death of Andronicus the younger, in 1341. Besides this work, he is the author of some others. His history, with a Latin translation by Jerome Wolf, was printed at Basil in 1562, and again at Geneva in 1615. We have also a new version of it, and a new edition more correct than any of the preceding, printed at the Louvre in 1702, by Boivin the younger, the French king’s librarian, 2 vols. fol. This edition contains, in the first volume, the thirty-eight books of Gregoras, which end with the year 1341; and in the second are the thirteen following, which contain a history of ten years. There are still fourteen remaining to be published; as also fourteen other pieces of Gregoras. Gregoras also wrote Scholia upon “Synesius de Insomniis,” published by Turnebus in 1553; the version of which, by John Pichon, is printed among the works of the same Synesius.

, a celebrated patriarch of Constantinople, of the ninth century, was distinguished for his zealous defence of the worship of images, against the emperor Leo the Armenian, who banished him in the year 815, to a monastery, where he died in the year 828, aged seventy. His works are, “An Abridgment of History,” from the death of the emperor Mauritius to Constantino Copronymus, printed at the Louvre, 1648, fol. It forms part of the Byzantine history, and has been translated into French by president Cousin. It is said to be accurate, but written in a dry and concise style. An “Abridgment of Chronography,” which is at the end of Syncellus; and several other works in Greek, which may be found in P. Labbe’s Councils, or the Library of the Fathers. Cardinal Baronius has inserted this patriarch’s “Confession of Faith” in torn. XI. of his Annals. He is supposed by Lardner and others, to have been the author of “The Stichometry,” a catalogue of the books of sacred scripture, which, ifof no other use, at least shews that the Jewish canon was generally esteemed sacred by Christians, and that the other books of the Old Testament, which are now deemed “Apocryphal,” were not of equal authority, though sometimes read in the churches, and quoted by Christian writers.

, a priest and monk of Mount Athos, flourished in the thirteenth century. He refused the patriarchate of Constantinople from his partiality to the Latin church, and being more inclined to peace than any of the Greeks of his time, la this spirit he composed two treatises concerning “The Procession of the Holy Ghost;” one addressed to James patriarch of Bulgaria, and the other to the emperor Theodore Lascaris, in both which he refutes those who deny that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son. These two tracts are printed in Greek and Latin, by Aliatius, who has also given us a letter, written by Blemmides on his expelling from the church of her convent the mistress of the emperor John Ducas. There are several other pieces of our author in the Vatican library.

, the son of Callistus Xanthopulus, a learned monk of Constantinople, is placed by Wharton at 1333, but by Lardner in 1325. He wrote in Greek an “Ecclesiastical History,” in twenty-three books, eighteen of which are still extant, containing the transactions of the church from the birth of Christ to the death of the emperor Phocas in the year 610. We have nothing left besides the arguments of the five other books, from the commencement of the reign of the emperor Heraclius to the end of that of Leo the philosopher, who died in the year 911. He dedicated this history to the emperor Andronicus Palseologus the elder: it was translated into Latin, by John Langius, and has gone through several editions, the best of which is that of Paris, in 1630. There is only one manuscript of this history, which was said to be formerly in the library of Matthias, king of Hungary, and now in that of Vienna. Nicephorus was no more than thirty years of age when he compiled it, and it is said to abound in fables, and therefore has been treated with contempt by Beza, and by Gesner. Some other pieces are ascribed to our author. Labbe, in his preliminary discourse prefixed to the “Byzantine Historians,” has given a catalogue of the emperors and patriarchs of Constantinople, composed by Nicephorus. His abridgment of the Bible in iambic verse was printed at Basil in 1536, and Dr. Hody has attributed to him a small piece which he published in Greek and Latin, during his controversy with Mr. Dodwell, under the title of “Anglicani Schismatis Redargutio.” His homilies on Mary Magdalen are also inserted in Bandini “Monumenta,” 1762, vol. III.

, a Greek historian, was born at Chone, or Colossus, a town in Phrygia. He flourished in the thirteenth century, and was employed in several considerable affairs at the court of the emperors of Constantinople. When that city was taken by the French in 1204, he withdrew, together with a young French captive, whom he afterwards married at Nice in Bithynia, and died there in 1206.

, a Greek historian, a native, as some relate, of Paphlagonia, flourished about the end of the ninth century. He wrote the “Life of St. Ignatius, Patriarch of Constantinople,” translated into Latin by Frederic Mutius, bishop of Termoli, and made use of by cardinal Baronius: but we have another version, by father Matthew Raderi, printed at Ingoldstadt, in 1604. This Nicetas composed also several panegyrics, in honour of the apostles and other saints, which are inserted in the last continuation of the “Bibliotheca Patrum,” by Combesis. There are several authors of this name mentioned by Gesner and Leo Allatius.

, deacon of the church of Constantinople, and contemporary with Theophylact in the eleventh century, and afterwards bishop of Heraclea, composed several “Funeral Orations upon the death of Gregory Nazianzen;” as also a “Commentary,” which is inserted in Latin among the works of that father. There is ascribed to him a “Catena upon the Book of Job,” compiled of passages taken from several of the fathers, which was printed by Junius at London, 1637, in folio. We have also, by the same author, several “Catenx upon the Psalms and Canticles,” printed at Basil in 1552. Ttiere is likewise a “Commentary upon the Poems of Gregory Nazianzen,” printed at Venice, under the name of Nicetas of Paphlagonia, which is apparently the same author.

In 1453 Nicholas received intelligence of the capture of Constantinople by Mahomet II. which some historians mention as the greatest affliction that befel the pope; but Gibbon, speaking on the subject, says, “Some states were too weak, and others too remote; by some the danger was considered as imaginary, by others as inevitable: the western princes were involved in their endless and domestic quarrels; and the Roman pontiff was exasperated by the falsehood or obstinacy of the Greeks. Instead of employing in their favour the arms and treasures of Italy, Nicholas V, had foretold their approaching ruin, and his honour seemed engaged in the accomplishment of his prophecy. Perhaps he was softened by the last extremity of their distress, but his compassion was tardy: his efforts were faint and unavailing; and Constantinople had fallen before the squadrons of Genoa and Venice could sail from their harbours.” From this time he spent the remainder of his pontificate in endeavours to allay the civil wars and commotions which took place in Italy, to reconcile the Christian princes who were then at war with one another, and to unite them in one league against the enemies of the Christian church. But all his efforts being unsuccessful, the disappointment is said to have hastened his death, which happened March 24, 1455. “The fame of Nicholas V.” says Gibbon, who seems to have formed a just estimate, of the character of this pontiff, " has not been adequate to his merits. From a plebeian origin, he raised himself by his virtue and learning; the character of the man prevailed over the interest of the pope; and he sharpened those weapons which were soon pointed against the Roman church. He had been the friend of the most eminent scholars of the age; he became their patron; and ‘such was the humility of his manners, that the change was scarcely discernible either to them or to himself. If he pressed the acceptance of a liberal gift, it was not as the measure of desert, but as the proof of benevolence; and when modest merit declined his bounty, ’ accept it,‘ he would say, with a consciousness of his own worth, ’ you will not always have a Nicholas among you.‘ The influence of the holy see pervaded Christendom; and he exerted that influence in the search, not of benefices, but of books. From the ruins of the Byzantine libraries, from the’darkcst monasteries of Germany and Britain, he collected the dusty manuscripts of the writers of antiquity; and wherever the original could not be removed, a faithful copy was transcribed, and transmitted for use. The Vatican, the old repository for bulls and legends, for superstition and forgery, was daily replenished with more precious furniture; and such was the industry of Nicholas, that in a reign of eight years he formed a library of 5000 volumes. To his munificence the Latin world was indebted for the versions of Xenophon, Diodorus, Polybius, Thucydides, Herodotus, and Appian; of Strabo’s Geography; of the Iliad; of the most valuable works of Plato and Aristotle; of Ptolemy and Theophrastus, and of the fathers of the Greek church.

, an eminent Greek, flourished about 1280, under the reign of Michael Paleologus, and Andronicus his successor. He was a person of high birth r and had acquired no less knowledge in church-affairs in the great posts he had among the clergy of Constantinople, than of state-matters in the high employments he held m the court of the emperor; so that his “History of Michael Paleologus and Andronicus” is the more esteemed, as he was not only an eye-witness of the affairs of which he writes, but had also a great share in them. This history was published by Poussines, a Jesuit, Gr. et Lat. “ex intorpr. et cum not. P. Possini,” Rome, 1666—69, 2 vols. fol. Pachymera composed also some Greek verses; but they were little esteemed, and never printed. Brucker mentions a compendium of the Aristotelian philosophy published from his manuscripts; and Tilman published his paraphrase on the epistles of Dionysius the Areopagite, “Georgii Pachymerae Paraphrasis in decem epistolas bead Dionysii Areopagitæ,” Paris, 1538.

Zosimus, either through a persuasion that these heretics had dealt insincerely with him, or finding it prudent to yield to the necessity of the occasion, upon the receipt of this letter, issued out a formal condemnation of the Pelagians, and applied also to Honorius, requesting him to cause all heretics to be driven out of Rome; in compliance with which, the emperor gave a rescript at Ravenna, April 418, directd to the pretorian prefect of Italy, who, in consequence, issued his ordinance jointly with the pretorian prefect of the east, and the prefect of Gaul, purporting, that all such as should be convicted of this error should suffer perpetual banishment, and that all their possessions should be confiscated. The pope also vigorously prosecuting hs design to extirpate the friends 01 Pelagius, caused all the bishops to be deposed who would not subscribe the condemnation of the new heresy, and drove them out of Italy by virtue of the laws of the empire. Atticus, bishop of Constantinople, likewise rejected their deputies. They were driven from Ephesus and Theodotus bishop of Antioch condemned them, and drove Pelagius thence, who was lately returned from Palestine, where he had taken refuge from the emperor’s rescript. We have no certain account of him after this; but there is reason to believe, that he returned to England, and spread his doctrine there; which induced the bishop of Gaul to send thither St. Germain of Auxerre, in order to refute it. However that be, it is certain that Pelagian heresy, as it is called, spread itself both in the east and west, and took so deep root, that it subsists to this day in different sects, who all go by the general name of Pelagians, except a more moderate part who are called Semi-Pelagians.

, an eminent prelate of the fifth century, and called Chrysologus from his eloquence, was descended of a noble family, and born at Imola, then called Forum Cornelii. After a suitable education, he was elected archbishop of Ravenna, about the year 433, and was much celebrated for his virtue and his eloquence. He died about the year 451. There are 126 sermons or homilies of his in the library of the fathers, in which he unites perspicuity with brevity; their style is concise and elegant, but not unmixed with quaintnesses. Father d'Acheri has published in his “Spicilegium,” five other sermons written by him; and in St. Peter’s works, is his answer to Eutyches, who had written to him in the year 449, complaining of St. Flavianus of Constantinople, in which he defends the orthodox faith, and refers Eutyches to the excellent letter sent by St. Leo to Flavianus, which teaches what is to be believed concerning the mystery of the incarnation. The best edition of St. Peter Chrysologus is that printed at Augsburg, 1758, folio.

, a famous heretic of the fourth century, known in church history as the chief of a sect called Photinians, was a native of Ancyra, the capital of Galatia, and bishop of Sirmium, or Sirmich, the chief city of Illyricum. He had been the disciple of Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra. He spoke with ease, and his eloquence gained him great power over his people after he was consecrated bishop; but his life was corrupted, and his doctrine soon became so too. He espoused the same opinions with Paul of Samosata, and wrote with great obstinacy against the divinity of Jesus Christ, for which in the year 345 he was condemned by the council of Antioch; in the year 374, by the council of Milan. However, he still maintained his see till he was deposed by the council of Sirmich, A. D. 251, and by the emperor sent into banishment, where he spent the remainder of his life, during which time he composed a piece against all heresies in general, with an intent to establish his own. He wrote in Greek and Latin. The emperor Julian sent him a letter, commending him for denying the divinity of Jesus Christ. Photinus died A. D. 375 (377, Cave), in Galatia, whither he had been banished. This heresy was, amongst many others, anathematized in the council of Constantinople, A. D. 381. It afterwards was revived by Socinus.

, patriarch of Constantinople in the ninth century, was descended from an illustrious family, and born in that city. He had great natural talents, which he cultivated with the utmost application, and there was no branch of literature, sacred or profane, or scarcely any art or science, with which he was not intimately acquainted. He seems to have been by far the greatest man of the age in which he lived; and was so intimately concerned in the chief transactions of it, that ecclesiastical writers have thence called it “Seculum Photianum.” He was first raised to the chief dignities of the empire, being made principal secretary of state, captain of the guards, and a senator; in all which stations he acquitted himself with a distinction suitable to his great abilities for he was a refined statesman, as well as a profound scholar.

When Ignatius was expelled and deposed from the see of Constantinople, Photius was nominated by the court to succeed him; and although at this time only a layman, in the space of six days he accumulated the degrees of monk, reader, sub-deacon, deacon, and priest, and in this rapid manner rose to the patriarchate on Christmas- day 858. The metropolitans, subject to the see of Constantinople, acknowledged Photius; but great opposition was made to this uncanonical ordination from other quarters, and he was actually degraded at Rome. Photius, however, ordered a council to be called at Constantinople, and got himself confirmed in 'his patriarchal dignity; in which, by various arts not very worthy of his high and sacred office, he continued during the life of his friend the emperor Michael. But Michael being murdered by the order of Basilius, who succeeded him in the year 867, the affairs of Photius were ruined, and Basilius banished him to a monastery, and reinstated Ignatius in his see. In this degraded state Photius remained for more than ten years, until a division between the pope and Ignatius afforded him an opportunity to attempt his own restoration; and, having obtained the emperor’s favour, he returned to Constantinople while Ignatius was yet alive. It is said Ignatius would have proposed conditions, but Photius, determined upon full restoration to the patriarchate, would be satisfied with nothing less. Ignatius however died Oct. 23, 878; and Photius immediately went into St. Sophia’s church with armed men; forced a great many bishops, clerks, and monks, to communicate with him; deposed and persecuted all that refused; and to prevent all opposition from the papal side, prevailed by threats and presents on two of the pope’s legates who were there, to declare publicly to the clergy and people, that they had come to depose Ignatius, and to declare Photius their patriarch. He kept his seat, thus forcibly obtained, till the year 886, and then was turned out, and banished by the emperor Leo into a monastery in Armenia, where he is supposed to have died soon after. He was, as we have observed, a man of great talents, great learning, and every way accomplished; but his ardent love of glory, and unbounded ambition, prompted him to such excesses, as made 'him rather a scourge than a blessing to those about him. He was the author of many intestine tumults and civil commotions; and not only divided the Greek church, but laid the foundation of a division between the Greek and Latin churches.

, a Greek monk of Constantinople, who lived at the end of the thirteenth, and the beginning of the fourteenth century, is the author of a “Life of Æsop,” full of anachronisms, absurdities, and falsehoods and of 149 “Fables;” which, though he published them as Æsop’s, have been suspected to be his own. There is also a collection of Greek epigrams, under the title of “Anthologia,” made by this monk and it is but just to allow him the merit of having preserved many valuable compositions which otherwise would have been lost. His “Anthologia” was published at Florence, 1494, a very rare edition, reprinted in 1600. No particulars are known of Planudes, except that he suffered some persecution on account of his zeal for the Latin church, and, although he wrote a recantation, Bessarion thinks he was not sincere.

He does not appear, however, to have given more than one course of those lectures before he took a second journey to the East, along with Mr. John Greaves, and this by the archbishop’s encouragement, who was still bent on procuring manuscripts, and would not lose the advantage of such agents. The archbishop also allowed him the profits of his professorship to defray his expences, besides which Mr. Pocock enjoyed his fellowship of Corpus, and had a small estate by the death of his father. The whole annual produce of these he is supposed to have expended in this expedition. During his absence Mr. Thomas Greaves, with the archbishop’s consent, supplied the Arabic lecture. On, Mr. Pocock’s arrival at Constantinople, the English ambassador, sir Peter Wyche, entertained him in his house as his chaplain, and assisted him, by his interest, in the great object of his journey. In pursuit of this he made several valuable acquaintances among some learned Jews, particularly Jacob Romano, author of an addition to Buxtorf’s “Bibliotheca Rabbinica,” a man of great learning and candour but his ablest assistant was the learned and unfortunate Cyril Lucar, patriarch of Constantinople (see Lucar), to whom we owe that valuable ms. the “Codex Alexandrinus” and Nath. Canopius, who to avoid the fate of his master Lucar, came to England, and lived for some time under the patronage of archbishop Laud, who gave him preferment in Christ church, from which he was ejected in 1648. He derived some assistance also from his fellow-labourer in the collection of books and Mss. Christian Ravius, but especially from John Greaves, whose zeal in this research we have already noticed.

During his residence in the East, he made a large collection of valuable manuscripts in the Greek and oriental languages; which, in 1628, he presented to the Bodleian library. He also brought over the fine Alexandrian manuscript of the Greek Bible, sent as a present to Charles I. by Cyril, patriarch of Constantinople; which has since been transcribed and published by Dr. Grabe. In 1629, he was sent ambassador to mediate a peace between the kings of Poland and Sweden. He succeeded in his negociation and gained so much credit with the great Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden, that he inspired that king with a design, which he executed in 1630, of making a descent into Germany to restore the freedom of the empire. Adolphus, upon gaining the victory of Leipsic, sent sir Thomas a present of 2000l. and in his letter calls him his “strenuum consultorem,” he being the first who had advised him to the war. He was afterwards employed in other negociations. In 1640, he was chosen member of parliament for the university of Oxford; and shewed himself a person of great eloquence, learning, and experience, as appears from his printed speeches. The year after, he was sent ambassador to the diet of Ratisbon, in order to mediate the restoration of the late king of Bohemia’s son to the palatinate; and, upon his return, was made chancellor of the garter, and one of the privy couuc;!. The calamities of the nation, in which he cou!d not avoid having a share, not only embittered his life, but probably contributed to shorten it; for he died in Nov. 1644. An epitaph was composed for him by Dr. Gerard Langbaine, but never set up: it may be seen in Wood’s “Athen. Oxon.” By will he left to the Bodleian two hundred and forty-two silver medals.

, brother of the preceding, was the seventh and youngest son of the archbishop of York, and was born at the archiepiscopal pala.ce of Bishopthorp in 1577. In 1588 he was sent to Oxford, and matriculated of St. Mary Hall. Wood is of opinion, that he afterwards removed to Corpus-Christi-coilege. How iang he resided in the university, or whether he took a degree, does not appear. In August 16 10, remarkable for the murder of king Henry IV“. of France, Mr. Sandys set out on his travels, and, in the course of. two years, made an extensive tour, having visited several parts of Europe, and many cities and countries of the East, as Constantinople, Greece, Egypt, and the Holy Land; after which, taking a view of the remote parts of Italy, he went to Rome and Venice, and, on his return, after properly digesting the observations he had made, published, in 1615, his well-known folio, the title of the 7th edition of which, in 1673, is,” Sandys* Travels, containing an history of the original and present state of the Turkish empire; their laws, government, policy, military force, courts of justice, and commerce. The Ma-^ hometan religion and ceremonies. A description of Constantinople, the grand signior’s seraglio, and his manner of living: also of Greece, with the religion and customs of the Grecians. Of Egypt; the antiquity, hieroglyphics, rites, customs, discipline, and religion, of the Egyptians, A voyage on the river Nilus. Of Armenia, Grand Cairo, Rhodes, the Pyramides, Colossus: the former flourishing and present state of Alexandria. A description of the Holy Land, of the Jews, and several sects of Christians Jiving there; of Jerusalem, Sepulchre of Christ, Temple of Solomon, and what else, either of antiquity orworth observation. Lastly, Italy described, and the islands adjoining; as Cyprus, Crete, Malta, Sicilia, the Eolian islands; of Rome, Venice, Naples, Syracusa, Mesena, jEtna, Scylla, and Charybdis; and other places of note. Illustrated with fifty maps and figures.“Most of the plates, especially those relating to Jerusalem and the Holy Land, are copied from the” Devotissimo Viaggio di Zualiardo, Roma,“1587, 4to. Of these travels there have been eight or ten editions published, and it still bears its reputation, his accounts having been verified by subsequent travellers. Mr. Markland has a copy of this work, edit. 1637, with a ms copy of verses by the author, which may be seen in the *' Censura Literaria,” but was first published at the end of his “Psalms,” 1640, 8vo.

His works, are, 1. “Diatriba de Chaldaicis Paraphrastis,” Oxon. 1662, 8vo. 2. “Syntagma de Druidum moribus ac institutis.” 3. “Remarks upon the Manners, Religion, and Government of the Turks; together with a Survey of the seven Churches of Asia, as they now lie in their Ruins; and a brief Description of Constantinople,” 1678, 8vo, originally published in Latin. 4. “De Grsecse Ecclesix hodierno statu Epistola;” which, with additions, he translated into English, and published with the following title: “An Account of the Greek Church, as to its Doctrines and Rites of Worship, with several Historical Remarks interspersed, relating thereto. To which is added, an Account of the State of the Greek Church under Cyrillus Lucaris, patriarch of Constantinople, with a Relation of his Sufferings and Death,” 1680, 8vo. 5. “De causis et rernediis dissidiorum,” &c. Ox. 1675, 4to, printed afterwards among his “Miscellanea,” and published by him in English, under the title of “A pacific Discourse or, the causes and remedies of the differences about religion, which distract the peace of Christendom,” Lond. 1688, 4to. 6. Two volumes of “Miscellanea” in Latin, on subjects chiefly of ecclesiastical history and biblical criticism, Lond. 1686, 8vo, and 1692, 4to. 7. A translation of the “Life of St. Mary Magdalen of Pazzi,” with a preface, ibid. 1687, 4to. 8. A Latin life of Camden, which was prefixed to his edition of Camden’s “Epistolse,” in 1691, 4to. 9. “Catalogus librorum manuscriptorum Bibl, Cottonianse,” Oxon. 1696, fol. with a life of sir Robert Cotton. 10. “Inscriptiones Grgecse. Palmyrenorum, cum scholiis Ed. Bernardi et Thotnse Smithi,” Utrecht, 1698, 8vo. 11. The lives of Dr. Robert Huntington, bishop of Raphoe, and of Dr. Edward Bernard, in Latin. 12. An edition of “Ignatii Epistolae,” Oxon. 1709, 4to. 13. A preface to sir Philip Warwick’s “Memoirs of the reign of Charles I.” prefixed to the edition of 1702, and of which there has lately been a republication (1813); and lastly, that very useful volume entitled “Vitae quorundam eruditissimorum & illustrium virorum,” 1707, 4to. In this collection are the lives of archbishop Usher, bishop Cosins, Mr. Henry Briggs, Mr. John Bainbridge, Mr. John Greaves, sir Patrick Young, preceptor to James I. Patrick Young, library-keeper to the same, and Dr. John Dee. Three papers by him are inserted in the “Philosophical Transactions:” 1. “Historical Observations relating to Constantinople, No. 152, for Oct. 20, 1683.” 2. “An Account of the City of Prusia in Bithynia, No. 155, for Jan. 1633.” 3. “A Conjecture about an Under-current at the Streights-mouth, No. 158, for April 1684.” He left his Mss. to Hearne, with whom he was a frequent correspondent.

, an ancient fathei: and bishop of the Christian church, flourished at the beginning of the fifth century. He was born at Cyrene in Africa, a town situated upon the borders of Egypt, and afterwards travelled to th neighbouring country for improvement, where he happily succeeded in his studies under the celebrated female philo-r sopher Hypatia, who presided at that time over the Platonic school at Alexandria, where also the eminent mathematicians Theon, Pappus, and Hero taught. Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople, who wrote annotations on a piece of Synesius, called “De insomniis,” represents him as a man of prodigious parts and learning and says, that “there was nothing he did not know, no science wherein he did not excel, no mystery in which he was not initiated and deeply versed.” His works are in high esteem with the curious; and his epistles, in Suidas’s opinion, are admirable, and in that of Photius, as well as Evagrius, “elegant, agreeable, sententious, and learned.' 1 Synesius was a man of noble birth, which added no less weight to his learning, than that reflected lustre on his quality; and both together procured him great credit and authority. He went, about the year 400, upon an embassy, which lasted three years, to the emperor Arcadius at Constantinople, on the behalf of his country, which was miserably harassed by the auxiliary Goths and other barbarians; and it was then, as he himself tells \is, that” with greater boldness than any of the Greeks, he pronounced before the emperor an oration concerning government.“About the year 410, when the citizens of Ptolemais applied to Theophilus of Alexandria for a bishop, Synesius was appointed and consecrated, though he took all imaginable pains to decline the honour. He declared himself not at all convinced of the truth of some of the most important articles of Christianity. He was verily persuaded of the existence of the soul before its union with the body; he could not^ conceive the resurrection of the body; nor did he believe that the world should ever be destroyed. He also owned himself to have such an affection for his wife, that he would not consent, either to be separated from her, or to Jive in a clandestine manner with her; and told Theophilus, that, if he did insist upon making him a bishop, he must leave him in possession of his wife and all his notions. Theophilus at length submitted to these singular terms,” upon a presumption,“it is said,” that a man, whose life and manners were in every respect so exemplary, could not possibly be long a bishop without being enlightened with heavenly truth. Nor,“continues Cave,” was Theophilus deceived; for Synesius was no sooner seated in hit bishopric, than he easily acquiesced in the doctrine of the resurrection.“Baronius says in his Annals,” that he does not believe these singularities of Synesius to have been his real sentiments; but only that he pretended them, with a view of putting a stop to the importunities of Theophilus, and of warding off this advancement to a bishopric, which was highly disagreeable to him." That the advancement was highly disagreeable to Synesius, is very certain; but it is likewise as certain, that Baronius’s supposition is without all foundation. There is extant a letter of Synesius to his brother, of which an extract may be given, as illustrative of his character and opinions.

, or Timur Bec, the great conqueror of the East, was born in 1335, in the village of Kesch, belonging to the ancient Sogdiana. His name of Tamerlane is derived by some writers from Timur Lenc 9 or Timur the lame, as he had some defect in his feet. His origin is uncertain, some reporting him to be the son of a shepherd, and others of the royal blood. He raised himself, however, by his personal courage and talents. He was distinguished early by these qualities; and, having acquired some followers devoted to his fortunes, his first conquest was that of Balk, the capital of Khorasan, on the frontiers of Persia. He then made himself master of the whole province of Candahar, and returning to subdue the people beyond the Oxus, took Bagdad. He now determined to undertake the conquest of India; but his soldiers, fatigued by their former efforts, refused at first to follow him. On this occasion he employed a pretended prophet to exhort them in the name of heaven; and having made them ashamed of their reluctance, and filled them with a strong enthusiasm, led them on to greater victories. Delhi fell before him, aiifl he became possessed of the immense treasures of the Mogul empire. Returning from his Indian exploits, he entered Syria and took Damascus: and Bagclad having attempted to revolt, he made a terrible example, by putting many thousands of the inhabitants to the sword, and delivering the city to pillage. Bajazet, emperor of the Turks, now attracted his notice, and to him he sent an embassy, requiring him to do justice to some Mahometan princes whom he had deposed, and to abandon the siege of Constantinople. This haughty message being as haughtily answered, war was commenced between them. Tamerlane marched towards Bajazet, whom, in 1402, he engaged, conquered, and took prisoner, in the plains of Ancyra near Phrygia. The battle lasted three days. The Turkish writers say, that after this event, Tamerlane asked JBajazet what he would have done to him, if he had been victorious. “I would have shut you up,” said Bajazet, “in an iron cage.” Upon which he was himself condemned to the same punishment. Some writers, however, boast of the generosity and magnanimity of the conqueror. Be this as it may, he certainly carried his victories to a wonderful extent: while he was engaged in the war with Bajazet, he vanquished Egypt, and seized the immense treasures of Grand Cairo, nor could any thing in the East withstand him. He died about three years after his victory, on the first of April, 1405, in the seventy-first year of his age, and the thirty-sixth of his reign. When he found death approaching, he called the princes together, appointed his grandson to be his heir, and died, professing his implicit faith in the Koran, and repeating the sacred words of the Mahometans, “There is no God but God, and Mahomet is his prophet.”

He had great interest with several succeeding emperors. Constantius elected him into the senate in the year 355, ordered a brazen statue to be erected to him in 361, and pronounced his philosophy “the ornament of his reign.” Julian made him prefect of Constantinople in the year 362, and wrote letters to him, some of which are still extant. Jovian, Valens, Valentinian, and Gratian, shewed him many marks of esteem and affection, and heard him with pleasure haranguing upon the most important subjects. Valens in particular, who was inclined to favour the Arians, suffered himself to be diverted byThemistius from persecuting the orthodox; who represented to him the little reason, there was to be surprised at a diversity of opinions among the Christians, when that was nothing in comparison of the differences among the heathens; and that such differences ought never to terminate in sanguinary measures; and by such arguments he is said to have procured universal toleration. Though himself a confirmed heathen, he maintained correspondences and friendship with Christians, and particularly with Gregory of Nazianzen, who, in a letter to him, still extant, calls him “the king of language and composition.” Lastly, the emperor Theodosius made him again prefect of Constantinople in the year 384; and, when he was going into the west, placed his son Arcadius with him as a pupil. He lived to a great age; but the precise time of his death is not recorded. He has Sometimes been confounded with another Themistius, who was much younger than he, a deacon of Alexandria, and the founder of a sect among Christians.

, a celebrated grammarian of Constantinople, died about the end of the twelfth century. Being put under proper masters at fifteen, he learnt not only the belles lettres, and the whole circle of sciences, but even the Hebrew and Syriac tongues. He had a prodigious memory, and, it is said, was able to repeat all the Scriptures by heart. He seems to have been a most accomplished person, who understood almost every thing; but was a severe critic on the performances of others, and not without a considerable share of vanity. He wrote “Commentaries upon Lycophron’s Alexandria,” which he published first under the name of his brother, Isaac Tzetzes: they are inserted by Potter in his edition of this poet at Oxford, 1697, in folio. He wrote also “Chiliades,” or miscellaneous histories, in verse, which Fabricius calls his most celebrated work, as abounding with political and civil knowledge; “Scholia upon Hesiod;” “Epigrams and other Poems;” “Pieces upon Grammar and Criticism.” He mentions also “Allegories upon Homer,” which he dedicated to the empress Irene, wife of Manuel Comnenus. This empress was married in 1143, and died in 1158, which nearly ascertains the age of Tzetzes. The “Allegories” of this author were published by Morel, Paris, 1616, 8vo, and the “Chiliades,” at Basil, 1546, fol.

But while this legation was going on, he removed from the cardinal’s palace, as enjoying there a course of life which he thought incompatible with his profession of Franciscan, and took up his residence at the Franciscan-convent of St. Peter, where he was honoured with the respect of many of the dignified ecclesiastics of Rome; and on the departure of the bishop to Spain, when the care of the legation was entrusted to the duke of Albuquerque, the Spanish ambassador at Rome, Wadding was appointed his assistant, and was, says his biographer, the life of the whole negotiation. He wrote three pamphlets on the subject of the immaculate conception, the titles of which we may be excused from giving. During the time he could spare from the business of this legation, he published an edition of some works of St. Francis, from Mss. in the public libraries, under the title of “Opusculorum St. Francisci Libri tres,” Antwerp, 1623. Before this time he performed what will probably be thought a more acceptable service to theological studies, in undertaking to print Calasio’s Concordance (see Calasio). Calasio died at Rome, wliile Wadding was there, leaving this large work in manuscript. Wadding, who saw its merits, regretted that it should be lost; and being unable of himself to defray the expence of printing, applied to pope Paul V. and to Benignus a Genua, the general of the Franciscans, by whose encouragement the whole was published at Rome in 1621, 4 vols, folio, under the inspection of Wadding, who prefixed to it a learned treatise “De Hebraic lingoos origine, praestaiitia et militate.” Pope Paul dying while the work was in the press, he dedicated it to his successor, Gregory XV. He published also, from original Mss. the works of some other Spanish divines, and wrote a life of Thomasius, patriarch of Constantinople, “Vita B. Petri Thomce Aquitani Carmelitse,” &c. Lyons, 1637, 8vo. But the most labourius effort of editorship was his rescuing from obscurity all the manuscript copies of Duns Scotus’s works, transcribing, collating, and correcting, and afterwards publishing the whole, in twelve folio volumes, at Lyons, in 1639.

, a patriarch of Constantinople in the eleventh century, was a native of Trebisond. He distinguished himself by his learning and piety, and was raised to the see of Constantinople in 1064. He died Aug. 2, 1075. There is a sermon of his in the Bibl. Patrum. Andrew Scottus and Vossius erroneously imagined him to be the abridger of Dion Cassius: but it was a nephew of his name, as that nephew says himself in the history of Augustus. This nephew made, about the end of the eleventh century, a compendium of the last forty-five books of Dion, which contain the history of the emperors to the time of Alexander son of Mammea. It is probable he did not abridge the first five and thirty books, since there remains no trace or testimony of it: and, besides, he assures us, that even in his time there wanted something of the history of Dion. As to what remains, he has been very exact and faithful in following the sense, and often the very words of his author, as may appear by comparing the abridgment with the original. It has been printed sometimes with Dion Cassius, and sometimes separately, particularly at Paris, 1592, fol.

, a Greek historian, who lived about 1120, held some considerable posts at the court of the emperors of Constantinople. He afterwards entered the monastic order of St. Basil. He has left “Annals,” to the death of Alexius Comnenus, 1118; the best edition of them is the Louvre, 1686 and 1687, 2 vols. fol. which form part of the Byzantine history; but these “Annals,” although valuable for their information, are written with little accuracy or critical skill, and discover too much credulity. President Cousin has translated into French what relates to the Roman history. We have also some “Commentaries” by Zonaras, on the canons of the apostles and of the councils, Paris, 1618, folio; and some “Tracts.”