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

, lord of Someldyck and Spyck, one of the most celebrated negociators of the United Provinces, was the son of Cornelius Aarsens, (who was greffier, or secretary of state, from 1585 to 1623,) and was born at the Hague in 1572. His father put him under the care of Duplessis Mornay at the court of William I. prince of Orange. The celebrated John Barnevelt sent him afterwards as agent into France; and, after residing there some time, he was recognised as ambassador, the first whom the French Court had received in that capacity from the United States; and the king, Louis XIII. created him a knight and baron. After holding this office for fifteen years, he became obnoxious to the French Court, and was deputed to Venice, and to several German and Italian princes, on occasion of the troubles in Bohemia. But such was the dislike the French king now entertained against him, that he ordered his ambassadors in these courts not to receive his visits. One cause of this appears to have been a paper published by Aarsens in 1618, reflecting on the French king’s ministers. In 1620 he was sent as ambassador to England, and again in 1641: the object of this last embassy was to negociate a marriage between prince William, son to the prince of Orange, and a daughter of Charles I. Previous to this, however, we find him again In France, in 1624, as ambassador extraordinary, where it appears that he became intimate with and subservient to the cardinal Richelieu; who used to say that he never knew but three great politicians, Oxenstiern, chancellor of Sweden, Viscardi, chancellor of Montferrat, and Francis Aarsens. His character, however, has not escaped just censure, on account of the hand he had in the death of Barnevelt, and of some measures unfriendly to the liberties of his country. He died in 1641. The editors of the Diet. Historique attribute to him “A Journey into Spain, historical and political,” published by De Sercy at Paris, 1666, 4to, and often reprinted; but this was the work of a grandson, of both his names, who was drowned in his passage from England to Holland, 1659.

, the son of Berenger, of noble descent, was born at Palais, near Nantes, in Bretagne, in 1079. Such was the state of learning at that time, that he had no other field for the exercise of his talents, which were exceedingly promising, than the scholastic philosophy, of which he afterwards became one of the most celebrated masters. After the usual grammatical preparation, he was placed under the tuition of Rosceline, an eminent metaphysician, and the founder of the sect of the Nominalists. By his instructions, before the age of sixteen, he acquired considerable knowledge, accompanied with a subtlety of thought and fluency of speech, which throughout life gave him great advantage in his scholastic contests. His avidity to learn, however, soon induced him to leave the preceptor of his early days, and to visit the schools of several neighbouring provinces. In his 20th year, he fixed hist residence in the university of Paris, at that time the first seat of learning in Europe. His master there was William de Champeaux, an eminent philosopher, and skilful in the dialectic art. At first he was submissive and humbly attentive to de Champeaux, who repaid his assiduity by the intimacy of friendship; but the scholar soon began to contradict the opinions of the master, and obtained some victories in contending with him, which so hurt the superior feelings of the one, and inflamed the vanity of the other, that a separation became unavoidable; and Abelard, confident in his powers, opened a public school of his own, at the age of 22, at Melun, a town about ten leagues from Paris, and occasionally the residence of the court.

, an Arabian poet, was born in the town of Maara, A. D. 973. He was blind from three years old, having lost his sight at that age by the small-pox; but this defect was compensated by the qualities of his mind. He adopted the vegetable diet of the Bramins, but appears in other respects to have believed in no religious principles. His principal work was entitled Sekth-al-zend, a poem which was greatly esteemed in the East. He was considered as one of the most celebrated poets of his nation. He died in 1057. Fabricius in 1638, and Golius in 1656, published some extracts from his poem.

, archbishop of Lyons, was one of the most celebrated and learned prelates of the ninth century. Dr. Cave and Olearius tell us he was a Frenchman, but Du Pin says there is no absolute proof of this. He was born in the year 779, as father Mabillon deduced from a short martyrology, upon which Agobard seems to have written some notes with his own hand. In the year 782 he came from Spain to France. Leidrade, archbishop of Lyons, ordained him priest in the year 804, and nine years after he was appointed coadjutor, or corepiscopus to that prelate, and when, in the year 816, Leidrade returned to a monastery at Soissons, Agobard was substituted in his room with the consent of the emperor, and the whole synod of the French bishops, who highly approved of the choice which Leidrade had made of a successor. This ordination, however, was objected to, as it is contrary to the canons, that a bishop should choose his successor himself. Agobard notwithstanding enjoyed the see quietly till he was expelled from it by the emperor Louis le Debormaire, because he had espoused the party of his sou Lothaire, and been one of the chief authors of deposing him in the assembly of bishops at Compiegne in the year 833. For Lewis, having secured himself against the injustice and violence which had been offered by Lothaire and the bishops of his party, prosecuted the latter in the council of Thionville in the year 835. Agobard, who had retired to Italy, with the other bishops of his party, was summoned three times before the council, and refusing to appear, was deposed, but no person was substituted in his room. His cause was again examined in the year 836, at an assembly held at Stramiac near Lyons: but it continued still undetermined, on account of the absence of the bishops, whose sole right it was to depose their brother. At length, the sons of the emperor having made their peace with him, they found means to restore Agobard, who was present in the year 838, at an assembly held at Paris; and he died in the service of his sovereign, in Xaintonge, June 5, in the year 840. This church honoured him with the title of saint. He had no less share in the affairs of the church, than those of the empire; and he shewed by his writings that he was a much abler divine than a politician. He was a strenuous defender of ecclesiastical discipline, very tenacious of the opinions he had once espoused, and very vigorous in asserting and defending them. Dupin, however, acknowledges that he was unfriendly to the worship of images, and it appears that he held notions on that subject which would have done honour to more enlightened times. He wrote a treatise entitled “Adversus dogma Faslicis ad Ludovicum Imp.” against Felix Orgelitanus, to shew that Christ is the true son of God, and not merely by adoption and grace. He wrote likewise several tracts against the Jews, a list of which may be seen in the General Dictionary, 10 vols. fol. from whence our account of him is principally taken. His style is simple, intelligible, and natural, but without elevation or ornament. He reasons with much acuteness, confirming his arguments, as was the custom then, by the authority of the fathers, whom he has largely quoted. His works were buried in obscurity for several ages, Until Papirius Masso found a manuscript of them by chance at a bookseller’s shop at Lyons, who was just going to cut it to pieces to bind his books with. Masso published this manuscript at Paris in 1603 in 8vo, and the original was after his death deposited in the king of France’s library. But Masso having suffered many errors to escape him in his edition, M. Baluze published a more correct edition at Paris, 1666, 2 vols. 8vo, from the same manuscript, and illustrated it with notes. He likewise added to it a treatise of Agobard entitled “Contra quatuor libros Amalarii liber,” which he copied from an old manuscript of Peter Marnæsius, and collated with another manuscript of Chifflet. This edition has been likewise reprinted in the “Bibliotheca Patrum.”

, son of the preceding, and one of the most celebrated anatomists of modern times, was born at Francfort in 1697. He received his first instructions from his father, and from the celebrated professors at Leyden, Rau, Bidloo, and Boerhaave; and in 1713 visited France, where he formed an acquaintance with Winslow and Senac, and afterwards corresponded with them on, his favourite science, anatomy. But he had scarce spent a year there when he was invited by the curators of the university of Leyden, to be lecturer in anatomy and surgery, in place of Rau. With this request, so flattering to a young man, he resolved to comply, although contrary to his then views and inclination, and on his arrival was created doctor in medicine without any examination. Soon after, upon the death of his father, he was appointed to succeed him as professor of anatomy, and on his admission, Nov. 9, 1721, he read a paper, “De vera via ad fabricae humani corporis cognitionem ducente,” which was heard with universal approbation.

, one of the most celebrated followers of Aristotle, flourished about the year 200. He was so called from Aphrodisea, a town in Caria, where he was born. He penetrated, with such success, into the meaning of the most profound speculations of his master, that he was not only respected by his contemporaries as an excellent preceptor, but was followed by subsequent Aristotelians among the Greeks, Latins, and Arabians, as the best interpreter of Aristotle. On account of the number and value of his commentaries, he was called, by way of distinction, “The Commentator.” Under the emperor Septimus Severus he was appointed public professor of the Aristotelian philosopln r, but whether at Athens or Alexandria is uncertain. In his works he supports the doctrine of Divine Providence; upon this head he leaned towards Platonism, but on most other subjects adhered strictly to Aristotle. In his book concerning the soul, he maintains that it is not a distinct substance by itself, but the form of an organized body.

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

, surnamed Saccas, one of the most celebrated philosophers of his age, was born in Alexandria, and flourished about the beginning of the third century. His history and his opinions have been the subject of much dispute among modern writers, to some of whom we shall refer at the close of this article, after stating what appears to be the probable account. In the third century, Alexandria was the most renowned seminary of learning. A set of philosophers appeared there who called themselves Eclectics, because, without tying themselves down to any one set of rules, they chose what they thought most agreeable to truth from different masters and sects. Their pretensions were specious, and they preserved the appearance of candour, moderation, and dispassionate inquiry, in words and declarations, as their successors, the modern free-thinkers, have since done. Ammonius Saccas seems to have reduced the opinions of these Eclectics to a system. Plato was his principal guide; but he invented many things of which Plato never dreamed. What his religious profession was, is disputed among the learned. Undoubtedly he was educated a Christian; and although Porphyry, in his enmity against Christianity, observes that he forsook the Gospel, and returned to Gentilism, yet the testimony of Eusebius, who must have known the fact, proves that he continued a Christian all his days. His tracts on the agreement of Moses and Jesus, and his harmony of the four gospels, demonstrate that he desired to be considered as a Christian. His opinion, however, was, that all religions, vulgar and philosophical, Grecian and barbarous, Jewish and Gentile, meant the same thing at bottom. He undertook, by allegorizing and subtilizing various fables and systems, to make up a coalition of all sects and religions; and from his labours, continued by his disciples, some of whose works still remain, his followers were taught to look on Jew, philosopher, vulgar Pagan, and Christian, as all of the same creed. Longinus and Plotinus appear to have been the disciples of Ammonius, who is supposed to have died about the year 243. His history and principles are discussed by Dr. Lardner, in his Credibility, and by Mosheim in his history, the translator of which differs from Dr. Lardner in toto, and has been in this respect followed by Milner in his Church History recently published.

, one of the most celebrated Italian poets of the sixteenth century, was born about 1517, at Sutri in Tuscany, of very poor parents. After receiving such education as he could afford, he came to Rome and engaged himself as a corrector of the press; but an intrigue with his master’s wife, in which he was detected, obliged him to leave Rome^with a little money and a few cloaths, of which he was stripped by robbers. He then begged his way to Vienna, and there got immediate employment from Franceschi, the bookseller; and, while with him, wrote his translation of Ovid, and some of his original works. He then returned to Rome, which his reputation as a poet had reached, but his misfortunes also followed him; and after having lived for some time on the sale of his cloaths and books, he died partly of hunger, and partly of a disease contracted by his imprudent conduct, in an inn near Torre de Nona. The exact date of his death is not known, but it appears by a letter addressed to him by Annibai Caro, that he was alive in 1564. His translation of the Metamorphoses still enjoys a high reputation in Italy, and Varchi and some other critics chuse to prefer it to the original. This is exaggerated praise, but undoubtedly the poetry and style are easy and elegant; although from the many liberties he has taken with the text, it ought rather to be called an imitation than a translation. The editions have been numerous, but the best is that of the Giunti, Venice, 1584, 4to, with engravings by Franco, and notes and arguments by Orologi and Turchi. He also began the Æneid, but one book only was printed, 1564, 4to; soon after which period it is supposed he died. His other works are: 1. “Œdipo,” a tragedy, partly original and partly from Sophocles. It had great success in representation, and was played in a magnificent temporary theatre built for the purpose by Palladio in 1565. 2. “Canzoni,” addressed to the dukes of Florence and Ferrara. 3. “Poetical arguments for all the cantos of Orlando Furioso.” 4. Four “Capitoli,” or satires, printed in various collections of that description. It appears by these last that he was gay and thoughtless in the midst of all his misfortunes.

, or Antimaco, one of the most celebrated Greek professors in Italy in the Sixteenth century, was born at Mantua, about the year 1473. After learning Greek as far as it could be taught in his own country, he went into Greece, and improved his acquaintance with that language under the ablest masters during a residence there of five years, and wrote and spoke Greek as easily as Latin or Italian. On his return to Mantua, he engaged in teaching the Greek language, and lectured on that and on Greek literature. In 1532 he was invited to Feirara, where he became professor of the same studies, and held the office until his death in 1552. He translated Gemistus Plethon, and part of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, &c. under the title “Gemisti Plethonis de gestis Gnecorum post pugnam ad Mantineam per capita tractatio duobus libris explicata, M. Antonio Antimacho interprete. Ad haec Dionysii Halicarnassei prcccepta, &c.” Bale, 1540, 4to. He wrote also many Latin poems, which are mostly unpublished. Some have attributed to him eight books of Greek epigrams, and there are several by him, both in Greek and Latin, in a collection of letters addressed to Vettori, and published by Bandini, at Pavia, 1753.

, or Anvari, one of the most celebrated poets of Persia, was born in the twelfth century, and was incited to turn poet from the honours bestowed on that class by the sultan Sandjar. He presented a composition to that sultan, who admitted him to his court, and here Raschidi was his rival. These two poets were for some time of opposite parties; Anvari was in the camp of Sangiar when he attacked Alsitz, governor and afterwards sultan of the Kouarasmians, with whom Raschidi had shut himself up. Whilst the two sultans were assailing and repulsing each other, the two versifiers were skirmishing in their own method, reciprocally throwing at one another rhymes fastened to the end of an arrow. Our poet was at the same time an astrologer; but in his predictions he was particularly unfortunate, and his enemies took advantage of this to injure him with the sultan, and he was obliged to retire to the town of Balke, where he died in 1200. This Persian bard corrected the licentiousness that had been customary in the poetry of his country, but nothing of his remains except two small pieces, one of which is inserted in the Asiatic Miscellany, No. I. 1786, and translated by capt. Kirkpatrick; the other, translated into German by Chezy, was published in the secoud number of the Oriental Mine, a journal printed at Vienna, under the patronage and at the expense of count Rzewuski.

, one of the most celebrated painters of antiquity, was born in the isle of Cos, according to Pliny, but Lucian and Strabo assign Ephesus as the place of his birth, and Suidas, Colophon. He flourished in the fourth century B. C. and in the time of Alexander the Great. He was in high favour with this prince, who made a law that no other person should draw his picture but Apelles: he accordingly drew him, holding a thunderbolt in his hand, and the piece was finished with so much skill and dexterity, that it used to be said there were two Alexanders; one invincible, the son of Philip, the other inimitable, the production of Apelles. Alexander gave him likewise another remarkable proof of his regard: for when he employed Apelles to draw Campaspe, one of his mistresses, having found that he had conceived an affection for her, he resigned her to him; and it was from her that Apelles is said to have drawn his Venus Anadyomene. This prince went often to see Apelles when at work; and one day, as he was overlooking him, he is said to have talked so absurdly about painting, that Apelles desired him to hold his tongue; telling him that the very boys who mixed the colours laughed at him. Freinshemius, however, thinks it incredible that Apelles would make use of such an expression to Alexander; or that the latter, who had so good an education, and so fine a genius, would talk so impertinently of painting: nor, perhaps, would Apelles have expressed himself to this prince in such a manner upon any other occasion. Alexander, as we are told, having seen his picture drawn by Apelles, did not commend it so much as it deserved: a little after, a horse happened to be brought, which neighed at sight of the horse painted in the same picture: upon which Apelles is said to have addressed Alexander, “Sir, it is plain this horse understands painting better than your majesty.” Bayle, with some reason, doubts the truth of these anecdotes, and thinks, if true, he must have been a capricious buffoon, which is not consistent with the character usually given of him.

, one of the most celebrated mathematicians among the ancients, flourished about 250 years before Christ, being about 50 years later than Euclid. He was born at Syracuse in Sicily, and was related to Hiero, who was then king of that city. The mathematical genius of Archimedes placed him with such distinguished excellence in the view of the world, as rendered him both the honour of his own age, and the admiration of posterity. He was indeed the prince of the ancient mathematicians, being to them what Newton is to the moderns, to whom in his genius and character he bears a very near resemblance. He was frequently lost in a kind of reverie, so as to appear hardly sensible; he would study for days and nights together, neglecting his food; and Plutarch tells us that he used to be carried to the baths by force. Many particulars of his lire, and works, mathematical and mechanical, are recorded by several of the ancients, as Polybius, Livy, Plutarch, Pappus, &c. He was equally skilled in all the sciences, astronomy, geometry, mechanics, hydrostatics, optics, &c. in all of which he excelled, and made many and great inventions. Among others, he made a sphere of glass, of a most surprizing contrivance and workmanship, exhibiting the motions of the heavenly bodies. Claudian wrote an epigram on this invention.

, or Eizarakel, a native of Toledo, in the twelfth century, was one of the most celebrated astronomers who appeared after the time of the Greeks, and before the revival of learning. He wrote a treatise on the “obliquity of the Zodiac,” which he fixed, for his time, at 23 34', and determined the apogee of the sun by four hundred and two observations. The famous Alphonsine Tables, published by order of Alphonsus, king of Castille, were partly taken from the works of Arzachel. Few particulars are known of the personal history of this astronomer, unless that he was of the Jewish persuasion. Montucla says that his tables are preserved in several libraries, in manuscript, with an introduction which explains their use.

, or Asser, or Asker (called, by Pitts, John,) a learned monk of St. David’s, and historian, was of British extraction, probably of that part of South Wales called Pembrokeshire, and was bred up in the learning of those times, in the monastery of St. David’s (in Latin Menevia), whence he derived his surname of Menevensis. There he is said to have had for his tutor Johannes Patricius, one of the most celebrated scholars of his age, and had also the countenance of Nobis, or Novis, archbishop of that see, who was his relation but it does not appear that he was either his secretary or his chancellor, as some writers would have us believe. From St. David’s he was invited to the court of Alfred the Great, merely from the reputation of his learning, probably about the year 880, or somewhat earlier. Those who had the charge of bringing him to court, conducted him from St. David’s to the town of Dene (Dean) in Wiltshire, where the king received him with great civility, and shewed him in a little time the strongest marks of favour and affection, insomuch that he condescended to persuade him not to think any more of returning to St. David’s, but rather to continue with him as his domestic chaplain and assistant in his studies. Asserius, however, modestly declined this proposal, alledging, that it did not become him to desert that holy place where he had been educated, and received the order of priesthood, for the sake of any other preferment. King Alfred then desired that he would divide his time between the court and the monastery, spending six months at court, and six at St. David’s. Asserius would not lightly comply even with this request, but desired leave to return to St. David’s, to ask the advice of his brethren, which he obtained, but in his journey falling ill at Winchester of a fever, he lay there sick about a year and as soon as he recovered he went to St. David’s, where, consulting with his brethren on the king’s proposal, they unanimously agreed that he should accept it, promising themselves great advantages from his favour with the king, of which, at that time, they appear to have had need, to relieve them from the oppressions of one Hemeid, a petty prince of South Wales. But they requested of Asserius, that he would prevail on the king to allow him to reside quarterly at court and at St. David’s, rather than that he should remain absent six months together. When he came back he found the king at Leoneforde, who received him with every mark of distinction. He remained with him then eight months at once, reading and explaining to him whatever books were in his library, and grew into so great credit with that generous prince, that on Christmas-eve following, he gave him the monasteries of Anigresbyri, and Banuwille, that is, Ambrosbury in Wiltshire, and Banwell in Somersetshire, with a silk pall of great value, and as much incense as a strong man could carry, sending together with them this compliment, “That these were but small things, and by way of earnest of better which should follow them.” Soon after, he had Exeter bestowed upon him, and not long after that, the bishopric of Sherburn, which, however, he seems to have quitted in the year 883, though he always retained the title, as Wilfred archbishop of York was constantly so styled, though he accepted of another bishopric. Thenceforward he constantly attended the court, in the manner before stipulated, and is named as a person, in whom he had particular confidence, by king Alfred, in his testament, which must have been written some time before the year 885; since mention is made there of Esna bishop of Hereford, who died that year. He is also mentioned by the king, in his prefatory epistle placed before his translation of Gregory’s Pastoral, addressed to Wulfsig bishop of London and there the king does not call him bishop of Sherburn, but “my bishop,” acknowledging the help received from him and others in that translation. It appears to have been the near resemblance, which the genius of Asserius bore to that of the king, that gained him so great a share in his confidence and very probably, it was on this account, that Asserius drew up those memoirs of the life of Alfred which we still have, and which he dedicated and presented to the king in the year 893. la this work we have a curious account of the manner in which that prince and our author spent their time together. Asserius tells us, that having one day, being the feast of St. Martin, cited in conversation a passage of some famous author, the king was mightily pleased with it, and would have him write it down in the margin of a book he carried in his breast; but Asserius finding no room to write it there, and yet being desirous to gratify his master, he asked king Alfred whether he should not provide a few leaves, in which to set dawn such remarkable things as occurred either in reading or conversation the king was delighted with this hint, and directed Asserius to put it immediately in execution. Pursuing this method constantly, their collection began to swell, till at length it became of the size of an ordinary Psalter and this was what the king called his “Hand-book, or Manual.” Asserius, however, calls it Enchiridion. In all probability, Asserius continued at court during the whole reign of Alfred, and, probably, several years after but where, or when he died is doubtful, though the Saxon Chronicle positively fixes it to the year 910. The editor of his life in the Biog. Brit, takes Asser the monk, and Asser bishop of Sherburnj for one and the same person, which some however have denied, and asserts him to have been also archbishop of Sk David’s, upon very plausible authority. He admits, however, i that if there was such a reader in the public schools at Oxford as Asser the monk, he must have been some other person of the same name, and not our author but this point rests almost wholly on the authority of Harpsfiekl nor is the account consistent with itself in several other respects,as sir John S'pelman has justly observed. There is no less controversy about the works of Asserius, than about his preferments for some alledge that he never wrote any thing but the Annals of king Alfred whereas, Pitts gives us the titles of no less than five other books of his writing, and adds, that he wrote many more. The first of these is a “Commentary on Boetius,” which is mentioned by Leland, on the authority of the Chronicle of St. Neot’s but he probably only explained this author to king Alfred when he made his Saxon translation. The second piece mentioned by Pitts, is the Anjials of Alfred’s life and reign. The third he styles “Annales Britannia;,” or the Annals of Britain, in one book, mentioned also by Leland and Bale, and which has been since published by the learned Dr. Gale. The fourth piece, he calls “Aurearum Sententiarum Enchiridion, lib. 1” which is without question the Manual or common-placebook made for king Alfred, and reckoned among his works by Pitts himself. Leland has also spoken of this Enchiridion, as an instance of the learning and diligence of Asser, which it certainly was and though the collections he made concerning this author, are much better and larger than those of Bale and Pitts, yet he modestly, upon this subject, apologizes for speaking so little and so obscurely of so great a man. The next in Pitts’ s catalogue, is a “Book of Homilies,” and the last, “A Book of Epistles” but the existence of these seems unsupported by any authority; nor is it known where he was interred. He appears to have been one of the most pious and learned prelates of the age in which he lived.

, an Italian Jesuit, and one of the most celebrated controversial writers of his time, was born in Tuscany, 1542, and admitted amongst the Jesuits in 1560. In 1569 he was ordained priest, at Ghent, by Cornelius Jansenius, and the year following taught divinity at Louvain. After having lived seven years in the Low Countries, he returned to Italy, and in 1576 began to read lectures at Rome on points of controversy. This he did with so much applause, that Sixtus V. appointed him to accompany his legate into France, in 1590, as a person who might be of great service, in case of any dispute concerning religion. He returned to Rome about ten months after, where he had several offices conferred on him by his own society as well as by the pope, and in 1599 was created cardinal. Three years after, he had the archbishopric of Capua given him, which he resigned in 1605, when pope Paul V. desired to have him near himself. He was now employed in the affairs of the court of Rome, till 1621, when, finding himself declining in health, he left the Vatican, and retired to the house belonging to the Jesuits, where he died the 17th of Sept. 1621. It appeared on the day of his funeral that he was regarded as a saint, and the Swiss guards belonging to the pope were obliged to be placed round his coffin, in order to keep off the crowd, which pressed to touch and kiss the body; but they could not prevent every thing he made use of from being carried away a venerable relic.

, was a native of Sienna, which circumstance has procured him to be recorded in some biographical works under the name of Hugo Senensis, and Freher, otherwise a correct biographer, has given these as distinct persons. He became one of the most celebrated physicians of the fifteenth century, and not less esteemed as a philosopher and divine. In such admiration was he held, that his contemporaries hailed him as another Aristotle and a new Hippocrates; and such was his memory, that he could readily and promptly give answers to any questions or doubts that were propounded from the works of Plato or Aristotle. He was, according to Ghilini, professor of medicine at Ferrara, and was a member of the council called to adjust the religious disputes between the Greeks and Latins. Castellanus informs us, that when Nicholas of Este founded the university of Parma, Bencius was appointed one of its first professors, and this Bencius himself confirms in the introduction to his commentary on Galen. He died at Rome in 1438, according to Castellanus, or in 1448, according to Ghilini. tjis principal works are, 1, “In aphorismos Hippocratis,” &c. expositio,“ Venice, 1498, folio, reprinted 1.517, 1523. 2.” Consilia saluberrima ad omnes Ægritudines,“Venice, 1518, folio. 3.” In tres libros Microtechni Galeni luculentissimi expositio,“ibid. 1523, fol. 4.” In primi canonis Avicennufc Fen primam expositio,“ibid. 1523, fol. 5.” Supra quarta Fen primi Avicennae expositio,“ib. 1717. 6.” In quarti canonis Avicennse Fen primam expositio," ibid. 1523. There is an edition of his works, Venice, 2 vols, folio, 1518, but whether it includes the above is not mentioned in our authorities.

, called by some writers Berna or Bernia, was one of the most celebrated Italian poets of the sixteenth century. He was born about the conclusion of the fifteenth, at Lamporecchio, in that part of Tuscany called Val-di-Nievole, of a noble but impoverished family of Florence. In his nineteenth year he went to Koine, to his relation cardinal Bibiena, who according to his own account, did him neither good nor harm. He was then obliged to take the office of secretary to Giberti, bishop of Verona, who was datary to pope Leo X. On this he assumed the ecclesiastical habit, in hopes of sharing some of that prelate’s patronage, but the mean and dull employment of his office of secretary, and for which he was ill paid, was very unsuitable to his disposition. There was at Rome what he liked better, a society or academy of young ecclesiastics as gay as himself, and lovers of wit and poetry like himself, who, no doubt in order to point out their taste for wine, and their thoughtless habits, were called Vignajuoli, vinedressers. To this belonged Mauro, Casa, Firenzuola, Capilupij and many others. In their meetings they laughed at every thing, and made verses and witticisms on the most grave and solemn subjects. The compositions Berni contributed on these occasions, were so superior to the others, that verses composed in the same style began to be called “La poesia Bernesca.”

, a French historical and miscellaneous writer of considerable fame, was born at Paris in 1734, of an opulent family, and devoted himself in his youth to high life and the fine arts. From being first valet de chambre to Louis XV. he became his favourite > and on the death of that monarch, he obtained the place of farmer-general, the duties of which unpopular office he performed with great assiduity, employing his leisure hours in cultivating music and general literature. He became one of the most celebrated composers of songs, and his “Recueil d'airs,” 4 vols. 8vo, ornamented with fine engravings, is in high esteem. He composed also the music of the opera of “Adela de Ponthieu,” which was performed with considerable success. Happening to read in De Bure, that there had been only thirty copies published of the Collection of antient paintings of Rome, coloured after Bartoli’s designs, he made inquiry for the coppers, had them repaired, and published a second edition of that work. His other works are: 1.“Essais sur la Musique ancienne et moderne,” 1780, 4 vols. 4to, a vast mass of useful materials, but many parts of it are written in the spirit of system and partiality, and many valuable passages of considerable length are borrowed from Dr. Burney and other authors of eminence, without any acknowledgment. The best part is that which treats of the French lyric music and poetry. 2. “Essai sur l‘histoire chronologique de plus de quatrevingts peuples de l’antiquité,” 1783, 8vo. 3. “Memoires historiques, de Coucy,” 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “Pieces interessantes pour servir a l'histoire des regnes de Louis XIII. et de Louis XIV.” 12mo. 5. “Lettres sur la Suisse,” 1781, 2 vols. 8vo. 6. “Abregè chronologique des principaux faits arrives depuis Henoch jusqu'a. Jesus Christ,” 1789, 8vo. 7. “Recueil de vers dedies à Adelaide par le plus heureux des epoux,” 16 mo, a tribute to conjugal happiness, so seldom celebrated by poets. La Borde also published a translation of Swinburne’s Travels; a fine edition of the Historical Romances of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, printed by Didot, in 11 vols, 12mo.; “Tableaux topographiques et pittoresques de la Suisse,” with letter-press and beautiful engravings by Robert: and lastly, in 1792, “L'Histoire abregée de la mer du Sud,” 3 vols. 8vo, containing an analysis of all the voyages to that sea from the time of Goneville, in the fifteenth century, to that of our countryman, Capt. Riou, in 1789. In this also he urges the Spaniards to widen the passage of Nicaragua, which is only three leagues, and make it navigable, and a communication between the North and South Seas, pointing out the advantages this would be attended with in voyages from Europe to China. During the Convention, la Borde retired to Rouen where he hoped to be overlooked, but the spies of the reigning tyrants discovered him, and conducted him to Paris, where he was beheaded July 22, 1791. His wife was the authoress of some “Poems” imitated fnjm the English, and printed by Didot in 1785, 18mo.

It appears that after he left the army, he studied for some time in the Inner Temple, but is said to have heard more sermons than law-lectures, and at length determined to study divinity. With this view he went to Cambridge about the month of August 1548, and took his degree of master of arts at Katherine-hall, and not Queen’s college, as some authors have reported. Dr. Ridley, bishop of Rochester, and afterwards of London, being then master of Pembroke-hall, invited him and his pious companion Thomas Horton, to become fellows of that hall, to which he was chosen. When urged by Bucer to take orders, he pleaded his inability, notwithstanding the high reputation for learning which he had established in college; but Bucer reconciled him by saying, “Though thou couldst not feed the flock with fine cakes and white bread, yet should thou satisfy them with barley-bread.” In 1550, when Ridley was translated to the see of London, he sent for him to take upon him deacon’s orders, after which he became one of the most celebrated and popular preachers of his time, and was made one of the king’s chaplains. The bishop afterwards gave him a prebend in St. Paul’s, and lodged him in his house.

, son of the preceding, was born at Daventer in 1554, and became one of the most celebrated lawyers in the Netherlands. He studied at Cologne, Erfurt, Marpurg, Wittemberg, and Basil, at which last place he took his doctor’s degree in 1579. He afterwards taught law at WittemHerg for a year, and at Erfurt for two years, and returned then to his own country, where he was appointed burgomaster of Daventer in 1586, and the year following professor at Leyden, where he died May 27, 1627. His principal works were: 1. “Centuriae et conciliationes earundem controversiarum juris, Cent. II.” 1621. 2. “Methodus Feudorum,” Leyden, 8vo. 3. “Aphorismi politici,” first collected by Lambert Danseus, and enlarged by Bronchorst, probably a good book, as it was prohibited at Rome in 1646.

, a most illustrious painter, sculptor, and architect, was born in the castle of Gaprese, in Tuscany, March 6, 1474, and descended from the noble family of the counts of Canossa. At the time of his birth, his father, Lodovico di Leonardo Buonarroti Sinione, was podesta, or governor of Caprese and Chiusi, and as he had not risen above the superstitious belief in astrological predictions, so common in that age, he was probably pleased to hear that “his chikl would be a very extraordinary genius.” His biographers indeed go so far as to tell us of a prediction, that he would excel in painting, sculpture, and architecture. When of a proper age, Michel Angelo was sent to a grammar-school at Florence, where, whatever progress he might make in his books, he contracted a fondness for drawing, which at first alarmed the pride of his family, but his father at length perceiving that it was hopeless to give his mind any other direction, placed him under Domenico Ghirlanda‘io, the most eminent painter at that time in Florence, and one of the most celebrated in Italy. He was accordingly articled for three years to Ghirlanda’io, from April 1488, but is said to have reaped no benefit from his instructions, as his master soon became jealous of his talents. He rapidly, however, surpassed his contemporary students, by the force of his genius, and his study of nature; and adopted a style of drawing and design more bold and daring than Ghirlandaio had been accustomed to see practised in his school; and, from an anecdote Vasari tells, it would seem Michel Angelo soon felt himself even superior to his master. One of the pupils copying a female portrait from a drawing by Ghirlandu'io, he took a pen and made a strong outline round it on the same paper, to shew him its defects; and the superior style of the contour was as much admired as the act was considered confident and presumptuous. His great facility in copying with accuracy whatever objects were before him sometimes forced a compliment even from Ghirlandaio himself.

, often called Hobertus de Licio, from Leze“or Lecce”, where he was born in 1425, descended probably from the illustriou; family of Caraccioli, and became one of the most celebrated preachers of his time. Having an early inclination to the church, he entered the order of the Franciscans, but finding their discipline too rigid, he removed to the Conventuals, and according to Erasmus, lived with more iVi-eJoin. He was. however, distinguished for talents, and occupied some honourable offices, and was appointed professor oi divinity. His particular bias was to preaching, which he cultivated with such success, as to incline all his brethren to imitate one who, throughout all Italy, was bailed as a second St. Paul. He displayed his pulpit eloquence not only in the principal cities of Italy, Assisa, Florence, Venice, Ferrara, Naples, &c. but before the popes, and is said to have censured the vices and luxury of the Roman court with great boldness and some quaint humour. This, however, appears not to have given serious offence, as he was employed by the popes, as well as by the king of Naples, in several negotiations of importance, and was made successively bishop of Aquino, of Lecce*, and of Aquila. After more than fifty years’ exercise of his talent as a preacher, he died at his native place May 6, 14-y 5. Of his sermons eight volumes have been often printed. 1. “Sermones de adventu,” Venice, 1496, 8vo. 2. “De Quadragesima,” Cologne, 1475, fol. 3. “De Quadragesima, seu Quadragesimale perutilissimum de Pcenitentia,” Venice, 1472, 4to. There are Italian translations of some of these. 4. “De Tempore, &c. Sanctorum,” Naples, 1489, 4to. 5. “De Solemnitatibus totius anni,” Venice, 1471. 6. “De Christo,” &c. Venice, 1489, 4to. 7. “De timorejudiciorum Dei,” Naples, 1473, fol. 8. “De amore divinorum officiorum,” ibid. 1473. There is another volume under the title “Roberti de Licio Sermones,” Leyden, 1500, 4to. He wrote also some theological works, of which a catalogue may be seen in our authority. Domenico de Angelis wrote his life, which was published at Naples in 1703, 4to.

, one of the most celebrated French poets, and called by his countrymen the Shakspeare of France, was born at Roan, June 6, 1606, of considerable parents, his father having been ennobled for his services by Louis XIII. He was brought up to the bar, which he attended some little time; but having no turn for business, he soon deserted it. At this time he had given the public no specimen of his talents for poetry, nor appears to have been conscious of possessing any such: and they tell us, that it was purely a trifling affair of gallantry, which gave occasion to his first comedy, called “Melite.” The drama was then extremely low among the French; their tragedy fiat and languid, their comedy more barbarous than the lowest of the vulgar would now tolerate. Corneille was astonished to find himself the author of a piece entirely new, and at the prodigious success with which his “Melite” was acted. The French theatre seemed to be raised, and to flourish at once; and though deserted in a manner before, was now filled on a sudden with a new company of actors. After so happy an essay, he continued to produce several other pieces of the same kind; all of them, indeed, inferior to what he afterwards wrote, but much superior to any thing which the French had hitherto seen. His “Medea” came forth next, a tragedy, borrowed in part from Seneca, which succeeded, as indeed it deserved, bul indifferently; but in 1637 he presented the “Cid,” another tragedy, in which he shewed the world how high his genius was capable of rising, and seems to confirm Du Bos’s assertion, that the age of thirty, or a few years more or less, is that at which poets and painters arrive at as high a pitch of perfection as their geniuses will permit. All Europe has seen the Cid: it has been translated into almost all languages: but the reputation which he acquired by this play, drew all the wits of his time into a confederacy against it. Some treated it contemptuously, others wrote against it. Cardinal de Richelieu himself is said to have been one of this cabal; for, not content with passing for a great minister of state, he affected to pass for a wit and a critic; and, therefore, though he had settled a pension upon the poet, could not abstain from secret attempts against his play . It was supposed to be under his influence that the French Academy drew up that critique upon it, entitled, “Sentiments of the French academy upon the tragi-comedy of Cid:” in which, however, while they censured some parts, they did not scruple to praise it very highly in others. Corneille now endeavoured to support the vast reputation he had gained, by many admirable performances in succession, which, as Bayle observes, “carried the French theatre to its highest pitch of glory, and assuredly much higher than the ancient one at Athens;” yet still, at this time, he had to contend with the bad taste of the most fashionable wits. When he read his “Polyeucte,” one of his best tragedies, before a company of these, where Voiture presided, it was very coldly received; and Voiture afterwards told him, it was the opinion of his friends that the piece would not succeed. In 1647 he was chosen a member of the French academy; and was what they call dean of that society at the time of his death, which happened in 1684, in his 79th year.

, queen of England, one of the most celebrated sovereigns of this or of any country, was the daughter of Henry VIII. by his queen Anne Boleyn, and born in the year 1533. JShe was educated in the principles of the protestant religion, and was distinguished for her attainments in classical literature. By the last will of her father, she was nominated third in order of succession, but by the influence of the duke of Northumberland, she was by an act of Edward VI. excluded from the crown, to which nevertheless she attained on the death of her sister Mary. During, however, the reign of that sister, she was treated with the utmost indignity and severity, committed to the Tower, and threatened with still greater calamities. Her confinement in this fortress was short, for even the judges of Mary could find no plea against her, and she was sent from thence to Woodstock, where, though kept in safe custody, she was treated with much respect. Her sufferings and her principles endeared her to the nation, and she became so extremely popular that it was, in a short time, deemed impolitic to put any restraint upon her. When set at liberty she chose study and retirement, and was very submissive to the will of her sister. Attempts were made to draw her into some declarations respecting her religion, which might be laid hold of; but in every instance she acted with so much prudence and caution as to give her enemies no advantage of that kind, and seemed to comply with the external forms of the established religion, though it was well known, she was attached to that of the reformation.

, one of the most celebrated philosophers of antiquity, the real merit of whose system, however, still remains doubtful, was an Athenian of the Egean tribe, and born at Gargettus, in the vicinity of Athens, at the beginning of the third year of the 109th oh mpiad, or B. C. 344. His father Neocles, and his mother Chaerestrata, were of honourable descent, but being reduced to poverty, they were sent with a colony of 2000 Athenian citizens, to the island of Samos, which Pericles had subdued, to divide the lands among them by lot; but wljat fell to their share not proving sufficient lor their subsistence, Neocles took up the profession of a schoolmaster. Epicurus remained at Samos till he was eighteen years of age, when he removed to Athens, which the tyranny of Perdiccas soon made him leave; but after passing one year at Mitylene, and four at Lampsacus, he returned to Athens. From his fourteenth to his thirty-sixth year, he studied under the various philosophers of his day, and therefore when we read in Cicero that he boasted he was a selftaught philosopher, we are to understand only that his system of philosophy was the result of his own reflections, after comparing the doctrines of other sects. About th thirty-second year of his age he opened a school at Mitylene, which he soon removed to Lampsacus, where he had disciples from Colophon, but not satisfied with this obscure situation, he determined to make his appearance on the more public theatre of Athens. Finding, however, the public places in the city proper for this purpose, already occupied by other sects, he purchased a pleasant garden, where he took up his constant residence, and taught his system of philosophy; and hence the Epicureans were called the Philosophers of the Garden. Besides this garden, Epicurus had a house in Melite, a village of the Cecropian tribe, to which he frequently retreated with his friends. From this time to his death, notwithstanding all the disturbances of the state, Epicurus never left Athens, unless in two or three excursions into Ionia to visit his friends. During the siege of Athens by Demetrius, which happened when Epicurus was forty -four years of age, while the city was severely [harassed by famine, Epicurus is said to have supported himself and his friends on a small quantity of beans, which he shared equally with them.

, one of the most celebrated anatomists of the sixteenth century, was a native of San Severino, a village in Italy. He was educated at Rome, where he first conceived a bias in favour of medicine, and especially of anatomy, and cultivated the latter with such success, that he was appointed to the professor’s chair in that college. His life probably passed in the quiet pursuit of his studies and exercise of his profession, as no other events are on record concerning him. He died at Home in 1574. Eustachius was the author of several works, the greater part of which are lost. His treatise “De Controversiis Anatomicorum,” which was one of the most considerable of his productions, is much regretted. His opuscula which remain appeared under the following titles, “Opuscula Anatomica, nempe de Renum structura, officio, et administratione de auditus organo ossium examen de mom capitis de vena quae azygos dicitur, et de alia, quae in flexn brachii communem profundam producit de dentibus,” Venet. 1563, and again in 1674, with the notes of Pinus. An edition was also published at Leyden, in 1707, under the superintendance of Boerhaave. He has the merit of several discoveries in anatomy; being the tirst who described the renal capsules, the thoracic duct, and the passage leading from the throat to the internal ear, which is still called from him the Eustachian tube. A series of figures engraved on copper were mentioned in his “Opuscula” as nearly finished; but they were not discovered until 1714, when they were published at Rome by Lancisi, physician to pope Clement XL in one volume, folio. These plates were again published, but not well printed, at Geneva in 1717. The edition of Rome in 1728 is excellent; but the one published at the same city in 1740, by Petrioli, is less valuable. The same work was twice published at Leyden, under the direction of Albinus, viz. in 1744 and 1762. Eustachius edited the lexicon of Erotran at Venice in 1666, under the title of “Erotiani, Graeci scriptoris vetustissimi, vocum, quae apud Hippocratem sunt, collectio, cum annotatiombus Eustachii,” in quarto.

, one of the most celebrated historians and poets of his nation in the seventeenth century, was born March 18, 1590, at Sonto near Caravilla in Portugal, of a noble family, both by his father’s and mother’s side. His father’s name was Arnador Perez d'Eiro, and his mother’s Louisa Faria, but authors are not agreed in their conjectures why he did not take his father’s name, but preferred Faria, that of his mother, and Sousa, which is thought to have been his grandmother’s name. In his infancy he was very infirm, yet made considerable progress, even when a puny child, in writing, drawing, and painting. At the age of ten, his father sent him to school to learn Latin, in which his proficiency by no means answered his expectations, owing to the boy’s giving the preference to the Portuguese and Spanish poets. These he read incessantly, and composed several pieces in verse and prose in both languages, but he had afterwards the good sense to destroy his premature effusions, as well as to perceive that the Greek and Roman classics are the foundation of a true style, and accordingly he endeavoured to repair his error by a careful study of them. In 1604, when only in his fourteenth year, he was received in the Tank of gentleman into the household of don Gonzalez de Moraes, bishop of Porto, who was his relation, and afterwards made him his secretary; and during his residence with this prelate, which lasted ten years, he applied himself indefatigably to his studies, and composed some works, the best of which was an abridgment of the historians of Portugal, “Epitome de las historias Portuguesas, desde il diluyio hasta el anno 1628,” Madrid, 1628, 4to. In this he has been thought to give rather too much scope to his imagination, and to write more like an orator than a historian. In 1612 he fell in love with a lady of Porto, whom he calls Albania, and who was the subject of some of his poems; but it is doubtful whether this was the lady he married in 1614, some time after he left the bishop’s house, on account of his urging him to go into the church, for which he had no inclination. -He remained at Porto until 1618, when he paid his father a visit at Pombeiro. The year following he went to Madrid, and into the service of Peter Alvarez Pereira, secretary of state, and counsellor to Philip the III. and IV. but Pereira did not live long enough to give him any other proof of his regard than by procuring to be made a knight of the order of Christ in Portugal. In 1628 he returned to Lisbon with his family, but quitted Portugal in 1631, owing to his views of promotion being disappointed. Returning to Madrid, he was chosen secretary to the marquis de Castel Rodrigo, who was about to set out for Rome as ambassador at the papal court. At Rome Faria was received with great respect, and his merit acknowledged; but having an eager passion for study, he visited very few. The pope, Urban VIII. received him very graciously, and conversed familiarly with him on the subject of poetry. One of his courtiers requested Faria to write a poem on the coronation of that pontiff, which we find in the second volume of his poems. In 1634, having some reason to be dissatisfied with his master, the ambassador, he quitted his service, and went to Genoa with a view to return to Spain. The ambassador, piqued at his departure, which probably was not very ceremonious, wrote a partial account of it to the king of Spain, who caused Faria to be arrested at Barcelona. So strict was his confinement, that for more than three months no person had access to him; until Jerome de Villa Nova, the prothonotary of Arragon, inquired into the affair, and made his innocence known to the king. This, however, had no other effect than to procure an order that he should be a prisoner at large in Madrid; although the king at the same time assured him that he was persuaded of his innocence, and would allow him sixty ducats per month for his subsistence. Faria afterwards renewed his solicitations to be allowed to remove to Portugal, but in vain; and his confinement in Madrid, with his studious and sedentary life, brought on, in 1647, a retention of urine, the torture of which he bore with great patience. It occasioned his death, however, on June 3, 1640. He appears to have merited an excellent character, but was too little of a man of the world to make his way in it. A spirit of independence probably produced those obstacles which he met with in his progress; and even his dress and manner, we are told, were rather those of a philosopher than of a courtier. Besides his History of Portugal, already mentioned, and of which the best edition was published in 1730, folio, he Wote, 1. “Noches claras,” a collection of moral and political discourses, Madrid, 1623 and 1626, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Fuente de Aganipr, o Rimes varias,” a collection of his poems, in 7 vols. Madrid, 1644, &c. 3. “Commentarios sobra las Lusiadas de Luis de Camoens,” an immense commentary on the Lusiad, ibid. 1639, in 2 vols. folio. He is said to have began it in 1614, and to have bestowed twentyfive years upon it. Some sentiments expressed here had alarmed the Inquisition, and the work was prohibited. He was permitted, however, to defend it, which he did in, 4. * Defensa o Information por'los Commentaries, &c.“Madrid, 1640 or 1645, folio. 5.” Imperio de la China, &e.“and an account of the propagation of religion by the Jeuits, written by Semedo: Faria was only editor of this work, Madrid, 1643, 4to. 6.” Nobiliario del Concle D. Petro de Barcelos,“&c. a translation from the Portuguese, with notes, ibid. 1646, folio. 7.” A Life of Don Martin Bapt. de Lanuza,“grand justiciary of Arragon,” ibid. 1650, 4to. 8. “Asia Portuguesa,” Lisbon, 1666, &c. 3 vols. folio. 9. “Europa Portuguesa,” ibid. 1678, 2 vols. folio. 10. “Africa Portuguesa,” ibid. 1681, folio. Of this we have an English Edition by John Stevens, Lond. 1695, 3 vols. 8vo. 11. “America Portuguesa.” All these" historical and geographical works have been considered as correct and valuable. Faria appears to have published some other pieces of less importance, noticed by Antonio.

was one of the most celebrated of the Provengal poets or troubadours. He had a fine figure, abundance of wit, and a pleasing address, and was much encouraged by the princes o his time. By representing his comedies, he soon acquired considerable riches, which his vanity and his love of debauchery and expence did not suffer him to keep. From a miserable state of poverty he was relieved by the liberality of Richard Cacur de Lion, who had a strong taste for the Provencal poetry. After the death of this protector, he returned to Aix, where he married a young woman of distinguished wit and beauty; but she did not long survive her marriage with this profligate husband. He died soon after, in 1220, at what age is not exactly known, but certainly early in life. Among the many pieces which he wrote, the following are mentioned: I. A poem on the death of his benefactor, Richard I. 2. “The palace of Love,” imitated afterwards by Petrarch. 3. Several comedies, one of which, entitled “Heregia dels Prestes,” the heresy of the priests, a satirical production against the corruptions of the church, was publicly acted at the castle of Boniface, marquis of Montserrat.

Alexander’s successor, the abbot Berthold Voge), who long resided at Salzburg, as professor of canon law and rector of the university, being well acquainted with Fixlmillner’s great knowledge, particularly in the mathematics, appointed him in 1762 to be astronomer at Kremsmunster, with leave to retain his office as professor of canon-law. He now applied with great zeal to render himself more fit for his new occupation, as he had not yet attended much to practical astronomy, and was even but little acquainted with those books from which he could obtain information on the subject. His great attachment, however, to this science, fine genius, and a desire of being useful to the institution in which he resided, and to the world, made him overcome every difficulty. The first book that fell into his hands was Lalande’s “Exposition du Calctil Astronomique,” with which alone, without any ^oral instruction, he began to study and to make observations. This work, together with Ylacq’s Logarithmic Tables, were for a long time his only sources and guides, till he at length obtained Lalande’s large work on astronomy. Fortunately, a carpenter, John Illinger, born in a village belonging to the abbey, though he could neither read nor write, waa able, under the direction of Fixlmillner, to construct for him very neat mural quadrants, zenith sectors, transit instruments, and pendulum clocks. Other instruments were made for him by Brander, of Augsburgh, and he procured achromatic telescopes from Dollond; so that by his activity the observatory at Kremsmunster soon became one of the most celebrated, and best supplied with apparatus, in Germany.

, of the same family, although what relation to the preceding is not mentioned, was oorn at Tubingen in 1748. He was the author of several performances on vegetable physiology, and the classification of plants; and likewise published numerous works on the materia medica, and chemistry, mineralogy, and every part of natural history. One of the most celebrated is his edition of the “System of Nature of Linnæus.” He, however, is said to have introduced great disorder into the science, by multiplying the species. He was also the author of a “History of Chemistry,” forming a part of the history of arts and sciences undertaken by the professors of Gottingen. The world is indebted to him for the discovery of several excellent dyes, extracted from vegetable and mineral substances. He died in 1805.

, one of the most celebrated surgeons of the sixteenth century, was a native of Orleans, and the pupil of the famous Ambrose Paré, and attained very high professional reputation in the army as well as at home. He received the honourable appointment of surgeon to the sovereigns Charles IX. and Henry IV. by both of whom he was highly esteemed. He died at Paris March 13, 1609. His first publication was a translation of Ambrose Paré's Treatise on Surgery into Latin, printed at Paris in 1582, folio. His next work was a small treatise, entitled “Apologie pour les Chirurgiens,” 1593. The remainder of his writings is contained in a collection of his “Œuvres de Chirurgie,” printed at Paris in 1598, and in 1612; and at Rouen in 1649, some of which were published separately. These are, “Tables Anutomiques,” with figures from Vesalius; “Histoire de tous les Muscles du corps humain,” &c.; “Traité de la Generation de l'homme;” “L'heureux Accouchement des femmes;” “Traité sur les abus qui se commettent sur les procédures de l'Impuissance des hommes et des femmes;” “La Chirurgie Françoise, recueillies des anciens Médecins et Chirurgiens, &c.;” “Traité des plaies recueillies des Leçons de M. Courtin;” “Operations de Chirurgie recueillies ides anciens Medecins et Chirurgiens;” “Traité des maladies de l'iŒil;” and lastly, “Traité de la parfaite methode d'Embaumer les corps;” which contains a report of that operation, as performed upon the bodies of Charles IX. and Henry III. and IV.

The first appearance of Hawkwood in Italy-was in the 1*isan service in 1364; after which period he was every where considered as a most accomplished soldier, and fought, as different occasions presented themselves, in the service of many of the Italian states. In 1387 we find him engaged in a hazardous service in defence of the state of Florence. The earl of Armagnac, the Florentine general, having been lately defeated by Venni, the governor of the Siannese, the victors marched to surprize Hawkwood, and encamped within a mile and a half of him. But this cautious general retreated into the Cremonese, and when by several skirmishes he had amused the enemy, who kept within a mile of him, and thought to force his camp, he sallied out and repulsed them with loss. This success a little discouraged them. Venni is said to have sent Hawkwood a fox in a cage, alluding to his situation; to which Hawkwood returned for answer, “the fox knew how to find his way out.” This he did by retreating to the river Oglio, placing his best horse in the rear till the enemy had crossed the river, on whose opposite bank he placed 400 English archers on horseback. The rear by their assistance crossed the river and followed the rest, who, after fording the Mincio, encamped within ten miles of the Adige. The greatest danger remained here. The enemy had broken down the banks of the river, and let out its waters, swoln by the melting of the snow and mountains to overflow the plains. Hawkwood’s troops, surprized at midnight by the increasing floods, had no resource but immediately to mount their horses, and, leaving all their baggage behind them, marched in the morning slowly through the water, which came up to their horses bellies. By evening, with great difficulty, they gained Baldo, a town in the Paduan. Some of the weaker horses sunk under the fatigue. Many of the foot perished with cold, and struggling against the water; many supported themselves by laying hold on the tails of the stronger horses. Notwithstanding every precaution, many of the cavalry were lost as well as their horses. The pursuers, seeing the country under water, and concluding the whole army had perished, returned back. The historian observes, that it was universally agreed no other general could have got over so many difficulties and dangers, and led back his small army out of the heart of the enemy’s country, with no other loss than that occasioned by the floods, which no precaution could have prevented. One of the most celebrated actions of Hawkwood’s life, says Muratori, was this treat, performed with so much prudence and art, that ! deserves to be paralleled with the most illustrious Roman generals; having, to the disgrace of an enemy infinitely superior in number, and in spite of all obstructions from the rivers, given them the slip, and brought off his army safe to Castel Baldo, on the borders of the Paduan. Sir John Hawkwood, as soon as he found himself among his allies, employed himself in refreshing his troop and watching the enemy’s motions.

, a native of Amelbrun in Westphalia, descended from a noble family, was born about 1533. He visited almost all the European courts, and, during his stay in Turkey, collected such excellent materials for an Ottoman history, that the public are indebted to him for their best information respecting that empire. His knowledge of law, as well as of the learned languages, enabled him also to succeed in translating the “Abridgment of the Basilica,” 1596, 2 vols folio. He was indeed one of the most celebrated translator* which Germany has produced. He died June 1593, at Vienna, aged sixty. His works are, “The Mussulman History,” 1591, folio, Latin; “Annals of the Ottoman Sultans,” folio, which he translated into Latin, from the translation made of it, by John Gaudier, otherwise Spiegel, from Turkish into German. The supplement to these Annals he continued to 1588, under the title of

, one of the most celebrated, and certainly one of the most extraordinary men of his time, was born at Florence, Oct. 28 or 29, 1633. His parents, who were of low rank, are said to have been satisfied when they got him into the service of a man who sold fruit and herbs. He had never learned to read, and yet was perpetually poring over the leaves of old books, that were used as waste paper in his master’s shop. A bookseller who lived in the neighbourhood, and who had often observed this, and knew the boy could not read, asked him one day, “what he meant by staring so much on printed paper?” He said, “that he did not know how it was, but that he loved it; that he was very uneasy in the business he was in, and should be the happiest creature in the world, if he could live with him, who had always so many books about him.” The bookseller, pleased with his answer, consented to take him, if his master was willing to part with him. Young Magliabechi thanked him with tears in his eyes, and having obtained his master’s leave, went directly to his new employment, which he had not followed long before he could find any book that was asked for, as ready as the bookseller himself. This account of his early life, which Mr. Spence received from a gentleman of Florence, who was well acquainted with Magliabechi and his family, differs considerably from that given by Niceron, Tiraboschi, and Fabroni. From the latter, indeed, we learn that he was placed as an apprentice to a goldsmith, after he had been taught the principles of drawing, and he had a brother that was educated to the law, and made a considerable figure in that profession. His father died while he was an infant, but Fabroni makes no mention of his poverty. It seems agreed, however, that after he had learned to read, that became his sole employment, but he never applied himself to any particular study. He read every book almost indifferently, as they happened to come into his hands, with a surprizing quickness; and yet such was his prodigious memory, that he not only retained the sense of what he read, but often all the words, and the very manner of spelling them, if there was any thing peculiar of that kind in any author.

nience, he went to Lucca, where he was made superior of St. Fridian, a house of his own order; and there he lived with Tremellius and Zanchius, whom he is said to have converted. But, finding himself in more danger here, he left the city secretly, and travelled to Pisa; whence, by letters to cardinal Pole, and to the society of Lucca, he fully explained the reasons of his departure. Then coming to Florence, but making no long stay there, he set forward for Germany; and, passing the Alps, went to Zurich with Ochinus, who had been one of the most celebrated preachers of Italy, but had now forsaken his former superstitions. From Zurich he went to Basil; and thence, by Bucer’s means, was brought to Strasburg; Here he married a young nun that had left her convent, who lived with him eight years, and died at Oxford, as will be noticed hereafter. After he had spent five years at Strasburg, he was, through the management of Seymour the protector, and archbishop Cranmer, sent for to England by Edward VI. who made him professor of divinity at Oxford in 1549. Here he read lectures, to which even the popish party, from the fame of his learning, resorted: and though they could not be easily reconciled to his doctrines, yet they bore him with some patience, till he came to handle that of the Lord’s Supper. Then they began to disturb him in his lectures, to fix up malicious and scandalous libels against him, and to challenge him to disputes; uhich challenges he did not disdain to accept, but disputed, first privately in the vice-chancellor’s lodge, and afterwards in public, before his majesty’s commissioners, deputed for that purpose. His adversaries, finding no advantage could be gained by argument, stirred up the multitude so successfully, that he was obliged to retire to London till the tumult was suppressed. In 1550, the king bestowed on him a canonry of Christ church, on which he returned, and entered on the lodgings belonging to him, near the great gate of Christ church leading into Fish-street. Here being still much disturbed by the rabble, who broke his windows in the night-time, and rendered the situation very uneasy, he was obliged to exchange his lodgings for those in the cloister, where he quietly passed the remainder of his abode in the university. For the more privacy in his studies, he erected a fabric of stone in his garden, situated on the east side of his apartments, in which he partly composed his commentaries on the first epistle to the Corinthians, and his epistles to learned men. This fabric, which contained two stories, remained until 1684, when it was pulled down by Dr. Aldrich, then canon.

, one of the most celebrated of the ancient Greek poets, was born at Athens in the year 342 before the Christian aera. He was educated in the school of Theophrastus the peripatetic, Aristotle’s successor, and began to write for the stage at the early age of twenty, when his passions seem to have been no less forward and impetuous than his genius. His attachment to the fair sex, and especially to his mistress Glycera, is upon record, and was vehement in the extreme; several of his epistles to that celebrated courtezan, written in a very ardent style, were collected and made public after his decease; his genius, however, is thought to have been a greater recommendation to Glycera’s favour, than his personal merit, which has not been represented as favourable to his addresses, although he is said to have added the recommendations of luxurious dress and manners. His intrigues, however, are of little importance compared to the fame he acquired as one, if not the principal, of the authors of the comedy, which if it possessed less wit and lire than the old, was superior to it in delicacy, regularity, and decorum, came nearer to nature,and to what we conceive of the legitimate drama. Among his contemporaries, who wrote upon this reformed plan, were Philemon, Diphilus, Apollodorus, Philippides and Posidippus; and from many fragments which remain, it appears that they were not Only bold declaimers against the vice and immorality of the age they lived in, but that they ventured upon truths and doctrines in religion totally irreconcileable to the popular superstition and idolatries of the heathen world; and therefore, says Cumberland, or rather Bentley, we cannot but admire at the extraordinary toleration of their pagan audiences.

, better known by the name of Marsilius of Padua, the place of his birth, was one of the most celebrated philosophers and lawyers of the 14th century. He was educated at the university of Orleans; was afterwards made counsellor to the emperor Louis of Bavaria; and wrote an apology entitled “Defensor pacis,” for that prince, in 1324. In this extraordinary work, for such at that time it might well be deemed, he boldly maintained that the pope ought to submit to the emperor, not only in temporal affairs, but also in what regards the outward discipline of the church. He described in strong colours, the pride, the luxury, and other irregularities of the court of Rome; and shewed at large, that the pope could not, by divine right, claim any powers or prerogatives superior to those of other bishops. John XXII. at that time filled the papal chair, and was so provoked at this doctrine of Marsilius, as well as his manner of propagating it, that he issued out a long decree, in which he endeavoured to refute it, and by which he excommunicated the author, in 1327. Dupin relates, that on this book being translated into French without the author’s name, pope Gregory XL complained of it to the faculty of divinity at Paris when the faculty declared, by an authentic act, that none of their members had any hand in that translation and that neither Marsilius of Padua, nor John de Jande, who was likewise thought to have been concerned in the work, belonged to their body. Besides the “Defensor pacis, seu de re imperatoria et pontifica, adversus usurpatam Romani Pontificis jurisdictionem, libri tres,” Marsilius wrotea treatise entitled “De translatione imperil” and also another, “De jurisdictione imperial! in causis matrimonialibus.” He died at Monternalto, in 1328; and, however his memory may have been honoured elsewhere, was ranked at Rome among the heretics of the first class.

, one of the most celebrated scholars of the seventeenth century, was born at Verona, Aug. 29, 1631. His baptismal name was Jerom, which he changed tO'Henry, when he entered the order of the Augustines. His family is said to have been originally of England, whence a branch passed into Ireland, and even to Cyprus. When this island was taken by the Turks, a James Noris, who had defended it as general of artillery, settled afterwards at Verona, and it is from this person that the subject of the present article descended. His father’s name was Alexander, and, according to Niceron, published several works, and among them a History of Germany. Maffei, however, attributes this work only to him, which is not a history of Germany, but of the German war from 1618 to the peace of Lubec, translated from the Italian by Alexander Noris. His son discovered, from his infancy, an excellent understanding, great vivacity, and a quick apprehension. His father, having instructed him in the rudiments of grammar, procured an able professor of Verona to be his preceptor. At fifteen, he was admitted a pensioner in the Jesuits’ college at Rimini, where he studied philosophy; after which, he applied himself to the writings of the fathers of the church, particularly those of St. Augustine; and, taking the habit in the convent of Augustine monks of Rimini, he so distinguished himself among that fraternity, that, as soon as he was out of his noviciate, the general of the order sent for him to Rome, in order to give him an opportunity of improving himself in the more solid branches of learning. Here he indulged his favourite propensity for study to the utmost, and spent whole days, and even nights, in the library of his order at Rome. His daily course of reading was fourteen hours, and this practice he continued till he became a cardinal. It, is easy to conceive that a student of such diligence, and whose memory and comprehension were equally great, must have accumulated a vast stock of knowledge. But for some time his reading was interrupted by the duties of a regent master being imposed on him, according to the usual practice; and we find that for some time he taught at Pesaro, and afterwards at Perugia, where he took his degree of doctor of divinity. Proceeding then to Padua, he applied himself to finish his “History of Pelagianism,” which he had begun at Rome, when he was no more than twentysix: and, having now completed his design, it was printed at Florence in 1673. The great duke of Tuscany invited him, the following year, to that city, made him his chaplain, and professor of ecclesiastical history in the university of Pisa, which the duke had founded with that view.

, one of the most celebrated Swiss divines of the latter age, was born at Neufchatel, Nov. 25, 1663. He was the only son of John Rtfdolph Ostervald, minister of Neufchatel, Inhere the family of Ostervald had been settled for nearly three centuries, and had produced many persons eminent in the army and at the bar. His father determined to give him the best education, with a view to the ministry, should his inclination lead that way. Accordingly, in 1676, he took him to Zurich, to be instructed in the learned languages, and to learn German at the same time, under the care of professor John Henry Ott, who was his intimate friend. After a dilfgent application here for eighteen months, young Ostervald returned home in Oct. 1677, and continued his classical studies tinder Mr. D'Aubigne, principal of the college of Neufchatel. A year after he was sent to Saumur, where he maintained some learned theses with such ability, that the degree of master of arts was conferred upon him with every testimony of respect, although he had not yet reached his sixteenth year. In Sept. 1680, he took a voyage to Rochelle, where he was introduced to some eminent literary characters; and the following year, removed to Orleans, and began the study of divinity under the celebrated Pajou, which he continued afterwards under Mr. Allix, and the celebrated Claude, at Paris. His fellow student here was Mr. Charles Tribolet, his relation, and afterwards his colleague at Neufchatel; few friends, we are told, have been more closely connected, or more similar in sentiment on all occasions.

, one of the most celebrated characters in literary history, was born in Tuscany, in 1304. His father was a notary at Florence, who having taken part with the Ghibellin faction, shared their fate, and was banished, after which he took up 'his residence at Pisa. Here, his infant son discovering marks of genius, his father destined him for a learned profession; and having recommended him to study the law, he passed several years at Montpellier and Bologna, listening to the ablest professors in that science, but much more inclined to peruse the writings of the classical authors. He relates himself, that his father, incensed at what he thought a misapplication of time, seized at once every classical author of which, he was possessed, and threw them into the fire; but the frantic grief which Petrarch expressed at that sight, so mollified the old man, that he hastily rescued Cicero and Virgil from the flames, and gave them back to his son; remarking, that it was only the immoderate attachment to these authors which he blamed, and that the works of Cicero, if rightly used, were the best preparative to the study of the law. Petrarch acknowledges that the struggle between the strong propensity of his nature, and the will of a respected parent, was the cause of many unhappy hours: but his father’s death, which happened when he was about the age of twenty-two, put an end to the contest; and left him at liberty to pursue his inclinations.

, one of the most celebrated sculptors that France has produced, was born at Paris in 1714, the son of a joiner, and by his talents became not only sculptor to the king, but chancellor of the academy of painting, and knight of the order of St. Michael. He did not manifest any early disposition for designing; he loved to model, but set about it awkwardly, and finished nothing but by means of indefatigable labour. A visit to Italy gave him that facility which he could not acquire at home. He there studied the works of the great artists, and returned thoroughly inspired with their genius. He died at Paris, Aug. 20, 1785. His most known works are, 1. “A Mercury and a Venus,” which he made by order of Louis XV. and which were presented to the king of Prussia. The king, who was delighted with them, was desirous to see the sculptor; and Pigalle, some time after, went to Berlin, but, being announced as the author of the Mercure de France, could not obtain an audience. When Frederic understood the mistake, he was very anxious to repair it; but Pigalle was already gone in some digust. Pigalle maintained that none of the heads of Frederic did justice to his physiognomy, which, in point of spirit, was the finest he had ever seen; and much regretted that he had not been allowed to model it. 2. The monument of marechal Saxe, in which the beauty of the whole obliterates all objections to the parts. 3. The pedestrian statue of Louis *XV. executed in bronze for the city of Rheims. 4. The statue of Voltaire. 5. A little boy holding a cage. '6. A girl taking a thorn from her foot. 7. Several busts of men of letters who were his friends. If Pigaile cannot be ranked among the men of the first genius in his art, the good sense of his designs, and the soundness of his taste, afford him a place in the very next class.

, a learned Spanish ecclesiastic, was born at Vigo in Gallicia in 1740. After the preparatory studies of divinity, &c. he entered into the church, and obtained a canonry in the cathedral of St. James, and was likewise appointed professor of divinity in that city. His fame procured him admission into many learned societies, and he became one of the most celebrated preachers of the last century, nor was he less admired for his benevolence. He obtained the honourable title of the father of the unfortunate, among whom he spent the whole profits of his canonry, and at his death in 1806, left no more than was barely sufficient to defray the expences of his funeral. The leisure he could spare from his professional duties was employed in the study of the ecclesiastical history of his country, which produced several works that are highly esteemed in Spain. Some of them were written in Latin, and some probably in Spanish, but our authority does not specify which. Among them are, 1. “Summa theologize sacrse,” Madrid, 1789, 4 jrols. 4to. 2. “Annales sacri,” ibid. 1784, 2 vols. 8vo. 3. ^History of the church of Africa,“ibid. 1784, 8vo, a work abounding in learned research. 4.” A treatise on Toleration in matters of Religion,“ibid. 1783, 3 vols. 4to, rather a singular subject for a Spanish divine. 5.” An essay on the eloquence of the pulpit in Spain,“ibid. 1778, 8vo. This is a history of sacred oratory in that country in various ages, with the names of those who were the best models of it. The restoration of a true taste in this species of eloquence he attributes to his countrymen becoming acquainted with the works of those eminent French preachers Bossuet, Massillon, Bourdaloue, &c. 6.” A collection of his Sermons,“ibid. 3 vols. 4to. These were much admired in Spain, and were the same year translated into Italian, and printed at Venice in 4 vols. 4to. 7.” A paper read in the Patriotic Society of Madrid in 1782, on the means of encouraging industry in Gallicia," ibid. 1782, 8vo. This being his native country, Dr. Sanchez had long laboured to introduce habits of industry, and had influence enough to procure a repeal of some oppressive laws which retarded an object of so much importance.

, an eloquent French divine, was born in 1601, at Paris, and was the son of Peter Senault, secretary to the council of the League. He entered young into the congregation of the oratory, then newly established by cardinal de Berulle, and was one of the most celebrated preachers and best directors of his time. He preached with uncommon reputation during forty years, at Paris, and in the principal cities of France, and wrote several books on pious and moral subjects, which were much esteemed by pious catholics. He appears to have been a disinterested man, for he refused some considerable pensions, and two bishoprics, but was elected general of the oratory in 1662. He died August 3, 1672, at Paris, aged seventy-one. His principal works are, “A Paraphrase on the Book oflob,” 8vo; “L' Usage des Passions,” 12mo; “L'Homme Chretien,” 4to; “L'Homme criminel,” 4to “Le Monarque, on les Devoirs du Souverain,” 12mo; “Panegyrics on the Saints,” 3 vols. 8vo; and the Lives of several persons illustrious for their piety, &c. It was this father, says L'Avocat, who banished from the pulpit that empty parade of profane learning, and that false taste, by which it was degraded, and who introduced a strong, sublime, and majestic eloquence, suited to the solemnity of our mysteries, and to the truths of our holy religion.

, eldest son to the preceding, and bishop of London, was born in that city in 1678. He was sent at an early age to Eton school, where he laid the foundation of that classical elegance which is visible in most of his works, especially in his much-admired sermons, About 1693 he was removed to Cambridge, and admitted of Katherine-hall, under the tuition of Dr. Long, afterwards bishop of Norwich. Here he took his degree of B. A. in 1697, and that of M. A. in 1701, and between these periods was elected to a fellowship, and entered into holy orders. How highly he must have been esteemed even at this early period, appears from his first preferment in the church, which was to one of its highest dignities, under the bench, the mastership of the Temple, to which he was appointed in 1704. That such a rapid elevation should have given offence, can excite no surprize. It was probably unprecedented, and in so young a man, might be thought unjustifiable, yet it took place at a time when preferments were not lightly bestowed, and Mr. Sherlock in a very short time exhibited such talents as removed all prejudices against him. Indeed he appears to have felt it necessary to justify the authors of his promotion, both upon his own account and that of the church. He exerted the utmost diligence, therefore, in the cultivation of his talents and the display of his learning and eloquence, and in the course of a few years became one of the most celebrated preachers of his time; and notwithstanding some decree of natural impediment (what is called a thickness of speech), he delivered his sermons with such propriety and energy as to rivet the attention of his hearers, and command their admiration.

, a learned French Jesuit, was born at Rennes, April 26, 1661,- of an ancient family. He entered among the Jesuits in 1680, and besides other literary honours due to his merit, was appointed librarian to the society in Paris. His range of study had been so extensive that most of his learned contemporaries considered him as an oracle in every branch of science, taste, or art. The holy scriptures, divinity, the belles lettres, antiquities, sacred and profane, criticism, rhetoric, poetry, had all been the objects of his pursuit, and added to his accomplishments. He was for many years editor of the “Journal de Trevoux,” one of the most celebrated in France, in which he wrote a great many essays and criticisms of considerable merit and acuteness. He published also a good edition of“Menochius,” 1719, 2 vols. fol. and an edition of Prideaux’s History of the Jews. He died May 16, 1739, He was a man of a communicative disposition, and very attentive to strangers. There was, however, some degree of vanity in his composition, and he even prided himself on his birth, but upon the whole, was an estimable character, and contributed, by his Journal, to the diffusion of much useful knowledge.

, an eminent botanist, the son of Leonard Targioni, born at Florence Sept. 11, 1722, was sent to the university of Pisa, where he very soon distinguished himself by a thesis on the use of medicine. At the age of nineteen he became acquainted with the famous botanist Micheli, by whom he was protected, with whom he kept up an uninterrupted friendship till 1737, when Micheli died, and whom he succeeded in the care of the famous botanic garden. Of the plants in this garden Micheli had already made a catalogue, which Targioni published after his death, with very considerable additions by himself. In the year 1737, he was made professor of botany in the Studio Fiorentino, a kind of university at Florence, and at the same time member of the academy ofApatisti. In 1738, he became a member of the Collegio Medico, or faculty of Medicine. Much about the same time he was named by government consulting physician in pestilential disorders, aud had the place of fiscal physician (physician to the courts of justice). This last place obliged him to write a great deal, being often consulted on the accidents that became discussions for a court of justice, such as deaths by poison, sudden deaths, unheard-of distempers, and (when, as it sometimes happened, foolish accusations of the kind were brought into court) witchcraft. Some time after, he was named, together with the celebrated Antonio Cocchi, to make a catalogue of the library, begun by P</lagliabecchi and increased by Marni, duke Leopold, and others, which consisted of 40,000 volumes of printed books, and about 1100 volumes of manuscripts. It is to this nomination we are indebted for the five volumes of letters of famous men, as, during his employment in this capacity, he used to make extracts of the curious books which fell into his hands. On Micheli’s death in 1737, Mr. Targioni had inherited his Hortus Siccus, Mss. and collection of natural history, which last, however, he purchased, but at a very cheap rate, with his own money. This seemed to lay him under the necessity of publishing what his master had left behind him, and accordingly he had prepared the second part of the “Nova Plantarum Genera,” but not exactly in the manner in which Micheli himself would have published them; for, though the drawings were too good to be lost, as they have all the accuracy which distinguish the other works of the great naturalist, Targioni could not suffer the work to come forth with the Zoophytes and Keratophytes classed among the plants, asMicheli had intended. Targioni therefore meant to have given the work another form. It was to be divided into two parts, the first of which would have contained the “Fucus’s, Algae, and Confervae;” and the second the “Zoophytes:” the first part was finished a week before Targioni’s death. Many of the plates are from drawings by Ottaviano Targioni, the son of John Targioni, who succeeded his father as reader of botany in the hospital of Sancta Maria Maggiore, a new establishment formed by the grand duke upon a liberal and extensive plan, in which ducal professors of medicine, anatomy, chemistry, physiology, surgery, &c. read gratis on the very spot where examples are at hand to confirm their doctrine. In 1739, Targioni was chosen member of the academy Naturae Curiosorum; and, in 1745, the Crusca gave him a public testimony of the value they set upon his style, by chusing him one of their members. In 1749, he was chosen member of the academy of Etruscans at Cortona, as he was of that of the Sepolti at Volterra in-4749. The academy of Botanophiles made him one of their body in 1757; as did that of practical agriculture at Udino in 1758. In 1771, he was chosen honorary member of the royal academy of sciences and belles lettres at Naples; and, finally, was named corresponding member of the royal society of medicine at Paris in 1780. It is much to be regretted that we cannot give an account of his manuscript works, several of which are known to be very important, as he was one of the most celebrated physicians of this time, and is known to have written a great deal on inoculation (of which he was one of the first promoters in Tuscany), putrid fevers, &c. &c. His printed works are extremely numerous; among the first of them was his “Thesis de prsestantia et usu Plantarum in medicina.” Pisis, 1734,“folio; and the latest, * Notizie degli Aggrandimenti delle Scienze Fisiche accaduti in Toscana nel corso di anni 60, nel secolo 17, Firenze,” 1780, 4 vols. 4to. He had just published the fourth volume of this last great work, on the improvement made in natural knowledge and natural philosophy in Tuscany in sixty years only of the 17th century, when he died of an atrophy in 1780. Mr. Targioni had a large cabinet of natural history, the foundation of which, as has been said, had been laid by Micheli. It consists of the minerals and fossils which are found in Tuscany, and the Zoophytes and Hortus Siccus of Micheli. There is a drawer made at Amboyna, by order of Rumphius, containing all the sorts of wood of that island. Besides this, there is a great suite of animals and shells and petrified animal substances, particularly of the bones of elephants which are found in the environs of Florence.

, 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.

, one of the most celebrated Protestant divines of the 16th century, was born at Breslau, in Silesia, July 28, 1534. He had already made a considerable progress, for one so young, when he was sent to Wittemberg in 1550, where he studied seven years, and, as his father was not rich, he was assisted by gratuities both private and public, and by the profits of taking pupils. At the same time, he applied himself so closely to study, that he acquired great skill both in poetry, lan-r guages, philosophy, and divinity. Melancthon, who was the ornament of that university, had a particular esteem and friendship for him. Ursinus accompanied him in 1557 to the conference of Worms, whence he went to Geneva, and afterwards to Paris, where he made some stay, in order to learn French, and improve himself in Hebrew under the learned John Mercerus. He was no sooner returned to Melancthon at Wittemberg, than he received letters from the magistrates of Breslaw in September 1558, offering him the mastership of their great school; and having accepted it, he discharged the duties of his employment in so laudable a manner, that he might have continued in it as long as he pleased, had he not been prosecuted by the clergy, the instant they perceived he was not a Lutheran. When he explained Melancthon’s book, “De examine ordinandorum ad Ministerium,” he handled the subject of the Lord’s supper in such a manner, as made the demagogues or factious orators (for so the author of his Life calls them) term him Sacramentarian. He wrote, however, a justification of himself, in which he discovered what his opinions were with regard to Baptism and the Lord’s Supper; and when he found that this did not pacify his adversaries, he obtained an honourable leave from the magistrates; and as he could not retire to his master Melancthon, he being dead a little before, in April 1560, he went to Zurich, where Peter Martyr, Bullinger, Simler, Gesner, and some other eminent personages, had a great friendship for him. From this place he was soon removed by the university of Heidelberg, which was in want of an able professor; and in September 1561 was settled in the Collegium Sapientiae (College of Wisdom) to instruct the students. He also attempted to preach, but finding he had not the talents requisite for the pulpit, he laid that aside. As a professor, he evinced, in the most eminent elegree, the qualifications requisite: a lively genius, a great fund of knowledge, and a happy dexterity in explaining things, and therefore, besides the employment he already enjoyed, he exercised the professorship of the loci communes, or common places in that university. To qualify him for this place, it was necessary for him, agreeably to the statutes, to be received doctor of divinity, and accordingly he was solemnly admitted to that degree the 25th of August, 1562, and he was professor of the common places till 1568. It was he who wrote the Catechism of the Palatinate, which was almost universally adopted by the Calvinists, and drew up an apology for it by ordtr of the elector Frederic III. in opposition to the clamours which Flacius Illyricus, Heshusius, and some other rigid Lutherans, had published in 1563. The elector, finding himself exposed, not only to the complaints of the Lutheran divines, but likewise to those of some princes, as if he had established a doctrine concerning the Eucharist, which was condemned by the Augsburg Confession, was obliged to cause to be printed an exposition of the une doctrine concerning the Sacraments. Ursinus the following year was at the conference of Maulbrun, where he spoke with great warmth against the doctrine of Ubiquity. He afterwards wrote on that subject, and against some other tenets of the Lutherans. The plan and statutes which he drew up for the elector, for the establishment of some schools, and several other services, raised him so high in his esteem, that finding him resolved to accept of a professorship in divinity at Lausanne in 1571, he wrote a letter to him with his own hand, in which he gave several reasons why it would not be proper for him to accept of that employment. This prince’s death, which happened in 1577, produced a great revolution in the palatinate; prince Lewis, his eldest son, who succeeded him, not permitting any clergyman to be there, unless he was a sound Lutheran; so that Ursinus and the pupils educated by him in the Collegium Sapientiae were obliged to quit it. He retired to Neustadt, to be divinity-professor in the illustrious school which prince Casimir, son to Frederic III. founded there at that time. He began his lectures there the 26th of May, 1578. He also taught logic there in his own apartment; published some books, and was preparing to write several more, when his health, which had been frequently and strongly attacked, occasioned by his incredible application to study, yielded at last to a long sickness, of which he died in Neustadt, the 6th of March, 1583, in the forty-ninth year of his age. His works were collected after his death, by the care of his only son, a minister, and by that of David Pareus and Quirinus Reuterus, his disciples; and to the last of these we are indebted for the publication of them in 1612, 3 vols. folio.

, one of the most celebrated physicians of the last century, and who attained the highest honours in his profession, was born at Leyden, May 7, 1700, of a very ancient family, which had furnished many distinguished characters for the state, the bar, and the array. He had the misfortune to lose his parents at a time when their affection would have been of most importance to him, and fell into the hands of tutors who took very little care of his property, and less of his education. This last, however, became early his own concern, and a thirst for knowledge led him to form a successful plan. After studying the classics at Leyden, he went in 1716 to Louvain, where, after a course of philosophy for two years, he was admitted into the first class, and his masters would have been glad to have detained him that he might become a farther ornament to their university; but he had by this time fixed his choice on medicine as a profession, and therefore returned to Leyden, where he placed himself under the illustrious Boerhaave. Van Swieten was not more happy in such a master than Boerhaave was in directing the studies of a pupil who soon promised to extend his favourite science. After seven years’ study here, Van Swieten, in 1725, received his doctor’s degree, and Boerhaave, notwithstanding the disparity of years and of fame, chose him for his friend, and discerned in him his future successor.

, one of the most celebrated philosophers of ancient Greece, was born at Chalcedon, B. C. 400. He at first attached himself to Æschines, but afterwards became the disciple of Plato, and always retained a high degree of respect and attachment for that great man, whom he accompanied in a voyage to Sicily. When Dionysius the tyrant threatened Plato one day, saying, “that some person should behead him;” “Nobody shall do that,” said Xenocrates, “till they have first beheaded me.” This philosopher studied under Plato at the same time with Aristotle, but did not possess equal talents: for he had a slow genius and dull apprehension, while Aristotle’s genius was quick and penetrating, whence their master observed of them, “that one wanted a spur, and the other a bridle.” But however inferior Xenocrates might be to Aristotle in genius, he greatly excelled him in the practice of moral philosophy. He was grave, sober, austere, and of a disposition so serious, and so far removed from the Athenian politeness, that Plato frequently exhorted him to “sacrifice to the graces.” He always bore his master’s reproofs with great patience, and when persuaded to defend himself, replied, “He treats me thus only for my good.” Xenocrates is particularly celebrated for chastity, and is said to have acquired so great a command over his passions, that Phryne, the most beautiful courtezan of Greece, who had laid a wager that she would seduce him, could not effect her purpose. Being afterwards laughed at, and the wager demanded, she replied, “I have not lost it; for I undertook to seduce a man, and not a statue.” The conduct of Xenocrates exhibited an equal example of temperance in every other respect. He cared neither for pleasures, wealth, or fame; and was so moderate in his dietj that he often found it necessary to throw away his provisions because they were grown stale and mouldy; whence the proverb among the Grecians, of Xenocrates* s cheese, when they would describe any thing which lasted a long time. This philosopher succeeded Speusippus, who was Plato’s immediate successor in the' academy at Athens, in 339 B. C. He required his disciples to understand mathematics before they placed themselves under his care; and sent back a youth who was ignorant of that science, saying, “that he had not the key of philosophy.” So great was his reputation fqr sincerity and probity, that the magistrates accepted his testimony without an oath; a favour granted to him alone. Polemo, a rich young man, but so debauched, that his wife had begun a prosecution against him for his infamoqs conduct, rambling through the streets, one day, with his dissolute companions, after they had drank freely, entered our philosopher’s school, with an intention to ridicule and insult him. The audience were highly offended at this behaviour; but Xenocrates Continued perfectly calm, and immediately turning his discourse upon temperance, spoke of that virtue in terms so forcible, lofty, and elevated, that the young libertine made a sudden resolution to renounce his licentiousness, and devote himself to wisdom. From that moment, Polemo became the pupil of virtue, and a model of temperance, and at length succeeded Xenocrates in the philosophical chair. Hia conversion made much noise, and so increased the public veneration for Xenocrates, that when he appeared in the streets, no dissolute youths dared to remain there, but turned aside that they might avoid meeting him. The Athenians sent this philosopher on an embassy to Philip, king of Macedon, and, a considerable time after, to Antipater; neither of whom could corrupt him by their presents, which circumstance made him doubly honoured. Alexander the Great so highly esteemed Xenocrates, that he sent him fifty talents, a large sum then; and when his messengers arrived at Athens, Xenocrates invited them to eat with him, but gaVe them only his common farel Upon their inquiring, next morning, to whom they should pay the fifty talents, he replied, “Has not lak night’s supper convinced you that I want no money?” intimating that he was contented with a little, and that money was necessary to kings, not to philosophers. But at the earnest entreaties of Alexander’s messengers, he accepted a small part of the sum, lest he should appear deficient in respect to that great monarch. It is astonishing that ‘the Athenians should suffer a philosopher of such exalted merit to be so ill treated by the collectors and receivers of their taxes 5 for though they were once fined for attempting to imprison Xenocrates, because he had not paid a certain tax imposed on foreigners, yet it is certain that the same collectors and receivers sold him at another time, because he had not enough to pay them. But Demetrius Phalereus, detesting so base an action; purchased Xenocrates’, gave hirri his freedom immediately, and discharged his debt to the Athenians. This philosopher died about 314 B.C. aged eighty-two, in consequence ’of falling in the dark into a reservoir of water. He 1 wrote, at the request of Alexander, *a small tract on the Art of Reigning; six books on Nature; MX books oh Philosophy one on Riches, &c, but none of these have come down to us. There is a tract on Death, under his name, in 'the Jamblicus of Aldus, 1497, folio. Xenocrates used to say, “That we often repent of having spoken, b,ut never of having kept silence; that true philosophers are the only persons who do willingly, and by their own choice, what others are constrained to do by fear of the laws; that it is as great a crime to look into our neighbour’s house as to enter it privately J that there was more necessity for putting iron-plates over the ears of children, to defend and preserve them from hearing vicious discourse, than of gladiators, to guard them from blows,” c. As to his philosophical system, it was truly Platonic; but in his’ method of teaching he made use of the language of the Pythagoreans. He made Unity and Diversity principles in nature, or gods; the former of whom he represented as the father, and the latter as the mother, of the universe. He taught, that the heavens are divine, and the stars celestial gods; and that besides these divinities, there are terrestrial daemons, of a middle order between the gods and man, which partake of the nature both of mind and body, and are therefore, like human beings, capable of passions, and liable to diversity of character. After Plato, he probably conceived the superior divinities to be the Ideas, or intelligible forms, which immediately proceeded from the supreme Deity, and the inferior gods or daemons, to be derived from the soul of the world, and therefore, like that principle, to be compounded of a simple and a divisible substance, or of that which always remains the same, and that which is liable to change.