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

, citizen and lord mayor of London, was a man highly esteemed fbr his prudence and piety, his loyalty and sufferings, and his acts of munificence: he was born in 1586, at Wem, in Shropshire, educated in the university of Cambridge, and (Fuller says) bred a draper in London. In 1609, he was chosen sheriff, when he gave a striking proof of his public spirit, by immediately giving up his business, and applying himself wholly to public affairs. He made himself complete master of the customs and usages, rights and privileges of the city of London, and succeeded to every honour his fellow-citizens had in their power to bestow. He was chosen master of the drapers’ company, alderman, and president of St. Thomas’s hospital, which institution he probably saved from ruin, by discovering the frauds of a dishonest steward. He was often returned member of parliament; but the violent politics of the times would not permit him to sit there. In 1645 he was elected lord mayor of London, in which office he gave a shining example of disinterestedness, by declining the advantages usually made by the sale of places which become vacant. His loyalty to Charles I. was so well known, that his house was searched by the republican party, to find the king there; and he was the next year committed to the Tower by the same party, and detained there some time. However, at length he became the oldest alderman upon the bench, and was consequently dignified with the honourable title of father of the city. His affection for his prince was so great, that during the exile of Charles II. he remitted him 10,000l.

, a celebrated Roman lawyer, and author of the oldest work on jurisprudence, flourished in the sixth century after the building of Rome. He was successively aedile, consul, and censor. When Cnaeus Flavius divulged his formula, the patricians, who considered themselves as the depositories of the law, composed novels, and endeavoured to conceal them with the utmost care. But Ælius, when scdile, got access to them, and published them. These last obtained the name of theÆlian law, as what Flavius had published were called the Flavian law. It appears also, that notwithstanding what Grotius and Bertrand have advanced, he was the author of a work entitled the “Tripartite,” by far the oldest work on the subject. It was so called as containing, 1. The text of the Law; 2. Its interpretation; and 3. The forms of procedure. He was appointed consul in A. U. C. 556, at the end of the second Punic war; and was distinguished for his homely diet, and simple manners, and his rejecting of presents.

, 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 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.

Alberoni was now prime minister of Spain, a cardipal, and archbishop of Valentia; and exercised his ministry with the most complete despotism. One of his projects was, to dispossess the duke of Orleans of the regency of France, and to bestow it upon his own sovereign, as the oldest representative of the house of Bourbon: to place the pretender on the throne of England, and to add tq Spain the kingdoms of Naples and Sicily. This project, however, was discovered by the regent; and one of the conditions he made with the king of Spain was, the banishjnent of Alberoni from his councils and his kingdom. With this he was obliged to comply, and the cardinal received orders to leave Madrid in twenty-four hours, and the kingdom of Spain in fifteen days. Alberoni, who took with him great wealth, had not proceeded far, when it was discovered that he was carrying out of the kingdom the celebrated will of Charles II. of Spain, which gave that kingdom to its then sovereign. Persons were immediately detached from Madrid, to wrest this serious and important document from him, which it was supposed he intended ta take to the emperor of Germany, to ingratiate himself with him. With some violence they effected their purpose, and the cardinal proceeded on his journey to the frontiers of France, where he had the additional mortification of being received by an officer, sent by the regent to conduct him through that kingdom, as a state prisoner. Unembarrassed, however, by this circumstance, Alberoni wrote to the regent, to offer him his services against Spain, but his highr ness disdained to return any answer.

The preceding account of this illustrious prince, taken from various authorities, exhibits altogether so pleasing a picture of Alfred, that we have not interrupted it by any of those objections which more modern research has discovered. For all the facts of Alfred’s history we are completely at the mercy of the monkish writers; and as we can have little now to disprove their assertions, most historians have implicitly followed their engaging narrative. In some respects, however, there is reason to question their authenticity. There is, in the first place, much reason to believe that the trial by jury is of older date than the time of Alfred: and secondly, there is still more reason to question the assertions in the note p. 448, respecting his having founded the university of Oxford. In addition to other objections which have been made to this origin of the university, we may now refer the reader to a work in which the question seems to be decided beyond all future controversy. The work we allude to is, “The Life of St. Neot, the oldest of all the brothers of king Alfred,” by the late John Whitaker, B. D. 1809. In section II. of this life, it is very clearly demonstrated that Alfred could not possibly have founded any university in Oxford, which was without the kingdom of West-Saxony in his days; and that the only university, or rather school, which he founded, was at Winchester. As to the broad assertion in the preceding note, that “Alfred is universally acknowledged the founder of University college, Oxford;” this is so far from being the case, that the historian of that college, Mr. Smith, a member of it, has clearly proved that Alfred had no hand whatever in it, and that the real founder was William of Durham.

, archbishop of Upsal, and one of the sons of the preceding, was born at Upsal in 1675. When he had finished his studies, his father sent him on his travels to the principal countries of Europe, and on his return, he was made librarian to the university of Upsal. He was afterwards for many years, and with great reputation, professor of divinity, and became successively bishop “of Gotcenburgh and Linkseping, and archbishop of Upsal, where he died in 1743. He was not only an able theologian, but versed in languages, history, and antiquities, and in all his wn< ings displays erudition and critical acumen. He published, 1.” vicnun*snta historica vetera Ecclesiae Sueco-Gothicit,“Upsal, 1704, 4to. 2.” Johannis Vastovii Vitis Aquilonia. sive Yitae Sanctorum regni SueeoGothici,“ibid. 1708, 4to. 3.” Dissertatio de Alexandria Ægypti,“ibid. 1711, 8vo. 4.” Laudatio funebris Michael. Enemanni,“Upsal, 1715, 4to. 5.” Dissertatio de re litteraria Judaeorum,“ibid. 1716, 4to. 6.” Acta Litteraria Suecia-, ab 1720 usque ad 1753,“ibid. 3 vols. 4to. 7.” Periculum Runicum, sive de origine et antiquitate Runarum,“ibid. 1724, 8vo. 8.” Oratio funebris in memoriam Laurcntii Molini, theologi Upsaliensis," ibid. 4to. Thesfe learned and ingenious works procured him very great reputation, and the correspondence of the most eminent men of learning in every part of Europe. In 1720, when librarian to the university, he associated with some of the professors in founding the academy of sciences of Upsal, which was soon after established by government, and is the oldest institution of that kind in the north; and when the academy of Stockholm was founded in 1739, Benzelius was admitted one of its first members.

The Rev. John Beuriman, above-mentioned, was born in 1689, and educated at St. Edmund hall, Oxford, and after taking orders, was for many years curate of St. Swithin, and lecturer of St. Mary Aldermanbury, but in 1744 was presented to the rectory of St. Alban’s, which he retained until his death, Dec. 8, 176S, being then the oldest incumbent in London. He published a sermon on the 30th of January, 1721 and in 1741, “Eight Sermons at lady Moyer’s lecture,” entirely of the critical kind, and giving an account of above a hundred Greek Mss. of St. Paul’s Epistles, many of them not before collated.

The predominant passion of Boccaccio, in youth, was the love of pleasure tempered by that of study; as he advanced in age, study became his sole delight. He had no ambition either for rank or fortune. The public employments confided to him came unasked, and when he could lay them down, he did so. He was equally averse to any domestic employments which were likely to take up much of his time, and would accept of no private tutorships, which so often eventually promote a man’s interest. His character was frank and open, but not without a degree of pride, which, however, particularly when he was in low circumstances, kept him from mean compliances. With respect to his talents, it is eviuent that he had always made a false estimate of them he had the fullest confidence in his poetical powers, yet nothing he wrote in verse rises above mediocrity, and many of his prose Italian writings desefve no higher praise. He is superior and inimitable only in his tales, on which he did not pride himself, nor indeed set any value. He fell into the same error with his master Petrarch in supposing that his serious Latin works would be the source of his fame, which he owes entirely to his Tales, as Petrarch owes his to his love-verses. All his Latin writings are crude and hasty. * In them, says Paul Cortesius, “he labours with thought, and struggles to give it utterance but his sentiments find no adequate vehicle, and the lustre of his native talents is obscured by the depraved taste of the times.” In his youth, he was flattered as having obtained the second place in poetry, his admiration for Dante not permitting him to aspire to the first, and the sonnets of Petrarch were not yet known. It is to his honour, however, that as soon us he saw the latter, he threw into the fire the greater part of his lyric compositions, sonnets, canzoni, &e. and seems to have determined to apply himself entirely to the perfection of Italian prose, in which it must be confessed he has succeeded admirably. As a recent event has rendered some of Boccaccio’s writings an object, of research among collectors, we shall enter somewhat more fully than is usual into a detail of their editions. Among his Latin works, we have, 1. “De genealogia Deorum lib. XV. De montium, sylvarum, lucuum, fluviorum, stagnorum, et marium nominibus, liber.” These two were first printed together in folio without date, but supposed to be at Venice, and. anterior to 1472, in which year appeared the second edition, at Venice, with that date. The third was published at the same place in 1473, and followed by others at Reggio, Vincenza, Venice, Paris, and Basle, which last, in 1532, is accompanied with notes and supplements. This account of the genealogy of the Gods, or the heathen mythology, must have been the fruit of immense reading, and as no information on the subject existed then, a high value was placed on it, although it has been since superseded by more recent and accurate works. He has been very unjustly accused of quoting authors no where else to be found, as if he had invented their names, but it is surely more reasonable to think they might be known in his days, although their memory has since perished, or that he might have been himself deceived. This same work, translated into Italian by Joseph Betussi, has gone through twelve or thirteen edi-. tions, the first, of Venice, 1547, 4to. There are -also two French translations, the first anonymous, Paris, 1498, fol. and 1531, also in fol. the second by Claude Wittard, Paris, 1578, 8vo. The lesser book, or Dictionary of the names of mountains, forests, &c. was also translated into Italian by Niccolo Liburnio, and printed in 4to. without date or place, but there is a second edition at Florence, 1598, 8vo. 2. “De casibus Virorum et Foeminarum illustrium libri IX.” Paris, 1535, 1544, fol. and at Vincenza the same year translated into Italian by Betussi, Venice, 1545, 8vo, and often reprinted. But there must have been an edition long previous to the oldest of these, as we find it translated into English in 1494, by John Lydgate, monk of Edmundsbury, at the commandment of Humphrey duke of Gloucester, under the title of “John Boccace of the Fall of Princes and Princesses .” It has likewise been translated and often reprinted in French, Spanish, and German. The first of the Spanish translations is dated Seville, 1495, and the first of the French was printed at Bruges in 1476, folio, then at Paris, 1483, at Lyons the same year, and again at Paris in 1494, 1515, folio, and 1578, 8vo. 3. “De claris Mulieribus.” The first edition of this is without place or date, in the black letter the second is that of Ulm, 1473, fol. followed by those of Louvain and Berne from 1484 to 1539. Of this work the Italians have two translations, one by Vincent Bagli, a Florentine, Venice, 1506, 4to; the other by Betussi, who prefixed a life of Boccaccio, Venice, 1545, and 1547, 8vo. The first edition of the Spanish translation is dated Seville, 1528, fol. That of the German translation is dated Augsburgh, 1471, and was followed by one at Ulm, 1473, 4to. The French have two translations, the oldest 1493, fol. 4. “Eclogae,” sixteen in number, and printed with those of Virgil, Calphurnius, &c. Florence, 1504, 8vo. They are also inserted in the “Bucolicorum auctorcs,” Basil, 1546, 8vo. Like Petrarch, he introduces the events of his time in these eclogues, with the principal personages under fictitious names, but he has furnished us with a key to these in a letter to P. Martin de Signa, his confessor, of which Manni has givdn an extract in his history of the Decameron. His Italian works in verse are, 5. “La Teseide,” the first attempt at an epic in Italian, and written in the ottava rima, or heroic verse, of which Boccaccio is considered as the inventor; printed at Ferrara, 1475, fol. Venice, 1528, 4to, and translated into French, 1597, 12mo. 6. “Amorosa visione,” Milan, 1520 and 1521, 4to, and with grammatical observations and an apology for Boccaccio by Claricio d'Lmola, Venice, 1531, 8vo. This singular poem is divided into fifty cantos or chapters, which contain five triumphs, namely those of wisdom, glory, riches, love, and fortune, written in the terza rima, with a curious contrivance, gratifying to the bad taste of the times, by which the initial letters of each stanza are made to compose an acrostic in praise of the princess Mary, whom elsewhere he celebrates under the name of Fiammetta. 7. “II Filastrato,” a poetical romance in heroic verse, the hero of which is young Troilus, the son of Priam, and the subject, his amours with Chryseis, whom the poet does not make the daughter of Chryses, but of Calchas. Of this there are four editions Bologna, 1498, 4to, Milan, 1499, 4to, Venice 1501 and 1528, 4to. 8. “Nimfale Fiesolano.” It is thought that in this poem Boccaccio has concealed, under the disguise of a pastoral fiction, an amorous adventure which happened in his time in the environs of Florence. The first edition is in 4to. without place or date; the second is of Venice 1477, and was followed by many others at Venice and Florence, and one recently of Paris, 1778, 12mo. It was translated into French by Anthony Guercin du Crest, and printed at Lyons, 1556, 16mo. 9. “Rime,” or miscellaneous poems. We have noticed that he burned the greater part of his minor poems, but those which were dispersed in manuscript in various hands, have been often collected, and the publication of them announced. M. Baldelli, who has since, in 1806, published a good life of Boccaccio, collected all of these poems he could find, and printed them at Leghorn, 1802, 8vo.

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

, a gentleman well known by his indefatigable attention to the works of Shakspeare, was born at Troston, near Bury, Suffolk, June 11, 1713, and received his education at the school of St. Edmund’s Bury. In the dedication of his edition of Shakspeare, in 1768, to the duke of Grafton, he observes, that “his father and the grandfather of his grace were friends, and to the patronage of the deceased nobleman he owed the leisure which enabled him to bestow the attention of twenty years on that work.” The office which his grace bestowed on Mr. Capell was that of deputy inspector of the plays, to which a salary is annexed of 200l. a year. So early as the year 1745, as Capell himself informs us, shocked at the licentiousness of Hanmer’s plan, he first projected an edition of Shakspeare, of the strictest accuracy, to be collated and published, in due time, “ex fide codicum.” He immediately proceeded to collect and compare the oldest and scarcest copies; noting the original excellencies and defects of the rarest quartos, and distinguishing the improvements or variations of the first, second, and third folios. But while all this mass of profound criticism was tempering in the forge, he appeared at last a self-armed Aristarchus, almost as lawless as any of his predecessors, vindicating his claim to public notice by his established reputation, the authoritative air of his notes, and the shrewd observations, as well as majesty, of his preface. His edition, however, was the effort of a poet, rather than of a critic; and Mr. Capell lay fortified and secure in his strong holds, entrenched in the black letter. Three years after (to use his own language) he “set out his own edition, in ten volumes, small octavo, with an introduction,” 1768, printed at the expence of the principal booksellers of London, who gave him 300l. for his labours. There is not, among the various publications of the present literary aera, a more singular composition than that “Introduction.” In style and manner it is more obsolete, and antique, than the age of which it treats. It is lord Herbert of Cherbury walking the new pavement in all the trappings of romance; but, like lord Herbert, it displays many valuable qualities accompanying this air of extravagance, much sound sense, and appropriate erudition. It has since been added to the prolegomena of Johnson and Steevens’s edition. In the title-page of this work was also announced, “Whereunto will be added, in some other volumes, notes, critical and explanatory, and a body of various readings entire.” The introduction likewise declared, that these “notes and various readings” would be accompanied with another work, disclosing the sources from which Shakspeare “drew the greater part of his knowledge in mythological and classical matters, his fable, his history, and even the seeming peculiarities of his language to which,” says Mr. Capell, “we have given for title, The School of Shakspeare.” Nothing surely could be more properly conceived than such designs, nor have we ever met with any thing better grounded on the subject of “the learning of Shakspeare” than what may be found in the. long note to this part of Mr. Capell’s introduction. It is more solid than even the popular essay on this topic. Such were the meditated achievements of the critical knight-errant, Edward Capell. But, alas! art is long, and life is short. Three-andtvventy years had elapsed, in collection, collation, compilation, and transcription, between the conception and production of his projected edition: and it then came, like human births, naked into the world, without notes or commentary, save the critical matter dispersed through the introduction, and a brief account of the origin of the fables of the several plays, and a table of the different editions. Cenain quaintnesses of style, and peculiarities of printing and punctuation, attended the whole of this publication. The outline, however, was correct. The critic, with unremitting toil, proceeded in his undertaking. But while he was diving into the classics of Caxton, and working his way under ground, like the river Mole, in order to emerge with all his glories; while he was looking forward to his triumphs; certain other active spirits went to work upon his plan, and, digging out the promised treasures, laid them prematurely before the public, defeating the effect of our critic’s discoveries by anticipation. Steevens, Malone, Farmer, Percy, Reed, and a whole host of literary ferrets, burrowed into every hole and corner of the warren of modern antiquity, and overran all the country, whose map had been delineated by Edward Capell. Such a contingency nearly staggered the steady and unshaken perseverance of our critic, at the very eve of the completion of his labours, and, as his editor informs us for, alas! at the end of near forty years, the publication was posthumous, and the critic himself no more! we say then, as his editor relates, he was almost determined to lay the work wholly aside. He persevered, however (as we learn from the rev. editor, Mr. Collins), by the encouragement of some noble and worthy persons: and to such their Cih couragement, and his perseverance, the public was, in 1783, indebted for three large volumes in 4to, under the title of “Notes and various readings of Shakspeare; together with the School of Shakspeare, or extracts from divers English books, that were in print in the author’s time; evidently shewing from whence his several fables were taken, and some parcel of his dialogue. Also farther extracts, which contribute to a due understanding of his writings, or give a light to the history of his life, or to the dramatic history of his time.”

With regard to his person, though he was not remarkably tall, nor eminently handsome, yet his person was always agreeable, and became more and more so, as he grew in years, age becoming him better than youth. The hair of his head and beard grew perfectly white, and he preserved almost to his dying day a fine and florid complexion. His temper contributed much towards making him generally beloved, for he was always serene and cheerful; so perfect a master of his looks and words, that what passed in his mind was never discoverable from either; patient in hearing, ready in answering, yet without any quickness, and in a style suited to the understanding of him to whom he spoke. Idleness was his aversion; and though from twenty-five years of age, at which he was sworn a privy counsellor, being then the youngest, as at his death the oldest in Europe, he laboured under a great weignt of public business; yet when he had any vacant moments he spent them not in trifles, or in pursuit of sensual pleasures, but in reading, meditating, or writing. He had a perfect knowledge, not only of foreign countries, but of foreign courts; knew the genius of every prince in Europe, his counsellors and favourites. At home he kept exact lists of all the great officers, and particularly of the sages in the law. He was acquainted with the course of every court of judicature in England, knew its rise, jurisdiction, and proper sphere of action; within which he took care that it should act with vigour, and was no less careful that it should not exceed its bounds. He wrote not only elegant Latin in prose, but also very good verses in that, and in the English language. He understood Greek as well as most men in that age; and was so learned in divinity, that divines of all persuasions were desirous of submitting to his judgment. His peculiar diversions were the study of the state of England, and the pedigrees of its nobility and gentry: of these last he drew whole books with his own hand, so that he was better versed in descents and families, than most of the heralds; and would often surprize persons of distinction at his table, by appearing better acquainted with their manors, parks, woods, &c. than tfcey were themselves. To this continual application, and to his genius, naturally comprehensive, was owing that fund of knowledge, which made him never at a loss in any company, or upon any subject. It was also owing to this that he spoke with such wonderful weight on all public occasions, generally at the end of the debate, but without repetition of what was said before, stating the matter clearly, shewing the convenience sought, the inconveniences feared; the means of attaining the former, and the methods by which the latter might be avoided, with a succinctness and accuracy which, perhaps, hardly ever fell to any other man’s share. But what was stiH more surprising, was the great facility with which he did this; for he required no preparation, no time for his most laboured speeches, nor ever turned a book for his most learned writings, but thought, and spoke, digested, and dictated, without any hesitation, with the greatest perspicuity of sentiment, and the utmost fulness of diction.

The high fame and repeated praises of this work did not divert the author from his studies or his duties; and in his station of a private clergyman, so great was his reputation, that he was importuned by the university, and by other acquaintance, to take upon him the weighty exercise of responding at the public commencement. Nothing but the earnest solicitation of his friends could have prevailed with a man void not only of ambition, but of even the desire of applause, to appear so publicly. This he did in 1680, in so masterly a manner, as to be remembered for many years after. The next specimen of his abilities was his “Essay on Jewish Measures and Weights,” 1686, 8vo, a work not only highly useful in its nature, but very much wanted, and was therefore received with the highest applause by the best judges, who were equally pleased with the method and matter, as well as the manner and conciseness, of the performance. It was afterwards reprinted, and will continue to support the reputation of its author, as long as this kind of literature is either en-, couraged or understood. His sincere attachment to the protestant religion made him very apprehensive of its danger; and the melancholy prospect of affairs in the reign of king James made so deep an impression on him as to affect his health. After the revolution he appears to have entertained no thoughts of soliciting for better preferment; and it was, therefore, a greater surprize to himself than to any body else, when walking after his usual manner, on a post-day, to the coffee-house, he read there in a newspaper, that one Dr. Cumberland, of Stamford, was named to the bishopric of Peterborough, This piece of intelligence, however, proved true, and he had the singular satisfaction of finding himself raised to a bishopric, not only without pains or anxiety, but without having so much as sought for it; but at that time it was necessary to the establishment of the new government, that men who were to be raised to these high stations in the church, should be such only as had been most eminent for their learning, most exemplary in their lives, and firmest to the protestant interest; and whilst these qualifications were only considered, the king, who in two years’ time had appointed no less than fifteen bishops of the above character, was told that Dr. Cumberland was the fittest man he could nominate to the bishopric of Peterborough. He was elected in the room of Dr. Thomas White, who refused the new oaths May 15th; was consecrated with other bishops, July 5th, and enthroned September 12th, 1691, in the cathedral of Peterborough. He now applied himself to the work of a bishop, making no omissions to consult his own ease, or to spare his pains; and the desires of his mind, that all under him should do their duty, were earnest and sincere. His composition had no alloy of vain-glory. He never did any thing to court applause, or gain the praise of men. He never acted a part, never put on a mask. His tongue and heart always went together. If he ran into any extreme, it was the excess of humility; he lived with the simplicity and plainness of a primitive bishop, conversed and looked like a private man, hardly maintaining what the world calls the dignity of his character. He used hospitality without grudging; no man’s house was more open to his friends, and the ease and freedom with which they always found themselves entertained, was peculiar to it. The poor had substantial relief at his door, and his neighbours and acquaintance a hearty welcome to his table, after the plentiful and plain manner in which he lived. Every thing in his house served for friendly entertainment, nothing for luxury or pomp. His desire was to make every body easy, and to do them good. He dispensed with a liberal hand, and in the most private and delicate manner, to the necessities of others. His speeches to the clergy at his visitations, and his exhortations to the catechumens before his confirmations, though they had not the embellishments of oratory, yet they were fervent expressions of the inward desires of his soul to do what good he was able, and to excite others to be influenced by it; the pious breathings of a plain and good mind. On all occasions he treated his clergy with singular ta and indulgence. An expression that often came from him, was, “I love always to make my clergy easy.” This was his rule in all applications made to him by them, and if he erred, it was always on this side. When the duties of his office required it, he never spared himself. To the last month of his life it was impossible to dissuade him from undertaking fatigues that every body about him feared were superior to his strength. He was inflexible to their intreaties, and his answer and resolution was, “I will do my duty as long as I can.” He had acted by a maxim like this in his vigour. When his friends represented to him, that by his studies and labours he would injure his health, his usual reply was, “A man had better wear out than rust out.” The last time he visited his diocese, he was in the eightieth year of his age; and at his next triennial, when he was in the eighty-third year of his age, it was with the utmost difficulty that he could be dissuaded from undertaking again the visitation of his diocese. To draw the clergy nearer than the usual decanal meetings, to make his visitations easier to himself, was a thing he would not hear of. Such were the public acts of this great prelate in the discharge of his duty as a father of the church. In respect to his temporal concerns, and his management of the revenue arising from his see, he was not less liberal and munificent. His natural parts were not quick, but strong and retentive. He was a perfect master of every subject he studied. Eyery thing he read staid with him. The impressions on his mind were some time in forming, but they were clear, distinct, and durable. The things he had chiefly studied, were researches into the most ancient times; mathematics in all its parts and the Scripture in its original languages but he was also thoroughly acquainted with all the branches of philosophy, medicine, and anatomy, and was a good classical scholar. He was so thoroughly conversant in Scripture, that no difficult passage ever occurred, either occasionally, or in reading, but he could readily give the meaning of it, and the several interpretations, without needing to consult his books. He sometimes had thoughts of writing an exposition of the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, with a view to set the doctrine of justification in a light very different from that in which it has been hitherto considered by most divines, but what that light was we are not told. One of his chief objects was the examination of Sanchoniatho’s Phoenician History, about which the greatest men had been most mistaken, and in relation to which none had entered into so strict an examination as our learned prelate thought it deserved. He spent many years in these speculations; for he began to write several years before the revolution, and he continued improving his design down to 1702. Jt may be justly wondered, that, after taking so mnch pains, and carrying a work of such difficulty to so high a degree of perfection, he should never judge it expedient to publish it; for though his bookseller refused to print the first part at a critical season, yet afterwards both might have seen the light; and for this the most probable reason that can be assigned is, that thorough dislike he had to controversy. His son-in-law, however, the rev. Mr. Payne, has done justice to his memory, and published it under the title of“Sanchoniatho’s Phoenician History, translated from the first book of Eusebius de Preparatione Evangelica,” &c. Lond. 1720, 8vo. Mr. Payne observes, that our author had a quicker sense than many other men, of the advances popery was making upon us, and was affected with the apprehension of it to the last degree. This made him turn his thoughts to the inquiry, by what steps and methods idolatry got ground in the world. The oldest account of this he believed he found in Sanchoniathe'a fragment. This he saw was a professed apology for idolatry, and owned openly what other heathens would have made a secret of, that the gods of the Gentile world had been all mortal men. He studied this fragment with no other view than as it led to the discovery of the original of idolatry. He spent some time upon it, before ever he had a thought of extracting from it footsteps of the history of the world preceding the flood. While other divines of the church of England were engaged in the controversy with the papists, in which they gained over them so complete a victory, our author was endeavouring to strike at the root of their idolatrous religion. These fragments have exercised the talents of some of the ablest scholars that foreign nations have produced, and several of these, being able to make nothing clear or consistent out of them, incline to think they were forgeries, and consequently not worthy of notice. Our prelate was not only of a different sentiment, but with great knowledge and great labour, has made it very evident that these fragments are genuine, and that he thoroughly understood them. He has proved that they contain the most ancient system of atheism and idolatry; that very system which took place in Egypt, and was set up against the true religion contained in the writings of Moses.

, so called from Laerta, or Laertes, a town of Cilicia, where he is supposed to have been born, is an ancient Greek author, who wrote ten books of the Lives of the Philosophers, still extant. In what age he flourished, is not easy to determine. The oldest writers who mention him are Sopater Alexandrinus, who lived in the time of Constantine the Great, and Hesychius Milesius, who lived under Justinian. Diogenes often speaks in terms of approbation of Plutarch and Phavorinus; and therefore, as Plutarch lived under Trajan, and Phavorinus under Hadrian, it is certain that he could not flourish before the reigns of those emperors. Menage has fixed him to the time of Severus; that is, about the year of Christ 200; and from certain expressions in his works, some have fancied him to have been a Christian; however, as Menage observes, the immoderate praises he bestows upon Epicurus will not suffer us to believe this, but incline us rather to suppose that he was an Epicurean. He divided his Lives into books, and inscribed them to a learned lady of the Platonic school, as he himself intimates in his life of Plato. Montaigne was so fond of this author, that, instead of one Laertius, he wishes we had a dozen; and Vossius says, that his work is as precious as old gold. Without doubt we are greatly obliged to him for what we know of the ancient philosophers; and if he had been as exact in the execution, as he was judicious in the choice of his subject, we had been more obliged to him still. Bishop Burnet, in the preface to his Life of sir Matthew Hale, justly speaks of him in the following manner: “There is no hook the ancients have left us,” says he, “which might have informed us more than Diogenes Laertius’s Lives of the Philosophers, if he had had the art of writing equal to that great subject which he undertook: for if he had given the world such an account of them, as Gassendus has done of Peiresc, how great a stock of knowledge might we have had, which by his unskilfulness is in a great measure lost! since we must now depend only on him, because we have no other and better author who has written on that argument.” He is no where observed to be a rigid affecter or favourer of any sect; which makes it somewhat probable, that he was a follower of Potomon of Alexandria, who, after all the rest, and a little before his time, established a sect which were called Eclectics, from their choosing out of every sect what they thought the best. His books shew him to have been a man of universal reading; but as a writer he is very exceptionable, both as to the disposal and the defect of his materials. Brucker, whose opinion must be of sterling value, in estimating the merits of Diogenes Laertius, says, that “he has collected from the ancients with little judgment, patched together contradictory accounts, relied upon doubtful authorities, admitted as facts many tales which were produced in the schools of the sophists, and has been inattentive to methodical arrangement.” Diogenes also composed a book of epigrams, to which he refers. The best edition is that of Meibomius, Amst. 1692, 2 vols. 4to; yet Rossius, in his “Commentationes Laertianae,” has convicted Meibomius of innumerable errors.

, the late learned bishop of Salisbury, was born in Scotland, in 1721, the son of Mr. Archibald Douglas, a merchant of Fittenween, in Fifeshire. His grandfather (who was a younger brother of the family of Douglas of Tulliquilly, one of the oldest branches of the house of Douglas now in existence), was an eminent clergyman of the episcopal church of Scotland, and the immediate successor of bishop Burnet in the living of Salten, in East Lothian, from which preferment he was ejected at the revolution, when presbyterianism was established in Scotland. The subject of this memoir was educated for some years at the school of Dunbar, but in 1736 was entered a commoner of St. Mary hall, Oxford, where he remained till 1738, and then removed to Baliolcollege, on being elected an exhibitioner on bishop Warner’s foundation. In 1741 he took his bachelor’s degree; and in 1742, in order to acquire a facility of speaking French, he went abroad, and remained for some time at Montreal, in Picardy, and afterwards at Ghent, in Flanders. On his return to college, in 1743, he took his master’s degree, and having been ordained deacon, in 1744, he was appointed to officiate as chaplain to the third regiment of foot-guards, which he joined when serving with the combined army in Flanders. During the time he tilled this situation, he employed himself chiefly in the study of modern languages. He was not an inactive spectator of the battle of Fontenoy, April 29, 1745, on which occasion he was employed in carrying orders from general Campbell to the English who guarded the village in which he and the other generals were stationed.

He had appointed his old and intimate friends Mr. Fountaine and Mr. Tutet, executors to his will; but both these gentlemen declining the trust, it devolved upon his nephew and heir, Gerard Gustavus Ducarel, esq. Dr. Ducarel had the happiness of enjoying the esteem of five successive primates, and lived to be the oldest officer in the palace of Lambeth. His official attendance to the duties of Doctors-commons was unremitting, and his attachment to the study of English antiquities formed his principal amusement. His collection of books and Mss. was valuable; and his indexes and catalogues so exact as to render them highly convenient to himself and the friends he was desirous to oblige. All these, with a good collection of coins and medals, he gave by his last will, to his nephew Gerard Gustavus, in the fond hopes of their being preserved as heir-looms in his family. But they were all afterwards consigned to the hammer of the auctioneer, and the greater part of the Mss. passed into the hands of Mr. Gough, many of which are now in Mr. Nichols’s possession. In the latter part of life he was too much immersed in professional engagements to enter into new attachments of friendship, but with his old friends he associated on the most liberal terms. Though he never ate meat till he was fourteen, nor drank wine till he was eighteen, as he was frequently heard to declare; yet it was a maxim which he punctually observed, that “he was an old Oxonian, and therefore never knew a man till he had drunk a bottle of wine with him.”' His entertainments were in the true style of the old English hospitality and he was remarkably happy in assorting the company he not un frequently invited to his table.

He applied to parliament to exonerate the copyholders of Lanchester-fell, and Hamsteel’s-fell, of the lord’s right to the timber, a measure highly useful and liberal; in consequence of which, many trees are planted on a surface of nearly thirty thousand acres, and are become already ornamental to the country, and will in time be useful to the nation. He cpnsemed to an act of parliament for infranchising certain copyholds in the manor of Howdenshire, for the accommodation and convenience of the tenants, by enabling them to convey their lands with more ease and safety, and at the same time without prejudice to the lord. In the great flood of November 1771 the whole of the bridge over the Tyne, between Newcastle and Gateshead, was either swept away, or so much damaged as to render the taking it down necessary. Of the expence of rebuilding it, the see of Durham was subject to onethird, and the corporation of Newcastle to the remainder. Parliament enabled the bishop to raise, by life annuities chargeable upon the see, a sum sufficient for rebuilding his proportion. The surveyors for the bishop and corporation disagreeing, the bridge is not rebuilt upon a regular plan; which was so contrary to his lordship’s wishes, that he offered to advance to the corporation the amount of his one-third, that they mi^ht undertake the management of the whole, and finish it uniformly; which proposal was not accepted. In the progress of this business, he not only consented that his expence should be enlarged, but likewise that his income should be diminished; for he agreed to the widening of the new bridge, by which the expences of rebuilding were increased; and then, to alleviate the losses of his tenants who had houses on the old bridge, he gave them full leases for building upon the new, without taking any tine: but as building upon the new bridge would impair the beauty of it, and be an inconvenience to the public, he gave up his own interests in the sites of the houses, on condition that his tenants should have an equivalent on another spot, upon agreeing not to build upon the new bridge; and he then procured it to be enacted by parliament, that no houses should, in future, be built upon the new bridge, though the renewal of the leases of the buildings that otherwise might have been erected thereon, would have produced him a considerable income. The important rights of property, which had been long in dispute between the see and the respectable family of C layering, were brought by his means to an amicable conclusion and the rights of boundary, which his predecessors had long been litigating, were fully ascertained and when, by authority of parliament, he granted a lease of the estates in question, for Un.<. lues, he gave the fine he received for the lease to his lessee of the mines, in consideration of the expences which were formerly incurred by him in defending the right It may truly be considered as no small proof of his moderation, that notwithstanding for nearly seventeen years he held the bishopric of Durham, in which the rights of property are so various and extensive, the persons with whom he had to transact business so numerous, and in their expectations, perhaps, not always reasonable, he had during that whole period but one Jaw-suit: and though there are in these times certainly no improper prejudices in favour of the claims of the church, that law-suit was, by a jury of the county, determined in his favour. It was instituted to prevent the onus of repairing the road between Auckland park and the river Wear from being fixed upon his successors, to whose interests he was always properly attentive. He adjusted the quota of the land tax of the estates in London belonging to the see, procuring to himself and his successors an abatement of 13-20ths of what had been before unduly paid; and he greatly increased the rents of the episcopal demesnes at Stockton. His additions and improvements at the episcopal palaces, offices, and grounds, did equal credit to his taste and liberality. Exclusively of such as he made in the castle and offices at Durham, by fitting up the great breakfast-room, now used as a drawing-room, and by enlarging and repairing the stables and their dependencies; at Auckland-castle, where he chiefly resided, his improvements were equally well judged, and much more various and expensive. At the north-east entrance of Auckland demesne, which, in the approach from Durham, opens the extensive and magnificent scene of the park and castle, he built a porter’s lodge and a gateway, and ornamented these with large plantations: and the new apartments at the south of the castle, which were begun by his predecessors, he completed, and made into a magnificent suite of rooms. The great room he fitted up, and new furnished the chapel. The steward’s house, as well as the offices and stables, he enlarged, repaired, and altered into regular buildings; and he lowered the walls of the court and bowling-green, to the great beauty of the scenery from the house. With the monies arising from the sale of the rents and fines in Howdenshire, he bought the Park closes, the Haver closes, and other grounds adjoining to the park, with some houses and tenements in Auckland; he considerably extended the park wall, intending to continue it round the whole the kitchen garden he greatly enlarged, and secured it by a stone pier from the river Gaunless he built another stone pier and wall, to cover part of the park from the ravages of the river Wear; he embanked against the Gaunless in its whole course through the park, and formed in it many beautiful falls. He ornamented the park and demesne lands with various plantations, draining and improving the whole with much judgment, and especially the park farm, which he inclosed. Ail the grounds he kept in the very neatest order, employing the oldest and most indigent persons in the neighbourhood. In Belbourne wood, he cut several walks and ridings, and totally rebuilt the lodge-house and farm, which presents a beautiful object to the castle. Notwithstanding all these expences, he was liberal and indulgent to his tenants, remitting many fines, and taking no more than one year’s rent for a renewal of seven years, or one life; attempts, however, were sometimes made to abuse his lenity and indulgence.

, a learned and pious German divine, and a great benefactor to his country, was born at Lubeck, March 12, O. S. 1663. His father, John Francke, was then one of the magistrates of Lubeck, and afterwards entered into the service of Ernest the Pious, duke of Saxe Gotha, as counsellor of the court and of justice. His mother, Anne Gloxin, was the daughter of one of the oldest burgomasters of Lubeck. Young Francke had the misfortune to lose his father in 1670, when he was between six and seven years old, and at this early age had shown such a pious disposition, that he was intended for the church, and with this view his mother placed him under the instructions of a private tutor. His proficiency in classical studies was such, th.'t at the age of fourteen he vvas considered as well qualified to go to the university. It was not, however, until 1679, that he went to that of Erfurt, and from thence to Kiel, where he st-idied some years under Kortholt and Morhoff. In 1682, he returned to Gotha, and visited Hamburgh in his way, where he remained two months to improve his knowledge of the Hebrew language, under Esdras Edzardi. In 1684 he went to Leipsic, and took his degree of M. A. in the following year. During his stay l;ere, he formed a society for literary conversation among his friends, which long subsisted under the name of “Collegium Philobiblicum,” their favourite topic being the study of the* Holy Scriptures. Some time after he went to Wittemberg, where he was received with great respect by the literati of that university, and thence to Luueburg, where he attended the divinity lectures of the celebratd Sandhagen. From Lunebourg he returned to Leipsic, and gave a course of lectures on the holy scriptures, practical as well as critical, which were frequented by above three hundred students. This success, with a more than common earnestness and seriousness in his method and address, occasioned some jealousy, and created him enemies likewise at Erfurt, whither, in 1690, he was invited to become pastor of St. Austin. The objection to him was that of pietism, and it increased with so much violence, that in 1691 he was deprived of his charge, and ordered to quit the city within two days. How little he deserved this treatment, had already appeared in some of his writings, and was more manifest afterwards in his conduct and services.

Africa was then under the dominion of Thrasitnond king of the Vandals, an Arian, and a cruel enemy to the catholics. He had forbidden to ordain catholic bishops in. the room of those who died: but the bishops of Africa were determined not to obey an order which threatened the extinction of orthodoxy. Fulgentius, under these circumstances, wished to avoid being a bishop; and when elected for the see of Vinta in the year 507, fled and concealed himself, but being soon discovered, was appointed bishop of Ruspae much against his will. On this elevation he did not change either his habit or manner of living, but uspd. the same austerities and abstinence as before. He still loved the monks, and delighted to retire into a monastery as often as the business of his episcopal function allowed him time. Afterwards he had the same fate with about two hundred and twenty catholic bishops of Africa, whom. Thrasimond banished into the island of Sardinia; and though he was not the oldest among them, yet they paid such respect to his learning, as to employ his pen in all the writings produced in the name of their body. So great was his reputation, that Thrasimond had a curiosity to see and hear him; and having sent for him to Carthage, he proposed to him many difficulties, which Fulgentius solved to his satisfaction: but because he confirmed the catholics, and converted many Arians, their bishop at Carthage prayed the king to send, him back to Sardinia. Thrasimond dying about the year 523, his son Hilderic recalled the catholic bishops, of whom Fulgentius was one. He returned, to the great joy of those who were concerned with him, led a most exemplary life, governed his clergy well, and performed all the offices of a good bishop. He died in the year 533, on the first day of the year, being then sixty- five.

, a native of York, and an industrious collector of antiquities, was born in 1691, and educated as a printer, which trade he first exercised in London, sometimes as a servant, and sometimes as a master. In 1724 he began the same business at York, where he remained the whole of his long life, dying there May 17, 1778, in the eighty-seventh year of his age. He was at this time supposed to be the oldest master printer in Britainj and was a freeman of London, York, and Dublin. He compiled various articles respecting the antiquities of Yorkshire, which, although printed in an humble form, and generally with mean cuts, contain some particulars not to be found in larger histories, and of late have risen considerably in price. Among these are, 1. The ancient and modern history of the famous City of York,“12mo. 2.” Compendious History of England and Rome,“York, 1741, 2 vols. 12mo: in this are some additions concerning York, Pontefract, &c. 3.” The ancient and modern History of the loyal town of Rippon,“ibid. 1733, 8vo. 4.” Annales Regioduni Hullini, or the History of Kingstonupon-Hull,“ibid. 1735, 8vo. 5.” Piety displayed; in the holy life and death of the ancient and celebrated St. Robert, hermit at Knaresborough, &c.“12 mo. 6.” The most delectable, scriptural, and pious history of the famous and magnificent great Eastern Window in St. Peter’s cathedral, York," ibid. 1762, 8vo.

, an ancestor of the preceding, and a heraldic writer, was born November 3, 1629. He was son of Robert Gibbon, a woollen-draper in London, and a member of the Cloth-workers’ company, by a daughter of the Edgars of Suffolk. Having spent some time in Jersey, he was sent to Jesus college, Cambridge, but afterwards became a soldier, and went to the Netherlands, to France, and in 1659 and 1660 was in Virginia. He procured the appointment of blue-mantle by the patronage of sir William Dugdale, then norroy. His patent was given only during pleasure, and he never received any other. Ab his death, in 17 he was the oldest officer at arms, but thought himself ill-treated in never having farther promotion. To assist in maintaining his family he kept a school. He was a learned, but imprudent man, injuring his best interests by an arrogant insolence to his superiors in the college, filling the margins of the books belonging to the library with severe reflections upon their conduct, couched in quaint terms, and with silly calculations of his own nativity. He despised them for not having had so classical an education as himself, and he supposed his destiny so fixed by the stars which presided at his birth, that good or ill behaviour could never alter it. These were weaknesses which shaded his excellencies. His “Introductio ad Latinam Blazoniam, an essay towards a more correct Blazon in Latin than formerly hath been used,” was a work which did him the highest credit: it was printed in octavo, in 1682. He wrote two small tracts also, in the French language, entitled, “Christian Valour encouraged,” exhorting the king of France to join the Venetians in their design upon the Morea, and to attack the Turks, and leave Germany alone. He likewise wrote “Day Fatality” “Unio Pissidentium” “Prince-protecting Providences;” “Edivardus Confessor redivivus.” “Satan’s welcome,” 1679, and “Flagellum Mercurii Antiducales.” He also diligently collected, out of various authors, a particular account of the great and important services of heralds of former times, which he styled “Heraldo Memoriale,” the heads of which came afterwards into the hands of Maitland, to be inserted in his History of London.

, the oldest British historian, surnamed The Wise, was, according to Leland, born in Wales, in the year 511, but according to others, in 493. Where he was educated is uncertain; but from his writings he appears to have been a monk. Some writers say that he went over to Ireland others, that he visited France and Italy; but they agree that after his return to England, he became a celebrated and assiduous preacher ofChristianity. Leland says that he retired to one of the small islands in the Bristol Channel called the Hulms; but that, being disturbed by pirates, he removed thence to the monastery of Glastonbury, where he died. But all this is supposed to belong to another of the name, called Gildas Albanius. Du Pin says he founded a monastery at Venetia in Britain. The place and time of his death are as uncertain as ther particulars of his history which may be found in our airthorities. He is the only British author of the sixth century whose works are printed; and they are therefore valuable on account of their antiquity, and as containing the only information of the times in which he wrote. The only book, however, attributed to him with certainty, i$ his “Epistola de excidio Britanniæ, et castigatio ordinis ecclesiastici,” Lond. 1525, 8vo, Basil, 1541, 8vo, Lond. 1567, 12mo, Paris, 1576, Basil, 1568, 12mo, and by Gale, in his “Rerum Anglic. Scriptores veteres,” fol. 1684—7. There is also an English translation, Lond. 1652, 12mo. In this he laments over the miseries and almost total ruia of his countrymen, and severely reproves th corruption and profligacy of the age. The first part contains a vague accwnnt of events from the Roman invasion to his own umes. There were two other Gildas’s of the sixth century, whom some make distinct persons, and others consider as one and the same.

, a learned and amiable English clergyman, the second son of Thomas Heber, &sq. of Marton-hall in the deanery of Craven, one of the oldest families in that district of Yorkshire, was born at Marton, Sept. 4, 1728, O. S. He had his school education under the rev. Mr. Wilkinson at Skipton, and the rev. Thomas Hunter at Blackburn, Lancashire, afterwards vicar of Weaverham, Cheshire, author of “Observations on Tacitus,” and other works of credit. From Blackburn he ‘removed to the freeschool at Manchester, and on March 4, 1746--7, was entered a commoner of Brazen-nose college; where his elder’ brother, Richard Heber, was at that time a gentleman commoner. In October 1752, his father died, and his mother in the month of March following. He was admitted to the degree of M. A. July 5, 1753, and chosen fellow of the college November 15 following, having previously in that year been ordained deacon by bishop Trevor, Match 18, and priest by bishop Hoadly, Nov. 1, to qualify himself for the fellowship founded in 1533 by William Clifton, subdean of York, for which he was a candidate. He had private pupils when he was only B. A. and was afterwards in much esteem as a public tutor, particularly of gentlemen commoners, having at one time more than twenty of that rank under his care. In July 1766, his brother died, and, as he left no male issue, Mr. Heber succeeded to a considerable estate at Hodnet in Shropshire, which was bequeathed in 1752 to his mother, Elizabeth Heber, by Henrietta, only surviving daughter and heiress of sir Thomas Vernon of Hodnet, bart. who chose for her heir the daughter, in preference to the son, of her niece Elizabeth wife of Richard Atherton, esq. ancestor of Henrietta wife of Thomas lord Liftbrd. Dec. 5, 1766, he was inducted into the rectory of Chelsea, the presentation to which had, several years before, been purchased for him by his brother and another kind relative. He resigned his fellowship July 1, 1767. Finding the rectorial house at Chelsea bad and unfinished, he in part rebuilt and greatly improved the whole, without asking for dilapidations, as the widow of his predecessor, Sloane Elsmere, D. D. was not left in affluent circumstances. In 1770, he exchanged Chelsea for the Upper Mediety of Malpas, Cheshire, into which he was inducted, July 25, on the presentation of William. Drake, esq. of Ainersham, Bucks; whose eldest son, the late William Drake, esq. had been one of his pupils in Brazen-nose college. In the long incumbency, and latterly non-residence, of his predecessor, the honourable and rev. Henry Moore, D. D. chaplain to queen Anue, and son of the earl of Drogheda, who was instituted to Malpas, Nov. 26, 1713, the parsonage was become ruinous. Mr. Heber therefore built an excellent new house, on a new site, which commands an extensive view of Flintshire and Denbighshire, and some other counties.

, one of the oldest English dramatic writers, was born at North Mims, near St. Alban’s in Hertfordshire, and received the first rudiments of his education at Oxford; but the sprightliness of his disposition not being well adapted to the sedentary life of an acader mician, he went back to his native place, which being in the neighbourhood of the great sir Thomas More, he presently contracted an intimacy with that Maecenas of wit and genius, who introduced him to the knowledge and patronage of the princess Mary. Heywood’s ready aptness for jest and repartee, together with the possession of great skill both in vocal and instrumental music, rendered him a favourite with Henry VIII. who frequently rewarded him highly. On the accession of Edward VI. he still continued in favour, though the author of the “Art of English Poetry” says, it was “for the mirth and quickness of conceit, more than any good learning that was in him.” When his old patroness queen Mary came to the throne, he stood in higher estimation than ever, being admitted into the most intimate conversation with her, on account of his happy talent of telling diverting stories, which it is said he did to amuse her painful hours, even when she was languishing on her death-bed. His stories must have been diverting indeed if they soothed the recollections of such a woman.

In 1789 the first volume of the “Asiatic Researches” was published, and the same year sir William Jones finished his translation of “Sacontala, or the Fatal Ring,” an ancient Indian drama, and one of the greatest curiosities that the literature of Asia had yet brought to light. In 1794 he published, as an institute, prefatory to his larger work, a translation of the ordinances of Menu, who is esteemed by the Hindus the first of created beings, and not only the oldest, but the holiest of legislators. The judgment and candour of the translator, however, led him to appreciate this work no higher than it deserved, as not being calculated for general reading, but exhibiting the manners of a remarkable people in a remote age, as including a system of despotism and priestcraft, limited by law, yet artfully conspiring to give mutual support, and as filled with conceits in metaphysics and natural philosophy, which might be liable to misconstruction. Amidst these employments, he still carried on his extensive correspondence with his learned friends in Europe, unfolding with candour his various pursuits and sentiments, and expressing such anxiety about every branch of science, as proved that even what he called relaxation, was but the diversion of his researches from one channel into another. In addition to the various studies already noticed, botany appears to have occupied a considerable share of his attention; and in this, as in every new acquisition, he disdained to stop at a moderate progress, or be content with a superficial knowledge.

, bishop of Cloghcr in Ireland, was descended from an ancient family, and born at Balquhaine, in the north of Scotland. The first part of his education was at Aberdeen, whence he removed to Oxford. Afterwards he travelled into Spain, Italy, Germany, and France: he spoke French, Spanish, and Italian, with the same propriety and fluency as the natives; and was so great a master of the Latin, that it was said of him, when in Spain, Solus Lcsleius Latine loquitur. He continued twenty-two years abroad; and, during that time, was at the siege of Rochelle, and the expedition to the isle of Rhee, with the duke of Buckingham. He was all along conversant in courts, and at home was happy in that of Charles I. who admitted him into his privy. council both in Scotland and Ireland; in which stations he was continued by Charles II. after the restoration. His chief preferment in the church of Scotland was the bishopric of the Orkneys, whence he was translated to Raphoe in Ireland, in 1633; and, the same year, sworn a privy-counsellor in that kingdom. He built a stately palace in his diocese, in the form and strength of a castle, one of the finest episcopal palaces in Ireland, and proved to be useful afterwards in the rebellion of 1641, by preserving a good part of that country. The good bishop exerted himself, as much as he could, in defence of the royal cause, and endured a siege in his castle of Raphoe, before he would surrender it to Oliver Cromwell, being the last which held out in that country. He then retired to Dublin, where he always used the liturgy of the church of Ireland in his family, and even had frequent confirmations and ordinations. After the restoration, he came over to England; and, in 1661, was translated to the see of Clogher. He died in 1671, aged above 100 3'ears, having been above 50 years a bishop; and was then consequently the oldest bishop in the world.

, or Von Linne' (Charles), the oldest, and only surviving son of the preceding, was born January 20, 1741, at the House of his maternal grandfather, at Fahlun. His father was anxiously desirous of his excelling in natural history, more particularly botany; and committed him, when about the age of nine or ten, t the more particular care of some of his own most favourite pupils. By them he was taught the names of the plants in the Upsal garden, and such of the principles of natural science as were suited to his period of life, as well as to converse habitually in Latin. He appears to have given satisfaction to his father, who procured for him, at the age of eighteen, the appointment of Demonstrator in the botanic garden, an office then first contrived on purpose for him. Having learned to draw from nature, he became an author at the age of twenty-one, publishing in 1762 his first “Decas Plantarum Rariorum Horti Upsaliensis,” the plates of which, in outline only, were drawn by his own hand, and are sufficiently faithful and useful, if not ornamental, while the descriptions are full and scientific. In 1763 another “Decas,” or collection of ten species, came out on the same plan, but, for whatever reason, he printed no more numbers under this title. In 1767, however, he published at Leipsic ten more plates and descriptions, like the above, entitled “Plantarum Rariorum Horti Upsaliensis Fasciculus Primus,” but no second fasciculus appeared. In 1763 he was nominated adjunct professor of botany, with a promise, hitherto unexampled, that after his father’s death he should succeed to all his academical functions. In 1765 he took his degree of doctor of physic, and began to give lectures.

, the oldest actor, and perhapsthe oldest man of his time, is entitled to some notice in this work, although his fame seems to have been derived principally from his longevity. He is said to have been born in the county of West Meath in Ireland, May I, 1690. His family name was Mac-Laughlin, which, on his coming to London, he changed to Macklin. He was employed in early life, as badgeman in Trinity college, Dublin, until his twenty-first year, when he came to England, and associated with some strolling comedians, after which he went back to his situation in Trinity college. In 1716 he again came to England, and appeared as an actor in the theatre, Lincoln’s-inn-fields, where, in Feb. 1741, he established his fame by his performance of Shylock in the “Merchant of Venice,” in which he followed nature, truth, and propriety, with such effect, as to distance all other performers through the whole course of his long life. It was, however, the only character in which he was pre-eminent, and all his subsequent attempts in characters of importance, particularly in tragedy, were unsuccessful, or, at least, displayed no exclusive merit. The remainder of his life consists of a series of tragi-comic adventures, involving the history of the stage for a considerable period, of which it would be impossible to give a satisfactory abridgment. We therefore refer to our authorities, where his life is detailed with great minuteness, and in a manner highly interesting to those to whom the vicissitudes of the theatres, and the wit of the green-room, are matters of importance. He continued on the stage until 1789, when a decay of memory obliged him to take a last leave of it. In 1791, a sum of money was collected by public subscription for the purchase of an annuity, which rendered his circumstances easy. During the last years of his life, his understanding became more and more impaired, and in this state he died July 11, 1797, at the very great age of 107, if the date usually given of his birth be correct. As a dramatic writer, he appears to much advantage in his “Man of the World” and “Love Alamode,” which still retain their popularity. He was a man of good understanding, which he had improved by a course of reading, perhaps desultory, but sufficient to enable him to bear his part in conversation very satisfactorily. While his memory remained, his fund of anecdote was immense, and rendered his company highly agreeable. His age, however, had in his opinion, conferred a dictatorial ppwer, and it was not easy to argue with him, without exciting his irascible temper, which shewed itself in much coarseness of expression. He is said to have been in his better days, a tender husband, a good father, and a steady friend. By his firmness and resolution in supporting the rights of his theatrical brethren, they were long relieved from a species of oppression to which they had been ignominiouslv subjected for many years, whenever the caprice or malice of their enemies chose to exert itself. We allude, says one of his biographers, “to the prosecution which he commenced and carried on against a certain set of insignificant beings, who, calling themselves The Town, used frequently to disturb the entertainments of the theatre, to the terror of the actors, as well as to the annoyance and disgrace of the publick.” It is almost needless to add that this advantage has been again lost to his brethren, by the toleration recently granted to scenes of brntality in the theatres both of London and Dublin, and which has placed them at the mercy of the lowest and most unprincipled of the populace.

, There are two saints of this name, of whom some notice may be taken; the oldest Maximus, of Turin, so called because he was bishop of that city in the fifth century, was eminent for his learning and piety. Many of his “Homilies” remain, some of which bear the name of St. Ambrose, St. Augustin, and Eusebius of messa, in the Library of the fathers. The other St. Maximus was an abbot, and confessor in the seventh century, born of an ancient and noble family at Constantinople. He warmly opposed the heresy of the Monothelites, and died in prison, August 13, 662, in consequence of what he had suffered on that occasion. We have a commentary of his on the books attributed to St. Dionysius the Areopagite, and several other works, which father Combesis published, 1675, 2 vols. folio; and they are also in the Library of the fathers.

, an English antiquary descended from an ancient family, which had been seated from the beginning of the sixteenth century at Great Coxwell, in the county of Berks, and allied by his grandmother to that of Rowe, which had been settled at Higham-Bensted in Waltbamstow, in the county of Essex, ever since the middle of the same century), was born Jan. 13, 1730, at Tunstall in Kent, where his father was rector for near 30 years. He was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school*; and admitted a commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, June 24, 1746. While he resided at Oxford, in 1746, he assisted in correcting an edition of “Calasio’s Concordance,” projected by Jacob Hive the printer, who afterwards associated with the rev. William Romaine, and published this “Concordance” in 1747, 4 vols. folio. Before he was twenty, Mr. Mores published at Oxford, in 1748, 4to, “Nomina & Insignia gentilitia Nobilium Equitumque sub Edvardo primo rege Militantium;” the oldest treasure, as he styles it, of our nobility after “Domesday” and the “Black Book of the Exchequer.” He had also printed, except notes and preface, a new edition in 8vo, of Dionysius Halicarnassensis “De claris Rhetoribus,” with vignettes engraved by Green, the few copies of which were sold after his death f. In 1752, he printed, in half a quarto sheet, some corrections made by Junius in his own copy of his edition of “Cadmon’s Saxon Paraphrase of Genesis, and other parts of the Old Testament,” Amst. 1655; and, in 1754, he engraved fifteen of the drawings from the ms. in the Bodleian library. The title of these plates is, “Figurae quaedam antiquse ex Caedmonis Monaclii Paraphraseos in Genesim exemplari pervetusto in Bibliotheca Bodleiana adservato delineatae ad Anglo- Sax­* Mr. Mores had made a few collec- tides there are several mutilations, lions for a history of this school, and Mr. Mores, in the interval from the lists of persons educated there. A first publication, had written to several view of it was engraved by Mynde. in learned men in different parts of Eu1756, for IVlaitland’stdition of” JStowe’s rope, in order to procure any informaSurvey,“1736, inscribed” Sdiolae tiun, which might be of service to him Mercatorum Scissorum Lond. facies in completing his edition, but met with orientalis. Negatam a Patronis D. no success. It is said that he intended Scholaris, Kdw. Rowe Mores, arm. to subjoin annotations, but nothing of A.M. S. A. S." A history of this --chool that nature was found among his pahas just been ably executed by the pers, except some remaiks on the marRev. H. B. Wilson, B. I>. 1812 1815, gin of a copy of Hudson’s edition, 2 vols. 4to. which was sold at the sale of his books,

It has been said, that after this period he was reduced to great difficulties in his fortune, and to the necessity of practising in some manner the science of physic as a profession. We know, however, of no authority for this assertion. On Feb. 22, 1765, he was advanced to the rank of genera], and lived to be the oldest officer in the king’s service. He died at Cranham, June 30, 1785.

The principal outlines of lord Chatham’s character, sagacity, promptitude, and energy, will be perceived in the foregoing narrative. The peculiar powers of his eloquence have been characterized since his death in language which will convey a forcible idea of it to every reader. “They who have been witnesses to the wonders of his eloquence, who have listened to the music of his voice, or trembled at its majesty; who have seen the persuasive gracefulness of his action, or have felt its force; they who have caught the flame of eloquence from his eye, who have rejoiced in the glories of his countenance, or shrunk from his frowns, will remember the resistless power with which he impressed conviction. But to those who have never seen or heard this accomplished orator, the utmost effort of imagination will be necessary, to form a just idea of that combination of excellence, which gave perfection to his eloquence. His elevated aspect, commanding the awe and mute attention of all who beheld him, while a certain grace in his manner, arising from a consciousness of the dignity of his situation, of the solemn scene in which he acted, as well as of his own exalted character, seemed to acknowledge and repay the respect which he received.—This extraordinary personal dignity, supported on the basis of his well-earned fame, at once acquired to his opinions an assent, which is slowly given to the arguments of other men. His assertions rose into proof, his foresight became prophecy.—No clue was necessary to the labyrinth illuminated by his genius. Truth came forth at his bidding, and realised the wish of the philosopher: she was seen, and beloved.”—We have omitted some parts of this spirited character because not written with equal judgment: but the result of the whole is, that while he sought, with indefatigable diligence, the best and purest sources of political information, he had a mind which threw new lights upon every topic, and directed him with more certainty than any adventitious aid. Another account of his extraordinary powers, more concise, but drawn with wonderful spirit, is attributed to the pen of Mr. Wilkes. “He was born an orator, and from nature possessed every outward requisite to bespeak respect, and even awe. A manly figure, with the eagle eye of the famous Condé, fixed your attention, and almost commanded reverence the moment he appeared; and the keen lightnings of his eye spoke the high spirit of his soul, before his lips had pronounced a syllable. There was a kind of fascination in his look when he eyed any one askance. Nothing could withstand the force of that contagion. The fluent Murray has faultered, and even Fox (afterwards lord Holland) shrunk back appalled, from an adversary, ‘ fraught with fire unquenchable,’ if I may borrow the expression of our great Milton. He had not the correctness of language so striking in the great Roman orator (we may add, and in his son), but he had the verba ardentia, the bold glowing words.”—Lord Chesterfield has given a more general picture of his character, in the following words: “Mr. Pitt owed his rise to the most considerable post and power in this kingdom, singly to his own abilities. In him they supplied the want of birth and fortune, which latter, in others too often supply the want of the former. He was a younger brother, of a very new family, and his fortune was only an annuity of one hundred pounds a-year. The army was his original destination, and a cornetcy of horse his first and only commission in it. Thus unassisted by favour or fortune, he had no powerful protector to introduce him into business, and (if I may use that expression) to do the honours of his parts; but their own strength was fully sufficient. His constitution refused him the usual pleasures, and his genius forbid him the idle dissipations of youth; for so early as at the age of sixteen he was the martyr of an hereditary gout. He therefore employed the leisure which that tedious and painful distemper either procured or allowed him, in acquiring a great fund of premature and useful knowledge. Thus by the unaccountable relation of causes and effects, what seemed the greatest misfortune of his life, was perhaps the principal cause of its splendor. His private life was stained by no vice, nor sullied by any meanness. All his sentiments were liberal and elevated. His ruling passion was an unbounded ambition, which, when supported by great abilities, and crowned with great success, makes what the world calls a great man. He was haughty, imperious, impatient of contradiction, and overbearing; qualities which too often accompany, but always clog great ones. He had manners and address, but one might discover through them too great a consciousness of his own superior talents. He was a most agreeable and lively companion in social life, and had such a versatility of wit, that he would adapt it to all sorts of conversation. He had also a most happy turn to poetry, but he seldom indulged, and seldom avowed it. He came young into parliament, and upon that theatre he soon equalled the oldest and the ablest actors. His eloquence was of every kind, and he excelled in the argumentative, as well as in the declamatory way. But his invectives were terrible, and uttered with such energy of diction, and such dignity of action and countenance, that he intimidated those who were the most willing and best able to encounter him. Their arms fell out of their hands, and they shrunk under the ascendant which his genius gained over theirs.” As a proof of this wonderful power, it is related that sir Robert Walpole scarcely heard the sound of his voice in the House of Commons, when he was alarmed and thunder-struck. He told his friends, that he would be glad at any rate, “to muzzle that terrible cornet of horse.” That minister would have promoted his rise in the army, if he would have given up his seat in the house.

Although his serious studies were now theological, he considered himself as answerable for a proper use of every branch of knowledge which he possessed. He therefore took the charge of several plantations around him in the capacity of a medical practitioner; and attended them with unremitting diligence, and with great success. Thus he lived till 1777, when, relinquishing the practice of physic entirely, he paid a visit to the place of his nativity, which he had not seen since 1755. After remaining three weeks in Scotland, and near a year in England, during which time he was admitted into the confidence of lord George Germaine, secretary of state for the American department, he was appointed chaplain to admiral Harrington, then going out to take a command in the West Indies. Under this gallant officer, and afterwards under lord Rodney, he was present at several engagements, where he displayed a fortitude and zeal for the honour of his country which would not have disgraced the oldest admiral. To the navy, indeed, he seems to have been strongly attached; and he wrote, at an early period of his life, an “Essay on the Duty and Qualifications of a Sea-officer,” with such a knowledge of the service as would not have discredited the pen of the most experienced commander. Of the first edition of this essay the profits were by its benevolent author appropriated, to the Magdalen and British Lying-in hospitals, as those of the second and third were to the Maritime-school, or, in the event of its failure, to the Marine society.

About 1752, he was appointed professor of astronomy in Gresham college. His knowledge of the subject was sufficient to qualify him for this situation, but his zeal for Hutchinsonian principles led him to dispute some parts of the Newtonian philosophy in a way which did uot greatly advance his reputation, and he did not retain his professorship long. He was far more popular afterwards in his opposition to the Jew Bill. All his writings on this subject were collected by himself, and printed by the city of London. On quitting his situation in St. George’s, Hanoversquare, in 1756, he became curate and morning preacher at St. Olave’s, Southwark, and when he left it in 1759, he became morning preacher, for nearly two years, at St. Bartholomew the Great, near West Smithfield. In 1764, he was chosen by the inhabitants of St. Andrew, Wardrobe, and St. Anne, Blackfriars, to be their rector, the right of presentation, which is vested in the crown and in the parishioners alternately, then belonging to the latter. This produced a suit in chancery, which was decided in his favour in 1766. In this situation he continued during thirty years, and was probably the most popular preacher of his day. It was noticed in the newspapers that on the Good Friday after his being settled here, he administered the sacrament to upwards of five hundred persons, and on the Sunday following to upwards of three hundred, numbers which had never been remembered by the oldest inhabitant, From this time he devoted himself to the service of his parishioners and his hearers at St. Dunstan’s, but was frequently solicited to plead the cause of charity for various institutions, and few preachers ever produced more money on such occasions.

The reputation which Dryden gained by the many prologues he wrote, made the players always solicitous to have one of his, as being sure to be well received by the public. Dryden’s price for a prologue had usually been four guineas, with which sum Southern once presentee; him when Dryden, returning the money, said, “Young man, this is too little, I must have six guineas.” Southern answered, that four had been his usual price: “Yes,” says Dryden, “it has been so, but the players have hitherto had my labours too cheap; for the future I must have six guineas.” Southern also was industrious to draw all imaginable profits from his poetical labours. Dryden once took occasion to ask him, how much he got by one of his plays? Southern said, after owning himself ashamed to tell him, 7OO/.; which astonished Dryden, as it was more by 6OO/, than he himself had ever got by his most successful plays. But it appears that Southern was not beneath the arts of solicitation, and often sold his tickets at a very high price, by making applications to persons of quality and distinction; a degree of servility, which Dryden might justly think below the dignity of a poet, and more in the character of an under-player. Dryden entertained a high opinion of Southern’s abilities; and prefixed a copy of verses to a comedy of his, called “The Wife’s Excuse,” acted in 1692. The night that Southern’s “Innocent Adultery” was first acted, which has been esteemed by some the most adocting play in any language, a gentlemnu took occasion to ask Dryden, “what was his opinion of Southern’s genius?” who replied, “that he thought him such another poet as Otway.” Such indeed was Dry den’s opinion of his talents, that being unable to finish his “Cieomenes,” he consigned it to the care of Southern, who wrote one half of the fifth act of that tragedy, and was with reason highly flattered by this mark of the author’s confidence and esteem. Of all Southern’s plays, ten in number, the most finished is “Oroonoko, or the Royal Slave:” which is built upon a real fact, related by Mrs. Beha in a novel. Besides the tender and delicate strokes of passion in this play, there are many shining and manly sentiments; and some have gone so far beyond the truth as to say, that the most celebrated even of Shakspeare’s plays cannot furnish so many striking thoughts, and such a glow of animated poetry. Southern died May 26, 1746, aged eighty-five. He lived the last ten years of his life in Tothill street, Westminster, and attended the abbey service very constantly; being particularly fond of church music. He is said to have died the oldest and the richest of his dramatic brethren. Oldys, in his ms additions to Gildon’s continuation of Langbaine, says, that he remembered Mr. Southern “a grave and venerable old gentleman. He lived near Covent-garden, and used often to frequent the evening prayers there, always neat and decently dressed, commonly in black, with his silver sword and silver locks; but latterly it seems he resided at Westminster.” The late poet Gray, in a letter to Mr. Walpole, dated from Burnham in Buckinghamshire, in Sept. 1737, has also the following observation concerning this author: “We have old Mr. Southern at a gentleman’s house a little way off, who often comes to see us; he is now seventy-seven years old, and has almost wholly lost his memory; but is as agreeable an old man as can be; at least I persuade myself so when I look at him, and think of Isabella and Oroonoko.” Mr. Mason adds in a note on this passage, that “Mr. Gray always thought highly of his pathetic powers, at the same time that he blamed his ill taste for mixing them so injudiciously with farce, in order to produce that monstrous species of composition called Tragi-comedy.” Mr. Southern, however, in the latter part of his life, was sensible of the impropriety of blending tragedy and comedy, and used to declare to lord Corke his regret at complying with the licentious taste of the time. His dramatic writings were for the first time completely published by T. Evans, in 3 vols. 12mo.

The discovery of this patent by Mr. Malone, is of farther importance, as tending to rescue the character of Lord Burleigh from the imputation of being hostile to our poet. The oldest date of this reproach is in “Fuller’s Worthies,” a book published at the distance of more than seventy years; and on this authority, which has been copied by almost all the biographers of Spenser, it has been said that Burleigh intercepted the pension, as too much to be given “to a ballad maker,” and that when the queen, upon Spenser’s presenting some poems to her, ordered him the gratuity of one hundred pounds, Burleigh asked, “What! all this for a song!” on which the queen replied, “Then give him what is reason.” The story concludes, that Spenser having long waited in vain for the fulfilment of the royal order, presented to her the following ridiculous memorial:

, the first of a family of eminent printers and booksellers, called in French Detournes, was born at Lyons in 1504, and learned printing first in the house of Sebastian Gryphius. He appears to have established another house about 1540, and printed many books in the name and on account of Gryphius; but from 1544 we find his own name to a number of very correct editions. Among others may be mentioned, an edition of “Petrarch,” in Italian, 1545, 16mo, with a letter from him to Maurice Sceva, of Lyons, in which he gives a curious account of the discovery of Laura’s tomb, in 1533, in the chapel of the Cordeliers’ church at Avignon a “Dante,” 1547, 16mo “Les Marguerites des Marguerites de la reine de Navarre,” 1547, 8vo; “Vitruviu$,” with Philander' s commentary and woodcuts finely executed, 1552, 8vo and “Froissart’s Chronicles,” 1559—61, 4 vols. fol. Most of his editions have Latin prefaces or dedications from his pen. His talents procured him the honour of being appointed king’s printer at Lyons, where he died of the plague in 1564. His device was two vipers forming a circle, the female devouring the head of the male, while she herself is devoured by her young, with the inscription “Quod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne faceris.” This device is still to be seen on the front of a house at Lyons, in the rue Raisin, where his printing-office stood. He was succeeded by his son, John, who was also king’s printer, and carried on the business until 1585. His editions did not yield in elegance or correctness to those of his father, but being obliged at the date above-mentioned to quit his country, upon account of his religion, for he was a protestant, he settled at Geneva, where he had every encouragement, and in 1604 became a member of the council of two hundred. Like the Geneva printers, however, he deteriorated what he printed here by employing bad paper. He died in 1615. His descendants continued the printing and bookselling business at Geneva, and had established a very extensive trade, when in 1726, John James, and James Detournes purchased the stock of Anisson and Posnel, famous booksellers of Lyons, and obtained permission, notwithstanding their religion, to settle there; and as they also continued their house at Geneva, they greatly extended their trade, particularly to Spain and Italy. In 1740 the learned John Christian Wolff dedicated to them his “Monumenta Typographica,” as to the oldest printing and bookselling family in Europe. Their trade, which consisted chiefly in theological works, having begun to fall off when the Jesuits were suppressed, their sons, who had a plentiful fortune, sold off the whole of their stock in 1730, and retired from a business which had been carried on in their family with great reputation for nearly two hundred and forty years.

Vander-Linden wrote many books upon physic, which are enumerated in our authorities, and one “De Scriptis Medicis.” This, which is a catalogue of books upon physic, was printed and enlarged several times by the author in his life-time; and very considerably so after his death, by a German, named Merklinns, who published it in a thick quarto, under the title of “Lindenius Renovattis,” at Nuremberg, in 1686, but it never was either correct or complete, and has since given place to more recent works of the kind, particularly Eloy’s Dictionary. Vander-Linden was also the editor of “Celsus,” Leyden, 1657, 12mo, and left an edition of the works of Hippocrates, published there in 1665, 2 vols. 8vo, Greek and Latin. With this he had taken great pains, but did not live to finish more than a correct text, to attain which he carefully compared all the old editions and several manuscripts, and restored a great number of passages, which were not correct even in Foesius’s edition. His Latin translation is that of Cornarius, because the oldest, and that commonly used. Having been attacked by his last illness a little before this edition was finished, he was prevented from publishing the notes which he intended.

Valuable as Vertue’s engravings are, he would have had more admirers, if his style had been more spirited; yet the antiquary and the historian who prefer truth to elegance of design, and correctness to bold execution, have properly appreciated his works, and have placed him, in point of professional industry at least, next to his predecessor Hollar. But the public owe another obligation to Vertue. After his death the late lord Orford purchased the manuscript notes and observations which he had put down, as materials for a history of artists, and from them published that very useful and entertaining work, which he entitled “Anecdotes of Fainting in England; with some account of the principal Artists, and incidental notes on other Arts, collected by Mr. George Vertue,” 1762, 5 vols. 4to; since republished in 1782, 5 vols. 8vo. “Vertue,” says Mr. Walpole, “had for several years been collecting materials for a work ‘ upon Painting and Painters:’ he conversed and corresponded with most of the virtuosi in England he was personally acquainted with the oldest performers in the science: he minuted down every thin^ he heard from them. He visited every collection of them, attended sales, copied every paper he could find relative to the art, searched offices, registers of parishes, and registers of wills for births and deaths, turned over all our own authors, and translated those of other countries which related to his subject. He wrote down every thing he heard, saw, or read. His collections amounted to near forty volumes, large and small. In one of his pocket-books I found a note of his first intention of compiling such a work: it was in 1713, and he continued it assiduously to his death in 1757. These Mss. I bought of his widow after his decease.” Venue’s private character, it must not be omitted, was of the most amiable kind; friendly, communicative, upright in all his dealings, a most dutiful son, and an affectionate husband. He laboured almost to the last, solicitous to leave a decent competence to a wife, with whom he lived many years in tender harmony, and who died in 1776, in the seventy-sixth year of her age. He had a brother James, who followed the same profession at Bath, and died about 1765.

, an artist and antiquary of great taste and talents, was born August 21, 1739, at Twickenham, in the house afterwards the residence of Richard Owen Cambridge, esq. He was educated at Eton school, from which he went to Christ’s-college, Cambridge, but took no degree. He returned from an extensive tour through France, Italy, Istria, and Switzerland, in 1769; and soon after married the honourable Charlotte De Grey, sister to the lord Walsingham; by whom he has left no issue. In all which is usually comprehended under the denomination of Belles Lettres, Mr. Windham may claim a place among the most learned men of his time. To an indefatigable diligence in the pursuit of knowledge, he joined a judgment clear, penetrating, and unbiassed, and a memory uncommonly retentive and accurate. An ardent love for truth, a perfect freedom from prejudice, jealousy, and affectation, an entire readiness to impart his various and copious information, united with a singular modesty and simplicity, marked his conversation and manners. Few men had a more critical knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages, or a deeper feeling for the beauties of style and sentiment in the classic writers; but in his minute and comprehensive acquaintance with every thing in them illustrative of human life and manners, especially all that relates to the fine arts, he scarcely had an equal. The history of art in the middle ages, and every circumstance relative to the revival of literature and the arts, from the fourteenth century to the present time, were equally familiar to him; and his acquaintance with the language of modern Italy was surpassed by few. He had very particularly studied the antiquities of his own country, and was eminently skilled in the history of English architecture. His pencil, as a draftsman from nature, was exquisite. His portraits of mere natural scenery were peculiarly spirited and free, and his drawings of architecture and antiquities most faithful and elegant. During his residence at Rome, he studied and measured the remains of ancient architecture there, particularly the baths, with a precision which would have done honour to the most able professional architect. His numerous plans and sections of them he gave to Mr. Cameron, and they are engraved in his great work on the Roman baths. To this work he also furnished a very considerable and valuable part of the letter-press. He also drew up the greater portion of the letter-press of the second volume of the “Ionian Antiquities,” published by the society of Dilettanti; and Mr. Stuart received material assistance from him in the second volume of his Athens. In his own name he published very little. His accuracy of mind rendered it difficult to him to please himself; and, careless of the fame of an author, he was better content that his friends should profit by his labours, than that the public should know the superiority of his own acquirements. He had been long a fellow of the Royal and Antiquarian Societies; and in the latter, was for many years of the council, and one of the committee for the publication of the Cathedrals of England. He more than once declined the honourable office of vice-president. Of the society of Dilettanti he was one of the oldest members; and to his zeal it was principally owing that the publications of that society were continued, after a suspension of many years. Mr. Windham died at Earsham-house, Norfolk, Sept. 21, 181U. In private life, he was the most amiable of men. Benevolent, generous, cheerful, without caprice, above envy, his temper was the unclouded sun-shine of virtue and sense. If his extreme modesty and simplicity of character prevented his striking at the first acquaintance, every hour endeared him to those who had the happiness of his intimacy. In every relation of life he was exemplary. A kind husband, a firm friend, a generous landlord, an indulgent master.

, a man of taste and learning, was born Nov. 28, 1701, in the parish of St. Botolph, Aldersgate. His father, sir Daniei Wray, was a London citizen, who resided in Little Britain, made a considerable fortune in trade (as a soap-boiler), and purchased an estate in Essex, near Ingatestone, which his son possessed aftr r him. Sir Daniel served the office of sheriff for that county, and was knighted in 1708 on presenting a loyal address to queen Anne. His son was educated at the Charter-house, and was supposed in 1783 to have been the oldest survivor of any person educated there. In 1718 he went to Queen’s college, Cambridge, as a fellow commoner. He took his degree of B. A. in 1722, after which he made the tour of Italy, accompanied by John, earl of Morton, and Mr. King, the son of lord chancellor King, who inherited his title. How long he remained abroad between 1722 and 1728 is not precisely ascertained, except by the fact that a cast in bronze, by Pozzo, was taken of his profile, in 1726, at Home. It had this inscription upon the reverse, “Nil actum reputans, si quid superesset agendum,” which line is said to have been a portrait of his character, as he was in all his pursuits a man of uncommon diligence and perseverance. After his return from his travels, he became M.A.-in 1728, and was already so distinguished in philosophical attainments, that he was chosen a fellow of the Royal Society in March 1728-9. He resided however generally at Cambridge, though emigrating occasionally^ to London, till 1739, or 1740, in which latter year, January 1740-41, he was elected F. S. A. and was more habitually a resident in town. In 1737 commenced his acquaintance and friendship with the noble family of Yorke; and in 1745, Mr. Yorke, afterwards earl of Hardwicke, as teller of the exchequer, appointed Mr.Wray his deputy teller, in which office he continued until 1782, when his great punctuality and exactness in any business he undertook made the constant attendance of the office troublesome to him. He was an excellent critic in the English language; an accomplished judge of polite literature, of virtft, and the fine arts; and deservedly a member of most of our learned societies; he was also an elected trustee of the British Museum. He was one of the writers of the “Athenian Letters” published by the earl of Hardwicke; and in the first volume of the Archaeologia, p. 128, are printed “Notes on the walls of antient Rome,” communicated by him in 1756; and “Extracts from different Letters from Rome, giving an Account of the Discovery of a most beautiful Statue of Venus, dug up there 1761.” He died Dec. 29, 1783, in his eighty. second year, much regretted by his surviving friends, to whose esteem he was entitled by the many worthy and ingenious qualities. which he possessed. Those of his heart were as distinguished as those of his mind; the rules of religion, of virtue, and morality, having regulated his conduct from the beginning to the end of his days. He was married to a lady of merit equal to his own, the daughter of Barrel, esq. of Richmond. This lady died at Richmond, where Mr.Wray had a house, in May 1803. Mr. Wray left his library at her disposal and she, knowing his attachment to the Charter-house, made the governors an offer of it, which was thankfully accepted and a room was fitted up for its reception, and it is placed under the care of the master, preacher, head schoolmaster, and a librarian. The public at large, and particularly the friends of Mr. Wray, will soon be gratified by a memoir of him written by the lare George Hardinge, esq. intended for insertion in Mr. Nichols’s “Illustrations of Literature.” This memoir, of which fifty copies have already been printed for private distribution, abounds with interesting anecdotes and traits of character, and copious extracts from Mr. Wray’s correspondence, and two portraits, besides an engraving of the cameo.

In 1379, having completed the several purchases of land necessary for the scite of the college, he obtained the king’s patent or licenceto found, dated June 3.0, of that year; and likewise the pope’s bull to the same effect. In his charter of foundation which he published on November 26 following, his college is entitled Seinte Marie College of Wynchestre in Oxenford. But it is raxher remarkable that the name of New college, which was then given in common speech without much impropriety, should be by-some means continued until the present day, when it is in reality the oldest as to its principal buildings, and the seventh in the order of foundation. The foundation-stone was laid March 5, 1380, and the whole completed in six years; and on April 14, 1386, the society took possession by a public entrance accompanied with much solemnity.