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

, an eminent bookseller, who began business at Leyden about the year 1682, and devoted his attention principally to geographical works and the construction of maps. A catalogue appeared at Amsterdam in 1729 of his publications, which are very numerous. Those in highest esteem are: 1. “A collection of Travels in France, Italy, England, Holland, and Russia,” Leyden, 1706, 30 vols. 12mo. 2. “A collection of Voyages in the two Indies,” Leyden, 1706, 8 vols. fol.; another edition, 29 vols. 8 vo, 1707-1710. This consists chiefly of an abridgment of De Bry’s collection, with some additions. 3. “A collection of Voyages in the Indies by the Portuguese, the English, the French, and the Italians,” 4 vols. fol. Leyden. These three works are in Dutch. 4. An “Atlas of two hundred Maps,” not in much estimation. 5. “A Gallery of the World,” containing an immense quantity of maps, topographical and historical plates, but without letter-press, in 66 vols. fol. which are usually bound in 35. He also continued Graevius’ “Thesaurus,” or, an account of the modern Italian writers, with the “Thesaurus Antiquitatum Siciliæ.” He died about 1730.

, 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.

, a celebrated sage, or impostor, whose history has been the subject of much learned discussion. Jamblicus, in his credulous Life of Pythagoras, mentions Abaris as a disciple of that philosopher, and relates the wonders he performed by means of an arrow which he received from Apollo. He also gives the particulars of a conversation which he had with Pythagoras, whilst the latter was detained prisoner by Phalaris, the tyrant. But this narration is filled with so many marvellous circumstances, and chronological errors, that it deserves little credit. Brucker, whom we principally follow in this article, gives the following instance. It is said that, in the time of a general plague, Abaris was sent from the Scythians on an embassy to the Athenians. This plague happened in the third olympiad. Now, it appears, from the learned contest between Bentley and Boyle, on the subject of Phalaris, that this tyrant, in whose presence Abaris is said to have disputed with Pythagoras, did not exercise his tyranny, at the most, longer than twenty-eight-years, and that his death happened not earlier than the fourth year of the fifty-seventh olympiad, which is the opinion of Bentley, nor later than the first year of the sixty-ninth olympiad, which is the date fixed by Dodwell. It is evident, therefore, that Abaris could not have lived, both at the time of the general plague mentioned above, and during the reign of Phalaris. The time when he flourished may, with some degree of probability, be fixed about the third olympiad; and there seems little reason to doubt, that he went from place to place imposing upon the vulgar by false pretensions to supernatural powers. He passed through Greece, Italy, and many other countries, giving forth oracular predictions, pretending to heal diseases by incantation, and practising other arts of imposture. Hence the fabulous tales concerning Abaris grew up into an entire history, written by Heraclides. Some of the later Platonists, in their zeal against Christianity, collected these and other fables, and exhibited them, not without large additions from their own fertile imaginations, in opposition to the miracles of Christ

, was born at Uzes on the llth of November 1679. His father died in the second year after his birth. As his parents were protestants, the mother removed him from France, to prevent his being educated in the Romish faith; but it being difficult to find a secure retreat, he was sent from one place to another, and at last was obliged to wander among the mountains of Cevennes, and to change his residence as often as his concealment was discovered, until at length he found a safe asylum in Geneva. In the mean time his mother was confined in the castle of Somieres; but nothing could shake her fortitude, or alter her resolution to have her son educated in her own persuasion. Her health was much impaired by confinement, under which she probably must have died, had not a fortunate occurrence required the commander of the fort to visit Paris. His brother, who occupied his place, interested himself in behalf of his prisoner, and obtained her enlargement. Having surmounted various perils, she arrived at Geneva two years after her son. The small share which she had been able to save from the wreck of a fortune which once had been considerable, she expended in the education of young Abauzit, who made a very rapid progress in his studies. Mathematics and natural history chiefly attracted his attention; tut he cultivated almost every department of literature. In 1698 he visited Hoiland, where he became acquainted with the most celebrated literary characters of the place, Bayle, Jurieu, and the Basnages. From Rotterdam he went to England, where he conversed with St. Evremond and sir Isaac Newton. With the latter he afterwards engaged in an epistolary correspondence, and received a compliment which must be esteemed highly honourable. “You,” says Sir Isaac, “are a very fit person to judge between Leibnitz and me.”

William III. invited Abauzit to settle in England, and ordered Michael le Vassor to offer some advantageous proposals; which, however, were not accepted. Filial aflectioil, or attachment to the country in which he had obtained a refuge, recalled him to Geneva; where, in 1723, the University offered him the chair of philosophy, which he declined, ple‘ading the weakness of his constitution, and his inability to do credit to the appointment. Jn 1726, he lost his mother, to whom he had ever been most affectionately attached. In the same year he was admitted a citizen of Geneva, and appointed librarian to the city. He profited by such a favourable opportunity to improve in useful literature. Principally attached to antiquities, he now dedicated to his newly-adopted country the fruit of his labours and his talents. In 1730, he published a newedition of the History and State of Geneva, which had been originally written by David Spon, and printed in two vols. 12mo. The work having already passed through three editions, was committed to Abauzit. Not contented with the mere republication, he corrected the errors, gave two dissertations on the subject, and annexed the public acts and memorials, that were necessary as proofs and illustrations. To these were added a copious variety of learned and useful notes, in which he gave an ample detail of facts which were but imperfectly related in the text. Modest himself, he was not ambitious of fame, but assisted others by his labours. Among those who derived benefit from his learning and researches, M. de Meiran alone had the gratitude to acknowledge his obligation. The labours of Abauzit were assiduous, and his knowledge was extensive. While he declined public notice his name was known, and his communications were frequent to most of the celebrated mathematicians, philosophers, and divines in Europe. Notwithstanding the simplicity of his manners, thismoclestphilosopher was not, perhaps, without a small share of vanity. For he employed himself in discovering what to his apprehension seemed errors in the different translations of the Bible. He could believe nothing but what he saw, or was suggested by his own ideas, or could be reduced to mathematical demonstration, and, becoming sceptical, wished to divest’ the scriptures of several miracles. He even made some efforts in poetry; but they were soon forgotten. He is acknowledged to have excelled more in diligence, accuracy, and precision, than in taste or genius. Voltaire, who had as great an aversion to miracles as Abauzit, esteemed and consulted him. As a citizen of Geneva, the philosopher was active in the dissensions of 1734. He exerted himself in support of the aristocratic party, though he had much of republican zeal. His industry was indefatigable, and he seemed to have written and acted from the conviction of his own mind. In religion he adopted and supported the doctrines of Arianism. Though declining praise, he acquired the esteem of many of the most eminent characters in Europe, and received an elegant compliment from Rousseau: “No,” says he, “this age of philosophy will not pass without having produced one true philosopher. I know one, and I freely own, but one; but what I regard as my supreme felicity is, that he resides in my native country, it is in my own Country that he resides: shall I presume to name him, whose real glorv it is to remain almost in obscurity? Yes, modest and learned Abauzit, forgive a zeal which seeks not to promote your fame. I would not celebrate your name in an age that is unworthy to admire you. I would honour Geneva by distinguishing it as the place of your residence: my fellowcitizens are honoured by your presence. Happy is the country where the merit that seeks concealment is the more revealed.” The reader will appreciate the merit of Abauzit, in proportion to the value he sets on the esteem of Voltaire or the praises of Rousseau. He, however, who could gain the approbation of two such opposite characters, could have been no ordinary person. He died on the 20th of March 1767.

, a learned Protestant divine, was born at Nay in Berne, in 1658, according to Niceron, or in 1654, as in the Gen. Dictionary. He studied at Puy Laurent, at Saumur, at Paris, and at Sedan; at which last place he received the degree of doctor in divinity. He intended to have dedicated himself very early to the ministry; but the circumstances of the Protestants of France rendering it impracticable there, he accepted the offer of the count d'Espense, an officer in the service of the elector of Brandenburgh, by whom he was settled at Berlin, as a French minister. Here he resided many years, and his congregation, at first very thin, was greatly increased by the revocation of the edict of Nantes. In 1688, the elector, Frederic William, died, and our author accepted of an invitation from marshal Schomberg, to go with him first into Holland, and then into England, with the prince of Orange. In 1689 he went to Ireland, and was there in the following year, when his patron was killed at the battle of the Boyne. On his return to England, he became minister of the French church at the Savoy, but the air disagreeing with him, he went again to Ireland, and would have been promoted to the deanery of St. Patrick’s had he been acquainted with the English language. He obtained, however, that of Killaloo, the value of which was far inferior, and never had any other promotion. He occasionally visited England and Holland, for the purpose of printing his works, which were all in French. In one of these visits to London, he died at Marybone, Sept. 25, 1727. He was strongly attached to the cause of king William, as appears by his elaborate defence of the Revolution, and his history of the Assassination-plot. He had great natural abilities, which he cultivated with true and useful learning. He was a most zealous defender of the primitive doctrine of the Protestants, as appears by his writings; and that strong nervous eloquence, for which he was so remarkable, enabled him to enforce the doctrines of his profession from the pulpit with great spirit and energy.

, or Ali Ebnol Abbas, as Abulpharagius calls him in his Hist. Dyn. or, as he is usually called, Magus, as being one of the Magi, the followers of Zaradusht or Zoroaster; and not for his learning, as the learned Dr. Freind supposes. He was a Persian physician, and studied under Abu Maher, another Persian doctor, who probably was of the Magian religion also; he wrote his book, or Royal Work, at the request of Bowaia the son of Adadb'ddaula the calif, to whom he dedicates it in the oriental manner, in lofty hyperbolical language, about A. D. 980. It was translated into Latin by Stephen of Antioch in 1127, in which language we have two editions, Venice 1492, and Leyden 1523, fol. There is an Arabic ms copy in 4 vols. folio in the Leyden library, which was brought by James Golius from the East.

, an eminent historical painter, was born at Modena in 1512, and was the scholar of Antonio Beggarelli, a Modenese sculptor, whose models Correggio is said to have often made use of for his works. Little is known of his progress at Modena, except that, in partnership with his fellow-scholar Alberto Fontana, he painted the pannels of the Butchers hall in that place; and at the age of thirty-five, for the church of the Benedictines, the celebrated picture of the martyrdom of St. Peter and St. Paul, now in the Dresden gallery: with some fresco paintings, drawn from Ariosto and Virgil, in the palace Scandiano. Of his works at Bologna, tradition has left a very distinguished account, though little or nothing exists of them now but the large symbolic picture in the Via di St. Mamolo; a nativity of Christ, under the portico of the Leoni palace; and four conversation pieces and concertos, of exquisite taste, in the Academical Institute, which have been engraved. Notwithstanding the innate vigour, the genial facility, and independent style of this artist, he owes his fame, in a great measure, to his coalition with Francisco Primaticcio, and to his happy execution of the designs of that great master, particularly the frescoes he painted in the galleries and apartments at Fountainbleau. These, however, being destroyed in 1738, to make room for a new fabric, nothing remains but a few pictures of the history of Alexander. Some of the others were engraved. The period of his death is not known .

, or Abbot of Fleuri, a Benedictine monk of the tenth century, was born in the territory of Orleans, and educated in the abbey of Fleuri, and afterwards at Paris and Rheims, where he distinguished himself in all the learning of the times, and particularly in mathematics, theology, and history. Oswald, bishop of Worcester, in 985, applied to the abbey of Fleuri to obtain a proper person to preside over the abbey of Ramsay, which he had founded, or rather re-established. Abbo was sent over to England for this purpose, and much caressed by king Ethelred and the nobility. Returning to Fleuri upon the death of the abbot, he was declared his successor. Here he experienced many vexations from some of the bishops, against whom he asserted the rights of the monastic order. His enemies charged him with some acrimony against his persecutors. In his justification, he wrote an apology, which he addressed to the kings Hugh and Robert. Some time afterwards he dedicated to the same princes a collection of canons on the duties of kings and the duties of subjects. King Robert, having sent him to Rome to appease the wrath of Gregory V. who had threatened to lay the kingdom under an interdict, the pope granted him all he requested. Abbo, on his return from this expedition, set about the reform of the abbey of Reole in Gascony. He was here slain in a quarrel that rose between the French and the Gascons, in 1004. His works are: 1. “Epitome de vitis Pontificum,” taken from Anastasius Bibliothecarius, and published with an edition of that author by Busscus, Mentz, 1602, 4to. 2. “Vita S. Edmundi Anglorum Orientalium regis & martyris,” printed in Surius’ Lives of the Saints. There is a ms. of it in the Cottonian Library. 3. “Collectio, seu epitome Canonum,” printed by Mabillon. 4. “Epistola ad abbatem Fuldensem,” in Baluze’s Miscellanies, 1678, 8vo. 5. “Letters to Hugh, king of France, to St. Bernard, Gregory,” &c. and his Apology, are inserted whole, or in fragments, in his Life by Aimonius, a monk of Fleuri, and his pupil.

In 1608, on the death of his patron, lord Buckhurst, earl of Dorset, he became chaplain to George Hume, earl of Dunbar, and treasurer of Scotland; and went home with him,in order to establish an union between the Churches of England and Scotland. King James’s object was to restore the antient form of government by bishops; notwithstanding the aversion of the people of Scotland to this measure, Dr. Abbot’s skill, prudence, and Moderation succeeded so far as to procure an act of the General Assembly, which was afterwards ratified and confirmed by the Parliament of Scotland. By this it was enacted, that the king should have the calling of all General Assemblies; that the bishops or their deputies should be perpetual moderators of the diocesan synods; that no excommunication or absolution should be pronounced without their approbation; that all presentations of benefices should be made by them, and that the deprivation or suspension of ministers should belong to them; that every minister, at his admission to a benefice, should take the oath of supremacy, and canonical obedience; that the visitation of the diocese should be performed by the bishop or his deputy only; and finally, that the bishop should be moderator of all conventions for exercisings or prophesyings, which should be held within their bounds.

In the following year he was preferred to the see of Canterbury, and confirmed April 9, and on the 23d of June he was sworn of his majesty’s most honourable privycouncil. At this time he was in the highest favour both with prince and people, and appears to have taken an active part in all the great transactions in church and state. Although not thought excessively fond of power, or desirous of carrying his prerogative, as primate of England, to an extraordinary height, yet he was resolute in maintaining the rights of the high commission court, and would not submit to lord Coke’s prohibitions. In the case of Vorstius, his conduct was more singular. Vorstius had been appointed to a professorship hi the university of Leyden, and was a noted Arminian. King James, by our archbishop’s advice, remonstrated with the States on this appointment; and the consequence was that Vorstius was banished by the synod of Dort, as will appear more at length in his life. This condact on the part of the archbishop alarmed those who were favourers of Arminianism, and who dreaded Calvinism from its supposed influence on the security of the church; but their fears as far as he was concerned appear to have been groundless, his attachment to the church of England remaining firm and uniform. He had soon, however, another opportunity of testifying his dislike of the Arminian doctrines. The zeal which the king had shewn for removing, first Arminius, and then Vorstius, had given their favourers in Holland so much uneasiness, that the celebrated Grotius, the great champion of their cause, was sent over to England to endeavour to mitigate the King’s displeasure, and, if possible, to give him a better opinion of the Remonstrants, as they then began to be called. On this occasion the archbishop wrote an account of Grotius and his negociation in a letter to sir Ralph Winwood, in which he treats Grotius with very little ceremony. For this he has met with an advocate in archdeacon Blackburn, who, in his Confessional, observes in his behalf, that “his disaffection to Grotius was owing to the endeavours and proposals of the latter, towards a coalition of the Protestants and Papists, which every wise and consistent Protestant, in every period lince the Reformation, as well as Abbot, has considered as a snare, and treated accordingly.” Another affair which occurred in 1613, created no little perplexity to our archbishop, while it afforded him an opportunity of evincing a decidedness of character not common at that period. This was the case of divorce between lady Frances Howard, daughter to the earl of Suffolk, and Robert, earl of Essex, her husband, which has always been considered as one of the greatest blemishes of king James’s reign. The part Abbot took in this matter displayed his unshaken and incorruptible integrity; and he afterwards published his reasons for opposing the divorce, as a measure tending to encourage public licentiousness. If this conduct displeased the king, he does not appear to have withdrawn his favour from the archbishop, as in 1615 he promoted his brother, Robert, to the see of Salisbury. The archbishop was less prudent in recommending -to the king, George Villiers, afterwards the celebrated duke of Buckingham; but of this he lived to repent, and to leave a satisfactory vindication.

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

Others of the contemporary historians, besides Heylin, have given unfavourable characters of the archbishop; but their accounts disagree. Lord Clarendon likewise bears hard on his religious principles and general character. “He had,” says his lordship, “been master of one of the poorest colleges in Oxford, and had learning sufficient for that province.” The Editor of the Biog. Britannica has here supplied the name (Balliol), a blunder which lord Clarendon was not likely to have made, as our archbishop was master of University College, and his brother Robert, master of Balliol. It is rather singular, however, that his lordship should undervalue the “learning sufficient for that province.” He also notices, as extraordinary, that he was promoted to the bishoprick of Lichfield and Coventry “before he had been parson, vicar, or curate of any parish church in England, or dean or prebendary of any cathedral church in England; and was in truth totally ignorant of the true constitution of the church of England, and the state and interest of the clergy.” Here again his lordship seems to have forgot, that he was dean of Winchester before he was bishop of Lichfield, and that the chief cause of uis promotion was the service he rendered to his majesty by procuring the establishment of episcopacy in Scotland. Upon the whole of his character as drawn by lord Clarendon, the late right hon. Arthur Onslow, speaker of the House of Commons, offers the following remarks: “That worthy prelate did surely deserve a better representation to posterity. He was a very wise and prudent man, knew well the temper and disposition of the kingdom with respect to the ceremonies and power of the church, and did therefore use a moderation in the point of ecclesiastical discipline, which if it had been followed by his successor, the ruin that soon after fell on the church might very likely have been prevented. His being without any credit at court from the latter end of king James’s reign will bring no dishonour on his memory, if it be considered that his disgrace arose from his dislike of, and opposition to, the imprudent and corrupt measures of the court at that time, and from an honest zeal for the laws and liberties of his country, which seemed then to be in no small danger, and it was a part truly becoming the high station he then bore. His advice upon the affair of the Palatinate and the Spanish match shewed his knowledge of the true interest of England, and how much it was at his heart; and his behaviour and sufferings in the next reign, about the loan and Sibthorp’s sermon, as thoy were the reasons of his disgrace at that time, so ought they to render his memory valuable to all who wish not to see the fatal counsels and oppression of those times revived in this nation. The duke of Buckingham was his enemy, because the archbishop would not be his creature; and the church perhaps might have been thought to have been better governed, if he had stooped to the duke, and given in to the wantonnesses of his power: but he knew the dignity of his character, and loved his country too well to submit to such a meanness, though very few of his brethren had the courage or honesty to join with him in this, and, if the archbishop himseif is to be credited, his successor’s rise was by the practice of those arts this good man could not bend to. As to his learning, we need no better testimony of it than his promotion by king James, who had too much affectation that way to prefer any one to such a station who had not borne the reputation of a scholar; but there are other proofs of his sufficiency in this, even for the high place he held in the church. If he had some narrow notions in divinity, they were rather the faults of the age he had his education in, than his; and the same imputation may be laid on the best and most learned of the Reformers. His warmth against Popery became the office of a Protestant bishop; though even towards Papists there is a remarkable instance of his mildness and charity, which shewed that his zeal against their persons went no farther than the safety of the state required. His parts seem to have been strong and masterly, his preaching grave and eloquent, and his style equal to any of that time. He was eminent for piety and a care for the poor; and his hospitality fully answered the injunction king James laid on him, which was, to carry his house nobly, and live like an archbishop. He had no thoughts of heaping up riches; what he did save was laid out by him in the erecting and endowing of an handsome Hospital for decayed tradesmen and the widows of such, in the town of Guildford, in the county of Surrey, where he was born and had his first education; and here I cannot omit taking notice that the body of statutes drawn by himself for the government of that house, is one of the most judicious works of that kind I ever saw, and under which for near one hundred years that hospital has maintained the best credit of any that I know in England. He was void of all pomp and ostentation, and thought the nearer the church and churchmen came to the simplicity of the first Christians, the better would the true ends of religion be served; and that the purity of the heart was to be preferred to, and ought rather to be the care of a spiritual governor, than the devotion of the hands only. If under this notion some niceties in discipline were given up to goodness of life, and when the peace of the church as well as of the kingdom was preserved by it, 'twas surely no ill piece of prudence, nor is his memory therefore deserving of those slanders it has undergone upon that account. It is easy to see that much of this treatment has been owing to a belief in the admirers and followers of archbishop Laud, that the reputation of the latter was increased by depreciating that of the former. They were indeed men of very different frames, and the parts they took in the affairs both of church and state as disagreeing. In the church, moderation and the ways of peace guided the behaviour of the first, rigour and severity that of the last. In the state they severally carried the like principles and temper. The one made the liberty of the people and the laws of the land the measure of his actions; when the other, to speak softly of it, had the power of the prince and the exalting the prerogative only, for the foundation of his. They were indeed both of them men of courage and resolution; but it was sedate and temperate in Abbot, passionate and unruly in Laud. It is not however to be denied that many rare and excellent virtues were possessed by the latter; but it must be owned too, he seems rather made for the hierarchy of another church and to be the minister of an arbitrary prince, and the other to have had the qualifications of a Protestant bishop and the guardian of a free state .”

His works are: 1. “Quæstiones Sex, totidem pralectionibus in Schola Theologica Oxoniae, pro forma habitis, discussae et disceptatae anno 1597, in quibus e Sacra Scriptura & Patribus, quid statuendum sit definitur.” Oxon. 1598, 4to, & Francfort, 1616, 4to, published by Abraham Scultetus. 2. “Exposition on the Prophet Jonah, contained in certaine Sermons, preached in S. Maries Church in Oxford,” 4to, 1600. It appears by a postscript to the reader, that these sermons or lectures were delivered on Thursdays early in the morning, “sometimes before daylight,” from 1594 to 1599. They were reprinted in and form the most popular of his works. 3. His “Answer to the questions of the Citizens of London in Jan. 1600, concerniug Cheapside Cross,” not printed until 1641. 4. “The reasons which Dr. Hill hath brought for the upholding of Papistry, unmasked and shewed to be very weak, &c.” Oxon. 4to. 1604. Hill was a clergyman of the church of England, which he exchanged for that of Rome, and wrote his “Quatron of Reasons” in vindication of his conduct, printed at Antwerp, 4to. 1600. 5. “A Preface to the examination of George Sprot,” &c. noticed before. 6. “Sermon preached at Westminster, May 26, 1608, at the funeral of Thomas earl of Dorset, late lord high treasurer of England, on Isaiah xl. 6.” 4to. 1608. 7. “Translation of a part of the New Testament,” with the rest of the Oxford divines, 1611. 8. “Some memorials, touching the Nullity between the earl-of Essex and his lady, pronounced Sept. 25, 1613, at Lambeth; and the difficulties endured in the same.” To this is added “some observable things since Sept. 25, 1613, when the sentence was given in the cause of the earl of Essex, continued unto the day of the marriage, Dec. 26, 1613,” which appears also to have been penned by his grace, or by his direction; and to it is annexed “the speech intended to be spoken at Lambeth, Sept. 25, 1613, by the archbishop of Canterbury, &c.” These were reprinted in one volume, 1719, 12mo, and the ms. in the archbishop’s hand was then said to be in the hands of an eminent lawyer. 9. “A brief description of the whole World, wherein is particularly described all the monarchies, empires, and kingdoms of the same, with their academies,” &c. 4to. 1617; a work, of which there have been several editions. 10. “A short apology for archbishop Abbot, touching the death of Peter Hawkins, dated Oct. 8, 1621.” 11. “Treatise of perpetual visibility and succession of the true Church in all ages,” Lond. 4to. 1624; published without his name; but his arms, impaled with those of Canterbury, are put before it. 12. “A narrative containing the true cause of his sequestration and disgrace at Court: in two parts, written at Ford in Kent,” 1627, printed in Rushworth’s Historical Collections, vol. I. p. 438—461, and In the Annals of king Charles, p. 213 224. Bp. Racket, in his life of Abp. Williams, p. 68, attests the authenticity of this curious memorial. 13. “History of the Massacre in the Valtoline,” printed in the third volume of Fox’s Acts and Monuments. 14. His “Judgment on bowing at the name of Jesus,” Hamburgh, 8vo. 1632. In 1618, he and sir Henry Savile defrayed the expence of an edition of Bradwardin’s “Cause of God,” a work written against the Pelagians.

, nephew of the preceding, and son of sir Maurice Abbot, the archbishop’s youngest brother, was elected probationer fellow of Merton College, Oxford, 1624, and admitted. LL. B. 1630. He wrote: 1. “The whole book of Job paraphrased,” Lond. 4to. 1640. 2. “Vindiciae Sabbati, or an answer to two treatises of Mr. Broad,” Lond. 1641, 4to. Broad was rector of Rendcombe in Gloucestershire; and wrote two treatises, one concerning the Sabbath or seventh day, and the other concerning the Lord’s day, or first day of the week; which falling into Mr. Abbot’s hands in manuscript, he wrote an answer to them, and published the whole under the above title. 3. “Brief notes upon the whole book of Psalms,” 4to, 1651. He married a daughter of col. Purefoy, of Caldecote-hall, Warwickshire, whose house he gallantly defended, by the help of the sen-ants only, against the attack of the princes Rupert and Maurice with eighteen troops of horse. He died Feb. 4, 1648, aged 44 years.

, father of the above, and youngest brother of archbishop Abbot, was bred up to trade, became an eminent merchant in London, and had a considerable share in the direction of the affairs of the East India Company. He was one of the commissioners employed in negociating a treaty with the Dutch East-India Company, by which the Molucca islands, and the commerce to them, were declared to be divided, two-thirds to the Dutch East India Company, and one-third to the English. This important treaty, which put an end to the long and violent disputes between the English and Dutch East India companies, was concluded at London, July 7, 1619, and ratified by the king on the sixteenth of the same month. In consequence of this treaty, and in order to recover the goods of some English merchants, sir Dudley Digges and Mr. Abbot were sent over into Holland in the succeeding year, 1620, but with what success does not appear. He was afterwards one of the farmers of the customs, as appears from a commission granted in 1623, to him and others, for administering the oaths to such persons, as should either desire to pass the seas from this kingdom, or to enter it from foreign countries. In 1624, he was appointed one of the council for settling and establishing the colony of Virginia, with full powers for the government of that colony. On the accession of king Charles I. he was the first person on whom the order of knighthood was conferred, and he was chosen to represent the city of London in the first parliament of that reign. In 1627 he served the office of Sheriff, and in 1738 that of Lord Mayor. There are no other particulars extant concerning him, unless the date of his death, Jan. 10, 1640 .

The fame of Dr. Abbot’s lectures became very great; and those which he delivered upon the supreme power of kings against Bellarmine and Suarez afforded the king so much satisfaction, that, when the see of Salisbury became vacant, he named him to that bishoprick; and he was consecrated by his own brother, the archbishop of Canterbury, Dec. 3, 1615. It would appear that he had enemies who would have deferred his promotion for various reasons. When he came to do homage, the king said, “Abbot, I have had very much to do to make thee a bishop; but I know no reason for it, unless it were because thou hast written against one,” alluding to Dr. Bishop before-mentioned. In his way to Salisbury, he took a solemn farewell of Oxford, and was accompanied for some miles by the heads of houses and other eminent scholars, who deeply regretted his departure. On his arrival at Salisbury he bestowed much attention on his cathedral, which had been neglected, and raised a considerable subscription for repairs. He afterwards visited the whole of his diocese, and preached every Sunday while his health permitted, which was not long, as the sedentary course he had pursued brought on the stone and gravel, which ended his pious and useful life, March 2, 1617. He had enjoyed his bishoprick only two years and three months, and was interred in the cathedral. He was twice married; the last time, which is said to have given offence to his brother the archbishop, about half a year after his promotion to the see. The lady, whose name seems to have escaped the researches of his biographers, was Bridget Cheynell, wU dow, and mother of the famous Francis Cheynell. By his first wife he left one son, or more, and a daughter who was married to sir Nathaniel Brent, warden of Merton college. All his biographers concur in the excellence of his character, his eminent piety, charity, and learning. One of them has attempted a parallel between the two brothers, viz. that “George was the more plausible preacher, Robert the greater scholar; George the abler statesman, Robert the deeper divine; gravity did frown in George, and smile in Robert.”

A few paritculars [sic] hitherto unnoticed by his biographers may be gleaned from Wood’s Annals, published by Mr. Gutch. It appears that in 1596 the corporation of London requested the two universities to send them a list of persons properly qualified for the professorships of Gresham college, just founded. On this occasion Mr. Abbot, then M. A. of Balliol college, was chosen with three others, but the election ultimately fell upon a gentleman of Cambridge. In 1612, Dr. John Howson, one of the canons of Christ church, preaching at St. Mary’s, reflected on the Annotations to the Geneva translation of the Bible, “as guilty of misrepresenting the divinity of Christ and his Messiahship.” For this he was afterwards suspended, or forced to recant, by Dr. Abbot, then pro-vicechancellor. Wood thinks this the more hard, because king James had been known to censure the partiality of these annotations. While king’s professor of Divinity, he had neither the canonry of Christ church, nor the rectory of Ewelme usually annexed; and his only profits were some fees from those who performed exercises in divinity, and a salary of forty pounds a-year paid by the dean and canons of Christ church. In dislike to Laud, as already noticed, he shared amply with his brother; but Wood’s account of the sermon he preached against him is more particular than that in the Biographia, and throws some light on the controversies as well as the manners of the times. “On Shrove Sunday towards the latter end of this year (1614), it happened that Dr. Laud preached at St. Mary’s, and in his sermon insisted on some points which might indifferently be imputed either to Popery or Arminianism (as about this time they began to call it), though in themselves they were by some thought to be no other than the true doctrine’s of the Church of England. And having occasion in th-it sermon to touch upon the Presbyterians and their proceedings, he used some words to this etfect, viz. `that the Presbyterians were as bad as the Papists.' Which being directly contrary to the judgment and opinion of Dr. Robert Abbot, the king’s professor of Divinity, and knowing how much Dr. Laud had been distasted by his brother when he lived in Oxford, conceived he could not better satisfy himself and oblige his brother, now archbishop of Canterbury, than by exposing him (on the next occasion) both to shame and censure, which he did accordingly. For preaching at St. Peter’s in the East upon Easter-day (1615) in the afternoon, in the turn of the vicechancellor, he pointed at him so direptly, that none of the auditors were so ignorant as not to know at whom he aimed. Dr. Laud, being not present at the first preaching of the sermon, was by hiss friends persuaded to shew himself at St. Mary’s the Sunday after, when it should come to be repeated (according to the ancient custom in this university); to whose persuasions giving an unwilling consent, he heard himself sufficiently abused for almost an hour together, and that so palpably and grossly, that he was pointed to as he sate.” It appears that Laud consulted his patron, Dr. Neal, bishop of Lincoln, who probably dissuaded him from taking any notice of the matter, as we do not find that he wrote any answer, or vindication.

, a German writer of high character, was born Nov. 25, 1738, at Ulm, where he received his education, and in 1751 produced his first dissertation, under the title of “Historia vitae magistra,” in which he maintained two theses, the one on burning mirrors, the other on the miracle of the dial of Ahaz. In 1756, he went to the university of Halle, where he was invited by professor Baumgarten to live in his house. Here he published a thesis “De Extasi,” and studied chiefly philosophy and the mathematics; and from 1758, when he received the degree of M. A. he confined himself to these, giving up divinity, to which he had been originally destined. In 1760, he was appointed professor-extraordinary of philosophy in the university of Francfort-on-the-Oder, and in the midst of the war which then raged, inspirited his fellow-­citizens by a work on “Dying for our Country.” In the following year, he passed six months at Berlin, and left that city to fill the mathematical chair in the university of Rinteln, in Westphalia; but, becoming tired of an academical life, began to study law, as an introduction to some civil employment. In 1763, he travelled through the south of Germany, Switzerland, and part of France; and, on his return to Rinteln, at the end of that year, published his work “On Merit,” which was re-printed thrice in that place, and obtained him much reputation. In 1765, the reigning prince of Schaumburg Lippe bestowed on him the office of counsellor of the court, regency, and consistory of Buckeburgh; but he did not long enjoy the friendship of this nobleman, or his promotion, as he died Nov. 27, 1766, when only in his twenty-eighth year. The prince caused him to be interred, with great pomp, in his private chapel, and honoured his tomb by an affecting epitaph from his own pen. Abbt was highly esteemed by his contemporaries, who seem agreed that, if his life had been spared, he would have ranked among the first German writers. He contributed much to restore the purity of the language, which had become debased before his time, as the Germans, discouraged by the disastrous thirty years war, had written very little, unless in French or Latin.

Besides what we have mentioned, Abbt wrote a great number of works in German or Latin. His first publications were theological: in 1757, he wrote on “the Burial of Moses,” Halle, 4to, which, contrary to the usual opinion, he contended was performed by men. In 1758, he published a thesis, to prove that the “Confusion of Tongues at Babel was not a punishment,” Halle, 4to; and another on the “Search of Truth,” Halle, 1759, 4to. These appear to have been the efforts of a young author eadeavouring to establish a reputation on paradox. After he had begun to study philosophy, he published a thesis on the proper manner of studying that science, Halle, 1760, 4.to. His “Treatise on the influence of the Beautiful on Science,” Rinteln, 1762, 4to, was intended as an introduction to his lectures on the belles-lettres. He next published a “Programma on the difficulty of measuring the Human Faculties,” Rinteln, 1763, 4to; and a “Consolatory Epistle to Dr. Schwartz,” 1763, 8vo. His work entitled “Recherches sur les Sentiments Moraux, traduites de l'Allemand de M. Moses Mendelsohn,” 1763, 12mo, was the only book he wrote in French. He wrote also a “Life of his old friend professor Baumgarten,” 1765, Halle, 4to, which was re-printed in the Rinteln Literary Journal. An anonymous work, which has the date of Hamburgh 1766, 8vo, but was really printed at Berlin, the subject, the “folly of persecution among Protestants,” is ascribed to him. “Reflections on a plan of Study for young men of rank,” was written by him in 1759, but not printed till after his death, in 1767; and reprinted at Berlin 1780. He had begun an universal history, a fragment of which was published by Miller, at Halle, 1767, 8vo. After his death, the count de la Lippe published a translation of the Catiline conspiracy from Sallust, written by Abbt, and esteemed one of his best productions, Stadthagen, 1767, &vo; but it must not be confounded with a translation of the same author published at Lemgow, 1772, under his name. His reputation was such, that there have appeared two surreptitious editions of his works, at Reutlingen in 1782, and at Frankfort in 1783; but the genuine edition is that of Nicolai, 6 vols. Stetin and Berlin, in 1768, 1781, and 1790, which contains many pieces not before printed. His correspondence with Blum, Gause, Gleim, Klotz, Moses Mendelsohn, Nicolai, and others, contained in this edition, was reprinted by itself at Berlin and Stetin in 1782, 8vo. Besides these, there are several papers, on various subjects, written by Abbt, in the German literary journals, particularly that conducted by Less’ing and Moses Mendelsohn. Abbt’s life was written by Frederic Nicolai, and published at Berlin 1767, 4to.

, a name admitted into various biographical collections, without much propriety. It has usually been said that Abdias was an impostor, who pretended that he had seen our Saviour, that he was one of the seventy-two disciples, had been an eye-witness of the lives and martyrdom of several of the apostles, and had followed St. Simon and St. Jude into Persia, where he was made the first bishop of Babylon. From what he saw, he compiled a work entitled “Historia certaminis Apostolici.” This work Wolfgang Lazius, a physician of Vienna, and historiographer to the emperor Ferdinand I. (hereafter noticed) found in manuscript in a cave of Carinthia, and believing it to be genuine, originally written in Hebrew, translated into Greek by one Europius, a disciple of Abdias, and into Latin by Afrieanus, published it at Basil in 1551, after which it was several times reprinted, but, on examination both by Papist and Protestant writers, was soon discovered to be a gross imposture, from the many anachronisms which occur. Melancthon, who saw it in manuscript, was one of the first to detect it; and the greater part of the learned men in Europe, at the time of publication, were of opinion that Abdias was a fictitious personage, and that it was neither written in Hebrew, nor translated into Greek or Latin: Fabricius has proved from internal evidence that it was first written in Latin, but that the author borrowed from various ancient memoirs, which were originally in Greek. As to the age of the writer, some have placed him in the fifth and some in the sixth century, or later. The object of the work is to recommend chastity and celibacy .

, an eminent Persian historian and philosopher, was born at Bagdad, in the 557th year of the Hegira, or the 1161st of the Christian aera. Having been educated with the greatest care by his father, who was himself a man of learning, and resided in a capital which abounded with the best opportunities of instruction, he distinguished himself by an early proficiency, not only in rhetoric, history, and poetry, but also in the more severe studies of Mahommedan theology. To the acquisition of medical knowledge he applied with peculiar diligence; and it was chiefly with this view that he left Bagdad, in his 28th year, in order to visit other countries. At Mosul, in Mesopotamia, whither he first directed his course, he found the attention of the students entirely confined to the chemistry of that day, with which he was already sufficiently acquainted. He therefore removed to Damascus, where the grammarian Al Kindi then enjoyed the highest reputation; and with him Abdcllatiph is said to have engaged in a controversy on some subjects of grammar and philology, which was ably conducted on both sides, but terminated in favour or our author.

Of one hundred and fifty treatises, on various subjects of medichre, natural philosophy, and polite literature, which have been ascribed to Abdollatiph, one only is to be found in the libraries of Europe. It is entitled “Al-kital Alsagir,” or his “Little Book,” being an abridgment of a larger history of Egypt. Of this compendium, one manuscript only has yet been discovered by the industry of European scholars, and is now in the Bodleian library. An edition of it was published in 1300, by professor White of Oxford (from whose preface the above particulars have been taken), enriched with valuable notes, and a translation into Latin. A very learned account and criticism on this work appeared in the Monthly Review for April 1802.

was born at Riez in Provence, in 1648. He removed to Paris early in life, where he was much admired for the brilliancy of his wit. The marechai de Luxembourg took notice of him, and gave him the title of his secretary; and the poet followed the hero in his campaigns. The marshal gave him his confidence during his life, and at his death recommended him to his heirs as an estimable man. The prince of Conti and the duke de Vendome vouchsafed him their familiarity, and found great pleasure in his lively and animated conversation. The witticisms which would have been common in the mouth of any other man, were rendered striking in him by the turn he gave them, and by the grimaces with which he accompanied them. A countenance remarkably ugly and full of wrinkles, which he managed at pleasure, stood him instead of a variety of masks. Whenever he read a tale or a comedy, he made a ludicrous use of this moveable physiognomy for distinguishing the personages of the piece he was reciting. The abbe Abeille enjoyed a priory, and a place in the French academy. We have of him some odes, some epistles, several tragedies, one comedy, and two operas. A certain prince observed of his tragedy of Cato, that, if Cato of Utica should return from the grave, he would be only the Cato of the abbe Abeille. He understood well enough what was necessary to the formation of a good poet: but he was not one himself. His style is feeble, low, and languid. In his versification he discovers none of that dignity he had in his character. He died at Paris, the 21st of May, 1718. A French critic, speaking of the two tragedies, Solyman and Hercules, written by Jean Juvenon de la Thuillerie, says, the reader will be able to judge of their merit, when he is informed that they were attributed to the Abbé Abeille .

Dr. Burney gives the following character of his compositions and performance. “His compositions were easy and elegantly simple; for he used to say, ` I do not choose to be always struggling with difficulties, and playing with all my might. I make my pieces difficult whenever I please, according to my disposition, and that of my audience.' Yet in nothing was he so superior to himself, and to other musicians, as in writing and playing an adagio; in which the most pleasing, yet learned modulation, the richest harmony, and the most elegant and polished melody, were all expressed with such feeling, taste, and science, that no musical production or performance with which I was then acquainted, seemed to approach nearer perfection. The knowledge Abel had acquired in Germany in every part of musical science, rendered him the umpire of all musical controversies, and caused him to be consulted in all difficult points. His concertos and other pieces were very popular, and frequently played on public occasions. The taste and science of Abel were rather greater than his invention, so that some of his later productions, compared with those of younger composers, appeared somewhat languidand monotonous. Yet he preserved a high reputation in the profession till his death.”

An incident now occurred in his life, which has given him more popular renown than his abilities as a philosopher, a theologian, or a writer, could have conferred, but which has thrown a melancholy shade on his moral character. About this time, there was resident in Paris, Heloise, the niece of Fulbert, one of the canons of the cathedral church, a lady about eighteen years of age, of great personal beauty, and highly celebrated for her literary attainments. Abelard, who was now at the sober age of 40, conceived an illicit passion for this young lady, flattering himself that his personal attractions were yet irresistible. Fulbert, who thought himself honoured by the visits of so eminent a scholar and philosopher, while he had any reason to place them to his own account, welcomed him to his house, as a learned friend whose conversation might be instructive to his niece, and was therefore easily prevailed upon, by a handsome payment which Abelard offered for his board, to admit him into his family as an inmate. When this was -concluded upon, as he apprehended no danger from one of Abelard’s age and gravity, he requested him to devote some portion of his leisure to the instruction of Heloise, at the same time granting him full permission to treat her in all respects as his pupil. Abelard accepted the trust, and, we gather from his own evidence, with no other intention than to betray it. “I was no less surprized,” he says, “than if the canon had delivered up a tender lamb to a famished wolf,” &c. In this infamous design he succeeded but too well, and appears to have corrupted her mind, as, amidst the rage of her uncle, and the reflections which would naturally be made on such a transaction, every other sentiment in her breast was absorbed in a romantic and indecent passion for her seducer. Upon her pregnancy being discovered, it was thought necessary for her to quit her uncle’s house, and Abelard conveyed her to Bretagne, where she was delivered of a son, to whom they gave the name of Astrolabus, or Astrolabius. Abelard now proposed to Fulbert to marry his niece, provided the marriage might be kept secret, and Fulbert consented; but Heloise, partly out of regard to the interest of Abelard, whose profession bound him to celibacy, and partly from a less honourable notion, that love like hers ought not to submit to ordinary restraints, at first gave a peremptory refusal. Abelard, however, at last prevailed, and they were privately married at Paris; but in this state they did not experience the happy effects of mutual reconciliation. The uncle wished to disclose the marriage, but Heloise denied it; and from tbis time he treated her with such unkindness as furnished Abelard with a sufficient plea for removing her from his house, and placing her in the abbey of Benedictine nuns, in which she had been originally educated. Fulbert, while he gave the provocation, pretended that Abelard had taken this step in order to rid himself of an incumbrance which obstructed his future prospects. Deep resentment took possession of his soul, and he meditated revenge; in the pursuit of which he employed some ruffians to enter Abelard’s chamber by night, and inflict upon his person a disgraceful and cruel mutilation, which was accordingly perpetrated. The ruffians, however, were apprehended, and punished according to the law of retaliation; and Fulbert was deprived of his benefice, and his goods confiscated.

The spot which he chose was a vale in the forest of Champagne, near Nogent upon the Seine, where, accompanied by only one ecclesiastic, he erected a small oratory, which he dedicated to the Trinity, but afterwards enlarged, and consecrated it to the Third Person, the Comforter, or Paraclete. In this asylum he was soon discovered, and followed by a train of scholars. A rustic college arose in the forest, and the number of his pupils soon increased to six hundred. But his enemies St. Norbert and St. Bernard, who enjoyed great popularity in this neighbourhood, conspired to bring him into discredit, and he was meditating his escape, when, through the interest of the Duke of Bretagne, and with the consent of the abbot of St. Denys, he was elected superior of the monastery of St. Gildas, in the diocese of Vannes, where he remained several years.

It was during Abelard’s residence at St. Gildas, that the interesting correspondence passed between him and Heloise, which is still extant, and that he wrote the memoirs of his life which came down to the year 1134. The letters of Heloise, in this correspondence, abound with proofs of genius, learning, and taste, which might have graced a Better age. It is upon these letters that Mr. Pope formed his “Epistle from Eloisa to Abelard,” which, however, deviates in some particulars from the genuine character and story of Heloise, and is yet more seriously censurable on account of its immoral tendency. Here, too, Abelard probably wrote his “Theology,” or revised it, which again subjected him to prosecution. William, abbot of St. Thievry, the friend f Bernard, now abbot of Clairvaux, brought a formal charge against him for heresy in thirteen articles, copied from the “Theology.” Bernard, after an unsuccessful private remonstrance, accused Abelard to pope Innocent II. of noxious errors and mischievous designs. Abelard, with the concurrence of the archbishop of Sens, challenged his accuser to appear in a public assembly, shortly to be held in that city, and make good his accusation. The abbot at first declined accepting the challenge; but afterwards made his appearance, and delivered to the assembly the heads of his accusation. Abelard, instead of replying, appealed to Rome, which did not prevent the council from examining the charges, and pronouncing his opinions heretical. It was, however, judged necessary to inform the bishop of Rome of the proceedings, and to request his confirmation of the sentence. In the mean time, Bernard, by letters written to the Roman prelates, strongly urged them to silence, without delay, this dangerous innovator. His importunity succeeded; for the pope, without waiting for the arrival of Abelard, pronounced his opinions heretical, and sentenced him to perpetual silence and confinement. Immediately upon being informed of the decision, Abelard set out for Rome, in hopes of being permitted to plead his cause before his holiness. In his way he called at Cluni, a monastery on the confines of Burgundy, where he found a 2ealous friend in Peter Maurice, the abbot, and also in Reinardus, the abbot of Citeaux, who negociated a reconciliation between him and Bernard, while Peter, by his earnest remonstrances, procured his pardon at Rome, and he was permitted to end his days in the monastery of Cluni.

“To erase these unfavourable impressions which the mind has conceived of Abelard, we must view him in distress, smarting from oppression and unprovoked malevolence. There was in his character something which irritated opposition, whether it was a love of singularity, an asperity of manners, or a consciousness of superior talents r which he did not disguise. However this might be, the behaviour of his enemies was always harsh, and sometimes cruel; and him we pity. He now became a religious, a benevolent, and a virtuous man; and thousands reaped benefit from his instructions, as they were tutored by his example. The close of his unhappy life was to the eye of the Christian spectator its most brilliant period. In his death he was the great and good man, the philosopher and the Christian.”

, a historian, born at Strasburgh, and who died about 1646, is perhaps better known by the name of John Louis Gottfried, or Gothofredus, which he used in most of his numerous works. Under his proper name, he published only the first volume of the “Theatre of Europe,” which contains the history of Europe from 1617 to 1628; and the 17th, 18th, 19th, and 20th volumes of the “Mercurius Gallo-Belgicus,” begun by Gothard Arthus, and containing the annals of Europe, but particularly of France, from 1628 to 1636, Francfort, 1628—1636, 8vo. The Mercurius is in Latin, but the Theatre in German. The second volume of the latter bears the name of Avelin; but Christian Gryphius, in his account of the historians of the seventeenth century, attributes it to John George Schleder, who also compiled some of the subsequent volumes. The best edition of the “Theatre of Europe” is that published at Francfort, from 1662 to 1738, in 21 vols. fol. illustrated by the engravings of Matthew Maittaire. The volumes composed by Abelin, Schleder, and Schneider, are most esteemed; the others, composed by their continuators, have neither the same reputation or merit.

In 1619, Abelin published an explanation of the metamorphoses of Ovid, under the title “P. Ovidii Nasonis Metamorphoseon plerarumque historica, naturalis, moralis *pfflwij,Εχφρις” Francfort, 8vo, with the engravings of J. Theodore de Bry. He signs the dedication to this work, “Ludovicus Gottofridus.” In 1628, he was concerned in a German and Latin translation of D'Ativy’s “Etats, Empires, Royaumes, et Principautez du Monde,” under the title of “Archontologia cosmica,” of which there have been three editions, the two last with plates by Merian; but, since the modern improvements in geography, this work is less esteemed. He also compiled or translated the 12th and last volume of the History of the East Indies, published at Francfort 1628, fol. under the title of “Historiarum Orientalis Indiae tomus XII.” This history bears a high price, when complete. The copy in the French imperial library cost 4000 francs. In 1632, Abelin published, in German, his “Description of Sweden,” folio; and the year following, also in German, a “Historical Chronicle,”, from the beginning of the world to the year 1619, folio, with a great number of plates by Merian, of which the letter-press is merely the description. His last work was a “History of the Antipodes, or the New World;” this, which is in German, is a description of the West Indies, and was published at Francfort, 1655, folio. It is thought that he published a German translation of the Plasnum, a comedy by Daniel Cramer, under the fictitious name of John Philip Abel, in 1627; but why he assumed these disguises, we are not told.

, an English musician, was celebrated for a fine counter-tenor voice, and for his skill on the lute. Charles II. of whose chapel he was, and who admired his singing, had formed a resolution of sending him to the carnival at Venice, in order to shew the Italians what England could produce in this way; but the scheme was dropped. Abell continued in the chapel till the Revolution, when he was discharged as being a Papist. Upon this he went abroad, and distinguished himself by singing in public in Holland, at Hamburgh, and other places; where, acquiring considerable wealth, he set up a splendid equipage, and affected the man of quality, though at intervals he vyas so reduced, as to be obliged to travel through whole provinces with his lute slung at his back. In rambling he got as far as Poland, and at Warsaw met with a very extraordinary adventure. He was sent for to court; but, evading to go by some slight excuse, was commanded to attend. At the palace he was seated in a chair, in 'the middle of a spacious hall, and suddenly drawn up to a great height, and the king, with his attendants, appeared in a gallery opposite to him. At the same instant a number of wild bears were turned in, when the king bid him choose, whether he would sing, or be let down among the bears Abell chose to sing, and declared afterwards, that he never sung so well in his life.

, Aven-Hezer, or Ben-Meir, (Abraham), a celebrated Rabbi, born at Toledo, in Spain, in 1099, called by the Jews, the wise, great, and admirable doctor, was a very able interpreter of the Holy Scriptures, and was well skilled in grammar, poetry, philosophy, astronomy, and in medicine. He was also a perfect master of the Arabic. His style is in general clear, elegant, concise, and much like that of the Holy Scriptures; he almost always adheres to the literal sense, and everywhere gives proofs of his genius and good sense: he however advances some erroneous sentiments, and his conciseness sometimes makes his style obscure. He travelled in most parts of Europe, visiting England, France, Italy, Greece, &c. for the purpose of acquiring knowledge, and far surpassed his brethren both in sacred and profane learning. He wrote theological, grammatical, and astronomical works, many of which remain in manuscript, but the following have been published: 1. “Perus a l'Altora,” or a commentary on the Law, fol. Constantinople, 5262 (1552), a very rare edition. There is likewise another edition printed at Venice, 1576, fol. 2. “Jesod Mora,” intended as an exhortation to the study of the Talmud, Constantinople, 8vo. 1530, by far the most scarce of all his works. 3. “Elegantiæ Grammaticæ,” Venice, 1546, 8vo. 4. “De Luminaribus et Diebus criticis liber,” Leyden, 1496, 4to. of which there have been three editions. 5. “De Nativitatibus,” Venice, 1485, 4to, republished by John Dryander, Col. 1537, 4to. He died in 1174 at the island of Rhodes, in the 75th year of his age, but some have placed his death in 1165.

, Abhengnefit, or Albenguefit, an Arabian physician, who flourished in the 12th century, is the author of 1. “De virtutibus Medicinarum et Ciborum,” translated from the Arabic into Latin by Gerard of Cremona, and published at Strasburgh, 1531, fol. 2. “DeBalneis,” Venice, 1553, fol.

, or Aben-Mallek, a learned rabbi of the 17th century, who wrote a commentary on the Bible, called in Hebrew the “Beauty of Holiness,” Amst. 1661, fol. Different parts of it have been translated into Latin, and printed, 4to and 8vo, in Germany. This rabbi follows the grammatical sense, and the opinions of Kimchi .

, a physician and historian, was the son of Alexander Abercromby, of Fetternear, in Aberdeenshire, and brother of Francis Abercromby, who was created lord Glasford in July 1685. He was born at Forfar, in the county of Angus, in 1656, and educated in the university of St. Andrew’s, where he took the degree of doctor in medicine in 1685. Some accounts say that he spent Ims youth in foreign countries, was probably educated in the university of Paris, and that his family were all Roman Catholics, who partook of the misfortunes of James II.; others, that on his return to Scotland he renounced the Protestant religion, at the request of king James, and was by him appointed one of the physicians to trie court, which he was obliged to relinquish at the Revolution. Soon after he attached himself to the study of antiquities, and published, “The Martial Achievements of Scotland,” 2 vols. fol. 1711 and 1715, to which he was encouraged by a large list of subscribers. The first volume abounds in the marvellous, but the second is valuable on account of its accurate information respecting the British history in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. He wrote also a treatise on Wit, 1686, which is now little known, and translated M. Beague’s very rare book, “L‘Histoire de la Guerre d’Escosse,” 1556, under the title of “The History of the Campagnes 1548 and 1549: being an exact account of the martial expeditions performed in those days by the Scots and French on the one side, and the English and their foreign auxiliaries on the other: done in French by Mons. Beague, a French gentleman. Printed in Paris 1556, with an introductory preface by the translator,” 1707, 8vo. The ancient alliance between France and Scotland is strenuously asserted in this work. He died about the year 1716, according to Mr. Chalmers, or, as in the last edition of this Dictionary, in 1726, about the age of 70, or rather 72.

, K. B. a British officer of great bravery and talents, was the son of George Abercrombie, of Tillibodie, in Clackmannanshire, esq. by Mary daughter of Ralph Dundas, of Manour, esq. and was born about the year 1738, or, according to his epitaph at Malta, 1733; and, after a liberal education, went by choice into the army. His first commission was that of cornet in the third regiment of dragoon guards, dated March 23, 1756. In the month of February 1760, he obtained a lieutenancy in the same regiment, and in that of April, a company in the third regiment of horse. In this last regiment he rose to the rank of major and lieutenant-colonel. In November 1780, he was included in the list of brevet colonels, and in 1781 was made colonel of the 103d, or king’s Irish infantry. On Sept. 26, 1787, he was promoted to the rank of major-general.

Soon after the war broke out on the Continent in 1792-3, he was employed there, and had the local rank of lieutenant-general conferred upon him. He commanded the advanced guard in the action on the heights at Gateau, and was wounded at Nimeguen. On every occasion his bravery and skill procured him the warmest praise of the commander in chief, and of the army. In the unfortunate retreat from Holland, in the winter of 1794, the guards as well as the sick were left under his care, whom he conducted with the utmost humanity, amidst many painful scenes, during the disastrous march from Deventer to Oldensall. In 1795, he was made knight of the Bath, and appointed commander in chief of the forces in the West Indies. On his arrival, he obtained possession of the island of Grenada, in the month of March, and soon after of the settlements of Demarara and Essequibo, in South America. His next conquests were the islands of St. Lucia and St. Vincent’s; and in February 1797 the Spanish island of Trinidad capitulated to him. This successful campaign being concluded, he returned to Europe, and had the command conferred upon him of the 2d, or North British dragoons, and had been before his arrival promoted to the rank of lieutenant-general, and was appointed lieutenant-governor of the Isle of Wight, from which he was in 1798 removed to the higher office of governor of Fort Augustus and Fort St. George. Previous to this he was appointed commander in chief in Ireland. In this situation he laboured to maintain the discipline of the army, to suppress the rising rebellion, which had been concerted between the French government and a number of traitors at home; and he protected the people from the inconveniencies of military government, with a care and skill worthy of the great general, and the enlightened and beneficent statesman. But circumstances rendering it necessary that the civil and military command of that country should be invested in the same person (the marquis Cornwallis), he was removed to the chief command in Scotland, where his conduct gave universal satisfaction.

A more favourable enterprize, however, soon afforded our gallant hero an opportunity of immortalizing his name. This was the memorable expedition ordered in 1801 to dispossess the French of Egypt. To this destination, sir Ralph conducted the English army and fleet in perfect health and spirits, and landed at Aboukir on the 8th of March, 1801, after a severe battle, in which the English were victorious. The landing, the first dispositions, the attack, and the courage opposed to attack, the high confidence of the army in their general, and the decided superiority of the British infantry under his command over the French, which was thought the bravest and best disciplined infantry in Europe, all demonstrated that the best qualities of the greatest commanders were united in sir Ralph Abercromby. But it was his destiny to fall in the moment of victory. After having repulsed the French in a general attack upon our army near Alexandria, the French again, on the 21st March, made a second advance, which was contested with unusual obstinacy, and they were again forced to retreat. On this memorable occasion, he received a mortal wound in the thigh, which he concealed until the enemy were totally routed, when he fell from his horse through loss of blood. He was conveyed from the field of battle on board the admiral’s ship, where he died on the 28th, and was interred under the castle of St. Elmo, in La Valetta, in the island of Malta. The following just and admired tribute to his memory was contained in the dispatch from lord Hutchinson, who succeeded him in the chief command:——“We have sustained an irreparable loss, in the person of our never to be sufficiently lamented commander in chief, sir Ralph Abercromby, who was mortally wounded in the action, and died on the 28th of March, I believe he was wounded early; but he concealed his situation from those about him, and continued in the field giving his orders with that coolness and perspicuity which had ever marked his character, till long after the action was over, when he fainted through weakness and loss of blood. Were it permitted for a soldier to regret any one who has fallen in the service of his country, I might be excused for lamenting him more than any other person; but it is some consolation to those who tenderly loved him, that, as his life was honourable, so his death was glorious; His memory will be recorded in the annals of his country; will be sacred to every British soldier, and embalmed in the recollection of a grateful posterity.” In private life, sir Ralph in his manners had somewhat of reserve; but was truly amiable, honourable, and virtuous, attached to his country and to his profession, and in every relative duty most exemplary. He was one of a family distinguished for bravery or talents. His brother James, a lieutenant-colonel in the 22d foot, was killed in America, 1774, at the battle of Bunker’s Hill. The character and high rank of his surviving brother, sir Robert Abercrombie, K. B. are well known. Another, Alexander, one of the Scotch Judges, died in 1795, a man of high reputation in the law, and not less distinguished for his taste in the belles lettres. He was the author of ten papers in the Mirror, and nine in the Lounger, two well-known periodical papers published at Edinburgh. Sir Ralph sat in three parliaments for the county of Clackmannan.

The most celebrated of his writings were his two volumes of “Discourses on the Divine Attributes,” the first of which only was published during his life. These excited a very general attention and admiration, were much applauded and recommended by archbishop Herring, and are still held in high esteem. Four volumes of “Posthumous Sermons” were likewise published, the two first in 1748, and the others in 1757: to which is prefixed the life of the author, written, as is generally understood, by Dr. Duchal. In 1751, a volume of his controversial “Tracts” was published in London. He published in his life-time three occasional Sermons, and a pamphlet or two on the dissenting controversy. He left behind him a diary of his life, which begins in February 1712-13, a little after his wife’s death. It consists of six large volumes in quarto, ia a very small hand, and very closely written. It is, indeed, say his biographers, an amazing work, in which the temper of his soul is throughout expressed with much exactness; and the various events he met with are described; together with his reflections upon them, and his improvements of them. The whole bears such characters of a reverence and awe of the Divine presence upon his mind, of a simplicity and sincerity of spirit, and of the most careful discipline of the heart, that how great soever his reputation in the world was, it shews his real worth to have been superior to the esteem in which he was held.

, or Abgarus, a name given to several of the kings of Edessa in Syria, one of whom is said to have written a letter to our Saviour, and to have received an answer, and at the same time an handkerchief, on which was impressed the portrait of Jesus Christ Eusebius is the first who has reported this story, which has generally obtained more belief from Protestant than from Popish writers. Father Simon and M. du p in pronounce the letters to be forgeries, while Dr. Parser, in his “Demonstration of the Law of Nature and the Christian Religion,” Dr. Cave, in his Literary History, and Dr. Grabe, in his “Spicilegium Patrum,” and others, are inclined to think them genuine. Dr. Lardner, however, in his “Testimonies of ancient Heathen Authors,” argues with much force of reasoning against their authenticity. The letters being short, are inserted here as curiosities. “The copy of the letter which was written by Abgarus the toparch to Jesus, and sent to him at Jerusalem by the courier Ananias:

“Abgarus, toparch of Edessa, to Jesus the good saviour, who has appeared at Jerusalem, sendeth greeting. I have heard of thee, and of thy cures, performed without herbs, or other medicines. For it is reported that thou makest the blind to see, and the iame to walk; that thou cleansest lepers, and easiest out unclean spirits and demons, and healest those who are tormented with diseases of a long standing, and raisest the dead. Having heard of all these things concerning thee, I conclude in my mind one of these two things either that thou art God come down from heaven to do these things, or else thou art the Son of God, and so performest them. Wherefore I now write unto thee, entreating thee to come to me, and to heal my distemper. Moreover, I hear that the Jews murmur against thee, and plot to do thee mischief. I have a city, small indeed, but neat, which may suffice for us both.”

, or Abiosus, a physician and mathematician, born at Bagnuolo, in the kingdom of Naples, flourished towards the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century. Some of his works were much esteemed. His “Dialogus in Astrologiae defensionem, item Vaticinium a diluvio usque ad Christi annos 17,” Venice, 1474, 4to, was put into the Index Expurgatovius, and is extremely rare.

, an English divine, was educated at Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. July 4, 1513, and that of M. A. June 27, 1516, and afterwards proceeding in divinity, became doctor of that faculty. He was not only a man of learning, but a great master of instrumental music, and well skilled in the modern languages. These qualifications introduced him at court, where he became domestic chaplain to queen Catherine, wife of Henry VIII. and tauoht her music and grammar. Strype calls him “the lady Marie’s chaplain.” In 1530 queen Catherine gave him the living of Bradwelljuxta-mare, in Essex; and the affection he bore to his royal mistress engaged him in that dangerous controversy which was occasioned by king Henry’s determination to divorce Catherine that he might be at liberty to marry Anne Bullen. Able opposed this divorce both by word and writing, publishing a tract, entitled, “Tractatus de non dissolvendo Henrici et Catherinæ matrimonio.” Tanner mentions this, or perhaps another tract, by the name of “Invicta Veritas: An answer, that by no manner of Jaw it may be lawful for the king to be divorced from the queen’s grace, his lawful and very wife.” It is not improbable that this was a distinct tract from the former, as in the Stat. 25 Henry VIII. c. 12, he is mentioned as having “caused to be printed divers books against the said divorce and separation animating the said lady Catherine to persist in her opinion against the divorce procured divers writings to be made by her by the name of Queen-­abetted her servants to call her Queen.” In 1534 he was prosecuted for being concerned in the affair of Elizabeth Barton, called the Holy Maid of Kent, and was found guilty of misprision of treason. He was also one of those who denied the king’s supremacy over the church; for which he was imprisoned, and afterwardshanged, drawn, and quartered in Smithfield, July 30, 1540. In a room in Beauchamp’s Tower, in the Tower of London, anciently a place of confinement for state prisoners, are a great number of inscriptions on the wall, written by the prisoners, and among others, under the word Thomas a great A upon a bell, a punning rebus on his name.

, or Aboanifa, surnamed Alfqqman, was the son of Thabet, and born at Cousa, in the year of the Hegira 80, and of the vulgar sera 700. He is the most famous of all the doctors of the orthodox musSuimans, concerning the matters of their law; for he held the first place among the four chiefs of particular sects, who may be followed implicitly in their decisions on points of right. He was not, however, in high estimation during his life, as the calif Almanzor had him put into prison at Bagdat, for refusing to subscribe to the opinion of absolute and determinate predestination, which the mussulmans term cad ha: but Abu-Joseph, sovereign Judge, and a sort of chancellor of the empire under the calif Hadi, brought his doctrine into such reputation, that, in order to be a good mussulman, it was necessary to be a Hanifite. Nevertheless he died in the prison of Bagdat; and it was not till 335 years after his death that Melikshah, sultan of the race of the Seljuk dynasty, caused to be built for him in the same city a noble mausoleum, to which he added a college particularly for those who made profession of his sect. This was in the year 485 of the Hegira, of the vulgar sera 1092. Several of the most illustrious authors among the Mohammedans have written, in a style of commendation, the life of this doctor; Zamakhsehari, Korderi, Marghinani, Deinouri, Sobahazmouni, are of that number r and some of them have even found his name in the Old Testament, and assert that he was foretold in the sacred writings, as well as their prophet. All the historians agree that he excelled not only in the knowledge, but also in the practice of the mussuhnau law: for he led a life of great austerity, entirely detached from the manners of the world; which has caused him to be considered as the first chief and iman of the law by all the orthodox, and he is only rejected by the Shiites, or followers of Ali. The author of Rabialabrar relates the opinion of this doctor concerning the authority of tradition in these terms: “As to what regards the things we have received from God and from his prophet, we respect them with perfect submission: as to what is come down to us from the companions or contemporaries of the prophet, we select the best of it; but as to what the other doctors who succeeded them have left us, we look upon it as coming from persons who were men like us.” Houssain-Vaez, expounding that verse of the chapter of Amram, where God says he has prepared Paradise for those who restrain their anger, and pardon such as have trespassed against them, relates a fact of Abou-Hanifah that deserves to be noted. That doctor, having received a blow on the face, said to him who had the audacity to strike him “I might return you injury for injury; hut I will not do it. 1 might carry my complaint to the calif; but 1 will not complain. I might at least lay before God in my prayers the outrage you have done me; but I will not. Lastly, I might, at the day of judgment, require God to avenge it; but, far from doing so, if that terrible day were to arrive this moment, and my intercession might avail, I would not enter into Paradise, except in your company.”

The principal writings of Abou-Hanifah are: “The Mesnad,” i. e. The Support, in which he establishes all the points of Mussulmanism on the authority of the Koran, and that of tradition. A treatise, “Filkelam, on scholastic theology;” and a catechism, or instruction, under the title of “Moallem,” that is, The Master; in which he maintains that the faithful who adhere to the faith, never become the enemies of God, though they fall into many sins; that sins do not cause a man to lose the faith, and that grace is not incompatible with sin. These propositions, and others of a like nature, gave a handle to Vazai to write against him the book “Ekhtelaf Abi-Hanifah,” or, The contradictions of Abou-Hanifah.

, a native of Biroun, in the province of Khovarezme, who flourished about the beginning of the eleventh century, attained the title of Ai-Mohakapad, or the subtle philosopher, on account of his knowledge of the sciences, and particularly his skill in astrology. He was contemporary and rival to Avicenna, a more celebrated Arabian writer. Abou-rihan wrote some treatises oa Geography, the fixed stars, and the sphere.

, a famous rabbi, was born at Lisbon in 1437,. of a family who boasted their descent from king David. He raised himself considerably at the court. of Alphonso V. king of Portugal, and was honoured with very high offices, which he enjoyed till this prince’s death; but, upon his decease, he felt a strange reverse of fortune under the new king. Abrabanei. was in his 45th year, when John II. succeeded his father Alphonso. All those who had any share in the administration of the preceding reign were discarded: and, if we give credit to our rabbi, their death was secretly resolved, under the pretext of their having formed a design to give up the crown of Portugal to the king of Spain. Abrabanei, however, suspecting nothing, in obedience to the order he received to attend his majesty, set out for Lisbon with all expedition; but having, on his journey, heard of what was plotting against his life, fled immediately to his Castilian majesty’s dominions. A party of soldiers were dispatched after him, with orders to bring him dead or alive: however, he made his escape, but his possessions were confiscated. On this occasion he lost all his books; and also the beginning of his Commentary upon the book of Deuteronomy, which he much regretted. Some writers affirm, that the cause of his disgrace at this time was wholly owing to his bad behaviour; and they are of the same opinion in regard to the other persecutions which he afterwards suffered. They affirm that he would have been treated with greater severity, had not king John contented himself with banishing him. They add that by negociating bills of exchange (which was the business he followed in Castile), he got introduced at the court of Ferdinand and Isabella: that he amassed prodigious wealth, by practising the usual tricks and frauds of the Jewish people, that he oppressed the poor, and by usury made a prey of every thing; that he had the vanity to aspire at the most illustrious titles, such as the noblest houses in Spain could hardly attain, and that being a determined enemy of the Christian religion, he was the principal cause of that storm which fell upon him and the rest of his nation. Of the truth of all this, some doubt may be entertained. That he amassed prodigious wealth seems not very probable, as immediately on his settling in Castile, he began to teach and write. In 1484, he wrote his “Commentary upon the books of Joshua, Judges, and Samuel.” Being afterwards sent for to the court of Ferdinand and Isabel, he was advanced to preferment; which he enjoyed till 1492, when the Jews were driven out of the Spanish dominions. He used his utmost endeavours to avert this dreadful storm; but all proved ineffectual; so that he and all his family were obliged to quit the kingdom, with the rest of the Jews. He retired to Naples; and, in 1493, wrote his “Commentary on the books of the Kings.” Having been bred a courtier, he did not neglect to avail himself of the knowledge he had acquired at the courts of Portugal and Arragon, so that he soon ingradated himself into the favour of Ferdinand king of Naples, and afterwards into that of Alphonso. He followed the fortune of the latter, accompanying him into Sicily, when Charles VIII. the French king, drove him from Naples. Upon the death of Alphonso he retired to the island of Corfu, where he began his “Commentary on Isaiah” in 1495; and, about this time, he had the good fortune to find what he had written on the book of Deuteronomy. The following year he returned to Italy, and went to Monopoli in Apulia, where he wrote several books. In 1496 he finished his “Commentary on Deuteronomy;” and also composed his “Sevach Pesach,” and his “Nachalath Avoth.” In the succeeding year he wrote his “Majene Hajeschua;” and in 1498 his “Maschmia Jeschua,” and his “Commentary on Isaiah.” Some time after, he went to Venice, to settle, the disputes betwixt the Venetians and Portuguese relating to the spice trade; and on this occasion he displayed so much prudence and capacity, that he acquired the favour and esteem of both those powers. In 1504 he wrote his “Commentary on Jeremiah;” and, according to some authors, his “Commentary on Ezekiel, and the twelve minor propnets.” In 1506 he composed his “Commentary on Exodus;” and died at Venice in 1508, in the 71st year of his age. Several of the Venetian nobles, and all the principal Jews, attended his funeral with great pomp. His corpse was interred at Padua, in a burial-place without the city. Abrabanel wrote several other pieces, besides what we have mentioned, the dates of which are not settled, and some have not been printed. The following list appears in the Leipsic Journal (Nov. 1686), and is probably correct: 1. “Commentaries on Genesis, Leviticus, and Numbers.” 2. “Rach Amana.” 3. “Sepher Jeschuoth Moschici, a treatise on the traditions relating to the Messiah.” 4. “Zedek Olammim, upon future rewards and punishments.” 5. “Sepher Jemoth Olam, a history from the time of Adam.” 6. “Maamer Machase Schaddai, a treatise on prophecy and the vision of Ezekiel, against rabbi Mainionides.” 7. “Sepher Atereth Sekenim.” 8. “Miphaloth Elohirn, works of God.” 9. “Sepher Schamaim Chadaschim.” 10. “Labakath Nebhiim.” His “Commentary on Haggai” was translated into Latin by Adam Sherzerus, and inserted in the Trifolium Orientale, published in Leipsic in 1663, where his “Commentary on Joshua, Judges, and Samuel,” was also printed in 1686, folio. In this same year his “Annotations on Hosea,” with a preface on the twelve minor prophets, were translated into French by Francis ab Husen, and published at Leyden. In 1683, Mr. de Veil, a converted Jew, published at London Abrabanel’s preface to Leviticus. His commentaries on the Scriptures, especially those on the prophets, are filled with so much rancour against our Saviour, the church, the pope, the cardinals, the whole clergy, and all Christians in general, but in a particular manner against the Roman catholics, that father Bartolocci was desirous the Jews should be forbid the perusal of them. And he tells us that they were accordingly not allowed to read or to keep in their houses Abrabanel’s commentaries on the latter prophets. He was a man of so great a genius, that most persons have equalled him, and some even preferred him, to the celebrated Maimonides. The Jews set a high value upon what he has written to refute the arguments and objections of the Christians; and the latter, though they hold in contempt what he has advanced upon this head, yet allow great merit in his other performances, wherein he gives many proofs of genius, learning, and penetration. He does not blindly follow the opinions of his superiors, but censures their mistakes with great freedom. The persecutions of the Jews, under which he had been a considerable sufferer, affected him to a very great degree; so that the remembrance of it worked up his indignation, and made him inveigh against the Christians in the strongest terms. There is hardly one of his books where he has omitted to shew his resentment, and desire of revenge; and whatever the subject may be, he never fails to bring in the distressed condition of the Jews. He was most assiduous in his studies, in which he would spend whole nights, and would fast for a considerable time. He had a great facility in writing; and though he discovered an implacable hatred to the Christians in his compositions, yet, when in company with them, he behaved with great politeness, and would be very cheerful in conversation.

, an eminent Greek scholar and commentator, was born at Hamburgh, Dec. 29, 1699. At the age of thirteen, he went to a village called Dabha-usen, or Taubhausen, near the town of Griefenstein, where there was then a French colony, to learn that language; and made so much progress within seven months, that it appeared to be his native tongue. On his return home, he studied Latin and Greek; and, as his father designed him for the church, he was sent, in 1717, to the college of Herborn, a small town in the principality of Nassau-Dillenbuvgh, where, for two years and a half, he went through a course of philosophy, and studied Hebrew and divinity. In 1720, he removed to the university of Utrecht, where the instructions of the celebrated Drakenburgh and Duker inspired him with a decided taste for ancient literature, and he gave up divinity. About the end of 1723, when he had finished his studies at Utrecht, and wished to go through the same course at Leyden, he was appointed vice-director of the college of Middleburgh. In 1725, he was promoted to be rector ofthe same college; and, in 1741, he filled the same office in that of Zwol, in Over-yssel, where he remained until his death, in 1782.

At Middleburgh he became first known to the learned world by many valuable pieces of criticism on ancient authors, Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Hesychius, Æschylus, &c. which he sent to a literary journal then printed at Amsterdam, under the title of “Miscellanea Observationes critics in auctores veteres et recentiores.” Some of these have his name appended, others are marked by an H. or H. L. or P. B. A. A. H., and the fictitious name of Petrobasilius. He published also separately some critical works in high estimation: 1. “Animadversionum ad Æschylum libri duo; accedunt annotationes ad qusedam loca Novi Testament!,” Middleburgh, 1743, 8vo. To this work is added a list of words in Æschylus which are not in Stephens’s Thesaurus. 2. “Aristaeneti Epistolae, Gr. cum notis,” Zwolle, 1749, 8vo, a most excellent edition, not only on account of the learned editor’s notes, but also for the emendations of Tollius, D'Orville, and Valckenaar. 3. With the assistance of J. J, Reiske, he published a “Supplement” to the preceding, Amsterdam, 1751, or 1752, 8vo. 4. “Dilucidationum Thucydidearum, pars prima,” Utrecht, 1753, 8vo; and the second part in 1755. In this are many valuable observations on other authors incidentally introduced; but the author has not been thought so happy in illustrations on the text of Thucydides. In 1763, he published a “Supplement” to this, and a continuation of his remarks on Æschyius. We also owe to Abresch a new and much improved edition of Cattier’s “Gazophyiacium Græcorum,” (which was first published at Paris in 1651) Utrecht, 1757, 8vo.

, of Vincenza, was a priest of the Carmelite order, and a professor at Genoa, Verona, Padua, and Vincenza. In 1654, he was obliged, we are not told why, to quit the religious habit; and died at Venice, 1699, in the 92d year of his age. He publisned 1. Academical Discourses, entitled “Funghi” because theygrew, as he said, like mushrooms in his uncultivated mind. 2. “II Vaglio,” or the Sieve, answers to the remarks of Veglia on the Godfrey of Tasso, Venice, 1662 and 1687. 3. “Poetry, Sonnets, &c.” Venice, 1663 and 1664, 12.rao. 4. “L‘Arte Poetica d’Horatio, tradotta in versi sciolti,” Venice, 1663, 12mo. 5. “Ode di Orazio tradotte,” Venice, 1630, 12mo. This, and the translation of the Ars Poetica, have been often re-printed. 6. “A translation of Lucan,” Venice, 1668, 8vo.

Abulfaragius was ordained bishop of Guba at 20 years of age, by Ignatius, the patriarch of the Jacobites. In 1247 he was promoted to the see of Lacabena, and some years after to that of Aleppo. About the year 1266 he was elected primate of the Jacobites in the East. As Abulfaragius lived in the 13th century, an age famous for miracles, it would seem strange if some had not been wrought by him, or in his behalf: he himself mentions two. One happened in Easter holidays, when he was consecrating the chrism or holy ointment; which, though before consecration it did not fill the vessel in which it was contained, yet increased so much after, that it would have run over, had they not immediately poured it into another. The other happened in 1285. The church of St. Barnagore having been destroyed by some robbers, Abulfaragius built a new one, with a monastery, in a more secure place, and dedicated it to the same saint; and as he desired the relics of the saint should be kept in the new church, he sent some persons to dig them out of the ruins of the old one: but they not finding the relics, the saint appeared to some Christians, and told them, if the primate himself did not come, they would never be found. Abulfaragius, hearing of this, would not believe it; and feigning to be sick, shut himself up in his cell from Friday till the Sunday evening; when a glorified boy appeared to him, and told him, the relics were deposited under the altar of the old church. Upon this the primate went immediately with his brother and two bishops in quest of those holy remains, which they found according to the boy’s direction.

, a learned Arabian geographer and historian, was born at Damas in 1275, succeeded in 1310 to the rights of his ancestors, the emirs and shieks of Hamah in Syria. He did not however obtain peaceful possession before the year 1319, and in 1320 was acknowledged sultan or king by the caliph of Egypt. He died in 1331, or 1332. His writings are a lasting monument of his knowledge in geography and many other sciences. Attached, however, as he was to study, he appears to have for some time led a military life, and in his youth followed his father in many df his expeditions, particularly in the wars against the Tartars and French in Syria. He speaks in his writings of other expeditions in which he bore a part before he arrived at the throne. His works are: 1. A system of Universal Geography, under the title of “Tekn-yni el Boldaan,” or Geographical Canons, which ends at the year 1321. It consists of preliminary matter, a general view of land, water, rivers, mountains, &c. twenty-four tables of longitude and latitude, with marginal notes descriptive of 'the countries, and twentyfour chapters describing the principal towns. There are manuscripts of this work in the Imperial Library at Paris, in the Vatican, and in the Bodleian. That in the library of the university of Leyden was written under the inspection of the author, with some notes, supposed to be by his own hand. 2. “An Universal History,” from the creation of the world to the birth of Mahomet, which forms about fifty or sixty pages. Various portions of these two works have been translated; as, 1. “Chorasmiai et Mavaralnahrai;” i.e. “Regionum extra fluvium Oxum descriptio, Arab, et Lat. ex interpret. Joan. Graevii ,” London, 1650, 4to. reprinted by Dr. Hudson, in his Collection of the lesser Geographers, Oxford, 1698 1712, 4 vols. 8vo. with a description of Arabia by Abulfeda, Arab, et Lat. and the same, translated into French, was added, by Ant. de la Roque, to his “Voyage en Palestine,” Paris, 1717, 12mo. 3. “Caput primum Geographic ex Arabico in Latinum translat. promulgari jussit L. A. Muratorius, in Antiq. Italicis medii sevi,” Dissert. 54, p. 941, 942. 4. “Tabula Syriae, Arab, et Lat. cum notis Koehleri, et animadversionibus Jo. Jac. Reiskii,” Lips. 1766, 4to. 5. “Annales Moslemici, Arab, et Lat. a Jo. Jac. Reiskio,” Lips. 1754, 4to. 6. “Abulfedae Annales Moslemici, Aral), et Lat. opera et studiis J. J. Reiske, sumptibus atque auspiciis P. F. Suhmii, nunc primum edidit J. G. Ch. Adler,” Copenhagen, 1789—1794, 5 vols. 4to. 7. “Descriptio Egypti, Arab, et Lat. ed. Jo. Dav. Michaelis,” Gottirigen, 1776, 4to. 8. “Africa, Arab, cum notis; excudi curavit I. G. Kickhorn,” Gottingen, 1790, 8vo. Eickhorn’s notes and additions are in the 4th vol. of the “Bibliotheque Theologique Universelle,” with M. Rinck’s additions and corrections. 9. “Tabulae qusedam Geographicae et alia ejusdem argurnenti specimina, Arabice,” by Fred. Theoph. Rinck, Lips. 1791, 8vo. 10. “Geographia Latina facta ex Arabico, a Jo. Jac. Reiskio.” 11. “Abulfedae descriptio regionum Nigritarum,” printed at the end of Rinck’s edition of Macrizi’s “Historia regum Islamiticorum in Abyssinia,” Leyden, 1790, 4to. 12. “Tabula septima ex Abulfedoe Geographia, Mesopotamiam exhibens, Arabice, cura E. F. C. Rosenmuller, notas adspersit H. E. G. Paulus,” 1791; inserted in the “Nouveau Repertoire de la Litterature Orientale,” vol. 3. 13. “Abulfedae Arabia; descriptio,” faith a Commentary by Chr. Rommel, Gottingen, 1801, 4to. In 1728, Gagnier published the prospectus of a translation of Abulfeda’s Geography, and had made some progress in the printing of it, when he died. This occasioned the mistake of some Bibliographers, who speak of this translation as having been published at London in 1732, fol. Gagnier, however, published, 14. “De Vita et rebus gestis Mohammedis liber, Arab, et Lat. cum notis,” Oxford, 1725, fol. 15. “Auctarium ad vitam Saladini, extractum ex Abulfedos Historia universali, cum versione Lat. Alb. Scultens;” this appears at the end of Bohadinus’s Life of Saladine, Leiden, 1732, or 1755, fol. 16. “Climats Alhend et Alsend,” translated into Latin from Abulfeda, may be found in Thevenot’s Voyages, Paris, 1696, 2 vols. fol. And, 17. In Muratori’s Italian Historians, is the History of the Saracens. 18. The last publication we shall notice, is, some extracts respecting the history of Africa and Sicily, under the empire of the Arabs, by Gregorio, in his collections for a history of Sicily, 1790. It remains yet to be mentioned, that a manuscript of Abulfeda’s Universal History is in the library of St. Germain-des-Pres, and another in the French imperial library. Several chapters of the first part of the Universal History, which had never been published, are printed, Arab, et Lat. in the new edition of Pococke’s “Specimen Historise Arabum,” by Professor White, of Oxford, 1806.

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

, or Abou-Navas, an Arabian poet of the first class, was born in the city of Bassora, in the year 762, and died in 810. He left his native country in order to go to settle at Cufa; but did not continue long there, as the caliph Haroun Al Raschid would have him near his person at Bagdad, and gave him an apartment in his palace with Abou-Massaab and Rekashi, two other excellent poets. His principal works have been collected into a body, called by the Arabians a Diwan t or volume, by various persons; for which reason there is a great difference in the copies of this author.

, a name assumed by a French poetical writer of the 16th century, who likewise sometimes called himself Maistre Tyburce. He resided at the town of Papetourte, whence he published or dated most of his productions, and called himself clerk or royal notary of Pont-St.-Esprit. He died, according to some biographers, in 1540 or 1544; and, according to others, in 1550. He wrote: 1. “Moralite, mystere, et figure de la Passion de N. S. Jesus Christ,” Lyons, printed by Benoit Rigaut, 8vo, without date, and now so rare that only one copy is known to exist, which is in the imperial library of Paris, and formerly belonged to that of La Valliere. 2. “La Joyeulx Mystere des trois Roys,” ms. in the same library. 3. “Farce nouvelle tres bonne et tres joyeuse de la Cornette,” ms. 4. “Le Gouvert d'Humanite, moralité a personnaiges,” printed at Lyons. 5. “Le Monde qui tourne le dos a chascun, et Plusieurs qui n'a point de conscience,” printed also at Lyons. According to the practice of the writers of his age, he assumed a device, which was Jin sans Jin. The titles and dates of his other works are given in the Bibliotheque of De Verdier, and consist of short poems, ballads, rondeaus, songs, &c.

, or Habib Ebn Aws Al-Hareth Ebn Kais, an Arabian poet of great eminence in his time, was born in the 190th year of the hegira, or A. D. 805, at Jasem, a little town between Damascus and Tiberias. He was educated in Egypt, and died at Mawsel, in the year 845. His poems consist chiefly of eulogiums on several of the caliphs, who richly rewarded him. He collected his compositions into a volume, entitled, “Al Hamasah,” according to D'Herbelot; but, according to Dr. Pococke, this was a selection from the ancient Arabic poets made by him, and not his own compositions. He was long considered as the prince of Arabian poets, and none but Al Motanabbi disputed precedence with him. Bakhteri, another celebrated poet, candidly as well as critically said of him, “Such verses as are good in Abu Temam excel the best of mine; but such of mine as are bad, are mortt endurable than where he falls off.”

, or Abydinus. This word, which signifies a native, or inhabitant of Abydos, is given by Eusebius, Cyril, and Syncellus, as the proper name of a Greek historian to whom some authors ascribe two works, “Assyriaca,” and “Chaldaica,” or the history of the Assyrians and Chaldeans; but it is probable that these are the titles of parts of the same work. The fragments quoted by Eusebius, in his “Praeparatio Evangelica,” St. Cyril, in his writings against Julian, and Syncellus, in his Chronography, have been collected and commented on by Scaliger, in his Thesaurus, and in his “Emendatio Temporum.” But Scipio Tettius, a Neapolitan writer of the sixteenth century, in his Catalogue of scarce Manuscripts, quoted by Labbe, in his “Biblioth. Nov. libror. Manuscr.” p. 167, informs us, that the entire work of Abydenus exists in manuscript in a library in Italy. The recovery of this would be of importance, as Abydenus appears to have taken, as the basis of his work, the Babylonish history of Berosus, of which only fragments remain, unless we admit, what is universally denied, the authenticity of the edition published by Annius of Viterbo.

The age and country of Abydenus are uncertain, the name Abydos being common to four cities. As Berosus, however, finished his work at Alexandria, under Ptolemy Philadelphia, it may be probable that our Abydenus, who followed him, was an Egyptian priest belonging to the temple of Osiris at Abydos, and that he flourished under the first Ptolemys, while the love of letters was encouraged at the court of Alexandria. Some writers have supposed that he was quoted by Suidas, because he mentions Paloephatus-Abydenus, a historian. This person, however, whose proper name was Palsephatus, was the disciple and friend of Aristotle, and may have written the histories of Cyprus, Delos, and Athens, which Suiclas attributes to him, after Philo of Heraclea, and Theodore of Ilium; but the history of Arabia, which Suidas also attributes to him, from the nature of the' subject, must belong to the author of the history of the Assyrians and Chaldeans, or perhaps been a different title to the same work. Such is the opinion of Malte-Bruu; but Vossius has ventured on another conjecture, although without giving his authority.

, surnamed Luscus, from his having but one eye, the disciple of Eusebius bishop of Cassarea, whom he succeeded in the year 338 or 340. Though scarce inferior to the former in erudition, eloquence, and reputation, he was deposed by the council of Sardica, together with several other bishops, who had declared themselves of his opinion; and who afterwards assembled at Philippolis, in Thrace; where, in their turn, they fulminated against Athanasius, pope Julius, and the rest of their antagonists. Acacius had also a great share in the banishment of pope Liberius, and bringing Felix into the see of Rome, he gave his name to a sect who were called Acaciani. He was a man of great genius and distinguished learning; and wrote several books before he was made a bishop, and particularly a book against Marceilus of Ancyra, of which Epiphanius has given us a fragment. Some time after he was made a bishop, he wrote the “Life of Eusebius” his predecessor; not now extant, but mentioned in Socrates’ history. St. Jerome says that he wrote 17 volumes of commentaries on Ecclesiastes, or probably a commentary in 17 books; and six volumes of miscellanies. He died in the year 365.

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

, bishop of Amida, or of Constance on the Tigris in Mesopotamia, was highly celebrated in the fifth century for his piety and charity. In the year 420 during the war between the emperor Theodosius the younger, and Varanius, the king of Persia, Acacius, seeing 7000 Persian slaves made prisoners by the Roman soldiers, and perishing in want and misery, determined to alleviate the horrors of their situation. To accomplish this, he sold the sacred vessels belonging to his church, and with the purchase of them fed the poor prisoners, and sent them home with some money. This action appeared so extraordinary to the king of Persia, that he desired to see the bishop; and Theodosius allowed him to go to Persia. The interview was probably agreeable on both sides, as it was followed by a peace between Theodosius and the king of Persia. In the Latin church, he is commemorated on the 9th of April.

, bishop of Hagustald, or Hexham, in Northumberland, succeeded Wilfrid in that see, in the year 709. He was a monk of the order of St. Benedict, an Anglo-Saxon by birth, and had his education under Bosa, bishop of York; and was then taken under the patronage of Wilfrid, whom he accompanied in a journey to Rome. Here he improved himself in ecclesiastical usages and discipline; which his historian, Bede, tells us it was impracticable for him to learn in his own country. This prelate by the help of architects, masons, and glaziers, hired irT Italy, ornamented his cathedral to a great degree of beauty and magnificence, furnished it with plate and holy vestments, procured a large collection of the lives of the Saints, and erected a noble library, consisting chiefly of ecclesiastical learning. About the year 732, he was driven from his see into banishment, but for what cause is unknown. He was esteemed a very able divine, and was remarkably skilled in church-music. He not only revived and improved church music, but introduced the use of many Latin hymns hitherto unknown in the northern churches of England. Acca wrote the following pieces; -“Passiones Sanctorum;” or the Sufferings, of the Saints; “Officia Susp Ecclesiae;” and “Epistolae ad Amicos:” a treatise also for explaining the Scriptures, addressed to Bede, which occurs, or at least part of it, in the catalogue of the Bodleian library. He died in the year 740, having governed the church of Hexham 2-1 years, under Egbert king of the Northumbrians. His body was buried with great solemnity in the church at Hexham.

, of Bologna, was professor of rhetoric at Mantua in the academy founded by the duke Ferdinand in 1627, and died bishop of Vesta in 1654. A volume has been published of his discourses, or orations on various subjects of divinity. When lecturing at Rome in 1636, from Aristotle’s book on the heavens, he maintained that the sun moved round the earth, and published his opinion 1637, 4to. Many of his other works yet remain in manuscript, among which are: 1. “De natalibus Virgilii.” 2. “De conscribenda Tragoedia.” 3. “Histoha rerum gestarum a sacra congregatione de fide propaganda, &c. duobus annis 1630 et 1631.” 4. “Epistolae Latinae.” 5. “Bentivoglio’s History of the Wars in Flanders, translated into Latin.”

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

While attending a general chapter of his order at Naples in 1515, he made an oration in Latin in praise of the city of Naples, which he afterwards published. He also translated into Latin, Eusebius of Caesarea, Olympiodorus, and Theodoret, and is supposed to have been the translator of the greater part of the works of Justin Martyr. Among his remaining works is an oration in praise of the city of Rome, printed in 4to, without place, printer, or date; but the dedication to the cardinal Julio de Medici is dated 26 May 1518. In 1495 he published Politian’s Greek epigrams, which were recommended to his care by the author in his last moments. He translated also into Latin verse the Greek address of Marcus Musurus to Leo X. prefixed to the first edition of Plato. Giraldi, in his first dialogue “De Poetis nostrorum temporum,” admits him among the good poets of his age; and others have bestowed great applause on his verses, a specimen of which may be seen in the work first quoted below.

, an eminent lawyer and historian of the fifteenth century, and the first of that ancient Tuscan family who acquired a name for literary talents, was born at Arezzo, in 1415. His father was Michel Accolti, a civilian of Florence, and his mother a daughter of Roselli of Arezzo, also a lawyer. After a classical education, he studied the civil law, and was made professor at Florence, where his opinions acquired him much popularity. The Florentines, after conferring on him the rights of citizenship, chose him in 1459 to be secretary of the republic, in the room of Poggius, which office he retained until his death in 1466. The account of his transactions in public affairs are preserved in four books, with a great collection of his letters to foreign princes, which evince his sagacity as a statesman, and his politeness as a writer. He married Laura Frederigi, the daughter of a lawyer and patrician of Florence, by whom he had a numerous family, of whom Bernard and Peter will be noticed hereafter. His memory is said to have been so retentive, that on one occasion, after hearing the Hungarian ambassador pronounce a Latin address to the magistrates of Florence, he repeated the whole word for word. His inclination for the Study of history made him relax in the profession of the law, and produced: 1. “De bello a Christianis contra Barbaros gesto, pro Christi sepulchre et Judaea recuperandis, libri quatuor,” Venice, 1532, 4to, and reprinted at Basle, Venice, and Florence, the latter edition with notes by Thomas Dempster, 1623, 4to, and at Groninguen, by Henry Hoffnider, 1731, 8vo. It was also translated into Italian, by Francis Baldelli, and printed at Venice, 1549, 8vo. Yves Duchat of Troyes in Champagne, translated it into French and Greek, and printed it at Paris, 1620, 8vo. This is a work of considerable historical credit, and in the succeeding century, served as a guide to TorquatoTasso, in his immortal poem, the Gerusalemme liberata. It was dedicated to Piero de Medici, and not to Cosmo, as Moreri asserts. Paulo Cortesi, a severe censor, allows that it is a work of great industry, and that it throws considerable light on a very difficult subject. A more recent critic objects to the purity of his style, and the length of the speeches he puts in the mouths of his principal personages. 2. “De praestantia virorum sui aevi,” Parma, 1689, or 1692, the tendency of which is to prove that the moderns are not inferior to the ancients. It appeared originally in the Bibliotheque of Magliabechi, and has been often reprinted since, particularly at Coburg, in 1735, in the first volume of John Gerard Meuschen’s “Vitae summorum dignitate et eruditione virorum.”

, the brother of Benedetto, and usually called Francis D'Arezzo, or Aretin, from the place of his birth, was born in 1418. The celebrated Francis Philelphus was his preceptor in polite learning; after which he studied law under the ablest professors, and became himself one of their number, teaching that faculty at Bologna, Ferrara, and Sienna. He was for five years secretary to the duke of Milan, and died of the stone at the baths of Sienna, in 1483. He has been accused, but without proof, of the grossest avarice. If he left vast wealth, it was owing to the profits of his profession, of which he was acknowledged to be the ablest and most successful practitioner. A journey which he made to Rome, when Sixtus IV. was Pope, has given rise to another story, equally without proof, that he solicited to be made Cardinal, which the Pope refused, on pretence of the injury that would accrue to learning from such a promotion. Another story is recorded, more to his honour. While professor of law at Ferrara, he had occasion to lecture to his scholars on the advantages of a character known for probity and honour; and, in order to exemplify his doctrine, he went in the night, accompanied by only one servant, broke open the butchers’ stalls, and took away some pieces. The law-students were immediately suspected of the robbery, and two of them, of indifferent character, were imprisoned. The Professor then went before the Duke, demanded their release, and accused himself: having proved the fact, which was with difficulty believed, he took the opportunity to show the advantage of a good character, and the dangers of a bad one.

, another of the sons of Benedetto the historian, was born at Florence in 1455, and studied law at Pisa, where he became doctor and professor. He afterwards went into the church, was promoted to the bishoprick of Ancona, and six years after, to be Cardinal, under the title of St. Eusebius, hut is better known by the title of Cardinal of Ancona. He afterwards held seven bishopricks in Spain, Flanders, France, and Italy; and attained the higher honours of cardinal-vicar and legate. He died at Rome Dec. 12, 1532, aged 77; and left some works on law of no great importance. He was the author of the bull against Luther, which condemned forty-one propositions or that reformer. One of his natural sons, Benedict Accolti, was, in 1564j the chief of the Florentine conspiracy against Pius IV. for which he was executed.

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

, eldest son of the preceding, was professor of law at Bologna, where he attained great reputation. When Edward I. king of England passed through Bologna, in 1275, after his return from the Holy Land, he wished to engage Accursius to teach law in the French provinces under his dominion; but the government of Bologna, unwilling to part with so able a professor, threatened to confiscate his goods if he dared to leave the city. Accursius, however, took his leave, and after having taught law at Toulouse for three years, was invited to Oxford by king Edward, and lodged ill his palace at Beaumont. The king gave him also the manor of Martlegh, and in the grant styles him “dilectus et fidelis Secretarius noster;” and in another charter, “illustris regis Anglian consiliarius.” In 1275, he read lawr lectures at Oxford, or more probably in 1276, if he remained three years at Toulouse, In 1280, he returned to Bologna, and was restored to his chair and his property. His death took place in 1321. None of his writings remain.

This writer has left an example of an author’s jealousy, and fear of being thought a plagiarist, which is too curious to be omitted. Having been accused of owing his notes on Ausonius to Fabricio Varano, bishop of Camarino, he endeavoured to clear himself by the following very solemn oath: “In the name of God and man, of truth and sincerity, I solemnly swear, and if any declaration be more binding than an oath, I in that form declare, and I desire that my declaration may be received as strictly true, that I have never read or seen any author, from which my own lucubrations have received the smallest assistance or improvement: nay, that I have even laboured, as far as possible, whenever any writer has published any observations which I myself had before made, immediately to blot them out of my own works. If in this declaration I am. foresworn, may the Pope punish my perjury; and may an evil genius attend my writings, so that whatever in them is good, or at least tolerable, may appear to the unskilful multitude exceedingly bad, and even to the learned trivial and contemptible; and may the small reputation I now possess be given to the winds, and regarded as the worthless boon of vulgar levity.” This singular protestation, which is inserted in the Testudo, has. been often quoted. In 1533, he published at Augsburgh a new edition of “Ammianus Marcellinus,” fol. more complete than the preceding edition (which is the princeps), and augmented by five books, not before known, and, as stated in the title, with the correction of above five thousand errors. In the same year and place, he published the “Letters of Cassiodorus,” and his “Treatise on the Soul.” This is the first complete collection of these letters, and, with the Treatise, is improved by many corrections. He also had made preparations for an edition of Claudian, and had corrected above seven hundred errors in that author; but this has not been published. At his leisure hours, he studied music, optics, and poetry. We have a specimen of his poetry in his “Protrepticon ad Corycium,” of eighty-seven verses, which is printed in a very rare work, entitled “Coryciana,” Rome, 1524, 4to. This Corycius, according to La Monnoie, was a German of the name of Goritz. The volume contains the poems of various Neapolitan authors, as Arisio, Tilesio, &c.

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

, a Greek poet, a native of Eretria, the son of Pythodorus, flourished, according to Saxius, between the 74th and 82d olympiad, or between 484 and 449 before the Christian æra, and consequently was the contemporary of Æschylus. He was both a tragic and satirical poet, having, according to some, composed thirty tragedies, and according to others, more than forty. These are all lost, except some fragments which Grotius collected in his “Fragmenta Tragic, et Comicorum Græcorum.” Achæus carried off the poetical prize only once. His satirical pieces have likewise perished, but Athenseus quotes them often. There was another Greek poet of the same name, quoted by Suidas, who also composed tragedies, of which there are no remains,

, an eminent painter, was born at Cologne, in 1556, of a good family. He discovered a taste for his art from his earliest years, and at the age of eleven, painted a portrait with such success, as to induce his parents to encourage his studies. After having been for some time taught by a very indifferent painter, he became the disciple of de Georges, or Jerrigh, a good portrait-painter, with whom he remained six years; and afterwards improved himself by studying and copying the works of Spranger. In his twenty-second year he went to Italy, and was introduced at Venice to a Flemish artist, named Gaspard Reims. This man no sooner learned that Van Achen was a German, than he recommended him to an Italian who courted necessitous artists that he might make, a trade of their labours. With him Van Achen made some copies, but, being unable to forget the reception which Reims had given him, he painted his own portrait, and sent it to him. Reims was so struck with the performance, that he apologized to Van Achen, took him into his house, and preserved the portrait all his life with great veneration. At Venice, he acquired the Venetian art of colouring, and thence went to Rome to improve his design, but never quitted the mannered forms of Spranger. His best performances at Rome were a Nativity for the church of the Jesuits, and a portrait of Madona Venusta, a celebrated performer on the lute. His talents, however, and polite accomplishments, recommended him to several of the greatest princes of Europe, and particularly to the elector of Bavaria, and the emperor Rodolph, by both of whom he was patronized and honoured. He was one of that set of artists who, in the lapse of the sixteenth century, captivated Germany and its princes by the introduction of a new style, or rather manner, grossly compounded from the principles of the Florentine and Venetian schools. He died at Prague in 1621.

, a celebrated publicist, and considered by some as the father of the t science of Statistics, was born at Elbing, a Prussian tpwn, Oct. 20, 1719. He received his academical education at Jena, Halle, and Leipsic. In 1746 he took up his residence at Marbourg, where he taught history, the law of nature and nations, and statistics, of which he appears to have formed very just notions, but at first confined himself to a knowledge of the constitutions of the different states. In 1748 he went to Gottingen, where, some years after, he became one of the professors of that university, and one of its greatest ornaments: here he remained until his death, May 1, 1772. He. had often travelled in Switzerland, France, Holland, and England; and published several works on the states of Europe, and political law and oeconomy. Those in highest estimation are, his “Constitution des. royaumes et etats d'Europe,” and “Elementa Juris Naturae,” of which six editions were printed in a very short time, each retouched and improved with great care. In his researches on the subjects of national wealth, resources, and means of prosperity, he availed himself, of the observations of all historians and travellers, and was much assisted by Hermann Conring, of Helmstadt, and Eberhard Otto, who had made large collections for the same purpose. Achenwall gave his new science the name of Statistics, or Scientia Statistica. His last work was “Observations sur les Finances de la France.”

, a Benedictine of the congregation of St. Maur, was born at St. Quintin, in Picardy, in 1609. He became celebrated as the editor of valuable manuscripts which lay buried in libraries. The first piece he published was the epistle ascribed to St. Barnabas. Father Hugh Menard, a monk of the same congregation, intended to publish this epistle, and for that purpose had illustrated it with notes, but having been prevented by death, D'Acheri gave an edition of it under the title of “Epistola Catholica S. Barnabas Appstoli, Gr. & Lat. cum notis Nic. Hug. Menardi, et eiogio ejusdem auctoris,” Paris, 1645, 4to. In 1648 he collected into one volume the “Life and Works of Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury,” Paris, fol. The Life is taken from an ancient manuscript in the abbey of Bee; and. the works are, Commentaries on the epistles of St. Paul, taken from a manuscript in the abbey of St. Melaine de Rennes, and a treatise on the Sacrament, against Berenger. The appendix contains the Chronicle of the Abbey of Bee from its foundation in 1304 to 1437; the life of St. Herluinus, founder and first abbot, of some of his successors, and of St. Austin the apostle of England, and some treatises on the eucharist. His catalogue of ascetic works appeared the same year, entitled “Asceticorum, vulgo spiritual] nm opusculorum, quae inter Patrum opera reperiuntur, Indiculus,” Paris, 1648, 4to. This curious work was reprinted by father Remi, at Paris, in 1671. In 16.51, D'Aclieri published the “Life and Works of Guibert, abbot of Nogent-sous-Couci,” and the lives of some saints, and other pieces, Paris, fol. There is much antiquarian knowledge in this work, respecting the foundation, Sac. of abbeys, but the dates are not always correct. In 1653 he republished father Grimlaic’s “Regie des Solitaires,” 12mo, Paris, with notes and observations. His most considerable work is “Veterum aliquot scriptorum, qui in Gallice bibliothecis, rnaxime Benedictinorum, latuerunt, Spieilegium, &c.” 1653 1677, 13 vols. 4to. Under the modest title of Spicilegium, it contains a very curious collection of documents pertaining to ecclesiastical afiairs; as acts, canons, councils, chronicles, lives of the saints, letters, poetry, diplomas, charters, &c. taken from the libraries of the different monasteries. This work becoming scarce and much sought after, a new edition was published in 1725, in 3 vols. fol. by Louis-FrancisJoseph de la Barre, with some improvements in point of arrangement, but at the same time some improper liberties taken with the text of D‘Acheri, and particularly with his learned prefaces. D’Acheri contributed also to Mabillon’s “Acta Sanctorum ordinis S. Benedicti,” &c. He lived a life of much retirement, seldom going out, or admitting trifling visits, and thus found leisure for those vast labours already noticed, and which procured him the esteem of the popes Alexander VII. and Clement X. who honoured him with medals. Although of an infirm habit, he attained the age of seventy-six, and died in the abbey of St, Germain-des-Pres, April 29, 1685. He was interred under the library of which he had had the care for so many years, and where his literary correspondence is preserved. There is a short eloge on him in the Journal de Trevoux for Nov. 26, 1685; but that of Maugendre, printed at Amiens in'1775, is more complete. Dupin says he was one of the first learned men that the congregation of St. Maur produced.

, a native of Bologna, where he was born Oct. 29, 1463, was a philosopher and physician, and professed both those sciences with great reputation. He had scholars from all parts of Europe. He died in his own country, August 2, 1512, at the age of 40, with the surname of The great philosopher, after having published various pieces in anatomy and medicine. To him is ascribed the discovery of the little bones in the organ of hearing'. He adopted the sentiments of Averroes, and was the rival of Pomponacius. These two philosophers mutually decried each other, and Pomponacius had generally the advantage, as he had the talent of mixing witticisms with his arguments, for the entertainment of the by-standers, while Achillini lowered himself with the public by his singular and slovenly dress. His philosophical works were printed in one vol. folio, at Venice, in 1508, and reprinted with considerable additions in 1545, 1551, and 1568. His principal medical works are: 1. “Annotationes Anatomies,” Bonon. 1520, 4to, and Venice, 1521, 8vo. 2. “De humani corporis Anatomia,” Venice, 1521, 4to. 3. “In Mundini anatomiam annotationes,” printed with Katham’s “Fasciculus Medicine,” Venice, 1522, fol. 4. “De subjecto Medicinæ, cum annotationibus Pamphili Montii,” Venice, 1568. 5. “De Chiromantiæ principiis et Physiognomiæ,” fol. without place or year. 6. “De Universalibus,” Bonon. 1501, fol. 7. “De subjecto Chiromantiæ et Physiognomiæ,” Bonon. 1503, fol. & Pavia, 1515, fol. Achillini also cultivated poetry; but if we may judge from some verses in the collection published on the death of the poet Seraphin dall' Aquila, not with much success.

, a divine, philosopher, and civilian of the sixteenth century, was born at Trent, where he was afterwards in orders; but, being disposed to a liberality of sentiment not tolerated there, he went to Switzerland in 1557, and made profession of the Protestant religion on the principles of Calvin. From thence he went to Strasburgh, and lastly to England, where he was hospitably received. Queen Elizabeth gave him a pension, not as a divine, but as an engineer. In gratitude, he addressed to her his book on the “Stratagems of Satan,” a work in which are unquestionably many sentiments of greater liberality than the times allowed, but, at the same time, a laxity of principle which would reduceill religions into one, or rather create an indifference about the choice of any. It was first printed at Basle, in 1565, under the title of “De stratagematibus Satanae in religionis negotio, per superstitionem, errorem, heresim, odium, calumniam, schisma, &c. libri VIII.” It was afterwards often reprinted and translated into most European languages. His latest biographer says, that this work may be considered as the precursor of Lord Herbert of Cherbury, and thoso other English philosophers who have reduced the articles of religion to a very small number, and maintain that all sects hold its essential principles. Acontius, however, had his enemies and his supporters; and even the former could allow that, in many respects, he anticipated the freedom and liberality of more enlightened times, although he was, in many points, fanciful and unguarded. A better work of his is entitled “De methodo sive recta investigandarum, tradendarumque artium, ac scientiarum ratione, libellus,” Basle, 1558, 8 vo. This has often been reprinted, and is inserted in the collection “De Studiis bene instituejulis,” Utrecht, 1658. His “Ars muniendorum oppidorum,” in Italian and Latin, was published at Geneva in 1585. In one of the editions of his “Stratagemata,” is an excellent epistle by him, on the method of editing books. He had also made some progress in a treatise on logic, as he mentions in the above epistle, and predicts the improvements of after-times.

, a Portuguese, born at Oporto towards the close of the sixteenth century. He was educated in the Romish religion, which his father also sincerely professed, though descended from one of those Jewish families who had been forced to receive baptism. Uriel had a liberal education, having been instructed in several sciences; and at last studied the law. He had by nature a good temper and disposition; and religion had made so deep an impression on his mind, that he ardently desired to conform to all the precepts of the church. He applied with constant assiduity to reading the scriptures and religious books, carefully consulting also the creed of the confessors; but difficulties occurred, which perplexed him to such a degree, that, unable to solve them, he thought it impossible to fulfil his duty, with regard to the conditions required for absolution, according to good casuists. At length, he began to inquire, whether several particulars mentioned about a future life were agreeable to reason; and imagined that reason suggested many arguments against them. Acosta was about two-and-twenty when he entertained these doubts; and the result was, that he thought he could not be saved by the religion which he had imbibed in his infancy. He still, however, prosecuted his studies in the law; and, at the age of five-and-twenty years, was made treasurer in a collegiate church. Being naturally of an inquisitive turn, and now made uneasy by the popish doctrines, he began to study Moses and the prophets; where he thought he found more satisfaction than in the Gospel, and at length became convinced that Judaism was the true religion: but, as he could not profess it in Portugal, he resigned his place, and embarked for Amsterdam, with his mother and brothers; whom he had ventured to instruct in the principles of the Jewishreligion, even when in Portugal. Soon after their arrival in this city they became members of the synagogue, and were circumcised according to custom; and on this occasion, he changed his name of Gabriel for that of Uriel. A little timewas sufficient to shew him, that the Jews did neither in their rites nor morals conform to the law of Moses, and of this he declared his disapprobation: but the chiefs of the synagogue gave him to understand, that he must exactly observe their tenets and customs; and that he would be excommunicated if he deviated ever so little from them. This threat, however, did not in the least deter him; for he thought it would be beneath him, who had left the sweets of his native country purely for liberty of conscience, to submit to a set of rabbis who had no jurisdiction: and that it would shew both want of courage and piety, to stifle his sentiments on this occasion. He therefore persisted in his invectives, and, in consequence, was excommunicated. He then wrote a book in his justification; wherein he endeavours to shew, that the rites and traditions of the Pharisees are contrary to the writings of Moses; and soon after adopted the opinions of the Sadducees, asserting, that the rewards and punishments of the old law relate only to this lite; because Moses nowhere mentions the joys of heaven or the torments of hell. His adversaries were overjoyed at his embracing this tenet; foreseeing, that it would tend greatly to justify, in the sight of Christians, the proceedings of the synagogue against him. Before his book was printed, there appeared a piece upon the immortality of the soul, written by a physician in 1623, who omitted nothing he could suggest to make Acosta pass for an atheist. This, however, did not prevent him from writing a treatise against the physician, wherein he endeavoured to confute the doctrine of the soul’s immortality. The Jews now made application to the magistrates of Amsterdam; and informed against him, as one who wanted to undermine the foundation of both Jewish and Christian religions. Hereupon he was thrown into prison, but bailed out within a week or ten clays after; but all the copies of his pieces were seized, and he himself fined 300 florins. Nevertheless, he proceeded still farther in his scepticism. He now began to examine, whether the laws of Moses came from God; and he at length found reasons to convince him, that it was only a political invention. Yet, such was his inconsistency, that he returned to the Jewish church, after he had been excommunicated 15 years; and, after having made a recantation of what he Jiad written, subscribed every thing as they directed. A few days after, he was accused by a nephew, who lived in his house, that he did not, as to his eating and many other points, conform to the laws of the synagogue. On this he was summoned before the grand council of the synagogue; and it was declared to him, that he must be again excommunicated, if he did not give such satisfaction as should be required; but he found the terms so hard, that he could not comply. The Jews then again expelled him jfrom their communion; and he afterwards suffered various hardships and persecutions, even from his own relations. After remaining seven years in a most wretched situation, he at length declared he was willing to submit to the sentence of the synagogue, having been told that he might easily accommodate matters; for, that the judges, being satisfied with his submission, would soften the severity of the discipline; they made him, however, undergo the penance in its utmost rigour. These particulars, relating to the. life of Acosta, are taken from his piece, entitled “Exemplar humanae vitce,” published and refuted by Limborch. It is supposed that he composed it a few days before Jus death, after having determined to lay violent feands on himself. He executed this horrid resolution a little after he had failed in his attempt to kill his principal enemy; for the pistol, with which he intended to have shot him as he passed his house, having missed fire, he immediately shut the door, and shot himself with another pistol. This happened at Amsterdam, but in what year is not exactly known; but most authors are inclined to place it in 1640, or 1647.

, a celebrated physician of Agrigentum in Sicily, lived, according to Plutarch, at the time of the great plague at Athens in the beginning of the Peloponnesian war, in the eighty-fourth olympiad, or 444 B. C. He is said to have stopped the prpgress of thecontagion by scattering perfumes in the air; but while doubts may be entertained of the efficacy of this practice, it was at least not new, having been tried before his time by the Egyptian priests, according to Suidas. Pliny considers Acron as the chief of the empirical sect, but that sect were riot known for two hundred years after. Suidas says he wrote a treatise on medicine, and another on food, neither of which is now known.

, the name of an aneient scholiast on Horace, who flourished in the seventh century. His scholia were published under the title “Expositio in Horatii Flacci Opera,” Mediolani, 1474, 4to. It forms the third edition of Horace, according to Dr. Harwood, and is so scarce as to have escaped the notice of Maittaire. A copy was purchased at Dr. Askew’s sale, by Mr. Mason, for nine guineas and a half; or, according to the editor of the Bibliographical Dictionary, for £6. 10s. It was reprinted at Venice in 1490, fol. Michael Bentius added the scholia to his edition, Basil, 1527, 8vo. Fabricius enumerates Aeron among the ancient commentators on Terence and Persius.

, a Spanish Jesuit and missionary, was born at Burgos, 1597. He was sent on a mission to the American Indians, and on his return in the year 1641, published in Spanish, by permission of the king, “Nuevo Descubrimiento del gran rio de las Amazones,” 4to; but the projects expected from his discoveries respecting this river, were discountenanced afterwards by the house of Braganza, and Philip IV. ordered all the copies of this curious work to be destroyed, so that for many years two only were known to exist; one in the Vatican library, and another in the possession of Marin Leroi de Gomberville, who translated it into French, and published it, under the title of “Relation de la riviere des Amazones,” Paris, 1682, 2 vols. 12mo, with a curious dissertation; but some passages of the text are not very faithfully translated. This was afterwards reprinted in the second volume of Wood’s Rogers’ s Voyage round the world. Acuna went to the East Indies some time after the publication of his work, and is supposed to have died at Lima about or soon after 1675.

, or Acusilaus, a Greek historian, the son of Cabas, born at Argos, lived, according to Josephus, a little before the expedition of Darius against Greece, and near the time when Caduius the Milesian wrote the first prose history. Acusilas’ work was entitled “Genealogies,” as they related to the chief families of Greece. Many authors quote this work, but the only fragments preserved are added to those of Ph'erecydes by M. Sturz, printed at Gera, 1798, 8vo.

, an English lawyer, and sometime recorder of London, was born in that city, and educated at Peter-house, Cambridge; where he took the degree of B. A. 1764, and of M. A. 1767. After prosecuting his lawstudies, he was admitted to the bar, and began to distinguish himself about the year 1770, when he took an active part in the political contentions of that period. Having sided with Mr. Wilkes in the memorable dispute between that gentleman and his co-patriot Mr. Home, Mr. Wilkes spoke of him at political meetings in such a manner as to draw the public eye upon him; and in 1779 he was chosen recorder of London, although not without a contest with his opponent Mr. Howarth. This situation he retained for some years, while his advancement at the bar was rapid, and highly honourable to his talents. The duties of the recordership he discharged with much ability, strict justice, and humanity. The situation, however, was rendered in some degree irksome by the changes of political sentiment which had taken place among his constituents, the members of the corporation. When he was chosen into this office, the city was out of humour with the court, and Mr. Adair probably owed his election to his being reputedly of Wilkes’s party, who was still rhe idol of the city. A great revolution, however, took place when the coalition-administration (that of lord North and Mr. Fox) was overthrown. Mr. Pitt and his friends, and by consequence the King and court, became highly popular in the city, while Mr. Adair retained his old opinions, took the part of the dismissed ministers, and became a zealous assertor of the whig principles which were then divulged from a newly-erected club, called the Whig club. This could not please his city friends; although such was his impartiality and integrity, that no fault could be found with the manner in which he discharged the duties of his office. The Common-council, however, requiring a closer attendance at their courts than he thought requisite, or was perhaps consistent with his numerous professional engagements in the court of Common pleas, he chose to resign the recordership in 1789; and upon this occasion received the thanks of the Court of Aldermen, and the freedom of the city in a gold box of one hundred guineas value, for his able and upright conduct in that office; and he was ordered to be retained, with the attorney and solicitorgeneral, in all causes in which the city was concerned.

, a physician, a native of Scotland, but many years settled at Bath, was afterwards physician to the commander in chief, and the colonial troops, of the island of Antigua, and subsequently of the Leeward islands, and also one of the judges of the court of King’s Bench and Common pleas in Antigua. His abilities as a physician have never been questioned, and his private character is said to have been in some respects amiable; but he possessed an irritability of temper, joined, as it generally is, with extraordinary self-conceit, which occasioned his being constantly engaged in disputes, and often with men, such as Philip Thicknesse, equally rulous and turbulent. Towards the end of his life, his writings partook much of his temper, and although read with some degree of pity, were soon thrown aside. Some account of one of his last quarrels may be seen in the dedication, to the first volume of Thicknesse' s Memoirs. He died at a very advanced age, April 24, 1802, at Harrowgate in Yorkshire. His first publications were on Regimen and the Materia Medica, in vol. VIII and IX of Duncan’s Medical Commentaries: 2. “Medical Cautions for the consideration of Invalids, those especially who resort to Bath,” 8vo, 1786, and a much enlarged edition, 1787. 3. “A philosophical and medical sketch of the Natural History of the Human Body and Mind,” 8vo, 1787. 4. “Unanswerable objections against the Abolition of the Slave-Trade,” 8vo, 1789. He was examined on this subject by the privy-council; but his objections have been long since fully answered. 5. “Essays on Fashionable Diseases,” 8vo, 1789. 6. “An essay on a Non-descript, or newlyinvented Disease,” 8vo, 1790. 7. “A candid inquiry into the truth of certain charges of the dangerous consequences of the Suttonian or Cooling regimen, under Inoculation for the Small Pox,” 8-vo, 1790. 8. “Anecdotes of the Life, Adventures, and Vindication of a Medical Character, metaphorically defunct, by Benjamin Goosequill and Peter Paragraph,” 8vo, 1790. This rambjing and incoherent production contains some particulars of his life, but more of his quarrels with his contemporaries. 9. “Two Sermons; the first addressed to British seamen, the second to the British West India slaves,” 8vo, 1791. Most of these were published for the benefit of the Bath, hospital, or the tin-miners of Cornwall.

, or Adelard, born about the year 753, was son of count Bernard, grandson of Charles Martel, and cousin-german of Charlemagne. He had been invited to the court in his youth, but, fearing the infection of such a mode of life, had retired; and, at the age of 20 years, became a monk of Corbie in Picardy, and was at length chosen abbot of the monastery. His imperial relation, however, forced him again to attend the court, where he still preserved the dispositions of a recluse, and took every opportunity, which business allowed, for private prayer and meditation. After the death of Charlemagne, he was, on unjust suspicions, banished by Lewis the Meek, to a monastery on die coast of Acquitaine, in the isle of Here. After a banishment of five years, Lewis, sensible of his own injustice, recalled Adalard, and heaped on him the highest honours. The monk was, however, the same man in prosperity and in adversity, and in the year 823 obtained leave to return to Corbie. Every week he addressed each of the monks in particular 5 he exhorted them in pathetic discourses, and laboured for the spiritual good of the country around his monastery. His liberality seems to have bordered on excess; and his humility induced him to receive advice from the meanest monk. When desired to live less austerely, he would frequently say, “I will take care of your servant, that he may be enabled to attend on you the longer.” Another Adalard, who had governed the monastery during his banishment, by the direction of our Adalard, prepared the foundation of a distinct monastery, called New Corbie, near Paderborn, as a nursery for ecclesiastical laboarers, who. should instruct the northern nations. Our Adalard now completed this scheme; went himself to New Corbie twice, and settled its discipline. The success of this truly charitable project was great: many learned and zealous missionaries were furnished from the new seminary, and it became a light to the north of Europe. Adalard promoted learning in his monasteries, for he was himself a man of great learning; and instructed the people both in Latin and French: and after his second return from Germany to old Corbie, he died ill the year 827, aged 73. Such is the account given us of Adalard, a character, there is reason to believe, of eminent piety and usefulness in a dark age. To convert monasteries into seminaries of pastoral education, was a thought far above the taste of the age in which he lived, and tended to emancipate those superstitious institutions from the unprofitable and illiberal bondage in which they had long subsisted. His principal work work was “A treatise on the French Monarchy;” but fragments only of any of his works have come down to our times. Hincmar has incorporated the treatise on the French monarchy in his: fourteenth Opusculum, “for the instruction of king Carloman.” The ancient statutes of of the abbey of Corbie, by our author, are in the fourth volume of D'Achery’s Spicilegium.

, LL.D. an eminent schoolmaster and useful writer in Scotland, was born June 1741, at Coats of Burgle, in the parish of Rafford, in the county of Moray, His parents were poor, but gave him such education as a parish school afforded; and after having unsuccessfully endeavoured to procure an exhibition at King’s college, Aberdeen, he was encouraged, in 1753, to go to the university of Edinburgh, where he surmounted pecuniary difficulties with a virtuous and honourable perseverance, such as are rarely to be found; and improved his opportunities of knowledge with great assiduity and success. In 1761 he was elected schoolmaster to Watson’s hospital, an establishment for the education of the poor, and continued to improve himself in classical knowledge by a careful perusal of some of the best and most difficult authors. In 1767, he was appointed assistant to the rector of the high school of Edinburgh, and in 1771 successor to the same gentleman, and filled this honourable statiou during the remainder of his life, raising the reputation of the school much higher than it had been known for many years. He would have perhaps raised it yet higher, had he not involved himself, not only with his ushers, but witk the patrons and trustees of the school, in a dispute respecting the proper grammar to be taught; Dr. Adam preferring one of his own compiling to that of Ruddiman, which had long been used in all the schools in Scotland, and was esteemed as near perfection as any work of the kind that had ever been published. The ushers, or undermasters, were unanimous in retaining Ruddtmaw’s grammar, for which they assigned their reasons; and Dr. Adam was as resolute in teaching from his own. The consequence was, that Dr. Adam taught his class by one grammar, and the four uncler-masters theirs by another. The inconvenience of this mode was soon felt; and the patrons of the school, who were the Magistrates of Edinburgh, after referring the question at issue to the principal of the university, the celebrated Dr. Robertson, together with the professors of the Greek and Latin languages, issued an order in 1786, directing the rector and other masters of the High School, to instruct their scholars by Ruddi man’s Rudiments and Grammar, and prohibiting any other grammar of the Latin language from being made use of. Dr. Adam, however, disregarded this and a subsequent 'order to the same purpose, and continued to use his own rules, in his daily practice with the pupils of his own class, and without being any further interrupted . The work which gave rise to this dispute was published in 1772, under the title of “The Principles of Latin and English Grammar,” and is undoubtedly a work of very considerable merit, and highly useful to those who are of opinion that Latin and English grammar should be taught at the same time.

Soon after this dispute was apparently terminated, Dr. Adam compiled “A Summary of Geography and History” for the use of his pupils, which he afterwards enlarged and published in 1794. In 1791, he published “Roman Antiquities, or, an account of the manners and customs of the Romans,” 8vo. This useful work has been translated into German, French, and Italian, and has been very generally recommended in preference to Dr. Kennet’s work on the same subject. In 1800 he published his “Classical Biography,” which was originally intended as the appendix to a Latin dictionary on which he had been employed for some years; but the high price of paper, and the great expence of printing such works, discouraged him from carrying into effect his original design. He printed, however, in 1805, an abridgement of his dictionary, under the title of “Lexicon Lingua? Latinx compendiarium,” 8vo. All these works have attained a high degree of popularity, and are used in the principal schools of this kingdom. Dr. Adam died Dec. 18, 1809, of an apoplexy, in the 69th year of his age, universally regretted as an able and successful teacher, a man of high rank in classical literature, and in private life benevolent and amiable. At one period of his life, when the French revolution distracted the political opinions of his country, he incurred some degree of censure for having introduced matters of a political kind into his school. For this no apology can be valid; but it appears that he became afterwards more cautious: and at the period of his death, his character was so universally esteemed, that his remains were honoured with a public funeral.

, an eminent French sculptor, was born at Nancy, Feb. 10, 1700. He was the son of Jacob-Sigisbert Adam, also a sculptor of considerable note. At the age of eighteen, he came to Metz; but a desire to extend his reputation made him repair to Paris, where he arrived in 1719. After exercising his profession about four years, he obtained the first prize, and then went to Rome, with a royal pension, where he remained ten years. While here, he was employed by the cardinal de Polignac in restoring the twelve marble statues known as the “family of Lycomedes,” which had been discovered among the ruins of the villa of Marius, about two leagues from Rome, and acquitted himself with great success in a branch of the art which is seldom rewarded or honoured in proportion to its difficulties. He afterwards restored several antique sculptures, of which the king of Prussia had got possession, and which he conveyed to Berlin. When an intention was formed of erecting that vast monument at Rome known by the name of the “Fountain of Trevi,” he was one of the sixteen sculptors who gave in designs; but, although his was adopted by pope Clement XI I. the jealousy of the Italian artists prevented his executing it. At this time, however, advantageous offers were made by his own country, to which he returned, after being chosen a member of the academies of St. Luke, and of Bologna. His first work, after his return to France, was the groupe of the “Seine et Marne” for the cascade at St. Cloud. He was then employed at Choisi; and, in May 1737, was elected a member of the French academy, and professor. The piece he exhibited on his admission was “Neptune calming the waves,” with a Triton at his feet; and not “Prometheus chained to the rock,” as some biographers have asserted, which was the production of his brother Nicholas. He then executed the groupe of “Neptune and Amphitrite” for the bason at Versailles, on which he was employed five years, and was rewarded, besides the stipulated price, with a pension of 500 livres. One of his best works was the figure of “St. Jerome,” now at St. Roch. His other works are, a groupe of five figures and of five animals, at Versailles, in bronze; the bas-relief of the chapel of St. Elizabeth, in bronze; two groupes in bronze of hunting and fishing at Berlin; “Mars caressed by Love,” at Bellevue; and a statue representing the enthusiasm of poetry. In all these there are undoubted proofs of genius, but proofs likewise of the bad taste in sculpture which prevailed in his time, and induced him, after the example of Bernini and others, to attempt efforts which can only be successful in painting. In 1754, he published “Recueil de Sculptures antiques Græcques et Romanies,” fol. for which he made the designs. Most of these he had purchased from the heirs of cardinal de Polignac. He died of an apoplexy, May 15, 1759.

, brother of the preceding, and likewise an eminent artist, was born at Nancy, March 22, 1705. He studied under his father at Paris, and in 1726 went to Rome. Two years after he gained one of the prizes of the academy of St. Luke. At this time his brother, the subject of the preceding article, and Francis, a younger brother, were at Rome, and assisted each other in their labours. After a residence of nine years, he returned to Paris, and with some opposition was admitted into the academy, where he exhibited his model of “Prometheus,” but did not execute it until long after. Next year he executed the “martyrdom of St. Victoria,” a bas-­relief in bronze, for the royal chapel at Versailles. For some time he assisted his brother in “the Neptune;” but, a disagreement occurring, quitted this, and employed himself at the hotel Soubise, the chamber of accounts, and the abbey of St. Dennis. He was a candidate for the mausoleum of the cardinal de Fleury, and the public adjudged him the prize; but Lemoyne was employed. The tomb of the queen of Poland, wife of Stanislaus, is esteemed one of his best works. His Prometheus was finished in 1763, and the king of Prussia offered him 30,000 franks for it; but Adam said it was executed for his master, and no longer his own property. He died March 27, 1778, in his 75th year. His merits as a sculptor have been thought equal to those of his brother. It is said to have been his constant prayer that he might be neither the first northe last in his art, but attain an honourable middle rank, as the surest way to avoid jealousy on the one hand, or contempt on the other; and his last biographer thinks his prayer was heard. The younger brother, Francis-Gaspard, exercised his profession as a sculptor for some years with considerable reputation, and obtained a prize from the French academy, but no important works of his are mentioned; he died at Paris in 1759.

, a very useful biographer, lived in the 17th century. He was born in the territory of Grotkaw in Silesia, and educated in the college of Brieg, where the dukes of that name, to the utmost of their power, ^encouraged learning and the reformed religion as professed by Calvin. Here he became a firm Protestant, and was enabled to pursue his studies by the liberality of a person of quality, who had left several exhibitions for young students. He was appointed rector of a college at Heidelberg, where he published his first volume of Illustrious Men in the year 1615. This volume, which consists of philosophers, poets, writers on polite literature, historians, &c. was followed by three others; that which treats of divines was printed in 1619; that of the lawyers came next; and finally, that of the physicians: the two last were published in 1620. All the learned men, whose lives are contained in these four volumes, lived in the 16th, or beginning of the 17th century, and are either Germans or Flemings; but he published, in 16 18, the lives of twenty divines cf other countries, in a separate volume. All his divines are Protestants. He has given but a few lives, yet the work cost him a great deal of time, having been obliged to abridge the pieces from whence he had materials, whether they were lives, funeral sermons, eulogies, prefaces, or memoirs of families. He omitted several persons who deserved a place in his work, as well as those he had taken notice of; which he accounts for, from the want of proper materials and authorities. The Lutherans were not pleased with him, for they thought him partial; nor will they allow his work to be a proper standard whereby to judge of the learning of Germany. His biographical collections were last published in one vol. fol. at Franc-fort, under the title, “Dignorum laude Virorum, quos Musa vetat mori, immortalitas.” His other works were, 1. “Apographum-Monumentorum Heidelbergensium,” Heidelberg, 1612, 4to. 2. “Parodice et Metaphrases Horatianse,” Frapcfort, 1616, 8vo. 3. “Notae io Orationem Julii Caesaris Scaligeri pro M, T. Cicerone contra Ciceronianum Erasmi,” 1618; and he reprinted Erasmus’s dialogue “De optimo genere dicendi,” 1617. The Oxford catalogue erroneously ascribes to him the history of the churches of Hamburgh and Bremen, which, we have just seen, was the work of Adam de Bremen. His biographical works are, however, those which have preserved his name, and have been of great importance to all subsequent collections. He died in 1622.

, an eminent architect, was born in 1728, at the town of Kirkaldy, in Fifeshire, Scotland. He was the second son of William Adam, esq. of Maryburgh, an architect of distinguished merit. He received his education at the university of Edinburgh. The friendships which he formed in that seat of learning were with men of high literary fame, among whom were Mr. Hume, Dr. Robertson, Dr. Adam Smith, and Dr. Ferguson. As he advanced in life, he had the happiness to enjoy the friendship and intimacy of Archibald duke of Argyle, Mr. Charles Townsend, and the celebrated earl of Mansfield. To perfect his taste in the science to which he had devoted himself, he went to Italy, and there studied, for some time, the magnificent remains of antiquity which still adorn that country. He was of opinion, that the buildings of the ancients are, in architecture, what the works of nature are with respect to the other arts; serving as models for our imitation, and standards of our judgment. Scarce any monuments, however, of Grecian or Roman architecture now remain, except public buildings, The private edifices, however splendid and elegant, in which the citizens of Athens and Rome resided, have all perished: few vestiges remaining, even of those innumerable villas with which Italy was crowded, although, in erecting them, the Romans lavished the spoils and riches of the world. Mr. Adam, therefore, considered the destruction of these buildings with particular regret; some incidental allusions in the ancient poets, and occasional descriptions in their historians, conveying ideas of their magnificence, which astonish the artists of the present age. He conceived his knowledge of architecture to be imperfect, unless he should be able to add the observation of a private edifice of the ancients fo his study of their public works. He therefore formed the scheme of visiting the ruins of the emperor Dioclesian’s palace, at Spalatro, in Venetian Dalmatia. To that end, having prevailed on M. Clerisseau, a French artist, to accompany him, and engaged two draughtsmen to assist him in the execution of his design, he sailed from Venice, in June 1757, on his intended expedition, and, in five weeks, he accomplished his object with much satisfaction.

, or Adamnanus, abbot of the monastery of Hey, or Icolmkil, was born in 624, but whether in Scotland or Ireland is uncertain. He appears to have been a man of considerable learning, and, according to Bede, of a peaceable disposition; yet he enforced the discipline of the church with much severity, and partook of the credulity of the times. He died Oct. 23, 704, in the eightieth year of his age. Having hospitably entertained a French bishop, the latter, who had been in Palestine, communicated such particulars to him, as enabled him to write a description of that country, “De locis Terras Sanctse, lib. tres.” This was first published by Serrarius, at Ingoldstadt, 1619, and afterwards by Mabillon, “Saec. Benedict.” He wrote also a life of St. Columba, published by Canisius and Surius.

Although America had obtained independence, she still required a form of government or constitution adapted to her rank among other nations, and calculated to concentrate the powers of sovereignty. Mr. Adams was among the first who proposed the present form, and was seconded by Washington, Hamilton, and others, who were termed federalists; and the change took place in 1787. Washington was elected president, and Mr. Adams vice-president. But the party in opposition to this measure were not silenced; and when the French revolution took place, they in general were found to attach themselves to the interests of France, in opposition to those of Great Britain. Mr. Adams, however, pursued his even course, and vindicated his principles and theory in an able publication, entitled, “A defence of the Constitution of Government of the United States of America,” 1787 88, 3 vols. 8vo, which he afterwards republished under the title of “History of the principal Republics,” 3 vols. 8vo, 1794. The leading idea which runs through this work is, that a mixture of the three powers, the regal, the aristocratical, and the democratical, properly balanced, composes the most perfect form of government, and secures the greatest degree of happiness to the greatest number of individuals.

When Mr. Washington was a second time chosen president, Mr. Adams was again chosen vice-president; and when the former intimated his intention to retire, Mr. Adams was elected his successor, in preference to Mr. Jefferson, who was the idol of the republican or anti-federalist party. At the conclusion of his term of president, Mr. Adams, now advanced in years, retired from public affairs, and died at New York Oct. 2, 1803, aged 68, if our date of his birth be correct, but most of the journals fixed his age at 82. His vigour and independence of mind, firmness and moderation, have placed him in the first rank of American statesmen; and his death was justly considered as a public loss.

In 1732, he was presented to the curacy? or, as usually called, the vicarage of St. Chad’s in Shrewsbury, and on this occasion quitted the college. In 1756 he visited Oxford, and took his degrees of B. D, and D. D. and then went back to Shrewsbury, where he discharged the duties of his ministry with exemplary assiduity, patience, and affection; and contributed a very active part in the foundation of the Salop infirmary, and in promoting its success. The year before he went last to Oxford, he was presented to the rectory of Counde in Shropshire, by Mrs. Elizabeth Cressett of that place, and retained it during his life. In 1775, about 43 years after he left college, Dr. Ratcliffe, master of Pembroke college, died; and although Dr. Adams had outlived almost all his contemporaries, the gentlemen of the college came to a determination to elect him, a mark of respect due to his public character, and highly creditable to their discernment. He accordingly became master of Pembroke, July 26, 1775, and in consequence obtained a prebend of Gloucester, which is attached to that office. He now resigned the living of St. Chad, to the lasting regret of his hearers, as well as of the inhabitants at large, to whom he had long been endeared by his amiable character, and pious attention to the spiritual welfare of his flock. He was soon after made archdeacon of Llandaff. Over the college he presided with universal approbation, and engaged the affections of the students by his courteous demeanour and affability, mixed with the firmness necessary for the preservation of discipline. In his apartments here, he frequently cheered the latter days of his old friend Dr. Johnson, whom he survived but a few years; dying at his prebendal house at Gloucester, Jan. 13, 1789, aged 82. He was interred in Gloucester cathedral, where a monument was erected. with an inscription, which celebrates his ingenuity, learning, eloquence, piety, and benevolence. Dr. Adams married Miss Sarah Hunt, by whom he left a daughter, married, in 1788, to B. Hyatt, esq. of Painswick, in Gloucestershire, who died July 1810.

, a Scottish prelate, archbishop of St. Andrew’s. He was born 1543, in the town of Perth, where he received the rudiments of his education, and afterwards studied philosophy, and took his degree of M. A. at the university of St. Andrew’s. In the year 1566 he set out for Paris, as tutor to a young gentleman. In the month of June in the same year, Mary queen of Scots being delivered of a son, afterwards James VI. of Scotland, and first of England, Mr. Adamson wrote a Latin poem on the occasion, in which he styled him king of England and France. This proof of his loyalty involved him in some difficulties, causing him to be arrested in France, and confined for six months; but he escaped by the intercession, of queen Mary, and some of the principal nobility. As soon as he recovered his liberty, he retired with his pupil to Bourges. He was in this city during the massacre at Paris; and, the same bloody persecuting spirit prevailing amongst the Catholics at Bourges as at the metropolis, he lived concealed for seven months at a public-house, the master of which, upwards of 70 years of age, was thrown from the top of the building, and had his brains dashed out, for his charity to heretics. Whilst Mr. Adamson lay thus in his sepulchre, as he called it, he wrote his Latin poetical version of the book of Job, and his tragedy of Herod, in the same language. In 1573, he returned to Scotland; and, having entered into holy orders, became minister of Paisley. In 1575, he was appointed one of the commissioners, by the general assembly, to settle the jurisdiction and policy of the church; and the following year he was named, with Mr. David Lindsay, to report their proceedings to the earl of Moreton, then regent. About this time, the earl made him one of his chaplains, and, on the death of bishop Douglas, promoted him to the archiepiscopal see of St. Andrew’s, a dignity which brought upon him great trouble and uneasiness; for he was extremely obnoxious to the Presbyterian party, and many inconsistent absurd stories were propagated about him. Soon after his promotion, he published his Catechism in Latin verse, a work highly approved, even by his enemies; who, nevertheless, continued to persecute him with great violence. In 1578, he submitted himself to the general assembly, which procured him peace but for a very little time; for, the year following, they brought fresh accusations against him. In the year 1582, being attacked with a grievous disease, in which the physicians could give him no relief, he happened to take a simple medicine from an old woman, which did him service. The woman, whose name was Alison Pearsone, was immediately charged with witchcraft, and committed to prison, but escaped out of her confinement: however, about four years afterwards, she was again found, and burnt for a witch. In 1583, king James came to St. Andrew’s; and the archbishop, being much recovered, preached before him, and disputed with Mr. Andrew Melvil, in presence of his Majesty, with great reputation, which drew upon him fresh calumny and persecution. The king, however, was so well pleased with him, that he sent him ambassador to queen Elizabeth, at whose court he resided for some years. His conduct, during his embassy, has been variously reported by different authofsV Two things he principally laboured, viz. the recommending the king, his master, to the nobility and gentry of England, and the procuring some support for the episcopal party in Scotland. By his eloquent preaching he drew after him such crowds of people, and raised in their minds Such a high idea of the young king, his master, that queen Elizabeth forbade him to enter the pulpit during his stay in her dominions. In 1584 he was recalled, and sat in the parliament held in August at Edinburgh. The Presbyterian party were still very violent against the archbishop. A provincial synod was held at St. Andrew’s in April 1586; where the archbishop was accused and excommunicated: he appealed to the king and the states, but this availed him but little; for the mob being excited against him, it became dangerous to appear in public in the city of St. Andrew’s. At the next general assembly, a paper being produced, containing the archbishop’s submission, he was absolved from the excommunication. In 1588, fresh accusations were brought against him. The year following, he published the Lamentations of the prophet Jeremiah, in Latin verse, which he dedicated to the king, complaining of his hard usage. In the latter end of the same year, he published a translation of the Apocalypse in Latin verse, and a copy of Latin verses, addressed also to his Majesty, when he was in great distress. The king, however, was so far from giving him assistance, that he granted the revenue of his see to the duke of Lenox so that the remaining part of this prelate’s life was very wretched — he having hardly subsistence for his family, notwithstanding his necessities compelled him to deliver to the assembly a formal recantation of all his opinions concerning church government. He died in 1591. His works were printed in a 4to volume in London in 1619, with his Life by Thomas Volusenus, or Wilson. Besides the contents of this volume, our author wrote many things which were never published: such as, six books on the Hebrew republick, various translations of the prophets into Latin verse, Praelections on St. Paul’s Epistles to Timothy, various apologetical and funeral orations; and, what deserves most to be regretted, a very candid history of his own times. His character has. been variously represented, as may be seen in Calderwood and Spotiswood’s Histories, Mackenzie’s Lives of Scottish Authors, and the last edition of the Biographia Britannica. He appears to have been one of those men of whom no just estimate can be formed, without taking into the account the distraction of the times in which he lived.

, an eminent French naturalist, was born at Aix in Provence, April 7, 1727. His father, of Scotch origin, appears to have been in the service of Vintimille, then archbishop of that city. When the latter was translated to the see of Paris, Adanson was brought thither at three years of age, educated with great care, and soon gave proofs of uncommon application. As he was small of stature, he appeared much younger than he was; and, when he carried off the university prizes, many jokes were passed upon him. Needham, however, the celebrated naturalist, known by his microscopical disc-jveries, happening to be a witness of his success, presented him with a microscope; adding, that one who knew the works of men so well ought to study those of nature. This circumstance first induced him to study natural history, but without neglecting the usual course pursued in the university of Paris. In natural history, Reaumur and Bernard de Jussieu, were his guides, and he divided his time between the royal gardens and the museums of these learned men; and, when the system of Linnæus began to be published, it afforded him new matter for speculation. His parents had intended him for the church, and had procured him a prebend; but such was his thirst for general science, that he resigned it, and determined to travel into some country not usually visited or described. Senegal was the first object of his choice, thinking that its unhealthy climate had prevented its being visited by any other naturalist. Accordingly, he set out in 1748, in the 21st year of his age; and, after visiting the Azores and the Canaries, landed on the island of Goree, on the coast of Senegal; where he made a vast collection of specimens, animal, vegetable, and mineral, which he classified and described in a manner which he thought an improvement on the systems of Tournefort and Linnæus. He extended his researches also to the climate, geography, and manners of the people. He was engaged in this employment for five years, entirely at his own expence; and, in 1757, published the result in his “Histoire naturelle de Senegal,” 4to; an abridged translation of which, very ill executed, was published in London, 1759, 8vo. His classification of the Testacea, in this work, is universally allowed to be and ingenious. In 1756, soon after his return, having been elected a corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences, he read a paper on the Baobab, or calabash tree, an enormous vegetable, that had almost been accounted fabulous; and afterwards, a history of the tree which produces Gum Arabic. He would not, however, perhaps, have proceeded in these studies, had it not been for the generous encouragement afforded him by M. de Bombarde, a zealous patron of science. This induced him to publish his “Families des Plantes,” 2 vols. 8vo, 1763, a work of vast information, and which would have created a new revolution in the botanical world, had not the genius of Linnæus been predominant. But, although this work was neglected at the time, discoveries have since been advanced as new, which are to be found in it. About five years after, he determined to give a new edition, and had made the necessary corrections, and many additions; but, while employed on this, he coneived the more extensive plan of a complete Encyclopaedia, and he was persuaded that Lewis XV. would encourage such an undertaking. Flattered by this hope, he devoted his whole time to the collection of materials. In 1775, having got together an immense quantity, he submitted them to the Academy, under the title of an account of his manuscripts and plates, from 1771 to 1775, arranged according to the method he discovered when at Senegal, in 1749. These consisted of, 1. The universal order of Nature, in 27 vols. 8vo. 2. The natural history of Senegal, 8 vols. 8vo. 3. A course of natural history. 4. An universal vocabulary of natural history, one vol. fol. of 1000 pages. 5. A dictionary of natural history. 6. Forty thousand figures, and as many specimens of objects already known. 7. A collection of thirty-four thousand specimens of his own collection. It may easily be conceived that the academicians were astonished at this proposal; but the committee, appointed to examine his labours, did not find the collection equally valuable in all its branches, and, therefore, he did not meet with the encouragement he expected. His intention was to have published the entire work at once; but it was thought that, if he had published it in parts, he might probably have been successful. He published, however, a second edition of his “Families of the Plants,” which is, in fact, an encyclopaedia of botany. After this, he published no considerable work, but furnished some papers for the Academy, which have not been printed, and wrote the articles on exotics in the Supplement to the Encyclopaedia. In 1753, he laid before the French East India Company the plan of forming on the coast of Africa a colony, where all sorts of colonial produce might be cultivated, without enslaving the Negroes. This first effort, however, to procure the abolition of the slave-trade was not then attended to. In 1760, indeed, when the English were in possession of Senegal, they made him very liberal offers to communicate his plan, which he refused, from a love for his own country. He was equally disinterested in. refusing the princely offers made, in 1760, by the emperor of Germany, and, in 1766, by Catherine of Russia, and, lastly, by the king of Spain, if he would reside in their dominions. In France, however, he frequently travelled into various parts, in pursuit of his favourite science.

In 1759, he was appointed royal censor; and the emoluments of this place, that of academician, and the pensions successively conferred upon him, might have rendered him easy in his circumstances, had he not expended the whole in collecting materials for the vast plan abovementioned. At length, the Revolution stripped him of all; and, what Imrt him more, his garden, on which he had bestowed so much pains, was pillaged. When the Institute was formed, he was invited to become a member; but he answered that he could not accept the invitation, “as he had no shoes.” The minister of the interior, however, procured him a pension, on which he subsisted until his death, August 3, 1806, after an illness of six months, which confined him to his bed. He left behind him an immense number of manuscripts, and a new edition of his Families of the Plants is now preparing for the press by M. Du-Petit Thouars, whose account of his life is here abridged. According to M. Thouars, Adanson was a man of many excellent qualities, an indefatigable student and collector, but careless of dress and manners, and not a little conceited. Although in his seventy-ninth year, when on his death bed, he amused himself with the hopes of recovery, and of publishing his grand encyclopaedia. In his opinions, and particularly where he differed with Linnæus, he was most obstinately tenacious; and gave a curious proof in his own case. Bernard de Jussieu, pleased with his account of the Baobab, would have named that genus the Adansona; but Adanson would not allow it, because Linnæus honoured botanists with such names; whereas his plan was to give to new plants the name of the country which produced them in preference to every other. Stoever informs us that Linnæus said of Adanson, “he is either mad or intoxicated;” but Haller thought him a “rival worthy of Linnæus.”

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

, son of Lancelot Addison a. clergyman, born at Mauldismeaburne in the parish of Crosby Ravens worth in Westmoreland, in 1632, was educated at the grammar school of Appleby, and afterwards sent to Queen’s college, Oxford, upon the foundation. He was admitted B. A. Jan. 25, 1654, and M. A. July 4, 1657. As he now had greatly distinguished himself in the univer? sity, he was chosen one of the terras filii for the act celebrated in 1658; but, his oration abounding in personal satire against the ignorance, hypocrisy, and avarice of those then in power, he was compelled to make a recantation, and to akk pardon on his knees. Soon after he left Oxford, and retired to Petworth in Sussex, where he resided till the restoration. The gentlemen of Sussex having recommended him to Dr. King, bishop of Chester, as a man who had suffered for his loyalty and attachment to th.e constitution of church and state; the bishop received him kindly, and in all probability would have preferred him, had he not, contrary to his lordship’s approbation, accepted of the chaplainship at Dunkirk; where he continued till 1662, when, the place being delivered up to the French, he returned to England. The year following he went chaplain to the garrison at Tangier, where he resided some years; and came back to England in 1670, with a resolution to return to Tangier. He was appointed chaplain in ordinary to his majesty soon after his coming over; but had no thoughts, however, of quitting his chaplamship at Tangier, until it was conferred upon another, by which Mr. Addison became poor in his circumstances. In this situation of his affairs, a gentleman in Wiltshire bestowed on him the rectory of Milston, in Wilts, worth about 120l. per annum. Soon after he was also made prebendary of Minor pars altaris, in the cathedral of Sarum; and took the degrees of B. and D. D. at Oxford, July 6, 1675. His preferments, though not very considerable, enabled him to live in the country with great decency and hospitality; and he discharged his duty with a most conscientious diligence. In 1683 the commissioners for ecclesiastical affairs, in consideration of his former service at Tangier, conferred upon him the deanry of Lichfield, in which he was installed July 3; was collated to the archdeaconry of Coventry Dec. 8, 1684, and held it with his deanry in commendam. In the convocation, which met Dec. 4, 1689, dean Addison was one of the committee appointed by the lower house to acquaint the lords, that they had consented to a conference on the subject of an address to the king. He died April 20, 1703, and was buried in the church-yard of Lichfield, at the entrance of the west door, with the following epitaph “Hie jacet Lancelotus Addison, S. T. P. hujus ecclesiae decanus, necnon archidiaconus Coventrise, qui obiit 20 die Aprilis, ann. Dom. 1703, aetatis suae 71.” He was twice married; first to Jane, daughter of Nathaniel Gulston, esq., and sister to Dr. William Gulston, bishop of Bristol, by whom he had, Jane, who died in her infancy; Joseph, or whom in thenext article; Gulston, who died governor of Fort St. George in the East Indies; Dorothy, married first to Dr. Sartre, prebendary of Westminster, secondly to Daniel Combes, esq.; Anne, who died young; and Lancelot, fellow of Magdalen college, Oxford, an able classical scholar.

Dean Addison published, 1. “West Barbary, or a short narrative of the revolutions of Fez and Morocco,” 1671, 8vo. 2. “The present State of the Jews (more particularly relating to those in Barbary), wherein is contained an exact account of their customs secular and religious, &c.” 1675, 8vo. 3. “The primitive Institution, or a seasonable discourse of Catechizing.” 4. “A modest plea for the Clergy,” 1677, 8vo. 5. “The first state of Mahometism, or an account of the Author and doctrine of that imposture,” 1678, 8vo-, reprinted afterwards under the title of “The Life and Death of Mahomet.” 6. “An introduction to the Sacrament,” 1681; reprinted in 1686 with the addition of “The Communicant’s Assistant.” 7. “A discourse of Tangier, under the government of the earl of Tiviot,” 4to, 1685, second edition. 8. “Χριστοσ Αυτοθεοσ, or an historical account of the heresy denying the Godhead of Christ;” one of the best books that had then appeared on the subject. 9. “The Christian’s daily Sacrifice, on Prayer,” 1698, 12mo. 10. “An account of the Millenium, the genuine use of the two Sacraments, &c.” And some have attributed to him “The Catechumen; or an account given by a young Person to a Minister of his knowledge in Religion, &c.” 1690, 12mo; but this appears to have been only recommended by him and Dr. Scot.

, son of Dr. Addison mentioned in the last article, and one of the most illustrious ornaments of his time, was born May 1, 1672, at Milston near Ambrosbury, Wiltshire, where his father was rector. Appearing weak and unlikely to live, he was christened the same day. Mr. Tyers says, that he was laid out for dead as soon as he was born. He received the first rudiments of his education at the place of his nativity, under the rev. Mr. Naish; but was soon removed to Salisbury, under the care of Mr. Taylor; and thence to Lichfield, where his father placed him for some time, probably not long, under Mr. Shaw, then master of the school there. From Lichfield he was sent to the Charter-house, where he pursued his juvenile studies under the care of Dr. Ellis, and contracted that intimacy with sir Rich. Steele, which their joint labours have so effectually recorded. In 1687 he was entered of Queen’s college in Oxford; where, in 1689, the accidental perusal of some Latin verses gained him the patronage of Dr. Lancaster, by whose recommendation he was elected into Magdalen college as demy. Here he took the degree of M. A. Feb. 14, 1693; continued to cultivate poetry and criticism, and grew first eminent by his Latin compositions, which are entitled to particular praise, and seem to have had much of his fondness; for he collected a second volume of the Musæ Anglicanæ, perhaps for a convenient receptacle; in which all his Latin pieces are inserted, and where his poem on the Peace has the first place. He afterwards presented the collection to Boileau, who from that time conceived an opinion of the English genius for poetry. In his 22d year he first shewed his power of English poetry, by some verses addressed to Dryden; and soon afterwards published a translation of the greater part of the fourth Georgic upon Bees. About the same time he composed the arguments prefixed to the several books of Dry den’s Virgil; and produced an essay on the Georgics, juvenile, superficial, and uninstructive, without much either of the scholar’s learning or the critic’s penetration. His next paper of verses contained a character of the principal English poets, inscribed to Henry Sacheverell, who was then, if not a poet, a writer of verses; as is shewn by his version of a small part of Virgil’s Georgics, published in the Miscellanies, and a Latin encomium on queen Mary, in the Musae Anglicana?. At this time he was paying his addresses to SacheverelPs sister. These verses exhibit all the fondness of friendship; but, on one side or the other, friendship was too weak for the malignity of faction. In this poem is a very confident and discriminative character of Spenser, whose work he had then never read. It is necessary to inform the reader, that about this time he was introduced by Congreve to Montague, then chancellor of the exchequer: Addison was now learning the trade of a courtier, and subjoined Montague as a poetical name to those of Cowley and of Dryden. By the influence of Mr. Montague, concurring with his natural modesty, he was diverted from his original design of entering into holy orders. Montague alleged the corruption of men who engaged in civil employments without liberal education; and declared, that, though he was represented as an enemy to the church, he would never do it any injury but by withholding Addison from it. Soon after, in 1695, he wrote a poem to king William, with a kind of rhyming introduction addressed to lord Somers. King William had no regard to elegance or literature; his study was only war; yet by a choice of ministers whose disposition was very different from his own, he procured, without intention, a very liberal patronage to poetry. Addison was caressed both by Somers and Montague. In 1697 he wrote his poem on the peace of Ryswick, which he dedicated to Montague, and which was afterwards called by Smith “the best Latin poem since the Æneid.” Having yet no public employment, he obtained in 1699 a pension of 300l. a year, that he might be enabled to travel. He staid a year at Blois, probably to learn the French language; and then proceeded in his journey to Italy, which he surveyed with the eyes of a poet. While he was travelling at leisure, he was far from being idle; for he not only collected his observations on the country, but found time to write his Dialogues on Medals, and four acts of Cato. Such is the relation of Tickell. Perhaps he only collected his materials, and formed his plan. Whatever were his other employments in Italy, he there wrota the letter to lord Halifax, which is justly considered as the most elegant, if not the most sublime, of his poetical productions. But in about two years he found it necessary to hasten home; being, as Swift informs us, “distressed by indigence, and compelled to become the tutor of a travelling squire.” At his return he published his travels, with a dedication to lord Somers. This book, though a while neglected, is said in time to have become so much the favourite of the publick, that before it was reprinted it rose to five times its price. When he returned to England in 1702, with a meanness of appearance which gave testimony to the difficulties to which tie had been reduced, he found his old patrons out of power; but he remained not long neglected or useless. The victory at Blenheim 1704 spread triumph and confidence over the nation; and lord Godolphin, lamenting to lord Halifax that it had not been celebrated in a manner equal to the subject, desired him to propose it to some better poet. Halifax named Addison; who, having undertaken the work, communicated it to the treasurer, while it was yet advanced no further than the simile of the angel, and was immediately rewarded by succeeding Mr. Locke in the place of commissioner of appeals. In the following year he was at Hanover with lord Halifax; and the year after was made under-secretary of state, first to sir Charles Hedges, and in a few months more to the earl of Sunderland. About this time the prevalent taste for Italian operas inclining him to try what would be the effect of a musical drama in our own language; he wrote the opera of Rosajnond, which, when exhibited on the stage, was either hissed or neglected; but, trusting that the readers would do him more justice, he published it, with an inscription to the duchess of Marlborough. His reputation had been somewhat advanced by The Tender Husband, a comedy, which Steele dedicated to him, with a confession that he owed to him several of the most successful scenes. To this play Addison supplied a prologue. When the marquis of Wharton was appointed lord lieutenant of Ireland, Addison attended him as his secretary; and was made keeper of the records in Bermingham’s tower, with a salary of 300l. a year. The office was little more than nominal, and the salary was augmented for his accommodation. When he was in office, he made a law to himself, as Swift has recorded, never to remit his regular fees in civility to his friends “I may have a hundred friends; and if my fee be two guineas, I shall by relinquishing my right lose 200 guineas, and no friend gain more than two.” He was in Ireland when Steele, without any communication of his design, began the publication of the Tatler; but he was not long concealed: by inserting a remark on Virgil, which Addison had given him, he discovered himself. Steele’s first Tatler was published April 22, 1709, and Addison’s contribution appeared May 26. Tickell observes, that the Tatler began and was concluded without his concurrence. This is doubtless literally true; but the work did not suffer much by his unconsciousness of its commencement, or his absence at its cessation; for he continued his assistance to Dec. 23, and the paper stopped on Jan. 2. He did not distinguish his pieces by any signature.

“This species of instruction was continued, and perhaps advanced, by the French; among whom La Bruyere’s Manners of the Age, though written without connection, deserves great praise. Before the Tatler and Spectator, if the writers for the theatre are excepted, England had no masters of common life. No writers had yet undertaken to reform either the savageness of neglect, or the impertinence of civility; to teach when to speak, or to be silent; how to refuse, or how to comply. We wanted not books to teach us more important duties, and to settle opinions m philosophy or politics; but an arbiter elegant iarum, a judge of propriety, was yet wanting, who should survey the track of daily conversation, and free it from thorns and prickles, which tease die passer, though they do not wound him. For this purpose nothing is so proper as the frequent publication of short papers, which we read not as study but amusement. If the subject be slight, the treatise likewise is short. The busy may find time, and the idle may find patience.

“But to say that they united the plans of two or three eminent writers, is to give them but a small part of their due praise; they superadded literature and criticism, and sometimes towered far above their predecessors, and taught, with great justness of argument and dignity of language, the most important duties and sublime truths.”

At the publication the wits seemed proud to pay their attendance with encomiastic verses. The best are from an unknown hand, which will perhaps lose somewhat of their praise when the author is known to be Jeffreys. Cato had yet other honours. It was censured as a party play by a scholar of Oxford, and defended in a favourable examination by Dr. Sewel. It was translated by Salvini into Italian, and acted at Florence; and by the Jesuits of St. Omer’s into Latin, and played by their pupils. While Cato was upon the stage, another daily paper, called the Guardian, was published by Steele; to which Addison gave great assistance. Of this paper nothing is necessary to be said but that it found many contributors, and that it was a continuation of the Spectator, with the same elegance, and the same variety, till some unlucky spark from a tory paper set Steele’s politics on fire, and wit at once blazed into faction. He was soon too hot for neutral topics, and quitted the Guardian to write the Englishman. The papers of Addison are marked in the Spectator by one of the letters in the name of Clio, and in the Guardian by a hand. Many of these papers were written with powers truly comic, with nice discrimination of characters, an accurate observation of natural or accidental deviations from propriety but it was not supposed that he tried a comedy on the stage, till Steele, after his death, declared him the author of “The Drummer;” this however he did not know to be true by any cogent testimony; for when Addison put the play into his hands, he only told him it was the work of a gentleman in the company; and when it was received, as is confessed, with cold disapprobation, he was probably less willing to claim it. Tickell omitted it in his collection; but the testimony of Steele, and the total silence of any other claimant, have determined the public to assign it to Addison, and it is now printed with his other poetry. Steele carried “The Drummer” to the playhouse, and afterwards to the press, and sold the copy for 50 guineas. To the opinion of Steele may be added the proof supplied by the play itself, of which the characters are such as Addison would have delineated, and the tendency such as Addison would have promoted. He was not all this time an indifferent spectator of public affairs. He wrote, as different exigencies required, in 1707, “The present state of the War, and the necessity of an augmentation;” which, however judicious, being written on temporary topics, and exhibiting no peculiar powers, has naturally sunk by its own weight into neglect. This cannot be said of the few papers intituled “The Whig Examiner,” in which isexhibited all the force of gay malevolence and humorous satire. Of this paper, which just appeared and expired, Swift remarks, with exultation, that “it is now down among the dead men.” His “Trial of count Tariff,” written to expose the treaty of commerce with France, lived no longer than the question that produced it.

Not long afterwards an attempt was made to revive the Spectator, at a time indeed by no means favourable to literature, when the succession of a new family to the throne filled the nation with anxiety, discord, and confusion; and either the turbulence of the times or the satiety of the readers put a stop to the publication, after an experiment of 80 numbers, which were afterwards collected into an eighth volume, perhaps more valuable than any one of those that went before it: Addison produced more than a fourth part, and the other contributors are by no means unworthy of appearing as his associates. The time that had passed during the suspension of the Spectator, though it had not lessened his power of humour, seems to have increased his disposition to seriousness: the proportion of his religious to his comic papers is greater than in the former series. The Spectator, from its recommencement, was published only three times a week, and no discriminative marks were added to the papers. To Addison Tickell has ascribed 23. The Spectator had many contributors; and Steele, whose negligence kept him always in a hurry, when it was his turn to furnish a paper, called loudly for the letters, of which Addison, whose materials were more, made little use; having recourse to sketches and hints, the product of his former studies, which he now reviewed and completed among these are named by Tickell the “Essays on Wit,” those on the “Pleasures of the Imagination,” and the “Criticism on Milton.”

Of the course of Addison‘ s familiar day, before his marriage, Pope has given a detail. He had in the house with him Budgell, and perhaps Philips. His chief companions were Steele, Budgell, ’Philips, Carey, Davenant, and col. Brett. With one or other of these he always breakfasted. He studied all morning; then dined at a tavern, and went afterwards to Button’s. From the coffee-house he went again to the tavern, where he often sat late, and drank too much wine. Dr. Johnson’s delineation of the character of Addison concludes by observing with Tickell, that he employed wit on the side of virtue and religion. He not only made the proper use of wit himself, but taught it to others; and from his time it has been generally subservient to the cause of reason and truth. He has dissipated the prejudice that had long connecte'd gaiety with vice, and easiness of manners with laxity of principles. He has restored virtue to its dignity, and taught innocence not to be ashamed. This is an elevation of literary character, “above all Greek, above all Roman fame.” No greater felicity can genius attain than that of having purified intellectual pleasure, separated mirth from indecency, and wit from licentiousness; of having taught a succession of writers to bring elegance and gaiety to the aid of goodness; and, to use expressions yet more awful, of having “turned many to righteousness.” As a describer of life and manners, he must be allowed to stand perhaps the first of the foremost rank. His humour, which, as Steele observes, is peculiar to himself, is so happily diffused as to give the grace of novelty to domestic scenes and daily occurrences. He never “outsteps the modesty of nature,” norraises merriment or wonder by the violation of truth. His figures neither divert by distortion, nor amaze by aggravation. He copies life with so much fidelity, that he can be hardly said to invent: yet his exhibitions have an air so much original, that it is difficult to suppose them not merely the product of imagination. As a teacher of wisdom he may be confidently followed. His religion has nothing in it enthusiastic or superstitious; he appears neither weakly credulous nor wantonly sceptical; his morality is neither dangerously lax, nor impracticably rigid. All the enchantment of fancy and all the cogency of argument are employed to recommend to the reader his real interest, the care of pleasing the Author of his being. Truth is shewn sometimes as the phantom of a vision, sometimes appears half-veiled in an allegory; sometimes attracts regard in the robes of fancy, and sometimes steps forth in the confidence of reason. She wears a thousand dresses, and in all is pleasing——“Mille habet ornatus, mille decenter habet.”

His prose is the model of the middle style; on grave subjects not formal, on light occasions not grovelling; pure without scrupulosity, and exact without apparent elaboration; always equable, and always easy, without glowing words or pointed sentences. Addison never deviates from his track to snatch a grace; he seeks no ambitious ornaments, and tries no hazardous innovations. His page is always luminous, but never blazes in unexpected splendour. It seems to have been his principal endeavour to avoid all harshness and severity of diction; he is therefore sometimes verbose in his transitions and connections, and sometimes descends too much to the language of conversation; yet if his language had been less idiomatical, it might have lost somewhat of its genuine Anglicism. What he attempted, he performed; he is never feeble, he did not wish to be energetic; he is never rapid, and he never stagnates. His sentences have neither studied amplitude, nor affected brevity: his periods, though not diligently rounded, are voluble and ea?y. Whoever wisnes to attain an English style, familiar but not coarse, and elegant but not ostentatious, must give his days and nights to the volumes of Addison.

, bishop of Brescia, whose name has been handed down with much honour by Roman catholic writers, flourished in the 11th century. He was at first clerk of the chu rch of Liege; and then president of the schools. He had studied at Chartres under the celebrated Fulbert, and had for his schoolfellow the no less celebrated Berenger, to whom he wrote a letter endeavouring to reconcile laim to the doctrine of transubstantiation. This appears to have been about 1047. In 1048 he was appointed bishop of Brescia, where he died, according to some, in 1057, or according to others, in 1061. His letter to Berenger was printed for the first time at Louvairi, with other pieces on the same subject, in 1551; and reprinted ia 1561, 8vo. It has also appeared in the different editions of the Biblioth. Patrum. The canon Gagliardi printed a corrected edition, with notes, at the end of the sermons of Sl Gaudentius, Padua, 1720, 4to. The last edition was by C. A. Schmid, Brunswicj 1770, 8vo, with Bereriger’s answer, and other pieces respecting Adelman. Adelman likewise wrote a poem “De Viris illustribus sui tern peris,” which Mabillon printed in the first volume of his Analecta.

, a learned German grammarian, and miscellaneous writer, was born Aug. 30, 1734, at Spantekow, in Pomerania; and after studying some time at Anclam and Closterbergen, finished his education at the university of Halle. In 1759 he was appointed professor of the academy of Erfurt, which he relinquished about two years after, and settled at Leipsic, where, in, 1787, he was made librarian to the elector of Dresden; and here he died of a hemorrhoidal complaint, Sept. 10, 1806, aged 72, aocording to our authority; but the Diet. Hist, fixes his birth in 1732, which makes him two years older. Adelung performed for the German language what the French academy, and that of De la Crusca, have done for the French and Italian. His “Grammatical and Critical Dictionary,” Leipsic, 1774 1786, 5 vols. 4to, a work of acknowledged merit and vast labour, has been alternately praised and censured by men of learning in Germany; some say that it excels Dr. Johnson’s dictionary of the English language in its definitions and etymologies, but falls short of it in the value of his authorities. This latter defect has been attributed either to the want of good authors in the language at the time he was preparing his work, or to his predilection for the writers of Upper Saxony. He considered the dialect of the margraviate of Misnia as the standard of good German, and rejected every thing that was contrury to the language of the better classes of society, and the authors of that district. It was also his opinion that languages are the work of nations, and not of individuals, however distinguished; forgetting that the language of books must be that of men of learning. Voss and Campe in particular reproached him for the omissions in his work, and his partiality in the choice of authorities. In 1793—1801, a new edition appeared in 4 vols. 4to, Leipsic, with additions, but which bore no proportion to the improvements that had been made in the language during the interval that elapsed from the publication of the first.

Adelung’s other works are: 1. “Glossarium manuale ad scriptores medii et infimae Latinitatis,” FJalle, 1772 84, 6 vols. 8vo, an abridgement of Du Cange and Charpentier. 2. Three “German Grammars:” the first is a treatise on the origin, changes, structure, &c. of the language, Leipsic, 1782, 2 vols. 8vo; the two others are school-books, and have been often reprinted. 3. “A treatise on the German Style,” Berlin, 1785, 1788, 1790, 2 vols.; esteemed one of the best books, in any language, on the philosophy of rhetoric. 4. “Supplements to Jcecher’s Dictionary of Literary Men,” 1784 and 1787, 2 vols. 4to; this goes no farther than letter I. 5. “History of Human Folly, or he Lives of the most celebrated Necromancers, Alchymists, Exorcists, Diviners, &c.” in seven parts, Leipsic, 1785 to 1789. 6. “A species of Cyclopedia of all the Sciences, Arts, and Manufactures, which contribute to the comforts of human life,” four parts, Leipsic, 1778, 1781, 1788; a work of great accuracy, and very comprehensive. 7. “Essay on the history of the Civilization of Mankind,” Leipsic, 1782, 1788. 8. “The history of Philosophy,” 3 vols. ibid. 1786, 1787, 8vo. 9. “Treatise on German Orthography,” 8vo, 1787. Many of the best German writers, and Wieland among the rest, have adopted his principles in this work; and their example, in the opinion of his biographer, may supply the want of the decisions of an academy, or national centre for improvements in language. 10. “The history of the Teutones, their language and literature before the general migration,” Leipsic, 1806, 8vo. 11. “Mithridate, or a universal table of Languages, with the Lord’s Prayer in one hundred languages,” Berlin, 1806, 8vo. The first volume of this work, which contains the Asiatic languages, was printed immediately before his death; the second, comprizing the languages of Europe, was completed and published in 1809, by an eminent philologist, M. John Severin Vater, then professor at Halle, now at Konigsberg, who has also promised a third volume. These two last works are inferior to those published by Adelung in his younger days; but his Mithridate is thought superior to the work which Conrad Gessner published under the same title about two centuries before. It must be observed, however, that this does not detract from that Author’s merit, as Adelung had not only Gessner’s work before him, but the improvements of two centuries on the subject.

, or Aymar, a monk of St. Martial, born in the year 988, rendered himself famous by the active part he took in the dispute respecting the pretended apostleship of St. Martial, but is now known chiefly by his “Chronicle of France” from the origin of the monarchy to 1029. This, although neither exact in chronology, or in proper arrangement of the events, is said to be very useful to French historians in what follows the time of Charles Martel. It was published by Labbe in his “Nouvelle Bibliotheque des Manuscripts,” and in other collections of French history. Mabillon, in his “Analecta,” has given the famous letter of Ademar’s on the apostleship of St. Martial, and some verses or acrostics.

, a satirical poet of the same family with the preceding, was born at Naples, Sept. 3, 1644, and educated at the university of Pisa, where the celebrated Luca Terenzi was his tutor. He visited, when young, the different courts of Italy, and was beloved for his talents and accomplishments. He received from the duke Ferdinand Charles of Mantua, the title of marquis, and gentleman of his chamber. He was also member of the academy of Florence, of De la Crnsca, and many other learned societies. He succeeded the famous Redi as professor of the Tuscan language in the academy of Florence, and was likewise professor of chivalry in that of the nobles, in which science his lectures, which he illustrated with apposite passages from ancient and modern history, were highly esteemed. These were never printed, but manuscript copies are preserved in several of the libraries of Florence. His only prose work, a collection of religious pieces, was published at Florence, 1706, small 4to, under the title “Prose sacre.” His poetry consists of: 1. “Sonnets and other lyric pieces,” and among them, a collection of Odes or Canzoni, dedicated to Louis XIV, and magnificently printed at Florence, 1693. 2. Some “Dramas,” one of which “Le Gare dell' Amore etdelP Amicitia,” Florence, 1679, 12mo, is so rare as to be unnoticed by any historian of Italian literature. 3. “Five Satires,” on which his fame chiefly rests; very prolix, but written in an elegant style; and as to satire, just and temperate, except where he treats of the fair sex. He died at Florence, after a tedious illness, June 22, 1708.

, an engraver of the 16th century, was a German, but we have no account of his life, nor is it known from whom he learned the art of engraving, or rather etching, for he made but little use of the graver in his works. At a time when etching was hardly discovered, and carried to no perfection by the greatest artists, he produced such plates as not only far excelled all that went before him, but laid the foundation of a style, which his imitators have, even to the present time, scarcely improved. His point is firm and determined, and the shadows broad and perfect. Although his drawing is incorrect, and his draperies stiff, yet he appears to have founded a school to which we owe the Hopfers, and even Hollar himself. Mr. Strutt notices only two plates now known by him, both dated 1518. In one of them he is styled Philipus Adler Patricias.

, an ingenious and learned Carthusian monk, is the author of a treatise entitled “De remediis utriusque fortunze,”' the first edition of which, published at Cologn, 1467, 4to, is the most scarce and valuable; the second bears date 1471, 4to; the third was printed at Cremona, 1492, fol. In order to avoid confounding this treatise with that of Petrarch on the same subject, it is necessary to know that the title says: “per quendam Adrianum poetam prsestantem, necnon S. Th. professorem eximium.” No particulars are known of his birth or death.

, the Roman emperor, was born at Rome Jan. 24, in the year of Christ 76. His father left him an orphan, at ten years of age, tinder the guardianship of Trajan, and Caelius Tatianus, a Roman knight. He began to serve very early in the armies, having been tribune of a legion before the death of Domitian. He was the person chosen by the army of Lower Mcesia, to carry the news of Nerva’s death to Trajan, successor to the empire. The extravagances of his youth deprived him of this emperor’s favour; but having recovered it by reforming his behaviour, he was married to Sabina, a grand niece of Trajan, and the empress Plotina became his great friend and patroness. When he was quaestor, he delivered an oration in the senate; but his language was then so rough and unpolished, that he was hissed: this obliged him to apply to the study of the Latin tongue, in which he afterwards became a great proficient, and made a considerable figure for his eloquence. He accompanied Trajan in most of his expeditions, and particularly distinguished himself in the second war against the Daci; and having before been quaestor, as well as tribune of the people, he was now successively praetor, governor of Pannonia, and consul. After the siege of Atra in Arabia was raised, Trajan, who had already given him the government of Syria, left him the command of the army; and at length, when he found death approaching, it is said he adopted him. The reality of this adoption is by some disputed, and is thought to have been a contrivance of Plotina; however, Adrian, who was then in Antiochia, as soon as he received the news of that, and of Trajan’s death, declared himself emperor on the llth of August, 117. He then immediately made peace with the Persians, to whom he yielded up great part of the conquests of his predecessors; and from generosity, or policy, he remitted the debts of the Roman people, which, according to the calculation of those who have reduced them to modern money, amounted to 22,500,000 golden crowns; and he caused to be burnt all the bonds and obligations relating to those debts, that the people might be under no apprehension of being called to an account for them afterwards. He went to visit all the provinces, and did not return to Rome till the year 118, when the senate decreed him a triumph, and honoured him with the title of Father of his country; but he refused both, and desired that Trajan’s image might triumph. The following year he went to Mcesia to oppose the Sarmatce. In his absence several persons of great worth were put to death; and though he protested he had given no orders for that purpose, yet the odium fell chiefly upon him. No prince travelled more than Adrian; there being hardly one province in the empire which be did not visit. In 120 he went into Gaul, and thence to Britain, where he caused a wall or rampart to be built, as a defence against the Caledonians who would not submit to the Iloman government. In 121 he returned into France, and thence to Spain, to Mauritania, and at length into the East, where he quieted the commotions raised by the Parthians. After having visited all the provinces of Asia, he returned to Athens in 125, where he passed the winter, and was initiated in the mysteries of Eleusinian Ceres. He went from thence, to Sicily, and saw mount Ætna. He returned to Rome the beginning of the year 129; and, according to some, he went again the same year to Africa; and after his return from thence, to the east. He was in Egypt in the year 132, revisited Syria the year following, returned to Athens in 134, and to Rome in 135. The persecution against the Christians was very violent under his reign; but it was at length suspended, in consequence of the remonstrances of Quadratus bishop of Athens, and Aristides, two Christian philosophers, who presented the emperor with some books in favour of their religion. He was more severe against the Jews; and, by way of insult, erected a temple to Jupiter on mount Calvary, and placed a statue of Adonis in the manger of Bethlehem he caused also the images of swine to be engraved on the gates of Jerusalem.

, pope, who deserves some notice on account of his personal merit, was born in Utrecht, 1459, of parents reputed mean, who procured him a place among the poor scholars in the college of Louvain, where his application was such as to induce Margaret of England, the sister of Edward IV. and widow of Charles duke of Burgundy, to bear the expences of his advancement to the degree of doctor. He became successively a canon of St. Peter, professor of divinity, dean of the church of Louvain, and fastly, vice-chancellor of the university. Recollecting his own condition, he generously founded a college at Louvain, which bears his name, for the education of poor students. Afterwards Maximilian I. appointed him preceptor to his grandson Charles V. and sent him as ambassador to Ferdinand king of Spain, who gave him the bishoprick of Tortosa. In 1517 he was made cardinal, and during the infancy of Charles V. became regent; but the duties of the office were engrossed by cardinal Ximenes. On the death of Leo X. Charles V. had so much influence with the cardinals as to procure him to be chosen to the papal chair, in 1522. He was not, however, very acceptable to the college, as he had an aversion to pomp, expence, and pleasure. He refused to resent, by fire and sword, the complaints urged by Luther; but endeavoured to reform such abuses in the church as could neither be concealed or denied. To this conduct he owed the many satires written against him during his life, and the unfavourable representations made by the most learned of the Roman Catholic historians. Perhaps his partiality to the emperor Charles might increase their dislike, and occasion the suspicion that his death, which took place Sept. 24, 1523, was a violent one. For this, however, we know no other foundation, than a pasquinade stuck upon the house of his physician “To the deliverer of his country.” He is said to have composed an epitaph for himself, expressing, that the greatest misfortune of his life was his being called to govern. He has left some writings, as, 1. “Questiones et Expositiones in IV. Sententiarum,” Paris, 1512 and 1516, fol.; 1527, 8vo. In this he advanced some bold sentiments against papal infallibility. Although he wrote the work before he was pope, he reprinted it without any alteration. 2. “Questiones Quodlibeticae,” Louvain, 1515, 8vo; Paris, 1516, fol. Foppen gives a large list of his other writings. His life was written by Paulus Jovius, Onuphrius Panviuius, Gerard Moringus, a divine of Louvain, and lastly by Caspar Burman, under the title “Analecta Historica de Adriano VI. Trajectino, Papa Romano,” Utrecht, 1727, 4to.

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

In the pontificate of Julius II. who succeeded Alexander, Adrian retired from Rome, having taken some disgust, or perhaps distrusting this pope, who was a declared enemy of his predecessor: nor did he return till there was a conclave held for the election of a new pope, where he probably gave his voice for Leo X. Soon after he was unfortunately privy to a conspiracy against Leo. His embarking in the plot is said to have been chiefly owing to his crediting and applying to himself the prediction of a fortune-teller, who had assured him, “that Leo would be cut off by an unnatural death, and be succeeded by an elderly man named Adrian, of obscure birth, but fa-­mous for his learning, and whose virtue and merit alone had raised him to the highest honours of the church.” Th conspiracy being discovered, Adrian was condemned to pay 12,500 ducats, and to give a solemn promise that he would not stir out of Rome. But being either unable to pay this fine, or apprehending still farther severities, he privately withdrew from Rome; and in a consistory held the 6th of July 1518, he was declared excommunicated, and deprived of all his benefices, as well as his ecclesiastical orders. About four years before, he had been removed from his office of the pope’s collector in England, at the request of king Henry VIII, and through the instigation of cardinal Wolsey. The heads of his accusation, drawn up at Rome, were, “That he had absented himself from that city in the time of Julius II. without the pope’s leave; that he had never resided, as he ought to have done^ at the church of St. Chrysogonus, from which he had his title; that he had again withdrawn himself from Rome, and had not appeared to a legal citation; and that he had engaged in the conspiracy of cardinal Petrucci, and had signed the league of Francis Maria, duke of Urbino, against the pope.” He was at Venice when he received the news of his condemnation: what becarme of him afterwards is uncertain. Aubery says, he took refuge among the Turks in Asia; but the most common opinion is, that he was murdered by one of his servants for the sake of his wealth. Polydore Vergil tells us, there is to be seen at Riva, a village in the diocese of Trent, a Latin inscription on one Polydorus Casamicus, the pope’s janitor, written by cardinal Adrian; in which he laments his own wretched condition, extolling the happiness of his friend, whose death had put an end to his miseries. Polydore Vergil gives Adrian a high character for his uncommon learning, his exquisite^ judgment in the choice of the properest words, and the truly classical style of his writings; in which he was the first, says that author, since the age of Cicero, who revived the purity of the Latin language, and taught men to draw their knowlege from the sources of the best and most learned authors. The only works of his that are published are, 1. “De Vera Philosophia;” 2. “De Sermone Latino et de Modis Latine loquendi,” 1515, Rome, fol.

, the son of the preceding, was born in 1513, or, as some say, 1511, and died at Florence in 1579. In his youth, he carried arms in defence of the liberties of his country, and afterwards devoted his time to study. For thirty years he taught rhetoric in the university of Florence, and enjoyed the friendship of the most celebrated of his contemporaries, Annibal Caro, Varchi, Flaminio, and the cardinals Bembo and Contarini. His chief work, which forms a continuation of Guicciardini, is the history of his own time, entitled “Deir Istoria de' suoi tempi,” from 1536 to 1574. Florence, 1583, fol. This is a most scarce edition, and more valued than that of Venice, 1587, 3 vols. 4to. The abbé Lenglet du Fresnoy, Bayle, and particularly Thuanus, who has derived much assistance from this work, speak highly of his correctness as a historian. He had the best materials, and among others, some memoirs furnished by the grand duke of Tuscany, Cosmo I. who advised him to the undertaking. He is said to have written funeral orations on the grand duke, on Charles V. and the emperor Ferdinand; but we know only of his oration on the grand duchess, Jane of Austria, which was translated from Latin into Italian, and published at Florence in 1579, 4to. In 1567 he published “Lettera a Giorgio Vasari sopra gli antichi Pittori nominati da Plinio,” 4to. This letter, oa the ancient painters mentioned by Pliny, which is rather a treatise on painting, is inserted by Vasari in the second volume of his lives of the painters. Vasari speaks of him as an enlightened amateur of the fine arts, and one whose advice was of much importance to him when he was employed at Florence in the palace of the grand duke.

, a geographer of considerable note, was born at Delft in Holland, February 14, 1533, After applying to his studies with much assiduity, he was ordained priest in 1561, and was director of the nuns of St. Barbara until the civil wars obliged him to take refuge first at Mecklin, then at Maestricht, and lastly at Cologne, where he died, June 20, 1585. He published “Vita Jesu Christi, ex quatuor evangelistis breviter contexta,” Antwerp, 1578, 12mo; but the work for which he is best known is his “Theatrum Terra; Sanctse,” or, history of the Holy Land, illustrated with maps, and printed in 1590, 1595, 1600, 1628, and 1682, foL; a proof of the esteem in which it was long held, although his authorities are thought to be sometimes exceptionable. The second part, which contains a description of Jerusalem, was printed by the author in 1584, and was reprinted after his death in 1588, and 1592, 8vo. He sometimes took the name of Christianus Crucius, in allusion to his banishment and sufferings.

was born in the beginning of the tenth century, in the environs of Condat, now St. Claude. He studied at the abbey of Luxeuil, which had then a very famous school, under the direction cf the Benedictines. Being charmed with their mode of life and doctrines, he entered into the order, and became abbot. His principal writings are the lives of some saints, which arc not free from the superstitions of the times. Calmet has printed his life of St. Mansuetus; and Mabillon, his life of St. Valbert, or Wandalbert. Cave mentions other works of his, but he deserves more credit as one of those who laboured in diffusing learning. Such was his reputation, that many bishops applied to him to establish schools in their dioceses, and he was even consulted by crowned heads on these and other subjects of importance. He died in Champagne in the year 992.

, of Cappadocia, an eclectic philosopher of the fourth century, was of a family originally noble, but reduced to poverty. His parents sent him into Greece to learn some means of subsistence, but he returned with only a love of philosophy. On this his father turned him out of doors; but at length was prevailed upon to forgive him, and even to let him pursue his studies, in which he soon surpassed the ablest masters of his country. In order to increase his knowledge, he went to Syria, and became the disciple of Jamblicus, and after the dispersion of that school by Constantine the Great, he settled at Pergamos, where he had a-very flourishing school. What he taught, however, was a composition of mysticism and imposture, and he even pretended to immediate communication with the deities, and to obtain the revelation of future events. The time of his birth or death is not ascertained.

, one of the most learned divines of the thirteenth century, entered into the Augustine order, and studied at Paris under Thomas Aquinas, where he became so eminent as to acquire the title of the Profound Doctor. He was preceptor to the son of Philip III. of France, and composed for the use of his pupil his treatise “De regimine Principum,” Rome, 1492, fol. The Venetian edition of 1498 is still in some esteem. He also taught philosophy and theology with high reputation at Paris. He was preferred by Boniface VIII. to the episcopal see of Berri, and, according to some writers was, by the same pope, created a cardinal. He was, however, elected general of his order in 1292, and assisted at the general council of Vienna in 1311. He died Dec. 22, 1316, at Avignon, leaving various works, enumerated by Cave; which afford, in our times, no very favourable opinion of his talents, although they were in high reputation during his life, and long after. One only it may be necessary to notice as a very great rarity. The title is “Tractatus brevis et utilis de Originali Peccato,” 4to, printed at Oxford, 1479, and is supposed to be the third, or second, or, as some think, the first book printed there. Dr. Clarke has described it.

, a lawyer, was born at Antwerp in 1486. He was educated under the care of the celebrated Erasmus, with whom he lived afterwards in close friendship, as he did with the illustrious sir Thomas More, and other eminent scholars of that age. More introduces him in the prologue to his Utopi with high praise, as “a man there in his country of honest reputation, and also preferred to high promotions, worthy truly of the highest. For it is hard to say whether the young man be in learning or in honesty more excellent. For he is both of wonderful virtuous conditions, and also singularly well learned, and towards all sorts of people exceeding gentle.” Sir Thomas adds, that “the charms of his conversation abated the fervent desire he had to see his native country, from which sir Thomas had been absent more than four months.” He occurs also with high praise in the life and writings of Erasmus. In 1510, on the death of Adrian Blict, first notary at Antwerp, he was unanimously elected into his place. He died Nov. 29, 1533. His works are, 1. “Threnodiain funus Maximiliani Caesaris, cum Epitaphiis aliquot et Epigrammatum libello,” Antwerp, 1519, 4to. 2. “Hypotheses, sive Spectacula Carolo V. Caesari ab S. P. Q. Antver.” ib. 4to. 3. “Enchiridion Principis ac Magistratus Christiani,” Colon. 1541. He edited also “Titulos Legum ex Codice Theodosiario,” Louvain, 1517, folio.

, successively bishop of Wilton and archbishop of Canterbury, and one of the greatest luminaries of his dark era, was the son of an earl of Kent, and after receiving a few scanty instructions from an ignorant secular priest, assumed the habit of the Benedictine order of monks in the monastery at Abingdon, over which Athelwold then presided, having been appointed abbot in the year 955. Athelwold, being created bishop of Winchester in the year 693, settled several of the Abingdon monks in his cathedral. Among these was Ælfric; who, in return for the benefit which he had formerly derived from the instructions of Alhelwold, was now eager to show his gratitude, by forwarding the wishes of his benefactor to instruct the youth of his diocese. With this view he drew tip his “Latin-Saxon Vocabulary,” and some “Latin Colloquies.” The former of these works was published by Somner, under the title of a Glossary, Oxon. 1659 (See Somner). During his residence in this city, Ælfric translated, from the Latin into the Saxon language, most of the historical books of the Old Testament: the greatest part of which translations has reached our time, having been printed at Oxford in 1698. Here, likewise, at the request of Wulfsine, bishop of Sherborn, he drew up what has been called his “Canons,” but might more properly be styled, a charge to be delivered by the bishops to their clergy. They are preserved in the first volume of Spelman’s Councils, and were composed, between the years 980 and 987. Some time about this last year, Ælfric was removed to Cerne Abbey, to instruct the monks, and regulate the affairs of that monastery. Here it was that he translated, from the Latin fathers, the first volume of his “Homilies.” After remaining in this place about a year, he was made abbot of St. Alban’s in the year 988, and composed a liturgy for the service of his abbey, which continued to be used there till Leland’s time. In the year 989 he was created Lishop of Wilton, and during his continuance in that see, translated, about the latter end of the year 991, a second volume of “Homilies.” These are the volumes of which Mrs. Elstob issued proposals for a translation, in 1713, accompanied with the original, but did not live to publish the work. Here also Ælfric wrote his “Grammar,” a supplement to his Homilies, and, probably, a tract dedicated to Sigeward or Sigeferth, containing two epistles oil the Old and New Testament, which his biographer concludes to have been written between the years 987 and 991. In 994, he was translated to Canterbury, where, after exerting himself for some years, with equal spirit and prudence, in defending his diocese against the incursions of the Danes, he died Nov. 16, 1005. He was buried at Abingdon, the place where he first embraced the profession of a monk, whence his remains were afterwards transferred to Canterbury, in the reign of Canute.

, an historian and rhetorician, born at Praeueste in Italy, about the year 160, taught rhetoric at Rome, according to Perizonius, under the emperor Alexander Severus. He was surnamed MEXryXaxro--, Honeytongue, on account of the sweetness of his style. He was likewise honoured with the title of sophist, an appellation in his days given only to men of learning and wisdom. He loved retirement, and devoted himself to study; and his works shew him to have been a man of excellent principles and strict integrity. He greatly admired and studied Plato, Aristotle, Isocrates, Plutarch, Homer, Anacreon, Archilochus, &c.; and, though a Roman, gives the preference to the writers of the Greek nation. His two most celebrated works are his “Various History,” and that “Of Animals.” He wrote also an invective against Heliogabalus, or, as some think, Domitian; but this is not certain, for he gives the tyrant, whom he lashes, the fictitious name of Gynnis. He composed likewise a book “Of Providence,” mentioned by Eustathius; and another on divine appearances, or the declarations of providence. Some ascribe to him also the work entitled “Tactica, or De re Militari;” but Perizonius is of opinion, that this piece belonged to another author of the same name, a native of Greece. There have been several editions of his “Varipus History.” The Greek text was published at Rome in 1545, by Camillas Peruscus. Justus Vulteius gave a Latin translation, which was printed separately in 1548; and joined to the Greek text in a new edition, by HenricusPetrus, at Basil, 1555. It contains likewise the works of several other authors, who have treated on such subjects as ^lian. John Tornaesius published three several editions at Lyons, in 1587, 1610, and 1625. All these were eclipsed by that of John Schefferus, in 1647 and 1662: he rectified the text in many places, and illustrated the whole with very learned notes and animadversions. Perizonius gave a new edition in two volumes, 8vo, at Leyden, 1701. He followed the translation of Vulteius, which he rectified in many places, together with the Greek text, illustrating the most intricate passages with learned notes. The nextand best edition of this work is that of Abraham Gronovius, who has given the Greek text and version of Vulteius, as corrected by Perizonius, together with the notes of Conrad Gessner, John Schefferus, Tanaquil Faber, Joachim Kuhnius, and Jac. Perizonius; to which he has added short notes of his own, and the fragments of Ælian, which Kuhnius collected from Snidas, Stobaeus, and Eustathius. His treatise on animals is in many respects a curious and important work, but, like that of Pliny, often disgraced with ridiculous and fabulous accounts.

, a Dutch painter, born at Delft in 1602, acquired a great reputation by his delicate manner of painting fruit, still life, and dead game. He was exact in copying every thing after nature, disposing them with elegance, and finishing his pictures with neatness, and transparency of colour. Whether he painted dead game, fruit, helmets with plumes of feathers, or vases of gold and silver, to each he gave a true and striking resemblance of nature, and an extraordinary lustre to the gold, silver, and steel. He died in 1658.

, or Ængus, an Irish abbot, or bishop, and historian, of the eighth century, called Hagiographus, from his having written the lives of the saints, descended from the kings of Ulster; and was reputed one of the Colidei, or Culdees, worshippers of God, on account of his great piety. The accounts we have of him are rather confused; but it appears that he took extraordinary pains in compiling ecclesiastical history and biography, under the names of martyrology, fastology, &c. Sir James Ware says, that his martyrology was extant in his time. Moreri gives an account of it, or of a different book under the title “De Sanctis Hiberniae,” which shews the vast labour? bestowed on it, or the fertility of his invention in bringing together such a mass of biographical legends. It consists of five books: The first comprehends three hundred and forty-five bishops, two hundred and ninety-nine priests or abbots, and seventy-eight deacons, all men of eminence for their piety. The second book, entitled the Book of homonomies, is a wonderful piece of labour, and comprehends all the saints who have borne the same name. The third and fourth gives an account of their families, particularly the maternal pedigree of two hundred and ten Irish saints. The fifth book contains litanies and invocations of saints, &c. He is said also to have written the history of the Old Testament in very elegant verse, and a psalter called Na-rann, which is a collection, in prose and verse, Latin and Irish, concerning the affairs of Ireland. He is thought to have died either in the year 819, 824, or 830.

, probably, according to Casaubon, a native of Stymphalus, an ancient city of the Peloponnesus, is one of the oldest authors on the art of war: he is supposed to have lived in the time of Aristotle, or about the year 361 B.'C.; and to have been emperor of Arcadia, and commander at the battle of Mantinea. Casaubon published his work, with a Latin translation, along with his edition of Polybius, fol. Paris, 1609. It was republished by Scriverius, Leyden, 1633, 12mo, with Vegetius and others on military affairs; and the Count de Beausobre published a French translation, with other pieces on the same subject, and a learned commentary, Paris, 1757, 2 vols. 4to.

, a fellow-labourer with Luther in promoting the Reformation, was born 1499, in the Marche of Brandenburgh. His family name was Huch, or Hsech, which he changed to Æpinus, a custom very common with the learned men of his time. He was originally a Franciscan friar, and entered that society when in England; but on his return to Germany he studied under Luther, whose religious principles he adopted, and propagated with zeal, first at Stralsund, and afterwards at Hamburgh, where, as pastor of the church of St. Peter, and ecclesiastical inspector, he obtained great influence. In 1547, when Charles V. endeavoured to obtrude the Interim on the Protestants, after he had defeated their forces, and after the death of Luther, he opposed this species of formulary, or confession of faith, so called because it was only to take place in the interim, until a general council should decide all the points in question between the Protestants and Catholics. It indeed satisfied neither party, and the Lutheran preachers refused to subscribe to it. Those who did subscribe got the name of adiaphorists, or indifferent or lukewarm persons, against whom Æpinus contended, both in the pulpit and press. He died May 13, 1553, leaving several works, of which Melchior Adam has given the subjects, but no notice of the dates, or proper titles. In learning, zeal, and intrepid spirit, he was equal to most of his contemporaries who opposed the church of Rome.

, an Arian presbyter, or monk, of the fourth century, had a contest with Eustathius for the bishoprick of Sebastia and Armenia; and being disappointed, endeavoured to lessen the power and dignity of the episcopal order, by maintaining that bishops were not distinguished from presbyters by any divine right, but that according to the institution of the New Testament, their offices and authority were absolutely the same.As about this time there were some bishops who had given offence by their arrogance, these opinions of Ærius became highly popular, and he was enabled to form a considerable sect, named Brians. He also condemned prayers for the dead, stated fasts, and the celebration of Easter; but whether these were constituent principles with his followers, does not appear. Both they and he, however, were opposed by the Arians; and by the church at large, excluded from churches and cities, and obliged to associate in private places and deserts, as long as they continued a party. It is perhaps unnecessary to add, that their opinion respecting the equality of bishops and presbyters has been since adopted by the modern presbyterians, and has been ably combated by writers in favour of the established church.

, or Aartgen, a painter of merit, was the son of a wool-comber, and born at Leyden in 1498. He worked at his father’s trade till he was eighteen, and then, having discovered a genius for designing, he was placed with Cornelius Engelhechtz, under whom he made a considerable progress in painting. He became so distinguished, that the celebrated Francis Floris went to Leyden, out of mere curiosity, to see him, and being. directed to a very mean apartment, when Aertgen was absent, he drew a St. Luke on the wall; which Aertgen had no sooner seen, than he exclaimed, that Floris only could have done it, and went immediately in search of him. Floris solicited him to go to Antwerp, promising him wealth and rank suitable to his merit; but Aertgen refused, declaring that he found more sweets in his poverty than others did in their riches. It was a custom with this painter never to work on Mondays, but to devote that day with his disciples to the bottle. He used to stroll about the streets in the night, playing on the German flute; and in one of those frolics he was drowned, in 1564.

, a Socratic philosopher, in the fourth century B. C. was an Athenian of mean birth, but discovered an early thirst after knowledge, and, though oppressed by poverty, devoted himself to the pursuit of wisdom, under the tuition of Socrates. When he first became his disciple, he told Socrates, that the only thing which it was in his power to present him, in acknowledgment of his kind instructions, was himself. Socrates replied, that he accepted and valued the present, but that he hoped to render it more valuable by culture. Æschines adhered to this master with unalterable fidelity and perseverance, and enjoyed his particular friendship. Having spent many years in Athens, without being able to rise above the poverty of his birth, he determined, after the example of Plato and others, to visit the court of Dionysius, the tyrant of Sicily, who at this time had the reputation of being a general patron of philosophers. On his arrival at Syracuse, though slighted on account of his poverty by Plato, he was introduced to the prince by Aristippus, and was liberally rewarded for his Socratic dialogues. He remained in Sicily till the expulsion of the tyrant, and then returned to Athens. Here, not daring to become a public rival of Plato or Aristippus, he taught philosophy in private, and received payment for his instructions. Afterwards, in order to provide himself with a more plentiful subsistence, he appeared as a public orator; and Demosthenes, probably because he was jealous of his abilities (for he excelled in eloquence), became his opponent. The time when he died is not known. He wrote seven Socratic dialogues, in the true spirit of his master, on temperance, moderation, humanity, integrity, and other virtues, under the titles, Miltiades, Callias, Rhinon, Aspasia, Alcis, Axiochus, and Telauges. Of these only three are extant, the best edition of which is by Le Clerc, Amsterdam, 1711, 8vo. There is another valuable edition, with the notes of Horneus, Leovard. 1788, 8vo.

, one of the most eminent tragic poets of ancient times, was born at Athens. Authors differ in regard to the time of his birth, some placing it in the 65th, others in the 70th olympiad; but according to Stanley, who relies on the Arundelian marbles, he was born in the 63d olympiad, or about 400 years B. C. He was the son of Euphorion, and brother to Cynegirus and Aminias, who distinguished themselves in the battle of Marathon, and the sea-fight of Salamis; at which engagement Æschylus was likewise present. In this last action, according to Diodorus Siculus, Aminias, the younger of the three brothers, commanded a squadron of ships, and behaved with so much conduct and bravery, that he sunk the admiral of the Persian fleet, and signalized himself above all the Athenians. To this brother our poet was, upon a particular occasion, obliged for saving his life. Ælian relates, that Æschylus, being charged by the Athenians with certain blasphemous expressions in some of his pieces, was accused of impiety, and condemned to be stoned to death. They were just going to put the sentence in execution, when Aminias, with a happy presence of mind, throwing aside his cloak, shewed his arm without a hand, which he had lost at the battle of Salamis, in defence of his country. This sight made such an impression on the judges, that, touched with the remembrance of his valour, and the friendship he shewed for his brother, they pardoned Æschylus. Our poet however resented the indignity of this prosecution, and resolved to leave a place where his life had been in danger. He became more determined in this resolution, when he found his pieces less pleasing to the Athenians than those of Sophocie’s, though a much younger writer. Simonides had likewise won the prize from him, in an elegy upon the battle of Marathon. Suidas having said that uÆschylus retired into Sicily, because the seats broke down during the representation of one of x his tragedies, some have taken this literally, without considering that in this sense such an accident did great honour to ^schylus; but, according to Joseph Scaliger, it was a phrase amongst the comedians; and he was said to break down the seats, whose piece could not stand, but fell to the ground. Some affirm, that Æschylus never sat down to compose but when he had drunk liberally. This perhaps was in allusion to his excessive imagination, which was apparent in an abrupt, impetuous, and energetic style. They who co.uld not relish the sublimer beauties of language, might perhaps have ascribed his rapid and desultory manner, rather to the fumes of wine than to the result of reason. He wrote a great number of tragedies, of which there are but seven remaining; viz. Prometheus, the Seven Champions before Thebes, the Persae, the Agamemnon, the Choephorae, the Eumenides, and the Suppliant Virgins; and in these it is evident, that if he was not the father, he was the great improver of the Grecian stage. In the time of Thespis there was no public theatre to act upon; the strollers drove about from place to place in a cart. Æschylus furnished his actors with masks, and dressed them suitably to their characters. He likewise introduced the buskin, to make them appear more like heroes; and the ancients give Æschyius the praise of having been the first who removed murders and shocking sights from the eyes of the spectators. He is said likewise to have lessened the number of the chorus; but perhaps this reformation was owing to an accident; in his Eumenides, the chorus, which consisted of fifty persons, appearing on the stage with frightful habits, had such an effect on the spectators, that the women with child miscarried, and the children fell into fits; which occasioned a law to be made to reduce the chorus to fifteen. Mr. Le Fevre has observed, that Æschylus never represented women in love, in his tragedies, which, he says, was not suited to his genius; but in representing a woman transported with fury, he was incomparable. Longinus says, that Æschylus has a noble boldness of expression; and that his imagination is lofty and heroic. It must be owned, however, that he affected pompous words, and that his sense is too often obscured by figures. But, notwithstanding these imperfections, this poet was held in great veneration by the Athenians, who made a public decree that his tragedies should be played after his death. When Æschylus retired to the court of Hiero king of Sicily, this prince was then building the city of Ætna, and our poet celebrated the new city by a tragedy of the same name. After having lived some years at Gela, we are told that he died of a fracture of his skull, caused by an eagle letting fall a tortoise on his head; and that this death is said to have been predicted by an oracle, which had foretold that he should die by somewhat from the heavens. He died, however, by whatever means, according to Mr. Stanley, in the 69th year of his age. He had the honour of a pompous funeral from the Sicilians, who buried him near the river Gela; and the tragedians of the country performedplays and theatrical exercises at his tomb; upon which was inscribed an epitaph, celebrating him only for his valour at the battle of Marathon.

, the fabulist. Of this man, the reputed author of many fables, it is very doubtful whether we are in possession of any authentic biography. The life by Planudes, a monk of the fourteenth century, is universally considered as a series of fictions; and the notices of him in writers of better authority, are not sufficiently consistent to form a narrative. The particulars usually given, however, are as follow. He was born at Amorium, a small town in Phrygia, in the beginning of the sixth century before the Christian aera, and was a slave to two philosophers, Xanthus and Idmon, the latter of whom gave him his liberty, on account of his good behaviour and pleasantry. The philosophers of Greece gained a name by their lofty sentences, clothed in lofty words; Æop assumed a more simple and familiar style, and became not less celeb rated. He taught virtue and ridiculed vice, by giving a language to animals and inanimate things; and composed those fables, which under the mask of allegory, and with all the interest of fable, convey the most useful lessons in morality. The fame of his wisdom spreading over Greece and the adjoining countries, Croesus, the king of Lydia, sent for him, and was his generous benefactor. There he found Solon, whom he soon equalled in favour, however different his mode of conducting himself. Solon preserved his austerity in the midst of a corrupt court, was a philosopher among courtiers, and often offended Croesus by obtruding his advice, who at last dismissed him. “Solon,” said Æsop, “let us not address kings, or let us say what is agreeable.” “By no means,” replied the philosopher, “let us either say nothing, or tell them what is profitable.” Æsop made frequent excursions from the court of Lydia into Greece. When Pisistratus assumed the chief power at Athens, Æsop, who witnessed the dissatisfaction of the people, repeated to them his fable of the frogs petitioning Jupiter for a king. He afterwards travelled through Persia and Egypt, everywhere inculcating morality by his fables. The kings of Babylon and Memphis received him with distinguished honour; and on his return to Lydia, Croesus sent him with a sum of money to Delphi, where he was to offer a magnificent sacrifice to the god of the place, and distribute a certain sum of money to each of the inhabitants. But being offended by the people, he offered his sacrifice, and sent the rest of the money to Sardis, representing the Delphians as unworthy of his master’s bounty. In revenge, they threw him from the top of a rock. All Greece was interested in his fate, and at Athens a statue was erected to his memory. Lurcher, in his notes on Herodotus, fixes his death in the 560th year before the Christian aera, under the reign of Pisistratus. Planudes, who, as already observed, wrote his life, represents him as exceedingly deformed in person, and defective in his speech, for which there seems no authority. It is to this monk, however, that we owe the first collection of Æsop’s Fables, such as we now have them, mixed with many by other writers, some older, and some more modern than the time of Æsop. He wrote in prose; and Socrates, when in prison, is said to have amused himself by turning some of them into verse. Plato, who banished Homer and the other poets from his republic, as the corruptors of mankind, retained Æsop as being their preceptor. Some are of opinion, that Lockman, so famous among the orientals, and Pilpay among the Indians, were one and the same with Æsop. Whatever may be in this, or in the many other conjectures and reports, to be found in the authorities cited below, the fables of Æsop may surely be considered as the best models of a species of instructive composition, that has been since attempted by certain men of learning and fancy in all nations, and particularly our own; nor will it be easy to invent a mode of arresting and engaging the attention of the young to moral truths, more pleasant or more successful. The best editions of Æsop are those of Plantin, Antwerp, 1565, 16mo; of Aldus, with other fabulists, Venice, 1505, fol. and Franckfort, 1610; that called Barlow’s, or “Æsopi Fabularum, cum Vita,” London, 1666, fol. in Latin, French, and English; the French and Latin by Rob. Codrington, with plates by Barlow, now very rare, as a great part of the edition was burnt in the fire of London; Hudson’s, published under the name of Marianus (a member of St. Mary Hall), Oxford, 1718, 8vo. They have been translated into all modern languages; and CroxalPs and Dodsley’s editions deserve praise, on account of the life of Æsop prefixed to each.

, a physician of Armicla, a town of Mesopotamia, lived about the end of the 5th or the beginning of the 6th century. The work for which he is now known is his­“Tetrabiblos,” a compilation from all the physicians who preceded him, particularly Galen, Archigenes, Dioscorides, &c. He describes also some new disorders, and throws out some opinions, not known before his time, respecting the diseases of the eye, and the use of outward applications. Partaking of the credulity of his time, he describes all the pretended specifics, charms, and amulets in vogue among the Egyptians, which forms a curious part of his writings. What he says on surgical topics is thought most valuable. The work, by the various transcribers, has been divided into four Tetrabiblons, and each into four discourses; and originally appears to have consisted of sixteen books. The first eight only were printed in Greek, at Venice, by the heirs of Aldus Manutius, 1534, fol. The others remain in manuscript in the libraries of Vienna and Paris. There have been many editions in Latin, of the translation of Janus Cornarius, under the title of “Contractse ex veteribus Medicinae Tetrabiblos,” Venice, 1543, 8vo; Basle, 1542, 1549, fol.; another at Basle, 1535, fol. translated by J. B. Montanus; two at Lyons, 1549, fol. and 1560, 4 vols. 12mo, with the notes of Hugo de Soleriis; and one at Paris, 1567, fol. among the “Medicae artis principes.” Dr. Freind has adverted to Mtius, in his history, more than to almost any ancient writer, but has not the same opinion of his surgical labours as is expressed above. Some writers have confounded this JEtius with the subject of the preceding article.

, a famous orator, born at Nismes, fifteen or sixteen years B. C. and flourished under Caligula, Claudius, and Nero. He was elected to the prsetorship; but, not being afterwards promoted according to his ambitious expectations, and desirous at any rate to advance himself, he turned informer against Claudia Pulchra, cousin of Agrippina, and pleaded himself in that affair. Having gained this cause, he was ranked amongst the first orators, and got into favour with Tiberius, who hated Agrippina: but this princess not thinking Domitius the author of this process, did not entertain the least resentment against him. The encomiums passed by the emperor on the eloquence of Domitius, made him now eagerly pursue the profession of an orator; so that he was seldom without some accusation or defence, by which he acquired a greater reputation for his eloquence than his probity. In the 779th year of Rome, he carried on an accusation against Claudia Pulchra; and the year following, Quintilius Varus her son was impeached by him and Publius Dolabella. It was not surprising that Afer, who had been poor for many years, and squandered the money got by former impeachments, should return to this practice; but it was matter of great surprise that one who was a relation of Varus, and of such an illustrious family as that of Publius Dolabella, should associate with this informer. Afer had a high reputation as an orator for a considerable time, but this he lost by continuing to plead when age had impaired the faculties of his mind.

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

, a Christian historian, was born at Nicopolis in Palestine, in the third century. He composed a chronology, to convince the heathens of the antiquity of the true religion, and the novelty of the fables of Paganism. This work was divided into five books, and is a sort of universal history, from the creation of Adam, to the reign of the emperor Macrinus. No more, however, is extant than what we find of it in the Chronicon of Eusebius. He wrote a letter to Origen concerning the history of Susannah, which he deemed to be spurious, and another to Aristides, to reconcile the genealogical tables of St. Matthew and St. Luke. It was in consequence of his entreaties, that the emperor Heliogabalus rebuilt the city of Nicopolis, which he founded on the spot where the village of Emmaus stood. A mathematical work, entitled “Cæstus,” has been attributed to him. The fragments which remain of this author were printed among the “Mathematici Veteres,” at Paris, in 1693, fol. and were translated into French by M. Guiscard, in his “Mernoires Militaires des Grecs et des Remains,” Paris, 1774, 3 vols. 8vo. It is supposed that the ancient part of the work of Julius Africanus, was an abridgment of the famous work of Manetho, an Egyptian priest, who flourished about 300 years before Christ. (See Manetho). A great part of Africanus’s Chronography is extant in Georg. Syncellus, edit. Paris, 1652, from whence, not being then published, it was borrowed by Scaliger in his edition of Eusebius’s Chronicon in Greek. Africanus is placed by Cave at the year 220, who likewise supposes that he died in an advanced age, about the year 232. But Dr. Lardner does not think that he was then in an advanced age, or died so soon. Of his character, he says, that we may glory in Africanus as a Christian. For it cannot but be a pleasure to observe, that in those early days there were some within the inclosure of the church of Christ, whose shining abilities rendered them the ornament of the age in which they lived; when they appear also to have been men of unspotted characters, and give evident proofs of honesty and integrity.

, a Spanish missionary of the 17th century, who lived under the reigns of Philip III. and Philip IV. was a barefooted Augustin, and celebrated for his apostolic zeal. These religious had a principal hand in the rapid, but for the most part short-lived, progress of the Catholic faith in Japan; and converted the populous nation of the Tagalians, or Tagaleze, Malayans by descent, who inhabited Lucon, one of the Philippine islands, and who remain Christians to this day. In 1640, Aganduru was appointed by his brethren, and with the authority of Philip IV. to go to Rome and offer to the pope, Urban VIII. the homage and obedience of these new converts. He wrote a “History of Conversions in Japan and the Philippine islands, with a detail of his religious embassy:” and a “General History of the Moluccas and the Philippines,” 2 vols. from the discovery of them, to the middle of the seventeenth century.

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

, a learned and industrious English antiquary, and one of the members of the first society of antiquaries, was the son of Clement Agard, of Foston (not Toston, as in the Biog. Brit.) in Derbyshire, by Eleanor, the daughter of Thomas Middleborough, of Egbaston in Warwickshire. He was born 1540, and originally studied law; but it does not appear that he was at either university. He afterwards became a clerk in the Exchequer office; and in 1570 was made deputy chamberlain of the Exchequer, which he held forty-five years. During this time, he had leisure and industry to accumulate large collections of matters pertaining to the antiquities of his country; and his rseal in these researches procured him the acquaintance of that eminent benefactor to English literature and antiquities, sir Robert Cotton, with whom he enjoyed the strictest friendship as long as he lived. Wood, in his Athenae, has made a strange mistake here in ascribing Agard’s proficiency in antiquary knowledge to Sir Robert, who was but just born the year Agard came into office. There can be no doubt, however, that they improved and assisted each other in their pursuits. Agard also could number the most eminent and learned men of the age among his friends and coadjutors. It was in his days, about 1572, that the society of antiquaries was formed by archbishop Parker; and among the names of its original members, we find Agard, Andrews, Bouchier, Camden, Carew, Cotton, Dodderidge, Ley, Spelman, Stow, Dethicke, Lambart, and others. In this society, Agard read these essays, which have since been published by Hearne, in his “Collection of Curious Discourses,” 1720 and 1775, 2. vols. Agard’s discourses are: 1. Opinion touching the antiquity, power, order, state, manner, persons, and proceedings of the high court of parliament in England. 2. On this question, Of what antiquity shires were in England In this essay various ancient manuscripts are cited; and Mr. Agard seems to think king Alfred was the author of this division: it was delivered before the society in Easter term, 33 Eliz. 1591. 3. On the dimensions of the lands in England. In this he settles the meaning of these words, solin, hida, carucata, jngum, virgata, ferlingata, ferlinges, from ancient manuscripts and authentic records in the exchequer. 4. The authority, office, and privileges of heraults [heralds] in England. He is of opinion, that this office is of the same antiquity with the institution of the garter. 5. Of the antiquity or privileges of the houses or inns of court, and of chancery. In this he observes, that in more ancient times, before the making of Magna Charta, our lawyers were of the clergy: that in the time of J^dward I. the law came to receive its proper form; and that in an old record, the exchequer was styled the mothercourt of all courts of record. He supposes that at this time lawyers began to have settled places of abode, but affirms he knew of no privileges. 6. Of the diversity of names of this island. In this we find that the first Saxons, residing in this island, came here under the command of ne Aelle and his three sons, in 43.5; and that the reason, why it was called England rather than Saxon land, was because the Angles, after this part of the island was totally suhdued, were more numerous than the Saxons. He likewise observes, that after this conquest, the name of Briton grew into distaste, and all valued themselves on being Englishmen. This was read, June 29, 1604, and is the last discourse of Agard in the collection. The society was dissolved soon after, and did not revive until the last century.

, a sculptor of Ephesus, the scholar or son of Dositheos. Mr. Fuseli observes, that the name of Agasias does not occur in ancient record; and whether he be the Egesias of Quintilian and Pliny, or these the same, cannot be ascertained; though the style qf sculpture, and the form of the letters in the inscription, are not much at variance with the character which the former gives to the age of Calon and Egesias. There are, therefore, no particulars of his life; but he is well known in the history of the arts, for his admired statue, usually called the Gladiator; formerly in the villa Borghese, and now in the museum at Paris. It was found, with the Apollo Belvidere, at Nettuno, formerly Antium, the birth-place of Nero; where he had collected a great number of the best works brought from Greece by his freed-man Acratus. The form of the letters on the inscription mark the high antiquity of this statue, which is less ideal than the Apollo, but not less admirable. Winkelman calls it an assemblage of the beauties of nature in a perfect age, without any addition from imagination. Fuseli terms it “A figure, whose tremendous energy embodies every element of motion, whilst its pathetic dignity of character enforces sympathy.” It is in perfect preservation, with exception of the right arm, which was restored by Algardi. It is now, however, agreed that it is not the statue of a Gladiator, but apparently one of a groupe. The attention and action of the figure is upwards to some higher object, as a person on horseback; and it is thought to be of a date prior to the introduction of the gladiatorial sports into Greece.

, an ancient painter, the son of Eudemus, was borti at Samos, and practised his art at Athens. He painted with great facility, and was distinguished for his skill in animals, ornaments, and decorations. Alcibiades employed him to decorate his magnificent house; and, according to Demosthenes (in his oration against Midias), while thus employed, he contrived to seduce the mistress of Alcibiades, who having discovered the intrigue, punished him no otherwise than by close imprisonment until he completed his work; and then dismissed him with many rich presents. Plutarch in his lives of Alcibiades and Pelopidas, speaks only of the imprisonment, which he imputes solely to Alcibiades’ impatience to have his house finished. From his connexion with Zeuxis and Alcibiades, it is probable that he lived about the ninety-fifth olympiad, or 400 years B. C.; but this does not accord with Vitruvius’s account, who informs us that Agatharcus was the first who painted scenes for the theatre; and wrote a treatise on the subject, under the direction of Æschylus, who died 480 B. C. This anachronism has given rise to the conjecture that there may have been two painters of the name.

, a Greek historian, who lived in the 6th century, under the emperor Justinian, was born at Myrina in Asia Minor. Some have concluded from Suidas, that he was an advocate at Smyrna; but Fabricius thinks that he was in general an advocate, or scholasticus, as he is called, from having studied the law in the schools appointed for that purpose. In his youth he was strongly inclined to poetry, and published some small pieces of the gay and amatory kind, under the title of “Daphniaca:” he tells us likewise, that he was author of a “Collection of epigrams” written by divers hands, a great part of which are presumed to be extant in the Greek Anthologia, where, however, he calls himself Agathius. These are also in Brunck’s Analecta. There have been doubts about his religion: Vossius and others have supposed him a pagan; and they have concluded this chiefly from a passage in the third book of his history; where, giving a reason why the fortress of Onogoris in Colchis was called, in his time, St. Stephen’s fort, he says, that this first Christian martyr was stoned there, but uses the word φασὶ, they say; as if he did not himself believe what he might think it necessary to relate. But this is by no means conclusive; and Fabricius supposes him, upon much better grounds, to have been a Christian, because he more than once gives very explicitly the preference to the doctrines of Christians: and in the first book he speaks plainly of the Christians as embracing the most reasonable system of opinions.

, or Agathon, a Greek poet, of Athens, and not of Samos as Gyraldi asserts, wrote several tragedies and comedies, of which only some fragments remain. Aristotle speaks of one, “The Flower,” with great praise. His first tragedy received the prize at the Olympic games. He was a man of expensive manners, and kept a magnificent table; at which the wits of his days used to assemble. Grotius has collected the fragments left of his dramas from Aristotle and Athenseus, in his collection of the fragments of Greek tragedies and comedies. He was the first who hazarded invented subjects. His comedies were written with elegance, but his tragedies abounded in antitheses and symmetrical ornaments. He lived about 735 B. C; but Barthelemi places him much earlier.

, or Agelas, an. eminent Greek sculptor, flourished in the eighty-seventh olympiade, or 432 B. C. according to Pliny and Pausanias. His statues were once well known and admired in Greece, particularly two, in brass, of an infant Jupiter, and a young Hercules, and the female captives.

, a native of Sorrento, in the kingdom of Naples, was celebrated in the sixteenth century for his general learning, and acquaintance with the learned languages, and for his writings on the Holy Scriptures. He was one of the inspectors of the Vatican press, where he bestowed great care in examining new editions by the best manuscripts. When he was promoted to the bishoprick of Acerno or Acerre, in the kingdom of Naples, in 1595, the learned Peter Morin complained of this transaction, in a letter addressed to cardinal Cajetan, as depriving the Vatican press of an editor of the first ability and accuracy; and begged that the cardinal would induce him, before he took possession of his bishopric, to instruct his successors in the library and press of the Vatican, and superintend such works as he had begun. What effect this had, we are not told; but he was employed by pope Gregory XIII. on the Greek edition of the Bible, Rome, 1587, fol. His original works consist of Commentaries: 1. On the “Psalms and Canticles,” fol. Rome, 1606; Cologne, 1607; and Paris, 1611. 2. “On the Lamentations,” compiled from, the Greek fathers, Rome, 1589; 4to. 3. “On the Proverbs of Solomon,” and, 4. “On the prophet Habakkuk,” Antwerp, 1697, 8vo. Le Long mentions other works of Agelius in manuscript; but his Commentary on the Psalms procured him most reputation, and has been frequently reprinted. He died at Acerno in 1608.

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

, a surveyor and engraver in the sixteenth century, whose original plates are now extremely rare. He first drew a plan of London, which, though referred to the time of Henry VIII. and Edward VI. appears from several circumstances to have been made early in Elizabeth’s reign, about 1560, on wood. It was republished in 1618, with alterations, in six sheets, cut in wood, and re-engraved by Vertue in 1748. The plates were bought by the Society of Antiquaries, and published in 1776. His next performances were plans of Oxford and Cambridge, about 1578. The former is the oldest plan of the city of Oxford extant. It was engraved at the expence of the university in 1728, with ancient views, on the borders, of the colleges and schools as they originally stood. This plate was unfortunately destroyed at the fire which consumed so much literary property belonging to Mr. Nichols, in 1808. The only other plan of Aggas’s workmanship, now known, is one of Dumvich in SulVolk, dated March, 1589, on vellum, and not engraved. Ames attributes to him a work entitled “A Preparative to platting of Landes and Tenements for suweigh, &c.” 1596. He is supposed to have been related to Edward Aggas, the son of Robert Aggas, of Stoke-nayland in Suffolk, who was a bookseller of some note from 1576 to 1594; and from one or ether probably descended Robert Aggas, or Angus, a landscape painter and scene painter, whose best work extant is a landscape now in Painter-stainers hall. He died in London, 1679, aged about sixty.

, archbishop of Ravenna in the ninth century, wrote the history of his predecessors in that see, in a bold style, and with little respect for the interests or character of the court of Rome, by which his grandfather or great-grandfather had been put to death. There are many curious facts in this collection of lives, but also several mistakes in dates. It was published by father Bacchini, in 1708, with notes, under the title “Agnelli qui et Andreas, abbatis S. Marias ad Blachernas, liber pontificalis, sive vituc Pontificum Ravennatum, &c.” 2-vols. 4to. Muratori reprinted it in his collection of Italian historians. Spreti, who wrote on the history of Ravenna, Vossius, and Moreri, have confounded Agnelli with, one of the same name who lived in the sixth century, and is supposed to have written a letter in the Bibliothec. Patrum, “De ratione Fidei ad Armenium.”

, 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.”

, of Valerano, an eminent musician, was born in 1593, and was the scholar of Bernardo Nanini, and successor to Soriano in the pontifical chapel. Antinio Liberati speaks of him as one of the most scientific and ingenious composers of his time, in every species of music then cultivated; and adds, that when he was master of the chapel of St. Peter’s church at Rome, he astonished the musical world with his productions for four, six, and eight choirs or choruses; some of which might be sung in four or six parts only, without diminishing or enervating the harmony. Father Martini, who bears testimony to the truth of this eulogium, has inserted an Agnus Dei, in eight parts, of this composer, which is truly a curious production, three different canons being carried on at the same time, in so clear and natural a manner, both as to melody and harmony, that this learned father, who had been long exercised in such arduous enterprizes, speaks of it as one of the greatest efforts of genius and learning in this most difficult kind of composition. Agostino died in 1629, in the prime of life.

, a Provencal gentleman and poet, of the twelfth century, died in 1181, leaving behind him the character of a man, learned, amiable, witty, and elegant in person and manners. He married Jausserande de Lunel, in praise of whom he wrote many verses, dedicated to Ildefonso, the first of the name, king of Arragon, prince of Provence, and count of Barcelona, in whose court he held the rank of first gentleman. He complained that in his time the passion of love was not properly understood, and therefore wrote a treatise or poem, entitled “La maniera d'Amar del temps passat.” In this he maintains, in a chain of reasoning, that no one can be happy unless he is a good man; that no one can be a good man unless he is in love; and that no man knows how to love who is not careful of his mistress’s honour. None of his writings have been published. The family of Agoult still exists in Dauphiny and Provence.

was born at the colony of Forum-Julii, or Frejus in Provence, A. D. 40, in the reign of Caligula. His father’s name was Julius Græcinus, a man of senatorian rank, and famous for his eloquence. He was put to death by Caligula for refusing to accuse Marcus Silanus. His mother’s name was Julia Procilla, a lady of exemplary virtue. He studied philosophy and civil law at Marseilles, as far as was suitable to his character as a Roman and a senator. His first service in war was under Suetonius Paulinus in Britain; and upon his return to Rome he married Domitia Decidiana, with whom he lived in the utmost harmony and tranquillity. He was chosen questor: in Asia at the same time that Salvius Titianus was pro-consul there; and he preserved his integrity, though that province was extremely rich, and Titianus, who was very avaricious, would have readily countenanced his extortions in order to screen his own. He was afterwards chosen tribune of the people, and then praetor, under the emperor Nero. In Vespasian’s time he was made legate to Vettius Bolanus in Britain, and upon his return was ranked among the patricians by that emperor, and afterwards appointed governor of Aquitania; which post he held for three years, and upon his return was chosen consul, and then governor of Britain, where he distinguished himself by his courage and conduct in several campaigns. He subdued the Ordovices, or people of North Wales, and the island Mona, or Anglesey; and then reformed the abuses occasioned by the avarice or carelessness of the former governors, putting a stop to all manner of extortions, and causing justice to be impartially administered.

Agricola wrote but few books. The first was “An explanation of three hundred German Proverbs;” and in a second edition he added another hundred. He wrote also “Commentaries upon St. Luke,” 8vo, and confuted the explication of the nineteenth Psalm, published in High Dutch, by Thomas Muncer. He was likewise concerned with Julius Pelugius, bishop of Naumburg, and Michael Sidonius, or Heldingus, by desire of the emperor Charles V. in drawing up a formulary, which might serve as a rule of faith and worship to the contending parties of Protestants and Papists, until a council should be summoned: this is well known in ecclesiastical history by the name of the Interim, and was opposed by many of the reformers.

, one of the most learned men of the fifteenth century, was born in 1442, in the village of Bafflon, or Bafteln, near Groningen, in Friseland. Melchior Adam says, his parents were of one of the most considerable families in Friseland; but Ubo Emmius, in his history of that country, represents him as of mean extraction; and Bayle, who appears to have examined the matter with his usual precision, inclines to the latter opinion. He was, however, sent to school, where he made an uncommon progress, and had scarcely taken his degree of M. A. at Louvain, when he was offered a professorship, which he did not accept, as it would have prevented his travelling for farther improvement, a course usually taken by the learned men of those times. He went from Louvain to Paris, and from thence to Italy, residing two years at Ferrara, where he learned Greek and taught Latin, and disputed in prose and verse with Guarinus and the Strozzas, and where the duke honoured him with particular attention. He read lectures likewise on philosophy in this city, and his auditors were so well pleased as to wish he had been an Italian. At his return to his own country, he had the offer of many considerable employments; and at last accepted of a post at Groningen, and attended the court of Maximilian I. for six months, upon the affairs of that city. After this, which the gratitude of his masters did not render a very profitable employment, he resumed his travels for many years, in the course of which he refused the presidentship of a college at Antwerp, and fixed at length in the Palatinate, influenced by the persuasions of the bishop of Worms, whom he had instructed in the Greek language. He came to reside here in 1482, and passed the rest of his life, sometimes at Heidelberg, and sometimes at Worms. The Elector Palatine was pleased to hear him discourse concerning antiquity, and desired him to compose an “Abridgement of Ancient History,” which he performed with great accuracy. He also read public lectures at Worms; but his auditors being more accustomed to the subleties of logic than to polite literature, he was not so popular as he deserved. About the fortieth year of his age, he began to study divinity; and having no hope to succeed in it without a knowledge of Hebrew, he applied himself to that language, in which he had made considerable pro-­gress, when he was seized with an illness, which put an end. to his life and labours, on the 28th of October, 1485. He died in a very devout manner, and was buried in the church of the minor friars at Heidelberg. He is thought to have inclined a little to the principles of the reformers. He was accomplished in music and poetry, although he used these talents only for his amusement. There are but two works of his extant: “De Inventione Dialectica,” printed at Louvain, 1516; and at Cologne in 1539, along with his “Abridgement of Ancient History,” under the title “R. Agricolffi lucubrationes,” 2 vols. 4to. Erasmus gives a very exalted character of his learning and abilities; and by some of his admirers he was compared to Virgil in verse, and to Politian in prose.

, a man of considerable learning, and even a great magician, according to report, in the 16th century, was born at Cologn, the 14th of September, 1486, of the noble family of Nettesheim. He was very early in the service of the emperor Maximilian: acted at first as his secretary; but afterwards took to the profession of arms, and served that emperor seven years in Italy, where he distinguished himself in several engagements, and received the honour of knighthood for his gallant behaviour. To his military honours he was desirous likewise to add those of the universities, and accordingly took the degrees of doctor of laws and physic. He was a man of an extensive genius, and well skilled in many parts of knowledge, and master of a variety of languages; but his insatiable curiosity, the freedom of his pen, and the inconstancy of his temper, involved him in so many vicissitudes, that his life became a series of adventures. He was continually changing his situation; always engaging himself in some difficulty or other; and, to complete his troubles, he drew upon himself the hatred of the ecclesiastics oy his writings. According to his letters, he was in France before the year 1507, in Spain in 1508, and at Dole in 1509. At this last place he read public lectures on the work of Reuchlin, “De Verbo mirifico,” which engaged him in a dispute with Catilinet, a Franciscan. These lectures, though they drew upon him the resentment of the monks, yet gained him general applause, and the counsellors of the parliament went themselves to hear them. In order to ingratiate himself into the favour of Margaret of Austria, governess of the Low Countries, he composed a treatise “On the excellence of Women;” but the persecution he met with from the monks prevented him from publishing it, and obliged him to go over to England, where he wrote a “Commentary upon St. Paul’s Epistles.” Upon his return to Cologn, he read public lectures upon those questions in divinity which are called Quodlibitales. He afterwards went to Italy, to join the army of the emperor Maximilian, and staid there till he was invited to Pisa by the cardinal de St. Croix.

In the year 1515 he read lectures upon Mercurius Trismegistus at Pavia. He left this city the same year, or the year following; but his departure was rather a flight than a retreat. By his second book of letters we find, that his friends endeavoured to procure him some honourable settlement at Grenoble, Geneva, Avignon, or Metz: he chose the last of these places; and in 1518 was employed as syndic, advocate, and counsellor for that city. The persecutions raised against him by the monks, because he had refuted a vulgar notion about St. Anne’s three husbands, and because he protected a countrywoman who was accused of witchcraft, obliged him to leave the city of Metz. The abuse which his friend Jacobus Faber Satulensis, or Jacques Faber d'Estaples, had received from the clergy of Metz, for affirming that St. Anne had but one husband, had raised his indignation, and incited him to maintain the same opinion. Agrippa retired to Cologn in the year 1520, leaving without regret a city, which those turbulent inquisitors had rendered hostile to all polite literature and real merit. He^eft his own country in 1521, and went to Geneva: here his income must have been inconsiderable, for he complains of not having enough to defray his expences to Chamber!, in order to solicit a pension from the duke of Savoy. In this, however, his hopes were disappointed; and in 1523 he removed to Fribourg in Switzerland. The year following he went to Lyons, and obtained a pension from Francis I. He was appointed physician to the king’s mother; but this was not much to his advantage; nor did he attend her at her departure from Lyons, in August 1525, when she went to conduct her daughter to the borders of Spain. He was left behind at Lyons, and was obliged to implore the assistance of his friends in order to obtain his salary; and before he received it, had the mortification of being informed that he was struck off the list. The cause of his disgrace was, that, having received orders from his mistress to examine by the rules of astrology, what success would attend the affairs of France, he too freely expressed his dislike that she should employ him in such idle curiosities, instead of things of consequence: at which she was highly offended; and became yet more irritated against him, when she understood that his astrological calculations promised new successes to the constable of Bourbon. Agrippa finding himself thus abandoned, gave way to the utmost rage and impetuosity of temper: he wrote several menacing letters, and threatened to publish some books, in which he would expose the secret history of those courtiers who had worked his ruin: nay, he proceeded so far as to say, that he would for the future account that princess, to whom he had been counsellor and physician, as a firuel and perfidious Jezebel.

Agrippa had been twice married. Speaking of his first wife, lib. II. ep. 19. “I have (says he), the greatest reason to return thanks to Almighty God, who has given me a wife after my own heart, a virgin of a noble family, well behaved, young, beautiful, and so conformable to my disposition, that we never have a harsh word with each other; and what completes my happiness is, that in whatever situation my affairs are, whether prosperous or adverse, she still continues the same, equally kind, affable, constant, sincere, and prudent, always easy, and mistress of herself.” This wife died in 1521. He married his second wife at Geneva, in 1522. The latter surpassed the former very much in fruitfulness; he had but one son by the former, whereas the latter was brought to bed thrice in two years, and a fourth time the year following. The third son by this marriage had the cardinal Lorrain for his godfather. She was delivered of her fifth son at Antwerp, in March 1529, and died there in August following. Some say that he married a third time, and that he divorced his last wife; but he mentions nothing thereof in his letters. Mr. Bayle saysj that Agrippa lived and died in the Romish communion; but Sextus Senensis asserts, that he was a Lutheran. Agrippa, in some passages of his letters, does indeed treat Luther with harsh epithets; however, in the 19th chapter of his Apology, he speaks in so favourable a manner of him, and with such contempt of his chief adversaries, that it is likely Sextus Senensis’s assertion was founded upon that passage. Bishop Burnet, in his History of the Reformation, speaks of Agrippa as if he had been an advocate for the divorce of Henry VIII. Mr. Bayle refutes this, and says that the ambassador of the emperor at London wrote to Agrippa, desiring him to support the interest of the queen: Agrippa replied, that he would readily engage, if the emperor would give him orders for that purpose; and declares that he detested the base compliance of those divines who approved of the divorce: and with regard to the Sorbonne, “I am not ignorant (says he), by what arts this affair was carried on in the Sorbonne at Paris, who by their rashness have given sanction to an example of such wickedness. When I consider it, I can scarce contain myself from exclaiming, in imitation of Perseus, Say, ye Sorbonnists, what has gold to do with divinity What piety and faith shall we imagine to be in their breasts, whose consciences are more venal than sincere, and who have sold their judgments and decisions, which ought to be revered by all the Christian world, and have now sullied the reputation they had established for faith and sincerity, by infamous avarice.” Agrippa was accused of having been a magician and sorcerer, and in. compact with the devil; but it is unnecessary to clear him, from this imputation. Bayle justly says, that if he was a conjuror, his art availed him little, as he was often in want of bread.

, a French statesman of great worth and talents, was born at Limoges, Nov. 7, 1668, the son of Henry d'Aguesseau, then intendant of the Limoisin, and afterwards counsellor of state. The family was distinguished for having produced many able magistrates, among whom was Anthony, the grandfather of the chancellor, who was first president of the parliament of Bourdeaux. Henry-Francis, the subject of the present article, was educated under his father in every species of knowledge which promised to qualify him for the office of magistrate. After being admitted, in 1690, an advocate, he became, a few months after, advocate-general of the parliament of Paris, at the age of only twenty-two years. The king, in appointing one so young to an office of very great consequence, was guided solely by the recommendation of his father. “I know him,” said his majesty, “to be incapable of deceiving me, even in the case of his own son;” and the young advocate completely justified the confidence reposed in him. The celebrated Denis Talon, who had obtained great reputation in the same office, declared that he should have been willing to conclude his career as that young man had begun his. After having performed the functions of his office with reputation equal to his commencement, he became procurator-general; and the nature of his new office furnished him with occasion to display new talents in the public service. In particular, he introduced a complete system of reformation in the management of the hospitals, by which abuses were prevented or corrected; and he restored order and discipline in the tribunals, by which the criminal code was greatly improved. In questions respecting estates, he discovered much acuteness and knowledge of antiquities.

, a very learned man of the 17th century, was born at Logrogno, a city of Spain, March 24, 1630, and took the degree of D. D. in the university of Salamanca in 1668, and read lectures in that faculty for many years. He was censor and secretary of the supreme council of the inquisition in Spain, chief interpreter of the scriptures in the university of Salamanca, and had been more than once abbot of the college of St. Vincent, when he was honoured with a cardinal’s hat by Innocent XI. in 1686. He died at Rome Aug. 19, 1699. His life was very exemplary; and the dignity to which he was raised was so far from making any change in him, that he shewed an instance very uncommon, by retracting in an express piece the doctrine of probability, which he had before maintained, as soon as he found it was inconsistent with the purity of the Christian morality. His first work was entitled “Ludi Salmanticenses sive Theologia Florulenta,” printed in 1668, fol. These are dissertations which he wrote, according to the custom of the university of Salamanca, before he received his degree of D. D. there; an-d there are some things in them to which he objected in his more mature years. In 1671 he published three volumes in folio upon philosophy, and in 1673 “A commentary upon Aristotle’s ten books of Ethics.” In 1677 he published “A treatise upon Virtues and Vices, or Disputations on Aristotle’s Moral Philosophy.” He then appfied himself to the study of St. Anselm’s works, upon whose principles in divinity he published “The Theology of St. Anselm,” 3 vols. fol. 1690. In 1683 he published a large work against the declaration of the assembly of the French clergy made in 1682, concerning the ecclesiastical and civil power, under the title of “A defence of the see of St. Peter.” The work for which he is chiefly celebrated is his “Collection of the Councils of Spain” with an introductory history. This was published in 1693-4, in 4 vols. fol.; and in 1753 in 6 vols. fol. He published a Prodromus of this work in 1686, 8vo. It is variously spoken of; Du Pin is inclined to depreciate its merit. Abstracts from it may be seen in the Acta Eruditorum of Leipsic, far the month of February, 1688, and some farther particulars in the General Dictionary.

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

, or Abou Amrou, a native of Djaen, was the first Spanish Arab who composed small epic poems in the style of the orientals. The fragments which Dobi has preserved in his Bibl. Arab. EspagnoL. prove that he excelled in that high species of poetry. He also left a historical work on “the Annals of Spain.” He died of the gout, brought on by intemperance, in the year 970.

, bishop of Lindisfarne, or Holy island, in the 7th century, was originally a monk in the monastery of Iona, one of the islands called Hebrides. In the year 634, he came into England, at the request of Oswald king of Northumberland, to instruct that prince’s subjects in the knowledge of the Christian religion. At his first coming to Oswald’s court, he prevailed upon the king to remove the episcopal see from York, where it had been settled by Gregory the great, to Lindisfarne, or Holy island; a peninsula joined to the coast of Northumberland by a very narrow neck of land, and called Holy island from its being inhabited chiefly by monks; the beautiful ruins of its monastery are still extant. In this place Aidan was very successful in his preaching, in which he was not a little assisted by the pious zeal of the king; who, having lived a considerable time in Scotland, and acquired a sufficient knowledge of the language, was himself Aidan’s interpreter 9 and explained his discourses to the nobility, and the rest of his court. After the death of Oswald, who was killed in battle, Aidan continued to govern the church of Northumberland, under his successors Oswin and Oswi, who reigned jointly; the former in the province of Deira, the latter in that of Bernicia; but having foretold the untimely death of Oswin, he was so afflicted for his loss, that he survived him hut twelve days, and died in August 6^1, after having sat sixteen years. Bede gives him an extraordinary character; but at the same time takes notice that he was not altogether orthodox in keeping of Easter, in which he followed the custom of the Scots, Picts, and Britons. The same historian ascribes three miracles to bishop Aidan; two of them performed in his lifetime, and the other after his death. He was buried in his church of Lindisfarne; and part of his relics were carried into Scotlaud by his successor Colman in 664.

With respect to the miracles ascribed to Aidan, they will not now bear a serious discussion. It is said that he prescribed oil to calm a turbulent sea; and Dr. Kippis, in the new edition of the Biographia Britannica, supposes from this that the good bishop might have some acquaintance with the property (lately brought to light by Dr. Franklin) which oil has of stilling waves. But in the bishop’s case, we must have a miracle or nothing; for the quantity he prescribed was contained in a phial, which could not have calmed the sea; and Dr. Franklin’s discovery has never been of the smallest use in any respect. Of the excellence of his character, as an ecclesiastic, much may be believed. His speech to a priest who employed harsh measures in converting the English, is a great proof of his good sense. “Your want of success, brother,” said he, “seems to me to be owing to your want of condescension to the weakness of your unlearned hearers; whom, according to the apostolic rule, you should first have fed with the milk of a milder and less rigid doctrine, till, being nourished by degrees with the word of God, they were become capable of relishing the more perfect and sublime precepts of the Gospel.” The reason he gave for foretelling Oswin’s death is also very striking. “I forsaw that Oswin’s life was but short; for in my life, I never saw so humble a prince before. His temper is too heavenly to dwell long among us; and indeed the nation does not deserve the blessing of snch a governor.”

, two brothers, whose history cannot be separated, as they were connected in all their pursuits, and shared alike in their success. They were born at Vire, in Normandy, about the middle of the sixteenth century; and were among the number of those who were encouraged bj the patronage of Francis I. to cultivate polite learning. After having studied law and medicine for some time at Paris and Poitiers, they retired to Normandy, and dedicated themselves to poetry only. Long and painful sickness, however, interrupted their joint labours, and shortened both their lives. Robert died at the age of fortynine, and Anthony two or three years after. Their reputation rests principally on their translations of Virgil and Horace into French verse. The former, which is most praised by French critics, was published in 1582, 4to; and reprinted the following year in 8vo, with the Latin; and a translation of the More turn and some other pieces attributed to Virgil. In their translation of Horace, which appeared in 1588, they failed totally in conveying the spirit, grace, and elegance of the favourite of Maecenas. There is also some original poetry of theirs at the conclusion of a collection of verses in their praise, published by their countryman, Pierre Lucas Salliere, under the title of “Le Tombeau de Robert et Antoine le chevalier, freres, sieurs d'Aigneaux,” Caen, 12 mo, 1591.

, a French antiquary, and canon of the cathedral of Montpelier, lived in the middle of the eighteenth century; but we have no particulars of his birth or death. The family of Aigrefeuille in Languedoc, has produced many distinguished ecclesiastics and magistrates. Our author published “Histoire de la ville de Montpellier, depuis son origine,” 1737, foL a valuable work, although little known except in the place it describes; and a second volume also in fol. “Histoire Ecclesiastique de Montpellier,” 1739; in which are contained, accounts of the bishops, the history of the churches, monasteries, hospitals, colleges, and university.

, or Alliacus, an eminent Romish ecclesiastic, and cardinal, was born at Compiegnein 1350, of an obscure family. He eame very young to study at P.aris, and was admitted into the college of Navarre in 1372. From this time he began to distinguish himself by his writings in philosophy, in which he fol lowed the principles of Occham, and the Nominalists; and his reputation made him be chosen to assist at the synod of Amiens, in which he made a, discourse to the priest, although he was then only a subdeacon. He received the doctor’s degree at Paris, April 11, 1380, and next year he made a discourse in the presence of the duke of Anjou, in the name of the university, to show that it was necessary to assemble a general council in order to put an end to schism. That same year he was made canon of Noyon, and continued there to the year 1384, when he was recalled to Paris, to be superior of the college of Navarre. Here he taught divinity, and acquired increased reputation by his lectures and sermons. From his school came Gerson, Clemangis, and Giles D‘Eschamps, the most famous divines of that time. The university of Paris could not find any person more capable of maintaining her cause against Monteson, at pope Clement VIL’s tribunal, than this learned doctor. She accordingly deputed him to Avignon, where he pleaded the cause of the university with so much force, that the pope and cardinals confirmed the judgment passed by that seminary. Having returned from this mission, he was honoured, in 1389, with three considerable dignities, that of chancellor of the church and university, and almoner and confessor to king Charles VI. In 1394 he was appointed treasurer of the holy chapel at Paris, and was sent by the king to Benedict XIII. to treat with him about the peace of the church. He was afterwards successively elected to two bishoprics: that of Puy, in Velay, in 1395, and that of Cam bray next year. He took possession of the latter, and laid down his charge of chancellor of the university in favour of John Gerson. After this he employed his time in extinguishing schism, as it was called, and assisted at the council of Pisa. At length pope John XXIII. made him cardinal of Chrysogonus in 1411. He assisted in that quality at the general council of Constance, and was one of those who took the greatest share in its transactions, and composed several sermons upon subjects handled there. He then returned to Cambray, where he died in 1425. He wrote many works, some of which were published after the invention of printing; as his “Commentaries on the Master of Sentences,” which are inserted in the appendix to the “Fasciculus rertim expetendarum,” 1490; a volume “of Tracts and Sermons,” about the same time. He wrote also on Astrology, in which he was a believer. His principal works, however, confirm the opinion which the Roman Catholic writers give of his learning and talents; and learning so extraordinary is to be venerated in an age of comparative darkness: but it is a great deduction from, his character that, although he possessed superior understanding and liberality to many of his contemporaries, and even is supposed to have leaned a little towards freedom of opinion, he was an implacable persecutor of schism, that is, the first beginnings of the Reformation; and was a principal agent in bringing John Huss to the stake, and in disturbing the ashes of Wickliffe.

, Ethelred, Ælred, or Ealred, abbot of Revesby in Lincolnshire in the reigns of king Stephen and king Henry II. was born of nobie parents, in 1109, and educated in Scotland, together with Henry, son of David, king of Scots. Upon his return into England, he took the habit in the Cistertian monastery of Revesby, where his extraordinary piety and learning soon raised him to the dignity of abbot. Leland says he outshone his brethren as the sun eclipses the brightness of the inferior luminaries: and endeared himself no less to the great men of the kingdom than to the monks of his own house. His great love of retirement, and a life of contemplation and study, induced him to decline all offers of ecclesiastical preferment, and even to refuse a bishopric. He was particularly attached to St. Austin’s works, especially his “Confessions;” and was a strict imitator of St. Bernard in his writings, words, and actions. He left behind him several monuments of his learning; in the composition of which he was assisted by Walter Daniel, a monk of the same convent. This abbot died January 12, 1166, aged fifty-seven years, and was buried in the monastery of Revesby, under a tomb adorned with gold and silver; and, we are told, he was canonized on account of some miracles said to have been wrought by him after his death.

, an eminent English nonconformist divine, who flourished in the latter end of the sixteenth, and beginning of the seventeenth centary, but it is not known when or where he was born. In 1590 he joined the Brownists, and by his adherence to that sect shared in their persecutions. He was well versed in the Hebrew language, and wrote many excellent commentaries on the holy scriptures which gained him great reputation. The Brownists having fallen into great discredit in England, they were involved in many fresh troubles and difficulties; so that Ainsworth at length quitted his country, and fled to Holland, whither most of the nonconformists, who had incurred the displeasure of queen Elizabeth’s government, had taken refuge. At Amsterdam Mr. Johnson and he erected a church, of which Ainsworth was the minister. In conjunction with Johnson he published, in 1602, “A confession of faith of the people called Brownists;” but being men of violent spirits, they split into parties about certain points of discipline, and Johnson excommunicated his own father and brother: the presbytery of Amsterdam offered their mediation, but he refused it. This divided the congregation, half of which joining Ainsworth, they excommunicated Johnson, who made the like return to that party. The contest grew at length so violent, that Johnson and his followers removed to Embden, where he died soon after, and his congregation dissolved. Nor did Mr. Ainsworth and his adherents live long in harmony, for in a short time he left them, and retired to Ireland; but when the heat and violence of his party subsided, he returned to Amsterdam, and continued with them until his death. Dr. Heylyn’s account of their contentions at Amsterdam, sufficiently shows what implicit obedience some men expect who are not much inclined to pay it, either to the church or the state.

Ainsworth’s learned writings, however, were esteemed even by his adversaries, who, while they refuted his extravagant tenets, yet paid a proper deference to his abilities; particularly Dr. Hall, bisbop of Exeter, who wrote with great strength of argument against the Brownists. But nothing could have effect upon him, or make him return home so he died in exile. His death was sudden, and not without suspicion of violence for it is reported, that having found a diamond of great value, he advertised it; and when the owner, who was a Jew, came to demand it, he offered him any gratuity he would desire. Ainsworth, though poor, requested only of the Jew, that he would procure him a conference with some of his rabbis, upon the prophecies of the Old Testament relating to the Messiah, which the Jew promised; but not having interest to obtain such a conference, it was thought that he contrived to get Ainsworth poisoned. This is said to have happened in 1622. He was undoubtedly a person of profound learning, and deeply read in the works of the rabbis. He had a strong understanding, quick penetration, and wonderful diligence.

Be wise and meditate thy end.” Of his private life, little else is known, except that in 1721 or 1724, he was elected a fellow of the society of Antiquaries; and honourable notice is taken of him in the history of the society prefixed to the first volume of the Archæologia. He published, 1. “Monumenta Vetustatis Kempiana, &c.” 1720, 8vo. The greatest part of this collection was originally made by Mr. John Gailhard, who had been governor to George, first lord Carteret, and sold to his lordship for an annuity of 200l. After lord Carteret’s death in 1695, Mr. John Kemp bought a considerable part of the collection duriug the minority of John lord Carteret, afterwards earl Granville, and more after his death. Some years after Kemp’s death, the collection was sold by auction. 2. “Irtiov, sive ex veteris monumenti Isiaci descriptione Isidis Delubrum reseratum,” 1729, 4to. 3. “De Clypeo Carnilli antique,” 1734, which had before appeared at the end of “Museum Woodwardianum,” the latter part of which was drawn up by Ainsworth, though Dr. Woodward himself had described most of the statues, tables, and vases, and written large notes upon most of them. But the work which has contributed most to Mr. Ainsworth’s name is his well-known Latin Dictionary. About the year 1714, it having been suggested to some principal booksellers, that a new compendious English and Latin Dictionary, upon a plan somewhat similar to Faber’s Thesaurus, was much wanted, Mr. Ainsworth was considered as a proper person to execute what proved to be a long and troublesome undertaking: and how well he completed it has been sufficiently shewn by the approbation bestowed on it by a succession of the ablest teachers and scholars. The first edition appeared in 1736, 4to, in which Dr. Patrick appears to have assisted Ainsworth; and the second edition in 1746 was entirely entrusted to Patrick’s care, who introduced many additions and improvements. Dr. Ward also contributed to this edition. The third edition irt 1751 was superintended by Mr.Kimber, but with little or no variation. In 1752 another appeared, greatly improved by Mr. William Young (the parson Adams of Fielding), and an editor far superior to either of the preceding. An abridgment in 2 vols. 8vo, 1758, by Mr. Nathanael Thomas, is chiefly valuable for the clearness of the print, and the facility of reference. In 1773, Dr. Morell corrected, for the third time, the quarto edition, and continued to improve it as far as the edition of 1780; the last edition of 1808 was revised by a gentleman, whose name we are not at liberty to mention, amply qualified for the task. By a curious list of the sums given to the various editors of this work, published by Mr. Nichols, we learn that Ainsworth received for the first edition, 66 6l. 17s. 6d., and-for what he had contributed to the second, his executors were paid 2501.

Mr. Watson, in his history of Halifax, notices a William Ainsworth, curate of Lightcliffe, and some time lecturer of St. Peter’s, Chester, who, in 1650 published “Triplex memoriale, or the Substance of three commemoration Sermons, preached at Halifax in remembrance of Mr. Nathanael Wattehouse deceased.” This gentleman taught school in aid of his maintenance, which appears to have been very scanty, but whether related to our Lexicographer, cannot now be ascertained.

, provost of Queen’s college, Oxford, was born in Westmoreland in 1559, educated in grammatical learning under the care of Bernard Gilpin, usually called the Northern Apostle, and by him sent to St. Edmund’s hall, Oxford, in 1579. He was then 19 years of age, and was maintained at the university by Gilpin, who afterwards left him a handsome legacy by his last will. Mr. Airay soon removed from St. Edmund’s hall to Queen’s college, and in 1583, took his bachelor’s degree, was made tabarder, and in 1586 he commenced master of arts and was chosen fellow. About this time he went into orders, and became a constant preacher in the university, particularly in the church of St. Peter in the east. In 1594, he took the degree of B. D. and March 9, 1598-9, was elected provost of his college; and in 1606 he was appointed vice-chancellor. He wrote the following pieces: 1. “Lectures upon the whole Epistle of St. Paul to the Philippians,” London, 1618, 4to. 2. “The just and necessary Apology touching his Suit in Law, for the Rector of Charlton on Otmore, in Oxfordshire,” London, 1621, 8vo. 3. “A Treatise against bowing at the Name of Jesus.” The lectures were preached in the church of St. Peter in the east, and were published by Christopher Potter, fellow, and afterwards provost of Queen’s college, with an epistle of his own composition prefixed to them. Airay ranks among the zealous Puritans, who were mostly Calvinists, and was a great supporter of his party in the university, where he was considered as a man of sincere piety, integrity, and learning. In 1602 when Dr. Howson, then vice-chancellor, wished to repress the practice of some Puritan divines of Oxford who preached against the ceremonies and discipline of the church, Dr. Airay and one or two otherlj were ordered to make submission by the queen’s commissioners who had investigated the matter; and this the others did, but Dr. Airay, according to Ant. Wood, appears to have been excused. In 1604, when king James, in commemoration of his escape from the Gowrie conspiracy, not only appointed an anniversary, but that there should always be a sermon and service on Tuesdays throughout the year, Dr. Airay introduced this last custom into Oxford, first at All Saints church, and then at St. Mary’s, with a rule that the sermons should be preached by the divines of the colleges in their respective turns. In 1606, when vice-chancellor, he was one of the first to call Mr. Laud, afterwards the celebrated archbishop, to task for preaching sentiments which were supposed to favour popery. He died in Queen’s college, Oct. 10, 1616, aged fiftyseven, and was buried in the chapel. He bequeathed to the college some lands lying in Garsington, near Oxford.

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

, a gentleman of Frizeland, was born at Doccum in 1600, of a considerable family. His father, Menard Aitzema, was burgomaster and secretary to the admiralty, and his uncle Foppius was resident for the states-general at Hamburgh, and often employed in negociations of the first importance. Leo had scarcely reached his sixteenth year, before he published his Poemuta Juvenilia, but was soon engaged in more serious studies, his uncle having procured him to be appointed counsellor of the Hanse towns, and their resident at the Hague. He is likewise said to have been twice in England on public affairs. The work for which he is best known is a compilation on the history of the United Provinces, written in Dutch, under the title of “Zaken van Staat en Oorlog.” Of this there have been two editions, the first in 16 vols. 4to, 1657 1671, including the period between 1621 and 1668. The second edition is in 7 vols. fol. 1669 1671, with an account of the peace of Munster, and a treatise entitled the “Lion restored,” or an account of Dutch affairs in 1650 and 1651, which had been separately published in 1652, 4to. The first edition is most esteemed by collectors of history, as in the second there were several omissions, although not of great importance; on the other hand this second is more correct, and the articles better arranged. It consists of an immense collection of original acts, instructions, memorials, letters, correspondence of crowned heads, &c. taken from the most authentic and often most secret sources. He is said to have employed much address in procuring the documents which he wanted. His connection with men in office gave him considerable advantages, but he often used means not quite so ingenuous and delicate. The Dutch reproach him with having divulged their secret correspondence with foreign courts, and particularly with England, and he is also accused of irreligious principles. Wicquefort, in his Ambassador, speaks slightingly of the original part of this great work, in which Bayle says he cannot agree with him. Voluminous, however, as it is, and in many parts uninteresting, it throws great light on the history of the times, and from it the “Histoire des Provinces Unies,” 8 vols. 4to, Paris, 1757 1771, is principally taken. A continuation of it, extending to the year 1697, was published by Lambert Bos, 4 vols. fol. Aitzema died in 1669 at the Hague, his usual residence.

, professor of medicine in the university of Paris, and created doctor in 1526, was a native of Chalons in Champagne, and according to the custom of the time, changed his name from “SansMalicc” or Harmless, to that of Akakia, a Greek word of the same import. He translated Galen “De rat ion e Curandi,” and “Ar Medica quae est ars parva.” He also published “Consilia Medica,” and two volumes on Female Diseases. He was a man of high reputation in his time, physician to Francis I. and one of the principal deputies from the university to the council of Trent, in 1545. He died in 1541.

As a physician, he commenced practice at Northampton soon after his return from Leyden. But not finding the success which he expected, or being desirous of moving in a more extensive sphere, he removed to Hampstead, where he resided more than two years, and then settled in London. That he might be enabled to support the figure which was necessary for his introduction to practice in town, his generous friend Mr. Dyson allowed him 300l. a year. Whether any bond or acknowledgment was taken is uncertain; but it is known that after his death Mr. Dyson possessed his effects, particularly his books and prints, of which he was an assiduous collector.

, a famous Rabbin, who flourished a little after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, was a Jew only by the mother’s side, and it is pretended that his father was descended from Sisera, general of the army of Jabin king of Tyre. Akiba, for the first forty years of his life, kept the flocks of Calba Schwa, a rich citizen of Jerusalem, whose daughter is said to have induced him to study in hopes of gaining her hand, if he should make any considerable progress. He applied himself accordingly to his studies with so much assiduity and success, for upwards of twenty years, that he was considered as one of the most able teachers in Israel, and was followed by a prodigious number of scholars. He declared himself for the impostor Barchochebas, and asserted that he was the true Messiah; but the troops which the emperor Hadrian sent against the Jews, who under the conduct of this false Messiah had committed horrid massacres, exterminated this faction, and Akiba was taken and put to death with great cruelty. He lived an hundred and twenty years, and was buried with his wife in a cave upon a mountain not far from Tiberias. The Jewish writers enlarge much upon his praises, and his sayings are often mentioned in the Mishnu and Talmud. When he died, they say, the glory of the law vanished away. This happened in the year 135. He was in truth a gross impostor, and the accounts handed down to us of him are entitled to very little credit. He is said to have forged a work under the name of the patriarch Abraham, entitled “Sepher Jezirah,” or, “The Book of the Creation,” which was translated into Latin by Postel, and published at Paris in 1552, 8vo, at Mantua in 4to, and at Basil in folio, 1587. Some charge him also with having altered the Hebrew text of the Bible, in order to contend with the Christians on certain points of chronology.

, an English divine, was born in Suffolk, and educated in Trinity college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of M. A. and was afterwards incorporated of the university of Oxford, June 7, 1592. Wood says, he was the rarest poet and Grecian that any one age or nation produced. He attended the unfortunate earl of Essex in his voyage to Cadiz, as his chaplain; and entertaining some doubts on religion, he was prevailed upon to declare himself a Roman Catholic, and published “Seven Motives for his Conversion,” but he soon discovered many more for returning to the church of England. He applied himself much to caballistic learning, the students of which consider principally the combination of particular words, letters, and numbers, and by this, they pretend to see clearly into the sense of scripture. In their opinion there is not a word, letter, number, or accent, in the law, without some mystery in it, and they even venture to look into futurity by this study. Alabaster made great proficiency in it, and obtained considerable promotion in the church. He was made prebendary of St. Paul', doctor of divinity, and rector of Thai-field in Hertfordshire. The text of the sermon which he preached for his doctor’s degree, was the first verse of the first chapter of the first book of Chronicles, namely “Adam, Seth, Enoch,” which he explained in the mystical sense, Adam signtfying misery, &c. He died April 1640. His principal work was “Lexicon Pentaglotton, Hebraicum, Chaldaicum, Syriacum, &c.” Lond. 1637, fol. He published also, in 1621, “Commentarius de bestia Apocalyptica,” and other works of that stamp. As a poet he has been more highly applauded. He wrote the Latin tragedy of “Roxana,” which bears date 1632, and was acted, according to the custom of the times, in Trinity college hall, Cambridge. “If,” says Dr. Johnson, in his life of Milton, “we produced any thing worthy of notice before the elegies of Milton, it was perhaps Alabaster’s Roxana.” He also began to describe, in a Latin poem entitled “Elisceis,” the chief transactions Of queen Elizabeth’s reign, but left it unfinished at the time of his death. The manuscript was for some time in the possession of Theodore Haak, and some manuscript verses of his are in the library of Gonvil and Caius college, Cambridge, and the Elisceis is in that of Emmanuel.

On the marriage of Henry duke of Orleans, afterwards Henry II. with Catherine de Medici, Alamanni was appointed her maitre d'hotel; and the reward of his services enabled him to secure to himself great emoluments, and to establish his family in an honourable situation in France, where he died at Amboise, of a dysentery, April 18, 1556, His principal works are, 1. “Opere Toscane,” a collection of poems on different subjects, and “Antigone,” a tragedy, Lyons, 1532 and 1533, 8vo, 2 vols.; Florence, vol. I. 1532; Venice, 2 vols. 1533—1542. Notwithstanding thesa frequent editions, they were prohibited in the pontificate of Clement VII. both at Florence and Rome, in the latter of which places they were publicly burnt. 2. “La Coltiva­?ione,” Paris, 1546, a beautiful edition corrected by the author and dedicated to Francis I. again reprinted the same year at Florence; and frequently reprinted, particularly a correct and fine edition, in large 4to, by Comino, at Padua, 1718, with the Api of Rucellai, and the epigrams of Alamanni; and at Bologne in 1746. This work, which Alamanni completed in six books, and which he appears to have undertaken rather in competition with, than in imitation of, the Georgics, is written not only with great elegance and correctness of style, but with a very extensive knowledge of the subject on which he professes to treat, and contains many passages which may bear a comparison with the most celebrated parts of his immortal predecessor. 3. “Girone il Cortese,” an heroic poem in 24 cantos, Paris, 1548, 4to; Venice, 1549. This work is little more than a transposition into the Italian ottava rima, of a French romance entitled Gyron Courtois, which Alamanni undertook at the request of Francis I. a short time before the death of that monarch, as appears from the information of the author himself in his dedication to Henry II. in which he has described the origin and laws of the British knights errant, or knights of the round table. 4. “La Avarchide,” or the siege of Bourges, the Avaricum of Caesar, an epic, also in 24 cantos, Florence, 1170, 4to. The plan and conduct of it is so closely founded on that of the Iliad, that if we except only the alteration of the names, it appears rather to be a translation than an original work. Neither of these have contributed much to the author’s fame, which rests chiefly on “La Coltivazione.” 5. “Flora,” a comedy in five acts, and in that verse which the Italians call Saruccioli, Florence, 1556 and 1601, 8vo.

, cardinal priest of the Roman church, and styled Cardinal of England, was the son of John Allen, by Jennet Lyster, sister to Thomas Lyster, of Westby, in Yorkshire, and was born at Rossal in Lancashire, in 1532. His father, according to Camden, was a gentleman of a reputable family, and had him educated at home until his fifteenth year, 1547, when he was entered of Oriel college, Oxford, and had for his tutor Morgan Philips, or Philip Morgan, a zealous Roman Catholic, and usually called the Sophister, which was a title, in the learning of those times, highly honourable. Young Alan made a rapid progress both in logic and philosophy, and was elected a fellow of his college, and took his bachelor’s degree in 1550. In the Act celebrated July 16, he went out junior of the act, having completed his degree of M. A. with the distinguished reputation of great parts, learning, and eloquence. Of this we have a proof in his being chosen principal of St. Mary hall, in 1556, when only twenty-four years of age, and the same year he served the office of proctor. In 1558, he was made canon of York; but on the accession of queen Elizabeth, when the reformed religion was again established, although he remained for a short time at Oxford, yet, as he refused to comply with the queen’s visitors in taking the oaths, &c. his fellowship was declared void; and in 1560 he found it necessary to leave England, and retire to Louvain, then a general receptacle of the expatriated English Catholics, and where they had erected a college. Here his talents and zeal recommended him to his countrymen, who looked up to him as their supporter, while they were charmed with his personal appearance, and easy address, chastened by a dignified gravity of manners.

In this seminary of Doway, many books were composed to justify the Popish religion, and to answer the books written in defence of the church of England, which occasioned a proclamation from the queen, forbidding the Doway books to be either sold or read; and we shall soon see that they were not merely books of religious controversy. In 1569, Alan appointed one Bristow to be moderator of studies at Doway, the same, it is supposed, whom he gained over when in the neighbourhood of Oxford. Not long after, Alan was appointed canon of Rheims, through the interest of the Guises, and to this city he transferred the seminary which had been settled at Doway; a matter, however, not of choice, as the then governor of the Netherlands, Don Lewis de Requesens, had obliged the English fugitives to withdraw out of his government. In the mean time, Alan laboured incessantly in the service of his party, by writing various treatises in defence of the doctrines or practices of the Papists, by licensing and recommending many books written by others, and by many journeys into Spain and Italy. He also procured a seminary to be established in Rome, and two in Spain, for the education and support of the English youth.

, or Alainde L'Isle or de Lille, is the name under which two persons, who were contemporaries, have been confounded by most biographers. The subject of the present article, usually termed Alanus senior, or major, was born at Lille in Flanders, about the beginning of the twelfth century; and his parents having demoted him from his birth to the service of religion, he received a suitable education. When the fame of St. Bernard began to spread abroad, Alanus was sent, in 1128, to study at Clairvaux, under that celebrated ecclesiastic, and very soon acquired a distinction above his companions. St. Bernard afterwards placed him at the head of the abbey of Rivour, in the diocese of Troyes in Champagne; and in 1151, procured him the bishopric of Auxerre, over which he presided until 1167, when he resigned it, and returned to Clairvaux, where he remained until his death in October 1181. His works, still in existence, are, 1. “Vita sancti Bernard!,” printed in the second volume of St. Bernard’s works, 1690, fol. 2. “Testamentum suum,” or his Testament, made in 1181, printed in Nicholas Camusat’s collection. 3. “Explanationes in Prophetias Merlini Angli,” in seven books, Francfort, 1608, 8vo. Alanus composed this treatise under the reign of Louis-the-Young, about 1171, on account of the noise which these pretended prophecies made. The subject is curiously illustrated by quotations from the English, Norman, and French historians, and even from the Latin poets. In the chapter-house of Auxerre is a manuscript life of Alanus, compiled in 1182 by one of the canons.

, or Alain de L‘Isle, surnamed the Universal Doctor, from his extensive knowledge, was born about the middle of the twelfth century, not at Lille in Flanders, as most biographers have asserted, but either at L’Isle, in the Comtat-Venaissain, according to the abbe Le Beuf, or in the island or peninsula of Madoc in the Bordelais. In all the accounts we have of him, he seems to be mistaken for the preceding. He appears to have taught theology in the university of Paris; but it is not true that he ever was a lay-brother of the Cistertians, or fed the sheep belonging to that abbey, or that he was called to Rome to assist at a general council. He died in the early part of the thirteenth century, in the abbey of the Cistertians, whither, after the example of many distinguished persons of his time, he retired to pass the remainder of his days. He was buried in the abbey with an inscription of seven lines, the last four of which Casimir Oudin, the ecclesiastical biographer and historian, discovered to have been added long after his death, and with a view to authenticate the stories that he had been a lay-brother, &c. But although our accounts of him are imperfect and confused, it appears that he enjoyed the esteem and admiration of his contemporaries, and that it was usual to say, “To have seen Alanus, is enough.” Sufficiat vobis vidisse Alanum. Among his works are, 1. “Anti-Claudianus, seu de viro optimo, et in omni virtute perfecto, lib. ix. Carmine,” Basil, 1536, and Antwerp, 1621. 2. “De planctu naturæ contra Sodomiæ vitium,” published with notes by Leo Allatius. 3. “Contra Albigenses, Waldenses, Judæos, et Paganos,” Paris, 1618, 8vo. 4. “Dicta de Lapide philosophico,” Leyden, 1600, 8vo. All his works, both prose and verse, were collected by Charles de Visch, and published at Antwerp, 1654, fol. but some of them have been attributed to the preceding Alanus. His “Parables” have been translated into French, Paris, 1492, fol. and by Denys Janot, 8vo, without a date.

, of a noble family at Brussels, was born about the beginning of the sixteenth century. His father William Alard de Centier, a zealous convert to popery, obliged him to enter the order of Dominican friars, where he was much admired for his talents as a preacher. While thus employed, a Hamburgh merchant, who was pleased with his preaching, procured him privately the works of Luther, which Alard read with conviction, and the same merchant having assisted him in escaping from his convent, he studied divinity at Jena and Wittemberg. But the death of this faithful friend having deprived him of resources, he ventured to return to Brussels and solicit assistance from his father. Before, however, he could obtain a private interview with him, he was discovered in one of the streets of Brussels by his mother, a violent bigot, who, after some reproaches, denounced him to the Inquisition; and when no persuasions could induce him to return into the bosom of the church which he had left, his mother was so irritated, as to call forth the rigour of the law, and even offered to furnish the wood to burn him. Sentence of death being pronounced, he was conducted to prison, but on the night previous to the appointed execution, he is said to have heard a voice saying, “Francis, arise and depart:” how far this and other particulars of his escape are true, we know not; but it is certain he cleared the prison, and after some hardships and difficulties, arrived in safety at Oldenburgh, where he became almoner to the prince. Here he remained until hearing that freedom of religion was granted at Antwerp, his affection for his native country induced him to return, which he did twice, notwithstanding the persecutions of the duke of Alba a.nd the dangers to which he was exposed; and when his father came to see him at Antwerp, in hopes of bringing him back to popery, he argued with so much power, as to make a sincere convert of this bigotted parent. At length, when it was not longer safe for him to remain in the Netherlands, Christian IV. king of Denmark, gave him the curacy of Wilster in Hoistein, at which asylum he died July 10, 1578. His works, which are In Flemish or German, consist of, 1. “The Confession of Antwerp.” 2. “Exhortation of the Ministers of Antwerp.” 3. “Agenda, or Discipline of Antwerp.” 4. “Catechism.” 5. “Treatise on original Sin,” &c.

, son of the preceding, was born at Krempen in 1600, and first studied there and at Harhburgh. At the age of nineteen, he went to the academy of Leipsic, where he entered on a course of theology and political science. In 1624, he had acquired much reputation both as a philosopher and a poet. When he returned to Krempen, he was made dean of the college, and held that station during five years. After this, the king of Denmark appointed him inspector of the schools at Brunswick, and assessor of the council of Meldorf, In 1643, by order of the emperor, he was created master of arts, and not being able, on account of the war, to go into Saxony, he was made a licentiate in divinity by diploma, or bull, which was sent to him. He died May 29, 1672. His works are, 1. “Delicia? Atticae,” Leips. 1624, 12mo. 2. “Heraclius Saxonicus, &c.” ibid. 1624, 12mo. 3. “Græcia in nuce, seu lexicon novurn omnium Græcae lingua primogeniarum,” Leips. 1628, 1632, 12mo. 4. “Promptuarium pathologicum Novi Testamenti,” Leips. 1635, 1636, 12mo. 5. “Laurifolia, sive poematum juvenilium apparatus,” 1627, 12mo, and some other works both in prose and verse, particularly a commentary on the Argonauticon of Valerius Flaccus, which is very little esteemed.

A Lasco, or Lasco, or Laski (John), usually styled the Polish reformer, a man of high rank, talents, and pious zeal, is said by Fox, the martyrologist, who was his contemporary, to have been uncle to Sigismond, king of Poland. He certainly was of a noble family in Poland, which took its name from Lasco, Latzki, or Latzeo, and subsisted under one of those titles long after his time. He was born, according to Saxius, in 1499, but we have no particulars respecting his family, unless that his brother Jerome was an able politician, and employed by the emperor Ferdinand, as his ambassador to the Turkish government. He had also an uncle, of the same name, who was archbishop of Gnesua, to whom Erasmus dedicated his edition of the works of St. Ambrose, and whom Le Clerc mistakes for our John Alasco. Erasmus in one of his epistles (ep. 862) mentions two others of the same illustrious family, Hieroslaus, and Stanislaus Alasco (usually written à Lasco); and in ep. 1167, he speaks of a John à Lasco (Joannes Lascanus), a young man, who died in Germany.

When Germany became an unsafe residence for the friends of the reformatiou, and the contest respecting the interim was eagerly pursued, Alasco, whose fame had reached England, was invited thither by archbishop Cranmer. This illustrious founder of the English church had for some time afforded a quiet asylum to such learned foreigners as bad been expatriated on account of their religion; and had at one time residing at Lambeth palace, those celebrated reformers Bucer, Martyr, Fagius, Ochin, and others of inferior note. Alasco arrived accordingly about the year 1548, and was introduced not only to the archbishop, but by his means to sir John Cheke, sir William Cecil, and to the duke of Somerset, the protector. In a conference with the latter, he was encouraged to request that be and his congregation might have leave to come over to London, and be protected in the exercise of their religion; and he urged that such a favour would be a matter of policy as well as charity, as by this step many useful manufactures might be introduced into England. He requested also that they might be incorporated by the king’s jetters patent; and some old dissolved church, or monastery, given them as a place of worship. Having proposed these measures, and obtained the assistance of the archbishop and other friends of rank and power, to assist in forwarding them, he returned again to Embden, where be corresponded with the archbishop and Cecil, As soon as they informed him that his request would be complied with, he again came to England, and brought with him a considerable number of German Protestants, who found an asylum for their persons, and toleration for their principles, under the mild reign of Edward VI. Three hundred and eighty of these refugees were naturalized, and erected into a species of ecclesiastical corporation, which was governed by its own laws, and enjoyed its own form of worship, although not exactly agreeing with that of the church of England. A place of worship in London, part of the once splendid priory of the Augustine friars, in the ward of Broad-street, which is still standing, was granted to them July 24, 1549, with the revenues belonging to it, for the subsistence of their ministers, who were either expressly nominated, or at least approved of by the king. His majesty also fixed the precise number of them, namely, four minisiers and a superintendant. This last office was conferred on Alasco, who, in the letters patent, is called a person of singular probity, and great learning; and it was an office which comprehended many important duties. It appears that as among the refugees from the Continent there were sometimes concealed papists, or dangerous enthusiasts, a power was given to Alasco to examine into their characters, and none were tolerated in the exercise of their religion but such as were protected by him. His office likewise extended not only over this particular congregation of Germans, but over all the other foreign churches in London, of which we find there was a French, a Spanish, and an Italian church or congregation; and over their schools and seminaries, all which were subject to his inspection, and declared to be within his jurisdiction. In 1552, we find him using his influence to procure for a member of the French church the king’s licence to set up a printing-house for printing the liturgy, &c. in French, for the use of the French islands (Jersey and Guernsey) under the English government.

The reign of Edward VI. was short; and on the accession of his bigotted and remorseless sister, the reformation was overthrown; and those who chose to adhere to it soon saw that they must be consistent at the expence of their lives. At the commencement, however, of the Marian tyranny, whether from a respect for Alasco’s illustrious family, or some regard for the rites of hospitality to those foreigners who had been invited into the country under the royal pledge of safety, Alasco and his congregation had the fair warning of a ' proclamation which ordered all foreigners to depart the realm, particularly heretics. Accordingly, about one hundred and seventy-five persons, consisting of Pules, Germans, French, Scotch, Italians, and Spaniards, belonging to the various congregations. under his superintendance, embarked in two ships, Sept. 17, 1553, with Alasco and his colleagues, and set sail for the coast of Denmark. Their reception here has been very differently represented. It has been said that, although known to be Protestants, yet because they professed the opinions of Zuinglius respecting the sacrament, they were not suffered to disembark, or to remain at anchor more than two days; during which their wives and children were prohibited from landing. Such is the account given by Melchior Adam, and by those who have followed him without examining other writers. According, however, to Hospinian, who may be the more easily credited as he was unfriendly to the Lutherans, it appears that the landing was not opposed, and that the Lutherans even admitted of a conference with Alasco and one of his colleagues, Micronius; but in the end, as neither party would give way, Alasco and his company were obliged to leave the kingdom in the depth of winter, and were refused admittance, with equal inhumanity, at Lubeck, Wismar, and Hamburgh. After 1 thus suffering almost incredible hardships at sea, during the whole of a very severe winter, they arrived in March, 1554, at Embden; and being received with kindness and hospitality, most of them settled there. Anne, countess dowager of Oldenburgh, again extended her friendship to Alasco, became the patroness of his flock, and procured them every comfort their situation required.

Alasco was twice married: his first wife died in 1552, and the second survived him; he appears to have had children by both. It was probably a descendant of his, Albertus Alasco, who was most magnificently entertained by the university of Oxford in 1583, by special command of queen Elizabeth. “Such an entertainment it was,” says Wood, “that the like before or since was never made for one of his degree, costing the university, with the colleges, about c350. And, indeed, considering the worthiness of the person for whom it was chiefly made, could not be less. He was one tarn Marti quam Mercuric: a very good soldier, and a very good scholar, an admirable linguist, philosopher, and mathematician.”

, a celebrated Spanish bishop, who lived in the sixteenth century, was a native of Vitoria, a city of Alava in the province of Biscay. He studied the civil and canon law at Salamanca, and made such considerable progress, that having been admitted one of the judges in several courts of judicature, he was at lant made president of the council of Granada. He afterwards entered into holy orders, and was advanced to the bishopric of Astorga. In that rank he assisted at the fifth Council of Trent, where his principal endeavours were to restrain pluralities. On his return he was made bishop of Avila, and afterwards of Cordova. He died in 1562. The only work he has left, the subject of which is general councils, is said to be well written “De Conciliis universalibus, ac de his quce ad reiigionis et reipublicie Christ, reformationem instituenda videutur,” Granada, 1582, fol. The family of D‘Alava produced at least two other writers of some eminence, Diego d’Alava de Beaumont, the sou of the master of the ordnance to the king of Spain, an able engineer, who wrote “El Perfecto Capitan, &c.” or the Perfect Captain instructed in the military science, and the art of fortification, Madrid, 1590, fol.; and Francis Ruis de Vergara y Alava, who wrote the history of the college of St. Bartholomew, in the university of Salamanca; and by order of Philip IV. superintended an edition, 1655, fol. of the Statutes of the order of the knights of St. James.

The cardinal w r as now in his seventy-seventh year, and. in all probability expected to close his life in the full enjoyment of his. splendid and unrivalled collections, when the French took possession of Rome. The depredations they committed in the Vatican and other public places of Rome, and the violences offered by them to the most eminent persons in that metropolis, may be easily accounted for from their characteristic rapacity, and the hatred which they then professed for religion under any shape. But the outrages which they practised on the family of Albani had such a Jjase and spiteful motive, as to brand them with eternal infamy. Owing to the successive marriages of the two last princesses of Carrara and of Modena, the family of Albani was a relative to the imperial house of Austria; and the French thought that the distress and humiliation, of the one would be communicated to the other. The estates were confiscated, the magnificent and elegant palace, within the precincts of Rome, was, sacked, and the unrivalled villa was plundered and destroyed. “This palace,” says Mr. Duppa, “which is not yet razed to the ground, nor its villa made an absolute heath, now remains (1798) a melancholy monument of the Vandalism of the eighteenth century. Every statue, every bust, every column, every chimney-piece, every piece of marble that served for ornament or use, was torn from its situation, and was either sent to Paris, or became the perquisite of certain agents employed by the Directory to see that there might be nothing wanting to the entire completion of its ruin: even the shrubs in the garden were rooted up, and sold.”

During this devastation, the cardinal took refuge, first, in a Camaidolese convent on the southern frontiers of the Roman state; but, it being intimated that he could not be safe there, he went to Naples; and, on the approach of the French, to Messina. In 1800 he was present at Venice, at the election of the reigning pope; and when the Austrian and Neapolitan troops reconquered the Roman territory, he returned to Rome, where he took private lodgings, but never had strength of mind to view either his palace or villa, nor could they be mentioned in his presence without throwing him into the deepest sorrow. Here he died, in 1803, in the eighty-fourth year of his age. He was handsome in person, sprightly and eloquent; sincere, cordial, unassuming, and affable; and both from his intellectual and moral qualifications, he was justly considered as one of the most accomplished characters of the age.

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

, an Arabic prince of Batan in Mesopotamia, was a celebrated astronomer, about the year 880, as appears by his observations. He is also called Muhammed ben Geber Albatani (Mahomet, the son of Geber) and Muhamedes Aractensis. He made astronomical observations at Antioch, and at Racah or Aracta, a town of Chaldea, which some authors call a town of Syria or of Mesopotamia. He is highly spoken of by Dr. Halley, as a man of great acuteness, and accuracy in making observations. Finding that the tables of Ptolemy were imperfect, he computed new ones, which were long used as the best among the Arabs: these were adapted to the meridian of Aracta or Racah. He composed in Arabic a work under the title of “The Science of the Stars,” comprizing all parts of astronomy, according to his own observations and those of Ptolemy. The original of this, which has never been published, is in the library of the Vatican. It was translated into Latin by Plato of Tibur, and was published at Nuremberg in 1537, with some additions and demonstrations of Regiomontanus; and the same was reprinted at Bologna in 1645, with this author’s notes. Dr. Halley detected many faults in these editions. (Philos. Trans, for 1693, No. 204.) In this work Albategni gives the motion of the sun’s apogee since Ptolemy’s time; as well as the motion of the stars, which he makes one degree in seventy years. He made the longitude of the first star of Aries to be 18 2‘; and the obliquity of the ecliptic 23 35’; and upon his observations were founded the Alphonsine tables of the moon’s motion.