political grounds. Armstrong not only served under government, as an army physician, but he was also a Scotchman, and could not help resenting the indignity which
In this poem he was supposed to reflect on ChurchilJ,
but in a manner so distant that few except of Churchill’s
irascible temper could have discovered any cause of offence.
This libeller, however, retorted on our author in “The
Journey,
” with an accusation of ingratitude, the meaning
of which is said to have been that Dr. Armstrong forgot
certain pecuniary obligations he owed to Mr. Wilkes.
About the same time a coolness took place between Dr.
Armstrong and Mr. Wilkes on political grounds. Armstrong not only served under government, as an army
physician, but he was also a Scotchman, and could not
help resenting the indignity which Wilkes was perpetually
attempting to throw on that nation in his North Briton.
On this account they appear to have continued at variance
as late as the year 1773, when our author called Wilkes to
account for some reflections on his character which he suspected he had written in his favourite vehicle, the Public
Advertiser. The conversation which passed on this occasion was lately published in the Gentleman’s Magazine
(1792), and is said to have been copied from minutes taken
the same afternoon, April 7, 1773, and sent to a friend:
but as the doctor makes by far the worst figure in the dialogue, it can be no secret by whom the minutes were
taken, and afterwards published.
ed” muscular motion“as the subject of the prize of that year, which was won by Mr. Alexander Stuart, a Scotchman, and physician to the queen of England, M. Bel, after
, counsellor of the parliament of
Bourdeaux, was born there March 21, 1693, and at the
age of nine was sent for education to the college of the
Oratory at Juilly, in the diocese of Meaux. Although of
a weakly habit, he made great progress in his early studies,
and was liberally encouraged by one of the regent masters,
father de Vize“. In 1711 he returned to his family, where
he continued his studies, deriving some assistance from his
father, a man of talents, but austere and somewhat unsocial. Here, likewise, he found many young men of his
own age who like himself were intended for the bar or for
offices of the magistracy. After five or six years application, M. Bel employed his pen on various subjects of metaphysics and morals, and amused himself occasionally with
perusing the best poets. In 1720, he was received as a
counsellor of parliament, and conducted himself in the
causes entrusted to him, with strict probity and impartiality. In 1731, on the death of his father, he succeeded
him in the office of treasurer of France. During his residence at Paris, he formed an intimacy with the literati of
the metropolis, and projected two considerable works, for
which he had collected materials: the one on taste, its
history, progress and decline; the other on French poetry.
On his return to Bourdeaux in 1736, he was elected a
member of the Bourdeaux academy, and the following year
chosen director, on which occasion he made a speech
which included some part of the work on taste above-mentioned. Some time afterwards he resigned his office of
counsellor, and obtained letters of superannuation (lettres de veteran). In 1737, the academy having proposed
” muscular motion“as the subject of the prize of that year, which
was won by Mr. Alexander Stuart, a Scotchman, and physician to the queen of England, M. Bel, after examining
the various dissertations sent in on this occasion, read one
of his own on the same subject before the academy; and
in order to study this and similar subjects more fully, with
a view to his situation in the academy, he determined to
make another visit to Paris. But from the moment of his
arrival there, he gave himself up so unremittingly to study,
as to bring on a dangerous illness, of which he died August
15, 1738. He left to the academy of Bourdeaux, his
house and a fine and well-chosen library, with a fund for
the maintenance of two librarians. His principal publications were, 1.
” Apologie de M. Houdart de la Motte, de
l'academie Franchise, Paris, 1724,“8vo, a satirical attack on
M. de la Motte’s works, especially his dramas. 2.
” Dictionnaire Neologique," since considerably augmented by
the abbe* Fontaines, a work intended to ridicule the use of
new and affected words. He wrote also a criticism on the
Mariamne of Voltaire, and some similar criticisms inserted
in the Literary Memoirs published by father Moletz of the
oratory.
field, Cawfield, Chalfhill, or Calfed, was born in Shropshire, in 1530. Strype, however, says he was a Scotchman, and cousin to Toby Malhew, afterwards archbishop
, a learned divine of
the sixteenth century, otherwise named Calfield, Cawfield,
Chalfhill, or Calfed, was born in Shropshire, in 1530.
Strype, however, says he was a Scotchman, and cousin to
Toby Malhew, afterwards archbishop of York. He received his education at Eton school, and from thence was
sent, in 1545, to King’s college in Cambridge, from which
he was removed, with many Other Cambridge men, in 1548,
to Christ Church in Oxford, newly founded by king Henry
VIII. Here be shewed himself to be a person of quick
wit and great capacity; being an excellent poet and author of a tragedy, with other theatrical performances. In
1549, he took his degree of bachelor of arts; and that of
master in 1552, being junior of the act celebrated in St.
Mary’s church, July 18. He was made, in 1560, canon of
the second canonry in Christ Church cathedral, Oxon; and,
On the 12th of December 1561, took the degree of bachelor
of divinity. In 1562 he was proctor for the clergy of London and the chapter of Oxford in the convocation that
made the XXXIX Articles and on the 16th of May, the
same year, was admitted to the rectory of St. Andrew
Wardrobe, London. The 4th of October following, he
was presented by the crown to the prebend of St. Pancras,
in the cathedral church of St. Paul; and May 4, 1565, was
collated by Matthew Parker, archbishop of Canterbury, to
the rectory of Booking, in Essex; and on July 16th following, to the archdeaconry of Colchester in Essex, by
Edmund Grindal, bishop of London. The same year, December 17th, he took the degree of doctor in divinity. In
1568, he preached two sermpns in Bristol cathedral, on purpose to confute Dr. Cheney, who held that see in commendam, and who had spoken disrespectfully of certain opinions of Luther and Calvin. In 1569 he made application
to secretary Cecil, chancellor of the university of Cambridge, for the provostship of king’s college, but Dr.
Goad’s interest prevailed. Upon the translation of.Dr. Edwin Sandys from the bishopric of Worcester to that of
London in 1570, Dr. Calfhiil was nominated by queen
Elizabeth to succeed him 3 but before his consecration he
died, about the beginning of August (having a little before resigned his canonry of Christ Church, and rectory of St. Andrew Wardrobe), and was buried in the chancel of
Bocking church. His works were, 1. “Querela Oxoniensis Academise ad Cantabrigiam,
” Lond. Historia de exhumatione Catherines nuper
uxoris Pet. Martyris;
” or, The History of the digging up
the body of Catherine late wife of Peter Martyr, Lond.
1562, 8vo. The remains of this lady had been deposited
in the cathedral of Christ Church, near to the relics of St.
Frideswide, and in queen Mary’s reign were dug up and
buried in the dunghill near the stables belonging to the
dean; but on the accession of queen Elizabeth, an order
was given to replace them with suitable solemnity. This
order our author partly executed, and the remains of
Martyr’s wife were on this occasion purposely mixed with
those of St. Frideswide, that the superstitious worshippers
of the latter might never be able to distinguish or separate
them. 3. Answer to John Martiall’s “Treatise of the Cross,
gathered out of the Scriptures, Councils, and ancient Fathers of the primitive Church,
” Lond. Progne,
” a tragedy, in Latin; whichprobably was never
printed. It was acted before que^n Elizabeth at Oxford
in 1566, in Christ Church hall; but, says Wood, “it did
not take half so well as the much admired play of Palsemon
and Arcyte,
” written by Edwards. 5. “Poemata varia.
”
As to his character, we are informed, that he was in his
younger days a noted poet and comedian and in his elder,
an exact disputant, and had an excellent faculty in speaking and preaching. One who had heard him preach, gives
this account of him: “His excellent tongue, and rhetorical tale, tilled with good and wholesome doctrine, so
ravished the minds of the hearers, that they were all in
admiration of his eloquence.
” One John Calfhill, chaplain to Dr. Matthew, archbishop of York, a prebendary of
Durham, &c. who died in 1619, was probably son to our
author.
s, and others have contended that he was an Irishman. It is, we apprehend, most probable that he was a Scotchman. However this may have been, he was animated, in a
, an eminent scholar of the
middle age, was born in an early part of the ninth century.
The most common account of him is, that he was a native
of Ayr, in Scotland, though some writers have said that
the place of his birth was Ergene, on the borders of Wales,
and others have contended that he was an Irishman. It is,
we apprehend, most probable that he was a Scotchman.
However this may have been, he was animated, in a very
dark period, with a most uncommon desire of literature.
Seeing his country involved in great confusion and ignorance, and that it afforded no means of acquiring the knowledge after which he thirsted, he travelled into foreign,
parts; and it is even asserted, by several authors, that he
went to Athens, and spent some years in studying the
Greek, Chaldaic, and Arabic languages. In whatever
place he obtained his learning, it is certain that in philosophy he had no superior, and in languages no equal, in.
the age during which he flourished. These extraordinary
accomplishments, together with his wit and pleasantry,
which rendered his conversation as agreeable as it was instructive, procured him an invitation from Charles the
Bald, king of France, the greatest patron of literature in
that period, to reside with him. Of this invitation Erigena
accepted, and Jived a number of years in the court of that
prince, on a footing of the most intimate acquaintance and
familiarity. He slept often in the royal apartments, and
dined daily at the royal table. From the following repartee, which is preserved by one of our ancient historians, we may judge of the freedom which Scotus used
with the monarch. As they were sitting one day at table
opposite to each other, after dinner, the philosopher having said something that was not quite agreeable to the rules
of politeness, the king, in a merry humour, asked him,
“Pray what is between a Scot and a sot
” To which he
answered, “Nothing but the table.
” Charles, says the
historian, laughed heartily, and was not in the least offended, as he made it- a rule never to be angry with his
master, as he always called Erigena; yet, in order to assist our belief in the above joke, it has been observed, that
we ought to know in what language Charles and Scotus
conversed. Charles, however, valued this great man for
his wisdom and learning, still more than for his wit, and
retained him about his person, not merely as an agreeable
companion, but as his preceptor in the sciences, and his
best counsellor in the most arduous affairs of governnfenf.
While Scotus resided in the court of France, he composed,
at the desire of his royal patron, a number of works, which
procured him many admirers on the one hand, and many
adversaries on the other. The clergy, in particular, were
dissatisfied with some of his notions, as not being perfectly
orthodox. One of the subjects which employed his pen
was the doctrine of predestination. In his treatise on this
subject, which was addressed to Hincmar, archbishop of
Rheims, and Pardulus, bishop of Laon, the position he
begins with is, that every question may be resolved by four
general rules of philosophy, viz. division, definition, demonstration, and analysis. By these rules he endeavours
to prove, that there cannot be a double predestination, of
one to glory, and another to damnation; and that predestination does not impose any necessity, but that man is
absolutely free; and that, although he cannot do good
without the grace of Jesus Christ, yet he does it, without
being constrained or forced to do it by the will of God, by
his own free choice. Sin, and the consequences of it, and
the punishments with which it is attended, are, says Erigena, mere privations, that are neither foreseen nor predestinated by God; and predestination hath no place but
in those things which God hath pre-ordained in order to
eternal happiness; for our predestination arises from the
foresight of the good use of our free-will. Sentiments so
bold, and delivered in such an age, could not fail of exciting great indignation. Wemlo, or Ganelo, archbishop
of Sens, having read the work, collected out of it several
propositions, which he arranged under nineteen heads,
according to the number and order of the chapters of Scotus’s treatise, and sent them to Prudentius, bishop of
Troyes. This prelate, having examined them, found in
them, as he thought, not only the errors of Pelagius, but
the impiety of the Collyridians. He employed himself,
therefore, in answering Erigena and another answer to
him was written by Florus, a deacon of the church of
Lyons. It does not appear that Scotus engaged any farther in the controversy.
, a Scotchman, born the latter end of the fifteenth century, whose
, a Scotchman, born the latter
end of the fifteenth century, whose sufferings by imprisonment and torture at Malaga, and whose travels on foot
over Europe, Asia, and Africa, seem to raise him almost
to the rank of a martyr and a hero, published a well-known
account of his peregrinations and adventures. The first
edition of this was printed in 1614, 4to, and reprinted in
the next reign, with additions, and a dedication to Charles J.
Though the author deals much in the marvellous, the accounts of the strange cruelties, of whioh he tells us he was
the subject, have, however, an air of truth. Soon after
his arrival in England from Malaga, he was carried to
Theobalds on a feather-bed, that king James might be an
eye-witness of his martyred anatomy, by which he means
his wretched body, mangled and reduced to a skeleton.
The whole court crowded to see him; and his majesty ordered him to be taken care of; and he was twice sent to
Bath at his expence. By the king’s command, he applied
to Gondamor, the Spanish ambassador, for the recovery of
money and other things of value which the governor of
Malaga had taken from him, and for a thousand pounds
for his support; but, although promised a full reparation
for the damages he had sustained, that minister never performed his promise. When he was upon the point of
leaving England, Lithgow upbraided him with the breach
of his word, in the presence-chamber, before several gentlemen of the court. This occasioned their fighting upon
the spot; and the ambassador, as the traveller oddly expressed it, “had his fistula contrabanded with his fist;
”
but the unfortunate Lithgow, although generally commended for his spirited behaviour, was sent to the Marshalsea, where he continued a prisoner nine months. At
the conclusion of the 8vo edition of his travels, he informs
us, that “in his three voyages his painful feet have traced
over, besides passages of seas and rivers, thirty-six thousand and odd miles, which draweth near to twice the circumference of the whole earth.
” Here the marvellous seems
to rise to the incredible; and to set him in point of veracity below Coryat, whom it is nevertheless certain that he
far outwalked. His description of Ireland is whimsical
and curious. This, together with the narrative of his
sufferings, is reprinted in Morgan’s “Phcenix Britannicus.
” He published also an account of the siege of Breda,
1637, of which the reader will find a notice in the “Restituta.
”
reception of an improbable fiction: they are seduced by their fondness for their supposed ancestors. A Scotchman must be a sturdy moralist who does not love Scotland
About this time seems to be the period of Mr. Macpherson’s literary mortifications. In 1773, Dr. Johnson and
Mr. Boswell made the tour to the Hebrides; and in the
course of it, the former took some pains to examine into
the proofs of the authenticity of Ossian. The result of his
inquiries he gave to the public in 1775, in his narrative of
the tour, ai^d his opinion was unfavourable. “I believe
they (i. e. the poems, says he) never existed in any other
form than that which we have seen. The editor or author
never could shew the original; nor can it be shewn by any
other. To revenge reasonable incredulity by refusing
evidence is a degree of insolence with which the world is
not yet acquainted; and stubborn audacity is the last refuge of guilt. It would be easy to shew it if he had it;
but whence could it be had? It is too long to be remembered, and the language had formerly nothing written. He
has doubtless inserted names that circulate in popular
stories, and may have translated some wandering ballads,
if any can be found; and the names and some of the
images being recollected, make an inaccurate auditor
imagine, by the help of Caledonian bigotry, that he has
formerly heard the whole.
” Again, “I have yet supposed
no imposture but in the publisher, yet 1 am far from certainty, that some translations have not been lately made,
that may now be obtruded as parts of the original work.
Credulity on one part is a strong temptation to deceit on
the other, especially to deceit of which no personal injury
is the consequence, and which flatters the author with his
own ingenuity. The Scots have something to plead for
their easy reception of an improbable fiction: they are
seduced by their fondness for their supposed ancestors. A
Scotchman must be a sturdy moralist who does not love
Scotland better than truth; he will always love it better
than inquiry, and, if falsehood flatters his vanity, will not
be very diligent to detect it. Neither ought the English
to be much influenced by Scotch authority; for of the
past and present state of the whole Erse nation, the Lowlanders are at least as ignorant as ourselves. To be ignorant is painful; but it is dangerous to quiet our uneasiness
by the delusive opiate of hasty persuasion.
”
, a preacher of some celebrity among the French protestants, was the son of a Scotchman, who was principal of the college at Castres in Languedoc,
, a preacher of some celebrity among the French protestants, was the son of a Scotchman, who was principal of the college at Castres in Languedoc, and born there in 1616. When he was about twenty, he was sent to Geneva to study divinity; and finding, upon his arrival, that the chair of the Greek professor was vacant, he became a candidate for it. and gained it against competitors greatly beyond himself in years. Having exercised this office for about three years, he succeeded Spanheim, who was called away to Leyden, in the functions of divinity-professor and minister of Geneva. As he was a favourite preacher, and a man of great learning, he appears to have excited the jealousy of a party which was formed against him at Geneva. He had, however, secured the good opinion of Salmasius, who procured him the divinity-professor’s place at Middlebourg, together with the parish-church, which occasioned him to depart from Geneva in 1649. The gentlemen of Amsterdam, at his arrival in Holland, offered him the professorship of history, which was become vacant by the death of Vossius; but, not being able to detach him from his engagements to the city of Middlebourg, they gave it to David Blondel, yet, upon a second offer, he accepted it about three years after. In 1654, he left his professorship of history for some time to take a journey into Italy; where it is said he was greatly noticed by the duke of Tuscany. During his stay in Italy, he wrote a beautiful poem upon the defeat of the Turkish fleet by the Venetians, and was honoured with a chain of gold by the republic of Venice. He returned to his charge; and, after some contests with the Walloon synods, went into France, to be ordained minister of the church of Paris. But here he met with many opponents, his character, as is said, being somewhat ambiguous both in regard to faith and morals. He succeeded, however, in being received minister of the church of Paris, although his reputation continued to be attacked by people of merit and consequence, who presented him again to the from whose censures he escaped with great difficulty, and had again to encounter in 1661. About this time he went to England, and on his return six months afterwards, the complaints against him were immediately renewed. He died at Paris, in the duchess of Rohan’s house, in September 1670.
nses,” under the article Briggs, on the authority of Oughtred and Wingate, viz. “That one Dr. Craig, a Scotchman, coming out of Denmark into his own country, called
, baron of Merchiston in
Scotland, and the celebrated inventor of the Logarithms,
was the eldest son of sir Archibald Napier of Merchiston,
and born in 1550. After going through the ordinary course
of education at the university of St. Andrew’s, he made the
tour of France, Italy, and Germany. On his return he
applied himself chiefly to the study of mathematics, to
which he joined that of the Scriptures; and in both discovered the most extensive knowledge and profound penetration. His “Essay upon the book of the Apocalypse
”
indicates the most acute investigation; though time has
discovered that his calculations concerning particular events
had proceeded upon fallacious data. But what his fame now
solely rests upon is his great and fortunate discovery of logarithms in trigonometry, by which the ease and expedition
in calculation have so wonderfully assisted the science of
astronomy and the arts of practical geometry and navigation. Napier, having much attachment to astronomy and
spherical trigonometry, had occasion to make many numeral calculations of such triangles, with sines, tangents,
&c. which being expressed in large numbers, occasioned
a great deal of labour and trouble: To spare themselves
part of this labour, Napier, and other authors about his
time, endeavoured to find out certain short modes of calculation, as is evident from many of their writings. To
this necessity, and these endeavours it is, that we owe several ingenious contrivances; particularly the computation
by Napier’s Rods, or Bones, as they are called, and several other curious and short methods that are given in his
“Rabdologia
” and at length, after trials of many other
means, the most complete one of logarithms, in the actual
construction of a large table of numbers in arithmetical
progression, adapted to a set of as many others in geometrical progression. The property of such numbers had
been long known, viz. that the addition of the former answered to the multiplication of the latter, &c. but it
wanted the necessity of such very troublesome calculations
as those abovementioned, joined to an ardent disposition,
to make such a use of that property. Perhaps also this
disposition was urged into action by certain attempts of this
kind which it seems were made elsewhere; such as the following, related by Wood 'in his “Athenae Oxonienses,
”
under the article Briggs, on the authority of Oughtred and
Wingate, viz. “That one Dr. Craig, a Scotchman, coming
out of Denmark into his own country, called upon John
Neper baron of Marcheston near Edinburgh, and told him,
among other discourses, of a new invention in Denmark,
(by Longomontanus as ‘tis said) to save the tedious multiplication and division in astronomical calculations. Neper
being solicitous to know farther of him concerning this
matter, he could give no other account of it, than that it
was by proportionable numbers. Which hint Neper taking,
he desired him at his return to call upon him again. Craig,
after some weeks had passed, did so, and Neper then
shewed him a rude draught of that he called ’ Canon Mirabilis Logarithmorum.' Which draught, with some alterations, he printed in 1614; it came forthwith into the
hands of our authorBriggs, and into thoseof William Oughtred, from whom the relation of this matter came.
”
ary 12, 1634, and retired to Egra, a strong city on the frontiers of Bohemia and Saxony; but Gordon, a Scotchman, lieutenant-colonel and governor of Egra, nattered
, duke of Fridland, a celebrated German commander, was born in 1584, and descended of a noble and ancient Bohemian family. His education appears to have been irregular. At first he had no inclination for study, but later in life he applied himself to astronomy and politics, at Padua. After his return to his own country, he married, but being soon left a widower, he went to the siege of Gradisca, in Friuli, and offered his services to the archduke Ferdinand, against the Venetians. When the troubles broke out in Bohemia, he offered himself to the emperor, with an army of thirty thousand men, on condition of being their general. The emperor having consented, Walstein marched at the head of this army, and reduced the diocese of Halberstadt and the bishopric of Halle he ravaged also the territories of Magdeburgh and Anhalt; defeated Mansfeldt in two battles retook all Silesia; vanquished the marquis d‘Urlach conquered the archbishopric of Bremen and Holsace, and made himself master of all the country between the ocean, the Baltic sea, and the Elbe; leaving only Gluckatadt to the king of Denmark, whom he also drove from Pomerania, where he had made a descent. After the treaty of Lubec, the emperor gave him the titles and spoils of the duke of Mecklenburgh, who had rebelled; but Walstein published an edict about that time, ordering the restitution of ecclesiastical property in the territories just given him; and the’ protest* tants, being alarmed, called in Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden, to their assistance. This step so intimidated the emperor, that he permitted Walstein to be removed, and sent only Tilly against Gustavus. Tilly having been defeated at Leipsic by the Swedes, the conqueror rushed into Germany like a torrent, which obliged the emperor to recall Walstein, whom he appointed generalissimo. Walstein accordingly entered the lists with the Swedish monarch; defeated him, and was defeated in his turn; took from him almost the whole of Bohemia, by the capture of Prague, and fought with various success till the bloody battle of Lutzen, November 16, 1632, which Walstein lost, though Gustavus Adolphus was killed at the commencement of the action. Walstein, notwithstanding this defeat, finding himself delivered from so formidable a prince, was suspected of aiming at independence; and these suspicions being increased by his refusing to submit to the court of Vienna in any of his enterprises, the emperor degraded him, and gave the command to Galas. Walstein, alarmed at this, made the officers of his army take an oath of fidelity to him at Pilsen, January 12, 1634, and retired to Egra, a strong city on the frontiers of Bohemia and Saxony; but Gordon, a Scotchman, lieutenant-colonel and governor of Egra, nattered by the hopes of great preferment, conspired against him with Butler, an Irishman, to whom Walstein had given a regiment of dragoons, and Lasci, a Scotchroan, captain of his guards. These three, who are said to have been instigated to this crime by the court of Vienna, murdered him in his chamber, February 15, 1634. He was, at that time, fifty years old. The family of Walstein is distinguished in Germany, and has produced several other great men.
mself about an English translation of the book of logarithms, then lately discovered by lord Napier, a Scotchman, who had a great affection for him. This posthumous
, a noted English mathematician,
who flourished in the latter part of the sixteenth century
and beginning of the seventeenth, is thus characterised in
a Latin paper in the library of Gonvile and Caius college,
Cambridge: “This year (1615) died at London, Edward
Wright, of Garveston, in Norfolk, formerly a fellow of
this college; a man respected by all for the integrity and
simplicity of his manners, and also famous for his skill in
the mathematical sciences; so that he was not undeservedly
styled a most excellent mathematician by Richard Hackluyt, the author of an original treatise of our English navigations. What knowledge he had acquired in the science
of mechanics, and how usefully he employed that knowledge to ths public as well as to private advantage, abundantly appear both from the writings he published, and
from the many mechanical operations still extant, which
are standing monuments of his great industry and ingenuity.
He was the first undertaker of that difficult but useful work,
by which a little river is brought from the town of Ware
in apew canal, to supply the city of London with water
but by the tricks of others he was hindered from completing the work he had begun. He was excellent both in
contrivance and execution, nor was he inferior to the most
ingenious mechanic in the making of instruments, either
of brass or any other matter. To his invention is owing
whatever advantage Hondius’s geographical charts have
above others; for it was Wright who taught Jodocus Horn
dius the method of constructing them, which wa.s till then
unknown; but the ungrateful Hondius concealed the name
of the true author, and arrogated the glory of the invention
to hjmself. Of this fraudulent practice the good man could
nqt help complaining, and justly enough, in the preface
to his treati.se of the
” Correction of Errors in the art of
Navigation;“which he composed with excellent judgment
and after long experience, to the great advancement of
naval affairsi For the improvement of this art he was appointed mathematical lecturer by the East India company,
and read lectures in the house of that worthy knight sir
Thomas Smith, for which he had a yearly salary of fifty
pounds, This office he discharged with great reputation,
and much to the satisfaction of his hearers. He published
in English a book on the doctrine of the sphere, and another
concerning the construction of sun-dials. He also prefixed an ingenious preface to the learned Gilbert’s book
on the loadstone. By these and other his writings, he has
transmitted his fame to latest posterity. While he was yet
a fellow of this college, he could not be concealed in his
private study, but was called forth to the public business
of the nation by the queen, about 1593. He was ordered
to attend the earl of Cumberland in some maritime expeditions. One of these he has given a faithful account of,
in the manner of a journal or ephemeris, to which he has
prefixed an elegant hydrographical chart of his own contrivance. A little before his death he employed himself
about an English translation of the book of logarithms, then
lately discovered by lord Napier, a Scotchman, who had a
great affection for him. This posthumous work of his- was
published soon after by his only son Samuel Wright, who
was also a scholar of this college. He had formed many
other useful designs, but was hindered by death from bringing them to perfection. Of him it may truly be said, that
he studied more to serve the public than himself; and
though he was rich in fame, and in the promises of the
great, yet he died poor, to tfie scandal of an ungrateful
age.
” So far the memoir; other particulars concerning
him are as follow: