« ZurückWeiter »
4. “ Oratio de laudibus Henrici magni," Rheims, 1611, 4to. 5.“ Synesii Opera," Paris, 1612-1633, 3 vols. folio. 6. “ Juliani imperatoris orationes tres panegyricæ,” Flexiæ (La Flêche), 1613, 8vo.
7. “ Themistii Orationes septemdecim. Gr. Lat." ibid. 1613, 8vo. 8.“ Tragedia, Carthaginienses," ibid. 1614, 8vo, a tragedy in the manner of Seneca, which it was then the fashion to imitate. 9. “ Pompa regia Ludovici XIII." &c. a collection of the complimentary verse's on the royal visit to La Flêche, mentioned before, 1614, 4to. 10. “Nicephori Breviarium Historicum," Gr. et Lat." Paris, 1616, 8vo. 11. “Themistii, cognomento Suadæ, orationes noveindecim, Gr. et Lat." ibid. 1618, 4to. 12. “Soteria ad S. Genovefamn," ibid. 1619, 4to, his votive poem to St. Genevieve. 13. Another, in praise of the same saint, “ Panegyricus in S. Genevefam,” ibid. 1619, 4to. 14. “ D. Petavii Orationes," ibid. 1620, 1622, 1624, 8vo. 15. “ D. Petavii Opera Poetica,” ibid. 1621, 8vo, reprinted at least three times. 16. “ Office de S. Genevieve, ibid. 1621, 16mo. 17. Epiphanii Opera omnia,” ibid. 1622, 2 vols. folio, reprinted at Cologn 1682. In April following the publication of this work, Salmasius took occasion to attack Petau, in his edition of the “ Pallio" of Tertullian, and certainly not in very respectful language. Petau's biographer says he ought to have taken no notice of such an attack, as in that case his silence would have completely disconcerted Salmasius, a man who could not exist without a quarrel with some contemporary; or, at all events, Petau should have been content with a short answer to such an opponent. Perhaps Petau might have been of this opinion, if he had not considered that Salmasius was a Protestant, and regarded by Protestants as the man who would one day supply the loss of Joseph Scaliger; and he was not therefore sorry to have this opportunity, not only to defend himself against Salmasius, but to attack him in his turn. He published, accordingly, 18.“ Animadversionum liber," under the fictitious name of Antonius Kerkoëtius Aremoricus, and the fictitious place of “ Rhedonis apud Yvonem Halecium,” i. e. "Parisiis, apud Sebast. Cramoisy," 1622, 8vo. This brought on an angry controversy, in which Salmasius cers tainly had some advantages, from his superior knowledge of the manner of handling the weapons of controversy ; and perhaps we may be permitted to say, from his having the better cause to support.
Petau's pamphlets, on this
casion, were entitled “ Mastigophores," and consisted of three, and a supplement, published in 1623 and 1624. -But we basten to his more important chronological works, which, of all others, preserve his memory in our times : 19.“ Opus de doctrina Temporum," Paris, 1627, 2 vols. folio, reprinted, with additions from his own copy, Amst. 1703, folio. 20. “ Uranologion, sive systema variorum authorum, qui de sphæra ac sideribus, eorumque motibus Græce commentati sunt," ibid. 1630, folio," intended as a supplement to his “ Doctrina temporum ;" to which an additional volume was published, with dissertations from the MSS. of Petau and Sirmond, in 1703, folio. 21. “Tabulæ Chronologicæ Regum, Dynastarum, Urbium, &c. à mundo condito, &c. &c." ibid. 1628, on large sheets, and often reprinted: the best edition is that of Vesel, 1702. 22. “Rationarium Temporum," ibid. 1633, 12mo. the best known and most useful of all his works, and long the standard book in all seminaries and private libraries, for chronology and history. It was consequently often reprinted, improved, and enlarged, not only by the author, but hy various other editors. There are two editions, printed at Leyden in 1724 and 1745, 2 vols. 8vo, which are said to be the best. Besides these, and many other works of inferior importance enumerated by his biographer, Petau published a considerable number of theological pieces, which have sunk into oblivion, except perhaps his “ Theologica dogmata," Paris, 1644, 5 vols. folio; reprinted more correctly at Antwerp, 1700, 3 vols. folio. Of this work, Bayle has observed, that Petavius did the Socinians great service, though unawares, and against his intentions; and quotes the following passage from the “ Lettres Choisies” of Mr. Simon : “ If there be any thing to censure in Petavius's works, it is chiefly in the second tome of his “Dogmata Theologica," in which he seems to favour the Arians. It is true, that he softened those passages in his preface; but as the body of the work continues entire, and the preface, which is an excellent piece, came afterwards, it has not entirely prevented the harm which that book is like to do at this time, when the new Unitarians boast, that father Petavius declared for them." Bayle thinks he has resolved this, by informing us that Petavius's original design, in the second volume of his “Dogmata Theologica," was, to represent ingenuously the doctrine of the three first centuries. Having no particular system to defend, he did not disguise the opinions of the fathers; but acknowledged that some of them entertained false and absurd notions concerning the Trinity. All this, however, either from fear, or upon better consideration, he retracted, and published a “ Preface,” in which he laboured solely to assert the orthodoxy of the fathers. The “ Dogmata Theologica of Petavius," says Gibbon, " is a work of incredible labour and compass: the volumes which relate solely to the incarnation (two folios of 837 pages) are divided into sixteen books: the first of history, the remainder of controversy and doctrine.” “The Jesuit's learning," adds our infidel historian, " is copious and correct: his Latinity is pure, his method clear, his argument profound and well connected: but he is the slave of the fathers, the scourge of heretics, and the enemy of truth and candour, as often as they are inimical to the Catholic cause."
PETER CHRYSOLOGUS (St.), an eminent prelate of the fifth century, and called CHRYSOLOGUS from his eloquence, was descended of a noble family, and born at Imola, then called Forum Cornelii. After a suitable education, he was elected archbishop of Ravenna, about the year 433, and was much celebrated for his virtue and his eloquence. He died about the year 451. There are 126 sermons or homilies of his in the library of the fathers, in which he unites perspicuity with brevity; their style is concise and elegant, but not unmixed with quaintnesses. Father d’Acheri has published in his “ Spicilegium,” five other sermons written by him; and in St. Peter's works, is his answer to Eutyches, who had written to him in the
year 449, complaining of St. Flavianus of Constantinople, in which he defends the orthodox faith, and refers Eutyches to the excellent letter sent by St. Leo to Flavianus, which teaches what is to be believed concerning the mystery of the incarnation. The best edition of St. Peter Chrysologus is that printed at Augsburg, 1758, folio.?
PETER DÈ Blois, or PETRUS BLESENSIS, one of the most learned and celebrated writers of the twelfth century, studied at Paris and Bologna, and was appointed preceptor and secretary to William II. king of Sicily, and afterwards was invited into Englandi by Henry II. who made him arch.
1 Life by Oudin, in Niceron, vol. XXXVII. Batesii Vitæ Selectorum Virorum.-Dupin. - Burigny's Life of Grotius. Gibbon's History. - Şaxii Onomasticon.
Cave, vol. I. -Dupin.-Saxii Onomast. VOL. XXIV.
deacon of Bath, but permitted him to reside near Richard, archbishop of Canterbury, whose chancellor he was. Peter de Blois lost this archdeaconry towards the end of his life, and had that of London, where it is said he laboured much for little profit. He died in 1200, in England. There are some letters, sermons, and other works of bis, in the library of the fathers, in which he strongly condemns the abuses and disorders which then reigned in the church. He is said to have been the first who used the word transubstantiation, to express the doctrine of the Romish church on the subject of the eucharist. The best edition of this author is by Peter de Gussanville, 1667, folio.'
PETER COMESTOR, or the Eater, a celebrated writer in the twelfth century, was born at Troyes,' of which city he was canon and dean, afterwards chancellor of the church of Paris. These benefices he resigned to enter as a regular canon of St. Victor at Paris, where he died in October 1198, leaving a work entitled “Scholastica historia super Nov. Test.” which contains an abridgment of the sacred history, from Genesis to the Acts, first printed at Utrecht in 1473, small folio, and reprinted at Vienna in the same year, and several times since: He dedicated this work to cardinal William de Champagne, archbishop of Sens.
He is the author likewise of “Sermons," published by Busée, under the name of Peter de Blois, 1600, 4to; and a " Ca. tena temporum," or universal history, is attributed to him, which was printed at Lubec, 1475, 2 vols. folio, and translated in French under the title of “Mer des Histoires," Paris, 1488, 2 vols. folio."
PETER DE CLUGNY, or PETER the VENERABLE, a native of Auvergne, descended from the family of the counts Maurice, or de Montboissier, took the monk's habit at Clugny, was made prior of Vezelay, afterwards abbot, and general of his order in 1121, at the age of twentyeight. He revived monastic discipline in the abbey of Clugny, and received pope Innocent II. there in 1130. He opposed the errors of Peter de Bruys and Henry, and died in his abbey, December 24, 1156. We have six books of his letters, with several other works of very little consequence, in the “ Library of Clugny,” and some homilies in Martenne's “ Thes. Anecd.” That so ignorant and trilling a writer should have been honoured with the
title of Venerable, is a strong mark of the low state of religious knowledge at that time. In these his works he takes great pains to vindicate the manners and customs of his monastery, and appears to place the essence of Christianity in frivolous punctilios and insignificant ceremonies. was he, however, who received the celebrated Abelard in his afflictions with great humanity, and who consoled Eloisa after his death, by sending to her, at her request, the form of Abelard's absolution, which she inscribed on his sepulchre.
PETER THE GREAT, czar of Russia, who civilized that nation, and raised it from ignorance and barbarism, to politeness, knowledge, and power, a man of a wonderful composition and character, was born the 30th of May, 1672, and was son of the czar Alexis Michaelowitz by a second wife. Alexis dying in 1672, Feodor, or Theodore, his eldest son by his first wife, succeeded to the throne, and died in 1682. Upon his decease, Peter, though but ten years of age, was proclaimed czar, to the exclusion of John his elder brother, who was of a weak body, and a weaker mind. The strelitzes, who were the established guard of the czars, as the janisaries are of the grand seigniors, made an insurrection in favour of John, at the instigation of the princess Sophia, who, being own sister to John, hoped, perhaps, to be sole regent, since John was incapable of acting; or at least to enjoy a greater share of authority under John, than if the power was lodged solely in her half-brother Peter. The matter, however, was at last com, promised; and it was agreed, that the two brothers should jointly share the imperial dignity. The Russian education was, at that time, like the country, barbarous, so that Pe. ter had no advantages; and the princess Sophia, who, with considerable talents, was a woman of great ambition and intrigue, took all imaginable pains to stifle his natural de sire of knowledge, to deprave and corrupt his mind, and to debase and enervate him with pleasures. Yet his abhorrence of pageantry, and love of military exercises, discovered itself in his tenderest years; and, to gratify this inclination, he formed a company of fifty men, commanded by foreign officers, and clothed and exercised after the German manner. He entered himself among them in the lowest post, and performed the duties of it with the utmost
1 Cave, vol. II.--Dupin.Milner's Church History.