LIPSIUS, Justus, a critic and antiquary of high reputation, was born on the 18th of October 1547, at the village of Isque, situate at an equal distance from Brussels and Louvain. His father, Gilles Lipse, a native of Brussels, belonged to one of the best families of that city, and inherited considerable property, which he impaired by his improvident mode of life. The name of his mother was Isabelle Petirive. At the age of six he removed to Brussels along with his parents; and being then sent to school, he discovered great aptitude for acquiring the elements of learning. Having reached his tenth year, he was placed at Ath in Hainaut, where he was initiated in Latin grammar; and after another interval of two years, he became a student in the college of the Jesuits at Cologne. There he devoted himself to the study of the Greek language, and likewise of history and philosophy. It was the policy of the Jesuits to allure into their society such of their pupils as exhibited the greatest promise of talent; and this young scholar was nearly entangled in their net, when his parents, having heard of his desire to enrol himself in the fraternity, recalled him from Cologne, and sent him to the university of Louvain. He had then attained the age of seventeen, and had already begun to exhibit various indications of his future eminence in letters. His father had destined ’ him for the legal profession, and, that he might seem to comply with his wishes, the son bestowed some attention upon-the study of jurisprudence; but philology and philosophy were his favourite pursuits, and of his proficiency in philology he exhibited a very early and conspicuous specimen. The death of his father, when he himself had nearly completed the eighteenth year of his age, left him at full liberty to devote himself to such studies as best suited his own inclination. After this event, his mother fixed her residence at Louvain, bringing with her an only daughter: she made a strenuous effort to preserve the remnant of their fortune, but her worldly cares were soon terminated by a dropsy. In the year 1567, before he had completed the age of twenty, he published his “Variarum Lectionum libri tres,” which he dedicated to Cardinal de Granvelle, and which procured him no mean reputation as a critic. It likewise had the effect of recommending him to the favour of this dignitary; who on proceeding to Rome for the purpose of assisting at the election of a pope, was accompanied by Lipsius in the capacity of his Latin secretary.

Here he had an opportunity of attending the prelections of Muretus, who was at that time a professor in the university of Rome; and with this very elegant scholar he appears to have contracted some degree of intimacy. He likewise became acquainted with several other learned men who then resided in Italy. His leisure hours were chiefly devoted to the examination of manuscripts preserved in the Vatican and other libraries; nor did he neglect those monuments of antiquity which, in so many different forms, solicited the notice of a young and ardent scholar. In the service of the cardinal he continued nearly two years; and having then returned to Louvain, and being released from all his engagements, as well as from all restraint, he there spent another year with little improvement of his learning or morals. But he at length became sensible of the folly of a life wasted in the frivolous and unsatisfactory pursuit of pleasure; and in order to effect a complete interruption of his habits and associations, he adopted the prudent resolution of again travelling in foreign countries. On passing through Franche Comté, he directed his course to Dole, the seat of a university, and there pronounced a panegyric on his friend Victor Giselin, on the occasion of his taking a doctor’s degree in physic. To the banquet which followed this ceremony he did so much honour, that he was seized with a fever which endangered his life. On regaining sufficient strength, he pursued his journey to Vienna, and there became acquainted with Busbequius, Sambucus, Pighius, and other men of learning. Such was the impression of his talents and attainments, that he was solicited to re [7:13:372]main in the Austrian dominions; but he declined more than one offer of employment, and adhered to the resolution of returning to his native country. Proceeding to Bohemia, he visited Prague, and was travelling through Germany, when he received an alarming account of the progress of the war in the Netherlands, and the serious injury to which his own property had been exposed. In this situation of his affairs, he was glad to accept the professorship of history and eloquence in the university of Jena. To this office he was admitted in the year 1572, and he retained it till the first of May 1574, when some indications of a favourable change had encouraged him to think of revisiting his native soil. But he first directed his course towards Cologne, where he married a widow named Anne Calstrie, who was descended of a good family at Louvain, and by whom he had no children. His first edition of Tacitus was printed in octavo, at Antwerp, in the year 1574. Totheillustration of this favourite author he afterwards devoted much labour; and a sixth edition, in folio and quarto, was printed at the same place in 1600. His “Antiquarum Lectionum libri quinque” were printed at Antwerp in 1575.

Having lingered nine months at Cologne, he conducted his wife to Isque, where he hoped to lead a life of studious tranquillity; but his dreams of felicity were speedi-Iy dispelled by the renewal of hostilities in that vicinity, and he found it expedient to seek shelter at Louvain. At the suggestion of his friends, he resumed the study of jurisprudence, and in the year 1576 he took the degree of LL.D. His taste and inclination did not lead him to the practice of this profession; but his knowledge of the civil law was of material use in the illustration of Roman antiquities. In 1577 he published his “Epistolicarum Quaestionum libri quinque; in quis ad varios Scriptores, ple-raeque ad T. Livium, Notae.” Here he could not long pursue his studies without alarm and danger: the war continuing with unabated vigour, Louvain was exposed to a siege, and changed its masters. After this event, he was offered the professorship of history in the university of Leyden; to which he accordingly removed in the year 1579, and there taught with high reputation. At Louvain he was a papist, at Jena he had been a Lutheran, and at Leyden he now became a Calvinist; if any adequate preferment had allured him to Constantinople, he would in all probability have become a Mohammedan. Towards the close of his life, Lipsius denied that he had ever conformed to the established church of Holland; but if any regard is due to this denial, how are we to understand the positive declaration of his zealous biographer Le Mire, who has stated that after his retreat from Leyden, he was publicly reconciled to the church of Rome? If he had never forsaken its communion, where was the necessity or the pretext for such a reconciliation? Niceron admits that he long appeared to be very indifferent about religion, and that it was his great principle to conform to the religion of the place where he resided; but, subjoins the reverend father, he at length quitted this state of indifference, and was constantly and sincerely attached to the Catholic faith, in which he was born.^[1. Niceron, Mémoires pour servir à l’Histoire des Hommes illustres, tom. xxiv. p. 110. ] Of the sincerity of a man who had so long adhered to this great principle, that is, who had so long evinced a total want of principle, it would seem but reasonable to require some very substantial evidence. During the latter years of his life, he certainly adhered to the tenets of popery, and endeavoured to signalize his zeal by professing to merge his intellect in the most abject superstition: but this was perhaps the mere zeal of a convert making his third profession, and fully aware of the extreme suspicion which his previous conduct could not have failed to excite; and had the course of his fortunes finally conducted him from Louvain to Oxford, it is by no means a violent or uncharitable supposition that he might have closed his career in the odour of high-church sanctity..

At Leyden he produced several of his more elaborate works. In 1580 appeared “Electorum liber primus,” and in 1582 “Electorum libri duo; in quibus, praeter Censuras, varii prisci Ritus ;” in 1584 “De Amphitheatro liber; in quo Forma ipsa Loci expressa, et ratio spectandi ;” to which is subjoined “De Amphitheatris quae extra Romam libellus ;” and in 1585 “Saturnalium Sermonum libri duo, qui de Gladiatoribus.” In 1586 he published “De recta Pronuntiatione Latinae Linguae Dialogus ;” of which dialogue the scene is laid in Rome, and the interlocutors are Lipsius and Muretus. It is dedicated to Sir Philip Sidney. His edition of the tragedies ascribed to Seneca was printed in 1588. Nor were his enquiries confined to philology and antiquities. In 1584 he had published “De Constantia libri duo, qui Alloquium praecipue continent in publicis Malis ;” and in 1589 he produced a more ample work entitled “Politicoum, sive Civilis Doctrinae, libri sex, qui ad Principatum maxime spectant.” The publication of this work was attended with some unpleasant consequences to the author, and it served to evince that his wisdom was not equal to his learning. He recommends, in very plain terms, the punishment of heretics, or, in other words, of those who dissent from the established faith; nor can it escape the observation of the most obtuse reader that this recommendation proceeded from a man who, according to his own doctrine, ought to have been punished at Jena if he had adhered to the opinions which he professed at Louvain, who ought to have been punished at Leyden if he had adhered to the opinions which he professed at Jena. But it must be admitted that his conduct was perfectly consistent in one respect, inasmuch as he changed his religion as often as he changed his place of residence. Wherever his lot was cast, he was never to be found among the nonconformists. This doctrine of exterminating heresy by fire and sword, proceeded with a peculiar grace from an individual who, having escaped from the wreck of his fortunes, had been protected and cherished by a people so recently released from the iron yoke of Spain, with all the atrocities of the Spanish inquisition. His intolerant opinions were immediately attacked by Theodore Koornhert; and finding himself placed in a situation of no small embarrassment, he, in 1590, made a very abortive attempt to defend himself, in a work entitled “De una Religione adversus Dialogistam liber; in quo tria capita libri quarti Politicoum explicantur.” His antagonist prepared a reply, which was not printed till after the death of the author.^[2. See Bayle, Dictionaire Historique et Critique, torn. ii. p. 1723. ] In consequence of these illiberal and unseasonable speculations, he probably found that his residence in Holland had been rendered less agreeable. Under the pretext of drinking the medicinal waters, he proceeded to Spa, and afterwards withdrew to Mentz, where the Jesuits gladly received the lost sheep returning to the sheepfold. From this place, on the 14th of April 1591, he addressed a canting letter to Delrio, a learned father of the same order; and only a short time elapsed before be was publicly reconciled to that church whose communion he had renounced as often as it suited his interest. So true it is that the bigots of a corrupt church are easily satisfied with a specious show of outward conformity, while the disguise of their votary is too transparent to deceive any one who is unwilling to be deceived. On ascertaining that there was no hope of his returning to [7:13:373]Leyden, the curators of the university manifested the utmost anxiety to find another scholar of equal and even superior attainments; and with true discernment they selected Joseph Scaliger, a man distinguished beyond all others by the extent and solidity of his learning. The rulers of the state acted with conspicuous liberality towards him, and afterwards towards Salmasius; "who,” as Dr Bentley has remarked, "were invited out of their own country with the solemnity almost of an embassy, that they would honour a potent republic with their presence, and accept of a noble pension without any incumbrance of an office.”^[3. Bentley’s Dissertation upon the Epistles of Phalaris, p. c. ] In many respects, Scaliger was greatly superior to Lipsius, and in none more than in the knowledge of the Greek language and literature, both of which his capacious mind had embraced in their entire conçpass. His advice and example had a great and lasting influence in recommending this study to the youth of his adopted nation, in which it long continued to flourish with a degree of vigour scarcely equalled in any other country of Europe.^[4. “Sub ipsa academiae incunabula Leidae bonas literas docuit Justus Lipsius, perfectus literis Latinis, Graecarum mediocriter peritus. Is dicere ausus est, Graecas literas homini erudito decoras esse, necessarias non item. Quod stultissimum dictum Isaaco etiam Ca-saubono, quo non fuit leuioris naturae criticus, vehementer bilem movit. Sed bonum factum, quod tam perniciosa literis opinio nullas radices egit. Mox enim tamquam coelo missus Josephus Scaliger, cui Batavi prope omnem rectum ingenii cultum, quem exeo tempore ceperint, si grati esse velint, acceptum referre debent, Scaliger igitur cum ceteras ingenuas artes, tum Graecas literas, earumque cum Latinis conjunctionem, in his regionibus fundavit. Scaligerana disciplina per Grotios, Heinsios, Gronovios, Graevios, et alios usque ad patrum nostrorum memoriam propagata est.” (Ruhnkenii Elogium Tiberii Hemsterhusii: Opuscula, torn. i. p. 268.) ]

Having entered Mentz as a heretic and quitted it as a good catholic, he afterwards lingered for about two years at Spa and Liege. During this interval, many advantageous offers were made to him by princes and by dignitaries of the church. One offer, not from a king or cardinal, but from a private individual, deserves to be recorded: Benedictus Arias Montanus, a learned Spaniard whose name is so frequently mentioned in the annals of biblical literature, repeatedly urged him to come and share his income during his life, and to be the heir of all his property at his death. But the love of his native land prevailed over many other inducements, and Lipsius finally returned to Louvain as professor of history and eloquence. His salary as a professor amounted to eight hundred florins; and with the title of historiographer royal, Philip the Second bestowed upon him a pension of one thousand. The archduke Albert, governor of the Netherlands, added two hundred florins, and nominated him a member of the council; but having no wish or aptitude to engage in public affairs, he wisely restricted himself to the duties of his academical office. He taught with much ability, and with high reputation, but his lectures did not attract a numerous auditory; the students of that university having been trained by the Jesuits to set a higher value upon scholastic disputation than upon classical erudition.^[5. “Docet vir doctus,” says Scultet in allusion to Puteanus, “ut et ante ipsum Lipsius, in sterili auditorio, non alia de causa (ex magno viro hoc audivi) quam quod juventus a melioribus studiis ad tricas disputationum scholasticarum per Jesuitas avocatur; a quibus hominibus, imperium in orbis terrarum academias affectantibus, nihil aliud quam barbarica politiorum literarum captivitas est expectanda.” (De Curriculo Vitae, inprimis vero de Actionibus Pragensibus Abrah. Sculteti, p. 66. Emdae, 1625,4to.) Erycius Puteanus was the immediate successor of Lipsius. ] He however continued with unabating ardour to pursue his favourite investigations, and about this period he composed several of his antiquarian works. “De Cruce libri tres, ad sacram profanamque Historiam utiles,” appeared in 1595; “De Militia Romana libri quinque; Commentarius ad Polybium,” in 1596; “Poliorceticωn, sive de Machinis, Tormentis, Telis, libri quinque,” in the same year; “Admiranda, sive de Magnitudine Romana, libri quatuor,” in 1598; “De Vesta et Vestalibus,” in 1603. In 1604 he published “Manuductionis ad Stoicam Philosophiam libri tres, & Physiologiae Stoicorum libri tres, L. Annaeo Senecae, aliisque Scriptoribus illustrandis.” “Monita et Exempla Politica, libri duo, qui Virtutes et Vitia Principum spectant,” followed in 1605. In the course of the same year he published his edition of Seneca the philosopher, and likewise “Lovanium, sive Oppidi et Academiae ejus Descriptio.” It would have been well for his reputation if he had adhered to such lucubrations as these, instead of occupying himself with miserable details of the miracles of our Lady of Hall and of Zichem. In 1604 he published “Diva Virgo Hallensis; Beneficia ejus et Miracula fide atque ordine descripta and in 1605 “Diva Sichemiensis, sive Aspricolis; nova ejus Beneficia et Admiranda.” These abject tales of superstition exposed him to the ridicule and contempt of protestants, nor have the more rational papists commended him for such a manifestation of his zeal. His idolatry of the wooden goddess^[6. An anonymous work, written by P. Denaisius, a German lawyer, was published under the following title: “Dissertatio de Idolo Hallensi, Justi Lipsii Mangonio et Phaleris ornato, atque producto,” Heidelbergae, 1605, 4to. This dissertation was answered by a Carmelite friar named Anastase Cochlet: “Palaestrita Honoris D. Virginis Hallensis pro Justo Lipsio.” Antv. 1607, 8vo. ] afforded occasion for several controversial tracts; and the character of Lipsius was not much indebted to those friends who undertook his vindication. One of his fiercest antagonists was our learned countryman George Thomson, who was a protestant clergyman in France, and the author of several works in French as well as Latin.^[7. Vindex Veritatis: adversus Justum Lipsium libri duo. Prior insanam ejus religionem politicam, fatuam nefariamque de Fato, sceleratissimam de Fraude doctrinam refellit. Posterior ∙ψstiSMraξtli llt υ Sichemiensis, id est, Idoli Aspricolis, et Deae ligneae miracula convellit. Uterque Lipsium ab Orco Gentilismum revocasse docet. Auctore Georgio Thomsono Andreapolitano Scoto-Britanno. Londini, 1606, 8vo. The defence of Lipsius was undertaken by Claude Dausquei, a canon of Tournay, who published a work entitled “Scutum duplex, alterum B. Virginis Aspri-Collensis, alterum J. Lipsii; utrumque adversus Agricoae Thracii satyricas petitiones.” Duaci, 1610, 8vo. Thomson is mentioned in the following terms by Dominicus Baudius: “Georgium Thomsonum amo quidem et aestimo plurimum, ob studium bonarum partium, et egregios in solida doctrina progressus; sed, ut verum apud to fabuler, nullo modo possum probare nimiam ejus violentiam atque asperitatem in nostrum Lipsium: cujus quidem Divarum sanos omnes pudet pigetque, sed tamen majore cum reverentia tractandum fuit praestantissimum pene ingenium hujus seculi, et qui pro parte sua strenue tutatus est literarum gloriam.” (Baudii Epistolae, p. 298. edit. Lugd. Bat. 1650, 12mo.) See likewise p. 242. and Camdeni Epistolae, p. 71. Lond. 1691, 4to. His treatment of Lipsius is more strongly censured by Scaliger: “De libro Georgii Thomson! gratias ago. Mitius illi cum Lipsio agendum, et alia via cum illo congrediendum fuit. Nam praefractam illam et gladiatoriam violentiam non laudo. Non enim tanquam vindex veritatis, ut ipse profitetur, sed tanquam ultor offensae alicujus cum eo agit, quum tamen ab eo nunquam ne verbulo quidem ullo laesus aut perstrictus fuerit.” (Scaligeri Epistolae, p. 809. Lugd. Bat. 1627, 8vo.) George Thomson was )orn at St Andrews, and studied in the university of his native city. Here he took the degree of A. Μ. and was incorporated at Oxford on the 30th of August 1605. (Wood’s Fasti Oxonienses, part i. col. 309. Bliss’s edit.) He was appointed minister of the reformed church at Châtaigneraye in Poitou. His command of the French language, and his eloquence as a preacher, are celebrated by John Dunbar. (Epigrammaton centuriae sex decades totidem, p. 191. Lond. 1616, 8vo.) Under the date of 1617, we find the following obituary notice by Robert Boyd: “Mr Thomson, pasteur de la Chaistaignoraye, demeurant à la laiterie en Poytou; homme scavant, disert, joyeuse, entier, et d’un fort agréable conversation.” (Bannatyne Miscellany, vol. i. p. 289.) Thomson is the author of a large volume entitled “La Chasse de la Beste Romaine: où est réfuté le xxiii. chap, du Catéchisme et Abrégé des Controverses de nostre temps touchant la Religion Catholique, imprimé à Fontenay le Comte en l’an M.DC.VII. et est recerché et évidemment prouvé que le Pape est l’Antichrist. Par George Thomson, Pasteur de l’Eglise Reformée de la Chastegneraye.” Rochelle, 1611, 8vo. Geneve, 1612, 8vo. Some copies of the second edition likewise bear Rochelle. Some passages of this elaborate work were attacked by René le Corvaisier, in “La Chasse au Loup Cervier, contre les Calomnies de G. Thomson.” Paris, 1612, 8vo. Thomson strenuously defended himself in “La Desroute de la Chasse du Loup Cervier; ou, Refutation du Traicté du Ieusne, fait par Maistre René le Corvaisier, soi disant Theologien de la Faculté de Paris: contre quelques passages par lui attaqués en la Chasse de la Beste Romaine. Par George Thomson,” &c.. Rochelle, 1612, 8vo. Thomson had at an earlier period published a French version of Napier’s commentary on the Revelation, under the subsequent title: “Ouverture de tous les Secrets de l’Apocalypse ou Revelation de S. lean, par deux traités, l’un recerchant et prouvant la vraye interpretation d’icelle, l’autre appliquant au texte ceste interpretation paraphrastiquement et historiquement, par lean Napeir (c. a. d.) Nonpareil, Sieur de Merchiston: reveue par lui-mesme, et mise en François par Georges Thomson Escossois.” Rochelle, 1602, 4to. Rochelle, 1605, 8vo. Rochelle, 1607, 8vo. To the second edition he added “Quatre Harmonies sur la Revelation de S. lean.” His Latin poems are partly reprinted in the Dclìtiae Poetarum Scotorum, tom. ii. p. 509-38. ] In the year 1602 the professor had suspended his silver pen [7:13:374]in the chapel of our Lady of Hall, to whose intercession he ascribed his recovery from a painful disease; and his votive tablet was ornamented with an effusion in Latin verse, not remarkable for the elegance of the composition. Here we very clearly discern the spirit of pagan idolatry; and it was under the same cloud of superstitious delusion that he awaited the approach of death. His biographer has deemed it worthy of record, that, when the spark of life was nearly extinct, he prayed with great fervour to the blessed virgin: of his reliance on the mercy of God through the atonement and mediation of Christ, we find a less anxious commemoration. With his dying breath he directed his wife to deposit his academical gown at the altar of the virgin in the church of St Peter; and having now testified as much false and as little true devotion as the five priests in attendance could require or expect, he expired on the 23d of March 1606, in the fifty-ninth year of his age. According to the direction of his testament, his remains were interred before the altar of the virgin in the church of the Franciscan friars. His death was lamented and his merits were extolled in prose and in verse by many different writers. One of his admirers undertook to prove that he was a good catholic; and of what materials a good catholic may be composed, we have already had occasion to state. Another, Wower of Antwerp, thought himself well employed in defending the propriety of his devout dedication of an old gown edged with fur; an act of driveling imbecility which had exposed his memory to much sarcastic animadversion.

Vidit homo frigere suae miracula divae, Crassaque pro calido stragula thure dedit.

The personal appearance of Lipsius presented nothing very striking or dignified. Le Mire, who abounds in rhetorical flourishes, is pleased to inform us that he had a divine twinkle in his eye; but he does not attempt to disguise the fact, that many of the strangers who came to visit him were not a little disappointed at the meanness of his aspect. He had an ample forehead, and was of an ordinary size and shape; but during the latter part of his life, his appearance was much affected by the diseased state of his liver. He lived in a plain style, and retained only one man servant, who likewise acted as his amanuensis. Nature had denied him all relish for music; but from his literary toils he found an agreeable relaxation in the cultivation of his garden, which was planted with a variety of flowers, and was particularly rich in tulips. His biographer has likewise thought it worthy of notice t*hat he was always fond of dogs, and that during his last residence at Louvain he generally kept three, one of them being of a Scotish breed.

Lipsius was a great master of the Latin language and literature. He has evinced much critical skill, as well as much erudition, in illustrating many of the ancient authors, and many different branches of Roman antiquities. His lucubrations on the poets are not in general very felicitous, nor did his taste particularly qualify him for this department of classical criticism: of the style and scope of historians, philosophers, grammarians, and rhetoricians, he was a more competent judge. In the Greek language he was not eminently skilled; and he has occasionally treated of subjects which required that knowledge in which he was somewhat deficient. His treatise on the military affairs of the Romans is fouŗtded on the Greek text of Polybius, which he transcribes and expounds; but, according to the opinion of Casaubon, where that text was formerly obscure, he has left it without any new elucidation. It is another charge against the same work, urged by Scaliger and Salmasius,^[8. Scaligerana, p. 143. Salmasii Epistolae, p. 213. Lugd. Bat. 1656, 4to. ] and repeated by many later writers that the materials are in a great measure stolen from the Italian treatise of Patrizi.^[9. La Militia Romana di Polibio, di Tito Livio, e di Dionigi Alicarnaseo, da Francesco Patricii dichiarata, e con varie figure illustrata: la quale a pieno intesa, non solo darà altrui stupore"de’ suoi buoni ordini e disciplina, ma ancora, in paragone, tara chiaro quanto la moderna sia difettosa e imperfetta. Ferrara, 1583, 4to. ] Nor is this the only occasion on which an accusation of downright plagiarism has been preferred against him: Muretus complained of his having appropriated some of his emendations on Tacitus; and Faber, in more indignant terms, averred that from his Semestria Lipsius had without acknowledgment borrowed the best part of the materials for his treatise on the gladiators. Torrentius and other writers had similar charges to prefer against him, nor is it easy to believe that these accusations were destitute of all foundation.^[10. Thomasii Dissertatio philosophica de Plagio Literario, § 115. 222. 487∙ Lipsiae, 1673, 4to. Crenii de Furibus Librariis Dissertationes epistolicae, p. 95. Lugd. Bat. 1716, 12mo. ]

The political writings of Lipsius possess little or no value, excep~ as a mere ’ collection of facts and quotations. Here he displays no liberality or enlargement of mind; and beyond the limits of classical erudition, he appears to have been a man of very slender judgment. His two treatises on the Stoic philosophy are however of more interest and importance. His taste in composition was singularly quaint and affected, nor does he seem to have retained the power of conveying any information in plain and direct terms. This vitiated mode of writing excited the disgust of some of his most learned contemporaries; and on the Latinity of Lipsius a volume of 560 pages was published by H. Stephanus.^[11. De Lipsii Latinitate (ut ipsimet antiquarii antiquarium Lipsii stylum indigitant) Palaestra I. Heur. Stephani, Parisiensis, nec Lipsiomimi, nec Lipsiomomi, nec Lipsiocolacis, multoque minus Lipsiomastigis, &c. Francofordii, 1595, 8vo. ] A considerable portion of it is however occupied with considerations respecting a war with the Turks; and this, says Scaliger, appeared so ridiculous that some person proposed to entitle it “De Lipsii Latinitate adversus Tuream." “The style of Lipsius,” says Dr Jortin, “is execrable, in his later compositions; for in his [7:13:375] youth he wrote far better, till he fell into a broken, incoherent, sententious, oracular, and figurative language, not through incapacity of doing better, but through an affected and vitiated taste. He had a few disciples, who imitated him, and wrote ten times worse than he, because they had not his learning, and his fancy, and vivacity; he was ingenious, and they were dull.'’^[12. Jortin’s Life of Erasmus, vol. i. p. 466—Grotius entertained nearly the same opinion of his style: “Cum floridum ipsi et profluens natura haud abnegaret, alterum maluit dicendi genus, consisum quidem, nec sine festivitate, sed vere novum obtentu antiqui: quod cum imitarentur, quibus ingenii judiciique non idem fuit, ad corruptissima quaeque deventum est.” (Hist, de Rebus Belgicis, lib. V. p. 378.) ] His Latinity has .been zealously vindicated by Klotz, who was however a lover of paradoxes; nor is it very probable that his arguments have made much impression on any scholar of a genuine taste for classical composition.^[13. Klotzii Opuscula varii argumenti, p. 1. Altenb. 1760, 8vo. ]

The epistles of Lipsius, amounting to the number of a thousand, occupy an entire volume in the collection of his works; and to this number a very large addition was afterwards made by Burman.^[14. Burmanni Sylloge Epistolarum, torn. i. ii. The correspondence of Lipsius occupies all the first volume, and 193 pages of the second. ] Many of them relate to topics of literature, and are very elaborate. On epistolary composition he has left a brief treatise, entitled “Epistolica Institutio.” Another of his short tracts may likewise deserve to be mentioned, namely, “De Bibliothecis Syntagma,” which relates to the libraries of ancient times. His only labour as a civilian is a collection of “Leges Reģiae et Leges Decemvirales,” to which he has however added no illustrations. Of his critical treatises he published a collection under the title of “Justi Lipsii Opera omnia quae ad Criticam spectant.” Antv. 1585, 4to. Lugd. Bat. 1596, 8vo. An elegant edition of his works appeared with the subsequent title: “Justi Lipsii, V. C. Opera omnia, postremum ab ipso aucta et recensita: nunc primum copioso rerum indice illustrata.” Antverpiae, 1637, 4 tom. fol. A life of the author by Aubertus Miraeus, or Aubert le Mire, and various panegyrics and defences, are inserted in the first volume. The collection of his works is sometimes described as consisting of six folio volumes; but this enumeration includes his edition of Tacitus and Velleius Paterculus, forming one volume, and his edition of Seneca the philosopher, forming another volume of the same size. Of his original works there is a more recent edition. Vesaliae, 1675, 4 tom. 8vo. The third volume contains seven very slight tracts on Roman antiquities, which are not inserted in the folio edition, and which ought never to have been printed. Lipsius contributed brief annotations on Catullus, Tibullus, Propertius, Martial, the younger Pliny, Florus, Suetonius, and Valerius Maximus; but his reputation as an editor chiefly depends on his emendations and elucidations of Seneca, and more especially of Tacitus.^[15. “Lipsii opera ita probata est viris intelligentibus, ut et Sospitator Taciti diceretur, et inter principes interpretum referretur.” (Fabricii Bibliotheca Latina, torn. ii. p. 396. edit. Ernesti.) With the works of Tacitus he was so familiarly acquainted, that, according to the statement of De Rossi, he could repeat them from beginning to end. (Erythraci Pinacotheca tertia, p. 2.) This morsel must however be taken with a grain of salt. ] (x.)