ears after his death the plays of Fletcher were more frequently acted than his, and during the whole of the seventeenth century, they were made to give place to performances,
Shakspeare died in 1616, and seven years afterwards appeared the first edition of his plays, published at the charges
of four booksellers, a circumstance from which Mr. Malone
infers, “that no single publisher was at that time willing to
risk his money on a complete collection of our author’s
plays.
” This edition was printed from the copies in the
hands of his fellow-managers, Heminge and Condell, which
had been in a series of years frequently altered through
convenience, caprice, or ignorance. Heminge and Condell had now retired from the stage, and, we may suppose,
were guilty of no injury to their successors, in printing
what their own interest only had formerly withheld. Of
this, although we have no documents amounting t^ demonstration, we may be convinced, by adverting to a circumstance which will, in our days, appear very extraordinary,
namely, the declension of Shakspeare’s popularity. We
have seen that the publication of his works was accounted a
doubtful speculation, and it is yet more certain that so much
had the public taste turned from him in quest of variety,
that for several years after his death the plays of Fletcher
were more frequently acted than his, and during the whole
of the seventeenth century, they were made to give place
to performances, the greater part of which cannot now be
endured. During the same period only four editions of
his works were published, all in folio; and perhaps this
unwieldy size of volume may be an additional proof that
they were not popular; nor is it thought that the impressions were numerous.
These circumstances which attach to our author and to
his works, must be allowed a plausible weight in accounting
for onr deficiencies in his biography and literary career;
but there were circumstances enough in the history of the
times to suspend the progress of that more regular drama,
of which he had set the example, and may be considered
as the founder. If we wonder why we know so much less
of Shakspeare than of his contemporaries, let us recollect
that his genius, however highly and justly we now rate it,
took a direction which was not calculated for permanent
admiration, either in the age in which he lived, or in that
which followed. Shakspeare was a writer of plays, a promoter of an amusement just emerging from barbarism; and
an amusement which, although it has been classed among
the schools of morality, has ever had such a strong tendency to deviate from moral purposes, that the force of law
has in all ages been called in to preserve it within the
bounds of common decency. The church has ever been
unfriendly to the stage. A part of the injunctions of queen
Elizabeth is particularly directed against the printing of
plays; and, according to an entry in the books of the Stationers’ Company, in the 4 1 st year of her reign, it is ordered
that no plays be printed, except allowed by persons in authority. Dr. Farmer also remarks, that in that age, poetry
and novels were destroyed publicly by the bishops, and
privately by the puritans. The main transactions, indeed,
of that period could not admit of much attention to matters
of amusement. The reformation required all the circumspection and policy of a long reign to render it so firmly
established in popular favour as to brave the caprice of any
succeeding sovereign. This was effected in a great measure by the diffusion of religious controversy, which was
encouraged by the church, and especially by the puritans,
who were the immediate teachers of the lower classes, were
listened to with veneration, and usually inveighed against
all public amusements, as inconsistent with the Christian
profession. These controversies continued during the reign
of James I. and were in a considerable degree promoted by
him, although he, like Elizabeth, was a favourer of the
stage as an appemiage to the grandeur and pleasures of the
court. But the commotions which followed in the unhappy
reign of Charles I. when the stage was totally abolished, are
sufficient to account for the oblivion thrown on the history
and works of our great bard. From this time no inquiry
was made, until it was too late to obtain any information
more satisfactory than the few hearsay scraps and contested
traditions above detailed. “How little,
” says Mr. Steevens,
“Shakspeare was once read, may be understood from Tate,
who, in his dedication to the altered play of king Lear,
speaks of the original as an obscure piece, recommended
to his notice by a friend; and the author of the Tatler having occasion to quote a few lines out of Macbeth, was con^
tent to receive them from D'Avenant’s alteration of that
celebrated drama, in which almost every original beauty is
either aukwardly disguised, or arbitrarily omitted.
”
, duke of Buckinghamshire, a poet and wit of the seventeenth century, was born in 1649, and Was the son of
, duke of Buckinghamshire, a poet and wit of the seventeenth century, was born in 1649, and Was the son of Edmund^ earl of Mulgrave. At nine years of age he lost his father, and his mother marrying again soon after, the care of his education was left entirely to the conduct of a tutor, who, though himself a mau of learning, had not that happy manner of communicating his knowledge by which his pupil could reap any great improvement under him. In consequence of which, when he came to part from his governor, after having travelled with him into France, he quickly discovered, in the course of his conversation with men of genius, that though he had acquired the politer accomplishments of a gentleman, yet that he was still greatly deficient in every part of literature, and those higher excellencies, without which it is impossible to rise to any considerable degree of eminence. He therefore resolved to educate himself, and dedicate for some time a certain number of hours every day to study. Such a purpose, 'says Dr. Johnson, formed at such an age, and successfully prosecuted, delights as it is strange, and instructs as it is real. By this means he very soon acquired a degree of learning which entitled him to the character of a scholar; and his literary acquisitions are the more wonderful, as those years in which they are commonly made were spent by him in the tumult of a military life, or the gaiety of a court. When war was declared against the Dutch, he went at the age of seventeen on board the ship in which princ Rupert and the duke of Albemarle sailed, with the command of the fleet; but by contrariety of winds they were restrained from action. His zeal, however^ for the king’s service was recompensed by the command of one of the independent troops of horse, then raised to protect the coast,
o monk of whatever order, has at any time been admitted “Socius of Sorbonne;” and from the beginning of the seventeenth century, whoever is received into the society
As to the fellowships, they were granted to those only
among the Socii who had not forty livres, of Paris money,
per annum, either from benefices or paternal inheritance;
and when they became possessed of that income, they
ceased to be fellows. A fellowship was worth about five
sous and a half per week, and was held ten years. At
the end of seven years all who held them were strictly
examined, and if any one appeared incapable of teaching,
preaching, or being useful to the public in some oilier
way, he was deprived of his t<-!! /wship. Yet, as the
founder was far from wishing to exclude the rich from his
college, but, on the contrary, sought to inspire them with
a taste for learning, and to revive a knowledge of the
sciences among the clergy, he admitted associates, who
were not fellows, “Socii uon Bursales.
” These were subject to the same examinations and exercises as the Socii,
with this only difference, that they paid fn - e sols and a half
weekly to the honse, a sum eqnal to that which the fellows
received. All the Socii bore and still bear the title of
“Doctors or Bachelors of the House and Society of
Sorbonne,
” whereas the Hospites have only the appellation of “Doctors or Bachelors of the House of Sorbonne.
” Their founder ordered that every thing should
be managed and regulated by the Socii, and that there
should be neither superior nor principal among them.
Accord'ngly he forbade the doctors to treat the bachelors
as pupils, or the bachelors to treat the doctors as masters,
whence the ancient Sorbonists used to say, “We do not
live together as doctors and bachelors, nor as masters and
pupils; but we live as associates and equals.
” In consequence of this equality, no monk of whatever order, has
at any time been admitted “Socius of Sorbonne;
” and from
the beginning of the seventeenth century, whoever is received into the society takes an oath on the gospels,
' That he has no intention of entering any society or
secular congregation, the members of which live in common under the direction of one superior, and that if after
being admitted into the society of Sorbonne, he should
change his mind, and enter any such other community, he
will acknowledge himself from that time, and by this single
art, to have forfeited all privileges of the society, as well
active as passive, and that he will neither do nor undertake any thing contrary to the present regulation.“Robert de Sorbonne permitted the doctors and bachelors to
take poor scholars, whom he wished to receive benefit
from his house; and great numbers of these poor scholars
proved very eminent men. The first professors in the Sorbonne were William de Saint Amour, Odon de Douai,
Gerard de Rheims, Laurence the Englishman, Gerard
^'Abbeville, &c. They taught theology gratis, according to
the founder’s intention; and from 1253, to the revolution,
there have been always six professors at least, who gave
lectures on the different branches of that science gratis,
even before the divinity professorships were established.
Fellowships were given to the poor professors, that is, to
those whose incomes did not amount to forty livres; but it
appears from the registers of the Sorbonne, that the first
professors above mentioned, were very rich, consequently
they were not fellows. Robert de Sorbonne ordered that
there should always be some doctors in his college who applied particularly to the study of morality and casuistry;
whence the Sorbonne has been consulted on such points
ever since his time from all parts of the kingdom. He
appointed different offices for the government of his college. The first is that of the Proviseur, who was always
chosen from among the most eminent persons. Next to
him is the Fn‘ciu’, chosen from the Socii bachelors, who
presided in the assemblies of the society, at the Robertine
acts, at the reading of the Holy Scriptures, at meals, and
at the Sorboniques, or acts of the licentiates, for which he
fixed the day; he also made two public speeches, one at
the first, the other at the last of these. The keys of the
gate were delivered up to him every night, and he was the
first person to sign all the acts. The other offices are those
of
” Senieur, Conscripteur, Procureurs, Professors, Librarian, &c.“There is every reason to believe that the Sorbonne, from its foundation, contained thirty-six apartments,
and it was doubtless in conformity to this first plan that no
more were added when cardinal Richelieu rebuilt it in the
present magnificent style. One, however, was afterwards
added, making thirty-seven, constantly occupied by as
many doctors and bachelors. After Robert de Sorbonne
had founded his divinity college, he obtained a confirmation of it from the pope, and it was authorized by letters
patent from St. Louis, uho had before given him, or exchanged with him, some houses necessary for that establishment in 1256, and 1258. He then devoted himself to
the promotion of learning and piety in his college, and
with success, for it soon produced such excellent scholars
as spread its fame throughout Europe. Legacies and donations now flowed in from every quarter, which enabled
the Sorbonists to study at their ease. The founder had
aLvays a particular partiality for those who were poor, for
although his society contained some very rich doctors, as
appears from the registers and other monumeiHs remaining
in the archives of the Sorbonne, yet his establishment had
the poor principally in view, the greatest part of its revenues being appropriated to their studies and maintenance.
He would even have his college called
” the House of the
Poor,“which gave rise to the form used by the Sorbonne
bachelors, when they appear as respondents, or maintain
theses in quality of Antique; and hence also we read on
many Mss. that they belong to the
” Pauvrcs Matures de
Sorbonne.“The founder, not satisfied with providing sufficient revenues for his college, took great pains to establish a library. From the ancient catalogue of the Sorbonne library drawn up in 1289 and 1290, it appears to
have consisted at that time of above a thousand volumes;
but the collection increased so fast, that a new catalogue
became necessary two years after, i. e. in 1292, and again
in 1338, at which time the Sorbonne library was perhaps
the finest in France. All the books of whatever value were
chained to the shelves, and accurately ranged according to
their subjects, beginning with grammar, the belles lettres,
&c. The catalogues are made in the same manner, and
the price of each book is marked in them. These Mss.
are still in the house. Robert de Sorbonne (very different from other founders, who begin by laying down rules, and then make it their whole care to enforce the observance of them,) did not attempt to settle any statutes till
he had governed his college above eighteen years, and
then prescribed only such customs as he had before established, and of which the utility and wisdom were confirmed
to him by long experience. Hence it is that no attempt
towards reformation or change has ever been made in the
Sorbonne; all proceeds according to the ancient methods
and rules, and the experience of five centuries has proved
that the constitution of that house is well adapted to its
purposes, and none of the French colleges since founded
have supported themselves in so much regularity and splendour. Robert de Sorbonne having firmly established his
society for theological studies, added to it a college for
polite literature and philosophy. For this purpose he.
bought of William de Cambrai, canon of S. Jean de Maurienne, a house near the Sorbonne, and there founded the
college tie Culvi, in 1271. This college, which was also
called
” the little Sorbonne,“became very celebrated by
the great men xvho were educated there, and subsisted till
1636, when it was demolished by cardinal Richelieu’s order,
and the chapel of the Sorbocne huilt upon the same spot.
The cardinal had, however, engaged to erect another, which
should belong equally to the house, and be contiguous to
it; but his death put a stop to this plan: and to fulfil his
promise in some degree, the family of Richelieu united the
college du Plessis to the Sorbonne in 1648. Robert de
Sorbonne had been canon of Paris from 1258, and became so celebrated as to be frequently consulted even by
princes, and chosen for their arbiter on some important
occasions.' He bequeathed all his property, which was
very considerable, to the society of Sorbonne, and died at
Paris, August 15, 1274, aged seventy-three, leaving several
works in Latin. The principal are, a treatise on
” Conscience,“another on
” Confession,“and
” The Way to
Paradise,“all which are printed in the
” Bibl. Patrum."
He wrote also other things, which remain in ms. in the
library. The house and society of Sorbonne is one of the
four parts of the faculty of theology at Paris, but has its
peculiar revenues, statutes, assemblies, and prerogatives.
, Sotwellus, but properly Southwell (Nathaniel), was an English Jesuit of the seventeenth century, and is entitled to some notice, as
, Sotwellus, but properly Southwell (Nathaniel), was an English Jesuit of the seventeenth century, and is entitled to some notice, as one of the
historians of his order, but we have no particulars of his
own life. Being employed to write the lives of eminent
authors among the Jesuits, he carried on the plan of llibadeneira and Alegambe down to his own times, that is, the
latter part of the seventeenth century. His improved edition was published under the title of “Bibliotheca scriptorum societatis Jesu, opus inchoatum a R. P. Petro Ribadeneira, et productum ad annum 1609: continuatum a
Philippo Alegambe ad annum 1643; recognitum, et productum ad annum 1675, a Nathanaelo Sotvvello,
” Rome,
, one of the most learned prelates of the seventeenth century, was the seventh son of Samuel Stillingfleet,
, one of the most learned prelates of the seventeenth century, was the seventh son of Samuel Stillingfleet, gent, descended from the ancient family of the StillingBeets of Stillingfleet, about four miles from York. His mother was Susanna, the daughter of Edward Norris, of Petworth, in Sussex,gent. He was born at Cranbourne in Dorsetshire, April 17, 1635, and educated at the grammar-school of that place by Mr. Thomas Garden, a man of eminence in his profession. He continued at this school until, being intended for the university, he was removed to Ringwood in Hampshire, that he might have a chance for one of Lynne’s exhibitions, who was the founder of that school.
d uniformly preserved, it will not be thought too much to rank him in the first class of learned men of the seventeenth century. While he was rector of Sutton, he married
“When I was a young man,
” says the present venerable bishop of Llandaff, “I had formed a mean opinion of
the reasoniog faculties of bishop Stillingfleet, from
reading Mr. Locke’s Letter and two replies to him but a better acquaintance with the bishop’s works has convinced me
that my opinion was ill-founded. Though no match for Mr.
Locke in strength and acuteness of argument, yet his
`Origines Sacræ,' and other works, show him to have been
not merely a searcher into ecclesiastical antiquities, but a
sound divine and a good reasoner.
” This confession from
one, perhaps a little more latitudinarian than our author
in some important points, has probably contributed to revive an attention to Stillingfleet’s works, which have accordingly risen very highly in value. Indeed if we consider the variety of subjects on which he wrote, and wrote
with acknowledged skill and with elegance of style, and
the early fame he acquired and uniformly preserved, it will
not be thought too much to rank him in the first class of
learned men of the seventeenth century. While he was
rector of Sutton, he married a daughter of William Dobyns, a Gloucestershire gentleman, who lived not long
with him; yet had two daughters who died in their infancy,
and one son, Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, afterwards rector
of Wood-Norton in Norfolk. Then he married a daughter
of sir Nicholas Pedley of Huntingdon, Serjeant at law,
who lived with him almost all his life, and brought him
seven children, of whom two only survived him; James
rector of Hartlebury and canon of Windsor, and Anne,
married afterwards to Humphrey Tyshe, of Gray’s-Inn,
esq. His grandson is the subject of the next article.
, a law writer, of the seventeenth century, was the son of Thomas Swinburne of
, a law writer, of the seventeenth century, was the son of Thomas Swinburne of the city
of York, where he was born. In his sixteenth year he was
sent to Oxford, and entered a commoner of Hart-hall,
whence after some time he removed to Broadgate-hall, now
Pembroke college, and there took his degree of bachelor
of civil law. Before he left the university he married Helena, daughter of Bartholomew Lant, of Oxford, and being
then obliged to quit the college, he returned to York, and
practised in the ecclesiastical courts as proctor. He afterwards commenced doctor of civil law, and became very
eminent in his profession. On Feb. 10, 1612, he was advanced to be commissary of the Exchequer, and judge of
the prerogative court of the province of York, in which
office he continued till his death. Of this event we have
no direct memorial; but, as his will was proved June 12,
1624, we may presume he died about that time. He
was buried in the cathedral of York, leaving his dwelling
house in York to his son Toby, and a benefaction to the
poor of the city. It appears he was twice married, and that
his second wife’s name was Wentworth. He wrote a
“Treatise of Spousals, or Matrimonial contracts,
” which
was not published until Treatise of Testaments and Last Wills, compiled out of the laws, ecclesiastical, civil, and canon, as
also out of the common laws, customs, and statutes of this
realm.
” This work has passed through seven editions, 4to.
adapted to each psalm, were the efforts of his mind.” This was a very popular work during the whole of the seventeenth century; but in the tenth edition, now before
The tranquillity of his life here was soon disturbed by
the progress of that commotion which finally accomplished
the destruction of the monarchical and episcopal governments. As yet he had appeared as an author only in a
“Sermon on the anniversary of the Gunpowder Treason,
”
printed at Oxford in Episcopacy asserted,
” which
was published at Oxford by the king’s command, and ran
its course with the works of bishop Hall and others on the
same subject. This is dedicated to his friend and patron,
sir Christopher Hatton, afterwards lord Hatton of Kirby,
whose son he afterwards assisted in preparing an edition
of the Psalms, according to the authorized version. This
appeared in 1644, and was entitled “The Psalter of David, with Titles and Collects according to the matter of
each Psalm, by the right hon. Christopher Hatton.
” His
biographer says, that “all that is new in this publication
was the production of Taylor. The preface, which bears
his name, and the titles and collects adapted to each psalm,
were the efforts of his mind.
” This was a very popular
work during the whole of the seventeenth century; but in
the tenth edition, now before us, Lond. 1683, both Hatton’s and Taylor’s names are omitted from the title and
preface, yet it appears even then to have been sold by the
name of “Ration’s Psalms,
” as the binder has so titled it
on the back.
, a learned doctor of the Sorbonne, and a celebrated writer of the seventeenth century, was born at Chartres, about 1636. He
, a learned doctor of the Sorbonne, and a celebrated writer of the seventeenth century, was born at Chartres, about 1636. He professed belleslettres at Paris, and became curate of Vibray, in the diocese of Mans, where he composed several of his works, and where he died February 28, 1703, aged sixty-five. He left a great many works, which are tiow but seldom read, though they are very learned, and very often singular.
, one of the most learned Baptist divines of the seventeenth century, was born at Bewdley in Worcestershire
, one of the most learned Baptist divines of the seventeenth century, was born at Bewdley in Worcestershire in 1603 and, being intended for the church, was educated at the grammar-school, where he made such proficiency as to be thought fit for the university at the age of fifteen. He was accordingly sent to Magdalen-hall, Oxford, at that time, and William Pcmble was his tutor. Here he acquired such distinction for talents and learning, that on his tutor’s death in 1624, he was chosen to succeed him in the catechetical lecture in Magdalen-hall. This he held with great approbation for about seven years, during which he was, amongst other pupils, tutor to Mr. Wilkins, afterwards bishop of Chester. He then, we may presume, took orders, and went to Worcester, and after that to Leominster in Herefordshire, of which he had the living, and became a very popular preacher, and when the living was found insufficient for a maintenance, lord Scudamore. made some addition to it. Tombes was, says his biographer, among the first of the clergy of those times who endeavoured a reformation in the church, that is, was an enemy to the discipline or ceremonies, for which he suffered afterwards, when the king’s forces came into that country; and being in 1641 obliged to leave it, he went to Bristol, where the parliamentary general Fiennes gave him the living of All Saints. When Bristol was besieged by prince Rupert, the year following, he removed again to London with his feu mily, and there first communicated to some of the West* minster divines, his scruples as to infant-baptism, and held conferences with them on the subject, the result of which was, that he made no converts, but was more confirmed in his own opinions, and a sufferer too, for, being appointed preac-her at Fenchurch, his congregation not only refused to hear him, but to allow him any stipend. From this dilemma he was relieved for a time by a call to be preacher at the Temple-church, provided he would abstain, in the pulpit, from the controversy about infant-baptism. To this he consented on these terms: first, that no one else should preach for the baptising of infants in his pulpit; and, secondly, that no laws should be enacted to make the denial of infant-baptism penal. All this being agreed upon, he continued to preach at the Temple for four years, and was then dismissed for publishing a treatise against infant-baptism. This was construed into a breach of his engagement, but he endeavoured to defend it as necessary to his character, he being often attacked in the pulpit for those opinions. on the subject which he had communicated to the Westminster assembly, although they had neither been published, or answered, by that learned body.
, a learned English divine, of the seventeenth century, was a native of Middlesex, and became
, a learned English divine, of
the seventeenth century, was a native of Middlesex, and
became a commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1650,
where he completed his degree of master of arts in 1657.
In 1660, he was elected fellow of All Souls, about which time
he entered into holy orders. His first preferment was to the
rectory of Welwyn in Hertfordshire. He took his degree of
D. D. in 1677, and in April 16i)2 was inducted into the living
of St'. Andrew Undershaft, London, where he became a very
distinguished preacher. He was presented to this rectory
by king William, on the promotion of Dr. Grove to the
bishopric of Chichester, and in consequence of the recommendation of archbishop Tillotson. This he acknowledges
in the epistle dedicatory to his Latin “Tractatus in Epist.
ad Philippenses,
” and in the same place gratefully acknowledges his obligations to Dr. Tudor, rector of Tewing in
Hertfordshire, to whom probably he was indebted for the
living of Welwyn. He died in Oct. 1697, and was interred at Welwyn. Dr. Stanhope preached his funeral
sermon at St. Andrew Undershaft, and gave him a very
high character for piety, humility, and learning. His
works are, 1. a pamphlet, entitled “A brief account of
some expressions in St. Athanasius’s creed,
” Oxon, An Explication of the Decalogue, or Ten Cornmandments,
” and “Explication of the Catechism of the
church of England,
” in three parts or volumes, London,
Of the sacraments in general, in
pursuance of an explication of the catechism of the church
of England,
” Lond. Of the sacrament of
Baptism in particular; of the right of baptism among the
heathen and Jews and of the institution of Christian baptism,
” &c. ibid. 1687, 8vo.
is principal work a treatise on the council of Basil, which was translated into French about the end of the seventeenth century by Dr. Gerbais, of the Sorbonne, and
, an eminent canonist, was a native of Sicily, and commonly called Panormitanus, from his being at the head of a Benedictine abbey in Palermo, and afterwards archbishop of that city. He was born probably towards the close of the fourteenth century, some say in 1336, and became one of the most celebrated canonists of his time. He was present at the council of Basil, and had a considerable hand in the proceedings there against pope Eugenius; in recompense for which service he was made a 1 cardinal by Felix V. in 1440. He was afterwards obliged, by the orders of the king of Arragon his master, to return to his archbishopric, where he died of the plague in 1445. There is a complete edition of his works, Venice, 1617, in 9 vols. fol. Dupin mentions as his principal work a treatise on the council of Basil, which was translated into French about the end of the seventeenth century by Dr. Gerbais, of the Sorbonne, and printed at Paris.
, was an eminent mathematician irt Italy, in the end of the sixteenth and early part of the seventeenth century, but no particulars are known of his
, was an eminent mathematician irt
Italy, in the end of the sixteenth and early part of the
seventeenth century, but no particulars are known of his
life, nor when he died. The following occur in catalogues
as his works: 1. “Mechanica,
” Pis. Pianisphaeriorum universalium Theorica,
”
Pis. Paraphrasis in
ArchimedisSquiponderantia,
” Pis. ibid. 1600, fol. 5.
” Problemata Astronomica,“Ven. 1609, fol. 6.
” De Cochlaea," ibid. 1615, fol.
, a physician of the seventeenth century, was born of genteel parents at Petherton,
, a physician of the seventeenth century, was born of genteel parents at Petherton, near Bridgewater, in Somersetshire, in 1577, and in 1594 became a commoner of St. Alban’s-hall, Oxford. After taking a degree in arts, he studied physic, and practised for a time about Oxford. In 1613, he took his doctor’s degree, and returning to his own country, practised for many years at Bridgewater; but afterwards, at or near Bath. He was highly esteemed in that part of the country for skill in his profession, and maintained the character of an upright and charitable person. He died March 27, 1660, and was buried in St. Peter’s church in Bath, where a monument with a large inscription, by Dr. Pierce of that city, was erected to his memory.
aid to be useful for consultation. His son, Nicholas Vignier, was minister at Blois at the beginning of the seventeenth century, but adopted the sentiments of the Catholic
, king’s physician, and historiographer of France, was born in 1530, of a good family, at
Troyes, in Champagne. He became very celebrated by his
practice, and died at Paris, 1596, aged sixty-six, after having abjured protestantism, in which he was brought up. His
principal works are, 1. “Les Fastes des anciens Hébreux,
Grecs, et Remains,
” 4to. 2. “Bibliotheque Historiale,
”
4 Vols. fol. 3. A collection of “Church History,
” fol. but
little valued. 4. An excellent treatise “On the state and
origin of the ancient French,
” fol. and 4to. 5. “Sommaire
de l'Histoire des François,
” fol. 6. “Traité de l'ancien
etat de la petite Bretagne,
” 4to, and other works on French
history, which are said to be useful for consultation. His
son, Nicholas Vignier, was minister at Blois at the beginning of the seventeenth century, but adopted the sentiments of the Catholic church after the year 1631, and
left several controversial works.
eine, March 5, 1750. His family was originally of Spain, but had settled in France in the early part of the seventeenth century. His father, as well as others of his
, a
very learned Frenchman, member oi the Institute, and of
all the academies and learned societies of Kurope, was born
at Corbeille-sur- Seine, March 5, 1750. His family was
originally of Spain, but had settled in France in the early
part of the seventeenth century. His father, as well as
others of his ancestors, had served in the army. He began
his stiuiies at a very early age at the college of Lisieux,
from which he removed to that of Du Plessis, and in both
was distinguished by a decided taste for the ancient languages, especially the Greek, for the sake of which he
again removed to the college of Des Grassis, that he might
attend the Greek lectures of M. le Beau. Under his tuition
he distanced all his fellow-students, and gained all the
prizes destined to those who proved the superiority of their
taste in Homer. He afterwards attended the lectures of
Capperonier, Greek professor in the royal college of France,'
which were adapted to a more advanced state of proficiency,
and soon made such progress as to need no other instructor
than his own study. And such was the extent of his application, that he had already, although scarcely fifteen years
of age, perused almost all the writers of antiquity, poets,
orators, historians, philosophers, and grammarians. Having thus exhausted the usual stores of printed works, he
sought new treasures in manuscripts; and having foil' 1 i in
the library of St. Germain-des-Pres, a collection of inedited Greek lexicons, among which was that of Homer by
Apollonius, he formed the design of publishing this last,
which accordingly appeared in 1773, preceded by ample
prolegomena, and accompanied by notes and observations,
the extensive and profound erudition of which appeared
very extraordinary in a young man of only twenty-two.
The academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, to which
Villoison submitted his work before it was printed, had admitted him a member during the preceding year, after having obtained a dispensation on account of his age, without
which he could not be elected. The reason assigned was
extremely honourable to him: “that having anticipated
the age of profound knowledge, it was just that he should
enjoy its advantages earlier than other men; and that he
should outstrip them in a career of honours, as he had in
that of learning.
”
e. It was first printed at Strasburgh in 1476, and has often been reprinted, as low as the beginning of the seventeenth century. Vincent died in 1264, as some assert,
, a Dominican of the thirteenth century, was reader to St. Louis, king of France,
and tutor to his children. He compiled a summary of varions knowledge, called the “Speculum Majus,
” containing matters of a natural, doctrinal, moral, and historical
kind, which contains the opinions of authors that are not
now extant, and on that account is an object of some curiosity. In other respects it serves only to shew the ignorance and superstition of the age. It was first printed at
Strasburgh in 1476, and has often been reprinted, as low
as the beginning of the seventeenth century. Vincent died
in 1264, as some assert, but, according to Dupin, this is a
matter of great doubt. He left some other works.
, an ingenious doctor, and one of the most learned men of the seventeenth century, in Hebrew and the Oriental languages,
, an ingenious doctor, and one of
the most learned men of the seventeenth century, in Hebrew and the Oriental languages, was a native of Bourdeaux, descended from a respectable family of distinction
in the law. He at first held the office of counsellor to the
parliament in his native city; but having afterwards chosen
the ecclesiastical profession, was raised to the priesthood,
and became preacher and almoner to Armand de Bourbon,
prince of Conti. M. de Voisin was extremely well skilled
in rabbinical learning, and the ecclesiastical authors. He
died 1685. His principal works are, a “System of Jewish
Theology,
” On the Divine Law,
” 8vo another “On the Jubilee of the Jews,
”
8vo, both in Latin learned notes on Raymond Martin’s
“Pugio Fidei
” Defense du Traite de M. le Prince
de Conti centre la Comédie et les Spectacles,
”
lic of great learning liberality, was born at Moortown, in the county of Kildare, irr the early part of the seventeenth century. He was a friar of the Franciscan order,
, an Irish catholic of great learning liberality, was born at Moortown, in the county of Kildare, irr the early part of the seventeenth century. He was a friar of the Franciscan order, and was professor of divinity at Louvain, where he probably was educated. Returning to Ireland, he went to Kilkenny at the time the pope’s nuncio was there, but was not of his party. On the contrary, he made many endeavours to persuade the Ifish Roman catholics to the same loyal sentiments as he himself held; and after the restoration of Charles II. when he was procurator of the Romish clergy of Ireland, he persuaded many of them to subscribe a recognition or remonstrance, not only of their loyalty to the king, but of their disclaiming the pope’s supremacy in temporals. This drew upon him the resentment of many of his brethren, and particularly of the court of Rome. Such hopes, however, were entertained of this important change in the sentiment! of the Irish catholics, that in 1666 the court thought proper to permit their clergy to meet openly in synod at Dublin, in order, as was expected, to authorize the above remonstrance by a general act of the whole body. But this assembly broke up without coming to any decision, and the duke of Ormond, then lord lieutenant, considered it necessary to proceed against those who refused to give any security for their allegiance. But when, in 1670, lord Berkeley succeeded him, by some secret orders or intrigues of the popishly-affected party in England, Walsh, and those who had signed the remonstrance, were so persecuted as to be obliged to leave the country. Walsh came to London, and by the interest of the duke of Ormond, got an annuity of lOOl. for life. He had lived on terms of intimacy with the duke for nearly forty years, and had never touched much on the subject of religion until the reign of James II. when he made some overtures to gain the duke over to popery; but desisted when he found his arguments had no effect. Dodwell took some pains, although in vain, to convert Walsh, hoping, that as they had cast him out of the communion of the church of Rome, he might be persuaded to embrace that of the church of England. Walsh died in September 1687, and was buried in St. Dun* stan’s in the West.
, master of Sidney-Sussex college, Cambridge, a learned divine of the seventeenth century, was born of a good family in the bishopric
, master of Sidney-Sussex college, Cambridge, a learned divine of the seventeenth century, was born of a good family in the bishopric of Durham, at a place called Bishops-Middleham. He was first sent to Christ’s college, Cambridge, where he became a scholar of the house, whence he was, on account of his extraordinary merit, elected into a fellowship at Emmanuel, and succeeded to the mastership of Sidney-Sussex college on Jan. 5, 1609. On April 29, 1615, he was installed archdeacon of Taunton, and was at that time D. D. and prebendary of Bath and Wells. On Feb. 11, 1617, he was promoted to a stall in the metropolitical church of York, where he had the prebend of Ampleford, which he kept to his death. In 1620 he was vice-chancellor of the university, and the year following was made lady Margaret’s professor of divinity. In 1622 he was at Salisbury with bishop Davenant, his intimate and particular friend, with whom, together with bishops Hall and Carleton, he had been sent by king James to the synod of Dort in 1613, as persons best able to defend the doctrine of the Church of England, and to gain it credit and reputation among those to whom they were sent.
, a political writer and historian of the seventeenth century, was by birth a gentleman, descended
, a political writer and historian of the seventeenth century, was by birth a gentleman,
descended from the Warwicks of Warthwykes of Warwicke
in Cumberland, and bearing the same arms: “Vert, 3 lions
rampant Argent.
” His grandfather, Thomas Warwick, is
(in the visitation of Kent, by sir Edward Bysche, in 1667),
styled of Hereford, but whom he married is not mentioned.
His father, Thomas Warwick, was very eminent for his
skill in the theory of music, having composed a song of
forty parts, for forty several persons, each of them to have
his part entire from the other. He was a commissioner for
granting dispensations for converting arable land into
pasture, and was some time organist of
Westminster-abbey and the Chapel-royal. He married Elizabeth daughter
and co-heir of John Somerville, of Somerville Aston le
Warwick; by whom he had issue: one son, Philip, our
author, and two daughters; Arabella, married to Henry
Clerke, esq. and afterwards married to Christopher Turnor, of the Middle Temple, esq. barrister at law, who, at
the Restoration, was knighted, and made a baron of the
exchequer.
m an ancient family in Cheshire, of which a branch had been established in Virginia about the middle of the seventeenth century. No remarkable circumstances have transpired
, commander in chief of the armies, and first president of the United States of America, was born Feb. 11, 1732, in the parish of Washington, Virginia. He was descended from an ancient family in Cheshire, of which a branch had been established in Virginia about the middle of the seventeenth century. No remarkable circumstances have transpired of his education or his early youth; and we should not indeed expect any marks of that disorderly prematureness of talent, which is so often fallacious, in a character whose distinguishing praise was to be regular and natural. His classical instruction was probably small, such as the private tutor of a Virginian country gentleman could at that period have imparted; and if his opportunities of information had been more favourable, the time was too short to profit by them. Before he was twenty he was appointed a major in the Colonial militia, and he had very early occasion to display those political and military talents, of which the exertions on a greater theatre have since made his name so famous throughout the world.
, a loyal astrologer of the seventeenth century, was descended from an ancient family
, a loyal astrologer of the seventeenth century, was descended from an ancient family in Westmoreland, and born at Kirby-Kendal in that county April 4, 1617. He passed some time at the university of Oxford, but was more studious of mathematics and astronomy than of any other academical pursuits. After this, having some private fortune, he retired from the university, until the breaking out of the rebellion, when he converted his property into money, and raised a troop of horse for his majesty, of which he became captain. After other engagements, he was finally routed at Stow-on-the-Would in Gloucestershire, March 21, 1645, where sir Jacob Astley was taken prisoner, and Wharton received several wounds, the marks of which he carried to his grave. He then joined the king at Oxford, and had an office conferred upon him in the ordnance, but after the decline of the royal cause, he came to London and gained a livelihood by his writings, chiefly by that profitable article, the composing of almanacks, with predictions. In some of his productions he gave offence by his loyal hints and witticisms, and was several times imprisoned, particularly in Windsor-castle, where he found his brother conjuror William Lilly. Lilly showed him much kindness, which Wharton repaid afterwards by saving him from prosecution as a republican prophet. Upon the restoration, Whartori*s loyalty was rewarded by the place of treasurer and paymaster of the ordnance, and he was also created a baronet. He died Aug. 12, 1681. He wrote, besides his Almanacks, Mercuries, astronomical pieces, and chronologies of the events of his time. His works were collected and published by Gadbury in 1683, 8vo.
se on his biographical labours, which were principally five volumes of memoirs of the celebrated men of the seventeenth century, as a sequel to those of Meichior Adam.
, or W1TTEN (Henningus), a German biographer, was born in 1634. We find very few particulars
of him, although he has contributed so muc)i to our knowledge of other eminent men. He was a divine and professor of divinity at Riga, where he died Jan. 22, 1696.
Morhoff bestows considerable praise on his biographical labours, which were principally five volumes of memoirs of
the celebrated men of the seventeenth century, as a sequel
to those of Meichior Adam. They were octavo volumes,
and published under the titles of “Memoria Theologorum
nostri seculi,
” Franc. Memoria Medicorum
” “Memoria Jurisconsultorum
”
“Memoria Philosophorum,
” &c. which last includes poets
and polite scholars. The whole consist of original lives, or
eloges collected from the best authorises. The greater
part are Germans, butthere are a few French and English.
In 1688 he published, what we have often found very useful, his * 4 Diarium Biographicum Scriptorum seculi xvii.“vol. I. 4to, 1688, vol, II. 1691. It appears that Wittepaid
a visit to England in 1666, and became acquainted with
the celebrated Dr. Pocock, to whom he sent a letter ten
years afterwards, informing the doctor that he had for some
time been engaged in a design of writing the lives of the
most famous writers of that age in each branch of literature, and had already published some decades, containing
memoirs of divines, civilians, and physicians;
” that he
was now collecting eloges on the most illustrious phiiologers, historians, orators, and philosophers; but wanted memoirs of the chief Englishmen who, in the present (seventeenth) century, have cultivated these sciences, having no
relation of this sort in his possession, except of Mr. Camden; he begs, therefore, that Dr. Pocock, would, by the
bearer, transmit to him whatever he had to communicate
in this way."
merits some notice from his name occurring so frequently in the popish controversy at the latter end of the seventeenth century, was the son of John Woodhead of Thornhill
, whom Dr. Whitby pronounces “the most ingenious and solid writer of the Roman (catholic) party,
” and who merits some notice from his
name occurring so frequently in the popish controversy at
the latter end of the seventeenth century, was the son of
John Woodhead of Thornhill in Yorkshire, and was born
in 1608 at Meltham in the parish of Abbersbury, or Ambury, in that county. He had his academical education
in University college, Oxford, where he took his degrees
in arts, was elected fellow in 1633, and soon after entered
into holy orders. In 1641 he served the office of proctor,
and then set out for the continent as travelling tutor to
some young gentlemen of family who had been his pupils
in college. While at Rome he lodged with the duke of
Buckingham, whom he taught mathematics, and is supposed about the same time to have embraced the communion of the church of Rome, although for a long time he
kept this a profound secret. On his return to England he
had an apartment in the duke of Buckingham’s house in
the Strand, and was afterwards entertained in lord Capel’s
family. In 1648 he was deprived of his fellowship by the
parliamentary visitors, but merely on the score of absence,
aod non-appearance, when called. After the restoration
he was reinstated in his fellowship, but rinding it impossible any longer to conform, he obtained leave to travel,
with the allowance of a travelling fellowship. Instead,
Kbwever, of going abroad, he retired to an obscure residence at Hoxton near London, where he spent several
years, partly in instructing some young gentlemen of popish families, and partly in composing his works. Here
he remained almost undiscovered, until a little while before
his death, which happened at Hoxton, May 4, 1678. He
was buried in St. Pancras church-yard, where there is a
monument to his memory.
, a learned and loyal divine of the seventeenth century, was the son of Richard Wright, citizen
, a learned and loyal divine of the
seventeenth century, was the son of Richard Wright, citizen and silk-dyer of London, who was the son of Jeffrey
Wright, of Loughborough, in Leicestershire. He was born
in Black- Swan alley, Thames-street, in the parish of St.
James’s, Garlick Hythe, London, Dec. 23, 1611, and educated partly at Mercers’- chapel school, but principally at
Merchant Taylors, whence he was elected scholar of St.
JobnVcollege, Oxford, in 1629, by the interest of Dr.
Juxon, then president, w/ho became his patron. He was
much admired at this time for a natural eloquence, and a
love of polite literature. In 1632 he was elected fellow,
and while bachelor of arts, made a collection of modern
Latin poetry, which he published afterwards under the
title of “Delitiae delitiarum, siveepigrammatum ex optimis
quibusque hujus novissimi seculi Poetis in amplissima ilia
Bibl. Bodleiana, et pene omnino alibi extantibus artthologia
in unum corollum connexa,
” Ox. 1637, 12mo. In 1636,
when archbishop Laud entertained the royal family at St.
JohnVcollege, Mr. Wright was selected to make an English address, and afterwards distinguished himself as a
performer in a comedy called “Love’s Hospital,
” which
was acted before their majesties in the hall, by a company
of St. John’s men.
whereas the information contained in all the other histories of Scotland preceding the middle of the seventeenth century, if we except the brief chronicle subjoined
whereas the information contained in all the other histories of Scotland preceding the middle of the seventeenth century, if we except the brief chronicle subjoined to some manuscripts of Wyntown, and the translations of Ballenden and Read, was effectually concealed from the unlearned part of mankind under the veil of a dead or a foreign language. In Wyntbwn’s Chronicle the historian may find what, for want of more ancient records, which have long ago perished, we must now consider as the original accounts of many transactions, and also many events related from his own knowledge or the reports of eye-witnesses. His faithful adherence to his authorities appears from comparing his accounts with unquestionable vouchers, such as the Fcedera Anglise, and the existing remains of the Register of the priory of St. Andrew’s, that venerable monument of ancient Scottish history and antiquities, generally coaeval with the facts recorded in it, whence he has given large extracts, almost literally translated. All these we have hitherto been obliged to take at second or third hand in copies by Bower and others, with such additions and embellishments as they were pleased to make to Wyntown’s simple and genuine narrative. An ecclesiastical historian of Scotland can no where find so good an account of the bishops of St. Andrew’s, with occasional notices concerning the other sees, as from Wyntown, who in describing the churches, their buildings and paraphernalia, shews himself quite at home. The compiler of a Scottish peerage may obtain from Wyntown more true information concerning the ancient noble families of Scotland, than is to be found in any work extant, except the accurate and elaborate research made by the late lord Hailes in the celebrated Sutherland case, wherein he has repeatedly had recourse to our author for proofs of the laws and customs of succession. In this view the lawyer will also find the Chronicle of Wyntown an useful addition to his library, and may consult it with advantage, when called upon to adjust a disputed inheritance in an ancient family. Mr. Ellis, who allows that Wynton is highly valuable as a historian, adds that his versification is easy, his language pure, and his style often animated.