the doctor’s expectation, in conciliating the opinion of the faculty, yet, what is more valuable to an empiric, it procured the genera' good-will of ordinary readers,
, a noted empiric and chemist in the latter end of the sixteenth and the
beginning of the seventeenth centuries, was the son of an
eminent goldsmith in the city of London, who had an employment of considerable value in the jewel-office undef
the reign of queen Elizabeth. He was born April 16,
1550; and having been carefully instructed in the first
rudiments of learning while at home, was, about the year
1569, sent to the university of Cambridge, where he studied with great diligence and success, and some time in
the year 1574 took the degree of master of arts. It appears from his own writings, that he applied himself for
many years in that university, to the theory and practice
of chemistry, with sedulous industry. He came up to
London, probably before he attained the age of forty, and
began soon after his arrival to publish to the world the
effects of his chemical studies. In the year 1598, he sent
abroad his first treatise, concerning the excellency of a
medicine drawn from gold; but, not having taken the necessary precautions of applying to the college of physicians for their licence, he was, some time in the year 1600,
summoned before the president and censors. Here he
confessed that he had practised physic in London at least
more than six months, and had cured twenty persons of
several diseases, to whom he had given purging and vomiting physic, and to others, a diaphoretic medicine, prepared from gold and mercury, as their case required; but
acknowledged that he had no licence, and being examined,
in several parts of physic, and found inexpert, he was interdicted practice. About a month after, he was committed to the Counter-prison, and fined in the sum of five
pounds “propter illicitam praxin
” that is, for prescribing
physic against the statutes and privilege of the college;
but upon his application to the lord chief justice, he was
set at liberty, which gave so great umbrage to the college,
that the president and one of the censors waited on the
chief justice, to request his favour in defending and
preserving the college privileges; upon which Mr. Anthony
submitted himself, promised to pay his fine, and was forbidden practice. But not long after he was accused again
of practising physic, and upon his own confession was
fined five pounds; which, on his refusing to pay it, was
increased to twenty pounds, and he committed to prison
till he paid it; neither were the college satisfied with this,
but commenced a suit at law against him in the name of
the queen, as well as of the college, in which they succeeded, and obtained judgment against him; but after some
time, were prevailed upon by the intreaties of his wife, to
remit their share of the penalty, as appears by their warrant to the keeper of the prison for his discharge, dated
under the college seal, the 6th of August, 1602. After
his release, he seems to have met with considerable patrons, who were able to protect him from the authority of
the college; and though Dr. Goodall tells us, that this
learned society thought him weak and ignorant in physic,
yet he contrived to obtain the degree of doctor of physic
in some university. This did not hinder new complaints
being brought against him, by Dr. Taylor, and another
physician, who grounded their proceedings chiefly on his
giving a certain nostrum, which he called “Aurum potabilt!,
” or potable gold, and which he represented to the
world as an universal medicine. There were at this time
also several things written agaiust him, and his manner of
practice, insinuating that he was very inaccurate in his
method of philosophizing, that the virtues of metals as to
physical uses were very uncertain, and that the boasted
effects of his medicine were destitute of proof. Dr. Anthony, upon this, published a defence of himself and his
Aurum potabile in Latin, written with a plausible display
of skill in chemistry, and with an apparent knowledge of
the theory and history of physic. This book, which he
published in 1610, was printed at the university press of
Cambridge, and entitled “Medicinac Chymicae, et verj
potabilis Auri assertio, ex lucubrationibus Fra. Anthonii
Londinensis, in Medicina Doctoris. Cantabrigise, ex
officina Cantrelli Legge celeberrimae Academics Typographi,
” 4to. It had a very florid dedication to king James
prefixed. He, likewise, annexed certificates of cures, under the hands of several persons of distinction, and some
of the faculty; but his book was quickly answered, and
the controversy about Aurum potabile grew so warm, that
he was obliged to publish another apology in the Englis
language, which was also translated into Latin, but did not
ans.wer the doctor’s expectation, in conciliating the opinion
of the faculty, yet, what is more valuable to an empiric, it
procured the genera' good-will of ordinary readers, and
contributed exceedingly to support and extend his practice, notwithstanding all the pains taken to decry it. What
chiefly contributed to maintain his own reputation, and
thereby reflected credit on his medicine, was that which is
rarely met with among quacks, his unblemished character
in private life. Dr. Anthony was a man of unaffected piety,
untainted probity, of easy address, great modesty, and
boundless charity; which procured him many friends, and
left it not in the power of his enemies to attack any part of
his conduct, except that of dispensing a medicine, of
which they had no opinion. And though much has been
said to disgredit the use of gold in medicine, yet some very
able and ingenious men wrote very plausibly in support of
those principles on which Dr. Anthony’s practice was
founded, and among these the illustrious Robert Boyle.
The process of making the potable gold is given in the
Biog. Britannica, but in such a contused and ignorant
manner that any modern chemist may easily detect the
fallacy, and be convinced that gold does not enter into the
preparation. The time Jn which Anthony flourished, if
that phrase may be applied tq him, was very favourable to
his notions, chemistry being then much admired and very
little understood. He had therefore a most extensive and
beneficial practice, which enabled him to live hospitably
at his house in Bartholomew close, and to be very liberal
in jiis alms to the poor. He died May 26, 1623, and was
buried in the church of St. Bartholomew the Great, where
a handsome monument was erected to his memory. His
principal antagonists were, Dr. Matthew Gwinne, of the
college of physicians, who wrote “Aurum non Aurum,
sive adversaria in assertorem Chymiæ, sed veræ Medicinæ
desertorem Franciscum Anthonium,” Lond. 1611, 4to,
and Dr. Cotta, of Northampton, in 1623, in a work entitled, “Cotta contra Antonium, or an Ant-Antony, or an
Ant-Apology, manifesting Dr. Anthony his Apology for
Aurum potabile, in true and equal balance of right reason,
to be false and counterfeit,
” Oxford, 4to.
Dr. Anthony by his second wife had two sons: Charles,
a physician of character at Bedford, and John, the subject
of the following article.
f the former, and learned physic of him. Avenzoar, however, is reckoned by the generality of writers an empiric, although Dr. Freind observes that this character suits
,
an eminent Arabian physician, flourished about the end
of the eleventh or the beginning of the twelfth century.
He was of noble descent, and born at Seville, the capital
of Andalusia, where he exercised his profession with great
reputation. His grandfather and father were both physicians. The large estate he inherited from his ancestors
rendered it unnecessary for him to practise for gain, and
he therefore took no fees from the poor, or from artificers,
though he refused not the presents of princes and great
men. His liberality extended even to his enemies; for
which reason he used to say, that they hated him not for
any fault of his, but rather out of envy. Dr. Freind thinks
that he lived to the age of 135, that he began to practise
at 40 or, as others say, at 20, and had the advantage of
a. longer experience than almost any one ever had, as he
enjoyed perfect health to his last hour. He left a son,
known also by the name of Ebn Zohr, who followed his
father’s profession, was in great favour with Al-Mansor
emperor of Morocco, and wrote several treatises of physic.
Avenzoar was contemporary with Averroes, who, according to Leo Africanus, heard the lectures of the former, and
learned physic of him. Avenzoar, however, is reckoned
by the generality of writers an empiric, although Dr.
Freind observes that this character suits him less than any
of the Arabians. He wrote a book on the “Method of
preparing Medicines,
” which is much esteemed. It was
translated into Hebrew in the year 1280, and thence into
Latin by Paravicius, and printed at Venice in 1490, fol.
and again in 1553.
, an empiric, whose wori r derful cures have been attested by some
, an empiric, whose wori r
derful cures have been attested by some of the most eminent men of the seventeenth century, was the son of William Greatrakes, esq. and born at Affane, co. Waterforcl,
in Ireland, Feb. 14, 1628. He was educated a protestant
in the free-school of Lismore, until the age of thirteen,
when his friends intended to have removed him to Trinity
college, Dublin, but the rebellion breaking out, his mother took refuge with him in England, where he was kindly
received by his great uncle Edmund Harris, brother to
sir Edward Harris, knt. his grandfather by the mother’s
side. After his uncle’s death he spent some years in the
study of the classics and divinity under a clergyman in Devonshire, and then returned to Ireland, which was at that
time in so deplorable a state that he retired to the castle of
Caperquin, where he spent a year in contemplation, and
seems to have contracted a species of enthusiasm which
never altogether left him. In 1649 he entered into the
service of the parliament, and continued in the army until
1656, when, a great part of the English being disbanded,
he retired to his native country of Aflfane, and by the interest of the governor there, was made clerk cf the peace
for the county of Cork, register for transplantation, and
justice of the peace. At the Restoration all these places
were taken from him, and his mind being disturbed partly
with this disappointment, and partly for want of any regular and useful occupation, he felt an impulse, as he calls
it, that the gift of curing the king’s evil was bestowed upon
him and accordingly he began his operations, which were
confined to praying, and stroking the part affected and
such wonderful cures were effected, that he determined
not to stop here. Three years after, he had another impulse that he could cure all kinds of diseases, and by
the same simple remedy, which must be administered
by himself. When however he pretended to some supernatural aid, and mentioned the Holy Ghost with irreverent presumption, as his assistant, he was cited to the
bishop’s court, and forbid to take such liberties. This
probably was the cause of his coming to England in January 1665, where he performed many cures, was invited
by the king to Whitehall, and his reputation spread most
extensively. Even Dr. Henry Stubbe, an eminent physician, published a pamphlet in praise of his skill. Having
failed in one instance, that of a Mr. Cresset in Charterhouse square, there appeared a pamphlet entitled “Wonders no miracles: or Mr. Valentine Greatrakes Gift of
Healing examined,
” &c. Lond. A brief account of Mr. Valentine Greatrakes, and
divers of his strange cures,
” &c. ibid.
f his art, grief for the loss of a most beautiful and amiable wife, and the injudicious medicines of an empiric, his countryman, who pretended to restore his health,
, a celebrated modern
painter, was born at Aussig in Bohemia, in 1726. His
lather was painter to Augustus 111. king of Poland, and
he, observing the talents of his son for the same art,
took him to Rome in 1741. After studying about four
years, the young painter returned to Dresden, where
he executed several works for Augustus with uncommon
success. But his greatest patron was Charles III. king of
Spain, who having, while only king of Naples, become
acquainted with Mengs and his merits, in 1761, within
two years after his accession to the throne of Spain, settled
upon him a pension of 2000 doubloons, and gave him an
house and an. equipage. Mengs, nevertheless, did not go
to Spain, but resided chiefly at Rome, where he died in
1779. The labours of his art, grief for the loss of a most
beautiful and amiable wife, and the injudicious medicines
of an empiric, his countryman, who pretended to restore
his health, are said to have occasioned his death. His character was very amiable, with no great fault but that which
too commonly attends genius, a total want of reconomy;
so that, though his profitsin various ways,forthe last eighteen years of his life, were very considerable, he hardly left
enough to pay for his funeral. In his address, he was timid
and aukward, with an entire ignorance of the world, and
an enthusiasm for the arts, which absorbed almost all his
passions. He left five daughters, and two sons, all of
whom were provided for by his patron the king of Spain.
He was an author as well as a painter, and his works were
published at Parma in 1780, by the chevalier d'Azara,
with notes, and a life of Mengs, in 2 vols. 4to, which were
translated into English, and published in 2 vols. 1796, 8vo.
They consist chiefly of treatises and letters on taste, on
several painters, and various subjects connected with the
philosophy and progress of the arts. They were partly
translated into French, in 1782, and more completely in
1787. All that is technical on the subject of painting, in
the work of his friend Winckelman, on the history of art,
was supplied by Mengs. He admired the ancients, but
without bigotry, and could discern their faults as well as
their beauties. As an artist, Mengs seems to have been
mostly admired in Spain. In this country, recent connoisseurs seem disposed to under-rate his merit, merely, as
it would appear, because it had been over-rated by
Azara and Winckelman. The finest specimen of his art in
this country is the altar- piece of All Souls Chapel, Oxford.
The subject of this picture is our Saviour in the garden
it consists of two figures in the foreground, highly finished,
and beautifully painted. It was ordered by a gentleman
of that college whilst on his travels through Spain; but
being limited to the price, he was obliged to choose a
subject of few figures. This gentleman relates a singular
anecdote of Mengs, which will further show the profundity
of his knowledge and discernment in things of antiquity.
While Dr. Burney was abroad collecting materials for his
History of Music, he found at Florence an ancient statue
of Apollo, with a bow and riddle in his hand: this, he considered, would be sufficient to decide the long-contested
point, whether or not the ancients had known the use of the
bow. He consulted many people to ascertain the certainty if
this statue were really of antiquity; and at last Mengs was
desired to give his opinion, who, directly as he had examined it, without knowing the cause of the inquiry,
said, “there was no doubt but that the statue was of antiquity, but that the arms and fiddle had been recently
added.
” This had been done with such ingenuity that no
one had discovered it before Mengs; but the truth of the
same was not to be doubted.
t was some time after this that he made that celebrated speech, in which he compared the ministry to an empiric, and the constitution of England to his patient. This
The “Craftsman
” involved Pulteney in other controversies, in one of which he wrote his famous pamphlet,
entitled “An Answer to one part of a late infamous libel,
intituled ‘ Remarks on the Craftsman’s vindication of his
two honourable patrons,’ in which the character and conduct of Mr. P. is fully vindicated.
” In this Mr. Pulteney
was so irritated, as to disclose some secret conversation
with Walpole, and some contemptuous expressions which
that statesman uttered against the king, when prince of
Wales; but this, instead of producing the effect which
Pulteney probably expected, only raised his majesty’s
resentment higher against himself. Franklin, the printer
of the pamphlet, was arrested; Pulteney’s name was struck
out of the list of privy-counsellors, and he was put out of
all commissions of the peace; measures which tended to
render the breach irreparable, while they added considerable popularity to Pulteney, It was some time after this
that he made that celebrated speech, in which he compared
the ministry to an empiric, and the constitution of England to his patient. This pretender in physic,“said he,
” being consulted, tells the distempered person, there
were but two or three ways of treating his disease, and be
was afraid that none of them would succeed. A vomit
might throw him into convulsions, that would occasion
immediate death: a purge might bring on a diarrhoea, that
would carry him off in a short time: and he had been
already bled so much, and so often, that he could bear it
no longer. The unfortunate patient, shocked at this decla-,
ration, replies, Sir, you have always pretended to be a
regular doctor, but I now find you are an errant quack,:
I had an excellent constitution when I first fell into your
hands, but you have quite destroyed it; and now, I find,
I have no other chance for saving my life, but by calling
for the help of some regular physician."