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

, an eminent magistrate of the city of London, was one of the younger sons of James Abney, esq. of Willesley, in the county of Derby, where his ancestors had resided for upwards of five hundred years. He was born January 1639; and, as his mother died in his infancy, his father placed him at Loughborough school, in Leicestershire; to be under the eye of his aunt, lady Bromley, widow of sir Edward Bromley, a baron of the Exchequer in the reigns of queen Elizabeth and James I. At what time he came to London, we are not told; but he appears to have carded on business with success and reputation, as in 1693 he was elected sheriff of London, and in the following year he was chosen alderman of Vintry ward, and about the same time received the honour of knighthood from king William. In 1700, some years before his turn, he was chosen lord mayor, and employecd his influence in favour of the Protestant religion with much zeal. He had the courage, at this critical juncture, when the king of France had proclaimed the Pretender king of Great Britain, to propose an address from the Corporation to king William, although opposed by the majority of his brethren on the bench; and he completely succeeded. The example being followed by other corporations, this measure proved of substantial service to the king, who was thereby encouraged to dissolve the Parliament, and take the sense of the people, which was almost universally in favour of the Protestant succession. The zeal sir Thomas had displayed in this affair, as well as his steady adherence to the civil and religious privileges established by the Revolution, rendered him so popular, that his fellow-citizens elected him their representative in parliament. He was also one of the first promoters of the Bank of England, and for many years before his death was one of its directors. He died Feb. 6, 1721-2, aged 83, after having survived all his senior brethren of the court of Aldermen, and become the father of the city. He was a man of strict piety and independence of mind, and munificent in his charities. Having been educated among the dissenters, he attended their places of worship in common, but in his magistracy attended the church, on all public occasions, and. wjien solicited to support pubirc charities. The most remarkable circumstance of his hospitality, is the kind and lasting asyr lum which he provided for the celebrated Dr. Watts at his house at Stoke Newington. That eminent divine was attacked by an illness in 1712, which incapacitated him for public service. “This calamitous state,” says Dr. Johnson, “made the compassion. of his friends necessary, and drew upon him the attention of sir Thomas Abney, who received him into his house; where, with a constancy of friendship and uniformity of conduct not often to be found, he was treated for thirty-six years with all the kindness that friendship could prompt, and all the attention that respect could dictate. Sir Thomas died about eight years afterwards, but he continued with the lady and her daughters to the end of his life.”

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

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

, one of the writers in the Byzantine history, was born at Constantinople in the year 1220, and brought up at the court of the emperor John Ducas, at Nice. He studied mathematics, poetry, and rhetoric under Theodorus Exapterygus, and learned logic of Nicephorus Blemmidas. In his one-and-twentieth year, he maintained a learned dispute with Nicholas the physician, concerning the eclipse of tLe sun, before the emperor John. He was at length appointed great logothete, and employed in the most important affairs of the empire. John Ducas sent him ambassador to Larissa, to establish a peace with Michael of Epirus. He was also constituted judge by this emperor, to try Michael Comnenus on a suspicion of being engaged in a conspiracy. Theodorus Lascaris, the son of John, whom he had taught logic, appointed him governor of all the western provinces of his empire. When he held this government, in the year 1255, being engaged in a war with Michael Angelus, he was taken prisoner by him. In 1260, he gained his liberty by means of the emperor Palasologus, who sent him ambassador to Constantine prince of Bulgaria. After his return, he applied himself wholly to the instruction of youth, in which employment he acquitted himself with great honour for many years; but being at last weary of the fatigue, he resigned it to Holobolus. In 1272, he sat as one of the judges upon the cause of John Vecchus, patriarch of Constantinople. The year following he was sent to pope Gregory, to settle a peace and re-union between the two churches, which was accordingly concluded; and he swore to it, in the emperor’s name, at the second council of Lyons, in 1274. He was sent ambassador to John prince of Bulgaria in 1382, and died soon after his return. His principal work is his “Historia Byzantina,” Gr. Lat. Paris, fol. 1651. This history, which he was well qualified to write, as he took an active part in public aifajrs, contains the history of about fifty-eight years; i.e. from 1203, when Baldwin, earl of Flanders, was crowned emperor, to 1261, when M. Palseologus put himself in the place of Baldwin II. A manuscript translation of it, by sir William Petty, was in Mr. Ames’s collection. The original was found in the east by Douza, and first published in 1614; but the Paris edition is superior, and now very scarce. His theological writings were never printed. His son Coustantine succeeded him as grand logothete, and was called by the Greeks, the younger Metaphrastes, from his having written the lives of some of the saints in the manner of Simeon Metaphrastes. There is little else in his history that is interesting.

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

, a Nestorian priest, lived, according to Vossius, under the emperor Zeno, about the year 483; but Cave is of opinion that he lived some years later, as he continued his history five books after the deposing of Peter the Fuller. This was an Ecclesiastical History, beginning with the reign of Theodosius the younger, when Nestorius published his opinions, and ending with the reign of Zeno, and the deposition of Peter the Fuller, who had usurped the see of Antioch. He wrote likewise a treatise against the council of Chalcedon. Photius praises his style, but censures his principles. There is only a fragment extant of his history in the Concilia, vol. VII. and in the collections of Theodoras Lector.

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

He wrote an “History of Justinian’s reign” in five books, at the desire of Eutychianus, secretary of state, who was his intimate friend, and probably furnished hinty with many important materials for the purpose. It begins at the 26th year of Justinian’s reign, where Procopius ends; and, as Evagrius says, was carried down to the flight of Cosroes the younger to the Romans, and his restoration by Mauritius: but the same Evagrius adds, that the work was not then published. It was printed in Greek, with Bonaventure Vulcanius’s Latin version and notes, at Leyden, 1594, in 4to; and at Paris in the king’s printinghouse, 1660, in folio, to accompany the other Byzantine historians. His manner is prolix, and his style too much interspersed with poetical flights; but his facts are said to be accurate.

In this society he soon became known to and patronized by people of the first rank, and was in habits of intimacy with many of them; particularly the earl of Burlington, so well known for his taste in the fine arts, especially architecture. For him he painted, among others, a large picture of the royal family of England: in the middle compartment are all the younger branches of the family on a very large canvas, and on one hand above the door a half length of her majesty queen Caroline; the picture of the king was intended to fill the niche opposite to it, but Mr. Aikman’s death happening before it was begun, the place for it is left blank. This picture came into the possession of the duke of Devonshire, whose father married lady Mary Boyle, daughter and only child to the earl of Burlington. Towards the close of his life he painted many other piclures of people of the first rank and fashion in England. At Blickling in Norfolk, the seat of Hobart earl of Buckinghamshire, are a great many full length pictures by Mr. Aikman, of noblemen, gentlemen, and ladies, relations and friends of the earl. These, with the royal family above named, were his last works; and but a few of the number he painted in London. He died June 7, 1731.

, an eminent Italian poet, was born of a noble family at Florence, in 1475, and passed the early part of his life in habits of friendship with Bernardo and Cosimo Rucellai, Trissino, and other scholars who had devoted themselves more particularly to the study of classical literature. Of the satires and lyric poems of Alamanni, several were produced under the pontificate of LeoX. In the year 1516, he married Alessandra Serristori, a lady of great beauty, by whom he had a numerous offspring. The rank and talents of Alamanni recommended him to the notice and friendship of the cardinal Julio de Medici, who, during the latter part of the pontificate of Leo X. governed on the behalf of that pontiff the city of Florence. The rigid restrictions imposed by the cardinal on the inhabitants, by which they were, among other marks of subordination, prohibited from carrying arms under severe penalties, excited the indignation of many of the younger citizens of noble families, who could ill brook the loss of their independence; and among the rest, of Alamanni, who, forgetting the friend in the patriot, not only joined in a conspiracy against the cardinal, immediately after the death of Leo X. but is said to have undertaken to assassinate him with his own hand. His associates were Zanobio Buondelmonti, Jacopa da Diaceto, Antonio Brueioli, and several other persons of distinguished talents, who appear to have been desirous of restoring the ancient liberty of the republic, without sufficiently reflecting on the mode by which it was to be accomplished. The designs of the conspirators, however, were discovered, and Alamanni was under the necessity of saving himself by flight. After many adventures and vicissitudes, in the course of which he returned to Florence, and took an active part in the commotions that agitated his country, he finally withdrew to France, where he met with a kind and honourable reception from Francis I. who was a great admirer of Italian poetry, and not only conferred on him the order of St. Michael, but employed him in many important missions.

, an eminent Italian artist, and one of the earliest scholars that appeared in the revival of letters, was of a noble and very ancient family at Florence, but was born at Venice in the end of the fourteenth, or beginning of the fifteenth century. Various authors have given 1398, 1400, and 1404, as the date of his birth. In his youth he was remarkable for his agility, strength, and skill in bodily exercises, and an unquenchable thirst of knowledge possessed him from his earliest years. In the learned languages he made a speedy and uncommon proficiency. At the age of twenty, he first distinguished himself by his Latin comedy entitled “Philodoxius,” copies of which he distributed among his friends, as the work of Lepidus, an ancient poet. The literati were completely deceived, and bestowed the highest applauses on a piece which they conceived to be a precious remnant of antiquity. It was written by him during the confinement of sickness, occasioned by too close an application to study, and appeared first about the year 1425, when the rage for ancient manuscripts was at its height, and Lepidus for a while took his rank with Plautus and Terence. Even in the following century, the younger Aldus Manutius having met with it in manuscript, and alike ignorant of its former appearance, and the purpose it was intended to serve, printed it at Lucca, 1588, as a precious remnant of antiquity. Alberti took orders afterwards in order to have leisure to prosecute his studies. In 1447 he was a canon of the metropolitan church of Florence, and abb of St. Savino, or of St. Ermete of Pisa. Although he became known to the world as a scholar, a painter, a sculptor, and an architect, it is to his works of architecture that he owes his principal fame. He may be regarded as one of the restorers of that art, of which he understood both the theory and practice, and which he improved by his labours as well as his writings. Succeeding to Brunelleschi, he introduced more graceful forms in the art; but some consider him notwithstanding as inferior to that celebrated architect. Alberti studied very carefully the remains of ancient architecture, which he measured himself at Rome and other parts of Italy, and has left many excellent specimens of his talents. At Florence, he completed the Pitti palace, and built that of Ruccellai, and the chapel of the same family in the church of St. Pancras; the facade of the church of Santa Maria Novella, and the choir of the church of Nunziata. Being invited to Rome by Nicholas V. he was employed on the aqueduct of PAqua Vergine, and to raise the fountain, of Trevi; but this having since been reconstructed by Clement XII. from the designs of Nicholas Salvi, no traces of Alberti’s work remain. At Mantua, he constructed several buildings, by order of Louis of Gonzaga, of which the most distinguished are the churches of St. Sebastian, and that of St. Andrew: the latter, from the grandeur and beauty of its proportions, is esteemed a model for ecclesiastical structures. But his principal work is generally acknowledged to be the church of St. Francis at Rimini.

Alcibiades, though an exile, endeavoured to restore the power of his country. He was in a small town of Phrygia, Under the government of Pharnabazus, when he was informed of the levies the younger Cyrus was making in Asia Minor, and concluding that this prince meditated an expedition against his brother Artaxerxes, he determined to repair to the court of the king of Persia, to apprise him cf the danger, and to obtain succours for the deliverance of his country. But assassins sent by the satrap suddenly surrounded his ho^use, and wanting the courage to attack him, set fire to it. Alcibiades rushed forth sword in hand through the flames, repulsed the barbarians, and fell beneath a shower of darts. This happened when he was only forty years old, in the ninety-fourtn olympiad, or 404 B.C.

, called the younger, to distinguish him from his grand-uncle the cardinal, was born, according to La Motte, in 1574, in the principality of Friuli, and studied at Padua, where he became so distinguished in early life, that Baillet has classed him among his “Enfants celebres par leurs etudes.” He afterwards studied law with equal reputation, and in his twenty-sixth year published his commentaries on the institutions of Caius. When he went to Rome, he was employed as secretary under cardinal Octavio Bandini, and discharged this office with great honour for almost 20 years. He was one of the first members of the Academy of Humourists, wrote a learned treatise in Italian on the device of the society, ftnd displayed his genius on many different subjects.

, a painter of Nuremberg, of the sixteenth century, was the disciple of the younger Holbein, and a successful imitator of his manner. His designs were correct, the disposition of the figures admirable, and the perspective excellent, nor was he deficient in colouring. His chief reputation rests on a composition of the history of Joseph, which he described in twelve pictures. He also painted a portrait of the emperor Charles V. which that monarch, according to the testimony of Sandrart, accounted equal to any of the portraits of him painted by Titian; and to express his high approbation of that performance, he not only paid the artist three times as much as he expected, with a liberality truly royal, but he honoured him also with a rich chain of gold and a medal. There are several of his pictures in the royal gallery of Munich. The abbé Marolles, and, after him, Florent le Comte mention Amberger, as an engraver, without specifying his works; but Basan tells us, that he engraved in wood several prints, from his own compositions. He died in 1550.

Marcellus Marcini being chosen pope in 1555, under the name of Marcellus II. Ammirato, who knew that Nicolao Majorano, bishop of Molfetta, a city near Barri, had been formerly a friend of the pope’s, persuaded him to go to Rome, and congratulate him upon his election, with a view, by attending the bishop in his journey, to procure some place under the nephews of that pope; but, as they were preparing for this journey, the death of Marcellus put a stop to their intended scheme, and destroyed their hopes; upon which Ammirato retired to a country-seat of his father’s, where he applied himself closely to his studies. At last he was determined to return to Naples, in order to engage again in the study of the law, and to take his degrees in it; his relish for this profession was not in the least increased, but he thought the title he might procure would be of advantage to him. He had not, however, been six months at Naples, before he grew weary of it, and entered successively into the service of several noblemen as secretary. Upon his return to Lucca, he was appointed by this city to go and present a petition to pope Pius IV. in their favour, which office he discharged with success. Upon his return to Lucca, he was appointed by the city of Naples to settle there, and write the history of that kingdom; but the cold reception he met with from the governors who had sent for him, disgusted him so much, that he left the city with a resolution to return no more, and although they repented afterwards of their neglect of him, and used all possible means to bring him back, he continued inflexible. He then went to Rome, where he procured a great many friends; and, having travelled over part of Italy, visited Florence, where he resolved to settle, being engaged by the kind reception which the Grand Duke gave to men of letters. He was appointed to write the history of Florence, and received many instances of that prince’s bounty, which he increased after this publication, by presenting him with a canonry in the cathedral of Florence. This easy situation now gave him an opportunity of applying himself more vigorously to his studies, and writing the greatest part of his works. He died at Florence the 30th of January, 1601, in the 69th year of his age. His works are as follow: 1. “Arguments,” in Italian verse, of the cantos of Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso, which were first published in the edition of that poem at Venice, in 1548, in 4to. 2. “II Decalione dialogo del poeta,” Naples, 1560, 8vo. 3. “Istorie Florentine dopo la fondatione di Fierenze insino all' anno 1574,” printed at Florence, 1600, in 2 vols. folio. 4. “Discorsi sopra Cornelio Tacito,” Florence, 1598, 4to. 5. “Delle famiglie nobili Napolitane,” part I. at Florence, 1580, in folio; part II. at Florence, 1651, folio. 6. “Discorsi delle famiglie Paladina et PAntoglietta,” Florence, 1605, in 4to. 7. “Albero et storia della famiglia de conte Guidi, coll' agiunte de Scipione Ammirato Giovane,” Florence, 1640 and 1650. 8. “Delle famiglie Florentine,” Florence, 1615, folio. 9. “Vescovi de Fiesoli di Volterra, e d‘Arezzo, con l’aggiiinta di Scipione Ammirato il Giovane,” Florence, 1637, 4to. 10. “Opuscoli varii,” Florence, 1583, in 8vo. 11. “Rime varie,” printed in a collection of poems by different authors. Venice, 1553, in 8vo. 12. “Poesi Spirituali,” Venice, 1634, in 4to, 13. “Annotazioni sopra la seconde parte de Sonetti di Bernardino Rota fatti in morte di Porzia Capece sua moglia,” Naples, 1560, in 4to. He left a manuscript life of himself, which is said to have been deposited in the library of the hospital of St. Mary. He made his secretary, Dei Bianco, his heir, on condition of taking his name, who accordingly called himself Scipio Ammirato the younger. He was editor of some of his benefactor’s works, particularly of his history of Florence, a performance of great accuracy and credit.

, a miscellaneous writer of considerable learning and talents, was the younger son of Joseph Andrews, esq. of Shaw-house, near Newbury, Berks, and was born therein 1737. He was educated by a private tutor, the rev. Mr. Matthews, rector of Shaw, in Berks, and early distinguished himself by his application to literature and the fine arts. At the age of eighteen or nineteen, he went into the Berkshire militia, on the first calling out of that body of men, and held the rank of lieutenant until the regiment was disbanded.

, the sons of a mechanic in the town of Eu in Normandy, became very eminent for their skill in sculpture; and after pursuing their studies at Rome, embellished Paris with many of their best works. Of these, Francis executed the^ altar of Val de Grace, the fine marble crucifix of the high altar of the Sorbonne, the mausoleum of cardinal de Berulle in the church of St. Honorius; and especially that of the duke of Montmorenci at Moulins, and the four figures on the tomb of the duke de Longueville at Paris; the figure of Prudence is esteemed a chef-d'ouvre of graceful expression, This artist is said to have exercised his art in England, but we do not find him noticed by Walpole. He died at Paris in 1699, in the 95th year of his age. Michael, who was the younger brother, born in 1612, executed the tomb of the grand prior of Souvre, the ornaments on the gate of St. Dennis, the figures on the front gate of Val-de-grace, Amphitrite, &c. He assisted his brother likewise in some of his works, and died in 1686, aged 74. They were both buried at St. Koch, where they are honoured with an epitaph.

, the younger, is mentioned by Jerom, in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical writers, as bishop of Laodicea in Syria. Jerom adds that he employed his younger days chiefly in grammatical studies, and afterwards published innumerable volumes upon the holy scriptures, and died in the time of the emperor Theodosius; he mentions his thirty books against Porphyry, as being then extant, and esteemed the most valuable of his works. Apollinarius is placed by Cave as flourishing about the year 370, but Tillemont thinks he was bishop of Luodicea in the year 362, at the latest. Lardner thinks it certain tnat he flourished in the time of the emperor Julian, and afterwards; and it seems probable that he died about the year 382. He %vrote commentaries upon almost all the books of holy scripture, none of which have descended to our time except a “Paraphrase on the Psalms,” which has been often reprinted in Greek and Latin, and of which an account may be seen in Fabricius. In his early days, he wrote and preached the orthodox faith, but afterwards swerved so far from it, as to be deemed a heretic, and thus became the founder of a sect called the Apollinarians. This sect denied the proper humanity of Christ, and maintained that the body which he assumed was endowed with a sensitive and not a rational soul; but that the divine nature supplied the place of the intellectual principle in man. Their doctrine was first condemned by a council at Alexandria in the year 362, and afterwards in a more formal manner by a council at Rome in the year 375, and by another council in the year 378, which deposed Apollinarius from his bishopric. He is said to have held the doctrine of the Millenium, or the personal reigh of Christ on earth for a thousand years. The reader may find a very elaborate account of him and of his writings in Dr. Lardner’s works, vol. IV. p. 380—397.

After the death of the emperor, he was recalled by his successor Constantine the younger, and restored to his see, and received by his people with great joy. This emperor’s reign was short, and his enemies soon found means to draw down upon him the displeasure of Constantius so that, being terrified with his threats, he sought his safety by flight, and by hiding himself in a secret and obscure place. Julius, at this time bishop of Rome, being greatly affected with the injurious treatment of Athanasius, sought him out in his obscurity, and took him under his protection. He summoned a general council at Sardis, where the Nicene creed was ratified, and where it was determined, that Athanasius, with some others, should be restored to their churches. This decree the emperor shewed great unwillingness to comply with, till he was influenced by the warm interposition of his brother in the west for at this time the empire was divided between the two surviving brothers. Being thus prevailed upon, or rather indeed constrained by necessity, he wrote several letters with his own hand, which are still extant, to Athanasius, to invite him to Constantinople, and to assure him of a safe conduct. He restored him, by an edict, to his bishopric wrote letters both to the clergy and laity of Alexandria to give him a welcome reception and commanded that such acts as were recorded against him in their courts and synods, should be erased.

, a Stoic philosopher, was probably of Pergamus, where he lived till he was very much advanced in years. He constantly refused to accept the favours which kings and generals would have bestowed upon him. Cato the younger, being in Asia at the head of an army, and knowing the merit of this eminent character, was very desirous of having him with him; but thinking that a letter would not prevail upon him to leave his retirement, he resolved to go himself to Pergamus, and by his intreaties and prayeVs he prevailed upon Athenodo, rus to follow him to the camp, whither he returned in a triumphant manner, being more remarkable for his new acquisition than Lucullus or Pompey could be for the conquests they had made. Athenodorus continued with Cato till his death, which happened about fifty before the Christian era. He is perhaps the same who is mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, in the life of Zeno Citticus.

, was a celebrated Roman knight, to whom Cicero wrote a great number of letters, which contain the general history of the times. These are still extant, divided into seventeen books but it is the excellence of Atticus’s private character which has procured him a place in most collections of this description. He was a man of such prudence, that, without departing from his neutrality, he preserved the esteem and affection of all parties. He sent money to the younger Marius, who had been declared an enemy to the commonwealth yet was so much in favour with Sylla, that this Roman general would always have had him with him. He kept himself quiet at Rome during the war between Caesar and Pompey, without giving offence to the one or the other, and he sent money to Brutus, while he was doing kind offices to An­%ony. Afterwards, in the cruel divisions which arose between Antony and Augustus, he contrived to preserve the friendship of both, difficult as it must have been in the case of two such antagonists. The strict friendship he had with Cicero., did not hinder him from being intimate with Hortensius and he was the cause (as Nepos, his biographer, tells us) that these two rivals not only ceased from mutual reproaches, but even lived together upon very good terms. The contests between the parties of Cinna and Marius induced him to go to Athens young, where he continued a long time, and became such a favourite with the Athenians, that the day he left them was a day of mourning. He never attempted to raise himself above the rank of life in which he was born, which was that of knight, although he might have obtained the highest posts in the republic but he chose to renounce all pretensions to them, because, in the then prevailing corruption, he could neither gain nor discharge them according to the laws, and as a man of integrity; no inconsiderable proof of his virtue, notwithstanding he has been charged with avarice and political duplicity. He did not marry till he was fifty-three, and had only a daughter, who was married to Agrippa from which marriage came a daughter, whom Augustus betrothed to Tiberius almost as soon as she was born. He reached the age of seventy-seven years, almost without knowing bodily illness but when his last sickness, which was slight for three months, at length became painful, he sent for Agrippa, his son-in-law, and two other persons, and declared to them a resolution to put an end to his life, by abstinence from food. Agrippa remonstrated with tears, but all in vain. After two days abstinence, the fever left him, and the disease abated but Atticus persisted, and died three days after. This happened in the year of Rome 721.

, a very celebrated Dutch painter, was born in 1631, in the city of Embden his father was secretary of state, and his grandfather had held a post in administration. The first sixteen years of his life were employed in studies suitable to the intentions of his family, which were to breed him up to commerce, and for that purpose he was sent to Amsterdam, where it would appear he first caught an inclination for painting. The earliest instructions he received in this art were from Albert Van Everdingen, but he acquired his principal know r Jedge by frequenting the painting-rooms of different great masters, and observing their various methods of touching and colouring. One of these masters was IJenry Dubbels, whose knowledge of his art was very extensive, and who was very communicative of what he knew. From him Backhuysen obtained more real benefit, than from all the painters of his time, and he had not availed himself long of such an instructor before he became the subject of general admiration, so that even his drawings were sought after, and one of his earliest performances was sold for one hundred florins. It was observed of him, that while he was painting, he would not suffer even his most intimate friends to have access to him, lest his fancy might be disturbed, and the ideas he had formed in his mind might be interrupted. He studied nature attentively in all her forms in gales, calms, storms, clouds, rocks, skies, lights and shadows and he expressed every subject with so sweet a pencil, and such transparence and lustre, as placed him above all the artists of his time in that style, except the younger Vandervelde. It was a frequent custom with Backhuysen whenever he could procure resolute mariners, to go out to sea in a storm, in order to store his mind with grand images, directly copied from nature, of such scenes as would have filled any other head and heart with terror and dismay and the moment he landed, he always impatiently ran to his palette, to secure those incidents of which the traces might, by delay, be obliterated. He perfectly understood ttie management of the chiaro-scuro, and strictly observed the truth of perspective. His works may be easily distinguished by an observant eye, from the freedom and neatness of his touch, from the clearness and natural agitation or quiescence of the water, from a peculiar tint in his clouds and skies, and also from the exact proportions of his ships, and the gracefulness of their positions.

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

, a Portuguese historian, was born at Viseu in 1496, and brought up at the court of king Emanuel, with the younger branches of the royal family. He made a rapid progress in Greek and Latin learning. The infant Juan, to whom he was attached, in quality of preceptor, having succeeded the king his father in 1521, de Barros had a place in the household of that prince. In 1522 he became governor of St. George de la Mine, on the coast of Guinea in Africa. Three years afterwards, the king having recalled him to court, appointed him treasurer of the Indies: this post inspired him with the thought of writing the history of those countries, and in order to finish it, he retired to Pombal, where he died in 1570, with the reputation of an excellent scholar and a good citizen. De Barros has divided his History of Asia and the Indies into four decads. He published the first under the title “Decadas d'Asia,” in 1552, the second in 1553, and the third in 1563. The fourth did not appear till 1615, by command of king Philip III. who purchased the manuscript of the heirs ofde Barros. This history is in the Portugueze language. Possevin and the president de Thou speak more favourably of it than la Boulaye-le Goux, who considers it as a very confused mass; but certainly Barros has collected a great many facts that are not to be found elsewhere, and with less love of the hyperbole, and a stricter attachment to truth, he would have deserved a place among the best historians. Several authors have continued his work, and brought it down to the xiiith decad. There is an edition of it, Lisbon, 1736, 3 vols. folio. Alfonso Ulloa translated it into Spanish. Barros also wrote “Chronica do imperador Clarimando,” a species of romance in the style of Amadis, and some treatises on subjects of morality, religion, and education, for the use of the young princes.

Barthelemi was now in possession of a considerable income, not less than 35,000 livres per annum, and this he employed in a manner highly commendable. Ten thousand he distributed to men of letters in distress, and the remainder he enjoyed with great liberality. He took under his protection three of his nephews, and settled and established them in the world. He promoted the welfare also of the rest of his family which remained in Provence, and he collected a numerous and valuable library, which he disposed of some time before his death. In 1788, he published his celebrated work, “The Travels of Anacharsis the Younger in Greece,” the excellence of which it is unnecessary to point out, as the repeated editions of the English translation have made it familiar in this country. In 1789 he was prevailed upon to accept the vacant seat in the French academy, which he had before declined. In 1790, on the resignation of M. Le Noir, librarian to the king, that post was offered to our author by M. de St. Priest. He declined it, however, as interfering with his literary pursuits, being then preparing for the press a work he had long meditated, a Catalogue Kaisonnee of the rich cabinet he had long had under his care. In the execution of this project he was defeated by the unhappy circumstances of the times, which pressed very severely upon him in other respects. His places and appointments, by the madness of the moment, were suppressed, and he was at the close of his life reduced to great difficulties. Still, however, he was never known to complain, and might be seen daily traversing the streets of Paris on foot, bent double with age and infirmity, making his accustomed visits to madame De Choiseul.

, was born at Hermanstadt, the capital cf Transylvania, about 16SO, and leaving his country in pursuit of employment, engaged with Fritsch, the opulent and spirited bookseller of Leipsic, as corrector of the press, but his turbulent and unsocial character having occasioned a dispute between him and Fritsch, he went to Amsterdam, where his intimate knowledge of Greek recom-r mended him to the superintendance of Wetstein’s edition of Homer, 1702, 2 vols. 12mo, and the magnificent edition of the Onomasticon of Pollux, 2 vols. fol. 1706. Bergler afterwards went to Hamburgh, where he assisted Fabric! us in his Bibl. Grceca, and his edition of Sextus Ernpiricus, Leipsic, 1718, folio. Returning then to Leipsic, he transcribed an ancient scholiast on Homer, published a new edition of Alciphron, with excellent notes, 1715, 8vo, dnd made some progress in an edition of Herodotus, in a new translation of Herodian, more literal than that of Politian, and in an edition of Aristophanes, which was published by the younger Burmann in 1760, 2 vols. 4to. Amidst all these employments, he contributed several excellent papers to the Leipsic “Acta Eruditorum.” It is to him likewise that we owe the Latin translation of the four books of Genesius on the Byzantine history, which is inserted in vol. XXIII. of that collection, published at Venice in 1733, but is not in the fine Louvre edition. For Fritsch, to whom he seems to have been reconciled, he translated a Greek work of Alexander Maurocordato, hospodar of Walachia, which was published, with the original text, under the title “Liber de officiis,” Leipsic, 1722, 4to, and London, 1724, 12mo. For this he was so liberally rewarded by John Nicolas, prince of Walachia, and son to the author, that he determined to ^uit Leipsic, and attach himself to his patron. He went accordingly to Walachia, where the prince had a capital library of manuscripts, collected at a vast expence. Bergler found there the introduction and first three chapters of Eusebius’s “Evangelical Demonstration,” hitherto undiscovered, and sent a copy of them to Fabricius, by whom they were printed in his “Delectus argumentorum,” Hamburgh, 1725, 4to. On the death of the prince, however, Bergler being without support, went to Constantinople, where he died in 1746, after having, it is said, embraced Mahometanism. He was a most accomplished scholar in Greek and Latin, and an accurate editor; but his unsteady turn and unsocial disposition procured him many enemies, aud even among his friends he was rather tolerated than admired.

, who was born Feb. 8, 1582, at Hallstadt, in Austria, became rector of the college, and professor of history at Strasburgh, where he died Feb. 3, 1640. He was esteemed one of the best critics of his time, and had particularly studied the works of Thucydides, Tacitus, Suetonius, and Sallust. Niceron (vol. XXVII) has a large catalogue of his writings, of which the principal are: 1. “Hypobolimaea D. Maria? Deiparoe Camera, seu Idolum Lauretanum, &c. dejectum,” Strasburgh, 1619, 4to. 2. “De jure eligendi reges et principes,” ibid. 1627, 4to. He edited an edition of Tacitus, 1638, 4to, and one of Pliny the younger, with a selection of notes, 1635, 4to. He likewise translated Galileo from the Latin. Bernegger corresponded with Kepler and Grotius, and their letters were published under the titles “Epistolae mutuas H. Grotii et Matt. Berneggeri,” Strasburgh, 1667, 12mo; and “Epistolae Joannis Kepleri, &c.” ibid. 1672, 12mo. Freinshem was his nephew. His “Observationes miscellanei” on history, &c. were published by his son in 1669, 8vo.

, the younger, a noble Bolognese, was born at Bologna, Oct. 1, 1472. He was the nephew and pupil of the elder Beroaldo, the subject of the preceding article, under whose instructions he made such early proficiency in the Greek and Latin languages, that in 1496, when he was only twenty-four years of age, he was appointed public professor of polite literature at Bologna. Having afterwards chosen the city of Rome as his residence, he there attracted the notice of Leo X. then cardinal de Medici, who received him into his service, as his private secretary and when Leo arrived at the pontificate, Beroaldo was nominated president of the Roman academy, but probably relinquished this office on being appointed librarian of the Vatican. Bembo, Bibiena, Molza, Flaminio, and other learned men of the time, were his particular friends at Rome. He appeared also among the admirers of the celebrated Roman courtesan Imperiali, and is said to have been jealous of the superior pretensions of Sadoleti (afterwards cardinal) to her favour. The warmth of his temperature, indeed, sufficiently appears in some of his poems, but such was the taste of that age, and particularly of the licentious court of LeoX. His death, which happened in 1518, is said to have been occasioned by some vexations which he experienced from that pontiff, as librarian, but this seems doubtful.

, an English miscellaneous writer, and poet of considerable merit, was nephew to the preced ng, being the younger son of general George Boscawen, third son of lord Falmouth. He was born August 28, 1752, and was sent to Eton school before he was seven years old, where he obtained the particular notice and favour of the celebrated Dr. Barnard. From school he was removed to Oxford, where he became a gentleman commoner of Exeter college, but left it, as is not unusual with gentlemen intended for the law, without taking a degree. He then studied the law, as a member of the Middle Temple, and the practice of special pleading under Mr. (afterwards judge) Buller: was called to the bar, and for a time went the Western circuit. Nor were his legal studies unfruitful, as he published an excellent work under the title of “A Treatise of Convictions on Penal Statutes; with approved precedents of convictions before justices of the peace, in a variety of cases; particularly under the Game Laws, the Revenue Laws, and the Statutes respecting Manufactures, &c.” 1792, 8vo. He was also appointed one of the commissioners of bankrupts, which situation he held till his death. On Dec. 19, 1785, he was appointed by patent to the situation of a commissioner of the victualling office, in consequence of which, and of his marriage in, April 1786, he soon after quitted the bar. He married Charlotte, second daughter of James Ibbetson, D. D. archdeacon of St. A 1 ban’s, and rector of Bushey. By Mrs. Boscawt'n, who died about seven years before him, he had a numerous family, five of whom, daughters, survived both parents.

, a French engraver, was born at Tours, and gave the first lessons of perspective in the academy of painting at Paris. He had great judgement in that branch as well as in architecture. He left, 1. Three good tract on the manner of drawing the orders of architecture, 1684, folio; on the art of engraving, 1645, 8vo; on perspective, 1682, 8vo. 2. Representation of dirers human figures, with their measures, taken from the antiques at Rome, Paris, 1656; a pocket volume all engraved. His plates in aqua fortis, but in a peculiar method, are agreeable. The work of Bosse on the art of engraving was re-published some years ago, with the remarks and augmentations of M. Cochin the younger. Bosse died in his own country about the year 1660, according to Jombert. Bosse was a turbulent character,* and created many enemies, particularly owing to his having published some pieces of Desargues on perspective, and having adopted the opinions of this writer, which were adverse to those of Le Brim and the ablest academicians. This produced a controversy, in which he so displeased the academicians that they expelled him from their society.

, a French sculptor, was the son of a sculptor and architect, and born at Chaumont in Bassigni in 1698. He was drawn by an irresistible passion for these two arts, but confined himself at length to the former. After having passed some time at Paris under the younger Coustou, and obtained the prize at the academy in 1722, he was carried to Rome at the king’s expence. Upon his return from Italy, where his talents had been greatly improved, he adorned Paris with his works: a list of them may be seen in a life of him, published in 1762, 12mo, by the count de Caylus, but some of them no longer exist, particularly his fine equestrian statue of Louis XV. formerly in the square named after that monarch. In 1744 he obtained a place in the academy; and, two years after, a professorship. He died July 17, 1762, a loss to the arts, and much lamented; for he is described as a man of great talent, disinterested spirit, and of most amiable manners. Music was his object in the hours of recreation, and his talents in this way were very considerable. Count Caylus, in his “Tableaux tires de l‘Iliade et de l’Odysse d'Homere,” mentions Bouchardon, with honour, among the tew artists who borrowed their subjects from Homer, and relates the following anecdote: “This great artist having lately read Homer in an old and detestable French translation, came one day to me, his eyes sparkling with fire, and said, * Since I have read this book, men seem to be fifteen feet high, and all nature is enlarged in my sight'.” This anecdote, however, does not give a very high idea of the education of a French artist, and a professor of the art.

, eldest son of the preceding, was born at Paris in 1649, and acquired the principles of painting from his father, whom he resembled in his talent of imitating the works of the greatest masters. After a residence of five years in Italy, he was admitted into the academy, of which he became a professor, and employed by Louis XIV. at Versailles and Trianon. He excelled in history and portrait; his designs were accurate, and his colouring good. Besides his paintings in fresco, in two of the chapels of the Invalids, he painted several pieces for the churches and public buildings of Paris, several of which have been engraved. We have alsothree etchings done by him, from his own compositions, viz. a species of “Almanack;” “St. John in the Desert” and “St. Bruno in a landscape” its’ companion. He died at Paris in 1717. His brother Louis de Boullongne the younger, was born at Paris in 1654, and educated under his father, by whose instruction he made such improvement, that he obtained the prize of the academy at 18. His studies were completed at Rome, where he particularly studied the works of Raphael, and from his copies which were sent home, the Gobelin tapestries were executed. After his return he was received into the academy in 1680; and his works in the churches of Notre Dame and the Invalids, and particularly his frescos in the chapel of St. Augustin, were so much esteemed, that Louis XIV. honoured him with his special patronage, allowing him a considerable pension; conferring upon him the order of St. Michael; choosing him designer of medals to the academy of inscriptions, after the death of Anthony CoypeJ; appointing him his principal jminter, and ennobling him and all his descendants. The academy of painting also chose him first for its rector, and afterwards director, which place he occupied till his death. He chiefly excelled in historical and allegorical subjects. From his performances it appeared, that he had carefully studied the most eminent masters; his colouring was strong, his composition was in a good style, the airs of his heads had expression and character, and his figures were correctly designed. His regular attendance at the academy, and his advice to the students, commanded respect: and the general mildness and affability of his disposition engaged esteem among those who knew him. He raised a considerable fortune by his profession, and died in 1734. Two sisters of this family, “Genevieve” and “Magdalen,” painted well, and were members of the royal academy in 1669.

In October 1733, lord Orrery returned to England, and having now no attachment to London, he disposed of his house in Downing-street, Westminster, as likewise of his seat at Britwell, near Windsor, and retired to his seat at Marston, in Somersetshire. As this place had been much neglected by his ancestors, and was little more than a shell of a large old house, he amused himself in building offices, in fitting out and furnishing apartments, and laying out gardens and other plantations. Study and retirement being his principal pleasures, he took care to supply the loss he had sustained from his father’s will, by furnishing his library anew with the best authors. In the summer of 1734, probably in his way to France, where he sometimes went, he visited the tomb of his ancestors, Roger Boyle, esq, and Joan his wife, in Preston church, near Feversham. This monument, when the title of earl of Cork devolved upon him, he intended to have repaired, if his life had been prolonged. In the middle of the year 1735, we find him again in Ireland. On the 31st of October, in the same year, an amiable relation, and a most promising youth, Edmund duke of Buckingham, died at Rome, upon which melancholy event, lord Orrery paid a just tribute to the memory of the young nobleman, in an elegiac poem. It was printed in 1736, and is one of the most pleasing specimens which our author has afforded of his poetical abilities. In the winter of 1735-6, the duke of Dorset being then lord lieutenant of Ireland, the eail of Orrery neglected no opportunity of endeavouring to render his administration easy. If Dr. Swift is to be credited, Ireland was about that time in a wretched condition. As a proof of it, the dean asserted in a letter to Mr. Pope, that lord Orrery had 3000l. a year in the neighbourhood of Cork, and that more than three years rent was unpaid. In April 1737, his lordship, who was then at Cork, earnestly pressed Dr. Swift to accompany him to England; but the doctor, who never saw Marston, did not accept the invitation. Lord Orrery took over with him to Mr. Pope all the letters of that great poet to Swift, which the dean had preserved or could find, which were not more in number than twenty-five. About this time, our noble author, that his sons might be educated under his own eye, and also have the benefit of attending Westminster-school, took a small house in Duke-street, Westminster. On the 30th of June, 1738, the earl of Orrery, after having been six years a widower, married, in Ireland, Mrs. Margaret Hamilton, only daughter and heiress of John Hamilton, esq. of Caledon, in the county of Tyrone, grand-daughter of Dr. Dopping, bishop of Meath, and niece of Dr. Dopping, bishop of Ossory. Swift, in a letter to Miss Hamilton, on her intended nuptials, after pretending a prior claim, as she had made so many advances to him, and confessed “herself to be nobody’s goddess but his,” archly waves it, and politely “permits lord Orrery to make himself the happiest man in the world; as I know not,” he adds, “any lady in this kingdom of so good sense or so many accomplishments.” He gives a great character of her, likewise, in his last printed letter to Mr. Pope. In this lady, the earl of Orrery, with gratitude to Heaven, acknowledged that the loss of his former countess was repaired. In 1739 he published a new edition, 2 vols. 8vo, of the dramatic works of his great-grandfather. Though these volumes cannot be particularly valuable, they are now become exceedingly scarce. In 1741 he published separately, in folio, “The first Ode of the first book of Horace imitated, and inscribed to the earl of Chesterfield;” and “Pyrrha, an imitation of the fifth Ode of the first book of Horace.” In the preface to the last, lord Orrery characterises Dacier’s and Sanadon’s translations, and makes some observations on Horace, which shew that he entered with taste and spirit into the peculiar excellencies of that poet. In 1742 he published in one volume, folio, the “State Letters” of his great-grandfather, the first earl; to which were prefixed Morrice’s memoirs of that eminent statesman. On the 25th of August, 1743, his lordship was presented by the university of Oxford to the honorary degree of D. C. L.; and he was, likewise, F.R. S. Lord Boyle, in 1746, being settled at Oxford, and Mr. Boyle in the college at Westminster, their father quitted London, and fixed his residence at Caledon, in Ireland. During one of his occasional visits to England, after the publication of the second volume of the Biographia Britannica, he thanked Dr. Campbell, “in the name of all the Boyles, for the honour he had done to them, and to his own judgment, by placing the family in such a light as to give a spirit of emulation to those who were hereafter to inherit the title.” Lord Orrery resided in Ireland, with very little intermission, from 1746 to 1750; happy in that domestic tranquillity, that studious retirement and inactivity, from which, as he himself expressed it, he was scarcely ever drawn, but with the utmost reluctance. “Whenever,” as he observed in a private letter, “we step out of domestic life in search of felicity, we come back again disappointed, tired, and chagrined. One day passed under our own roof, with our friends and our family, is worth a thousand in any other place. The noise and bustle, or, as they are foolishly called, the diversions of life, are despicable and tasteless, when once we have experienced the real delight of a fire-side.” These sentiments, which do so much honour to the rectitude of his lordship’s understanding, and the goodness of his heart, reflect, at the same time, a just reproach on the absurd and criminal dissipation that prevails for the most part among persons of rank and fortune. During the earl of Orrery’s residence in Ireland, he employed his leisure in laying out gardens and plantations at Caledon, and in improving and adorning its fine situation. On his return to Marston, he continued his alterations and improvements in the house and gardens at that place, many of the plans for which were designed by lord Boyle, who had a taste for architecture. In the mean while, the amusement of our noble author’s winter evenings was his translation of “The Letters of Pliny the Younger, with observations on each letter, and an Essay on Pliny’s life, addressed to Charles lord Boyle.” The essay is dated Leicester-fields, January 27, 1750-1; and, together with the translation, was published at London, in the following April, in 2 vols. 4to. This work met with so good a reception from the public, that three editions of it in octavo have since been printed. In the summer of the same year, lord Orrery addressed to his second son Hamilton a series of letters, containing “Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr. Swift, dean of St. Patrick’s, Dublin.” This work gave rise to many strictures and censures on his lordship for having professed himself Swift’s friend while he was exposing his weaknesses. Subsequent inquiries into Swift’s character have proved that the portrait he drew was not unfaithful. To this, however, we shall have occasion to recur in our account of Swift.

, translator of the duke de Rohan’s Memoirs, was the younger brother of sir Thomas Bridges, of Keinsham abbey in Somersetshire, and son of Edward Bridges, esq. of the same place, by Philippa, daughter of sir George Speke, K. B. He died Jan. 1, 1677, and was buried in Keinsham church. His translation was entitled “The Memoirs of the Duke of Rohan or a faithful relation of the most remarkable occurrences iij France, especially those concerning the reformed churches there; from the death of Henry the Great until the peace made with them, in June 1629. Together with divers politic discourses upon several occasions. Written originally in French, by the duke of Rohan, and now Englished by George Bridges, of Lincoln’s-inn, esq.” London, 1660, 8vo. The translation is dedicated to James, marquis of Onnond, lord lieutenant of Ireland. The translator says he was principally induced to publish it in our language, by some passages tending to the vindication of Charles I. in the matter of relieving the inhabitants of Rochelle, during the memorable siege of that place. A very interesting account of the family of Mr. Bridges may be seen in our authority.

, the younger, and sometimes Called " Hellish Brueghel 17 froni the nature of his subjects, was the son of the preceding artist, born at Brussels, and became the disciple of Gelles Coningsloo. His compositions rather excite disgust than satisfaction; and his human figures, though freely pencilled, and not ill coloured, are not much more elegant than those of the infernal kind. In his historical subjects he generally introduced witches and devils; such as Orpheus charming Pluto and Proserpine to procure the deliverance of Eurydice, surrounded with horrible forms and appearances; Saul and the Witchof Endor; or St. Anthony’s temptations. He is also enumerated by Strutt among the engravers. He died 1642.

, called the second, or the younger, was son to Francis Burman and nephew to the first Francis Burman, whose life* we have given above, and was celebrated for philosophical knowledge. He was born at Amsterdam in 1713, and educated principally by his uncle, He rose to the offices of professor of history and eloquence atFraneker; and in 1742 removed to Amsterdam, where he died June 24, 1778, of an apoplexy. A year before, he had resigned his professorship, and had retired to a country house between Leyden and the Hague. He published editions, 1. of “Aristophanes,” properly Bergler^s edition, but under the care of Burman, Leyden, 1760, 2 vols. 4to, 2. “Claudian,” Amst. 1760, 4to. 3. “Anthologia,” of the Latin poets, Amst. 1759, 2 vols. 4to. 4. “Propertius,” Utrecht, 1780, 4to, a posthumous work superintended by Santenius, by far the best edition of Propertius ever published. 5. “Poematum Libri Quatuor,” Leyden, 1774, 4to.

, the celebrated bishop of Salisbury, was born at Edinburgh, Sept. 18, 1643. His father was the younger brother of an ancient family in the county of Aberdeen, and was bred to the civil law, which he studied for seven years in France. His excessive modesty so far depressed his abilities, that he never made a shining figure at the bar, though he was universally esteemed to be a man of judgment and knowledge in his profession. He was remarkably generous in his practice, never taking a fee from the poor, nor from a clergyman, when he sued in the right of his church; and bestowing great part of his profits in acts of charity and friendship. In 1637, when the troubles in Scotland were breaking out, he was so disgusted at the conduct of the governing bishops there, whom he censured with great freedom, and was, at the same time, so remarkable for his strict and exemplary life, that he was generally called a Puritan. But when he saw, that instead of reforming abuses in the episcopal order, the order itself was struck at, he adhered to it with great zeal and constancy, as he did to the rights of the crown, not once complying with that party which afterwards prevailed in both nations. For though he agreed with Barclay and Grotius (with the latter of whom he had been intimately acquainted) as to their notions of resistance where the laws are broken through by a limited sovereign, yet he did not think that was then the case in Scotland. He married the sister of the famous sir Archibald Johnstoun, called lord Warristoun; who, during the civil wars, was at the head of the presbyterian party, and so zealously attached to that interest, that neither friendship nor alliance could dispose him to shew favour to those who refused the solemn Jeague and covenant. Our author’s father, persisting in this refusal, was obliged, at three several times, to quit the kingdom; and, when his return was afterwards connived at, as his principles would not permit him to renew the practice of the law, much less to accept the preferments in it offered him by Oliver Cromwell, he retired to his own estate in the country, where he lived till the restoration, when he was made one of the lords of the session by the title of lord Cramond. His wife, our author’s mother, was very eminent for her piety and virtue, and a warm zealot for the presbyterian discipline, in which way she had been very strictly educated.

, author of the “Anatomy of Melancholy,” the younger brother of William Burton, the antiquary, the subject of the next article but one, was born at Lindley, Feb. 8, 1576, and had his grammatical education at Sutton-Colfield; after which, in 1593, he was admitted a commoner of Brazen-nose college, and elected a student of Christ church, in 1599, under the tuition (though only for form’s sake) of Dr. John Bancroft, afterwards bishop of Oxford. He took the degree of B. D. in 16 14, and was in that year admitted to the reading of the sentences. In 1616, the dean and chapter of Christ church presented him to the Vicarage of St. Thomas in Oxford, in which parish he always gave the sacrament in wafers; and George lord Berkeley bestowed upon him the rectory of Segrave in Leicestershire. Both these preferments he held till his decease, which happened at Christ church, January 25, 1639—4O. He was a curious calculator of nativities, and among others, of his own; and the time of his death answering exactly to his own predictions, it was whispered in the college, that (to use Anthony Wood’s language), rather than there should be any mistake in the calculation, he sent up his soul to heaven through a slip about his neck; but for this insinuation there appears little foundation. He was a general scholar and severe student, of a melancholy yet humourous disposition, and appears to have been a man of extensive learning, which his memory enabled him to produce upon every subject. In his moral character, he was a man of great integrity, plain-dealing, and chanty. He was principally known as the author of a very celebrated and popular work, entitled “The Anatomy of Melancholy,” published first in quarto, and which afterwards went through several editions in folio, so that the bookseller acquired an estate by it. This book was compiled by our learned writer with a view of relieving his own melancholy; but it encreased to such a degree, that nothing could divert him but going to the bridge foot, and hearing the ribaldry of the bargemen, which seldom failed to throw him into a violent fit of laughter. In the intervals of his vapours, he was one of the most facetious companions in the university. The “Anatomy of Melancholy” is for the greater part a cento, though a very ingenious one. The quotations, which abound in every page, are pertinent; but if the author had made freer use of his invention, and less of his common -place book, his work, perhaps, would have been more valuable. However, he generally avoids the affected language, and ridiculous metaphors, which were common in that age. On Mr. Burton’s monument in Christ church is his bust, with his nativity, and this description by himself, put up by his brother: “Faucis notus, paucioribus ignotus, hie jacet Democritusjunior, cui vitam dedit et mortem Melancholia. Obiit viii. Id. Jan. A. C. MDCXXXIX.” He left behind him a choice collection of books, many of which he bequeathed to the Bodleian library, and that of Brazen-nose college. He left also a hundred pounds, for a fund to purchase five pounds’ worth of books, every year, for the library of Christ church.

, an ingenious English writer, the younger son of Edward Byrom, a linen-draper of Manchester, was born at Kersall in the neighbourhood of that town, in 1691; and after receiving such education as his native place afforded, was removed to Merchant-Taylors school in London, where he made very extraordinary progress in classical learning, and was soon deemed fit for the university. At the age of sixteen, he was admitted a pensioner of Trinity college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Baker. During his residence here the proficiency he had made in classical knowledge, was probably neither remitted, nor overlooked; but he is said to have paid no greater share of attention to logic and philosophy, than was necessary to enable him to pass his examinations with credit. In 1711, he was admitted to his degree of bachelor of arts.

, an artist, knqwn by the name of Moncalvo, from his long abode in that place, was born in 1568 at Montebone, in Montferrat, and marks perhaps the brightest data of Piemontese art, though with less celebrity than merit, for no traces appear of his education: had he been a scholar of the Caracci, his first essays in fresco would have been made at Bologna, not at the stationary chapels of Monte Crea; his style of design would resemble that of Annibale more than the ideal line of Raffaello, or Andrea del Sarto, or Parmigiano; and his landscape have Jess of Paul Brill. His numerous small Madonnas breathe the spirit of the Roman and Florentine school, and one in the royal palace of Torino seems to have issued from the hands of Andrea, if we except the colour, which, though graceful and delicate, has more of the weakness that marked the tints of Sabbatini and the predecessors of the Caracci. The powers of Moncalvo were not, however, coiir fined to soft subjects: the contrary appears in the church of the Conventuals at that place in numerous instances, and still more in a chapel of S. Domenico at Chieri, where the Resuscitation of Lazarus, and the Multiplication of the Loaves, two collateral altar-pieces, vie with each other in pathetic imagery, legitimate composition, energy of expression and attitude, and correctness of design. He was assisted by several scholars of no very eminent note, but N. Sacchi of Casale, in energy of varied expression and decision of pencil, perhaps excelled the master. His two daughters i< raneesca and Orsola Caccia became, under his tuition, apt associates of his labours in fresco, a practice else unknown to female hands; they drew from the father the structure of bodies, but not their animation; and such was the similarity of their execution, that to avoid confusion, Francesca, the younger, marked her performances with a small bird, whilst Orsola distinguished her own by a flower; she founded the Conservatory of the Ursuliiies at Moncalvo, where, and at Casale, she left altar-pieces and numerous cabinet-pictures, touched in the manner of Paul Brill, and strewn with flowers; A holy family in that taste is among the rich collection of the palace Natta. Caccia died about 1625.

Besides this history, he wrote also some theological works, particularly an apology for the Christian religion against that of Mahomet, in four books: this he did at the request of a monk and friend of his, who had been solicited by a mussulman of Persia to desert Christianity, and embrace Muimmetanism. In this he does not content himself with replying to the particular objection of the musulman to Christianity, but writes a general defence of it against the Koran. He calls himself Christodulus as a writer. This apology was printed in Greek and Latin at Basil, 1543, by Bibliander and Gualtharus, from Greek Mss. Gibbon, in his “Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,” says, that the name and situation of the emperor John Cantacuzenus might inspire the most lively curiosity. His memorials of forty years extend from the revolt of the younger Andronicus to his own abdication of the empire and it is observed, that, like Moses and Cresar, he was the principal actor in the scenes which he describes. But in this eloquent work, “we should vainly seek the sincerity of an hero or a penitent. Retired in a cloister from the vices and passions of the world, he presents not a confession, but an apology, of the life of an ambitious statesman. Instead of unfolding the true counsels and characters of men, he displays the smooth and specious surface of events, highly varnished with his -own praises and those of his friends. Their motives are always pure their ends always legitimate they conspire and rebel without any views of interest and the violence which they inflict or suffer is celebrated as the spontaneous effect of reason and virtue.”

, an eminent French protestant and learned divine, was born at Sedan, a town in Champagne, about 1579. He was professor of divinity and of the Oriental languages in the university of Saumur; and so very deeply skilled in the Hebrew, that our learned bishop Hall calls him “magnum Hebraizantium oraculurn in Gallia,” the great oracle of all that studied Hebrew in France. He was the author of some very learned works; but is now chiefly memorable for the controversy he had with the younger Buxtorf concerning the antiquity of the Hebrew points. Two opinions have prevailed concerning the true date and origin of these points both of which have been very warmly espoused. The first is, that the points are coeval with the language, and were always in use among the Jews: the second, that the points were not known to the Jews before their dispersion from Jerusalem, but invented afterwards by modern rabbis to prevent the language, which was every day decaying, from being utterly lost; viz. that they were invented by the Masoreth Jews of Tiberias, about 600 years after Christ . This opinion of their late invention was taken up by Capellus, who defended it in a very excellent and learned treatise entitled “Arcanum punctuationis revelatum,” &c. which work, after being refused a licence in France and at Geneva, was printed in Holland, and caused a great clamour among the protestants, as if it had a tendency to hurt their cause. It is, however, certain, that Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius, and others, had espoused the same notion as well as the Scaligers, Casaubons, Erpenius, Salmasius, Grotius, and the Heinsii; and therefore it could not be said, that Capellus introduced any novelty, but only more solidly established an opinion, which had been approved of by the most learned and judicious protestants. The true reason, perhaps, why the German protestants in general so warmly opposed Capellus’s opinion, was, that they had been accustomed to follow that of the two Buxtorfs, whom they considered as oracles in Hebrew learning. Buxtorf the father had written a little treatise in defence of the antiquity of the points; and as Buxtorfs credit was justly great among them, they chose rather to rely upon his authority than to examine his arguments, in so abstruse an inquiry. Buxtorf the son wrote against Capellus, and maintained his father’s opinion. Capellus, however, has been generally supposed to have put the matter beyond any father dispute; on which account his scholars Bochart, Grotius, Spanheim, Vossius, Daille, and almost all the learned in Hebrew since, have very readily acceded to his opinion.

Capellus composed another work, entitled “Critics, Sacra;” fol. which so highly displeased the protestants that they hindered the impression of it; till John Capellus, who was his son, and afterwards turned papist, got leave of the king to print it at Paris in 1650. This work is a collection of various readings and errors, which he thought were crept into the copies of the Bible, through the fault of the transcribers, and must have been a work of prodigious labour, since the author acknowledges, that he had been thirty-six years about it. The younger Buxtorf wrote a learned answer to it, and some English protestants have also appeared against it: but Grotius, on the other side, very much commends it in an epistle to the author; where he tells him to be content with the judicious approbation of a few, rather than the blind applause of many readers. “Contentus esto,” says he, “magnis potius quam multis laudatoribus.” Father Simon quotes a letter which Morinus wrote to cardinal Francis Barbarini on the subject of his “Critrca Sacra,” in which he intimates that they would do Capellus a kindness in condemning his book, because it had procured him the hatred of his own party; but that at the same time it would be prejudicial to the Roman catholic 1 cause, which those “Critica” were thought to support. This letter was printed in England, and added to a collection of letters entitled “Bibliotheca Orientalis.” Capellus died at Saumur, June 16, 1658, aged almost eighty having made an abridgment of his life in his work “De gente Capellorum.”

, an English poet, was the younger brother of sir Matthew Carevv, a zealous adherent to the fortunes of Charles I. and of the family of Carews in Gloucestershire, but descended from the more ancient family of that name in Devonshire. He is supposed to have been born in 1589. According to Anthony Wood, he received his academical education at Corpus Christi college, Oxford, but was neither matriculated, nor took any degree. After leaving college he improved himself by travelling, according to the custom of the age, and by associating with men of learning and talents both at home and abroad'; and being distinguished for superior elegance of manners and taste, he was received into the court of Charles I. as gentleman of the privy-chamber, and sewer in ordinary. His wit had recommended him to his sovereign, who, however, Clarendon informs us, incurred the displeasure of the Scotch nation by bestowing upon him the place of sewer, in preference to a gentleman recommended upon the interest of the courtiers of that nation. He appears after this appointment to have passed his days in affluence and gaiety. His talents were highly valued by his contemporaries, particularly Ben Jonson and sir William Davenant. Sir John Suckling only, in his Session of the Poets, insinuates that his poems cost him more labour than is consistent with the fertility of real genius. But of this there are not many marks visible in his works, and what sir John mistakes for the labour of costiveness, may have been only the laudable care he employed in bringing his verses to a higher degree of refinement than many of his contemporaries. His death is said to have taken place in 1639, which agrees with the information we have in Clarendon’s Life. “He was a person of a pleasant and facetious wit, and made many poems (especially in the amorous way) which for the sharpness of the fancy, and the elegance of the language in which that fancy was spread, were at least equal, if not superior to any of that time. But his glory was, that after fifty years of his life spent with less severity or exactness than it ought to have been, he died with great remorse for that licence, and with the greatest manifestation of Christianity, that his best friends could desire.” It is pleasing to record such a*mple atonement for the licentiousness of some of his poems, which, however, most of his editors have persisted in handing down to posterity.

, was a celebrated solitary, a native of Scythia, of the fifth century, who spent part of his life in the monastery of Bethlehem with the monk Germain, his friend. They engaged openly in the defence of St. Chrysostom, against Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria. Cassian went to Rome, and from thence to Marseilles, where he founded two monasteries, one of men, the other of virgins. He ranks among the greatest masters of the monastic life, and died about the year 448. He left “Collations,” or conferences of the fathers of the desert, and “Institutions,” in 12 books, translated iHto French by Nic. Fontaine, 1663, 2 vols. 8vo; and seven books upon the Incarnation. These are all written in Latin, with a clearness and simplicity of style excellently calculated to inspire the heart with virtuous dispositions. They were printed at Paris, 1642, and at Leipsic, 1722, folio, and are in the library of the fathers. St. Prosper has written against the “Conferences.” Cassian is reckoned among the first of the Semi-Pelagians, of which sect Faustus of Riez, Vincent of Lerins, Gennadius of Marseilles, Hilerias of Aries, and Arnobius the younger, were the principal defenders. The semi-pelagians were opposed by the whole united forces of St. Augustin and Prosper, without being extirpated, or overcome by them. This sect was condemned by some synods, and was rejected by the church.

, a celebrated French astronomer, and member of the several academies of sciences of France, England, Prussia, and Bologna, was born at Paris Feb. 18, 1677, being the younger son of the preceding, whom he succeeded as astronomer at the royal observatory, the elder son having lost his life at the battle of La Hogue.

Although astronomy was the principal object of our author’s consideration, he made occasional excursions into other fields. We owe also to him, for example, Experiments on Electricity, or the light produced by bodies by friction; Experiments on the recoil of fire-arms; Researches on the rise of the mercury in the barometer at different heights above the level of the sea; Reflections on the perfecting of burning-glasses; and other memoirs. The French academy had properly judged that one of its most important objects was the measurement of the earth. In 1669, Picard measured a little more than a degree of latitude to the north of Paris; but as that extent appeared too small from which to conclude the whole circumference with sufficient accuracy, it was resolved to continue that measurement on the meridian of Paris to the north and south, through the whole extent of the country. Accordingly, in 1683, the late M. de la Hire continued that on the north side of Paris, and the older Cassini that on the south side. The latter was assisted in 1700 in the continuation of this operation by his son, our author. The same work was farther continued by the same academicians; and finally the part left unfinished by de la Hire in the north, was finished in 1718 by our author, with the late Maraldi, and de la Hire the younger.

His son, Francesco Castiglione, was the disciple of his father, and was born at Genoa. He inherited in a very considerable degree the talents of his father, and imitated his style and manner exactly in composition, handling, and design. Many pictures ascribed to Benedetto, and occurring in sales and collections, are thought to be copies after him by his son Francesco, or perhaps originals of the younger Castiglione.

Machiavel, who has written the Life of Castruccio, and from whom we have extracted this account of him, says, that he was not only an extraordinary man in his own age, but would have been so in any other. He was tall and well-made, of a noble aspect, and so winning an address, that all men went away from him satisfied. His hair was inclining to red; and he wore it above his ears. Whereever he went, snow, hail, or rain, his head was always uncovered. He had all the qualities that make a man great; was grateful to his friends, terrible to his enemies, just with his subjects, subtle with strangers; and, where stratagem would do the business, he never had recourse to force. No man was more forward to encounter dangers, no man more careful to escape them. He had an uncommon presence of mind, and often made repartees with great smartness. Machiavel’s Life, however, abounds in fiction. The younger Aldus published a better at Lucca, 1590, 4to. Castracani’s Life was also written in Latin by Nicolas Tegrimo, and printed at Modena, 1496, 4to, and Paris, 1546; and Muratori has inserted it in vol. XL of his “Script. Italic.”

Peter’s conduct, on the other hand, was mere infatuation. He permitted his mistress the countess Woronzoff to have the most complete ascendancy over him, and this woman had the hardihood to claim the performance of a promise which he had made when grand duke, to marry her, place her, in the room of Catherine, on the throne, and bastardize his son Paul, whose place he was to supply by adopting prince Ivan, who had been dethroned by the empress Elizabeth. Whatever ground he might have for expecting success to this wild project, he had not the sense to conceal it; and his mistress openly made her boast of it. Such indiscretion was, no doubt, in favour of Catherine^ but still the part she had to play required all her skill. It was no less than a plot to counteract that of her husband, and dethrone him. The minute details of this would extend too far in a sketch like the present; her conspirators were numerous, secret, and well prepared, and by their means she, who had been confined at Peterhof by her husband, was enabled to enter Petersburgh July 9, 1762, where she was received as empress, and where, while the enthusiasm was fresh in the minds of her troops and subjects, she was crowned in the church of Kazan, by the archbishop of Novogorod, who proclaimed her with a loud voice, sovereign of all the Russias, by the title of Catherine II. and declared at the same time the young grand duke, Paul Petrovitch, her successor. But of all this Peter III. had yet no suspicion. Such was his security, that he set out, after having received some intimations of the conspiracy, from Oranienbaum in a calash with his mistress, his favourites, and the women of his court, for Peterhof; but in the way, Gudovitch, the general aidede-camp, met one of the chamberlains of the empress, by whom he was informed of her escape from Peterhof; and upon his communicating the intelligence to Peter, he turned pale, and appeared much agitated. On his arrival at Peterhof, his agitation and confusion increased, when he found that the empress had actually left the palace, and he soon received the certain tidings of the revolution that had been accomplished; and the chancellor Worouzof offered his services to hasten to Petersburgh, engaging to bring the empress back. The chancellor, on entering the palace, found Catherine surrounded by a multitude of people in the act of doing homage; and forgetting his duty, he took the oath with the rest. He was permitted, however, at his earnest request, to return to his house, under the guard of some trusty officers; and thus secured himself from the vindictive spirit of the partisans of Catherine, and from the suspicions of the czar. After the departure of the chancellor, Peter became a prey to the most distressing anxieties, and he every instant received some fresh intelligence of the progress of the revolution, but knew not what steps to pursue. Although his Holstein guards were firmly attached to him, and the veteran marshal Munich offered to risk every thing for his service, he remained hesitating and undetermined; and after some fruitless attempts, he found it absolutely necessary to submit unconditionally to her will, in consequence of which he was compelled to sign a most humiliating act of abdication, in which he declared his conviction of his inability to govern the empire, either as a sovereign, or in any other capacity, and his sense of the distress in which his continuance at the head of affairs would inevitably involve it, and in the evening an officer with a strong escort came and conveyed him prisoner to Ropscha, a small imperial palace, at the distance of about 20 versts from Peterhof. He now sent a message to Catherine, requesting, that he might retain in his service the negro who had been attached to him, and who amused him with his singularities, together with a dog, of which he was fond, his violin, a Bible, and a few romances; assuring her, that, disgusted at the wickedness of mankind, he would henceforward devote himself to a philosophical life. Not one of these requests was granted. After he had been at Ropscha six days without the knowledge of any persons besides the chiefs of the conspirators, and the soldiers by whom he was guarded, Alexius Orlof, accompanied by Teplof, came to him with the news of his speedy deliverance, and asked permission to dine with him. While the officer amused the czar with some trifling discourse, his chief rilled the wine-glasses, which are usually brought in the northern countries before dinner, and poured a poisonous mixture into that which he intended for the prince. The czar, without distrust, swallowed the potion; on which he was seized with the most excruciating pains; and on his being offered a second glass, on pretence of its giving him relief, he refused it with reproaches on him that offered it. Being pressed to take another glass, when he called for milk, a French valet-de-chamhre, who was greatly attached to him, ran in; and throwing himself into his arms, he said in a faint tone of \oice, “It was not enough, then, to prevent me from reigning in Sweden, and to deprive me of the crown of Russia! I must also be put to death.” The valet-dechamhre interceded in his behalf; but the two miscreant forced him out of the room, and continued their ill treatment of him. In the midst of the tumult, the younger of the princes Baratinsky, who commanded the guard, entered; Orlof, who in a struggle had thrown down the emperor, was pressing upon his breast with both his knees, and firmly griping his throat with his hand. In this situation the two other assassins threw a napkin with a running knot round his neck, and put an end to his life by suffocation, July 17th, just one week after the revolution; and it was announced to the nation, that Peter had died of an haemorrhoidal colic. When Catherine received the news of Peter’s death, she appeared at court, whither she was going, with a tranquil air; and afterwards shut herself up with Orlof, Panin, Rasumofsky, and others who had been concerned in her counterplot, and resolved to inform the senate and people next day of the death of the emperor. On this occasion she did not forget her part, but rose from her seat with her eyes full of tears, and for some days exhibited all the marks of profound grief. The best part of her conduct was, that she showed no resentment to the adherents of Peter, and even pardoned the countess Woronzoff.

, a printer to whom the literary world owes great obligations, was born at Newton, in Warwickshire, Feb. 29, 1691. His father (Joseph) was the younger son of Mr. Edward Cave, of Cave’s in the Hole, a lone house on the street-road in the same county, which took its name from the occupier; but having concurred with his elder brother in cutting off the entail of a small hereditary estate, by which act it was lost from the family, he was reduced to follow in Rugby the trade of a shoemaker. He was a man of good reputation in his narrow circle, and remarkable for strength and rustic intrepidity. He lived to a great age, and was in his latter years supported by his son.

the younger, the son of the former by his wife Ethelreda, daughter of Mr. Frodsham of Elton in Cheshire, was born in 1559, and being very young at the time of his father’s decease, and his mother soon after marrying a second husband, he owed his education chiefly to the care and protection of the lordtreasurer Burleigh, by whom he was first put under the care of Dr. Malim, master of St. Paul’s school, and afterwards removed to Magdalen college in Oxford, where he closely pursued his studies at the time when his father’s poetical works were published; and as a proof of his veneration for his father’s friend, and gratitude for the many kindnesses himself had received, he prefixed a dedication to this work to his patron the lord Burleigh, He left the college before he took any degree, but not before he had acquired a great reputation for parts and learning. He had, like his father, a great talent- for poetry, which he wrote with much facility both in English and in Latin, but it does not appear that he published any thing before he left England, which was probably about the year 1580. He visited several parts of Europe, but made the longest stay in Italy, fprmed an acquaintance with the gravest and wisest men in that country, who very readily imparted to him their most important discoveries in natural philosophy, which he had studied with much diligence and attention., At his return home, which was some time before 1584, he appeared very much at court, and was esteemed by the greatest men there, on account of his great learning and manners. About this time he married his first wife, the daughter of his father’s old friend sir William Fleetwood, recorder of London, by whom he had several children. In the year 1591 he had the honour of knighthood conferred upon him, as well in regard to his own personal merit“as the great services of his father; and some years after, the first alum mines that were ever known to be in this kingdom, were discovered, by his great sagacity, not far from Gisborough in Yorkshire, where he had an estate. In the latter end of queen Elizabeth’s reign, sir Thomas Chaloner made a journey into Scotland, whether out of curiosity, with a view to preferment, or by the direction of sir Robert Cecil, afterwards earl of Salisbury, who was his great friend, is uncertain; but he soon grew into such credit with king James, that the most considerable persons in England addressed themselves to him for his favour and recommendation. Amongst the rest, sir Francis Bacon, afterwards chancellor, wrote him a very warm letter, which is still extant, which he sent him by his friend Mr. Matthews, who was also charged with another to the king; a copy of which was sent to sir Thomas Chaloner, and Mr. Matthews was directed to deliver him the original, if he would undertake to present it. He accomparried the king in his journey to England, and by his learning, conversation, and address, fixed himself so effectually in that monarch’s good graces, that, as one of the highest marks he could give him of his kindness and confidence, he thought fit to intrust him with the care of prince Henry’s education, August 17, 1603, not as his tutor, but rather governor or superintendant of his household and education. He enjoyed this honour, under several denominations, during the life-time of that excellent prince, whom he attended in 1605 to Oxford, and upon that occasion was honoured with the degree of master of arts, with many other persons of distinction. It does not appear that he had any grants of lands, or gifts in money, from the crown, in consideration of his services, though sir Adam Newton, who was preceptor to prince Henry, appears to have received at several times the sum of four thousand pounds by way of free gift. Sir Thomas Chaloner had likewise very great interest with queen Anne, and appears to have been employed by her in her private affairs, and in the settlement of that small estate which she enjoyed. What relation he had to the court after the death of his gracious master prince Henry, does no where appear; but it is not at all likely that he was laid aside. He married some years before his death his second wife Judith, daughter to Mr. William Biount of London, and by this lady also he had children, to whom he is said to have left a considerable estate, which he had at SteepleClaydon in the county of Buckingham. He died November 17, 1615, and was buried in the parish church of Chiswick in the county of Middlesex. His eldest son William. Chaloner, esq. was by letters patents dated July 20, in the 18th of James I. in 1620, created a baronet, by the title of William Chaloner of Gisborough in the county of York, esq. which title was extinct in 1681. Few or none, either of our historians or biographers, Anthony Wood excepted, have taken any notice of him, though he was so considerable a benefactor to this nation, by discovering the alum mines, which have produced vast sums of money, and still continue to be wrought with very great profit. Dr. Birch, indeed, in his” Life of Henry Prince of Wales,“has given a short account of sir Thomas, and has printed two letters of his, both of which shew him to have been a man of sagacity and reflection. In the Lambeth library are also some letters of sir Thomas Chaloner’s, of which there are transcripts by Dr. Birch in the British Museum. The only publication by sir Thomas Chalouer is entitled” The virtue of Nitre, wherein is declared the sundry cures by the same effected," Lond. 1584, 4to. In this he discovers very considerable knowledge of chemistry and mineralogy.

“Over the north porch of St. Mary Redcliffe church, which was founded, or at least rebuilt, by Mr. W. Canynge (an eminent merchant of Bristol, in the fifteenth century, and in the reign of Edward the Fourth), there is a kind of muniment room, in which were deposited six v or seven chests, one of which in particular was called Mr. Canynge’s cofre: this chest, it is said, was secured by six keys,- two of which were entrusted to the minister and procurator of the church, two to the mayor, and one to each of the church-wardens. In process of time, however, the six keys appear to have been lost: and about the year 1727, a notion prevailed that some title deeds, and other vyrjtings of value, wtrje contained in Mr. Ciniynge’s cofre. In consequence of this opinion an order of vestry was made, that the chest should be opened under the inspection of an attorney; and that those writings which appeared of consequence should be removed to the south porch of the church. The locks were therefore forced, and not only the principal chest, but the others, which were also supposed to contain writings, were all broken open. The deeds immediately relating to the church were removed, and the other manuscripts were left exposed as of no value. Considerable depredations had, from time to time, been committed upon them by different persons: but the most insatiate of these plunderers was the father of Chatterton. His uncle being sexton of St. Mary Redcliffe gave him free access to the church. He carried off, from time to time, parcels of the parchments, and one time alone, with the assistance of his boys, is known to have filled a large basket with them. They were deposited in a cupboard in the school and employed for different purposes, such as the covering of copy-books, &c. in particular, Mr. Gibbs, the minister of the parish, having presented the boys with twenty Bibles, Mr. Chatterton, in order to preserve these books from being damaged, covered them with some of the parchments. At his death, the widow being under a necessity of removing, carried the remainder of them to her own habitation. Of the discovery of their value by the younger Chatterton, the account of Mr. Smith, a very intimate acquaintance, which he gave to Dr. Glynn of Cambridge, is too interesting to be omitted. When young Chatterton was first articled to Mr. Lambert, he used frequently to come home to his mother, by way of a short visit. There one day his eye was caught by one of these parchments, which had been converted into a thread-paper. He found not only the writing to be very old, the characters very different from common characters, but that the subject therein treated was different from common subjects. Being naturally of an inquisitive and curious turn, he was very much struck with their appearance, and, as might be expected, began to question his mother what those threadpapers were, how she got them, and whence they came. Upon further inquiry, he was led to a full discovery of all the parchments which remained; the bulk of them consisted of poetical and other compositions, by Mr. Canynge, and a particular friend of his, Thomas Rowley, whom Chatterton at first called a monk, and afterwards a secular priest of the fifteenth century. Such, at least, appears to be the account which. Chatterton thought proper to give, and which he wished to be believed. It is, indeed, confirmed by the testimony of his mother and sister. Mrs. Chatterton informed a friend of the dean of Exeter (Dr. Milles), that on her removal from Pyle-street, she emptied the cupboard of its contents, partly into a large long deal box, where her husband used to keep his clothes, and partly into a square oak box of a smaller size; carrying both with their contents to her lodgings, where, according to her account, they continued neglected and undisturbed till her son first discovered their value; who having examined their contents, told his mother ‘ that he had found a treasure, and was so glad nothing could be like it.’ That he then removed all these parchments out of the large long deal box in which his father used to keep his clothes, into the square oak box: that he was perpetually ransacking every corner of the house for more parchments; and from time to time, carried away those he had already found by pockets full. That one day happening to see Clarke’s History of the Bible covered with one of those parchments, he swore a great oath, and stripping the book, put the cover into his pocket, and carried it away; at the same time stripping a common little Bible, but finding no writing upon the cover, replaced it again very leisurely. Upon being informed of the manner in which his father had procured the parchments, he went himself to the place, and picked up four more.”

years, when he was visited by the gout, the pains of which he contrived to alleviate, by conversations with his friends and the muses, and prolonged his life to a very advanced age, dying in 1726, in his 81st year. He was extremely desirous of becoming a member of -the academy of fine arts; and, on seeing another preferred to him, he took his revenge by satirical attacks on the management of the institution. It was the perfect consonance of his life with his poems, that gave them the natural air for which they have ever been so greatly admired. The philosophy of the graces, that animates his works, was also the rule of his life. But few of his poems were published during his lifetime, and those occasionally and detached; the trouble of collecting them he left to his friends after his death. The first editions were very imperfect, till Camusac and St. Marc took the pains to publish them in a completer collection, 1750, 2 vols. 12mo. They consist of epistles in verse, and letters in prose intermingled with verses. Both are characterised by an easy gaiety, agreeable pictures, lively strokes, genuine wit, pleasing fictions, Epicurean morality, or “sagesse commode,” as Saint Marc used to call it, and a style varied as the subject requires. They are not, however, without flat, incorrect, and puerile passages. His versification is flowing and harmonious, but frequently faulty and contrary to the rules of speech, and sometimes designedly negligent, in imitation of the simple style of Marot. Some find great harmony in the continual recurrence of the same rhymes, in which he followed Chapelle, and is praised by Dubos; and Camusac thinks that such verses are eminently adapted to music. Saint Marc, on the other hand, and the younger Racine, complain of their monotony, and conceive that the beauty of them consists solely in the conquest of greater difficulties, and that the French language is not so poor in sonorous phraseology as to stand in need of such a practice. Though the letters of Chaulieu were all actually written, and mostly directed to Bouillon, yet they are frequently interspersed with ingenious fictions. Excepting that to the chevalier Bouillon, the most remarkable letter is that addressed to M. la Fare, as the poet, with great frankness, gives us in it his own portrait. Chaulieu’s odes are not of the higher species.

In July 1698, when he was just entered into his 23d year, he married Martha, the daughter of sir Francis Child, who was the year following lord mayor of London and by her he had two sons and two daughters. The elder of his sons died in his infancy. Anthony, the younger, was born Oct. 1701, and was a gentleman of great sweetness of temper, a fine understanding, and of good learning. He was educated at Bene't college in Cambridge, and died universally lamented by all that knew him, Dec. 20, 1723. The year after, Collins married a second wife, namely Elizabeth, the daughter of sir Walter Wrottesley, bart. but had no children by her. His daughters survived him, and were unmarried at his death.

shipnaan with captain Cook in his first ship arrived in England. See Hawkesvoyage, and was appointed by him a worth’s Voyage, vol. iii. p. 395. lieutenant on the deaib of Mr. Hicks, was held as sacred as that of the king. During this time captain Cook was preparing to go ashore himself at the town of Kavaroah, in order to secure the person of Kariopoo, before he should have time to withdraw himself to another part of the island out of our reach. This appeared the most effectual step that could be taken on the present occasion, for the recovery of the boat. It was the measure he had invariably pursued, in similar cases, at other islands in these seas, and it had always been attended with the desired success: in fact, it would be difficult to point out any other mode of proceeding on these emergencies, likely to attain the object in view. We had reason to suppose that the king and his attendants had fled wheu the alarm was first given: in that case, it was captain Cook’s intention to secure the large canoes which were hauled up on the beach. He left the ship about seven o'clock, attended by the lieutenant of marines, a serjeant, corporal, and seven private men: the pinnace’s crew were also armed, and under the command of Mr. Roberts. As they rowed towards the shore, captain Cook ordered the launch to leave her station at the west point of the bay, in order to assist his own boat. This is a circumstance worthy of notice; for it clearly shews, that he was not unapprehensive of meeting with resistance from the natives, or unmindful of the necessary preparation for the safety of himself and his people. I will venture to say, that from the appearance of things just at that time, there was not one, beside himself, who judged that such precaution was absolutely requisite: so little did his conduct on the occasion bear the marks of rashness or a precipitate self-confidence! He landed, with the marines, at the upper end of the town of Kavaroah: the Indians immediately flocked round, as usual, and shewed him the customary marks of respect, by prostrating themselves before him. There were no signs of hostilities, or much alarm among them. Captain Cook, however, did not seem willing to trust to appearances; but was particularly attentive to the disposition of the marines, and to have them kept clear of the crowd. He first inquired for the king’s sons, two youths who were much attached to him, and generally his companions on board. Messengers being sent for them, they soon came lo him; and informing him that their father was asleep, at a house not far -from them, he accompanied them thither, and took the marines along with them. As he passed along, the natives every where prostrated themselves before him, and seemed to have lost no part of that respect they had always shewn to his person. He was joined by several chiefs, among whom was Kanynah, and his brother Koohowrooah. They kept the crowd in order, according to their usual custom; and being ignorant of his intention in coining on shore, frequently asked him, if he wanted any hogs, or other provisions: he told them, that he did not, and that his business was to see the king. When he arrived B.L the house, he ordered some of the Indians to go in and inform Kariopoo, that he waited without to speak with him. They came out two or three times, and instead of returning any answer from the king, presented some pieces of red cloth to him, which made captain Cook suspect that he was not in the house; he therefore desired the lieutenant of marines to go in. The lieutenant found the old man just awaked from sleep, and seemingly alarmed at the message; but he came out without hesitation. Captain Cook took him by the hand, and in a friendly manner asked him to go on board, to which he very readily consented. Thus far matters appeared in a favourable train, and the natives did not seem much alarmed or apprehensive of hostility on our side; at which captain Cook expressed himself a little surprisec), saying, that as the inhabitants of that town appeared innocent of stealing the cutter, he should not molest them, but that he must get the king on board. Kariopoo sat down before his door, and was surrounded by a great crowd: Kanynah and his brother were both very active in keeping order among them. In a little time, however, the Indians were observed arming themselves with long spears, clubs, and daggers, and putting on thick mats, which they use as armour. This hostile appearance increased, and became more alarming, on the arrival of two men in a canoe from the opposite side of the bay, with the news of a chief, called Kareemoo, having been killed by one of the Discovery’s boats, in their passage across: they had also delivered this account to each of the ships. Upon that information, the women, who were sitting upon the beach at their breakfast, and conversing familiarly with our people in the boats, retired, and a confused murmur spread through the crowd. An old priest came to captain Cook, with a cocoa nut in his hand, which he held out to him as a present, at the same time singing very loud. He was often desired to be silent, but in vain: he continued importunate and troublesome, and there was no such thing as getting rid of him or his noise: it seemed as if he meant to divert their attention from his countrymen, who were growing more tumultuous, and arming themselves in every quarter. Captain Cook, being at the same time surrounded by a great crowd, thought his situation rather hazardous: he therefore ordered the lieutenant of marines to march his small party to the water-side, where the boats lay within a few yards of the shore: the Indians readily made a lane for them to pass, and did not offer to interrupt them. The distance they had to go might be fifty or sixty yards; captain Cook followed, having hold of Kariopoo’s hand, who accompanied him very willingly: he was attended by his wife, two sons, and several chiefs. The troublesome old priest followed, making the same savage noise. Keowa, the younger son, went directly into the pinnace, expecting his father to follow; but just as he arrived at the water-side, his wife threw her arms about his neck, and, with the assistance of two chiefs, forced him to sit down by the side of a double canoe. Captain Cook expostulated with them, but to nopurpose they would not suffer the king to proceed telling him he would be put to death if he went on board the ship. Kariopoo, whose conduct seemed entirely resigned to the will of others, hung down his head, and appeared much distressed.

The period of his residence here was from Dec. 1763 to July 1764, and the mode of his insanity appears to have been that of religious despondency; but this, about the last-mentioned date, gave way to more cheering views, which first presented themselves to his mind during a perusal of the third chapter of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. After his recovery from this awful visitation, he determined to retire from the busy world altogether, finding his mind alienated from the conversation and company^ however select, in which he had hitherto delighted, and looking back with particular horror on some of his former associations: and by the advice of his brother, the Rev. John Cowper, of Bene‘t-college, Cambridge, he removed to a private lodging in Huntingdon. He had not, however, resided long in this place, before he was introduced into a family that had the honour, for many years, of administering to his happiness, and of evincing a warmth of friendship of which there are few examples. This intercourse was begun by Mr. Cawthorn Unwin, a young man, a student of Cambridge, and son to the rev. Mr. Unwin, rector of Grimston, and at this time a resident at Huntingdon. Mr. Unwin the younger was one day so attracted by Cowper’ s uncommon and interesting appearance, that he attempted to solicit his acquaintance; and achieved this purpose with such reciprocity of delight, that Cowper was finally induced to take up his abode with his new friend’s amiable family, which then consisted of the rev. Mr. Unwin, Mrs. Unwin, the son, just mentioned, and a daughter. It appears to have been about the month of September 1765 that he formed this acquaintance, and about February 1766 he became an inmate in the family. In July 1767, Mr. Unwin senior was killed by a fall from his horse. The letters which Mr. Hayley has published describe, in the clearest light, the singularly peaceful ajid devout life of the amiable writer, during his residence at Huntingdon, and this melancholy accident, which occasioned his removal to a distant county.

, a late dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was the great grandson of the preceding. His father, Denison, so named from his mother, was educated at Westminster school, and from that admitted fellow-commoner of Trinity college, Cambridge. He married, at the age of twenty-two, Joanna, the younger daughter of Dr. Richard Bentley (the Phoebe of Byron’s Pastoral); by whom he had a daughter, Joanna, and Richard, the subject of this article. Though in possession of an independent fortune, he was readily prevailed upon by his father-in-law to take the rectory of Stanwick, in. Northamptonshire, given to him by lord chancellor King, as soon as he was of age to hold it. From this period he fixed his constant residence in that retired spot, and sedulously devoted himself to the duties of his function, never holding any other preferment for thirty years, except a small prebend in the church of Lincoln, given him by his uncle bishop Reynolds, He was in the commission of the peace, and a very active magistrate in the reconcilement of parties rather than in the conviction of persons. When the rebels were on the march, and had advanced to Derby, he raised among the neighbouring parishes two companies of 100 men each for the regiment then enrolling under the command of the earl of Halifax, and marched them in person to Northampton. The earl, as a mark of his consideration, insisted upon bestowing one of the companies upon his son, who being too young to take the command, an officer was named to act in his place. Some time after, on the approach of the general election for the county of Northampton, a contest took place with the rival parties of Knightly and Hanbury, or, in other words, between the tories and the whigs. His politics accorded with the latter, and he gave a very active and effectual support to his party. His exertions, though unsuccessful, were not overlooked by the earl of Halifax, who was then high in office, and lord lieutenant of the county. Offers were pressed upon him; yet, though he was resolute in declining all personal favours, he was persuaded to lend an ear to flattering situations pointed out for his son, who was shortly afterwards employed by lord Halifax as his confidential secretary. In 1757 he exchanged the living of Stanwick for Fulham, in order to be nearer his son, whose attendance on the earl of Halifax required his residence in town. On the earl being appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland, he was made one of his chaplains; and in 1763, at the close of his lordship’s administration, was promoted to the bishopric of Clonfert. In this situation he much ingratiated himself with all classes of people by his benevolence and generosity. He introduced many improvements and comforts among the Irish peasantry. He encouraged the English mode of agriculture by judicious rewards; and, as one of the members of the linen trade, introduced a number of spinning-wheels, and much good linen was made in consequence. This improving manufacture formed an interesting occupation also to his lady, and flourished under her care. The city of Dublin presented him with his freedom in a gold box, an honour never before (except in the remarkable instance of dean Swift) conferred on any person below the rank of a chief governor; and the deed which accompanied it assigned as the motive, the great respectability of his character, and his disinterested protection of the Irish clergy. In 1772 he was translated to the see of Kilmore. Some alarming symptoms soon after indicated the breaking up of his constitution, which was increased by the anxiety he experienced, through the debility and loss of health of his, amiable lady. When his son took leave of him at the end of his summer visit, the bishop expressed an intention of attempting a journey to England; but died in the winter of the same year; and this sad event was speedily succeeded by the death of his lady, whose weak and exhausted frame sunk under the blow, May 27, 1775.

, medallist to the republic of Geneva, where he was born in 1678, aspiring to be employed in the English mint, struck a series of kings of England in a good style, though not all of them taken from originals. He published them by subscription in 1731, at six guineas the set in copper, and fifteen in silver. He published also a series of events in the Roman History; some of the great characters in the reign of Louis XVI.; and a series of the reformers. He died in 1763. His brother James was in London three or four years to solicit a place for John in the mint, but did not succeed. James Antony Dassier, nephew of John, came over on Croker’s death in 1740, was next year appointed second engraver to the mint, returned to Geneva in 1745, and died at Copenhagen in 1759. The uncle had begun large medals of some of our great men then living; the nephew did several more, which were sold in copper at 7s. 6d. each. There is also a numerous suite of Roman history in small medals of bronze, by the younger Dassier, that are good performances.

In his estimation of the merit of historical composition, sir Symonds displayed a far superior discernment. He was a passionate admirer of Thuanus’s History, anxiously applied to the younger Thuanus, to obtain copies of such parts of it as had not hitherto been published, and was successful in procuring a picture of that great author, and another of the famous admiral Coligni. Several of his ms collections and correspondence are preserved in the British Museum.

, another artist, known in this country, was born at the Hague, in 1655; but spent the greatest part of his life in England, to which he came in his seventeenth year, and where he gradually rose into considerable credit, having been well instructed by his father, who was a skilful painter of sea-pieces. His taste of landscape was formed almost entirely (as he often declared) by designing the lovely views in the western parts of England, and along the coasts. Some of his pictures have great clearness and transparence in the colouring, and a peculiar tenderness in the distances; they are truly fine in the skies, have an uncommon freedom in the clouds, and an agreeable harmony through the whole. But, as he was often obliged to paint for low prices, there is a great disproportion in his works. The narrowness of his circumstances depressed his talent, and rendered him inattentive to fame, being solely anxious to provide for his family. Had he been so happy as to receive a proper degree of encouragement, it is not improbable that he might have approached near to those of the first rank in his profession. The figures in his landscapes were frequently inserted by the younger Adrian Coloni, his brother-in-law. He began to engrave a set of prints, after views from his own designs, but the gout put an end to his life in 170-1, in the forty- ninth year of his age. Lord Orford, who has a portrait of him, thinks he was not much encouraged in England, except by Granville earl of Bath, for whom he drew several views and ruins in the West of England.

His works, which procured him a very high reputation in France, were published inxhe following order: 1. “Histoire des quatre Gordiens, prouvee et illustree par les medailles,” Paris, 1695, 12mo, in which he proves, contrary to the common opinion, that there was a fourth Gordianus, the son of the younger Gordianus of Africa; but this produced two answers, in which his opinion was attacked. 2. “Animadversiones ad Nicolai Bergerii librog de publicis et militaribus imperii Romani viis,” Utrecht and Leyden, 1699. 3. “Les interets de PAngleterre, mal entendiis dans la guerre presente,” Amst. 1704, of which there have been several editions, but it appears to have been better relished in France than in England; it consists of many melancholy prophecies respecting England, one of which only, the separation of the American colonies from the mother country, which he hints at, has been fulfilled. 4. “Histoire de la ligue de Cambrai, faite Tan 1508, centre la republique de Venise,” Paris, 1709, 2 vols. 12mo, and reprinted in 1728. 5. “Reflections critiques sur la Poesie et la Peinture,” Paris, 1719, 2 vols. 12mo, and often reprinted in 3 vols, and translated into English. This work, on which the abbe“Dubos’s reputation now principally rests, contains many useful remarks, in a style peculiarly agreeable, but his taste has been frequently attacked, and his enthusiasm for the arts doubted. Voltaire gave him the praise of having seen, heard, and reflected upon the fine arts, and he must be allowed to be upon some topics an elegant writer, and an ingenious reasoner; but, with regard to the subject of music, both his prejudices and his ignorance are visible. He not only determines, says Dr. Burney, that the French and Fleming* cultivated music before the Italians; but, wholly unacquainted with the compositions of other parts of Europe, asserted that there was no music equal to that of Lulli, only known and admired in France. And where, adds the doctor, will he be believed, except in that kingdom, when he says that foreigners allow his countrymen to understand time and measure better than the Italians? He never loses an opportunity of availing himself of the favourable opinions of foreigners in behalf of French music, against that of other parts of Europe. Not only Guicciardini, but Addison, Gravina, and Vossius, all equally unacquainted with the theory, practice, or history of the art, and alike deprived of candour by the support of some favourite opinion or hypothesis, are pressed into the service of his country. If when D'Alembert wrote his Eulogy, he could say that Dubos was one of those men of letters who had more merit than fame, the converse of the proposition is now nearer the truth, and yet the merit of having produced a very agreeable book may be allowed him; and a book, a great deal of which will contribute to form a just taste on those subjects with which he is really acquainted. 6.” Histoire critique de l'etablissment de la monarchic Franoise dans les Gaules," Paris, 1734, 3 vols. 4to. Profiting by some criticisms on this work from the pen of M. Hoffman, professor of history at Wittemberg, he left for publication a corrected edition, which appeared in 1743, 2 vols. 4to. Besides these, he published a translation in French prose, of part of Addison’s Cato, and some discourses held in the French academy.

, an English civilian, was born at Heavy-Tree, near Exeter in Devonshire, 1580, of a considerable family, and was the younger brother of Nicholas Duck, recorder of Exeter. At the age of fifteen he was entered of Exeter college, Oxford, took his degree of B. A. and became a fellow-commoner in 1599. From thence he removed to Hart-hall, took his master’s degree, and afterwards was elected fellow of All-souls but his genius leading him to the study of the civil law, he took his degree of doctor in that faculty.* He travelled into France, Italy, and Germany; and, after his return, was made chancellor of the diocese of Bath and Wells. He was afterwards made chancellor of London, and at length master of the requests: but the confusions, which were then beginning, probably hindered him from rising higher. In 1640 he was elected burgess for Minehead in Somersetshire, and soon after siding with king Charles in the time of the rebellion, became a great sufferer in the fortunes of his family, being stripped by the usurpers of 2000l. In 1648 he was sent for by his majesty to Newport in the Isle of Wight, to assist in his treaty with the commissioners from the parliament; but, that treaty not succeeding, he retired to his habitation at Chiswick near London, where he died in May 1649, but in Smith’s obituary he is said to have died in December preceding. He was an excellent civilian, a man of piety, a tolerable poet, especially in his younger days, and very well versed in history, ecclesiastical as well as civil. His only defect was a harshness of voice in pleading. He left behind him, “Vita Henrici Chichele,” &c. Oxon. 1617, 4to, added to Bates’s Lives, and translated into English, 1699, and “De usu & authoritate Juris Civilis Romanorum in dominiisprincipmn Christianorum:” a very useful and entertaining work, which has been printed several times at home and abroad, and is added to De Ferriere’s “History of Civil Law,” 1724, 8vo. He was greatly assisted in this work by the learned Dr. Gerard Langbaine.

The persecution of protestants in France continuing to drive great numbers of them from all its provinces into Germany, he defrayed occasionally the expences of some small bodies of these poor emigrants, who passed through Cassel in 1702, in their way to Brandenburg, where encouraging offers of a comfortable maintenance were held out by Frederic, the newly created king of Prussia, to industrious manufacturers of every sort. The praises these people spread of Dr. Duncan’s liberality, when they arrived at Berlin, procured him a flattering invitation to that court. Here he was well received by the reigning prince; who appointed him distributor of his prudent munificence to some thousands of these poor artificers, and superintendant of the execution of a plan formed for their establishment. This office he discharged with great credit and internal satisfaction; but with no other advantage to himself. Though appointed professor of physic with a decent salary, and physician to the royal household, he found his abode at Berlin likely to prove injurious to his health and fortune. His expences there were excessive, and increasing without bounds by the daily applications made to him as distributor of the royal bounty, which fell short of their wants. Besides, the intemperate mode of living at that court was not according to his taste, and this last reason induced him. in 1703, to remove to the Hague. In this most agreeable residence he settled about twelve years, a short excursion to London excepted in 1706, for the purpose of investing all his monied property in the English funds. He kept at this time a frequent correspondence with Dr. Boerhaave, at whose persuasion he published a Latin edition of uis Natural Chemistn with some improvements and additional illustrations. He commenced about the same time a correspondence upon similar subjects with Dr. Richard Mead, From the time of his leavijig London in 1681. it appears that Dr. Duncan constantly entertained thoughts of fixing there his final abode. He however did not effect this purpose till about the end of 1714. He expressed an intention to quit the Hague some months sooner; but unhappilv just then he was suddenly seized with a stroke of the palsy, which greatly alarmed his friends. Yet, when he had overcome the first shock, he found no other inconvenience from it himself till his death twenty-one years after, except a slight convulsive motion of the head, which seized him commonly in speaking, but never interrupted the constant cheerfulness of his address. To a patient likely to do well he would say, “It is not for your case that I shake my head, but my own. You will soon shake me off, I warrant you.” He dedicated the last sixteen years of his life to the gratuitous service of those who sought his advice. To the rich who consulted him, from whom he as peremptorily refused to take a fee, he was wont to say, with a smile, ' The poor are my only paymasters now; they are the best I ever had; their payments are placed in a government-fund that can never fail; my security is the only King who can do no wrong.“This alluded to the loss he had sustained, in 1721, of a third part of his property by the South Sea scheme, which, however, produced not the least alteration in his purpose, nor any retrenchment of his general beneficence to the poor. He left behind him a great number of manuscripts, chiefly on physical subjects. The writers of the” Bibliotheque Britannique“for June 1735, whence the substance of this account is taken, close the article relating to him with this short sketch of his character” His conversation was easy, cheerful, and interesting, pure from all taint of partyscandal or idle raillery. This made his company desired by all who had a capacity to know its value; and he afforded a striking instance that religion must naturally gain strength from the successful study of nature.“He died at London, April 30, 1735, aged 86. He left behind him an only son, the reverend doctor Daniel Duncan, author of some religious tracts; among the rest,” Collects upon the principal Articles of the Christian Faith, according to the order of the Catechism of the Church of England.“Printed lor S. Birt, 1754. This was originally intended for an appendix to a larger work, completed for the press, but never published, entitled,” The Family Catechism, being a free and comprehensive Exposition of the Catechism of the Church of England.“He corresponded with the writers of the” Candid Disquisitions,“c. in which work he was from that circumstance supposed to have had some share. He died in June, 1761, leaving behind him two sons, both clergymen, the younger of whom, John Duncan, D. D. rector of South Warmborough, Hants, died at Bath Dec. 28, 1808. He was born in 1720, and educated at St. John’s college, Oxford, where he took his degrees of M. A. in 1746, B. D. 1752, and D. D. by decree of convocation in 1757. Jn 1745 and 1746 he was chaplain to the king’s own regiment, and was present at every battle in Scotland in which that regiment was engaged. He afterwards accompanied the regiment to Minorca, and was present at the memorable siege of St. Philip’s, which was followed by the execution of admiral Byng. In 1763 he was presented to the college living of South Warmborough, which he held for forty-five years. Besides many fugitive pieces in the periodical journals, Dr. Duncan published an” Essay on Happiness,“a poem, in four- books; an” Address to the rational advocates of the Church of England;“the” Religious View of the present crisis“” The Evidence of Reason, in proof of the Immortality of the Soul,“collected from Mr. Baxter’s Mss. with an introductory letter by the editor, addressed to Dr. Priestley; and some other tracts and occasional sermons. He contributed to the” Biographia Britannica,“the life of his grandfather, and an account of the family of Duncans and what the editor of that work said of him in his life-time may be justly repeated now,” that he sustained the honour of his family, in the respectability of his character, in the liberality of his mind, and in his ingenious and valuable publications."

, a learned divine of the church of England, was born at Coventry, August 10, O.S. 1729, and was the son of the Rev. Thomas Edwards, M. A. vicar of St. Michael’s in that city, and of Katharine his wife. His grammatical education he received partly under the tuition of Edward Jackson, D. D. master of the free grammar-school in Coventry, but principally under the care of his own father; and such was his eagerness for the acquisition of knowledge, that he seldom engaged in the diversions common to boys. In 1747, at the age of eighteen, he was matriculated at the university of Cambridge, and entered of Clare hall, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1750, and of M. A. in 1754. He was likewise a fellow of his college. In the younger part of his life he was a self-taught musician, and became no mean performer on the spinnet and the bass-viol: but, finding that this amusement encroached too much upon his studies, he entirely relinquished it. On the 22d of September, 1751, he was ordained deacon, and on the 23d of September, 1753, he was ordained priest, both which orders he received from the hands of Dr. Frederick Cornwallis, at that time bishop of Litchfield and Coventry. In the spring of 1755, when Mr. Edwards was not yet twenty-six years of age, he gave a striking proof of the diligence with which he applied himself to the study of the learned languages, and the acquisition of sacred literature. This was his publication of “A new English Translation of the Psalms from the original Hebrew, reduced to metre by the late bishop Hare with notes, critical and explanatory, illustrations of many passages, drawn from the classics, and a preliminary dissertation, in which the truth and certainty of that learned prelate’s happy discovery is stated, and proved at large,” 8vo. It was Mr. Edwards’s design to make Dr. Hare’s system of Hebrew metre better known, and to prove, that, by a judicious application of it, great light might be thrown upon the poetical parts of the Hebrew scriptures. He was of opinion that Dr. Hare’s hypothesis was rejected by many persons, partly from an over-hasty determination, and partly from too scrupulous a veneration for the Hebrew text. The notes, which comprehend more than one third of this book, chiefly contain emendations of the Hebrew text, pointed out by the metre, and illustrations of some passages, drawn from the classics, together with an explanation of the most difficult places. Considerable use is made by our author of Hare and Mudge, but with no servile adherence to their authority. Mr. Edwards’s next publication was only a single sermon, which he had preached at St. Michael’s in Coventry, on the 6th of February, 1756. On the 2d of May, 1758, he was nominated, by the corporation of Coventry, master of the free grammar-school, and presented to the rectory of St. John, the Baptist in that city. This promotion was- followed by his marriage, November 27th, in the same year, to Anne Parrott, daughter of Stony er Parrott, esq. of Hawkesbury, in the parish of Foleshill, in the county of Warwick, by whom he had one son, Dr. Edwards of Cambridge. Early in 1759, Mr. Edwards published one of his principal works, “The doctrine of irresistible Grace proved to have no foundation in the writings of the New Testament.” This was levelled at the opinions of the Calvinists on that subject. Our author’s next publication, which appeared in 1762, was entitled “Prolegomena in Libros Veteris Testamenti Poeticos; sive dissertatio, in qua viri eruditissimi Francisci Harii nuper Episcopi Cicestriensis de antiqua Hebraeorum poesi hypothesin ratione et veritate niti, fuse ostenditur, atque ad objecta quaedam respond etur. Subjicitur Metricae Lowthianae Confutatio, cum indicibus necessariis,” 8vo. This attack upon Dr. Lowth’s “Metricae Harianaj brevis Confutatio,” which had been annexed to the first edition of his admirable “Praelectiones de sacra Poesi Hebraeorum,” did not pass unnoticed by that gentleman. In the second edition of his “Praelectiones” he added a note, in which he strenuously maintained his own opinion, in opposition to that of Mr, Edwards. In reply to this note our author published, in 1765 t “Epistola ad doctissimimi Robertum Lowthium, S. T. P., In qua nonnulla, quae ad nuperae siur de sacra Hebraeorum Poesi Prielectionum editionis calcem habet, expenduntur.” In this he indulged himself in some severity of language, which the subject did not merit, and which ought not to have been used towards such an antagonist as Dr. Loath. The doctor thought the “Epistola” of consequence enough to deserve a reply; and therefore he printed, in 1766, “A larger Confutation of bishop Hare’s System of Hebrew Metre in a letter to the reverend Dr. Edwards in answer to his Latin cpisile,” 8vo. Here the controversy ended and the general opinion of the learned world gave the preference to Dr. Lowth’s arguments.

In 1753 he made a poetical version of the younger Racine’s poem of “Religion,” which we are told was approved by Young. About the same time he composed an English grammar for the use of his school, which he afterwards enlarged and published in 2 vols. 12mo. This is by far the most useful of his works, and perhaps the only one likely to live. The late Mr. John Walker, a very competent judge, always spoke highly of this work. In the year 1763, Mr. Elphinston published a poem called “Education” but his taste was ill-adapted to poetry, of which unfortunately he never could be persuaded and this erroneous estimate of his talents led him to translate Martial, for which he issued proposals about 1778, and was at least fortunate in the number of his subscribers. Previous to this he had, for what reason we are not told, given up his school, and in 1778 removed altogether from Kensington, where, in the same year, his wife died. He then visited Scotland, and while in that city there was a design started of establishing a professorship of modern languages in the university of Edinburgh, with a view that Mr, Elphinston should fill the chair; but although this never took place, he gave a course of lectures on the English language, both at Edinburgh and Glasgow.

, of Oppyck, in Holland, was born there in the latter part of the sixteenth century, and acquired great reputation for his knowledge of the oriental languages. He was also an able lawyer and divine, and took his degree of doctor in the latter faculty. He studied the oriental languages under Drusius and Erpenius, and after having been professor of theology and Hebrew at Harderwich for eight years, was, in 1627, made professor of Hebrew at Leyden, on which occasion he delivered an harangue on the dignity and utility of the Hebrew language, and it was his constant endeavour to diffuse a knowledge of that language, and of the Arabic and jSyriac, among his countrymen, that they might be the better enabled to combat the objections of the Jews to the Christian religion. In 1639, count Maurice, governor of Bresil, appointed him his counsellor. He died in June 1648, very soon after he had begun a course of theology at Leyden. He lived in much intimacy with Lewis de Dieu, Daniel Heinsius, and the Buxtorfs, who speak very highly of him. He offered at one time to superintend the printing of a Talmudical dictionary in Holland, and endeavoured to bring the younger Buxtorf to Leyden, who had undertaken to defend the vowel points against Lewis Cappel. We also find him corresponding with our excellent archbishop Usher. Constantine’s works are, 1 “Coinmentarius ad codicem Babylouicum, seu Tractatus Thalmudicus de mensuris Templi,” Leyden, 1630, 4to. 2. “Versio et Notae ad Paraphrasin Joseph! Jachiadae in Danielem,” Amst. 1633, 4to. 3. “Itinerarium D. Benjaminis,” Heb. and Lat. Leyden, 8vo. 4. “Moysis Kimchi Grammatica Chaldaica,” ibid. 8vo. 5. “Confutatio Abarbanelis et Alscheichi in caput liii. Isaia-,” ibid. 1631, 8vo, and Franc. 1685. 6. “Commentarius in Tractatum Thaimudicum, qui dicitur Porta, de legibus Hebraeorum forensibus,” Heb. and Lat ibid. 1637, 4to. 7. “Commentariuf ad Betramum de Republica Hebrseorum,” 1641, 8vo.

The period in which Epicurus opened his school was peculiarly favourable to his design. In the room of the simplicity of the Socratic doctrine, nothing now remained but the subtlety and affectation of stoicism, the unnatural severity of the Cynics, or the debasing doctrine of indulgence taught and practised by the followers of Aristippns. The luxurious refinement which now prevailed in Athens, inclined the younger citizens to listen to a preceptor who smoothed the stern brow of philosophy, and, under the notion of pleasure, led them unawares to moderation and virtue. Hence his school became exceedingly popular, and disciples flocked into the garden, not only from different parts of Greece, but from Egypt and Asia. Those who were regularly admitted into this school lived upon such a footing of friendly attachment, that each individual cheerfully supplied the necessities of his brother. Cicero describes the friendship of the Epicurean fraternity as unequalled in the history of mankind. That he might prosecute his philosophical labours with the less interruption, Epicurus lived in a state of celibacy. In his own conduct he was exemplary for temperance and continence, and he inculcated upon his followers severity of manners, and the strict government of the passions, as the best means of passing a tranquil and happy life. Notwithstanding his regular manner of living, towards the close of his days, probably in consequence of intense application to study, his constitution became infirm, and he was afflicted with the stone. Perceiving from these marks of decay that his end was approaching, he wrote a will, in which he bequeathed his garden, and the buildings belonging to it, to Hermachus, and through him to the future professors of his philosophy. On the last day of his life he wrote to hi friend Hermachus, informing him that his disease had for fourteen days tormented him with anguish, which nothing could exceed; at the same time he adds, “All this is counterbalanced by the satisfaction of mind which I derive from the recollection of my discourses and discoveries.” The emperor Marcus Antoninus confirms this account, attesting that Epicurus in his sickness relied more upon the recollection of his excellent life than upon the aid of physicians, and instead of complaining of his pain, conversed with his friends upon those principles of philosophy which he had before maintained. At length, finding nature just exhausted, he ordered himself to be put into a warm bath, where, after refreshing himself with wine, and exhorting his friends not to forget his doctrines, he expired. His death happened in the second year of the 127th olympiad, or B.C. 271, and the seventy-third of hisage. He is said to have written a greater number of works from his own invention, than any other Grecian philosopher; but none are extant except a compendium of his doctrine, preserved by Laertius, and a few fragments dispersed among ancient authors. Not only did the immediate followers of Epicurus adorn the memory of their master with the highest honours, but many eminent writers, who have disapproved of his philosophy, have expressed great respect for his personal merit. Yet it cannot be denied that from the time when this philosopher appeared to the present day, an uninterrupted course of censure has fallen upon his memory; so that the name of his sect has almost become a proverbial expression for every thing corrupt in principle, and infamous in character. The charges brought against Epicurus are, that he superseded all religious principles, by dismissing the Gods from the care of the world; that if he acknowledged their existence, it was only in conformity to popular prejudice, since, according to his system, nothing exists in nature but material atoms; that he discovered great insolence and vanity in the disrespect with which he treated the memory of former philosdphers, and the characters and persons of his contemporaries; and that both the master and the whole fraternity were addicted to the vilest and most infamous vices. These accusations against the Epicurean school have been more or less confirmed by men distinguished for their wisdom and virtue, by Zeno, Cicero, Plutarch, Galen, and many of the Christian fathers. By what, therefore, are they to be repelled Brucker, who has examined this question with, his usual acuteness and erudition, observes, that with respect to the first charge, that of impiety, it certainly admits of no refutation. The doctrine of Epicurus concerning nature, not only militated against the superstitions of the Athenians, but against the agency of a supreme deity in the formation and government of the world; and his misconceptions with respect to mechanical motion, and the nature of divine happiness, ld him in his system to divest the Deity of some of his primary attributes. It does not indeed appear that he entirely denied the existence of superior powers. Cicero, who is unquestionably to be ranked among his opponents, relates, that Epicurus wrote books concerning piety, and the reverence due to the gods, expressed in terms which might have become a priest; and he charges him with inconsistency, in maintaining that the gods ought to be worshipped, whilst he asserted, that they had no concern in human affairs; herein admitting, that he revered the gods, but neither through hope nor fear, merely on account of the majesty and excellence of their nature. But if, with the utmost contempt for popular superstitions, Epicurus retained some belief in, and respect for, invisible natures, it is evident that his gods were destitute of many of the essential characters of divinity, and that his piety was of a kind very different from that which is inspired by just notions of Deity. Not to urge, that there is some reason to suspect, that what he taught concerning the gods might have been artfully designed to screen him from the odium and hazard which would have attended a direct avowal of atheism. The second charge against Epicurus, that of insolence and contempt towards other philosophers, seems scarcely compatible with the general air of gentleness and civility which appears in his character. If he claimed to himself the credit of his own system, he did no more than Zeno, Plato, and Aristotle, after availing themselves of every possible aid from former philosophers, had done before him. But, adds Brucker, calumny never appeared with greater effrontery, than in accusing Epicurus of intemperance and incontinence. That his character was distinguished by the contrary virtues appears not only from the numerous attestations brought by Laertius, but even from the confession of the most creditable opponents of his doctrine, particularly Cicero, Plutarch, and Seneca; and indeed this is sufficiently clear from the particulars which are related concerning his usual manner of living. But nothing can be a greater proof that his adversaries had little to allege against his innocence, than that they were obliged to have recourse to forgery. The infamous letters which Diotimus, or, according to Athcnucus, Theotimus, ascribed to him, were proved, in a public court, to have been fraudulently imposed upon the world, and the author of the imposition was punished. Whatever might be the case afterwards, therefore, there is little reason to doubt that, during the life of Epicurus, his garden was rather a school of temperance, than a scene of riot and debauchery.

, a Scotch divine, was one of the younger of the thirty- three children of Ralph Erskine, of Shieltield, a family of considerable antiquity in the county of Merse, and descended from the noble family of Marr. He was born at Dryburgh, still the family-seat of the Buchan family, in 1624, where he received the rudiments of his education, and in 1650 took the degree of M. A. in the university of Edinburgh. He was ordained to the ministry by the presbyterians in England, to the Jiving of Cornhill, in Durham, but soon after was ejected by the act of uniformity, on which he returned to his own country; but the persecution carried on at that time in Scotland against the presbyterians, obliged Mr. Erskine to take refuge in Holland, whence the want of the common necessaries of life induced him again to return to his native country, where he was apprehended and committed prisoner to the Bass, a strong fort in the mouth of the Forth. There he continued near three years till, through the interest of the then earl of Marr, his kinsman, he was set at liberty but such was the violence of the times, that he was again driven from Scotland. In 1687, when king James’s toleration, was proclaimed, Mr. Erskine embraced it; and on the re-establishment of presbytery in 1690, he was appointed minister of Churnside in the county of Berwick. He died August 10, 1696, aged sixty-eight, much respected by all who knew him, and left behind him several manuscripts, elucidating difficult passages in scripture; but these having been written in Latin, none of them were ever published.

, a Roman empress (wife to Theodosius the younger), whose proper name was Athenais, was the daughter of Leontius, an Athenian philosopher, and born about the year 400. Her father took such care of her education, that she became at length so accomplished in learning, that, at his death, he left his whole estate to his two sons, except an hundred pieces of gold, which he bequeathed to his daughter, with this declaration, that “her own good fortune would be sufficient for her.” This compliment, however, did not satisfy her, and having gone to law with her brothers, without success, she carried her cause to Constantinople, where she was recommended to Pulcheria, sister of the emperor Theodosius the younger, and became her favourite. In the year 421 she embraced Christianity, and changed her name from Athenais to Eudocia 3 and the same year was married to the emperor, through the powerful recommendation of his sister; by which event her father’s prophecy appeared to be fulfilled. Amidst all the grandeurof her new situation, she still continued to lead a very studious and philosophic life, spending much of her time in reading and writing; and lived very happily till the year 445, when an apparently trifling accident exposed her to the emperor’s jealousy. The emperor, it is said, having sent her an apple of an extraordinary size, she sent it to Paulinus, whom she respected on ac­"count of his learning. Paulinus, not knowing from whom it came, presented it to the emperor who, soon after seeing the empress, asked her what she had done with it. She, being apprehensive of raising suspicions in her husband, if she should tell him that she had given it to Paulinus, very unwisely declared that she had eaten it, which excited a suspicion of her intimacy with Paulinus, that seemed to be confirmed by her confusion on his producing the apple. He also put Paulinus to death. Upon this she went to Jerusalem, where she spent many years in building and adorning churches, and in relieving the poor. It is said that even when here, the jealousy of Theodosius pursued her, and that hearing she visited the priest Severus and the deacon John, he sent Saturninus with orders to put them both to death. Eudocia was so irritated at this barbarous persecution, that she for once stained the purity of her own life, by procuring Saturninus to be murdered. Dupin says, she did not return while the emperor lived; but Cave tells us, that she was reconciled to him, returned to Constantinople, and continued with him till his death; after which, she went again to Palestine, where she spent the remainder of her life in pious works. She died about A. D. 460; and, as Cave says, upon her death-bed, took a solemn oath, by which she declared herself entirely free from any stains of unchastity.

, archbishop of Toledo in the seventh century, and called the Younger, to distinguish him from his immediate predecessor of the same name, was at first clerk of the church of Toledo, and when chosen archbishop on the death of the elder Eugenius, retired to Saragossa with, a view to spend his days in the retirement of a monastery. Being however discovered, he was brought back to Toledo by order of his sovereign, and appointed archbishop in the year 646, an office which he filled for nine years. He presided at the councils held at Toledo in the years 653, 655, and 656. He was the author of several works, particularly a treatise on the Trinity, two books of miscellanies, and one in prose and verse, which were published by father Sirmond at Paris in 1619, 8vo, along with the poetical pieces of Dracontius. His style is not remarkable for elegance, but his thoughts are often just and pious. He died in the year 657.

, a stoic philosopher, who flourished in the second century, was a friend of Dio and of Apollonius Tyanseus, who introduced him to Vespasian. Although a violent quarrel arose between the latter philosopher and Euphrates, in consequence of which Philostratus, the panegyrist of the former, inveighs with great severity against the latter, it appears from the testimony of Epictetus, Pliny the younger, and Eusebius, that Euphrates was v universally esteemed for his talents and virtues, and that the censures of Philostratus deserve only contempt. Pliny’s character of him is highly interesting. “If ever,” says he, " polite learning flourished at Rome, it certainly does at present. Of this I could give you many instances; but I will content myself with naming only Euphrates the philosopher. When in my youth I served in the army in Syria, I had an opportunity of conversing familiarly with this excellent man, and took some pains to gain his affection, though that indeed - was not difficult for he is exceedingly open to access, and full of that gentleness of manner which he teaches. Euphrates is possessed of shining talents, which cannot fail to interest even the unlearned. He discourses with great accuracy, dignity, and elegance; and frequently rises into the sublimity and luxuriance of Plato himself. His style is copious and diversified, and so wonderfully sweet as to captivate even the most reluctant auditor. Add to all this, his graceful form, comely aspect, long hair, and large white beard; circumstances which, though they may probably be thought trifling and accidental, contribute, however, to procure him much reverence. There is no disgusting negligence in his dress; his countenance is grave, but not austere; his approach commands respect, without exciting awe. With the strictest sanctity, he unites the most perfect politeness of manner. He inveighs against vice, not against men; and, without chastising, reclaims the offender. You listen with 6xed attention to his exhortations, and even when convinced, still hang with eagerness upon his lips. In conformity to the principles of the stoic philosophy, Euphrates, when he found his strength worn out by disease and old age, voluntarily put a period to his life by drinking hemlock, having first, for some unknown reason, obtained permission from the emperor Adrian.

, is the name of two engravers whose works are held in some estimation among portrait-collectors. The elder was born in Holland, where he learned the art of mezzotinto-scraping, and also drew portraits from the life, on vellum, with a pen. What time he came into England does not appear, but he resided here a considerable time, in Fountain court in the Strand, London. He died at Bristol in May 1721. He drew many of the portraits which he engraved from nature, but they are not remarkable either for taste or execution. His most esteemed works were, a collection of the founders of the colleges of Oxford, half sheet prints, the heads of the philosophers from Rubens, and a portrait of Dr. Wallis the mathematician, from Kneller. The other John Faber, the younger, was his son, and lived in London, at the Golden Head in Bloomsbury-square, where Strutt thinks he died in 1756. Like his father, he confined himself to the engraving of portraits in mezzotinto; but he excelled him in every requisite of the art. The most esteemed works are the portraits of the Kit-Cat club, and the Beauties of Hampton Court. Some of his portraits are bold, free, and beautiful.

He now opened a shop opposite the Palsgrave -head tavern without Temple-bar, where he sold not only his own engravings, but those of other English artists, and imported a considerable number of prints from Holland, France, and Italy. He also worked for the booksellers, particularly Mr. Royston, the king’s bookseller, Mr. Martin, his brother-in-law, in St. Paul’s church-yard, and Mr. William Peake, a stationer and printseller on Snow-hill, the younger brother of his old master. About 1680, he retired from his shop, and resided in Printing-house-yard: but he still continued to work for the booksellers, and painted portraits from the life in crayons, which art he learned of Nanteuil, during his abode in France. He also painted in miniature; and his performances in both these styles were much esteemed. These portraits are what we now find with the inscription “W. Faithorne pinxit” He appears to have been well paid for his engravings, of which lord Orford has given a very full list. Mr. Ashmole gave him seven pounds for the engraving of his portrait, which, if not a large one, or very highly finished, could not at that time have been a mean price. Unfortunately, however, for him, his son William dissipated a considerable part of his property, and it is supposed that the vexation he suffered from this young man’s misconduct, tended to shorten his days. He died in May 1691, and was buried by the side of his wife in the church of St. Anne, Blackfriars. In 1662 he published “The Art of Engraving and Etching.”

, surnamed Strabo, was consul at Rome in 161 B. C. with Valerius Messala. The law called Fannia was made during his consulate, for regulating the expences of feasts, and empowering the pretors to drive the rhetoricians and philosophers from Rome. This law prohibited more than ten asses to be spent at a common feast, and an hundred at the most solemn, such as those of the Saturnalia, or of the public games; which seems almost incredible, when it is considered that a sheep at that time cost ten asses, and an ox an hundred, according to the opinion of several learned men. Caius Fannius, his son, distinguished himself by his eloquence, and was consul 120 B. C. He opposed the enterprizes of Caius Gracchus, and made a speech against him, which is praised by Cicero. Caius Fannius, cousin-german of this latter, was questor 139 B. C. and pretor ten years after; served under Scipio Africanus the younger in Africa; and, in Spain, under Fabius Maximus Servilianus. He was the disciple of Panetius, a celebrated stoic philosopher; married the youngest daughter of Lelius, and wrote some annals, which are much praised by Cicero.

, of Vincenza, was a Benedictine monk, and eminent as an antiquary. In 1672 he published, at Verona, his “Musae Lapidariae,” in folio, which is a colledlion, though by no means complete or correct, of the verses found inscribed on ancient monuments. Burman the younger, in his preface to the “Anthologia Latino,” seems to confound this Ferreti with him who flourished in the fourteenth century, speaking of his history of his own times. The exact periods of this author’s birth and death are not known.

, a very learned lawyer in the reign of Henry VIII. was descended from an ancient family, and was the younger son of Ralph Fitzherbert, esq. He was born at Norbury, co. Derby , but it is not known in what year. After he had been properly educated in the country, he was sent to Oxford, and from thence to one of the inns of court; but we neither know of what college, nor of what inn he* was admitted. His great parts, judgment, and diligence, soon distinguished him in his profession; and in process of time he became so eminent, that on Nov. 18, 1511, he was called to be a serjeant at law. In 1516 he received the honour of knighthood, and the year after was appointed one of his majesty’s Serjeants at law. He began now to present the world with the product of his studies; and published from time to time several valuable works. In 1523, which was the fifteenth year of Henry the Eighth’s reign, he was made one of the justices of the court of common pleas, in which honourable station he spent the remaining part of his life; discharging the duties of his office with such ability and integrity, that he was universally respected as the oracle of the law. Two remarkable things are related of his conduct; one, that he openly opposed cardinal Wolsey in the height of his power, although chiefly on the score of alienating the church lands; the other, that on his death-bed, foreseeing the changes that were likely to happen in the church as well as state, he pressed his children in very strong terms to promise him solemnly neither to accept grants, nor to make purchases of abbey-lands. He died May 27, 1515—8, and was buried in his own parish church of Norbury. He left behind him a very numerous posterity; and as he became by the death of his elder brother John possessed of the family estate, he was in a condition to provide very plentifully for them. The Fitzherbert family, in the different branches of it, continues to flourish, chiefly in Derbyshire and Staffordshire.

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

, a German, was descended from a learned family, and born at Augsburg, July 26, 1565. He went into France very young, to study the civil law under Cujacius; yet paid so much attention to history and criticism, that he became eminent in both. When he was scarcely three and twenty, he was chosen among the counsellors of Casimir, prince of Palatine, and the year after made professor of law at Heidelberg, where he lived in friendship with Leunclavius, Sylburgius, Opsoprcus, the younger Douza, and other learned men of his time. Some little time after, he resigned his professor’s chair, and was taken into the most important employments by the elector Frederic IV. This prince made him vice-president of his court, and sent him in quality of ambassador to several places. In the midst of these occupations he never intermitted his usual method of studying; and wrote a great many works upon criticism, law, and history, the history of his own country in particular. When we view the catalogue of them given by Melchior Adam, we are ready to imagine that he must have lived a very long life, and hardly have done any thing but write books; yet he died in his forty-ninth year, May 13, 1614. Oouza says that he seems to have been born for the advancement of polite literature: and Thuanus acknowledges that it would be difficult to find his equal in all Germany. Casaubon calls him a man of profound and universal knowledge; and Scioppius says that he joined great acuteness to an incredible depth of learning. Add to this, that he was perfectly skilled in coins, medals, statues, antiques of all sorts, and could paint very well. His moral qualities are described as not inferior to his intellectual; so that Melchior Adam seems justly to have lamented, that a man who deserved so much to be immortal, should have died so soon. His principal works are, 1. “Origines Palatinae,” fol. 2. “De Inquisitionis processu,” 1679, 4to. 3. “De re monetaria veterum Romanorum, &c.” Leyden, 1605, 4to, inserted by Graevius in vol. II. of his Roman Antiquities. 4. “Rerum Bohemicarum scriptores,” Hanau, 1602, fol. 5. “Rerum Germanic-arum scriptores,” fol. S vols. 1600 1611, reprinted in 1717. 6. “Corpus historia Francia,” fol. &c.

, a learned physician, was born at Nieder Wesel, in the duchy of Cleves, Oct. 30, 1581 but his relations being compelled, by the troubles of the times, to retire to Osnaburg, he began his classical studies there. He was afterwards sent to Cologne, Wesel, and Helmstadt; but his disposition being early turned to medicine, as a profession, he studied at Rostock, afterwards returned to Helmstadt to attend the lectures of Duncan Liddell and of Francis Parcovius; he likewise derived much advantage from the lectures of the celebrated Meibomius, in whose house he resided in the capacity of tutor to his son, and was soon thought fit to give private lectures to the younger students on the practice of physic. He afterwards lectured in public as professor extraordinary; and in 1604, at the age of twenty-three, he obtained the ordinary professorship in the university, which office he filled during four years. He then took his degree of doctor, and went to the court of Philip Sigismund, duke of Brunswick Lunenburg, and bishop of Osnaburg, who had appointed him his principal physician. About 1622, Ernest, duke of Holstein and earl of Schawenburg, offered him the same office, with the addition of the chief medical professorship in the university which he had lately founded at Rinteln; but his patron would not permit him. to accept it. This prince-bishop dying in 1623, his nephew, duke Frederic Ulric, gave Freitag the option of being his chief physician, or of resuming his professorship at Helmstadt. He con*­tinued at Osnaburg, where the new bishop retained him as his physician, and also appointed him one of his chamberlains. He also served his successor in the same capacity, but was dismissed in 1631, on account of his refusal to become a catholic. He found protection and patronage, however, under Ernest Cassimir, count of Nassau, and. the counts of Bettheim, who procured for him the vacant professorship in the university of Groningen. He fulfilled this new appointment with great reputation, and continued to distinguish himself by the success of his practice till the decline of his life, which was accelerated by a complication of maladies. Dropsy, gout, gravel, aud fever, terminated his life Feb. 8, 1641.

, a Roman writer, who flourished in the first century, and was in high repute under Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, Nerva, and Trajan, was a man of consular dignity, a great officer who commanded the Roman armies in England, and elsewhere, with success; and he is mentioned in high terms of panegyric by all the writers of his time. He was city-prgetor when Vespasian and Titus were consuls. Nerva made him crfrtitor of the aquasducts, which occasioned him to write his treatise, “De Aquaeductibus Urbis Romse.” He wrote also “Tres libros’ Stratagematum,” or, concerning the stratagems used in war by the most eminent Greek and Roman commanders; and afterwards added a fourth, coritaining examples of those arts and maxims, discoursed of in the former. These two works are still extant, together with a piece “De Re Agraria;” and another, “De Limitibus.” They have been often printed separately, but were all published together in a neat edition at Amsterdam in 1661, with notes by Robertus Keuchenius, who has placed at the end the fragments of several works of Frontinus that are lost. This eminent man died in the year 106, under Trajan, and was succeeded as augur by the younger Pliny, who mentions him with honour. He forbade any monument to be erected to him after his death, declaring, that every man was sure to be remembered without any such testimonial, if he had lived so as to deserve it. His words, as Pliny has preserved them, were these: “Impensa monument! supervacua est memoria nostri durabit, si vita meruimus.”

Dr. Pulteney’s account of the fate of Gesner’s excellent figures, forms, as he justly observes, a mortifying anecdote in the literary history of the science of botany. Of the 1500 figures left by Gesner, prepared for his “History of Plants,” at his death, a large share passed into the “Epitome Matthioli,” published by Camerarius in 1586, which contained in the whole 1003 figures; and in the same year, as also in a second edition in 1590, they embellished an abridged translation of Matthiolus, printed under the name of the “German Herbal.” In 1609 the same blocks were used by Uftenbach for the Herbal of Castor Durantes, printed at Francfort. This publication, however, comprehends only 948 of these icons, nearly 100 being introduced of very inferior merit. After this period, Camerarius the younger being dead, these blocks were purchased by Goerlin, a bookseller of Ulm, and next served for the “Parnassus medicinalis illustratus” of Becher, printed in that city in 1663. In 1678 they were taken into a German herbal by Bernard Verzacha; and such was the excellence of the materials and workmanship of these blocks, that they were exhibited a sixth time in the “Theatrum Botanicum” of Zwinger, Basil, 1696, and finally in a new edition of the same wor.k, so late as 1744. Thus did the genius and labours of Gesner add dignity and ornament to the works of other men, and even of some whose enmity he had experienced during his lifetime. Besides the above mentioned, Gesner left five volumes, consisting entirely of figures, which, after various vicissitudes, became the property of Trew, of Norimberg, who gratified the public, by the pen of Dr. Schmiedel, with an ample specimen, published in 1753.

Much of this is certainly true. His plays, enumerated in the “Biog. Dramatics,” procured him little reputation. He had some talent, however, for criticism, and Pope was weak enough to believe that Addison employed Gildon to write against him. Pope introduced him into the Dunciad for another reason, his “New Rehearsal, or, Bays the Younger; containing an examen of Mr. Rowe’s plays, and a word or two on Mr. Pope’s ‘ Rape of the Lock,’” 1714. Gildon wrote the “Life of Betterton,” published in 1710.

, a French lady of literary reputation, was the daughter of a military officer, and born about the year 1694. She was married, or rather sacrificed to Francis Hugot de Grafigny, chamberlain to the duke of Lorraine, a man of violent passions, from which she was often in danger of her life; but after some years of patient suffering, she was at length relieved by a legal separation, and her husband finished his days in confinement, which his improper conduct rendered necessary. Madame de Grafigny now came to Paris, where her merit was soon acknowledged, although her first performance, a Spanish novel, did not pass without some unpleasant criticisms, to which, says our authority, she gave the best of all possible answers, by writing a better, which was her “Lettres d'une Peruvienne,” 2 vols. 12mo. This had great success, being written with spirit, and abounding in those delicate sentiments which are so much admired in the French school, yet an air of metaphysical speculation has been justly objected, as throwing a chill on her descriptions of love. She also wrote some dramatic pieces, of which the comedies of “Cenie” & “La Fille d'Aristide” were most applauded. Having resided for some time at the court of Lorraine, she became known to the emperor, who had read her “Peruvian Letters” with much pleasure, and engaged her to write some dramatic pieces proper to be performed before the empress and the younger branches of the royal family at court. This she complied with, and sent five or six such pieces to Vienna, and in return received a pension of 1500 livres, but with the express condition that she was not to print these dramas, nor give copies to any other theatre. She long retained the esteem and patronage of the court of Vienna, and was chosen an associate of the academy at Florence. She died, much esteemed by all classes, at Paris in 1758. A complete edition of her works was published at Paris in 1738, 4 vols. 12mo; and her “Letters of a Peruvian Princess,” were published in English, by F. Ashworth, 1782, 2 vols. 8vo.

, surnamed the Great, was born of a patrician family, equally conspicuous for its virtue and nobility at Rome, where his father Gordian was a senator, and extremely rich; and, marrying a lady of distinction, called Sylvia, had by her this son, about the year 544. From his earliest years he discovered genius and judgment; and, applying himself particularly to the apophthegms of th ancients, he fixed every thing worth notice in his memory, where it was faithfully preserved as in a store-house; he also improved himself by the conversation of old men, in which he took great delight. By these methods he made a great progress in the sciences, and there was not a man. in Rome, who surpassed him in grammar, logic, and rhetoric; nor can it be doubted but he had early instructions in the civil law, in which his letters prove him to have been well versed: he was nevertheless entirely ignorant of the Greek language. These accomplishments in a young nobleman procured him senatorial dignities, which he filled with great reputation and he was afterwards appointed praefect of the city by the emperor Justin the Younger but, being much inclined to a monastic life, he quitted that post, and retired to the monastery of St. Andrew, which he himself had founded at Rome in his father’s house, and put it under the government of an abbot, called Valentius. Besides this, he founded six other convents in Sicily; and, selling all the rest of his possessions, he gave the purchase-money to the poor.

, was the younger brother of St. Basil, and had an equal care taken of his education, being brought up in all the polite and fashionable modes of learning; but, applying himself particularly to rhetoric, he valued himself more upon being accounted an orator than a Christian. On the admonition of his friend Gregory Nazianzen he quitted those studies; and, betaking himself to solitude and a monastic discipline, he turned his attention wholly to the holy scriptures, and the controversies of the age; so that he became as eminent in the knowledge of these as he had before been in the course of more pleasant studies. Thus qualified for the highest dignity in the church, he was placed in the see of Nyssa, a city on the borders of Cappadocia. The exact time of his promotion is not known, though it is certain he was bishop in the year 371. He proved in this station a stout champion for the Nicene faith, and so vigorously opposed the Arian party, that he was soon after banished by the emperor Valens; and, in a synod held at Nyssa by the bishop of Pontus and Galatia, was deposed, and met with very hard usage. He was hurried from place to place, heavily fined, and exposed to the rage and petulance of the populace, which fell heavier upon him, as he was both unused to trouble, and unapt to bear it. In this condition he remained for seven or eight years, during which, however, he went about countermining the stratagems of the Arians, and strengthening those in the orthodox faith; and in the council of Antioch in the year 378, he was, among others, delegated to visit the eastern churches lately harassed by the Arian persecution.

, descended of an ancient family distinguished by many honourable persons, which took its name from a town so called in Norfolk, was the younger son of sir Richard Gresham, knight, alderman, sheriff, and lord mayor of London, an opulent merchant, and a man of great public spirit, who died in February 1548. His brother, sir John Gresham, was also an opulent merchant, and had served the offices of alderman, sheriff, and lord mayor. He died of a pestilential fever in 1556, after, among other acts of munificence, endowing the free school of Holt in Norfolk, and bestowing the government of it on the fishmongers’ company in London. Thomas, the son of the preceding sir Richard, was born in 1519 at London, and bound apprentice to a mercer there while he was young: but, to enlarge his mind by an education suitable to his birth and fortune, was sent to Caius college, then Gonvil-hall, in Cambridge; where he remained a considerable time, and made such improvements in learning, that Caius the founder of the college styles him “doctissimus mercator,” the very learned merchant. However, the profits of trade were then so great, and such large estates had been raised by it in his own family, that he afterwards engaged in it, and was admitted a member of the Mercers’ company in 1543. About this time he warned Anne, the daughter of William Femley, esq. of West Creting, in Suffolk, und widow of William Heade, of Fulham, in Middlesex, esq., by whom he had a son named Richard, who not long after succeeded his father in the office of agent to king Edward for taking up money of the merchants at Antwerp, and removed to that city with his family in 1551.

, an English physician of considerable eminence in his day, was the son of Edward Gwinne, descended from an ancient family in Wales, who at this time resided in London. His son was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, whence in 1574 he was elected a scholar of St. John’s college, Oxford, took the degree of B. A. May 14, 1578, and was afterwards perpetual fellow of the college. It was the custom at that time in Oxford for the convocation to appoint a certain number of regent masters, to read each of them upon some one of the liberal arts two years, for which they received a small stipend, levied upon the younger scholars. This provision was made, before the public professorships were settled and supported by fixed salaries. Agreeably to this practice, Mr. Gwinne was made regent-master in July 1582, and appointed to read upon music, and there is extant a manuscript oration of his upon that subject, spoken Oct. 15, of that year, in which he calls himself prelector musica publicus. When he had taken his degrees in arts, he studied physic, and practised in and about Oxford for several years. In 1588 he was chosen junior proctor of the university, and in 1592 distinguished himself in a disputation at Oxford before queen Elizabeth. On July 17, 1593, he was created doctor of physic. He obtained leave of the college in 1595, to attend sir Henry Union, ambassador from queen Elizabeth to the French court, and continued with him during his absence abroad.

, a learned Englishman, was the younger son of Thomas Hales, of Hales’-place, at Halden in Kent, and was liberally educated, although at no university. He became an excellent scholar in the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew tongues, and was well skilled in the municipal laws and antiquities. In the reign of Henry VIII. he was clerk of the ha,naper for several years^ and in 1548 was appointed a commissioner to inquire into inclosures, decayed houses, and the unlawful converting of arable land into pasture, for the counties of Oxfordj, Berks, &c. On this occasion he made an excellent charge, which is printed at length by Strype. He obtained a good estate in Warwickshire and elsewhere, upon the dissolution of the monasteries, and founded a free-school at Coventry. For the use of the scholars there, he wrote “Introductiones ad Grammaticam,” Latin and English. He was also the author of the “High way to Nobility,” Lond. 4to; and translated into English “Plutarch’s Precepts for the preservation of good health,” Lond. 1543, 8vo. Being a zealous protestant, he went abroad during queen Mary’s reign, and took every pains to compose the unhappy differences that took place among the English exiles at Francfort. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he distinguished his loyalty in “An Oration to Queen Elizabeth at her first entrance to her reign,” which was, however, not spoken, but delivered in manuscript to the queen. He also wrote a treatise in favour of the succession of the house of Suffolk to the crown on the demise of Elizabeth, who was so displeased with it, as to commit the author to the Tower. It was answered by Lesley, bishop of Ross. Mr. Hales, whose imprisonment was probably of no long duration, died Jan. 28, 1572, and was buried in the church of St. Peter le Poor, Broad-street, London. Some of his. Mss. are in the Harleian collection.

But the labours of Dr. Haller during his residence at Gottingen, were by no means confined to any one department of science. He was not more anxious to be an improver himself, than to instigate others to similar pursuits. To him, the anatomical theatre, the school of midwifery, the chirurgical society, and the royal academy of sciences at Gottingen, owe their origin. Such distinguished merit could not fail to meet with a suitable reward from the sovereign under whose protection he then taught. The king of Great Britain not only honoured him with every mark of attention which he himself could bestow, but procured him also letters of nobility from the emperor. The title, however, of baron de Haller, he never assumed, although it was often bestowed on him. On the death of Dillenius he had an offer of the professorship of botany at Oxford the states of Holland invited him to the chair of the younger Albinus and the king of Prussia was anxious that he should be the successor of Maupertuis at Berlin. Marshal Keith wrote to him in the name of his sovereign, offering him the chancellorship of the university of Halle, vacant by the death of the celebrated Wolff. Count Orlowr invited him to Russia, in the name of his mistress, the empress, offering him a distinguished place at St. Petersburgh. The king of Sweden conferred on him an unsolicited honour, by raising him to the rank of knighthood, of the order of the polar star; and the late Joseph II. emperor of Germany, honoured him with a personal visit.

, a polite and ingenious scholar, was the younger son of the rev. Gideon Hardinge, and grandson of sir Robert Hardinge, of King’s Newton, a small hamlet in the parish of Melbourne in Derbyshire, who was knighted in the civil wars. He was born in 1700, and educated at Eton school, which he left in 17 Is for King’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of B. A. in 1722, and that of M. A. in 1726. When he left the university, he studied law, and was called to the bar; but obtained in 1731 the office of chief clerk of the house of commons, which he held until 1752, when he was appointed joint secretary of the treasury, in which post he died April 9, 1758.

, a celebrated scholar and critic, professor of politics and history at Leyden, and librarian of the university there, was born at Ghent, in Flanders, May 1SO, of an illustrious family, who had possessed the first places in the magistracy of that town. He was frequently removed in the younger part of his life. He began his studies at the Hague, and afterwards went with his parents into Zealand, where he was instructed in polite literature and philosophy. He soon learned the outlines of morality and politics, but did not relish logic, and had an unconquerable aversion to the niceties of grammar. He discovered early a strong propensity to poetry, and began to make verses before he knew any thing of prosody or the rules of art. He composed a regular elegy at ten years of age, upon the death of a play-fellow; and there are several epigrams and little poems of his, written when he was not above twelve, which shew a great deal of genius and facility. He is represented, however, as having been somewhat indolent, and not likely to make any progress in Greek Und Latin learning; on which account his father sent him, at fourteen years of age, to study the law in the university of Franeker. But from that time, as if he had been influenced by a spirit of contradK*:on, nothing would please him but classics; and he applies inmself there to Greek and Latin authors, as obstinately as he had rejected them in Zealand. He afterwards removed to Leyden, where he became a pupil of Joseph Scaliger; and was obliged to the encouragement and care of that great man for the perfection to which he afterwards arrived in literature, and which at the beginning of his life there was so little reason to expect. He published an edition of “Silius Italicus,” in 1600, professedly taken from an ancient ms. and added notes of his own, which he called “Crepundia Siliana,” to shew that they were written when he was extremely young. This edition was reprinted at Cambridge, 1646, 12mo. Heinsius was made Greek professor at eighteen, and afterwards succeeded Scaliger in the professorship of politics and history. When he was chosen librarian to the university, he pronounced a Latin oration, afterwards published, in which he described the duties of a librarian, and the good order and condition in which a library should be kept. Being a great admirer of the moral doctrine of the stoics, he wrote an elegant oration in praise of the stoic philosophy. He died Feb. 25, 1655, after having distinguished himself as a critic by his labours upon Silius Italicus, Theocritus, Hesiod, Seneca, Homer, Hesychius, Theophrastus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Ovid, Livy, Terence, Horace, Prudentius, Maximus Tyrius, &c. He published two treatises “De Satira Horatiana,” which Balzac affirms to be masterpieces. He also wrote poems in various languages, which, have been often printed, and always admired. He was the author of several prose works, some of which were of the humourous and satirical cast; as “Laus Asini,” “Laus Pediculi,” &c.

, is the name of two celebrated mathematicians of antiquity, who are usually distinguished by the epithets, Hero the elder, and Hero the younger. The first was a native of Alexandria, and the disciple of Ctesias, who flourished in the reigns of Ptolemy Philadelphia and Euergetes I. He was distinguished by his great skill in mechanics, and particularly in the construction of machinery; as a moralist he was inclined to the tenets of Epicurus. He was author of a treatise “De Constructione et Mensura Manubalistoe,” of which a fragment was published in Greek by Bernardino Baldi “Pe Telis conficiendis jaculandisque Liber,” published with notes by Baldi “Spiralia,” published in 1575 by Frederic Commandine and “De Automatorum Fabrica.” These are all to be found in the Louvre edition of the “Ancient Mathematicians.” The younger Hero is supposed to have flourished under the reign of the emperor Heraclius. He was author of “De Machinis Bellicis Geodcesia;” “Liber de Obsidione repellenda et toleranda” and <c De Vocabulis Geonaetricis et Stereometricis."

His learning was of the superior kind, Greek was almost as familiar to him as his native language. He was master of the classics, and in the younger part of his life had written some verses, which shewed no contemptible genius for poetry, but these he afterwards suppressed. His “Meditations” are indeed a species of poetical composition as far as respects imagery and fancy. He had, too, a critical knowledge of the Hebrew tongue, and delighted in those studies which tend to explain the sacred text. His Life is prefixed to his “Letters,” 2 vols. 8vo.

, a relation of the preceding, was the younger brother of sir Scroop Howe, of Nottinghamshire. In the convention-parliament, which met at Westminster Jan. 22, 1688-9, he served for Cirencester, and was constantly chosen for that borough, or as a knight of the shire for the county of Gloucester, in the three last parliaments of king William, and in the three first of queen Anne. In 1696 he was a strenuous advocate for sir John Fenwick; and his pleading in behalf of that unfortunate gentleman, shews his extensive knowledge of the laws, and aversion to unconstitutional measures. In 1699, when the army was reduced, it was principally in consideration of Mr. Howe’s remonstrances, that the House of Commons agreed to allow half-pay to the disbanded officers; and when the partition-treaty was afterwards under the consideration of that house, he expressed his sentiments of it in guch terms, that king William declared, that if it were not foi the disparity of their rank, he would demand satisfaction with the sword. At the accession of queen Anne, he was sworn of her privy-council April 21, 1702; and, on June 7 following, constituted vice-admiral of the county of Gloucester. Before the end of that year, Jan. 4, 1702-3, he was constituted paymaster-general of her majesty’s guards and garrisons. Macky says of him, “he seemed to be pleased with and joined in the Revolution, and was made vice-chamberlain to queen Mary; but having asked a grant, which was refused him, and given to lord Portland, he fell from the court, and was all that reign the most violent and open antagonist king William had in the house. A great enemy to foreigners settling in England; most clauses in acts against them being brought in by him. He is indefatigable in whatever he undertakes; witness the old East India company, whose cause he maintained till he> fixed it upon as sure a foot as the new, even when they thought themselves past recovery. He lives up” to what his visible estate can afford; yet purchases, instead of running in debt. He is endued with good natural parts, attended with an unaccountable boldness; daring to say what he pleases, and will be heard out; so that he passeth with some for the shrew of the house. On the queen’s accession to the throne he was made a privy-counsellor, and paymaster of the guards and garrisons. He is a tall, thin, pale-faced man, with a very wild look; brave in his person, bold in expressing himself, a violent enemy, a sure friend, and seems to be always in a hurry. Near fifty years old." Such is the character given of this gentleman in 1703. A new privy council being settled May 10, 1708, according to act of parliament, relating to the union of the two kingdoms, he was, among the other great officers, sworn into it. He continued paymaster of the guards and garrisons till after the accession of George I. who appointed Mr. Walpole to succeed him on Sept. 23, 1714: the privy council being also dissolved, and a new one appointed to meet on Oct. 1 following, he was left out of the list. Retiring to his seat at Stowell in Gloucestershire, he died there in 1721, and was buried in the chancel of the church of Stowell.

, was the younger brother of Mr. John Hughes, and, like him, a votary of the Muses, and an excellent scholar. He was born in 1685. He published, in 1714, in 8vo, a translation of “The Rape of Proserpine,” from Claudian, and “The Story of Sektus and Erictho,” from Lucan’s “Pharsalia,” book vi. These translations, with notes, were reprinted in 1723, 12mo. He also published, in 1717, a translation of Suetonius’ s “Lives of the Twelve Caesars,” and translated several “Novels” from the Spanish of Cervantes, which are inserted in the “Select Collection of Novels and Histories,” printed for Watts, 1729. He died Jan. 17, 1731. A posthumous volume of his “Miscellanies in Verse and Prose” was published in 1737. His widow accompanied the lady of governor Byng to Barbadoes, and died there in 1740.

, an eminent antiquary, architect, and critic, was probably a native of Verona, and flourished in the sixteenth century. He was of the order of the Dominicans, but in his travels, and during his scientific labours, wore the habit of a secular priest. When at Rome, where he was first known as an architect, he began to apply to the study of classical antiquities, and made a judicious collection of inscriptions, which he dedicated to Lorenzo de Medici. He was some time at the court of the emperor Maximilian I. and thence went to France about 1500, where Louis X. appointed him royal architect. He built at Paris two bridges over the Seine, that of Notre Dame, and the little bridge. In the mean time, while he had leisure, he employed it in examining ancient manuscripts, and had the felicity to recover all the letters of Pliny the younger, and the work of Julius Obsequens on prodigies. These he arranged for publication, and sent them to Aldus Manutius, by whom they were both printed in 1508, 8vo. He also collated several other classics, and illustrated Caesar’s Commentaries by useful notes and figures, and was the first to give a design of the famous bridge which Caesar built across the Rhine. On his return to Italy, he edited the fine edition of Vitruvius, printed by Aldus in 1511, and enriched it with designs. When the famous bridge the Rialto was burnt down in 1513, he gave a magnificent design for a new one; but that of an inferior architect being preferred, he quitted Venice, and went to Rome, where, after the death of Bramante, he was employed on St. Peter’s church. His last work was the bridge over the Adige, at Verona, which he built in 1520: He died about 1530, at a very advanced age.

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

, a celebrated Grecian orator, of Chalcis, in Syria, the d isciple of Lysias, and master of Demosthenes, was born probably about 418 B.C. He taught rhetoric with reputation at Athens; and sixty-four orations are attributed to him, but he composed only fifty, and we have but ten of them remaining in the “Greek Orators” of Stephens, 1575, fol. of which we have an excellent translation by sir William Jones, in 1779, 4to. Isaeus took Lysias for his model, and has so well imitated his style and elegance, that he might be easily confounded with the other but for the figures of speech, which Isaeus is the first orator who makes frequent use of. He was also the first who applied eloquence to political subjects, in which his pupil Demosthenes followed him. He must be distinguished from another celebrated orator named Is^us, who lived at Rome in the time of the younger Pliny, about the year 97, by whom he is highly extolled. A sketch of his life is drawn by Philostratus, but he had nothing in common with the Athenian orator, except the volubility of his language, and his name, which last sir William Jones thinks might be assumed, as that of Isocrates also was taken by one of the later sophists, who wrote the instructions to Demonicus. The best of the recent editions of Isseus is that of Reiske, in the “Orat. Graec.” Leipsic, 1770 75, 8vo.

, an English prelate, born in 1713, was the younger son of Charles Keene, of Lynn, in Norfolk, esq. sometime mayor of that town, whose eldest son was sir Benjamin Keene, many years ambassador at Madrid, and K. B. who died Dec. 15, 1757, leaving his fortune to the subject of this article. Mr. Edmund Keene was first educated at the Charter-house, and afterwards at Caius college, Cambridge, where he was admitted in 1730. In 1738 he was appointed one of his majesty’s preachers at Whitehall chapel, and made fellow of Peterhouse in 1739. In 1740 he was made chaplain to a regiment of marines; and, in the same year, by the interest of his brother with $ir Robert Walpole, he succeeded bishop Butler in the valuable rectory of Stanhope, in the bishopric of Durham. In 1748, he preached and published a sermon at Newcastle, at the anniversary meeting of the society for the relief of the widows and orphans of clergymen; and, in December following, on the death of Dr. Whalley, he was chosen master of Peterhouse. In 1750, being vice-chancellor, under the auspices of the late duke of Newcastle, he verified the concluding paragraph in his speech on being elected, “Nee tardum nee timidum habebitis procancellarium,” by promoting, with great zeal and success, the regulations for improving the discipline of the university. This exposed him to much obloquy from the younger part of it, particularly in the famous “Fragment,” and “The Key to the Fragment,” by Dr. King, in which Dr. Keene was ridiculed (in prose) under the name of Mun, and in that of the “Capitade” (in verse), under that of Acutus, but at the same time his care and attention to the interests and character of the university justly endeared him to his great patron, so that in Jan. 1752, soon after the expirW tion of his office, which he held for two years, he was nominated to the see of Chester, vacant by the death of bishop Peploe, and was consecrated in Ely-house chapel on Palm Sunday, March 22. With this he held in commendam his rectory, and, for- two years, his headship, when he was succeeded, much to his satisfaction, by Dr. Law. In May following his lordship married the only daughter of Lancelot Andrews, esq. of Edmonton, formerly an eminent linen-draper in Cheapside, a lady of considerable fortune, and a descendant of the family of bishop Andrews. She died March 24, 1776. In 1770, on the death of bishop Mawson, he was translated to the valuable see of Ely. Receiving large dilapidations, his lordship procured an act of parliament for alienating the old palace in Holborn, and building a new one, by which the see has been freed from a great incumbrance, and obtained some increase also of annual revenue. “The bishopric,” it has been humorously observed, “though stripped of the strawberries which Shakspeare commemorates to have been so noted in Holborn, has, in lieu of -them, what may very well console a man not over-scrupulous in his appetites, viz. a new mansion of Portland stone in Dover-street, and a revenue of 5000l. a year, to keep it warm and in good repute.” Bishop Keene soon followed his friend Dr. Caryl, “whom,” he said, “he had long known and regarded, and who, though he had a few more years over him, he did not think would have gone before him.” He died July 6, 1781, in the sixty-eighth year of his age, and was buried at his own desire in bishop West’s chapel, Ely cathedral, where is a short epitaph drawn up by himself. “Bishop Keene,” it is observed by bishop Newton, “succeeded to Ely, to his heart’s desire, and happy it was that he did so; for, few could have borne the expence, or have displayed the taste and magnificence, which he has done, having a liberal fortune as well as a liberal mind, and really meriting the appellation of a builder of palaces. For, he built a new palace at Chester; he built a new Fly-house in London and, in a great measure, a new palace at Ely leaving onjy the outer walls standing, he formed a new inside, and thereby converted it into one of the best episcopal houses, if not the very best, in the kingdom. He had indeed received the money which arose from the sale of old Elyhouse, and also what was paid by the executors of his predecessor for dilapidations, which, all together, amounted to about 11,000l. but yet he expended some thousands more of his own upon the buildings, and new houses require new furniture.” It is chiefly on account of this taste and munificence that he deserves notice, as he is not known in the literary world, unless by five occasional sermons of no distinguished merit.

, field-marshal in the king of Prussia’s service, was born in 1696, and was the younger son of William Keith, earl marshal of Scotland. He had his grammar-learning under Thomas Ruddiman, author of the “Rudiments;” his academical, under bishop Keith and William IMeston, in the college of Aberdeen. He was designed by his friends for the profession of the law; but the bent of his genius inclined him to arms, with which they wisely complied. His first military services were employed while a youth of eighteen, in the rebellion of 1715. In this unhappy contest, through the instigation of the counless his mother, who was a Roman catholic, he joined the Pretender’s party, and was at the battle of Sheriffmuir, in which he was wounded, yet able to make his escape to France. Here he applied to those branches of education, which are necessary to accomplish a soldier. He studied mathematics under M. de Maupertuis; and made such proficiency, that he was, by his recommendation, admitted a fellow of the royal academy of sciences at Paris. He afterwards travelled through Italy, Switzerland, and Portugal; with uncommon curiosity examined the several productions in architecture, painting, and sculpture; and surveyed the different fields where famous battles had been fought. In 1717, he had an opportunity of forming an acquaintance with Peter, czar of Muscovy, at Paris, who invited him to enter into the Russian service. This offer he declined, because the emperor was at that time at war with the king of Sweden, whose character Keith held in great veneration. He then left Paris, and went to Madrid; where, by the interest of the duke of Lyria, he obtained a commission in the Irish brigades, then commanded by the duke of Ormond. He afterwards accompanied the duke of Lyria, when he was sent ambassador extraordinary to Russia, and was recommended by him to the service of the czarina, who promoted him to the rank of lieutenant-general, and invested him with the order of the black eagle.

, a dramatic and miscellaneous writer, a native of Ireland, was born on the banks of the lake of Killarney, in 1739. His father was a gentleman of good family in that country, whose fortune being reduced by a series of misfortunes, he was obliged to repair to Dublin, in order to endeavour to support himself by his personal industry. He gave our author, however, some school education; but the narrowness of his finances would not permit him to indulge his son’s natural propensity to study, by placing him in the higher schools of Dublin. He was therefore bound apprentice to 3j stay-maker, an employment but ill suited to his inclination; yet continued with his master till the expiration of his apprenticeship, and then set out for London, in 1760, in order to procure a livelihood by his business. This, however, he found very difficult, and was soon reduced to the utmost distress for the means of subsistence. In this forlorn situation, a stranger, and friendless, he used sometimes to endeavour to forget his misfortunes, and passed some of his heavy hours at a public-house in Russel-street, Covent-garden, much resorted to by the younger players. Having an uncommon share of good-humour, and being lively, cheerful, and engaging in his behaviour, he soon attracted the notice, not only of these minor wits, but of a set of honest tradesmen who frequented that house every evening, and who were much entertained with his conversation. In a little time Mr. Kelly became so well acquainted with the characters of the club, that he was enabled to give a humorous description of them in one of the daily papers; and the likenesses were so well executed as to draw their attention, and excite their curiosity to discover the author. Their suspicions soon fixed on Mr. Kelly, and from that time he became distinguished among them as a man of parts and consideration.

, bishop of St. Andrew’s, Scotland, and founder of the college of St. Salvator there, was the younger son of James Kennedy, of Dunmure, by the lady Mary, countess of Angus, his wife, daughter of Robert III. king of Scotland. He was born in 1405, or 1406, and after some preparatory education at home, was sent abroad for his philosophical and theological studies. Entering into holy orders, he was preferred by James I. to the bishopric of Dunkeld in 1437. In order to be better qualified to reform the abuses which had crept into his diocese, he undertook a journey to pope Eugenius IV. then at Florence, but the schism which then prevailed in the church of Rome prevented his procuring the necessary powers. The pope, however, to show his esteem for him, gave him the abbey of Scoon in commendam. In 1440, while he was at Florence, the see of St. Andrew’s becoming vacant, was conferred upon him: and on his return, after being admitted in due form, he restored order and discipline throughout his diocese. In 1444 he was made lord chancellor, but not finding his power equal to his inclination to do good in this office, he resigned it within a few weeks. The nation being much distracted by party feuds during the minority of James II. and bishop Kennedy finding himself unable to compose these differences, determined to go again abroad, and try what he could do in healing that schism in the papacy which had so long disturbed the quiet of the church. With this view he undertook a journey to Rome, with a retinue of thirty persons; and it being necessary to pass through England, he obtained a safe conduct from Henry VI. dated May 28, 1446.

His manners and behaviour were easy, affable, and courteous. He was accessible and communicative, much a friend to the younger clergy, recollecting how greatly he had himself been indebted to the kindness of early patrons and was always ready to assist them in their studies and, according to their merit, to promote them in the church. He was also liberal to the poor, and generous to his relations.

, lord chief justice of the King’s Bench, was born at Gredington, in Flintshire, 1733 and was the eldest surviving son of Lloyd Kenyon, esq. originally of Bryno in the same county, and one of the younger sons of the ancient family of Kenyon of Peele in Lancashire. He received the elementary part of his education at Ruthen in Denbighshire, whence he was taken, at an early age, and articled to Mr. W. J. Tomlinson, an eminent attorney at Nantwich, in Cheshire. On the expiration of his articles, Mr. Kenyon determined to enter into a line which afforded a more ample scope to his industry and talents, and, accordingly, became a member of the Society of Lincoln’s Inn, in Trinity Term 1754, and after a sedulous application to the requisite studies, was called to the bar in Hilary Term 1761. In the early part of his professional career, his advancement was but slow; he was unassisted by those means which powerful connexion and interest afford. The branch of his profession to which he chiefly applied himself, that of conveyancing, was not calculated to bring him forward into public notice; but the sterling merit of genuine abilities and persevering industry were not to be overlooked. He rose gradually into practice; few opinions at the bar, at the time, carried more weight and authority, and he was frequently recurred to as an advocate. In 1773, he formed a matrimonial connexion with his relative, Mary, the third daughter of George Kenyon, of Peele and, not long after, contracted an intimacy with Mr. afterwards lord Thurlow and chancellor. About this period too, and for some years after, his practice in the Courtof Chancery was very extensive and of the most lucrative kind, by which, as well as in the other branches of his profession, he acquired a very considerable property. In 1780, a circumstance occurred which not a little contributed to establish his reputation as an advocate and a public speaker, his being employed as leading counsel for the defence of the late lord George Gordon, on a charge of high treason; on this interesting occasion his second was Mr. now lord Erskine, who on that day distinguished himself in such a manner as in a great degree laid the foundation of his future fame. In April 1782, soon after the accession of the Rockingham party to ministerial power, Mr. Kenyon was, without serving the intermediate office of solfcitor, appointed to the important situation of attorney-general, and, at the same time, chief justice of Chester; in the former office he succeeded the late James Wallis, esq. The circumstance of his direct promotion to the office of attorney-general was regarded as a singular instance; this however is erroneous, similar promotions have before occurred, and the case of sir Edward Law (the late attorney-general, now lord Ellenborough, his successor as lord chief justice), is a recent instance. In parliament Mr. Kenyon took a decided part in politics, warmly attaching himself to the party of Mr. Pitt; and distinguishing himself not a little by his speeches on the noted affair of the coalition, Mr. Fox’s India-bill, &c. In March 1784 he was appointed master of the rolls, an office of high judicial dignity, and generally leading to still higher legal honours; yet its emoluments fell very short of those which he necessarily relinquished by discontinuing his professional pursuits as a counsel. About this time he was created a baronet. In this situation sir Lloyd Kenyon continued till the latter end of May 1788, when, on the resignation of the venerable earl of Mansfield, who, for the long interval of thirty-two years, had held the honourable and very important office of chief justice of the court of KingVbench, he was appointed to succeed him, and at the same time was elevated to the peerage, by the title of lord Kenyon, baron of Gredington in the county of Flint. He was now fixed in a situation, which, though not nominally the highest, is perhaps the most important office in the administration of the law of this country; and lord Kenyon furnished an instance nearly as striking as that of the illustrious Hardwicke, that the profession of the law is that which, of all others, affords the fairest opportunies for the exertion of genuine talents and persevering industry; whether the object be the gratification of ambition in the attainment of the highest honours in the state, or the possession of abundant wealth. His conduct in those arduous and important situations attracted and fixed the applauses and gratitude of his countrymen. He was distinguished for his laudable, firm, and persevering exertions to keep the channels of the law clear and unpolluted by low and sordid practices, which were particularly exemplified in the vigilant and salutary exercise of his authority over the attorneys of his own court, the utility of which has been experienced in a very considerable degree. Nor was he less distinguished for his zeal in the cause of morality and virtue, which most conspicuously appeared in his conduct with respect to cases of adultery and seduction. On these occasions neither rank, wealth, nor station, could shield deliquency from the well-merited censure and rebuke of offended justice and morality. Though much, unhappily, remains to be done, yet his lordship’s exertions, combined with those of some of the most virtuous and exalted characters of the upper House of Parliament, have contributed greatly, notwithstanding the acknowledged inadequacy and imperfection of the law in these respects, to restrain the fashionable and prevailing vices alluded to. What likewise redounded to the honour of his lordship’s magisterial character, was the strictness, not to say severity, with which he administered the justice of the law against the pernicious tribe of gamblers of every description, who have for some years infested the metropolis. On these occasions, as well as in those above mentioned, the conduct of this truly virtuous judge was such as incontrovertibly shewed that “the law is no respecter of persons;” and his persevering exertions to restrain the destructive vice of gaming have been attended with no inconsiderable degree of success. Nor should we omit to mention the very laudable spirit and firmness, which on all occasions he evinced in maintaining due order and decorum in his court. It was justly said of him, that though he might not equal in talents or eloquence the pre-eminent character whom he succeeded on the bench of justice; nevertheless, he possessed qualities mor*e appropriate to, and knowledge more connected with, the important office which he held. Profound in legal erudition, patient in judicial discrimination, and of the most determined integrity, he added no common lustre to his exalted station. He did not sacrifice his official to his parliamentary character; the sphere of his particular duty was the great scene of his activity, as of his honour; and though, as a lord of parliament, he never lessened his character, it was as a judge that he aggrandized it. In private life, the character of lord Kenyon was amiable and praise- worthy in the highest degree no man could excel him in the relations of husband and father in the former he may be considered as a pattern of conjugal virtue. In his mode of living he was remarkably temperate and regular; while the gratuitous assistance in his professional capacity, which it was well known he had often afforded to necessitous and injured individuals, is a proof that a fondness for money was not a prevailing trait in his character. He died at Bath, April 2, 1802, supposed to be worth 300,000l. all acquired by his own professional exertions, and a rigid spirit of economy. Lord Kenyon had issue by his lady, three sons; Lloyd, born in 1775, whom his father appointed to the office of filazer of the Court of King’s-bench; but who died in 1800. The manner in which his lordship was affected by this melancholy event, is supposed, in some degree, to have accelerated his own dissolution. Secondly, George, the present lord Kenyon, born in 1776. His lordship was appointed by his late father to the very lucrative situation of joint chief clerk of the Court of King’s-bench, on the demise of the late earl of Mansfield, better known as lord viscount Stormont, and joined in the patent with the late John Waye, esq. And, thirdly, the hon. Thomas Kenyon, born in 1780,

On the dedication of Radcliffe’s library, 1749, he spoke a Latin oration in the theatre at Oxford, which was received with the highest acclamations by a splendid auditory. Mr. Warton, in “The Triumphs of Isis,” pays him a very great compliment on that occasion. But this oration, which was soon after printed, did not meet with such favourable reception from the public; for he was attacked in several pamphlets on account of it, in which he was charged with writing barbarous Latin, with being disaffected to the government, and that he instigated the younger members of the university to sedition and licentiousness; very heavy accusations, if we may not candidly suppose them dictated by the spirit of malevolence and party zeal. And again, in 1755, when the memorable election contest happened in Oxfordshire, his attachment to the old interest drew -on him the resentment of the new. He was libelled in newspapers and in pamphlets, and charged with the following particulars, viz. that he was an Irishman; that he had received subscriptions for books never published to the amount of 1500l. of which sum he had defrauded his subscribers; that he had offered himself to sale both in England and Ireland, and was not found worth the purchase that he was the writer of “The London Evening Post” the author of a book in queen Anne’s reign, entitled “Political Considerations,” 1710, in which there was false English; and of a book then just published, called, “The Dreamer,” 1754, 8vo. At this time he published his “Apology” in 4to, and plausibly vindicated himself from the several matters charged on him, except only the last article, of his being the author of “The Dreamer;” and warmly retaliated on his adversaries.

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

Linnæus had by his wife Sarah Elizabeth, who survived to extreme old age, two sons and four daughters. His eldest son Charles succeeded him in the botanical professorship. The younger, John, died March 7, 1757, in the third year of his age. His eldest daughter, Elizabeth Christina, is recorded as having discovered a luminous property in the flowers of the nasturtium, tropaeolum majus, which are sometimes seen to flash like sparks of fire in the evening of a warm summer’s day. Of the other daughters we know nothing materially worthy of record.

His progress would probably have been happy, if not brilliant, but for the conduct of his unnatural mother, who, not content with dishonouring her husband’s bed, and making his home as uncomfortable as she could, by the meanest parsimony and disgusting petty tyranny, conceived a hatred for her only son, which she displayed by every affront and persecution that her situation gave her the means of inflicting on his susceptible and naturally amiable mind. According to Fabricius, she forced her husband, who by such a concession surely partook largely of her guilt and meanness, to procure the nomination of his pupil Solander to be his future successor, in preference to his own son; and it was a part of her plan that he should marry her eldest daughter. Solander, however, disdained both the usurpation and the bait, refusing to leave England; and the misguided father recovered his senses and authority, causing his son, as we have said above, to receive this truly honourable distinction. The mind and spirit of the young man nevertheless still drooped; and even when he had attained his thirtieth year, he would gladly have escaped from his miseries and his hopes together. The authority of the king was obliged to be exerted, at his father’s solicitation, to prevent his going into the army. This measure of the parent was happily followed up by kindness and encouragement in his botanical pursuits, to which treatment the son was ever sensible, and he revived from his despondency before his father’s death, which happened when he was thirty-seven years of age. Though obliged by his mother to purchase, at her own price, the library, manuscripts, herbarium, &c. which he ought by every title to have inherited, he rose above every impediment, and betook himself to the useful application of the means now in his hands, for his own reputation and advancement. His father had already prepared great part of a third botanical appendix, or “Mantissa;” from the communications of Mutis, Kcenig, Sparmann, Forster, Pallas, and others. Hence originated the “Supplementum Plantarum,” printed at Brunswick, under the care of Ehrhart in 1781. The ingenious editor inserted his own new characters of some genera of mosses; which Hedwig has since confirmed, except that some of the names have been justly rejected. This sheet was, in an evil hour, suppressed by the mandate of Linnæus from London, where, at that period, the subject of generic characters of mosses was neither studied nor understood, whatever superior knowledge was displayed concerning their species. The plants of the “Supplementum” are admitted into the fourteenth edition of the “Systema Vegetabilium” by Murray, and figures of some of the most curious have been published by sir J. Smith, in his “Plantarum Icones ex Herbario Linnæano.” Three botanical dissertations also appeared under the presidency of the younger Linnæus, on grasses, on lavandula, and the celebrated Methodus muscorum, which last was the work, and the inaugural thesis, of the present professor Swartz of Stockholm. These form a sequel to the 186 similar essays, which most of them compose the seven volumes of the Amcenitates Academicae, the rest being published by Schreber in three additional ones.

Scarcely any man was ever more honoured, both in his life-time and after his death, than this historian. Pliny the younger relates that a gentleman travelled from Cades, the extreme part of Spain, to see Livy; and, though Rome abounded with more stupendous and curious spectacles than any city in the world, immediately returned; because, after having seen Livy, he thought nothing worthy of his notice. To the following story, however, we cannot so easily give credit. A monument was erected to this historian in the temple of Juno, where the monastery of St. Justina was afterwards founded. There, in 1413, was discovered the following epitaph upon Livy: “Ossa Titi Livii Patavini, omnium mortalium judicio digni, cujus prope invicto Calamo invicti Populi Romani Res gestaa conscriberentur.” In 1451, we are told that Alphonsus, king of Arragon, sent his ambassador, Anthony Panormita, to desire of the citizens of Padua the bone of that arm with which this their famous countryman had written his history; and, obtaining it, caused it to be conveyed to Naples with the greatest ceremony, as a most invaluable relic. He is said to have been assisted in his recovery from an ill state of health, by the pleasure he found in reading this history; and therefore, out of gratitude, was induced to pay extraordinary honours to the memory of the writer."

, the younger, another famous monk, a friend of the former, and a native also of Alexandria, had near 5000 monks under his direction. He was persecuted by the Arians, and banished into an island where there was not a single Christian, but where he converted almost all the inhabitants by his preaching, and as some say, by his miracles. He died in the year 394 or 395. “The Rules of Monks,” in 30 chapters, are attributed to him, and a discourse by him on the “Death of the Just,” was published by Tollius, in his “Insignia Itinerarii Italici.”

, an author whose fame rests chiefly on his being the editor of Ossian’s poems, was descended from one of the most ancient families in the North of Scotland, being cousin-german to the chief of the clan of the Macphersons, who deduce their origin from the ancient Catti of Germany. His father, however, was a farmer of no great affluence. He was born in the parish of Kingcusie, Inverness-shire, in the latter end of 1738, and received the first rudiments of his education at one of the parish schools in the district, called Badenoch, from which, in 1752, he entered King’s college, Aberdeen, where he displayed more genius than learning, entertaining the society of which he was a member, and diverting the younger part of it from their studies by his humorous and doggrel rhimes. About two months after his admission into the university, the King’s college added two months to the length of its annual session or term, which induced Macpherson, with many other young men, to remove to Marischal college, where the session continued short: and this circumstance has led the biographer, from whom we borrow it, to suppose that his father was not opulent. Soon after he left college, or perhaps before, he was schoolmaster of Ruthven or Riven, of Badenocb, and afterwards is said to have delighted as little as his antagonist Johnson, in the recollection of that period, when he was compelled, by the narrowness of his fortune, to teach boys in an obscure school.

, the younger, son of the preceding, was born in 1547. His father paid the utmost attention to his education; and so extraordinary was the progress of the youth in learning, that he was enabled to give the world “A collection of elegant phrases in the Tuscan and Latin languages,” when he was only eleven years of age. Other juvenile works at different periods marked his advances in classical literature, and he soon became his lather’s assistant in his labours. When very young, he conducted the printing-business at Venice while his father was engaged at Rome. In 1572 he married a lady of the Giunti family, so well known in the annals of typography; and on the death of his father in 1574, all the concerns of the Aldine press devolved upon him. He was, however, less calculated for the business of a printer than for the profession of an author. ' In 1577 he was appointed professor of the belles lettres in the school of the Venetian chancery, in which young men designed for public employments were educated. This office he held till 1585, when he was made professor of rhetoric at Bologna. In the same year he published the “Life of Cosmo de Medici,” which was so well received, that he was almost immediately invited to undertake the professorship of polite literature at Pisa, which he accepted, although he received an invitation at the same time to a professorship at Rome, which had been lately held by Muratus. During his stay at Pisa he received the degree of doctor of laws, and was admitted a member of the Florentine academy, on which occasion he delivered an eloquent oration “On the nature of Poetry.” He now paid a visit to Lucca in order to obtain materials for a “History of Castruccio Castracani,” which he afterwards published, and which is much applauded by Thuanus. The Roman professorship being reserved for him, he removed thither in 1588, and intending to spend his life there, he caused his whole library to be brought to Rome from Venice, at a very great expence. He was in high favour with Sixtus V. who gave him an apartment in the Vatican, and a table at the public expence. He was also patronized in various ways by Clement VIII. He died in the fifty-firstyear of his age, in October 1597. He left no posterity, and with him ended the glory of the Aldine press. His library, consisting of 8.0,000 volumes, collected by himself and his predecessors, was sold to pay his debts. He was author of many performances besides those already mentioned, but the most celebrated of his works were his “Commentaries on all the Works of Cicero,” in ten volumes. His “Familiar Letters,” published in 1592, were highly esteemed; but M. Renouard confesses, that were it not from his inheriting the Aldine offices, it might not have been remembered he bad ever been a printer; yet, though difference of taste gave his studies a different bent, his numerous writings, notwithstanding they were inferior to his father’s and grandfather’s, sufficiently prove his industry and learning, and justify, to a certain point, the commendations bestowed on him by many to whom his merits were known.

, an ancient Latin poet, and the model of epigrammatists, was born at Bilbilis, now called Bubiera, a town of the ancient Celtiberia in Spain, which is the kingdom of Arragon. He was born, as is supposed, in the reign of Claudius, and went to Rome when he was about twenty-one. He was sent thither with a view of prosecuting the law; but soon forsook that study, and applied himself to poetry. He excelled so much in the epigrammatic style, that he soon acquired reputation, and was courted by many of the first rank at Rome. Silius Italicus, Stella, and Pliny the younger, were his friends and patrons. Stertinius, a noble Roman, had so great an esteem for his compositions, that he placed > his statue in his library, while he was yet living; and the emperor Verus, who reigned with Antoninus the philosopher, used to call him his Virgil, which was as high an honour as could well be paid to him. We learn also from Pliny and Tacitus, as well as from several passages in his own writings, that he had honours and dignities bestowed upon him by some of the emperors. Domitian, whom it must be confessed he has flattered not a little, made him a Roman knight, and gave him likewise the “Jus trium liberorum,” the privileges of a citizen who had three children. He was also advanced to the tribunate. But though he was so particularly honoured, and had so many great and noble patrons, who admired him for his wit and poetry, it does not appear that he made his fortune among them. There is reason to think that, after the death of Domitian, his credit and interest declined at Rome; and if he had still remaining among the nobles some patrpns, such as Pliny, Cornelius Priscus, &c. yet the emperor Nerva took but little notice of him, and the emperor Trajan none at all. Tired of Rome, therefore, after he had lived in that city about four and thirty years, and grown, as himself tells us, grey-headed, he returned to his own country Bilbilis, where he took a wife, and had the happiness to live with her several years. He admired her much, as one who alone was sufficient to supply the want of every thing he enjoyed at Rome. She appears to have brought him a very large fortune; for, in one of his epigrams he extols the magnificence of the house and gardens he had received from her, and says, “that she had made him a little kind of monarch.” About three years after he had retired into Spain, he inscribed his twelfth book of Epigrams to Priscus, who had been his friend and benefactor; and is supposed to have died about the year 100. As an epigrammatist, Martial is eminently distinguished, and has been followed as a model by all succeeding wits. All his efforts, however, are not equally successful, and many of his epigrams are perhaps unjustly so called, being merely thoughts or sentiments without applicable point. He offends often by gross indelicacy, which was the vice of the times; but his style is in general excellent, and his frequent allusion to persons and customs render his works very interesting to classical antiquaries.

Meibomius, after this learned and elegant publication, was invited to the court of the queen of Sweden, to whom be had dedicated it; but this visit was not followed by the most pleasing consequences. Having by his enthusiastic account of the music of the ancients, impressed this princess with similar ideas, the younger Bourdelot, a physician, and his rival (as a classical scholar) in the queen’s favour, instigated her majesty to desire him to sing an ancient Grecian air, while Naudet, an old Frenchman, danced a la Grec to the sound or his voice. But the performance, instead of exciting admiration, produced loud bursts of laughter from all present; which so enraged Meibomius, that seeing the buffoon Bourdelot in the gallery among the scoffers, and having no doubt but that it was he who, with a malicious design, had persuaded her majesty to desire this performance, immediately flew thither, and exercised the pugilist’s art on his face so violently, without being restrained by the presence of the qneen, that he thought it necessary to quit the Swedish dominions before he could be called to an account for his rashness; and immediately went to Copenhagen, where being well received, he fixed his residence there, and became a professor at Sora, a Danish college for the instruction of the young nobility. Here too he was honoured with the title of aulic counsellor, and soon after was called to Elsineur, and advanced to the dignity of Architesorie, or president of the board of maritime taxes or customs; but, neglecting the duty of his office, he was dismissed, and upon that disgrace quitted Denmark'. Soon after, he settled at Amsterdam, and became professor of history in the college of that city; but refusing to give instructions to the son of a burgomaster, alleging that he was not accustomed to instruct boys in the elements of knowledge, but to finish students arrived at maturity in their studies, he was dismissed from that station. After quitting Amsterdam, he visited France and England; then returning to Holland, he led a studious and private life at Amsterdam till 1710 or 1711, when he died at near 100 years of age.

, or Van Merle, a very learned Hollander, was born at Dort, Aug. 19, 1558; and went to France and Geneva, to study the law. Afterwards he traTelled to Italy, Germany, and England; and, having been absent nine years, returned to Dort. Here he frequented the bar four years, and then quitted it for the professorship of history, which was vacated by the cession of Justus Lipsius in 1592. It has been thought a sufficient encomium on him that he was doemed worthy to succeed so great a man. In 1598, the curators of the university of Leyden joined to his professorship the office of public librarian, vacant by the death of the younger Dousa. He married in 1589, and had several children. He hurt his constitution so much by an overstrained application to books, that he died July 20, 1607, when he was no more than forty-nine. Merula was the author or editor of several works, some of the principal of which are, 1. “Q. Ennii annalium librorum xviii. fragmenta collecta & commentariis illustrata,” L. Bat. 1595, 4to. 2. “Eutropii Historiae Rom an Sb, libri x.” 1592, 8vo; but more complete with the entire notes of Glareanus and Merula, Leyden, 1594, 8vo. 3. “Urbi$ Romae delineatio & methodica ex variis authoribus descriptio,” 1599. 4. “Vita Desiderii Eras on ex ipsius manu fideliter representata. Additi sunt epistolarum ipsius libri duo,” 1607, 4to. 5. “Cosmographiae generalis libri tres. Item geographies particularis libri quatuor, quibus Europa in genere, speciatim Hispania, Galiia, Italia describuntur, cum tabuiis geographicis,” 1605, 4to. This work went through many editions; but its use is now superseded by the more accurate labours of subsequent geographers. Merula published several other works enumerated in our authorities.

, a learned orientalist, professor of divinity, Greek, and oriental languages, and director of the divinity school of Halle, was born at Kettenburg, in Hohenstein, July 26, 1668. His father sent him in 1683 to Brunswick, to learn trade, but a few months after, he allowed him to be placed at the school of St. Martin in that city, where the rector, M. Msering, cultivated his talents, and found him capable of instructing some of the younger scholars. An illness obliging him to leave this place, he continued his studies at Nordhausen, and in 1688 at Leipsic, where he went through courses of philosophy and divinity, and also studied the oriental languages and rabbinical Hebrew. In 1694 he quitted Leipsic for the university of Halle, where he taught the Greek, Hebrew, and Chaldeewith great reputation. Here he published, with the assistance of professor Francke, who mentions him respectfully in his “Pietas Hallensis,” a work entitled “Conamina brevioris Manuductionis ad Doctrinam de Accentibus Hebraeorum Prosaicis.” In 1696 he published another piece, entitled “Epicrisis philologica de reverendi Michaelis Beckii, Ulmensis, Disquisitionibus philologicis, cum responsionibus ad Examen XIV. Dictor. Gen.” In 1699, he succeeded Francke in the Greek professorship at Halle, and in 1707 was made keeper of the university library. He was afterwards nominated professor of divinity in ordinary, and admitted to the degree of D. D. In 1732 he was made senior of the faculty of divinity, and inspector of the theological seminary. He died in 1738, at about the age of seventy. He was author of many works besides those already mentioned, the titles of which are enumerated in our authority.

And when the place of his interment was lately pulled down, his remains were removed to the garden of the Museum, and placed among the honorary monuments there, in 1799. Of the numerous editions of Moliere, the French bibliographers point out, as the best, that by Bret, 1773, 6 vols. 8vo, with the engravings of the younger Moreau, and a splendid one by Didou 1792, 6 vols. 4to.

is the name of a family well known among the eminent French printers, although we are not sure that they were all closely related. The first, William, an excellent scholar in the early part of the sixteenth century, was corrector of the press of Louis Tilletan, and then succeeded Turnebus as director of the royal printing-office, in 1555. He employed his attention principally on Greek authors, and his editions are much esteemed. He also wrote critical commentaries on “Cicero de finibus,” Paris, 1545, 4to; and compiled a Greek- Latin- and French dictionary. He died in 1564. He appears to have injured his property by the expences of his undertakings, as we find Turnebus addressing a letter to Charles IX. king of France, recommending his widow and children to his majesty’s bounty. The next we meet with, Frederic the elder, a native of Champagne, was king’s printer at Paris, and interpreter to his majesty for the Greek and Latin languages; he composed several works, and died at Paris in 1583, at about the age of 60, leaving a son, known as Frederic Morel the younger, the most celebrated of the family, who succeeded his father, in 1581, as -king’s printer in the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French tongues. He was well versed in these languages, and translated from the Greek, and published, from the manuscripts in the king’s library, a number of authors, particularly the fathers, with annotations of his own. He sacrificed every thing to study, and being informed that his wife was in the act of expiring, he refused to quit his pen till he had finished what he was about, and by that time news was brought him that she was dead; to which he coolly replied, “I am sorry for it she was a good woman.” He died in 1638, at the age of 78. He had a brother Claude, who was nominated king’s printer in 1602, and published valuable editions of several Greek fathers, and other authors, to which he prefixed learned prefaces of his own composition. He died in 1626, while he was engaged in an edition of St. Athanasius and Libanius, which was completed by his son Claude, who succeeded to the business. Charles, another son of Frederic, exercised the same office with credit, which he resigned, in 1639, to his brother Giles. The latter printed an edition of Aristotle, Greek and Latin, in four volumes folio, and the great Bibliotheca Patrum, in 17 volumes.

, a philosopher and divine of the Roman catholic persuasion, was born at London Sept. 10, 1713. His father possessed a considerable patrimony at Hilston, in the county of Monmouth, being of the younger or catholic branch of the Needham family, but died young, leaving only a small fortune to his four children. Our author, his eldest son, studied in the English college of Douay, where he took orders, and taught rhetoric for several years, but was particularly distinguished for his knowledge of experimental philosophy.

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

, a peripatetic philosopher of Alexandria, lived under Theodosius the younger, about the year 430, and wrote Commentaries on part of Aristotle, 1551, fol. and a Life of Plato, which contains many particulars not to be met with in Diogenes Laertius. James "WinJet has translated this Life into Latin, and added notes to it. It seems probable, however, that the commentator on Aristotle, and the author of the life of Plato, were different persons; and there is a third Olympiodorus, a Greek monk, who lived in the fifth or sixth century, and left short and elegant Commentaries on Job and Ecclesiastes, which may be found in the library of the Greek fathers. The little that is known of either of these may be seen in our authorities.

He published, in 1750, in quarto, a new edition of “Chereas and Callirhoe;” and a new edition of the Greek Anthology was expected from him, for which he had some valuable materials, and one of Theocritus, perhaps also one of Catullus, Tibulius, and Propertius but all these undertakings were frustrated by the unexpected death of this labprious and acute critic, which took place Sept. 13, or 14, 1751. He left a son John, who was born in 1734. What D'Orville published is to be found in a collection, in imitation of one begun in England by Jortin, in 1731, under the title of “Observationes Miscellaneae,” a work of profound erudition, which he edited along with Burman, as far as Jo vols. 8vo; and after Burman’s death, D'Orville published four additional volumes, under the title of “Observationes Miscellaneae Novae,” the last of which was completed a few clays before his death. Of his dissertations inserted in these volumes, two have been greatly admired, “Exercitatio de inscriptionibus Deliacis,” and “Diatribe in Inscriptiones quasdam,” &c. Some years after his death, his travels and observations in Sicily were published by Peter Burman, the younger, under the title “Simula, quibus Siciliae veteris rudera, additis antiquitatum tabulis illustrantur,” &c. 1764, fol. His only other publication was a controversial pamphlet against Cornelius Pauw, Amst. 1737, 8vo, in which he retorts on that author for some of the severities he was too much accustomed to exercise upon his learned contemporaries. D'Orville had a brother Peter, who died in 1739. He wrote some elegant Latin poems, a collection of which was published at Amsterdam, in 1740.

In 1703 Ostervald went to Zurich with his son John Rodolphus, whom he placed for education under his friend Mr. Ott; from Zurich he went to Basil to visit his friend Werenfels, and other learned men of that place; and to Geneva, where he saw for the last time his friends Tronchin, Pictet, and Turretin. In all these places he preached to crowded audiences, attracted by the reputation of his talents for the pulpit. These were afterwards (in 1707) admired by an audience of royal and noble personages drawn to Neufcliatel to settle the sovereignty of that state, in consequence of the death of the duchess de Nemours. The decision was in favour of the king of Prussia, before whom he preached with such eloquence on the duties of subjects to their sovereign, that his majesty requested his sermons might be printed; but this was declined on the part of Ostervald. This year, however, he published his “Traite contre PImpurite,” which was translated into English, under the title of “A Discourse against the sin of Uncleaiiness,” and went through many editions both in English, French, and German. In 1708 he again, accompanied by Werenfels, went to Geneva, where they lodged with their friend Alphonsus Turretin the younger in this journey he fell in with the son of bishop Burnet. In November of next year he had the satisfaction to see his eldest son appointed pastor at Basil.

In 1650 he was chosen dean of the faculty of medicine, and afterwards succeeded Riolan, the younger, in the professorship of medicine in the Royal-college, where he taught with great reputation. The disputes which took place in his time respecting the use of antimony roused all his spleen, as he regarded this medicine as a poison, and had even made out a list of patients, which he called the martyrology of antimony. Great, however, was his mortification when, in 1666, a majority of the faculty decided to admit emetic wine into the list of prescriptions. He was quite inconsolable.

, a learned antiquary, the younger son of Robert and Elizabeth Peck, was born in the parish of St. John the Baptist, at Stamford, in Lincolnshire, May 4, and baptized May 12, 1692. His mother’s maiden name was Jephson. It does not appear at what seminary he received the early part of his education; but it was probably at the grammar-school of his native town. He completed his studies at Trinity-college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. 1715; and of M. A. 1727.

This singular composition bears date May 2, 1685, and runs thus: “In the name of God, Amen. I, sir William. Petty, knt. born at Rumsey, in Hantshire, do, revoking all other and former wills, make this my last will and testament, premising the ensuing preface to the same, whereby to express my condition, design, intentions, and desires, concerning the persons and things contained in, and relating to, my said will, for the better expounding any thing which may hereafter seem doubtful therein, and also for justifying, on behalf of my children, the manner and means of getting and acquiring the estate, which I hereby bequeath unto them; exhorting them to improve the same by no worse negociations. In the first place I declare and affirm, that at the full age of fifteen years I had obtained the Latin, Greek, and French tongues, the whole body of common Arithmetic, the practical Geometry and Astronomy conducing to Navigation, Dialling, &c. with the knowledge of several mathematical trades, all which, and having been at the university of Caen, preferred me to the king’s navy; where, at the age of twenty years, I had gotten up about threescore pounds, with as much mathematics as any of my age was known to have had. With this provision, anno 1643, when the civil wars between the king and parliament grew hot, I went into the Netherlands and France for three years, and having vigorously followed my studies, especially that of medicine, at Utrecht, Leyden, Amsterdam, and Paris, I returned to Rumsey, where I was born, bringing back with me my brother Anthony, whom I had bred, with about 10l. more than I had carried out of England. With this 70l. and my endeavours, in less than four years more, I obtained my degree of M. D. in Oxford, and forthwith thereupon to be admitted into the College of Physicians, London, and into several clubs of the Virtuous (Virtuosi); after all which expence defrayed, I had left 28l. and in the next two years being made Fellow of Brazen -Nose, and Anatomy Professor in Oxford, and also Reader at Gresham-college, I advanced my said stock to about 400l. and with 100l. more advanced and given me to go for Ireland, unto full 500l. Upon the 10th of September, 1652, I landed, at Waterford in Ireland, Physician to the army who had suppressed the rebellion begun in the year 1641, and to the general of the same, and the head quarters, at the rate of 20^. per diem, at which I continued till June 1659, gaining, by my practice, about 400l. a year above the said salary. About Sept. 1654, I perceiving that the admeasurement of the lands, furfrited by the aforementioned rebellion, and intended to regulate the satisfaction of the soldiers who hadsuppressed the same, was most insufficiently and absurdly managed; I obtained a contract, dated llth December, 1654, for making the said admeasurement, and, by God’s blessing, so performed the same, as that I gained about 9,000l. thereby, which, with the 500l. abovementioned, and my salary of 20s. per diem, the benefit of my practice, together with 600l. given me for directing an after survey of the adventurer’s lands, and 800l. more for two years’ salary as clerk of the council, raised me an estate of about 13,000l. in ready and real money, at a time when, without art, interest, or authority, men bought as much lands for ten shillings in real money, as in this year, 1685, yields 10s. per annum rent, above his majesty’s quit-rents. Now I bestowed part of the said 13,000l. in soldier’s debentures, part in purchasing the earl of Arundel’s house and garden in Lothbury, London, and part I kept in cash to answer emergencies. Hereupon I. purchased lands inIreland, with soldiers’ debentures , bought at the above market-rates, a great part whereof I lost by the Court of Innocents, anno 1663; and built the said garden, called Tokenhouse Yard, in Lothbury, which was for the most part destroyed by the dreadful fire, anno 1666. Afterwards, anno 1667, I married Elizabeth, the relict of sir Maurice Fenton, bart. I set up iron-works and pilchard-fishing in Kerry, and opened the lead -mines and timber-trade in Kerry: by all which, and some advantageous bargains, and with living under my income, I have, at the making this my will, the real and personal estate following: viz. a large house and four tenements in Rumsey, with four acres of meadow upon the causeway, and four acres of arable in the fields, called Marks and Woollsworths, in all about 30A per ann.; houses in Token-house Yard, near Lothbury, London, with a lease in Piccadilly, and the Seven Stars and Blazing Star in Birching-lane, London, worth about 500l. per annum, besides mortgages upon certain houses in Hoglane, near Shoreditch, in London, and in Erith, in Kent, worth about 20l. per annum. I have three fourth parts of the ship Charles, whereof Derych Paine is master, which I value at 80l. per annum, as also the copper-plates for the maps of Ireland with the king’s privilege, which I rate at lOOl. per annum, in all 730l. per annum. I have in Ireland, without the county of Kerry, in lands, remainders, and reversions, about 3,100l. per annum. I have of neat profits, out of the lands and woods of Kerry, above 1,100l. per annum, besides iron-works, fishing, and leadmines, and marble-quarries, worth 600l. per annum; in all 4,800l. I have, as my wife’s jointure, during her life, about 850l. per annum; and for fourteen years after her death about 2001. per ann. I have, by 3,300l. money at interest, 20l. per annum; in all about 6,700l. per annum. The personal estate is as follows, viz. in chest, 6,600l.; in the hands of Adam Loftus, 1,296l.; of Mr. John Cogs, goldsmith, of London, 1,2 5 1l.; in silver, plate, and jewels, about 3,000l.; in furniture, goods, pictures, coach-horses, books, and watches, 1,1 So/.; per estimate in all 12,000l. I value my three chests of original map and field -books, the copies of the Downe-survey, with the Barony-maps, and chest of distribution-books, with two chests of loose papers relating to the survey, the two great barony-books, and the book of the History of the Survey, altogether at 2,000l. I have due out of Kerry, for arrears of my rent and iron, before 24th June, 1685, the sum of 1,912l. for the next half year’s rent out of my lands in Ireland, my wife’s jointure, and England, on or before 24th June next, 2,000l. Moreover, by arrears due 30th April, 1685, out of all my estate, by estimate, and interest of money, 1,800l. By other good debts, due upon bonds and bills at this time, per estimate, 900l. By debts which I call bad 4000l. worth perhaps 800l. By debts which I call doubtful, 50,0007. worth, perhaps, 25,000l. In all, 34,4 12l. and the total of the whole personal estate, 46,412l.: so as my present income for the year 1685 may be 6,700l. the profits of the personal estate may be 4,64 \l. and the demonstrable improvement of my Irish estate may be 3,659l. per ann. to make in all I5,000l. per ann. in and by all manner of effects, abating for bad debts about 28,000l.; whereupon I say in gross, that my real estate or income may be 6,600l. per ann. my personal estate about 45,000l. my bad and desperate debts 30,000l. and the improvements may be 4,000 /. per ann. in all 15,000l. per ann. ut supra. Now my opinion and desire is (if I could effect it, and if I were clear from the law, custom, and other impediments) to add to my wife’s jointure three fourths of what it now is computed at, viz. 637l. per ann. to make the whole 1,487l. per ann. which addition of 637l. and 850l. being deducted out of the aforementioned 6,600l. leaves 5,113l. for my two sons whereof I would my eldest son should have two-thirds, or 3,408l. and the younger 1,705l. and that, after their mother’s death, the aforesaid addition of 637l. should be added in like proportion, making for the eldest 3,S32l. and for the youngest 1,916l. and I would that the improvement of the estate should be equally divided between my two sons; and that the personal estate (taking out 10,000l. for my only daughter) that the rest should be equally divided between my wife and three children; by which method my wife would have 1,587l. per ann. and 9,000l. in personal effects; my daughter would have 10,000l. of the Crame, and 9,000l. more, with less certainty: my eldest son would have 3,800l. per ann. and half the expected improvement, with 9,000l. in hopeful effects, over and above his wife’s portion: and my youngest son would have the same within 1,900l. per ann. I would advise my wife, in this case, to spend her whole l,587l. per ann. that is to say, on her own entertainment, charity, and munificence, without care of increasing her children’s fortunes: and I would she would give away one-third of the above mentioned 9,000l. at her death, even from her children, upon any worthy object, and dispose of the other two-thirds to such of her children and grand-children as pleased her best, without regard to any other rule or proportion. In case of either of my three children’s death under age, I advise as follows; viz. If my eldest, Charles, die without issue, I would that Henry should have three-fourths of what he leaves; and my daughter Anne the rest. If Henry die, I would that what he leaves may be equally divided between Charles and Anne: and if Anne die, that her share be equally divided between Charles and Henry. Memorandum, That I think fit to rate the 30,000l. desperate debts at 1,1 Ooj. only, and to give it my daughter, to make her abovementioned 10,000l. and 9,000l. to be full 20,000l. which is much short of what I have given her younger brother; and the elder brother may have 3,800 per ann. and 9,000l. in money, worth 900l. more, 2,0001. by improvements, and 1,300l. by marriage, to make up the whole to 8,000l. per ann. which is very well for the eldest son, as 20,000l. for the daughter.” He then leaves his wife executrix and guardian during her widowhood, and, in case of her marriage, her brother James Waller, and Thomas Dame: recommending to them two, and his children, to use the same servants and instruments for management of the estate, as were in his life- time, at certain salaries to continue during their lives, or until his youngest child should be twenty-one years, which would be the 22d of October, 1696, after which his children might put the management of their respective concerns into what hands they pleased. He then proceeds:

After a short interval, Dionysius, repenting of his unjust resentment, wrote to Plato, inviting him to return to Syracuse, to which Plato answered, with some contempt, that philosophy would not allow him leisure to think of Dionysius. He was induced, however, to return by another expedient. Plato had made Dion a determined votary of virtue, and he naturally wished to extend this advantage to the younger Dionysius, who also expressed a most earnest desire to become acquainted with Plato< Letters were then dispatched to him, from the tyrant, from Dion and several followers of Pythagoras, importuning him to return to Syracuse, and take upon him the education of the young prince. After considerable hesitation, he consented, and is said to have had some kind of promise on the part of Dionysius that he would adopt the Platonic form of government. In the mean time the enemies of Dion prevailed upon Dionysius to recall from exile Philistus, a man of tyrannical principles and spirit, who, they hoped f would oppose the doctrines and measures of Plato. The philosopher in the mean time was conducted to Syracuse with public honours; the king himself received him into his chariot, and sacrifices were offered in congratulation of his arrival. New regulations were immediately introduced; the licentiousness of the court was restrained; moderation reigned in all public festivals; the king assumed an air of benignity; philosophy was studied by his courtiers; and every good man assured himself of a happy revolution in the state of public manners. It was now that Philistus and his adherents found means to rekindle the jealousy of the tyrant, and through their intrigues, Dion became so obnoxious to Dionysius, that he ordered him to be imprisoned, and afterwards banished him into Italy. With Plato, however, he continued to keep up some appearance of friendship, and under that pretence allotted Plato an apartment in his palace, but at the same time placed a secret guard about him, that no one might visit him without his knowledge. At length, upon the commencement of a war, Dionysius sent Plato back into his own country, with a promise, that he would recal both him and Dion upon the return of peace. Part of this promise he was soon inclined to keep, by recalling Plato but the philosopher received his solicitations with coolness, pleaded in excuse his advanced age, and reminded the tyrant of the violation of his promise respecting Dion nor was it until the request of Dionysius was seconded by the intreaties of the wife and sister of Dion, and by the importunities of Archytas of Tarentum, and other Pythagorean philosophers, to whom the tyrant had pledged himself for the performance of his promises, that he could be prevailed upon to return.

, called the elder, to distinguish him from his nephew, was one of the most learned of the ancient Roman writers, and was born in the reign of Tiberius Caesar, about the year of Christ 23. His birth-place was Verona, as appears from his calling Catullus his countryman, who was unquestionably of that city. Tho ancient writer of his life, ascribed to Suetonius, and, after him, St. Jerom, have made him a native of Rome: father Hardouin has also taken some pains to confirm this notion, which however has not prevailed. We can more readily believe Aulus Gellius, who represents him as one of the most ingenious men of his age; and what is related of his application by his nephew the younger Pliny, is almost incredible. Yet his excessive love of study did not spoil the man of business, nor prevent him from filling the most important offices with credit. He was a procurator, or manager of the emperor’s revenue, in the provinces of Spain and Africa; and was advanced to the high dignity of augur. He had also several considerable commands in the army, and was distinguished by his courage in the field, as well as by his eloquence at the bar. His manner of life, as it is described by his nephew, exhibits a degree of industry and perseverance scarcely to be paralleled. In summer he always began his studies as soon as it was night: in winter, generally at one in the morning, but never later than two, and often at midnight. No man ever spent less time in bed; and sometimes he would, without retiring from his books, indulge in a short sleep, and then pursue his studies. Before day-break, it was his custom to wait upon Vespasian, who likewise chose that season to transact business: and when he had finished the affairs which the emperor committed to his charge, he returned home again to his studies. After a slender repast at noon, he would frequently, in the summer, if he was disengaged from business, recline in the sun: during which time some author was read to him, from which he made extracts and observations. This was his constant method, whatever book he read; for it was a maxim of his, that “no book was so bad, but something might be learned from it.” When this was over, he generally went into the cold-bath, after which he took a slight refreshment of food and rest and then, as if it had been a new day, resumed his studies till supper-time, when a book was again read to him, upon which he would make some remarks as they went on. His nephew mentions a singular instance to shew how parsimonious he was of his time, and how covetous of knowledge. His reader having pronounced a word wrong, some person at the table made him repeat it: upon which, Pliny asked that person if he understood it? and when he acknowledged that he did, “Why then,” said he, “would you make him go back again we have lost, by this interruption, above ten lines.” In summer, he always rose from supper by clay-light and in winter, as soon as it was dark. Such was his way of life amidst the noise and hurry of the town but in the country his whole time was devoted to study without intermission, excepting only when he bathed, that is, was actually in the bath for during the operation of rubbing and wiping, he was employed either in hearing some book read' to him, or in dictating himself. In his journeys, he lost no time from his studies, his mind at those seasons being disengaged from all other thoughts, and a secretary or amanuensis constantly attended him in his chariot; and that he might suffer the less interruption to his studies, instead of walking, he always used a carriage in Rome. By this extraordinary application he found leisure to write a great many volumes.

The circumstances of his death, like his manner of livr ing, were very singular, and are also described at large by the elegant pen of his nephew. He was at that time, with a fleet under his command, at Mis en urn, in the gulf of Naples; his sister and her son, the younger Pliny, being with him. On the 24th of August, in the year 79, about one in the afternoon, his sister desired him to observe a cloud of a very unusual size and shape. He was in his study; but immediately arose, and went out upon an eminence to view it more distinctly. It was not at that distance discernible from what mountain this cloud issued, but it was found afterwards to ascend from mount Vesuvius. Its figure resembled that of a pine-tree; for it shot up to a great height in the form of a trunk, which extended itself at the top into a sort of branches; and it appeared sometimes bright, and sometimes dark and spotted, as it was either more or less impregnated with earth and cinders. This was a noble phenomenon for the philosophic Pliny, who immediately ordered a light vessel to be got ready; but as he was coming out of the house, with his tablets for his observations, the mariners belonging to the gallies stationed at Retina, earnestly intreated him to come to their assistance, since that port being situated at the foot of mount Vesuvius, there was no way for them to escape, but by sea. He therefore ordered the gallies to put to sea, and went himself on board, with intention of assisting not only Retina, but several other towns, situated upon that beautiful coast. He steered directly to the point of danger, whence ethers fled with the utmost terror; and with so much calmness and presence of mind, as to be able to make and dictate his observations upon the motion and figure of that dreadful scene. He went so nigh the mountain, that tha cinders, which grew thicker and hotter the nearer he approached, fell into the ships, together with pumice-stonet and black pieces of burning rock: they were likewise in danger, not only of being aground by the sudden retreat of the sea, but also from the vast fragments which rolled down from the mountain, and obstructed all the shore. Here he stopped to consider, whether he should return; to which the pilot advising him, “Fortune,” said he, “befriends the brave; carry me to Pomponianus.” Pomponianus was then at Stabioe, a town separated by a gulf, which the sea, after several windings, forms upon that shore. He found him in the greatest consternation, but exhorted him to keep up his spirits; and, the more to dissipate his fears, he ordered, with an air of unconcern, the baths to be got ready; when, after having bathed, he sat down to supper with apparent cheerfulness. Jn the mean while, the eruption from Vesuvius flamed out in several places with much violence, which the darkness of the night contributed to render still more visible and dreadful. Pliny, to soothe the apprehensions of his friend, assured him it was only the burning of the villages, which the country people had abandoned to the flames: after this he retired, and had some sleep. The court which led to his apartment being in the mean time almost filled with stones and ashes, if he had continued there any longer, it would have been impossible for him to have made his way out: it was therefore thought proper to awaken him. He got up, and went to Pomponianus and the rest of the company, who were not unconcerned enough to think of going to bed. They consulted together, whether it would be most prudent to trust to the houses, which now shook from side to side with frequent and violent rockings; or to fly to the open fields, where the calcined stones and cinders, though light indeed, yet fell in large showers, and threatened destruction. In this distress they resolved for the fields, as the less dangerous situation of the two; and went out, having pillows tied upon their heads with napkins, which was all their defence against the storms of stones that fell around them. It was now day every where else, but there a deeper darkness prevailed than in the most obscure night; which, however, was in some degree dissipated by torches, and other lights of various kinds. They thought proper to go down farther upon the shore, to observe if they might safely put out to sea; but they found the waves still run extremely high and boisterous. There Pliny, taking a draught or two of water, threw himself down upon a cloth which was spread for him; when immediately the flames and a strong smell of sulphur, wkich was the forerunner of them, dispersed the rest of the company, and obliged him to arise. He raised himself, with the assistance of two of his servants, for he was corpulent, and instantly fell down dead: suffocated, as his nephew conjectures, by some gross and noxious vapour; for he had always weak lungs, and was frequently subject to a difficulty of breathing. As soon as it was light again, which was not till the third day after, his body was found entire, and without any marks of violence upon it; exactly in the same posture that he fell, and looking more like a man asleep than dead.

is the name of many eminent personages recorded in ancient writers, particularly Julius Polysenus, of whom some Greek epigrams are extant, in the first book of the Anthologia. But the Polyænus who is best known, flourished in the second century, and is the author of the eight books of the “Stratagems of illustrious Commanders in war.” He appears to have been a Macedonian, and probably was a soldier in the younger part of his life; but we are more certain that he was a rhetorician, and a pleader of causes and that he enjoyed a place of trust and dignity under the emperors Antoninus and Veriis, to whom he dedicated his work. The “Strategemata” were published in Greek by Isaac Casaubon, with notes, in 1589, 12mo but no good edition of them appeared, till that of Leyden; 1690, in 8vo. The title-page runs thus: “Polygeni Strategematum libri octo, Justo Vulteio interprete, Pancratius Maasvicius recensuit, Isaaci Casauboni nee non suas notas adjecit.” This was followed, in 1756, by Mursinua’s edition, Berlin, and by that of Coray, at Paris in 1809, 8vo. We have now an excellent English translation by Mr. R. Shepherd, 1793, 4to. It contains various stratagems, of above three hundred commanders and generals of armies, chiefly Greeks and Barbarians, which are at least entertaining, and illustrative of the manners of the times in which those commanders lived but it may be doubted whether a modern soldier would gain much advantage by making himself master of this tricking study. The original has come down to us incomplete, and with the text considerably mutilated and corrupted; but the style is classical, and even elegant.

, marquis of, a French nobleman, still more distinguished by his talents in poetry than by his rank, was born at Montauban in 1709. He was educated for the magistracy, and became advocategeneral, and first president of the court of aids at Montauban. His inclination for poetry, however, could not be repressed, and at the age of twenty-five he produced his tragedy of “Dido,” in which he approved himself not only one of the most successful imitators of Racine, but an able and elegant poet. After this success at Paris, he returned to his duties at Montauban, which he fulfilled in the most upright manner; but having suffered a short exile, on account of some step which displeased the court, he became digusted with the office of a magistrate. As he had now also increased his fortune by an advantageous marriage, he determined to remove to Paris, where at first he was received as his virtues and his talents deserved. His sincere attachment to Christianity brought upon him a persecution from the philosophists, which, after a time, drove him back to the country. Voltaire and his associates had nowinundated France with their deistical tracts the materialism of Helvetius in his book de TEsprit, had just been brought forward in the most triumphant manner the enemies of Christianity had filled the Encyclopedic with the poison of their opinions, and had by their intrigues formed a powerful party in the French academy, when the marquis of Pompignan was admitted as an academician, in 1760. He had the courage, at his admission, to pronounce a discourse, the object of which was to prove that the man of virtue and religion is the only true philosopher. From this moment he was the object of perpetual persecution. Voltaire and his associates were indefatigable in pouring out satires against him: his religion was called hypocrisy, and his public declaration in its favour an attempt to gain the patronage of certain leading men. These accusations, as unjust as they were illiberal, mingled with every species of sarcastic wit, had the effect of digusting the worthy marquis with Paris. He retired to his estate of Pompignan, where he passed the remainder of his<laysin the practice of a true philosophy, accompanied by sincere piety and died of an apoplexy in 1784, at the age of seventy-five, most deeply regretted by his neighbours and dependents. The shameful treatment of this excellent man, by the sect which then reigned in the academy, is a strong illustration of that conspiracy against religion, so ably detailed by M. Barruel, in the first volume of his Memoirs of Jacobinism. When once he had declared himself a zealous Christian no merit was allowed him, nor any effort spared to overwhelm him with disgrace and mortification. His compositions nevertheless were, and are, esteemed by impartial judges. His “Sacred Odes,” notwithstanding the sarcasm of Voltaire, “sacred they are, for no one touches them,” abound in poetical spirit, and lyric beauties though it is confessed also that they have their inequalities. His “Discourses imitated from the books of Solomon,” contain important moral truths, delivered with elegance, and frequently with energy. His imitation of the Georgics of Virgil, though inferior to that of the abbe De Lille (whose versification is the richest and most energetic of modern French writers), has yet considerable merit and his “Voyage de Languedoc,” though not equal, in easy and lively negligence to that of Chapelle, is superior in elegance, correctness, and variety. He wrote also some operas which were not acted and a comedy in verse, in one act, called “Les Adieux de Mars,” which was represented with success at the Italian comic theatre in Paris. The marquis of Pompignan was distinguished also as a writer in prose. His “Eulogium on the Duke of Burgundy,” is written with an affecting simplicity. His “Dissertations,” his “Letter to the younger Racine,” and his “Academical Discourses,” all prove a sound judgment, a correct taste, and a genius improved by careful study of the classic models. He produced also a “Translation of some dialogues of Lucian,” and some “Tragedies of Æschylus,” which are very generally esteemed. He was allowed to be a man of vast literature, and almost universal knowledge in the fine arts. Yet such a man was to be ill-treated, and crushed if possible, because he had the virtue to declare himself a partizan of religion. Even his enemies, and the most inflexible of them, Voltaire, were unable to deny the merit of some of his poetical compositions. The following stanza in particular, in “An- Ode on the Death of Rousseau,” obtained a triumph for him in defiance of prejudice. The intention seems to be to illustrate the vanity of those who speak against religion:

Pomponius was never rich, but it is a mistake that he died in an hospital. In 1484, during a public commotion, his library and goods were destroyed; but the loss was soon made up by his friends and scholars, so that at last his house was better furnished than before. He was indeed universally esteemed for the probity, simplicity, and even the occasional harshness of his manners. He died at “Rome in 1498, and was interred with honourable solemnity. He wrote some works, illustrative of the manners, customs, and Jaws of the Roman republic, and the state of ancient Rome. These are, treatises on the priesthood, the magistrates, the laws, an abridgment of the history of the emperors, from the death of the younger Gordianus to the exile of Justin III. all which shew great research and erudition. He also was a commentator on some ancient authors he corrected for the press the first edition of Sallust, and collated it with some antient Mss, although his name is not mentioned by our bibliographers. He extended the same care to the works of Columella, Varro, Nonius Marcellus, Pliny the younger, and wrote notes on Quintilian and Virgil. His own works were collected in one vol. 8vo, very rare, printed at Mentz, 1521, under the title” Opera, Pomponii Laeti varia."

, a very learned Italian, was born at Cerreto, in Umbria, in 1426, and settled at Naples, where his merit procured him illustrious friends. He became preceptor to Alphonso the younger, king of Arragon, to whom he was afterwards secretary and counsellor of state. Having reconciled this prince to his father Ferdinand, and not being rewarded by the latter as he thought he deserved, he aimed against him “A Dialogue on Ingratitude,” in which also he launched out into the praises of Charles VIII. of France, his great enemy. Ferdinand had the magnanimity to despise his censures, and suffer him to hold his appointments. Pontanus died, according to Moreri, in 1503, at the age of seventy-seven; according to others two years later. His epitaph is famous, and, though vain enough in the beginning, concludes with a fine thought, which seems to have suggested the still more sublime close of Dr. Foster’s epitaph on himself.

, an eminent French professor of philosophy, was born at Poilly, a village in the diocese of Sens, in the year 1651, and studied at the university of Paris, where he distinguished himself by his talents and great diligence, and in 1673 he was admitted to the degree of M. A. In the year 1677 he was appointed professor of philosophy in his own college, whither his reputation soon attracted a multitude of students and at the opening of the “College des Quatre Nations,' 7 he was appointed to fill the philosophical chair in that seminary. Mr. Pourchot soon became dissatisfied with the Aristotelian philosophy, and embraced the principles of Des Cartes, applying mathematical principles and reasonings to the discovery of physical and moral truths. He now drew up a system of philosophy, which he published under the title of” Institutiones Philosophies,“which was very generally applauded, and met with an astonishing sale. His reputation as a philosopher, at this time, stood so high, that his lectures were always attended by a numerous concourse of students. His acquaintance was eagerly courted by the most celebrated literary characters of his time Racine, Despreaux, Mabillon, Dupin, Baillet, Montfaucon, and Santeul, were his intimate associates. He was honoured with the esteem of M. Bossuet and M. de Fenelon. The latter would have procured for him the appointment of tutor to the younger branches of the royal family, but he preferred to employ his talents in the service of the university; and was seven times chosen to fill the post of rector of that body, and was syndic for the long space of forty years. At a very advanced age he began to apply himself to the study of the Hebrew language, with a degree of ardour which soon enabled him to deliver a course of lectures upon it at the college of St. Barbe. In the midst of his numerous engagements, he found leisure to improve his” Philosophical Institutions,“of which he was preparing the fourth edition for the press, when he lost his eyesight. He died at Paris in 1734, in the 83d year of his age. Besides his” Institutions,“he was author of numerous” Discourses,“which were given to the public in the” Acts of the University,“and various” Memoirs.“He assisted the learned Masclef in greatly improving the second edition of his” Grammatica Hebraica," and he aided him in drawing up the Chaldee, Syriac, and Samaritan grammars, which are combined in that edition.

The preceding sketch is taken from an advertisement prefixed to a volume of his “Discourses on various subjects,” published by his friend Dr. Thomas Balguy “which Discourses,” says the editor, “are not published for the credit of the writer, but for the benefit of his readers; especially that class of readers, for whom they were chiefly intended, the younger students in divinity. The author’s reputation,” he adds, “stands on a much wider bottom: a whole life uniformly devoted to the interests of sound philosophy and true religion.”

, an ancient Roman poet, was born at Mevania, a town in Urnbria, as we learn from his own writings, and probably about the year of Rome 700. Some say, his father was a knight, and a man of considerable authority; who, becoming a partizan with Antony, on the capture of Perusia, was made prisoner, and killed by Augustus’s order, at the altar erected to Caesar when his estate was forfeited of course. This which happened when the poet was very young, he alludes to in one of his elegies, and laments the ruin of his family in that early season of his life. His wit and learning soon recommended him to the patronage of Maecenas and Gallus; and among the poets of his time, he was very intimate with Ovid and Tibullus. We have no particular account of his life, or the manner of his death; only he mentions his taking a journey to Athens, probably in company with his patron Maecenas, who attended Augustus in his progress through Greece. Those that make him live the longest carry his age no higher than forty-one. His death is usually placed B. C. 10. The great object of his imitation was Callimachus Mimnermus and Philetas were two others, whom he likewise admired and followed in his elegies. Quintilian tells us, that Propertius disputed the prize with Tibullus, among the critics of his time and the younger Pliny, speaking of Passienus, an eminent and learned elegiac poet of his acquaintance, says, that this talent was hereditary and natural for that he was a descendant and countryman of Propertius. Propertius however was inferior to Tibullus in tenderness, and to Ovid in variety of fancy, and facility of expression still it must be granted that he was equal in harmony of numbers, and certainly gave the first specimen of the poetical epistle, which Ovid afterwards claimed as his invention.

, the younger, a Greek physician, mathematical writer, critic, and commentator of the writings of the classic ages, flourished about 1105. He is, for his various and extensive learning, ranked among the first scholiasts of his time. He commented and explained no less than twenty-four plays of Menander, which, though now lost, were extant in his time. The emperor Constantine Ducas made him preceptor to his son Michael, who succeeded to the crown in 1071. His principal works are, 1. “De Quatuor Mathematicis Scientiis,” Bas. 1556, 8vo. 2. “De Lapidum Virtutibus,” Tol. 1615, 8vo. 3. “De Victus ratione,” in 2 books, Bale, 1529, 8vo. 4. “Synopsis Legum, versibus Grsecis edita,” Paris, 1632. Leo Allatius has written a treatise de Psellis, Rome, 1634, 8vo, which contains an account of all the authors of the name of Psellus. One of them, “Michael Psellus the Elder, who flourished in the ninth century, was author of” De Operatione Daemonum," Gr. & Lat. Paris, 1623, which has been improperly given to the preceding author.

, a learned French historian, was the younger son of Claude Du Puy, an eminent French lawyer, who died in 1594, aijd who was celebrated by all the learned of his time in eloges, published collectively under the title of “Amplissimi viri Claudii Puteani Tumulus,” Paris, 1607, 4to. His son was born at Agen, Nov. 27, 1582, and was in early life distinguished for his proficiency in the languages, but principally for his knowledge of civil law and history. His talents produced Trim the esteem and friendship of the president De Thou, who was his relation, and of Nicholas Rigault and he was concerned in the publication of those editions of De Thou, which appeared in 1620 and 1626. When that great work met with opponents, he wrote, in concert with Rigault, a defence of it, entitled “Memoires et Instructions pour servir a justifier Pinnocence de messire Franc.ois-Auguste de Thou,” which was reprinted in 1734, at the end of the 15th volume of the French edition of the history. Our author was appointed successively counsellor to the king, and librarykeeper. Having accompanied Thumeri de Boissise, whom the king had sent on a political mission to the Netherlands and to Holland, he became acquainted, through his father’s reputation, with the learned men of those countries. On his return he was employed in researches respecting the king’s rights, and in making a catalogue of the charters. These scarce and valuable papers gave him so extensive an insight into every thing relative to the French history, that few persons have made such curious discoveries on the subject. He was also employed with Messrs. Lebret and Delorme, to defend his majesty’s rights over the three bishoprics of Metz, Toul, and Verdun, and produced a great number of titles and memoirs in proof of those rights. His obliging disposition made him feel interested in the labours of all the literati, and willing to communicate to them whatever was most valuable, in a vast collection of memorandums and observations, which he had been gathering together during fifty years. He died at Paris, December 14, 1651, aged 69. Among his numerous works, the French critics select the following as the most important 1. “Traité des Droits et des Libertes l'Eglise Gallicane, avec les Preuves,” 1639, 3 vols. folio. In this, as in all his works, he was an able defender of the rights of the Gajlican church, in opposition to the encroachments of the see of Rome. In 1651 he published an edition of the “Proofs,” in 2 vok. folio. 2. “Traités concernant l‘histoire de France, savoir la condemnation des Templiers, l’histoire du schisme d'Avignon, et quelques proces criminels,” Paris, 1654, 4to. 3. “Traité de la Majorite de nos rois et du regences du royaume, avec les preuves,” Paris, 1655, 4to. 4. “Histoire des plus illustres Favoris anciens et modernes,” Leaden, 1659, 4to and 12mo. In this curious list of favourites, Jbe has recorded only five French. He published also separate treatises on the rights of the king to the provinces of Burgundy, Artois, Bretagne, the three bishoprics before mentioned, Flanders, &c. &c. the titles of which it would be uninteresting to repeat. His life was published by Nicholas Rigault, Paris, 1652, 4to, and is inserted in that very useful volume, Bates’s “Vitae Selectorum aliquot virorum.”

Quien de la Neufville (James Le), a good historian, was born May 1, 1647, at Paris, and was the son of Peter Le Quien, a captain of horse, descended from an ancient Boulenois family. He made one campaign as a cadet in the regiment of French guards, and then quitted the service, meaning to attend the bar; but a considerable disappointment, which his father met with, deranged his plans, and obliged him to seek a resource in literary pursuits. By M. Pelisson’s advice, he applied chiefly to history, and published in 1700, a “General History of Portugal,” 2 vols. 4to, a valuable and well-written work, which obtained him a place in the academy pf inscriptions, 1706. This history is carried no farther than the death of Emmanuel I. 152 1.“M. de la Clede, secretary to the marechal de Coigni, published a” New History of Portugal,“1735, 2 vols. 4to, and 8 vols. 12mo, that comes down to the present time; in the preface to which he accuses M. Le Quien of having omitted several important facts, and passed slightly over many others. M. le Quien afterwards published a treatise on the origin of posts, entitled” L' Usage des Postes chez les Anciens et les Modernes," Paris, 1734, 12mo. This treatise procured him the direction of part of the posts in Flanders, and in France. He settled at Quesnoy, and remained there till 1713, when the abbe de Mornay, being appointed ambassador to Portugal, requested that he might accompany him, which was granted, and he received the most honourable marks of distinction on his arrival; the king of Portugal settled a pension of 1500 livres upon him, to be paid wherever he resided, created him a knight of the order of Christ, which is the chief of the three Portuguese orders, and worn by himself. His majesty also consulted him respecting the academy of history which he wished to establish, and did establish shortly after at Lisbon. Le Quien, flattered by the success of his Portuguese history, was anxious to finish it; but his too close application brought on a disorder, of which he died at Lisbon, May 20, 1728, aged 81, leaving two sons, the elder of whom was knight of St. Louis, and major of the dauphin foreign regiment, and the younger postmaster general at Bourdeaux.

In the year 68, upon the death of Nero, Galba returned to Rome, and took Quintilian with him who there taught rhetoric at the expence of the government, being allowed a salary out of the public treasury. His career was attended with the highest reputation, and he formed many excellent orators, who did him great honour; among whom was the younger Pliny, who continued in his school to the year 78. After teaching for twenty years he obtained leave of Domitian to retire, and applied himself to compose his admirable book called “Institutiones Oratorise.” This is the mpst complete work of its kind which antiquity has left us; and the design of it is to form a perfect orator, who is accordingly conducted through the whole process necessary to attain eminence in that art. Few books abound more with good sense, or discover a greater degree of just and accurate taste. Almost all the principles of good criticism are to be found in it. He has digested into excellent order all the ancient ideas concerning rhetoric, and is at the same time himself an eloquent writer. “Though some parts of his work,” says Blair, “contain too much of the technical and artificial system then in vogue, and for that reason may be thought dry aiui tedious, yet I would not advise the omitting to read any part of his ‘ Institutions.’ To pleaders at the bar, even these technical parts may prove of some use. Seldom has any person of more sound and distinct judgment than Quintilian, applied himself to the study of the art of oratory.” The first entire copy of the “Institutiones Oratorio,” for the Quiutilian then in Italy was much mutilated and imperfect, was discovered by Poggius, as we have already noticed in his article, in the monastery of St. Gall, at the time of holding the council of Constance. The most useful editions of this work are those of Burman, 1720, 2 vols. 4to of Capperoperius, Paris, fol. 1725; of Gesner, Gottingen, 1738, 4to, beautifully reprinted in 1805, at Oxford, 2 vols. 8vo.

The anonymous dialogue (t De Oratoribus, sive de causis, corrupts eloquentiaj,“has sometimes been printed with Quintilian’s works yet is generally ascribed to Tacitus, and is commonly printed with the works of that historian and the late Mr. Melmoth, in his” Fitzosborne’s Letters,“seems inclined to give it to the younger Pliny” because,“says he,” it exactly coincides with his age, is addressed to one of his particular friends and correspondents, and is marked with some similar expressions and sentiments. But as arguments of this kind are always more imposing than solid,“he wisely leaves it as” a piece, concerning the. author of which nothing satisfactory can be collected,“only” that it is evidently a composition of that period in which he flourished." It was. ascribed to Quintilianj because he actually wrote a book upon the same subject, and with the same title, as he himself declares yet the critics are convinced by sufficient arguments, that the dialogue, or rather fragment of a dialogue, now extant, is not that of which Quintilian speaks.

Quintilian spent the latter part of his life with great dignity and honour. Some imagine that he was consul but the words of Ausonius, on which they ground their supposition, shew that he did not possess the consulship, but only the consular ornaments“honestamenta nominis potius quam insignia potestatis” and we may add, that no mention is made of his name in the “Fasti Consulares.” It is certain that he was preceptor to the grandsons of the emperor Domitian’s sister. Though Quintilian’s outward condition and circumstances were prosperous and flourishing, yet he laboured under many domestic afflictions. In his forty-first year he married a wife who was but twelve years old, and lost her when she was nineteen. He bestows the highest applauses on her, and was inconsolable for her loss. She left him two sons, one of whom died at five years old, and the other at ten, who was the eldest, and possessed extraordinary talents. He soon after, however, married a second wife, and by her he had a daughter, whom he lived to see married who also, at the time of her marriage, received a handsome dowry from the younger Pliny, who had been his scholar, in consideration, as we are told, that she was married to a person of superior rank, who of course required more with her than her father’s circumstances would admit. Quintilian lived to be fourscore years of age, or upwards, as is pretty certainly determined although the time of his death is not recorded. He appears, from his works, and from what we are able to collect of him, to have been a man of great innocence and integrity of life. His “Oratorial Institutions” contain a great number of excellent moral instructions; and it is a main principle inculcated in them, that “none but a good man can make a good orator.”

, the late bishop of London, was the younger son of the preceding, and was born July 6, 1749. He became a student of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, and took his degrees at the usual periods that of M. A. in 1774; B. D. in 1782 D. D. by diploma, in 1783. In 1776 he was appointed prselector of poetry, and in 1782 regius professor of Greek. In the same year he was presented to a prebend of Salisbury; and in 1783 became canon of Christ church, regius professor of divinity, and rector of Ewelnoe. In the year 1799 he was elevated to the bishopric of Oxford; translated to that of Bangor in 1807; and thence to London in 1809. He was elected F. R. S. in 1811. He passed a great part of his life in the university of Oxford, and it was generally believed that when he was raised to the see of Oxford, the university was complimented with the nomination by the crown. His lordship was author of many single sermons, and charges delivered on different occasions: also of “De Grsecae Linguae Studio Prselectio habita in Schola Linguarum,” 1783, and “Concio ad Clerum in Synodo Provinciali Cantuariensis Provincial ad D. Pauli,” 1790. One of his last works was a report of the progress made by the National School Society, to which the general committee referred in terms of gratitude, at their first meeting after his lordship’s decease. They notice his lordship as one “whose latest employment had been to state, for the information qf the public, the progress of a work to which he had contributed his time, his labour, and his counsels. The committee therefore could not fail to entertain a common sentiment of profound regret for the loss which they have sustained, and to cherish in their minds the liveliest recollection of the service which has been so successfully fulfilled by him in this second report. They wish, therefore, to add to this document, designed for general circulation, their sense of what is due from the public, and themselves, to the. memory of one who was a constant and assiduous promoter of this salutary institution, from its first establishment to the last hour of his life. The committee trust, that this testimony, though limited to a single object in the large field of pastoral duty in which he was incessantly engaged, may serve to denote the benefits which have resulted from his prompt, unwearied, and effectual exertions.” The following is the character drawn of him by Mr. archdeacon Jefferson, and which alludes to his zeal for the church, of which he was an active member: “Fearless now of being censured for mercenary adulation, or reproved by unconscious merit, a just tribute may be paid to the character of that departed and exalted prelate, who is, and will be, most lamented where he was best and most entirely known. This opportunity, therefore, is willingly embraced of offering a heartfelt condolence to the ministry of the diocese on the affecting and important loss, which, in these perilous times of contending sects and unsettled opinion, has arisen to them, and to the church: To them, in the premature privation of a diocesan, firm in his support of ecclesiastical authority, but considerate in its application; eminently versed in the letter of ecclesiastical law, but liberal in its practical construction, reluctant in interference, but determined in duty, slow in the profes-. sion of service, but prompt in its execution; disinterested, in patronage, unwavering in measures, correct in judgment, attentive in council, and kind and compassionate to distress: To the church, in the premature privation of a father, diligent in her rites and services, but unostentatious in piety and devotion; sound and unrelaxing in her doctrines and faith, but discreet in zeal, and comprehensive in charity; ever vigilant in defending her interests, ever forward in asserting her privileges, and ever able in the assertion and the defence.” This high character, how-, ever, has been thought capable of abatement. It was perhaps unfortunate that he succeeded a prelate of the mild and conciliating temper of Dr. Porteus, and that he undertook the government of a diocese, which, above all others, requires such a temper. It was, perhaps, not less unfortunate that in his first charge to the clergy of this diocese, he betrayed no little ignorance of the state of religious opinions, and the creeds of those sectaries against whom he wished to warn his clergy.

In 1671 he was afflicted with a feverish disorder, which terminated in the yellow jaundice; but he was soon cured of it, and resumed his botanical pursuits. The year after, his beloved friend Mr. Willoughby died, in his 37th year, at Middleton-hall, his seat in Yorkshire; “to the infinite and unspeakable loss and grief,” says Mr. Ray, “of myself, his friends, and all good men.” There having been the sincerest friendship between Mr. Willoughby and Mr. Ray, who were men of similar dispositions and tastes, from the time of their being fellow-collegians, Mr. Willoughby not only confided in Mr. Ray in his life-time, but also at his death; for, he made him one of the executors of his will, and charged him with the education of his sons, Francis and Thomas, leaving him also for life 60l. per ann. The eldest of these young gentlemen not being four years of age, Mr. Ray, as a faithful trustee, betook himself to the instruction of them; and for their use composed his “Nomenclator dassicus,” which was published in 1672, and is far more exact, especially in the names of natural objects, than any that had previously appeared. Francis, the eldest, dying before he was of age, the younger became lord Middleton. Not many months after the death of Mr. Willoughby, Mr. Ray lost another of his best friends, bishop Wilkins; whom he visited in London, November 13, 1672, and found expiring. Mr. Ray having thus lost some of his best friends, and being in a manner left destitute, endeavoured to consoler himself with female society; and in June, 1673, married a young lady, not half his age, being only 20 years of age, the daughter of Mr. Oakeley, of Launton in Oxfordshire. Towards the end of this year came forth his “Observations, Topographical, Moral, &c.” made in foreign countries; to which was added his “Catalogus Stirpium in exteris regionibus observatarum” and, about the same time, his “Collection of unusual or local English words,” which he had gathered up in his travels through the counties of England. In 1674, Mr. Oldenbufgh, the secretary of the Royal Society, renewed his correspondence with Mr. Ray^, which had been some time intermitted, and sent him letters almost every month. Mr. Ray’s accounts in these letters were published by Oldenburgh in the Philosophical Transactions. Oldenburgh had a farther view in his correspondence with Mr. Ray; it was to engage him with those leading members, who had agreed to entertain the society with a philosophical discourse at their meetings, so that the burthen might not lie among too few of the members. Mr. Ray complied, and accordingly sent him “A Discourse concerning Seeds, and the Specific Differences of Plants;” which, Oldenburgh tells him, was so well received by the president and fellows, that they returned him their thanks, and requested he would repeat his favours of that kind.

When about the age of twenty, his indentures were given up, at his own request, as he had a strong desire to become a preacher. His first sermon was delivered to a small congregation at Mildenhal!, in Suffolk, and he afterwards continued to preach among the methodists, at various places, for about two years, when being unsuccessful in forming a church among them, he left them, and formed a small independent congregation at, Norwich, on leaving which, he also gave up infant baptism. In 1759, he became preacher to a congregation of baptists at Cambridge, and such was his popularity here, that his hearers, dady increasing, were enabled to build a new and commodious meeting, in 1774. Here he was frequently interrupted by the impertinent visits of some under-graduates, against whom he was finally compelled to appeal to the laws of his country, which secured the future tranquillity of the assembly. This seems to be the period of his life most happy and faultless. He had not as yet publicly engaged in abstruse theological disputations; he vigilantly performed the duties of his pastoral office; and, if some of the younger students of the university, in the gaiety of youthful intemperance, had insulted him, he was amply repaid for it by the friendship and protection of many of its most worthy and learned members; for, he embraced every opportunity which that university afforded of making amends for a defective education, and pursued a course of reading extensive and varied. The public libraries were not only open to him, but he was allowed the privilege of having books from them at his own habitation.

, a very conspicuous racter during the republican state of England, descended from an ancient family in Devonshire, was the younger son of sir Anthony Rons, knight, by Elizabeth, his first wife, daughter of Thomas Southcote, gent. He was born at Halton, in Cornwall, in 1570, and entered a commoner of Broadgate-hall, now Pembroke-college, Oxford, where he took a bachelor’s degree in arts. He afterwards studied the law, and there is a report that he took orders, and preached at Saltash; but for this there was probably no other foundation than what his works afforded, which would not have disgraced many of the divines of that period. It is evident that he had studied religious controversy with, more attention than laymen usually bestow on such subjects. His destination, however, was to make a figure in political history. In the first parliament called by Charles I, he was returned for Truro in Cornwall, for Tregony in the third, and for Truro again in the 15th and 16th of that reign; in all which he proved one of the most zealous enemies to the established church, and a vehement declaimer. against what he termed innovations and abuses both in church and state, and particularly against Arminianism, which was also the subject of some of his works. He was one of the few laymen appointed by the Commons to sit in the Assembly of Divines at Westminster. In the parliament called in 1653, he was one of the representatives for Devonshire, and at that time was first chosen chairman, and then speaker for a month; but continued, during the whole sitting, to forward Cromwell’s plans. He procured a vote, that Cromwell, Lambert, Harrison, Disbrowe, and Tomlinson, should sit in that house as members; and afterr wards proposed, that the parliament should resign the govertment into Cromwell’s hands, with the title of Protector. His original intention was to form the English commonwealth after the model of the Jewish; but as a theocracy was rejected, he made the above proposal in favour of Cromwell, whom he affected to look upon as a compound of the characters of Moses and Joshua. In gratitude for this, he was declared one of Jus highness’ s privy-council. In 1656, he was returned one of the members for Cornwall; and in the year following was seated in the House of Lords. He had been made provost of Eton in 1643, and had a college- lease, which together were worth 1200l. per annum. He died at Acton, near London, Jan, 7, 1659, and was buried with great pomp at Eton, and a standard-­pennon, with other things relating to a baron, were erected over his grave, but these were taken away at the Restoration. We have omitted to notice, that he was principal trier and approver of public preachers, and a commissioner for the ejectment of “scandalous and ignorant ministers.” He founded three fellowships in Pembroke college, and bequeathed other property to pious uses. Lord Clarendon and other contemporaries undervalue his abilities, which certainly did not appear to much advantage in parliament, where his speeches were rude, vulgar, and enthusiastic, both in style and sentiment, yet perhaps not the worse adapted to the understandings of his hearers. Wood has given a long catalogue of his writings, the principal of which relating to subjects of religions controversy, or general piety, were collected in a folio printed at London in 1657, under the title of “The Works of Francis Rous, esq. or treatises and meditations dedicated to the saints, and to the excellent throughout the three nations.” This has Faithorne’s fine print from the picture in Pembroke college. He published also, a tract, “The Lawfulness of obeying the present Government,” 1649, 4to, and “Mel la Patrum,” a thick octavo, 1650, containing what may he termed the beauties of the fathers of the first three centuries; “Jnteriora regni Dei,” 1665, 12mo, and a translation of the Psalms into English metre, printed in 1645, by order of the House of Commons. His son Francis was a young physician of great talents, but died early in life in 1643. When at Merton college, he was distinguished for classical attainments, and published a work on Greek antiquities, “Archaeologiae Atticae libri tres,” Oxon. 1637, which Wood says went through several impressions.

, fourth son to the preceding, was born at Florence, Oct. 20, 1475, at a time when his family was in the plenitude of its power. By what masters he was educated we have not been told, but it maybe presumed, from his father’s character, that he procured him the best which Florence could afford; and it is said that he became very accomplished in the Greek and Latin languages, as well as in his own. In 1505 he was sent as ambassador from Florence to Venice. In the tumult raised by the younger citizens of Florence on the return of the Medici in 1512, and which contributed so greatly to facilitate that event, he and his brother Pallas took a principal part, apparently in opposition to the wishes of their father, who was on the popular side. On the elevation of Leo X. and the appointment of his nephew Lorenzo to the government of Naples, Ruccellai is supposed to have accompanied the latter to Rome, when he went to assume the insignia of captain-general of the church. In 1515 he attended Leo on his visit to Florence, on which occasion the pontiff was entertained in the gardens of the Ruccellai with the representation of the tragedy of “Rosmunda,” written by our author in Italian blank verse. As Ruccellai entered into the ecclesiastical order, it has appeared surprising that Leo did not raise him to the purple; but political reasons, and not any want of esteem, seem to have prevented this, fop he sent him, at a very important crisis, as his legate to Francis I. in which station he continued until Leo’s death. After this event he returned to Florence, and was deputed, lyith five other principal citizens, to congratulate the net* pope Adrian VI. which he performed in an oration yet extant. The succeeding pope Clement VII. appointed Ruccellai keeper of the castle of St. Angelo, whence he obtained the name of IL Gastellano. He died in 1526. His fame rests chiefly on his poem of the “Api,” or Bees, which was published in 1539, and will secure to its author a high rank among the writers of didactic poetry. “His diction,” says Mr. Roscoe, “is pure without being insipid, and simple without becoming vulgar; and in the course of his work he has given decisive proofs of his scientific acquirements, particularly on subjects of natural history.” Besides the tragedy of “Rosmunda,” already noticed, he wrote another, V Oreste,“which remained in manuscript until published by Scipio Maffei in his” Teatro Italiano,“who consider it as superior to his” Rosmunda.“They are both imitations of Euripides. An edition of all his works was printed at Padua in 1772, 8vo, and his poem of the” Bees" was translated into French by Pingeron, in 1770.

, a most learned man, and a great benefactor to the learning of his country, was the son of Henry Savile of Bradley, in the township of Stainland, in the parish of Halifax, Yorkshire, by Ellen, daughter of Robert Ramsden. He was born at Bradley, Nov. 30, 1549, and first entered of Brasen-nose college, Oxford, whence he was elected to Merton-college in 1561, where he took the degrees in arts, and was chosen fellow. When he proceeded master of arts in 1570, he read for that degree on the Almagest of Ptolemy, which procured him the reputation of a man wonderfully skilled in mathematics and the Greek language; in the former of which, he voluntarily read a public lecture in the university for some time. Having now great interest, he was elected proctor for two years together, 1575 and 1576, an honour not very common, for as the proctors were then chosen out of the whole body of the university, by the doctors and masters, and the election was not, as now, confined to particular colleges, none but men of learning, and such as had considerable interest, durst aspire to that honour. In 1578 he visited the continent, became acquainted with various learned foreigners, and obtained many valuable Mss. or copies of them. He is said to have returned a man of high accomplishment*, and was made tutor in the Greek tongue to queen Elizabeth, or, as it is otherwise expressed, he read Greek and mathematics with her majesty, who had a great esteem for him. In 1585 he was made warden of Mertoncollege, which he governed six and thirty years with great credit, and greatly raised its reputation for learning, by a judicious patronage of students most distinguished for talents and industry. In 1596, he was chosen provost of Eton-college, of which society also he increased the fame by rilling it with the most learned men, among whom was the ever-memorable John Hales. It is said, however, that he incurred some odium among the younger scholars by his severity, and his dislike of those who were thought sprightly wi s. He used to say, “Give me the plodding student. If I would look for wits, I would go to Newgate, there be the wits.” John Earte, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, was the only scholar he ever accepted on the recommendation of being a wit. James 1. upon his accession to the crown of England, expressed a particular regard for him, and would have preferred him either in church or state; but sir Henry declined it, and only accepted the honour of knighthood from his majesty at Windsor on Sept. 21, 1604. His only son dying about that time, he devoted his fortune entirely to the promoting of learning. In 1619 he founded two lectures, or professorships, one in geometry, the other in astronomy, in the university of Oxford; which he endowed each with a salary of 160l. a year, besides a legacy of 600l. for purchasing more lands for the same use. In the preamble of the deed, by which a salary was annexed to these two professorships, it is expressly said that “geometry was almost totally unknown and abandoned in England.” Briggs was his first professor of geometry; but Aubrey says, on the authority of bishop Ward, that he first sent for Gunter for that purpose, who, coming with his sector and quadrant, “fell to resolving of triangles and doing a great many fine things. Said the grave knight, ‘ Do you call this reading of Geometric This is shewing of tricks, man,’ and so dismissed him with scorne, and sent for Brings.” Sir Henry also furnished a library with mathematical hooks near the mathematical school, for the use of his professors; and gave 100l. to the mathematical chest of his own appointing; adding afterwards a legacy of 4C/. a year to the same chest, to the university and to his professors jointly. He likewise gave 120l. towards the new-building of the schools; several rare manuscripts and printed books to the Bodleian library; and a good quantity of matrices and Greek types to the printingpress at Oxford. Part of the endowment of the professorships was the manor of Little Hays in Essex. He died, at Eton -college, Feb. 19, 1621-2, and was buried in the chapel there, on the south side of the communion table, near the body of his son Henry, with an inscription on a black marble stone. The university of Oxford paid him the greatest honours, by having a public speech and verses made in his praise, which were published soon after in 4to, under the title of “Ultima Linea Savilii,” and a sumptuous honorary monument was erected to his memory on the south wall, at the upper end of the choir of Merton- college chapel. Sir Henry Savile, by universal consent, ranks among the most learned men of his time, and the most liberal patrons of learning; and with great justice the highest encomiums are bestowed on him by all the learned of his time: by Isaac Casaubon, Mercerus, Meibomius, Joseph Scaliger, and especially the learned bishop Montagu; who, in his “Diatribes” upon Selden’s “History of Tithes,” styles him “that magazine of learning, whose memory shall be honourable amongst not only the learned, but the righteous for ever.”

, or John the son of Serapion, an Arabian physician, lived between the time of Mesne and Rhazes, and was probably the first writer on physic in the Arabic language. Haly Abbas, when giving an account of the works of his countrymen, describes the writings of Ser.ipion, as containing only an account of the cure of diseases, without any precepts concerning the preservation of health, or relating to surgery; and he makes many critical observations, which, Dr. Freind observes, are sufficient proofs of the genuine existence of the works ascribed to Serapion, from their truth and correctness. Rhazes also quotes them frequently in his “Continent.” Serapion must have lived towards the middle of the ninth century, and not in the reign of Leo Isaurus, about the year 730, as some have stated. One circumstance remarkable in Serapion, Dr. Freind observes, is, that he often transcribes the writings of Alexander Trailian, an author with whom few of the other Arabians appear to be much acquainted. This work of Serapion has been published, in translations, by Gerard of Cremona, under the title of “Practica, Dicta Breviarum;” and by Torinus, under that of “Therapeutica Methodus.” There is another Serapion, whom Sprengel calls the younger, and places 180 years later than the former, and who was probably the author of a work on the materia medica, entitled “De Medicamentis tarn simplicibus, quam compositis.” This work hears intrinsic evidence of being produced at a much later period, since authors are quoted who lived much posterior to Rhazes.

Mr. Sharp wrote, besides the works already mentioned 1. “Remarks on several very important Prophecies in five Parts. I. Remarks on the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 16th Verses in the seventh Chapter of Isaiah; in answer to Dr. Williams’s Critical Dissertation on the same subject; II. A Dissertation on the nature and style of Prophetical Writings, intended to illustrate the foregoing Remarks III. A Dissertation on Isaiah vii. 8 IV. On Gen. xlix. 10; V. Answer to some of the principal Arguments used by Dr. Williams in Defence of his Critical Dissertation,” 1768, 8vo. 2. “A Representation of the injustice and dangerous tendency of tolerating Slavery, &c.” with some other tracts in support of his opinions. 3. “Remarks on the Encroachments on the Riyer Thames, near Durham Yard,” 1771, 8vo. 4. “Remarks on the Opinions of some of the most celebrated writers on Crown Law, respecting the due distinction between Manslaughter and Murder; being an attempt to shew tiiat the plea of sudden anger cannot remove the imputation and guilt of murder, when a mortal wound is wilfully given with a weapon: that the indulgence allowed by the courts to voluntary manslaughter in rencounters, and in sudden affrays and duels, is indiscriminate, and without foundation in law: and that impunity in such cases of voluntary manslaughter is one of the principal causes of the continuance and present increase of the base and disgraceful practice of duelling. To which are added, some thoughts on the particular case of the gentlemen of the army, when involved in such disagreeable private differences. With a prefatory address to the reader, concerning the depravity and folly of modern men of honour, falsely so called; including a short account of the principles and designs of the work,” 1773, 8vo. 5. “Remarks on the Uses of the Definitive Article in the Greek of the New Testament; containing many new proofs of the Divinity of Christ, from passages which are wrongly translated in the common English Version. To which is added a plain matter-of-fact argument for the Divinitv of Christ, by the Editor,” Durhiin, '798, 8vo. The first twenty pages of this important, critical, and theological work, appeared in t797, in the second fasciculus of the “Museum Oxoniense,” published by Dr. Burgess, the present very excellent bishop of St. David’s. A Supplement to the Remarks was, at the same time, promised in the third fasciculus of the Museum. “But,” says Dr. Burgess, “as many learned friends concurred with the editor in thinking that the Remarks contain a very valuable accession to the evidences of Christ’s divinity, he was unwilling to detain the Supplement, which exemplifies the rules of the Remarks, any longer from the public; and has, therefore, prevailed on Mr. Sharp to permit him to publish it with the Remarks. He earnestly recommends them both to Mr. Wakeneiu’s must deliberate consideration. To Mr. Sharp’s Remarks and Supplement he has subjoined a plain historical proof of the divinity or Cnrist, iounded on Chnst’s own testimony of himself, attested and, interpreted by his living witnesses and enemies, the Jews; on the evidence of his trial and crucifixion; and on the most explicit declarations of the apostles after the resurrection of Christ. What appeared to him on a former occasion (in a sermon on the divinity of Christ, 1792, second edition), to be a substantial and unanswerable argument, he has, in this little exercise on the subject, endeavoured to render an easy and popular proof of our Saviour’s divinity. It was printed separately for the use of the unlearned part of his parishioners; and is subjoined to this treatise for the convenience of other unlearned readers, and such as have not much considered the subject.” A second edition of the “Remarks” was published in 1804, with the following letter to Mr. Sharp prefixed: “Dear sir, I have great pleasure in presenting you with a new edition of your valuable tract. That you have very happily and decisively applied your rule of construction to the correction of the common English version of the New Testament, and to the perfect establishment of the great doctrine in question, the divinity of Christ, no impartial reader, I think, can doubt, who is at all acquainted with the original language of the New Testament. I say decisively applied, because I suppose, in all remote and written testimony, the weight of evidence must ultimately depend on the grammatical analogy of the language in which it is recorded. I call the rule yours; for, though it was acknowledged and applied by Bege and others to some of the texts alluded to by you, yet never so prominently, because singly, or so effectually, as in your remarks, In the addition to the former edition, I wished to excite the attention of a learned and declared enemy to the doctrine of our Saviour’s divinity; but he is no more and J do not know that he even expressed, or has left behind him, any opinion on the subject, or that any other Socinian has undertaken to canvass the principles of your Remarks. The public has, however, lately seen an ample and learned confirmation of your rule, drawn from a very minute, laborious, and candid examination of the Greek and Latin fathers, in ‘Six Letters addressed to Granville Sharp, Esq. respecting his Remarks on the Uses of the Definitive Article in the Greek Text of the New Testament. London, 1802.’ I have taken some pains to improve the plain argument for Christ’s divinity, which I before subjoined to your Remarks. In this edition I have prefixed to it a table of evidences by Dr. Whitby, which I hope the younger part of your readers will find useful to them in pursuing the different branches of this most important subject; and you, J think, will not disapprove, because it is conducive to the principal purpose of your tract.” Bishop Burgess afterwards adverted, in a note on his primary charge, to a weak attack on Mr. Granville Sharp, in a publication entiled “Six more Letters, &c. by Gregory Blunt, esq.” 1803. Of this Dr. Burgess says with great truth, “These letters are very well calculated to mislead the unlearned reader, by abstract questions, gratuitous assertions, and hypothetical examples, but communicate nothing on the score of authority, which bears any comparison with the unanimous consent of the Greek fathers; and nothing at all which has any pretence to grammatical observation.” In the latter part of 1812, Mr. Sharp demonstrated that his faculties retained their full vigour, by an elaborate illustration of the LXVIIIth Psalm, relative to the Hill of Bashan, and the calling together of the Jews.

, an eminent naturalist, the younger of two sons of the rev. Timothy Shaw, was born Dec. 10, 1751, at Bienon in Buckinghamshire, of which place his father was vicar. His propensity for the studies which rendered him distinguished, discovered itself at the early age of four years; when, entering into no such amusements as those with which children are generally delighted, he entertained himself with books, or wandered by the sides of ditches, catching insects, and taking them home with him, where he would spend all his leisure time in watching their motions and examining: their structure. He was educated entirely by his father; and as the precocity of his intellect gave him an aptitude for acquiring whatever it was wished that he should acquire, he was, to the credit of the preceptor as well as the pupil, abundantly qualified at the age of little more than thirteen, to enter upon a course of academical studies. In 1765 he was entered at Magdalen -hall, Oxford, where he was no less distinguished by the regularity of his conduct than by an uncommonly diligent application to his studies. On May 24, 1769, he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts; and on May ^6, 1772, to that of master of arts. That he might assist his father in his clerical duties, he took orders, and was ordained deacon in 1774, at Buckden, by Green, bishop of Lincoln, and performed regularly the duty at Stoke and Buckland, two chapels, each three miles apart from Bierton, the mother-church. As his predilection for natural science never forsook him, and feeling a stronger inclination for studies more connected with it than parochial duties and theological acquirements, he laid aside the clerical habit, and went to Edinburgh, where he engaged in a course of reading, and qualified himself for a profession more congenial with his favourite pursuit. Having directed his views to medicine, he attended for three years the lectures of Black and Cullen, and other eminent professors, and then returned to Oxford, where he obtained an appointment by which he acquired much celebrity, viz. deputy botanical lecturer. To this office he was appointed by Dr. Sibthorp, the botanical professor, who was then upon the eve of setting out upon his travels in Greece, &c. Upon the death of Dr. Sibthorp, Dr. Shaw was a candidate for the vacant chair of the professor of botany; and so high did the votes of the members of the university run in his favour, that he would have succeeded in his wishes, had it not been discovered that the statute relating to that professorship enacted that no person in orders should be deemed eligible. On October 17, 1787, he was admitted to the degrees of bachelor and doctor of medicine. It appears from the catalogue of of Oxford graduates that when he took these degrees he had removed his name from Magdalen-hall to Magdalencollege. In this year Dr. Shaw removed to London, where he practised as a physician. In 1788 some gentlemen, distinguished for their attachment to the study of, and eminent for their acquirements in natural history, established a society for the advancement of this science, under the name of the Linmean Society. Dr. (now sir James) Smith was elevated to the chair of president of this society, and Dr. Shaw was appointed one of the vice-presidents. Among the Linnsean transactions appear the following articles, contributed by Dr. Shaw: “Description of the Stylephorus cordatus, a new fish.” “Description of the Cancer stagnalis of Linnaeus.” “Remarks on Scolopendra electrica, and Scolopendra subterranea.” “A Note to Mr. Kirby’s Description of the new species of Hirudo.” “Account of a minute Ichneumon.” “Description of a species of Mycteria,” “Description of the Mus Bursarius, and Tubularia magnifica.”

, a strenuous champion for repub-­lican government, who set up Marcus Brutus for his pattern, and died like him in the cause of liberty, was second son of Robert, earl of Leicester, by Dorothy, eldest daughter of Henry Percy, earl of Northumberland; and was born about 1617, or as some say, 1622. Of his education, and how he spent the younger part of his life, we know little. It appears that his father, when he went as ambassador to Denmark in 1632, took him with him, when a mere boy, and again in 1636, when he went as ambassador to France. During the rebellion he adhered to the interest of the parliament, in whose army he was a colonel; and was nominated one of the king’s judges, and as some say, sat on the bench, but was not present when sentence was passed, nor: did he sign the warrant for his execution. His admirers, however, assure us that he was far from disapproving of that atrocious act. He was in truth such a zealous republican, that he became a violent enemy to Cromwell, after “he had made himself protector. In June 1659 he was appointed, by the council of state, to go with sir Robert Houeywood, and Bulstrode Whitelocke, esq. commissioners to the Sound, to mediate a peace between the kings of Sweden and Denmark: but Whitelocke observes, that himself was unwilling to undertake that service,” especially,“says he,” to be joined with those that would expect precedency of me, who had been formerly ambassador extraordinary to Sweden alone; and I knew well the over-ruling temper and height of colonel Sidney. I therefore endeavoured to excuse myself, by reason of my old age and infirmities; but the council pressed it upon me:" which at last he evaded. While Sidney was at the court of Denmark, M. Terlon, the French ambassador there, had the 1 confidence to tear out of the university Album this verse; which the colonel, when it was presented to him, had written in it

Upon this occasion he repaired to Nuneaton, a town at a small distance from Bosworth, where he went to lodge at the house of a taylor’s widow, of the name of Swinfield, who had been left with two children, a daughter and a son, by her husband, of whom the son, who was the younger, being but about two years older than Simpson, had become his intimate friend and companion. And here he continued some time, working at his trade, and improving his knowledge by reading such books as he could procure.

In the place of such judges as were inclined to lenity, he substituted others of a more austere disposition, and appointed commissaries to examine not only their conduct, but also that of other governors and judges for many years past; promising rewards to those who could convict them of corruption, or of having denied justice to any one at the instance or request of men in power. All the nobility, and persons of the highest quality, were strictly forbidden, on pain of displeasure, to ask the judges any thing in behalf of their nearest friends or dependants; at the same time the judges were to be fined in case they listened to any solicitation. He further commanded every body, “on pain of death, not to terrify witnesses by threats, or tempt them by hopes or promises. He ordered the syndics and mayors of every town and signiory, as well those that were actually in office, as those who had been for the last ten years, to send him a list of all the vagrants, common debauchees, loose and disorderly people in their districts, threatening them with the strappado and imprisonment, if they omitted or concealed any one.” In consequence of this ordinance, the syndic of Albano, leaving his nephew, who was an incorrigible libertine, out of the list, underwent the strappado in the public market-place, though the Spanish ambassador interceded strongly for him. He par ticularly directed the legates and governors of the ecclesiastical state to be expeditious in carrying on all criminal processes; declaring, “he had rather have the gibbets and gallies full, than the prisons.” He aUo intended to have shortened all other proceedings in law. It had been usual, and was pleasing to the people, as often as his holiness passed by, to cry out, “Long live the pope:” but Sixtus, having a mind to go often unexpectedly to the tribunals of justice, convents, and other public places, forbade this custom in regard to himself; and punished two persons who were ignorant of this edict, with imprisonment, for crying out, “Long live pope Sixtus.” Adultery he punished with death: nor was he less severe to those who voluntarily permitted a prostitution of their wives; a custom at that time very common in Rome. The female sex, especially the younger part, attracted, in a very particular manner, the attention of Sixtus; not only the debauching of any of them, whether by force or artifice, but even the attempting of it, or offering the least offence against modesty, was very severely punished. For the more effectual prevention, as well of private assassinations, as public quarrels, he forbade all persons, on pain of death, to draw a sword, or to carry arms specified in the edict; nor would he be prevailed on to spare any who transgressed this order: even to threaten another with an intended injury was sufficient to entitle the menacer to a whipping and the gallies; especially if the nature of their profession furnished the means of carrying their threats into execution. The banditti, who were numerous when Sixtus was advanced to the papacy, were rendered still more so by the junction of many loose and disorderly people; who, conscious of their demerits, and terrified at the severities they daily saw practised, had fled from justice. Their insolence increased with their numbers; insomuch, that no one could live in the ecclesiastical state with saiety to his person or fortune, nor could strangers travel without imminent danger of being robbed or murdered. The public security more especially required the extirpation of these plunderers, which, by the prudence, vigilance, and resolution of this pope, was effectually performed in less than six months. He obliged the nobility of Rome, and the country round it, to an exact payment of their debts. He abolished all protections and other immunities, in the houses of ambassadors, cardinals, nobles, or prelates. To this purpose, he sent for all the ambassadors, and ordered them to acquaint their respective masters, “that he was determined nobody should reign in Rome but himself; that there should be no privilege or immunity of any kind there, but what belonged to the pope; nor any sanctuary or asylum but the churches, anil that only at such times, and upon such occasions, as he should think proper.”

The younger years of sir Hans Sloane were marked by a strong attachment to the works of nature, in the contemplation of which he passed his leisure hours, until his studies of every kind were, in his sixteenth year, interrupted by a spitting of blood, which confined him to his room for three years. When, by strict regimen and abstinence, he had recovered, he studied the preliminary branches of physic in London, particularly chemistry, under Mr. Strafforth, an excellent chemist, who had been pupil to the celebrated Stahl. He also studied his favourite science of botany at Chelsea garden, which was then but just established, and, young as he was, contracted during that time an acquaintance with Boyie and Ray.

Having thus resigned all his public employments, he left London in May 1741, and retired to his house at Chelsea, the manor of which he had purchased in 1712, and to which he removed his museum. Here he received, as in London, the visits of persons of rank, of all learned foreigners, of the royal family, who sometimes did him. that honour; and never refused admittance or advice to any, whether rich or poor, who came to consult him concerning their health. Hitherto his great temperance had preserved him from experiencing the infirmities of old age, but in his ninetieth year, he complained of frequent "pains, and was sensible of an universal decay, the progress of which he bore with complacency, and after an illness of only three days, expired Jan. 11, 1752. He was interred on the 18th at Chelsea, in the same vault with his lady, who died in 1724. She was the daughter of alderman Langley of London, and married to Dr. Sloane in 1695. Of this marriage two daughters only survived him, the eldest of whom was married to George Stanley, esq. of Hampshire, and the younger to lord Cadogan.

, one of the seven wise men of Greece, as they are called, was born atS;t!amis, of Athenian parents, who were descended from Codrus, in the sixth century B. C. His father leaving little patrimony, he had recourse to merchandise for his subsistence. He hat!, however, a greater thirst after knowledge and fame, than after riches, and made his mercantile voyages subservient to the increase of his intellectual treasures. He very early cultivated the art of poetry, and applied himself to the study of moral and civil wisdom. When the Athenians, tired out with a long and troublesome war. with the Megarensians, for the recovery of the isle of Salamis, prohibited any one, under pain of death, to propose the renewal of their claim to that island, Solon, thinking the prohibition dishonourable to the state, and finding many of the younger citizens desirous to revive the war, feigned himself mad, and took care to have the report of his insanity spread through the city. In the mean time, he composed an elegy, adapted to the state of public affairs, which he committed to memory. Every tiling being thus prepared, he sallied forth into the market place, with the kind of cap on his head which was commonly worn by sick persons, and, ascending the herald’s stand, he delivered, to a numerous crowd, his lamentation for the desertion of Salamis. The verses were heard with general applause; and Pisistratus seconded his advice, and urged the people to renew the war. The decree was immediately repealed, and the conduct of the war being committed to Solon and Pisistratus, they defeated the Megarensians, and recovered Salamis. He afterwards acquired additional fame by a successful alliance which he formed among the states, in defence of the temple at Delphos, against the Cirrhoeans.

a learned gentleman, of Cussington, Leicestershire, after having completed his academical education at Peter- house, Cambridge, was admitted of the Inner Temple, July 2, 1647, and called to the bar June 12, 1654. In 1656, he married Mary the youngest daughter of John Onebye, esq. of Hinckley, and steward of the records at Leicester, and succeeded his father-in-law in that office in 1672. In 1674, when the court espoused the cause of popery, and the presumptive heir to the crown openly professed himself a Catholic, Mr. Staveley displayed the enormous exactions of the court of Rome, by publishing in 1674, “The Romish Horseleech.” This work was reprinted in 1769. Some years before his death, which happened in 1683, he retired to Belgrave near Leicester, and passing the latter part of life in the study of English history, acquired a melancholy habit, but was esteemed a diligent, judicious, and faithful antiquary. His “History of Churches in England: wherein is shown, the time, means, and manner of founding, building, and endowing of Churches, both, cathedral and rural, with their furniture and appendages,” was first published in 1712, and reprinted 1773. It is a work of considerable research and learning, the result of having carefully examined many books and records; and contains a complete account of the sacred furniture of churches from the earliest origin. In one respect, however, he has too hastily adopted the notion that the Saxons had no stone buildings among them, while he is forced to acknowledge that Bede’s Candida casa was one of them. Besides this work, Mr. Staveley left a curious historical pedigree of his own family, drawn up in 1682, the year before he died, which is preserved at large in the work which furnishes this article; and also some valuable collections towards the “History and Antiquities of Leicester,” to which he had more particularly applied his researches. These papers, which Dr. Farmer, the late learned master of Emanuei-college, Cambridge, intended once to publish, were, by that gentleman’s permission, put into the hands of Mr. Nichols, who gave them to the world in the “Bibliotheca Topographia Britannica,” and since in his more elaborate “History of Leicestershire.” The younger Mr. S. Carte (an able antiquary, and an eminent solicitor), who had a copy of Mr. Staveley’s papers, says of them, in a ms letter to Dr. Ducarel, March 7, 1751: “His account of the earls of Leicester, and of the great abbey, appears to have been taken from Dugdale’s” Baronage,“and” Monasticon;“but as to his sentiments in respect to the borough, I differ with him in some instances. By the charter for erecting and establishing the court of records at Leicester, the election of the steward is granted to the mayor and court of aldermen, who likewise have thereby a similar power, in respect to a bailiff” for executing their writs. But afterwards, viz. Dec. 20, 7 Jac. I. the great earl of Huntingdon bavins: been a considerable benefactor to Leicester, the corporation came to a resolution of granting to him and his heirs a right of nominating alternately to the office of steward and bailiff, and executed a bond under their common seal, in the penalty of one thousand pounds, for enforcing the execution of their grant. And as John Major, esq. was elected by the court of aldermen to succeed Mr. Staveley, in December, 1684, I infer that Staveley was nominated by the earl of Huntingdon, and confirmed by the aldermen, in pursuance of the grant above-mentioned.

, the Young, son of the preceding, was born about 1589, and, by studying the works of his father from his infancy, and also receiving excellent directions from him, he adopted the same manner and style; and, by some very competent judges, was thought to have often equalled, if not surpassed, his father. Vaudyck, who admired his works, introduced him. to the court of ki'ig Charle^ I. where he met with such a degree of encouragement as was due to his extraordinary talents, and found employment in England for several years. His usual subjects were the insides of churches and grand edifices; but at last he quitted the dark manner, which he had originally acquired by imitating the manner of his father. He sometimes painted the back grounds of Vandyck’s portraits, as often as they required ornamental architecture; and it is the portrait of the younger Stenwyck which was painted by Vandyck, and perpetuated by his hand among the distinguished artists of his time. He died at London, but when is not known; and his widow, who practised perspective painting during the life of her husband, retired after his death to Amsterdam, where she followed that profession, and painted in the style of her husband and his father with great credit; and as her works were generally esteemed, she was enabled to live in affluence and honour.

Such was the melancholy end of one of the most learned men of his time, and one of the greatest benefactors to literature. The unfortunate circumstances of his life prevented him from bestowing the same attention which his father had to the typographical beauty of the works which issued from his press; but he published a great many which do not yield to Robert’s in point of correctness. To all his editions he prefixed learned prefaces, illustrated them by short and judicious notes, and they have generally formed the basis of all future reprints. Some modern critics, of Germany chiefly, have attacked his fidelity as an editor, and accused him of having introduced readings not justified by the authority of manuscripts; but he has been very ably defended against this charge by Wyttembach, in the preface to his edition of Plutarch’s morals. Henry had great facility in writing Latin poetry, which he often composed almost extempore, while walking, riding, or conversing with his friends. He had a correspondence with all the learned of Europe; but had seme little alloy in his character. He was rather impatient of contradiction, and too frequently indulged his epigrammatic turn at the expence of those who could not accede to his opinions. Among the ancient authors which he published, with notes, we may mention the “Poet. Gracci, principes heroici carminis,” 1566, fol. a magnificent collection, which is every day rising in price; “Pindari et casterorum octo Grfficorum carmina,” 1560, 1566, 1586, 24mo: to these we may add Maximus Tyrius, Diodorus, Xenophon, Thucydides, Hefodotus, Sophocles, ^schylus, Diogenes Laertius, Plutarch, Apollonius Rhotlius, Callimachus, Plato, Herodian, and Appian; Horace, Virgil, the younger Pliny, Aulus Gellius, Macrobius, and a collection of the Latin historians; but his taste most inclined to Greek literature, and from that language he has furnished us with Latin translations of Anacreon, Theocritus, Bion and Moschus, Pindar, Sextus Empiricus; Æschylus, Sophocles, &c. &e. and all his translations, extensive as they are, are allowed to be excellent.

, an ancient historian and biographer, was born at Rome about the beginning of the reign of Vespasian, perhaps in the year 70, as may be collected from his own words in the life of Nero. His father Suetonius Lenis was tribune of a legion, in the service of the emperor Otho, against Vitellius. He passed his first years probably at Romej and when grown up, applied himself to the bar. He appears to have very early acquired the friendship of the younger Pliny, who procured for him the office of tribune and aiteru lkl.N, upon his resignation, transferred it to his kinsman, at Sdetonius’s request. He ohtained also In* him th “Jus trimn liberon.m;” a favour seldom granted, and which Pliny could not have obtained, if, besides hU great interest at court, he had not very earnestly solicited the emperor Trajan, in a letter written from Bnhynia, of which he was at that time governor. In this letter he describes Suetonius as a man of gr<at integrity, honour, a. d learning, whose manners and studies were the same with his own; and he adds, “the better I have known him, the more I have loved him. He has been rather unhappy in his marriage; and the privileges of those who have three children are upon several accounts necessary. He begs through me, therefore, that your bounty will supply what his ill fortune has denied him. I know, sir, the high value of the favour I ask but I am asking a sovereign whose indulgence to all my wishes I have long experienced. How desirous I am to obtain it, you will easily conclude, from my applying to you at this distance; which I should not have done, if it had been a mutter of indifference to me.” Suetonius advanced himself to be afterwards secretary to the emperor Adrian; but he lost that place, for not paying a due respect to the empress. Spartian, speaking of him and others involved in the same blame, uses the words “quod apud Sabinam uxorem, injussu ejus, familiarius se tune egerant, quam reverentia domus aulicae postulabat.” On the nature of this disrespect, or “too great familiarity,” critics are not agreed. Their offence probably rose only from the capricious temper of the emperor, who, we are told, treated her with great contempt himself for some reason, and permitted others also to do so under certain limitations; which limitations Suetonius and others might ignorantly transgress.

, the co-founder of Brasen-nose college, Oxford, descended from the ancient family of the Suttons of Sutton near Macciestield in the county palatine of Chester, was the younger son of sir William Sutton, knight. Of the time or place of his birth, we have no cer tain account, nor whether he was educated in the university to which he became so bountiful a benefactor. He practised as a barrister of the Inner Temple, and probably with success. In 1490 he purchased some estates in Leicestershire, and afterwards increased his landed property in different counties. In 1498, if not earlier, he was a member of Henry Vllth’s privy council, and attended the court for many years after. In 1505, he was one of the governors of the Inner Temple, and was in other years chosen to this annual office.

The friendship that subsisted between Tacitus and the younger Pliny, and which is well known, was founded on the consonance of their studies and their virtues. When Pliny says that a good and virtuous prince can never be sincerely loved, unless we shew our detestation of the tyrants that preceded him, we may be sure that Tacitus was of the same opinion. They were both convinced that a striking picture of former tyranny ought to be placed in contrast to the felicity of the times that succeeded. Pliny acted up to his own idea in the panegyric of Trajan, where we find a vein of satire on Domitian running through the whole piece. It appears in his letters, that he had some thoughts of writing history on the same principle, but had not resolution to undertake that arduous task. Tacitus had more vigour of mind: he thought more intensely, and with deeper penetration, than his friend. We find that he had formed, at an early period, the plan of his history, and resolved to execute it, in order to shew the horrors of slavery, and the debasement of the Roman people through the whole of Domitian’s reign. From the year of Rome 853, when along with Pliny, he pleaded in the famous cause of Priscus, the proconsul of Africa, and in behalf of those who had been oppressed by him, Tacitus appears to have dedicated himself altogether to his history. At what time it was published is uncertain, but it was in some period of the reign of Trajan, who died in the year of Rome 870, A. D. 117. In this work he began from the accession of Galba, and ended with the death of Domitian, i. e. from the year of Rome 82-2 to 849, a period of twenty-seven years. Vossius says that the whole work consisted of no less than thirty books; but, to the great loss of the literary world, we have only four books, and the beginning of the fifth. In what remains, we have little after the accession of Vespasian. The reign of Titus is totally lost, and Domitian has escaped the vengeance of the historian’s pen.

, a very eminent statesman and writer, was the son of sir William Temple, of Sheen, in Surrey, master of the rolls and privy-counsellor in Ireland, 1 in the reign of Charles II. by a sister of the learned Dr.' Henry Hammond. His grandfather, sir William Temple, the founder of the family, was the younger son of the Temples, of Temple-hall, in Leicestershire. He was fellow of King’s college, in Cambridge, afterwards master of the free-school at Lincoln, then secretary successively to sir Philip Sidney, to William Davison, esq. one of queen Elizabeth’s secretaries, and to the celebrated earl of Essex, whom he served while he was lord-deputy of Ireland. In 1609, upon the importunate solicitation of Dr. James Usher, he accepted the provostship of Trinity college, in Dublin; after which he was knighted, and made one of the masters in chancery of Ireland. He died about 1626, aged sevetity-two, after having given proof of his abilities and learning, by several publications in Latin.

, bishop of Rochester, the eldest of three sons of the rev. John Tnomas, many years vicar of Brampton in Cumberland, was born at Carlisle Oct. 14, 1712. Many of his ancestors, both on the paternal and maternal side, were remarkable for their longevity; so that he might be considered as “born with somewhat like an hereditary claim to length of days.” Being designed for the church, at a proper age he was placed in the grammar-school at Carlisle, whence he was sent to Oxford, in 1730, and, on the 23d of November, was admitted a commoner of Queen’s-college. Soon after his admission he had a clerkship given him by Dr. Smith, then provost. Having discharged this office, and completed his terms, he put on a civilian’s gown, and, leaving Oxford, became an assistant at the classical academy in Soho-square. In this situation he acquitted himself so well, as to be recommended to be private tutor to the younger son of sir William Clayton, bart. a charge which led to his future elevation. How long he remained in it, is not precisely known, but probably till he had completed his pupil’s education. His conduct, however, was so well approved, that shortly after, with the consent of sir William Clayton, the sister of his pupil, on the death of her first husband, sir Charles Blackwell, of Sprowston-hall, Norfolk, became his wife. Mr. Thomas lived in habits of the closest friendship with his brother-in-law, until about 1784, when that gentleman met a premature death, occasioned by a fall from his horse.

Mr. Thoresby’s widow survived him near fifteen years. By her he had ten children, of whom three only, a daughter and two sons survived him. The eldest son, Ralph, was of Queen’s college, Cambridge, vicar of Rickmansworth in Hertfordshire, and rector of Stoke Newington in Middlesex, where he died in 1763. The younger, Richard, was of Catherine-hall, and rector of St. Catherine Colman, London, and died about 1774.

The Townley Marbles were now become a national object; the trustees of the British Museum, therefore, obtained from Parliament a grant of 20,000l. probably not halt the original cost; and for this sum they were purchased from the family. In the midst of an expensive war, and under the administration of one whose great mind rarely condescended to patronize the fine arts, this may be considered as a remarkable testimony to their value. They were, on the whole, undoubtedly the most select assemblage of Greek and Roman sculpture ever brought into England. That of the earl of Arundel, the first which travelled so far beyond the Alps, though much more numerous, appears from the remnants of it which are preserved, to have been filled with subjects of very inferior merit. The same perhaps may be said of a few celebrated collections yet remaining in some noble houses. But in the Townley Museum there was not a single statue, bust, or basso relievo, which did not rise far above mediocrity; and with the exception of seven or eight subjects beyond the hope or possibility of private attainment, it certainly contained the finest specimens of ancient art yet remaining in the world. Among these may be distinguished the farfamed head of Homer, the apotheosis of Marcus Aurelius, the younger Verus, the Astragalizontes, a small but exquisitely beautiful group, the Isis, the female Bacchus, the ivy-crowned Muse, and the small bronze of Hercules Alastor, found at Biblus in Syria.

Castle-Howard Vanbrugh built for Charles, earl of Carlisle, deputy to the earl marshal, who gave him the appointment of Clarenceux, king-at-arms, in 1704. The appointment, however, was remonstrated against by the superseded heralds, and the college at large felt the slight put upon them by having a total stranger made king-at-­arms, and who was likewise ignorant of the profession of heraldry and genealogy. Swift’s pun was, that he might now build houses He was knighted at Greenwich, September 9, 1714, appointed comptroller of the royal works January 6, 1714-5, and surveyor of the works at Greenwich hospital, August 17, 1716. It was designed to have given him the place of garter but finding that the younger Anstis had a reversionary grant, he resigned his tabard to Knox Ward, esq. February 9, 1725-6, and died March 26 following, at Whitehall. His country residence was Vanbrugh-Fields, at Greenwich,- where he built two seats, one called the Bastile, standing on Maize, or Maze-Hill, on the east side of the park. Lady Vanbrugh, his relict, sold it to lord Trelawny, who made it his residence: the name was taken from the French prison of which it was a model. It is said, but no time is mentioned, that on a visit to France, his curiosity and natural taste exciting him to take a survey of the fortifications in that kingdom, he was taken notice of by an engineer, secured by authority, and carried to the Bustile, where his confinement was so much softened by humanity, that he amused himself by drawing rude draughts of some comedies. This circumstance raised such curiosity at Paris, that he was visited by several of the noblesse, and by their means procured his liberty before any solicitation for it came from England. He had another built in the same style at Blackheath, called the Mincepye-house, now or lately inhabited by a descendant. Lady Vanbrugh, his relict, died April 26, 1776, aged ninety, and their only son, an ensign of the second regiment of the foot-guards, died of the wounds he received in a battle fought near Tournay, in 1745.

It has been remarked that we have very few dates in the biography of Vanini. We can only therefore say generally that, after he had commenced his travels, he went through part of Germany and the Low Countries, to Geneva, and thence to Lyons; whence, having presumed to vent his irreligious notions, under the pretext of teaching philosophy, he was obliged to fly. He passed over into England, and in 1614 was at London, where he was imprisoned for nine and forty days, “well prepared,” says he, with that air of devotion which runs through all his writings, “to receive the crown of martyrdom, which he longed for with all the ardour imaginable.” Being set at liberty, he repassed the sea, and took the road to Italy. He first stopped at Genoa, and undertook to teach youth; but, it being discovered that he had infused pernicious notions into their minds, he was forced to abandon that city. He then returned to Lyons, where he endeavoured to gain the favour of the ecclesiastics by a pretended confutation of Cardan and other atheistical writers, in which he artfully contrived, by the weakness of his arguments, to give his opponents the advantage. This work was printed at Lyons, in 1615, 8vo, under the title of “Amphitheatrum eeternae Providentiae Divino-Magicum, Christiano-Physicum, necnon Astrologo-Catholicum, adversus veteres Philosophos Atheos, Epicureos, Peripateticos, & Stoicos. Autore Julio Ceesare Vanino, Philosopho, Theologo, ac Juris utriusque Doctore;” dedicated to the count de Castro, the protector of his family and his benefactor; and it so far imposed orVtbe licensers of books, as to receive their approbation. But Vanini being apprehensive that his artifice might be detected, went again into Italy; where being accused of reriving and propagating his former impieties, he returned to France, and became a monk in the convent of Guienne, a/nd from this he is said to have been banished for immorality. He then retired to Paris, where he endeavoured to introduce himself to Robert Ubaldini, the pope’s nuncio; and, in order to make his court to him and the clergy in general, undertook to write an apology for the council of Trent. He procured likewise several friends, and had access to the mareschal de Bassompierre, who made him his chaplain, and gave him a pension of two hundred crowns. Upon this account, he dedicated to him his “Dialogues,” which were printed at Paris in 1616, 8vo, with this title, “Julii Caesaris Vanini, Neapolitani, Theologi, Philosophi, & Juris utriusque Doctoris, de admirandis Naturae Reginae Deaeque Mortalium arcanis, libri quatuor.” This work likewise was printed with the king’s privilege, and the approbation of three learned doctors, either from carelessness or ignorance. In his “Amphitheatrum” he had taken some pains to disguise his irreligion; but in these “Dialogues,” his sentiments are too obvious, and notwithstanding their having escaped the censors of the press, the faculty of the Sorbonne soon discovered their tendency, and condemned them to the flames. Finding himself now become generally obnoxious, and in consequence reduced to poverty, he is said to have written to the pope, that, “If he had not a good benefice soon bestowed upon him, he would in three months’ time overturn the whole Christian religion;” but although it is not impossible that Vanini might have written such a letter for the amusement of his friends, it is scarcely credible that he should have sent it to Rome. Whatevermay be in this, it is certain that he quitted Paris in 1617, and returned to Toulouse; where he soon infused his impious notions into the minds of his scholars, in the course of his lectures on physic, philosophy, and divinity. This being discovered, he was prosecuted, and condemned to be burnt to death, which sentence was executed Feb. 19, 1619. Gramond, president of the parliament of Toulouse, gives us the following account of his death. “About the same time, Feb. 1619, by order of the parliament of Toulouse, was condemned to death Lucilio Vanini, who was esteemed an arch-heretic with many persons, but whom I always looked upon as an atheist. This wretch pretended to be a physician, but in reality was no other than a seducer of youth. He laughed at every thing sacred: he abominated the incarnation of our Saviour, and denied the being of a God, ascribing all things to chance. He adored nature, as the cause of all beings: this was his principal error, whence all the rest were derived; and he had the boldness to teach it with great obstinacy at Toulouse. He gained many followers among the younger sort, whose foible it is to be taken with any thing that appears extraordinary and daring. Being cast into prison, he pretended at first to be a catholic; and by that means deferred his punishment. He was even just going to be set at liberty, for want of sufficient proofs against him, when Franconi, a man of birth and probity, deposed, that Vanini had often, in his presence, denied the existence of God, and scoffed at the mysteries of the Christian religion. Vanini, being brought before the senate, and asked what his thoughts were concerning the existence of a Gpd answered, that < he adored with the church a God in three persons,‘ and that * Nature evidently demonstrated the being of a deity:’ and, seeing by chance a straw on the ground, he took it up, and stretching it forth, said to the judges, ‘ This straw obliges me to confess that there is a God;’ and he proved afterwards very amply, that God was the author and creator of all things, nature being incapable of creating any thing. But all this he said through vanity or fear, rather than an inward conviction; and, as the proofs against him were convincing, he was by sentence of parliament condemned to die, after they had spent six months in preparing things for a hearing. I saw him in the dung-cart, continues Gramond, when he was carried to execution, making sport with a friar, who was allowed him in order to reclaim him from his obstinacy. Vanini refused the assistance of the friar, and insulted even our Saviour in these words, ‘ He sweated with weakness and fear in going to suffer death, and I die undaunted.* This profligate wretch had no reason to say that he died undaunted: I saw him entirely dejected, and making a very ill use of that philosophy of which he so much boasted. At the time when he was going to be executed he had a horrible and wild aspect; his mind was uneasy, and he discovered in all his expressions the utmost anxiety; though from time to time he cried out that he ’ died like a philosopher.' Before the fire was applied to the wood-pile, he was ordered to put out his tongue, that it might be cut off; which he refused to do; nor could the executioner take hold of it but with pincers. There never was heard a more dreadful shriek than he then gave; it was like the bellowing of an ox. His body was consumed in the flames, and his ashes thrown into the air. I saw him in prison, and at his execution; and likewise knew him before he was arrested. He had always abandoned himself to the gratification of his passions, and lived in a very irregular manner. When his goods were seized there was found a great toad alive in a large crystal bottle full of water. Whereupon he was accused of witchcraft; but he answered, that that animal being burned, was a sure antidote against all mortal and pestilential diseases. While he was in prison he pretended to be a catholic, and went often to the sacrament, but, when he found there were no hopes of escaping, he threw off the mask, and died as he had lived.”

Upon the accession of king Charles I. sir Horace Vere, as a reward for his services, was advanced to the peerage, by the title of lord Vere, baron of Tilbury; being the first peer created by that monarch. He died the 2d of May, 1635, and was buried in Westminster-abbey. He married a lady who was then the widow of Mr. John Hoby: she was the youngest daughter of sir John Tracy of Doddington, or Tuddington, in Gloucestershire. She died in 1671, at a great age. The parliament placed the younger children of Charles I. under the care of this lady, who was a person of great piety and worth, and in her punning epitaph, written by Dr. Simon Ford, is thus addressed,

, usually called the Younger, to distinguish him from the preceding, was born at Justinopolis, and of the same family. Where he was educated we are not told, but he soon became celebrated for his acquirements in canon-law and scholastic divinity; and these recommended him to the attention of the pope, Clement VII. who employed him as his nuncio at the memorable diet of Augsburgh in 1530, and entrusted him with a very ample commission. He was instructed to use every endeavour to prevent the holding of a national council in Germany, and to induce king Ferdinand, the emperor’s brother, to oppose any proposition of that kind. Vergerius executed this commission with great 2eal, and gave every opposition to the Lutherans, by shewing his partiality to Eckius, Faber, Cochlaeus, and other enemies to the reformation; he also made Eckius a canon of Ratisbonne, a piece of preferment which, as the pope’s legate, he could confer. Vergerius executed this commission with such ability, that he was thought the most proper person to succeed the superannuated bishop of Rhegio, as the pope’s ambassador to Germany. He accordingly was sent, with instructions, openly to represent his holiness’s ardent desire to convene a general council, but secretly to take every step to prevent that measure. On the death of Clement VII. and the accession of Paul III. the latter recalled Vergerius from Germany, in order to be exactly informed of the state of religion in that country; and, says Sleidan, he also consulted with the cardinals, as to the prevention of a national council, until they should, by private and unsuspected contrivances, be able to embroil the emperor afhd other princes in a war. As a part of this plan, Paul III. resolved at length to send Vergerius back to Germany to profer a general council, and in the mean time to learn what form the Protestants would insist upon as to the qualifications, votings, and disputations, of such a council; and his object in this was, to be able to impose such rules and terms as he was sure they would never accept; by which contrivance the odium of not holding a general council would fall upon them. Vergerius was also instructed to exasperate the princes of the empire against the king of England, Henry V1IL whose dominions the pope had in contemplation to bestow upon those who would conquer them: and he had also a secret article of instruction to tamper with Luther and Melancthon, in order to bring them over to the cause of Rome.

2. “DC virjx illustrious urhis Romoe.” This was often reprinted in the sixteenth century, un.ler the names of the younger Pliny, or Suetonius or Emilius Probus. It has also been attributed to Cornelius Nepos. The series of illustrious men begins with Phocas, and ends with Pompey.

Parthenope cecini Pascua, Kura, Duces." His bones were carried to Naples, according to his earnest request; and a monument was erected at a small distance from the city. He was of a swarthy complexion, tall, of a sickly constitution, afflicted with frequent head-aches and spitting of blood, very temperate, sober, and chaste, whatever may have been surmised to the contrary. That he wrote in his youth some indecent verses is not to he doubted, since the younger Pliny, who had done the same, justifies himself by his example; and, in his “Bucolics,” he relates very criminal passions; but it does not thence follow that he was tainted with them. On the contrary, it is delivered down to us as a certain truth, that the inhabitants of Naples gave him the name of Parthenias, on account of the purity of his words and manners. He was so very bashful, that he frequently ran into the shops, to prevent being gazed at in the streets; yet so honoured by the Roman people, that once, coming into the theatre, the whole audience rose, out of respect to him. He was of a thoughtful and melancholy temper, spoke little, loved retirement and contemplation. His fortune was not only easy, but affluent: he had a delightful villa in Sicily, and a fine house and well furnished library near Maecenas’s gardens on the Esquiline-hill at Rome. He revised his verses with prodigious severity, and used to compare himself to a she-bear, which licks her cubs into shape. He was so benevolent and inoffensive, that most of his contemporary poets, though they envied each other, agreed in loving and esteeming him. Among Caligula’s follies we may undoubtedly reckon his contempt and hatred of Virgil; who, he had the confidence to say, had neither wit nor learning, and whose writings and effigy he endeavoured to remove out of all libraries. The emperor Alexander Severus, on the contrary, called him the Plato of the poets, and placed his picture with that of Cicero in the temple in which he had placed Achilles and other great men. So did Silius Italicus the poet, when he kept Virgil’s birthday, as Pliny relates, with greater solemnity than his own; and so did our sir William Temple, who did “not wonder that the famous Dr. Harvey, when he was reading Virgil, should sometimes throw him down upon the table, and say, `He had a devil'.” With regard to the characteristical difference between Virgil and Homer, so much disputed, it may with truth be affirmed, that the former excelled all other poets in judgment, and the latter in invention; the former is the greater genius, the latter the most correct writer. “Methinks the two poets,” says Mr. Pope, “resemble the heroes they celebrate. Homer, boundless and irresistible as Achilles, bears all before him, and shines more and more, as the tumult increases Virgil, calmly daring, like Æneas, appears undisturbed in the midst of the action, disperses all about him, and conquers with tranquillity. Or, when we look on their machines, Homer seems like his own Jupiter in his terrors, shaking Olympus, scattering the lightnings, and firing the heavens: Virgil, like the same power in his benevolence, counselling with the gods, Jaying plans for empires, and regularly ordering his whole creation.”

, a celebrated warrior and patriot, was born, according to the account of his poetical biographer Henry, or Blind Harry, in 127G. He was the younger son of sir Malcolm Wallace of Ellerslie, near Paisley, in the shire of Renfrew, Scotland, and in his sixteenth year was sent to school at Dundee. In 1295, he was insulted by the son of Selby, an Englishman, constable of the port and castle of Dundee, and killed him; on which he fled, and appears to have lived a roving and irregular life, often engaged in skirmishes with the English troops which then bad invaded and kept Scotland under subjection. For his adventures, until he became the subject of history, we must refer to Henry. Most of them appear fictitious, or at least are totally unsupported by any other evidence. Wallace, however, is represented by the Scotch historians as being about this time the model of a perfect hero; superior to the rest of mankind in bodily stature, strength, and activity; in bearing cold and heat, thirst and hunger, watching and fatigue; and no less extraordinary in the qualities of his mind, beirrg equally valiant and prudent, magnanimous and disinterested, undaunted in adversity, modest in prosperity, and animated by the most ardent and inextinguishable love of his county. Having his resentment against the English sharpened by the personal affront abovementioned, and more by the losses his family had sustained, he determined to rise in defence of his country, and being joined by many of his countrymen, their first efforts were crowned with success; but the earl of Surrey, governor of Scotland, collecting an army of 40,000 men, and entering Annandale, and marching through the South-west of Scotland, obliged all the barons of those parts to submit, and renew the oaths of fealty. Wallace, with his followers, uuable to encounter so great a force, retired northward, and was pursued by the governor and his army.

, a heraldic writer and antiquary, was the son of Benjamin Warburton, of Bury in Lancashire, by Mary, his wife, eldest daughter, and at length heiress of Michael Buxton, of Buxton, in Derbyshire. He was born Feb. 28, 1681-2. According to Mr. Grose, he received no education, and was originally an exciseman; Mr. Grose adds that he was ignorant not only of the Latin, but of his native language, and so far from understanding mathematics, he did not even understand guaging, which, “like navigation, as practised by our ordinary seamen, consists only in multiplying and dividing certain numbers, or writing by an instrument, the rationale of both which they are totally ignorant of.” It appears from Mr. Brooke Somerset’s notes, that Toms, who owed his rise to him, told that gentleman that he had great natural abilities, but no education. Grose observes, that “his life was one continued scene of squabbles and disputes with his brethren, by whom he was despised and detested.” Toms remarks, that “though his conduct was faulty, yet he was extremely illused, especially by the younger Anstis, who was of a violent tyrannical disposition,” and there seems reason to suspect that his quarrelsome disposition, rather than his incapacity, has occasioned many of the discreditable reports which have accompanied his name. As a collector of antiquities he appears to have been indefatigable.

In 1785, this learned prelate was editor of a “Collection of Theological Tracts, selected from various authors, for the use of the younger Students in the University,” 6 vols. 8vo. This compilation, comprising pieces on the most interesting subjects in sacred literature by different writers, was intended to form a library of divinity for every candidate for holy orders. Some objections, however, have been made to it on the score of its not being entirely confined to the writings of members of the Church of England, or at least that it did not exclude some of dubious principles. In the same year he published “The Wisdom and Goodness of God, in having made both Rich and Poor, a Sermon,” 4to; and a second edition in 1793.

, an ingenious improver of the English pottery manufacture, was born in July 1730, and was the younger son of a potter, whose property consisting chiefly of a small entailed estate, that descended to the eldest son, Josiah was left, at an early period of life, to lay the foundation of his own fortune. This he did most substantially by applying his attention to the pottery business, which, it is not too much to say, he brought to the highest perfection, and established a manufacture that has opened a new scene of extensive commerce, before unknown to this or any other country. His many discoveries of new species of earthen wares and porcelains, his studied forms and chaste style of decorations, and the correctness and judgment with which all his works were executed under his own eye, and by artists for the most part of his own forming, have turned the current in this branch of commerce; for, before his time, England imported the finer earthen wares; but for more than twenty years past, she has exported them to a very great annual amount, the whole of which is drawn from the earth, and from the industry of the inhabitants; while the national taste has been improved, and its reputation raised in foreign countries.

Strafford at length prepared to obey these repeated mandates; and having discovered a traitorous correspondence, in which his enemy Savile and some other lords had invited the Scots to invade England, he resolved to anticipate and confound his adversaries by an accusation of these popular leaders. But no sooner were the Commons informed that he had taken his seat among the peers, than they ordered their doors to be shut; and after they had continued several hours in deliberation, Pyrn appeared at the bar of the House of Lords; and in the name of the Commons of England, impeached the earl of Strafford of high treason. This charge was accompanied by a desire that he should be sequestered from parliament, and forthwith committed to prison; a request which, after a short deliberation, was granted. A committee of thirteen was chosen by the lower House, to prepare a charge against him. The articles of impeachment, produced at his trial, were twentyeight in number, and regarded his conduct, as president of the council of York, as lord-lieutenant of Ireland, and as counsellor or commander in England. It would be impossible to detail all the circumstances of his trial, which was conducted with great solemnity; but though four months were employed by the managers in framing the accusation, and all Strafford’s answers were extemporary, it appears from comparison, not only that he was free from the crime of treason, of which there is not the least appearance, but that his conduct, making allowance for human infirmities, exposed to such severe scrutiny, was innocent, and even laudable. The masterly and eloquent speech he made on his trial has always been admired as one of the first compositions of the kind in that age. “Certainly,” say Whitlocke, who was chairman of the impeaching committee, “never any man acted such a part, on such a theatre, with more wisdom, constancy, and eloquence, with greater reason, judgment, and temper, and with a better grace in all his words and actions, than did this great and excellent person; and he moved the hearts of all his auditors, some few excepted, to remorse and pity.” But his fate was determined upon. His enemies resolved to hasten it, at the expence of justice, by adopting a proceeding, which overstepped the established forms and maxims of law, and against which innocence could form no protection. Dreading the decision of the lords, if the charges and evidence were to be weighed by the received rules, they resolved to proceed by a bill of attainder: and to enact that Strafford was guilty of high treason, and had incurred its punishment. The commons endeavoured to veil the infamy of this proceeding, by an attempt, not less infamous, and still more absurd, to satisfy the legal rules of evidence. The advice of Strafford about the employment of the Irish army, and which, by a forced interpretation, was construed into a design to subdue England by that force, had hitherto been attested by the solitary evidence of sir Henry Vane; but an attempt was now made to maintain the charge by two witnesses, as the laws of treason required. The younger Vane, on inspecting some of jiis father’s papers, discovered a minute, as it appeared, of the consultation at which the words imputed to Strafford were alleged to have been spoken; and this minute was recognised by the elder Vane, as taken down by him at the time, in his quality of secretary. In reporting this discovery to the House, Pym maintained, in a solemn argument, that the written evidence of sir Henry Vane, at the period of the transaction, and his oral evidence at present, ought to be considered as equivalent to the testimony of two witnesses; and this extravagant position was actually sanctioned by the House, and adopted as a ground of their proceedings.

Some time after the death of his wife, he married in 1701, as his second, Jane, the widow of Mr. Francis Barkstead, and the daughter of one Guill, a French refugee; by her also he had a very considerable fortune, which he devoted to the purposes of liberality. Of his political sentiments, we Jearn only, that he was an enemy to the bill against occasional conformity, and a staunch friend to the union with Scotland. When on a visit to that country in 1709, he received a diploma for the degree of D. D. from the university of Edinburgh, and another from Glasgow, Qne of his biographers gives us the following account of his conduct on this occasion. “He was so far from seeking or expecting thjs honour, that he was greatly displeased with the occasion of it, and with great modesty he entreated Mr. Carstairs, the principal of the college at Edinburgh, to prevent it. But the dispatch was made before that desire of his could reach them. I have often heard Jiim express his dislike of the thing itself, and much more his distaste at the pfficious vanity of some who thought they had much obliged him when they moved for the procuring it; and this, not that he despised the honour of being a graduate in form in that profession in which he was now a truly reverend father; nor in the least, that he refused to receive any favours from the ministers of the church gf Scotland, for whom he preserved a very great esteem, and on many occasions gave signal testimonies of his respect; but he thought it savoured of an extraordinary franity? that the English presbyterians should accept a nominal distinction, which the ministers of the church of Scotland declined for themselves, and did so lest it should break in upon that parity which they so severely maintained; which parity among the ministers of the gospel, the presbyterians in England acknowledged also to be agreeable to that scripture rule, ‘ Whosoever will be greatest among you let him be as the younger,’ Luke xxii. 26 and Matt, xxiii. 8, `Be ye not called Rabbi,' of which text a learned writer says, it should have been translated, `Be ye not called doctors’ and the Jewish writers and expositors of their law, are by some authors styled Jewish Rabbins, by others, and that more frequently, doctors, &c. &c.” Our readers need scarcely be told that this is another point on which Dr. Williams differs much from his successors, who are as ambitious of the honour of being called doctor, as he was to avoid it.

In June 1642, the king being at York, our archbishop was enthroned in person in his own cathedral, but, soon after the king had left York, which was in July following, was obliged to leave it too; the younger Hotham, who was coming thither with his forces, having sworn solemnly to seize and kill him, for some opprobrious words spoken of him concerning his usage of the king at Hull. He retired to his estate at Aber Con way, and fortified Con way-castle for the king; which so pleased his majesty, that by a letter, Oxford, Aug. the 1st, 1643, the king “heartily desired him to go on with that work, assuring him, that, whatever moneys he should lay out upon the fortification of the said castle should be repayed unto him before the custody thereof should be put into any other hand than his own, or such as he should command.” By virtue of a warrant, Jan. 2, 1643-4, the archbishop deputes his nephew William Hooks, esq. to have the custody of this castle; and, some time after, being sent for, set out to attend the king at Oxford, whom he is said to have cautioned particularly against Cromwell, who, “though then of but mean rank and use in the army, yet would be sure to rise higher. I knew him,” says he, “at Buckden; but never knew his religion. He was a common spokesman for sectaries, and maintained their parts with stubbornness. He never discoursed as if he were pleased with your majesty and your great officers; indeed he loves none that are more than his equals. Your majesty did him but justice in repulsing a petition put up by him against sir Thomas Steward, of the Isle of Ely; but he takes them all for his enemies that would not let him undo his hest friend; and, above all that live, I think he is injuriarum perscquentissimus^ as Portius Latro said of Catiline. He talks openly, that it is fit some should act more vigorously against your forces, and bring your person into the power of the parliament. He cannot give a good word of his general the eajl of Essex; because, he says, the earl is but half an enemy to your majesty, and hath done you more favour than harm. His fortunes are broken, that it is impossible for him to subsist, much less to be what he aspires to, but by your majesty’s bounty, or by the ruin of us all, and a common confusion; as one said, ‘ Lentulus salva republica salvus esse non potuit.’ In shprt, every beast hath some evil properties; but Cromwell hath the properties of all evil beasts. My humble motion is, either that you would win him to you by promises of fair treatment, or catch him by some stratagem, and cut him off.”

, commonly called the Apostle of the Indies, was born April 7, 1506, in Navarre, at the castle of Xavier. His father, Don John de Jasso, was one of the chief counsellors of state to John III. king of Navarre. Among their numerous family of children, of which Francis was the youngest, those that were elder bore the surname of Azpilcueta, the younger that of Xavier. Francis was sent to the university of Paris, in the eighteenth year of his age. He was afterwards admitted master of arts, and tauglit philosophy in the college of Beauvais, with an intention of entering the society of the Sorbonne; but having formed a friendship with Ignatius Loyola, he renounced all establishments, and became one of his first disciples. Xavier then went to Italy, where he attended the sick at the hospital of incurables at Venice, and was ordained priest. Some time after, John III. king of Portugal, having applied to St. Ignatius for some missionaries to preach the gospel in the East Indies, Xavier was chosen for that purpose, who, embarking at Lisbon, April 7, 1541, arrived at Goa, May 6, 1542. In a short time he spread the knowledge of the Christian religion, or, to speak more properly, of the Romish system, over a great part of the continent, and in several of the islands of that remote region. Thence in 1549 he passed into Japan, and laid there, with amazing rapidity, the foundation 'of the famous church which flourished during so many years in that vast empire. His indefatigable zeal prompted him to attempt the conversion of the Chinese, and with this view he embarked for that extensive and powerful kingdom, but died on an island in sight of China, Dec. 2, 1552. The body of this missionary lies interred at Goa, where it is worshipped with the highest marks of devotion. There is also a magnificent church at Cotati dedicated to Xavier, to whom the inhabitants of the Portuguese settlements pay the most devout tribute of veneration and worship. In 1747, the late king of Portugal obtained for Xavier, or rather for his memory, the title of protector of the Indies, from Benedict XIV. There are two lives of this saint, the one by Tursellinus, and the other by Bouhours, but the latter is little more than a translation from Latin into French of the former, dressed out in a more elegant manner. They both contain the miracles ascribed to this saint, which are among the most absurd and incredible in the annals of superstition. For this, however, Xavier, who appears to have been only a zealous enthusiast, ought not to be censured. He claims no miracles for himself, nor were any such heard of for many years after his death; on the contrary, in his correspondence with his friends, during his mission, he not only makes no mention of miracles, but disclaims all supernatural assistance. For the miracles, therefore, his biographers must be accountable, and we know of no evidence they have produced in confirmation of them. The life of Xavier is not unknown in this country. No less a person than our celebrated poet Dryden published a translation of Bouhours’s Life of Xavier, in 1688, in consequence qf the queen of James II. having, when she solicited a son, recommended herself to Xavier as her patron saint. Besides this, a Wesleyan preacher published, in 1764, anabridgment of Bouhours, as if he had intended to assist bishop Lavington in proving the alliance between the enthusiasm of the methodists and papists. Xavier’s Letters were published at Paris, 1631, 8vo, with some lesser works ascribed to him.

He was one of Socrates’s most eminent scholars; but he did not excel in philosophy only; he was also famous for arms and military achievements. In the Peloponnesian war, he was personally engaged in the fight before Delium, the first year of the 89th Olympiad; in which the Bœotians overcame the Athenians. Here Xenophon, in the precipitation of flight, was unhorsed and thrown down; when Socrates, who having lost his horse was fighting on foot, took him upon his shoulders, and carried him many furlongs, till the enemy gave over the pursuit. This was the first essay of his military profession: afterwards he became known to the younger Cyrus, by means of Proxenus the Boeotian, who was favoured by that prince, and resided with him at Sardis. Proxenus, then Xenophon’s friend, wrote to Athens, to invite him to come to Cyrus. Xenophon shewed his letters to Socrates, desiring -his advice. Socrates referred him to the oracle of Delphi, which Xenophon accordingly consulted: but, instead of asking whether he should go to Cyrus, he inquired how he should goto him; for which Socrates reprimanded him, yet advised him to go. Being arrived at the court of Cyrus, he acquired at least as great a share of his favour as Proxenus himself; and accompanied that prince in his expedition to Persia, when he took up arms against his brother Artaxerxes, who had succeeded his father Darius in the kingdom. Cyrus was killed: and Artaxerxes sent -the day after to the Grecians, that they should give up their arms. Xenophon answered Phalinus, who brought the order, “that they had nothing left but their arms and valour; that as long as they kept their arms they might use their valour; but, if they surrendered them, they should cease to be masters of themselves.” Phalinus replied, smiling, “Young man, you look and speak like a philosopher; but assure yourself, that your valour will not be a match for the king’s power.” Nevertheless, ten thousand of them determined to attempt a retreat, and actually effected it with Xenophon at their head, who brought them' from Persia to their own homes, remaining victorious over all who attempted to oppose his passage. The history of this expedition, which happened in the 4th year of the 94th Olympiad, was written by himself; and is still extant.

Xenophon, being extremely old, died at Corinth in the firstyear of the 105th Olympiad, or B. C. 360 leaving behind him many excellent works, of which a fine collection are happily come down to us. The principal of these are, the “Cyropeedia,” or the life, and discipline, and actions, of the elder Cyrus seven books of the “Expedition of the younger Cyrus into Persia, and of the retreat of the ten thousand Greeks under himself;” seven books of the “Grecian History” four books of the “Memorabilia” of Socrates, with the “Apologia Socratis.” Cicero tells us, probably grounding his opinion upon what he had read in the third book of Plato “de legibus,” that the “Cyropaedia” is not a real history, but only a moral fable; in which Xenophon meant to draw the picture of a great prince, without confining himself to truth, except in two or three great events, as the taking of Babylon, and the captivity of Croesus: and in this he has been pretty generally followed, though some have thought otherwise. The “Hellenica,” or seven books of Grecian history, are a continuation of Thucydides to forty-eight years farther; and here is recorded an instance of Xenophon’s integrity, who freely gave the public the writings of Thucydides, which he might either have suppressed, or made to pass as his own. The smaller pieces of Xenophon are, “Agesilaus;” of which piece Cicero says, “that it alone surpasses all images and pictures in his praise;” “Oeeonomics” with which Cu cero was so delighted, that in his younger years he translated it, and when he was grown old, gave an honourable testimony of it. The other writings of Xenophon arej “The Republic of the Lacedemonians,” and “The Republic of the Athenians” “Symposium” “Hiero, or, of a Kingdom” *< Accounts of the Revenues, of Horses, of Horsemanship;“and” Epistles."