at least of them was not very well pleased with it. We are told, indeed, that lord Chesterfield and bishop Warburton were at first deceived; but this proves only the exactness
It is certain, however, that about 1753 he came to London, and entered himself, as already noticed, as a student
of the Middle Temple, where he is said to have studied,
as in every other situation, with unremitting diligence.
Many of his habits and conversations were long remembered at the Grecian coffee-house (then the great rendezvous of the students of the Middle Temple), and they
were such as were highly creditable to his morals and his
talents. With the former, indeed, we should not know
jhow to reconcile a connection imputed to him at this time
with Mrs. Woffington, the actress, if we gave credit to the
report; but it is not very likely, that one in Mr. Burke’s
narrow circumstances would have been admitted to more
than a slight acquaintance with a lady of that description.
Though by the death of his elder brother, he was to have
succeeded to a very comfortable patrimony, yet as his.
father was living, and had other children, it could not be
supposed that his allowance was very ample. This urged
him to draw upon his genius for the deficiency of fortune,
and we are told that he became a frequent contributor to
the periodical publications. His first publication is said to
have been a poem, which did not succeed. There is no
certain information, however, concerning these early productions, unless that he found it necessary to apply with
so much assiduity as to injure his health. A dangerous
illness ensued, and he resorted for medical advice to Dr.
Nugent, a physician whose skill in his profession was
equalled only by the benevolence of his heart. He was,
if we are not mistaken, a countryman of Burke’s, a Roman
catholic, and at one time an author by profession. This
benevolent friend, considering that the noise and various
disturbances incidental to chambers, must retard the recovery of his patient, furnished him with apartments in
his own house, where the attention of every member of
the family contributed more than medicine to the recovery
of his health. It was during this period that the amiable
manners of miss Nugent, the doctor’s daughter, made a
deep impression on the heart of Burke; and as she could
not be insensible to such merit as his, they felt for each,
other a mutual attachment, and were married soon after
his recovery. With this lady he appears to have enjoyed
uninterrupted felicity. He often declared to his intimate
friends, “That, in all the anxious moments of his public
life, every care vanished when he entered his own house.
”
Mr. Burke' s first known publication, although not immediately known, was his very happy imitation of Bolingbroke, entitled “A Vindication of Natural Society,
” The critics knew the turn of his
periods; his style; his phrases; and above all, the matchless dexterity of his nietaphysical pen: and amongst these,
nobody distinguished himself more than the lately departed
veteran of the stage, Charles Macklin; who, with the
pamphlet in his hand, used frequently to exclaim at the
Grecian coffee-house (where he gave a kind of literary law to the young Templars at that time),
” Oh! sir, this must
be Harry Bolingbroke: I know him by his cloven foot."
But much of this account is mere assumption. Macklin,
and such readers as Macklin, might be deceived; but no
man was deceived whose opinion deserved attention. The
public critics certainly immediately discovered the imitation, and one at least of them was not very well pleased
with it. We are told, indeed, that lord Chesterfield and
bishop Warburton were at first deceived; but this proves
only the exactness of the imitation; a more attentive perusal discovered the writer’s real intention.
leman’s family, where he continued some years. He entered young upon the ministry, being ordained by bishop Reynolds; and the first employment which he had was at Milden,
, a celebrated commentator on the New Testament, the son of the rev. Miles Burkitt, who was ejected for nonconformity, was born at Hitcharn, in Northamptonshire, July 25, 1650. He was sent first to a school at Stow Market, and from thence to another at Cambridge. After his recovery from the small pox, which he caught there a he was admitted of Pembroke-hall, at the age of no more than fourteen years; and upon his removal from the university, when he had taken his degree, he became a chaplain in a private gentleman’s family, where he continued some years. He entered young upon the ministry, being ordained by bishop Reynolds; and the first employment which he had was at Milden, in Suffolk, where he continued twenty-one years a constant preacher (in a plain, practical, and affectionate manner), first as curate, and afterwards as rector of that church. In 1692 he was promoted to the vicarage of Dedham, in Essex, where he continued to the time of his death, which happened in the latter end of October, 1703. He was a pious ancT charitable man. He made great collections for the French Protestants in the years 1687, &c. and by his great care, pains, and charges, procured a worthy minister to go and settle in Carolina. Among other charities, he bequeathed by his last will and testament the house wherein he lived, with the lands thereunto belonging, to be an habitation for the lecturer that should be chosen from time to time to preach the lecture at Dedham. He wrote some books, and among the rest a Commentary upon the New Testament, in the same plain, practical, and affectionate manner in which he preached. This has often been reprinted in folio, and lately with some alterations and improvements, by the rev. Dr. Glasse. Mr. Burkitt’s other works are small pious tracts for the use of his parishioners.
his majesty’s justices of the peace for the counties of Westmorland and Cumberland, and was made by bishop Lyttelton chancellor of the diocese of Carlisle. In 1755, he
, an eminent law-writer, was born at
Winton in Westmoreland some time about the beginning
of the last century; he was educated at Queen’s college,
Oxford, which university conferred on him March 22. 1762,
the honorary degree of LL. D. He died at Orton, of
which place he had been vicar forty-nine years, Novembet 20, 1785. He was one of his majesty’s justices of the
peace for the counties of Westmorland and Cumberland,
and was made by bishop Lyttelton chancellor of the diocese
of Carlisle. In 1755, he first published his “Justice of
Peace and Parish Officer, upon a plan entirely new, and
comprehending all the law to the present time, 57 2 vols.
8vo, reprinted in the same form in 1756, and in the same
year in folio, in 1757, 3 vols. 8vo, &c. The fourteenth
edition was enlarged to 4 vols. 8vo, in which form it has
passed, with gradual amendments and improvements,
through various editions; the last of which is the twentyfirst. In 1760 he published his
” Ecclesiastical Law,“2
vols. 4to, which afterwards was reprinted in 4 vols. 8vo.
Both works were strongly recommended by Judge Blackstone, and both are extraordinary examples of unrivalled
popularity and permanence. In 1764 he wrote
” A History of the Poor Laws,“8vo, and in 1776
” Observations
on the Bill proposed in parliament for erecting County
Workhouses.“He likewise published
” The History and
Antiquity of the two counties of Westmoreland and Cumberland, " in conjunction with Joseph Nicolson, esq. nephew to the bishop of Carlisle, 1771, 2 vols. 4to, in which
work he has given the above brief notices of himself.
nted to the vicarage of Greenwich; and in 1786 the archdeaconry of Leicester was conferred on him by bishop Thurlow, without the least expectation or solicitation on his
, D. D. archdeacon of Leicester
and vicar of Greenwich, was born in 1732, at Asfordby in
Leicestershire, of which place his father, grandfather,
and great grandfather, were in succession patrons and
rectors, as his youngest brother is at this time. He was
elected into Westminster college in 1748, but removed
from that school, and was entered of Queen’s college,
Cambridge, where he took his bachelor’s degree in 1754,
and his master’s in 1757. After having travelled through
the middle settlements in North America in 1759 and 1760,
Dr. Burnaby was appointed chaplain to the British factory
at Leghorn, were he resided five years; in occasional excursions visited Corsica, and almost every part of Italy;
and during the last of those years (sir John Dick having obtained his majesty’s leave to return to England for his private concerns) had the honour to do the consular business, by the appointment of government, under the denomination of proconsul. In 1769 he was presented to the
vicarage of Greenwich; and in 1786 the archdeaconry of
Leicester was conferred on him by bishop Thurlow, without the least expectation or solicitation on his part; both
which preferments he enjoyed till his death, March 9, 1812.
His widow, the heiress of John Edwyn, esq. of Bagrave in
Leicestershire, died on the 16th of the same month, aged
seventy-six. Dr. Burnaby was distinguished by the purest
integrity and benevolence of heart, the most unaffected
urbanity of manners, and a lively and ardent zeal for his
profession. His principal works were, 1. “Travels through
the middle settlements in North America in the years 1759
and 1760, with observations upon the state of the colonies,
”
A Journal of a Tour to Corsica in the year 1766, with a
series of original letters from general Paoli to the author,
referring to the principal events which have taken place in
that island from the year 1769 to 1302, with explanatory
notes,
”
, the celebrated bishop of Salisbury, was born at Edinburgh, Sept. 18, 1643. His father
, the celebrated bishop of Salisbury, was born at Edinburgh, Sept. 18, 1643. His father was the younger brother of an ancient family in the county of Aberdeen, and was bred to the civil law, which he studied for seven years in France. His excessive modesty so far depressed his abilities, that he never made a shining figure at the bar, though he was universally esteemed to be a man of judgment and knowledge in his profession. He was remarkably generous in his practice, never taking a fee from the poor, nor from a clergyman, when he sued in the right of his church; and bestowing great part of his profits in acts of charity and friendship. In 1637, when the troubles in Scotland were breaking out, he was so disgusted at the conduct of the governing bishops there, whom he censured with great freedom, and was, at the same time, so remarkable for his strict and exemplary life, that he was generally called a Puritan. But when he saw, that instead of reforming abuses in the episcopal order, the order itself was struck at, he adhered to it with great zeal and constancy, as he did to the rights of the crown, not once complying with that party which afterwards prevailed in both nations. For though he agreed with Barclay and Grotius (with the latter of whom he had been intimately acquainted) as to their notions of resistance where the laws are broken through by a limited sovereign, yet he did not think that was then the case in Scotland. He married the sister of the famous sir Archibald Johnstoun, called lord Warristoun; who, during the civil wars, was at the head of the presbyterian party, and so zealously attached to that interest, that neither friendship nor alliance could dispose him to shew favour to those who refused the solemn Jeague and covenant. Our author’s father, persisting in this refusal, was obliged, at three several times, to quit the kingdom; and, when his return was afterwards connived at, as his principles would not permit him to renew the practice of the law, much less to accept the preferments in it offered him by Oliver Cromwell, he retired to his own estate in the country, where he lived till the restoration, when he was made one of the lords of the session by the title of lord Cramond. His wife, our author’s mother, was very eminent for her piety and virtue, and a warm zealot for the presbyterian discipline, in which way she had been very strictly educated.
ent sir Robert Murray, to be a member of the royal society. In 1665, he was ordained a priest by the bishop of Edinburgh, and presented by sir Robert Fletcher to the living
About six months after he returned to Scotland, where
he declined accepting the living of Saltoun, offered him
by sir Robert Fletcher of that place, resolving to travel for
some time on the continent, in 1664, he went over into
Holland; where, after he had seen what was remarkable
in the Seven Provinces, he resided for some time at Amsterdam, and afterwards at Paris. At Amsterdam, by the
help of a learned Rabbi, he increased his knowledge in
the Hebrew language, and likewise x became acquainted
with the leading men of the different persuasions tolerated
in that country: among each of whom, he used frequently
to declare, he had met with men of such real piety and
virtue, that he contracted a strong principle of universal
charity. At Paris he conversed with the two famous
ministers of Charenton, Dailie and Morus. His stay in
France was the longer, on account of the great kindness
with which he was treated by the lord Holies, then ambassador at the French court. Towards the end of the
year he returned to Scotland, passing through Londo/rr,
where he was introduced, by the president sir Robert
Murray, to be a member of the royal society. In 1665,
he was ordained a priest by the bishop of Edinburgh, and
presented by sir Robert Fletcher to the living of Saitoun,
which had been kept vacant during his absence. He soon
gained the affections of his whole parish, not excepting the
presbyterians, though he was the only clergyman in Scotland that made use of the prayers in the liturgy of the
church of England. During the five years he remained at
Saitoun, he preached twice every Sunday, and once on
one of the week-days; he catechized three times a-week,
so as to examine every parishioner, old or young, three
times in the compass of a year: he went round the parish
from house to house, instructing, reproving, or comforting
them, as occasion required: the sick he visited twice a
day: he administered the sacrament four times a year, and
personally instructed all such as gave notice of their intention to receive it. All that remained above his own necessary subsistence (in which he was very frugal), he gave
away in charity. A particular instance of his generosity
is thus related: one of his parishioners had been in execution for debt, and applied to our author for some small
relief; who inquired of him, how much would again set
him up in his trade: the man named the sum, and he as
readily called to his servant to pay it him: “Sir,” said he,
“it is all we have in the house.” “Well,” said Mr. Burnet, “pay it this poor man: you do not know the pleasure
there is in making a man glad.” This may be a proper
place to mention our author’s practice of preaching extempore, in which he attained an ease chiefly by allotting many
hours of the day to meditation upon all sorts of subjects,
and by accustoming himself, at those times, to speak his
thoughts aloud, studying always to render his expressions
correct. His biographer gives us here two remarkable
instances of his preaching without book. In 1691, when
the sees, vacant by the deprivation of the nonjuring
bishops, were filled up, bishop Williams was appointed to
preach one of the consecration -sermons at Bow-church;
but, being detained by some accident, the archbishop of
Canterbury desired our author, then bishop of Sarum, to
supply his place; which he readily did, to the general satisfaction of all present. In 1705, he was appointed to preach
the thanksgiving-sermon before the queen at St. Paul’s; and
as it was the only discourse he had ever written before-hand,
it was the only time that he ever made a pause in preaching, which on that occasion lasted above a minute. The
same year, he drew up a memorial of the abuses of the
Scotch bishops, which exposed him to the resentments of
that order: upon which, resolving to confine himself to
study, and the duties of his function, he practised such a
retired and abstemious course, as greatly impaired his
health. About 1668, the government of Scotland being in
the hands of moderate men, of whom the principal was sir
Robert Murray, he was frequently consulted by them; and
it was through his advice that some of the more moderate
presbyterians were put into the vacant churches; a step
which he himself has since condemned as indiscreet. In
1669, he was made professor of divinity at Glasgow; in
which station he executed the following plan of study.
On Mondays, he made each of the students, in their turn,
explain a head of divinity in Latin, and propound such
theses from it as he was to defend against the rest of the
scholars; and this exercise concluded with our professor’s
decision of the point in a Latin oration. On Tuesdays, he
gave them a prelection in the same language, in which he
proposed, in the course of eight years, to have gone
through a complete system of divinity. On Wednesdays,
he read them a lecture, for above an hour, by way of a
critical commentary on St. Matthew’s Gospel;' which he
finished before he quitted the chair. On Thursdays, the
exercise was alternate; one Thursday, he expounded a
Hebrew Psalm, comparing it with the Septuagint, the
Vulgar, and the English version; and the next Thursday,
he explained some portion of the ritual and constitution
of the primitive church, making the apostolical canons his
text, and reducing every article of practice under the head
of one or other of those canons. On Fridays, he made
each of his scholars, in course, preach a short sermon upon
some text he assigned; and, when it was ended, he observed upon any thing that was defective or amiss in the
handling of the subject. This was the labour of the mornings: in the evenings, after prayer, he every day read
some parcel of scripture, on which he made a short
discourse; and, when that was over, he examined into
the progress of their several studies. Ail this he performed
during the whole time the schools were open; and, in
order to acquit himself with credit, he was obliged to study
hard from four till ten in the morning; the rest of the day
being of necessity allotted, either to the care of his pupils,
or to hearing the complaints of the clergy, who, rinding he
had an interest with men of power, were not sparing in
their applications to him. In this situation he continued
four years and a half, exposed, through his principles of
moderation, to the censure both of the episcopal and presbyterian parties. The same year he published his “Modest and free Conference between a Conformist and a Nonconformist.
” About this time he was entrusted, by the
duchess of Hamilton, with the perusal and arrangement
of all the papers relating to her father’s and uncle’s
ministry; which induced him to compile “Memoirs of the
Dukes of Hamilton,
” and occasioned his being invited to
London, to receive farther information, concerning the
transactions of those times, by the earl of Lauderdale; between whom and the duke of Hamilton he brought about
a reconciliation. During his stay in London, he was offered a Scotch bishopric, which he refused. Soon after
his return to Glasgow, he married the lady Margaret Kennedy, daughter of the earl of Cassilis. In 1672, he published his “Vindication of the Authority, Constitution, and
Laws, of the Church and State of Scotland,
” against the
principles of Buchanan and others; which was thought, at
that juncture, such a public service, that he was again
courted to accept of a bishopric, with a promise of the
next vacant archbishopric, but he persisted in his refusal
of that dignity. In 1673, he took another journey to
London; where, at the express nomination of the king,
after hearing him preach, he was sworn one of his majesty’s
chaplains in ordinary. He became likewise in high favour
with his majesty and the duke of York . At his return to
Edinburgh, finding the animosities between the dukes of
Hamilton and Lauderdale revived, he retired to his station
at Glasgow; but was obliged the next year to return to
court, to justify himself against the accusations of the duke
of Lauderdale, who had represented him as the cause and
instrument of all the opposition the measures of the court
had met with in the Scotch parliament. Thus he lost the
favour of the court; and, to avoid putting himself into the
hands of his enemies, he resigned the professor’s chair at
Glasgow, and resolved to settle in London, being now
about thirty years of age. Soon after, he was offered the
living of St. Giles’s Cripplegate, which he declined accepting, because he heard that it was intended for Dr.
Fowler, afterwards bishop of Gloucester. In 1675, our
author, at the recommendation of lord Holies, and notwithstanding the interposition of the court against him, was
appointed preacher at the Rolls chapel by sir Harbottle
Grimstone, master of the Rolls. The same year he was
examined before the house of commons in relation to the
duke of Lauderdale, whose conduct the parliament was
then inquiring into. He was soon after chosen lecturer of
St. Clement’s, and became a very popular preacher. In
1676, he published his “Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton;
” and the same year, “An account of a Conference
between himself, Dr. Stillingfleet, and Coleman.
” About
this time, the apprehensions of popery increasing daily, he
undertook to write the “History of the Reformation of the
Church of England.
” The rise and progress of this his
greatest and 'most useful work, is an object of too great
curiosity to require any apology on account of its length.
His own account of it is as follows: “Some time after I
had printed the ‘ Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton,’
which were favourably received, the reading of these got
me the acquaintance and friendship of sir William Jones,
then attorney-general. My way of writing history pleased
him; and so he pressed me to undertake the History of
England. But Sanders’s book, that was then translated
into French, and cried up much in France, made all my
friends press me to answer it, by writing the History of
the Reformation. So now all my thoughts were turned
that way. I laid out for manuscripts, and searched into
all offices. I got for some days into the Cotton Library.
But duke Lauderdale hearing of my design, and apprehending it might succeed in my hands, got Dolben, bishop
of Rochester, to divert sir John Cotton from suffering me
to search into his library. He told him, I was a great
enemy to the prerogative, to which Cotton was devoted,
even to slavery. So he said, I would certainly make an ill
use of all 1 had found. This wrought so much on him,
that I was no more admitted, till my first volume was published. And then, when he saw how I had composed it,
he gave me free access to it.
” The first volume of this
work lay near a year after it was finished, for the perusal
and correction of friends; so that it was not published tiii
the year 1679, when the affair of the popish plot was in
agitation. This book procured our author an honour never
before or since paid to any writer: he had the thanks of
both houses of parliament, with a desire that he would
prosecute the undertaking, and complete that valuable
work. Accordingly, in less than two years after, he
printed the second volume, which met with the same general approbation as the first: and such was his readiness
in composing, that he wrote the historical part in the
compass of six weeks, after all his materials were laid in
order. The third volume, containing a supplement to the
two former, was published in 1714. “The defects of
Peter Heylyn’s
” History of the Reformation,“as bishop
Kicolson observes,
” are abundantly supplied in our
author’s more complete history. He gives a punctual account of all the affairs of the reformation, from its beginning in the reign of Henry VIII. to its final establishment
under queen Elizabeth, A. D. 1559. And the whole is
penned in a masculine style, such as becomes an historian,
and is the property of this author in all his writings. The
collection of records^ which he gives at the end of each
volume, are good vouchers of the truth of what he delivers
in the body of the history, and are much more perfect than
could reasonably be expected, after the pains taken, in
queen Mary’s days, to suppress every thing that carried
the marks of the reformation upon it.“Our author’s performance met with a very favourable, reception abroad, and
was translated into most of the European languages; and
even the keenest of his enemies, Henry Wharton, allows it
to have
” a reputation firmly and deservedly established.“The most eminent of the French writers who have attacked
it, M. Varillas and M. Le Grand, have received satisfactory
replies from -the author himself. At home it was attacked
by Mr. S. Lowth, who censured the account Dr. Burnet
had given of some of archbishop Cranmer’s opinions, asserting that both our historian and Dr. Stillingfleet had imposed upon the world in that particular, and had
” unfaithfully joined together“in their endeavours to lessen
episcopal ordination. Our author replied to Mr. Lowth,
in some
” letters. in answer“to his book. The next assailant was Henry Wharton, who, under the name of Anthony
Harrner, published
” A specimen of some Errors and
Defects in the History of the Reformation,“1693, 8vo, a
performance of no great candour; to which, however, our
historian vouchsafed a short answer, in a
” Letter to the
Bishop of Lichfield.“A third attack on this History was
made by Dr. Hickes in
” Discourses on Dr. Burnet and
Dr. Tillotson;“in which the whole charge amounts to no
more than this, that,
” in a matter of no great consequence,
there was too little care had in copying or examining a
letter writ in a very bad hand,“and that there was some
probability that Dr. Burnet
” was mistaken in one of his
conjectures.“Our author answered this piece, in a
” Vindication“of his History. The two first parts were translated into French by M. de Rosemond, and into Latin by
Melchior Mittelhorzer. There is likewise a Dutch translation of it. In 1682, our author published
” An abridgment of his History of the Reformation," in 8vo, in which
he tells us, he had wholly waved every thing that belonged
to the records, and the proof of what he relates, or to the
confutation of the falsehoods that run through the popish
historians; all which is to be found in the History at large.
And therefore, in this abridgment, he says, every thing is
to be taken upon trust; and those who desire a fuller satisfaction, are referred to the volumes he had before published.
n preaching any more at the Rolls chapel. In 1685 came out our author’s “Life of Dr. William Bedell, Bishop of Kilmore in Ireland.” Upon the death of king Charles, and
During the affair of the popish plot, Dr. Burnet was
often consulted by king Charles, upon the state of the
nation; and, about the same time, refused the vacant
bishopric of Chichester, which his majesty offered him,
“provided he vvould entirely come into his interest.
” But,
though his free access to that monarch did not procure him
preferment, it gave him an opportunity of sending his
majesty a most remarkable letter , in which, with great
freedom, he reprehends the vices and errors both of his
private life and his government The unprejudiced part
he acted during the time the nation was inflamed with the
discovery of the popish plot; his candid endeavours to
save the lives of Staley and the lord Stafford, both zealous
papists; his temperate conduct in regard to the exclusion
of the duke of York; and the scheme of a prince regent,
proposed by him, in lieu of that exclusion; are sufficiently
related in his “History of his own Time.
” In Life of sir Matthew Hale,
” and
his “History of the Rights of Princes, in disposing of
ecclesiastical Benefices and Church-lands;
” which being
attacked bv an anonymous writer, Dr. Burnet published,
the same year, “An answer to the Animadversions on the
History of the Rights of Princes.
” As he was about this
time much resorted to by persons of all ranks and parties,
as a pretence to avoid the returning of so many visits, he
built a laboratory, and, for above a year, went through a
course of chemical experiments. Upon the execution of
the lord Russel, with whom he was familiarly acquainted,
he was examined before the house of commons, with respect to that lord’s speech upon the scaffold, in the penning of which he was suspected to have had a hand. Not
long after, he refused the offer of a living of three hundred pounds a year, in the gift of the earl of Halifax, who
would have presented him, on condition of his residing
*till in London. In 1683, he went over to Paris, where
he was well received by the court, and became acquainted
with the most eminent persons, both popish and protestant.
This year appeared his “Translation and Examination of a
Letter, writ by the last General Assembly of the Clergy
of France to the Protestants, inviting them to return to
their Communion, &c.;
” also his “Translation of Sir
Thomas More’s Utopia,
” with a “Preface concerning the
Nature of Translations.
” The year following, the resentment of the court against our author was so great, that he
was discharged from his lecture at St, Clement’s, by virtue
of the king’s mandate to Dr. Hascard, rector of that parish;
and in December the same year, bv an order from the
lord-keeper North to sir Harbottle Grimstone, he was forbidden preaching any more at the Rolls chapel. In 1685
came out our author’s “Life of Dr. William Bedell, Bishop
of Kilmore in Ireland.
” Upon the death of king Charles,
and accesion of king James, having obtained leave to go
out of the kingdom, he went first to Paris, where he lived
in great retirement, to avoid being involved in the conspiracies then forming in favour of the difke of Monmbuth.
But, having contracted an acquaintance with brigadier
Stouppe, a protestant officer in the French service, he
was prevailed upon to take a journey with him into Italy,
and met with an agreeable reception at Rome and Geneva. After a tour through the southern parts of France,
Italy, Switzerland, and many places of Germany, of which
he has given an account, with reflections on their several
ojovernments, &c. in his “Travels,
” published in Translation of Lactantius,
concerning the Death of the Persecutors.
” The high favour shewn him at the Hague disgusting the English court,
king James wrote two severe letters against him to the
princess of Orange, and insisted, by his ambassador, on
his being forbidden the court; which, at the king’s importunity, was done; though our author continued to be
employed and trusted as before. Soon after, a prosecution
for high-treason was commenced against him, both in
Scotland and England; but the States refusing, at the demand of the English court, to deliver him up, designs were
laid of seizing his person, and even destroying him, if he
could be taken. About this time Dr. Burnet married Mrs.
Mary Scott, a Dutch lady of large fortune and noble extraction. He had a very important share in the whole
conduct of the revolution in 1688; the project of which he
gave early notice of to the court of Hanover, intimating,
that the success of this enterprise must naturally end in an
entail of the British crown upon that illustrious house. He
wrote also several pamphlets in support of the prince of
Orange’s designs, which were reprinted at London in 1689,
in 8vo, under the title of “A Collection of eighteen Papers relating to the affairs of Church and State during the
Reign of King James II. &c.
” And when his highness
undertook the expedition to England, our author accompanied him as his chaplain, notwithstanding the particular
circumstances of danger to which he was thereby exposed.
At Exeter, after the prince’s landing, he drew up the association for pursuing the ends of his highness’s declaration. During these transactions, Dr. Crew, bishop of Durham, who had rendered himself obnoxious by the part he
had acted in the high-commission court, having proposed
to the prince of Orange to resign his bishopric in favour of
Dr. Burnet, on condition of an allowance of 1000l. per
annum out of the revenue, our author refused to accept it
on those terms. But king William had not been many
days on the throne before Dr. Burnet was advanced to the
see of Salisbury, and consecrated March 31, 1689 . Our
prelate had scarcely taken his seat in the house of lords,
when he distinguished himself by declaring for moderate
measures with regard to the clergy who scrupled to take
the oaths, and for a toleration of the protestant dissenters;
and when the bill for declaring the rights and privileges of
the subject, and settling the succession of the crown, was
brought into parliament, he was the person appointed by
king William to propose naming the duchess (afterwards electress) of Brunswick, next in succession after the
princess of Denmark and her issue; and when this succession afterwards took place, he had the honour of being
chairman of the committee to whom the hill was referred.
This made him considered by the house of Hanover as
one firmly attached to their interests, and engaged him in
an epistolary correspondence with the princess Sophia,
which lasted to her death. This year bishop Buruet addressed a “Pastoral Letter
” to the clergy of his diocese,
concerning the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to king
Wiliiam and queen Mary; in which having grounded their
majesties title to the crown upon the right of conquest,
some members of both houses took such offence at it, that
about three years after, they procured an order for burning
the book by the hands of the common executioner. After
the session of parliament was over, the bishop went down
to his diocese, where, by his pious, prudent, and vigilant
discharge of the episcopal functions, he gained universal
esteem.
ted them in order for confirmation. He endeavoured, as much as possible, to reform the abuses of the bishop’s consistorial court.' No part of the episcopal office was more
As he had always looked upon Confirmation as the likeliest means of reviving a spirit of Christianity, he wrote a
short “Directory,
” for preparing the youth upon such
occasions, and sent copies of it, some months beforehand, to the minister of every parish where he intended to
confirm. Every summer, he made a tour, for six weeks
or two months, through some district of his bishopric, daily
preaching and confirming from church to church, so as, in
the compass of three years (besides his triennial visitation),
to go through all the principal livings of his diocese. In
these circuits he entertained all the clergy that attended
upon him, at his own expence, and held conferences with
them upon the chief heads of divinity. During his residence at Salisbury, he constantly preached a Thursday’s
lecture, founded at St. Thomas’s church: he likewise
preached and confirmed, every Sunday morning, in some
church of that city, or of the neighbourhood round about
it; and, in the evening, he had a lecture in his own
chapel, wherein he explained some portion of scripture.
Every week, during the season of Lent, he catechised the
youth of the two great schools in the cathedral church, and
instructed them in order for confirmation. He
endeavoured, as much as possible, to reform the abuses of the bishop’s
consistorial court.' No part of the episcopal office was
more strictly attended to by him, than the examination of
candidates for holy orders. He examined them himself
as to the proofs of the Christian religion, the authority of
the scriptures, and the nature of the gospel covenant; and,
a day or two before ordination, he submitted all those whom
he had accepted to the examination of the dean and prebendaries. As the qualification of clergymen for the pastoral care was always uppermost in his thoughts, he instituted at Salisbury a little nursery of students in divinity,
being ten in number, to each of whom he allowed a salary
of thirty pounds a year. Once every day he examined their
progress in learning, and gave them a lecture on some
speculative or practical point of divinity, or some part of
the pastoral function. But this foundation being considered as reflecting upon the method of education at the
universities, he was prevailed upon, after some years, to
lay it wholly aside. He was a warm and constant enemy
to pluralities, where non-residence was the consequence of
them, and in some cases hazarded a suspension, rather
than give institution. In the point of residence, he was
so strict, that he immediately dismissed his own chaplains,
upon their preferment to a cure of souls. He exerted the
principle of toleration, which was deeply rooted in him, in
favour of a nonjuring meeting-house at Salisbury, which
he obtained the royal permission to conAive at; and this
spirit of moderation brought over several dissenting families
of his diocese to the commnnion of the church.
In 1698 the bishop lost his wife by the small-pox; but the consideration of the
In 1698 the bishop lost his wife by the small-pox; but
the consideration of the tender age of his children, and
his own avocations, soon induced him to supply that loss
by a marriage with Mrs. Berkley. This year he was appointed preceptor to his highness the duke of Gloucester,
and employed great care in the education of that young
prince. In 16.99 our author published his “Exposition of
the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England.
” This
work was censured by the lower house of convocation in
1701, first, as allowing a diversity of opinions, which the
Articles were framed to prevent; 2dly, as containing many
passages contrary to the true meaning of the Articles, and
to other received doctrines of our church; and, 3dly, as
containing some things of pernicious consequence to the
church, and derogatory from the honour of the reformation: but that house refusing to enter into particulars, unless they might at the same time offer some other matters
to the upper house, which the bishops would not admit of,
the affair was dropped. The “Exposition
” was attacked,
supposed by Dr. William Binckes, in a piece entitled “A
prefatory discourse to an examination of a late book, entitled ‘An Exposition, &c.’
” London, The Exposition given by my lord bishop of
Sarum of the second Article of our Religion, examined,
”
London, Remarks on the Examinist of the Exposition,
” &c. London, A Vindication of the twenty-third Article of
Religion, from a late Exposition, ascribed to my lord
bishop of Sarum.
” Mr. Edmund Elys likewise published,
in Reflections on a late Exposition of the Thirtynine Articles,
” &c. 4to. There were two editions of the
Exposition, in folio, the same year. In 1704 the scheme
for the augmentation of poor livings, first projected by
bishop Bur net, took place, and passed into an act of parliament. In 1706, he published a collection of “Sermons
and Pamphlets,
” 3 vols. 4to; in 1710, an “Exposition
of the Church Catechism;
” and in 17 13, “Sermons on
several occasions,
” with an “Essay towards a new book of
Homilies.
” This learned and eminent prelate died the
17th of March 1714—15, in the seventy-second year of his
age, and was interred in the parish-church of St. James
Clerkenwell, in London. Since his death, his “History
of his own Time,
” with an account of his life annexed,
was published in 2 vols. fol. but the best edition is that of
1753, 4 vols. 8vo, edited by the rev. Dr. Flexman, with
the life enlarged, and a very large catalogue of his publications, to which some trifling additions were made in the
last edition of the Biographia Britannica.
ailed at the beginning of the last century becomes either less, or of less importance to be revived, bishop Burnet’s works seem to rise in public estimation. All that is
As it would lead us, after “so long an account of the facts
of Dr. Burnet’s life, into an article perhaps yet longer,
were we to enter on the controversy so ably and so frequently repeated respecting the veracity of his ' History
of his own Time,
” we shall only notice, that as the strong
party zeal which prevailed at the beginning of the last century becomes either less, or of less importance to be revived, bishop Burnet’s works seem to rise in public estimation. All that is controversial, indeed, is nearly forgotten;
but his History of the Reformation, and of his own Time,
and his Lives of Rochester, Bedell, Hale, &c. afford a fair
prospect that his fame will yet be prolonged. The events
of his life show that both at home and abroad he stood high
in the estimation of his contemporaries, and his errors and
prejudices, of whatever kind, would not have excited so
many enemies had not his talents given him an unusual
degree of consequence both in church and state. On the
subject of his public character, however, we shall content
ourselves with referring to our authorities, and conclude
this article with some particulars of his private habits,
which, as well as the above account of his life, stand uncontradicted, and surely entitle him to our respect.
of his ever making any figure in life. This, perhaps, might proceed from the exact discipline of the bishop’s family, not calculated alike for every temper. To long and
, eldest son of the preceding, was
educated privately at first, and when perfected in the
learned languages, was removed to the university of Cambridge, where he was admitted a gentleman commoner of
Trinity college. In 1706 he was sent with his two younger
brothers abroad, to finish his studies at Leyden; from
whence he appears to have made a tour through Germany,
Switzerland, and Italy. By his own choice he was bred
to the law; but it is uncertain whether he practised at the
bar. In 1720 he was one of the unhappy persons who
suffered greatly in the infatuation of the South-Sea scheme.
He had, however, a place in the revenue, of twelve hundred pounds a year; but, being desirous of retrieving his
fortune, he quitted that post, and was appointed governor
of New York and the Jerseys. In this station his conduct
in general was very acceptable to those colonies, and approved of in England. After the accession of king George
the Second, in order to provide for a gentleman who was
understood to be in particular esteem with his majesty,
Mr. Burnet was removed from the governments of New
York and the Jerseys to those of the Massachusets and
New Hampshire. This change was highly disagreeable,
and he considered it as a great hardship to be obliged to
part with posts that were very profitable, for such. as would
afford him, at best, only a decent support; and to leave
an easy administration for one which he foresaw would be
extremely troublesome. Of this he complained to his
friends, and it had a visible effect upon his spirits. On the
13th of July, 1728, he arrived at Boston, and was received
with unusual pomp. Having been instructed from England to insist on a fixed salary’s being settled upon him as
governor, he adhered to his instructions with such unabated
vigour and perseverance, as involved him in the warmest
disputes with the general assembly of the province. A
large detail of these contests may be seen in Mr. Hutchinson’s History of Massachusets’ Bay, from which Mr. Burnet’s abilities, firmness, and spirit will appear in a striking
light. Being deprived of his salary, by refusing to receive
it in the mode proposed by the assembly, and having by
that means been driven to such straits as obliged him to
apply to the assistance of his friends for the support of his
family, he thought he might be justified in establishing a
fee and perquisite which had never been known in the
province before. At New York, all vessels took from the
governor a pass, or permission for sailing out of the harbour, which, though it had no foundation in law, was submitted to without complaint. The same disposition did
not prevail in the inhabitants of Boston. The fee which
Mr. Burnet imposed on the ships, for their passes, being
complained of to the king and council as illegal and oppressive, it was immediately disapproved. In all other
respects his administration was unexceptionable, but this
controversy with the general assembly made a great impression upon his mind. In the latter end of August, 1729,
he was seized, at Boston, with a fever, which carried him
off on the 7th of September, and the assembly ordered
him a very honourable funeral at the public expence.
Though he had been steady and inflexible in his adherence
to his instructions, he discovered nothing of a grasping
avaricious temper. His superior talents, and free and
easy manner of communicating his sentiments, rendered
him the delight of men of sense and learning; and his
right of precedence in all companies, facilitated his natural
disposition to take a great lead in conversation. His own
account of his genius was, that it was late before it budded;
and that, until he was nearly twenty years of age, his father despaired of his ever making any figure in life. This,
perhaps, might proceed from the exact discipline of the
bishop’s family, not calculated alike for every temper. To
long and frequent religious services at home in his youth,
Mr. Burnet would sometimes pleasantly attribute his indisposition to a scrupulous attendance on public worship.
Mr. Burnet' s first lady was a daughter of Dr. George Stanhope, dean of Canterbury, and was a woman equally distinguished for her beauty, wit, good-humour, singing, and
various accomplishments. Her sense will appear from the
following anecdote: When she was dying, being worn
out with a long and painful sickness, as they rubbed her
temples with Hungary water, in her last faintings, she
begged them not to do it, for “that it would make her
hair gray.
” Mr. William Burnet was the author of a tract
entitled “A View of Scripture Prophecy.
”
, the bishop’s second son, had the same advantages of education with his
, the bishop’s second son, had the
same advantages of education with his elder brother, having a distinct tutor both at home and the university. He
pursued his studies, likewise, for two years at Leyden. At
Oxford he was admitted a commoner of Merton college;
but how long he studied there we are not informed, nor
what degree he took. Having entered into holy orders, we
find him a chaplain in ordinary to his majesty so early as in
1718, when he could not be thirty years of age. He is said
to have been a contributor to Hibernicus’s Letters, a periodical paper carried on at Dublin in the years 1725, 1726,
and 1727: and we believe there is no doubt of his having
been one of the writers of another valuable paper, entitled
“The Free-thinker,
” which was afterwards collected into
three volumes, 12mo. In the Hoadlian controversy he
was an able assistant to the eminent prelate from whom that
controversy received its denomination. Three pieces were
published by Mr. Burnet on this occasion, the first of which
was, “A Letter to the rev. Mr. Trapp, occasioned by his
Sermon on the real Nature of the Church and Kingdom of
Christ;
” the second, “An Answer to Mr. Law’s Letter to
the Lord Bishop of Bangor;
” and the third, “A full and
free examination of several important points relating to
Church-Authority, the Christian Priesthood, the positive
Institutions of the Christian Religion, and Church-Communion, in answer to the notions and principles contained
in Mr. Law’s second Letter to the lord bishop of Bangor.
”
Dr. Hoadly considered our author as one of his best defenders. In 1719 Mr. Burnet published an abridgment of
the third volume of his father’s History of the Reformation.
If he had not been cut off in early life, there is no doubt
but that he would have made a distinguished figure in the
literary world; and it is probable that he would have risen
to a high rank in the church. The Gilbert Burnet who
abridged the Boylean Lectures was another person.
, the third and youngest son of the bishop, had an education equally advantageous with that of his two
, the third and youngest son of the
bishop, had an education equally advantageous with that
of his two elder brothers. When he had acquired a sufficient preparation of grammatical learning, he was sent
to the university of Oxford, where he becam^a commoner
of Merton-college. After this, he studied two years at
Leyden, from whence he seems to have made a tour
through Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. Having chosen
the profession of the law, he was entered at the Temple,
where he appears to have contracted wildness of disposition,
and irregularity of conduct. To this part of his character
there are frequent allusions in the satirical publications of
the times; and particularly in Dr. Arbuthnol’s notes and
memorandums of the six days preceding the death of a
right reverend prelate. Mr. Thomas Burnet was even
suspected of being one of the Mohocks mentioned in the
Spectator, whose extravagant and cruel exploits made
much noise, and excited no small degree of terror at that
period. Swift, in one of his letters to Stella, has the following passage: “Young Davenant was telling us, how
he was set upon by the Mohocks, and how they ran his
chair through with a sword. It is not safe being in the
streets at night. The bishop of Salisbury’s son is said
to be of the gang. They are all whigs. A great lady
sent to me, to speak to her father, and to lord treasurer,
to have a care of them, and to be careful likewise of myself; for she heard they had malicious intentions against
the ministry and their friends. I know not whether there
be any thing in this, though others are of the sante opinion.
” The report concerning Mr. Burnet might be
groundless; but it is certain that his time was not wholly
spent in dissipation; for, being warmly devoted to the
cause of the whigs, he commenced political writer against
the administration of the four last years of queen Anne.
No less than seven pamphlets of this kind, though without
his name, were written by him, in 1712 and 1713. His
first was entitled “A Letter to the People, to be left for
them at the Booksellers; with a word or two of the Bandbox Plot.
” This small tract is drawn up in short paragraphs, after the manner of Mr. Asgill; but not in ridicule
of that author, who is spoken of in terms of high commendation. Another piece of Mr. Burnet’s was: “Our
Ancestors as wise as we, or ancient Precedents for modern
Facts, in answer to a Letter from a noble Lord;
” which
was followed by “The History of Ingratitude, or a second
Part of ancient Precedents for modern Facts,
” wherein
many instances are related, chiefly from the Greek and
Roman histories, of the ungrateful treatment to which the
most eminent public characters have been exposed; and
the whole is applied to the case of the duke of Marlborough. A subsequent publication, that had likewise a reference to the conduct of the ministry towards the same
great general, and which was dedicated to him, was entitled “The true Character of an honest Man, especially
with relation to public Affairs.
” Another of Mr. Burnet’s
tracts, which was called “Truth, if you can find it; or a
Character of the present Ministry and Parliament,
” was
entirely of an ironical nature, and sometimes the irony
is well supported. But our author’s principal political
pamphlet, during the period we are speaking of, was, “A
certain Information of a certain Discourse, that happened
at a certain Gentleman’s House, in a certain County:
written by a certain Person then present; to a certain
Friend now at London; from whence you may collect the
great Certainty of the Account.
” This is a dialogue in
defence of the principles and conduct of the whigs; and
it gave such offence to queen Anne’s Tory ministry, that
on account of it, Mr. Burnet was taken into custody in
January 1712—13. He wrote, also, “Some new Proofs
by which it appears that the Pretender is truly James the
Third;
” in which, from the information, we suppose, of
his father, he gives the same account, in substance, of the
Pretender’s birth, that was afterwards published in the
bishop’s History of his own Time. What Mr. Burnet endeavours to make out is, that three supposititious children
Vol. VII. C c
were introduced; and consequently, that the “Pretender
was James the Third;
” or, to put it more plainly, “the
third pretended James.
” Whilst our young author, notwithstanding his literary application and engagements, still
continued his wild courses, it is related, that his father
one day seeing him uncommonly grave, asked what he
was meditating. “A greater work,
” replied the son,
“than your lordship’s History of the Reformation.
”
“What is that, Tom?
” “My own reformation, my
lord.
” “I shall be heartily glad to see it,
” said the bishop, “but almost despair of it.
” This, however, was
happily accomplished, though, perhaps, not during the
life of the good prelate, and Mr. Burnejt became not only
one of the best lawyers of his time, but a very respectable
character. After the accession of king George the First,
he wrote a letter to the earl of Halifax, on “the Necessity
of impeaching the late Ministry,
” in which he urges the
point with great zeal and warmth, and shews the utmost
dislike of treating with any degree of lenity, a set of men
whose conduct, in his opinion, deserved the severest punishment. He insists upon it, that the makers of the treaty
of Utrecht ought to answer for their treasons with their
heads. The letter to the earl of Halifax, which appeared
with Mr. Burnet’s name, was followed by an anonymous
treatise, entitled “A second Tale of a Tub; or the
History of Robert Powel the Puppet-Showman.
” This
work, which is a satire on the earl of Oxford and his ministry, and is far from being destitute of wit and humour, hath
never had the good fortune (nor, indeed, did it deserve it,) of being read and admired like the original “Tale of
a Tub.
” The author himself, in the latter part of his life,
wished it to be forgotten; for we are well informed that
he sought much for it, and purchased such copies as he
could meet with, at a considerable price. Soon after his
father’s death, he published “A Character of the right
reverend father in God, Gilbert lord bishop of Sarum;
with a true copy of his last Will and Testament.
” In ridicule of this publication, was printed in Hudibrastic
verse, and with a very small portion of merit, “A certain
dutiful Son’s Lamentation for the Death of a certain right
reverend; with the certain Particulars of certain Sums and
Goods that are bequeathed him, which he will most certainly
part with in a ctrtain time.
” In Homerides;
” which exposed
him to the lash of Mr. Pope, and occasioned that great poet
to give him a place, though not with remarkable severity,
in the Dunciad. He was likewise concerned in a weekly
paper, called “The Grumbler.
” He was, however, soon,
taken from these literary occupations, by being appointed
his majesty’s consul at Lisbon, where he continued several years. Whilst he was in this situation, he had a
dispute with lord Tyrawley, the ambassador, in which the
merchants sided with Mr. Burnet. During the continuance
of the dispute, the consul took an odd method of affronting-'
his antagonist. Employing the same taylor, and having
learned what dress his lordship intended to wear on a birthday, Mr. Burnet provided the same dress as liveries for
his servants, and appeared himself in a plain suit. It is
said, that in consequence of this quarrel (though how truly, may, perhaps, be doubted), the ambassador and
consul were both recalled. Upon Mr. Burnet’s return to
his country, he resumed the profession of the law. In
1723, he published, with a few explanatory notes, the
first volume of his father’s “History of his own Time;
”
and, in Reflections historical and political.
” When Mr.
Burnet gave to the public, in of whom I
take this opportunity to say with pleasure, and which your
lordship, I am sure, will allow me to say with truth, that
for his knowledge of the world, and his able judgment of
things, he was equalled by few, and excelled by none of
his contemporaries.
” The following clause in our learned
judge’s will was the subject of conversation after his decease, and was inserted in the monthly collections, as
being somewhat extraordinary. “I think it proper in this
solemn act to declare, that as I have lived, so I trust I
shall die, in the true faith of Christ as taught in the
Scriptures; but not as taught or practised in any one visible church that I know of; though I think the church of
England is as little stuffed with the inventions of men as
any of them; and the church of Rome is so full of them,
as to have destroyed all that is lovely in the Christian
religion.
” This clause gave occasion to the publication
of a serious and sensible pamphlet, entitled: “The true
Church of Christ, which, and where to be found, according to the Opinion of the late judge Burnet; with
an Introduction concerning divine worship, and a caution
to gospel preachers; in which are contained, the Reasons
for that Declaration in his last Will and Testament.
” A
judgment may be formed of his abilities in his profession,
from his argument in the case of Ryal and Rowls. In
1777 were published in 4to, “Verses written on several
occasions, between the years 1712 and 1721.
” These
were the poetical productions of Mr. Burnet in his youth,
of whom it is said by the editor, that he was connected in
friendship and intimacy with those wits, which will for
ever signalise the beginning of the present century; and
that himself shone with no inconsiderable lustre amidst the
constellation of geniuses which then so illustriously adorned
the British hemisphere.
Cambridge, of which he became a fellow, and where he was an eminent tutor. He was ordained priest by bishop Sanderson; and, in 1667, was appointed chaplain to lord keeper
, a divine of distinguished abilities, was educated in Magdalen college, Cambridge, of
which he became a fellow, and where he was an eminent
tutor. He was ordained priest by bishop Sanderson; and,
in 1667, was appointed chaplain to lord keeper Bridgeman, by whom he was presented to a prebend of Norwich,
and to the rectory of St. George’s in Southwark. In 1668,
he was engaged, with Dr. Stiliingfleet and Dr. Tillotson,
in the treaty proposed by sir Orlando Bridgeman, and
countenanced by lord chief baron Hale, for a comprehension;vith the Dissenters. About a year before his death,
Oct. 19, 1680, Dr. Burton, by the interest of his friend
Tillotson with the Chapter of St. Paul’s, obtained the rectory of Barnes in Surry, at which place he died, of a malignant fever, in 1681. The only thing of his that appeared during his life, was the short “Alloquium ad Lectorem,
” prefixed to Dr. Cumberland’s treatise “De Legibus Naturae.
” After Dr. Burton’s decease, dean Tillotson published two volumes of his discourses, which reflect
great credit on his memory, from the piety and just sentiments they abound with on the nature and end of religion.
the affection of his equals and the esteem of his superiors. Dr. Potter, in particular, at that time bishop of Oxford, conceived a great regard for him. March 24, 1720,
, a learned divine, was born in 1696
at Wemb worth in Devonshire, of which parish his father
wag rector. The first part of his grammatical education
he received at Okehampton, and the remainder at Ely,
under the rev. Sam. Bentham, his first cousin by the mother’s side. Such were the proofs which young Burton
afforded at school of his capacity, diligence, and worthy
dispositions, that the learned Dr. Ashton, master of Jesuscollege, Cambridge, designed to have him admitted into
his own college. But in the mean time, Dr. Turner, president of Corpus-Christi college, Oxford, having made an
accidental trial of Mr. Burton’s literary improvements, procured him a scholarship in that college in 1713, when he
was 17 years of age. Here he made so distinguished a
progress, that Dr. Mather, the president, appointed him
to the important office of tutor, when he was only B. A.
Soon after, the college conferred upon him the honour of
reading the Greek lecture. During the whole course of
his studies, he recommended himself both to the affection
of his equals and the esteem of his superiors. Dr. Potter,
in particular, at that time bishop of Oxford, conceived a
great regard for him. March 24, 1720, Mr. Burton was
admitted to the degree of M. A. In the exercise of his
duty as a tutor, no one could exceed him in attention,
diligence, and a zealous concern for the improvement of
his pupils. As he was himself unacquainted with mathematics, and ignorant of the Hebrew tongue, he took effectual care that the young men under his tuition should be
well instructed in these points. With regard to those of
his pupils who were upon charitable foundations, he was
solicitous that the acquisition of knowledge should be rendered as cheap to them as possible; and was so disinterested and beneficent in the whole of his conduct, that,
after having discharged the office of a tutor almost fifteen
years, he was scarcely possessed of 50l. when he quitted
the university. In revising, correcting, and improving
the exercises of the students, Mr. Burton displayed surprising patience and indefatigable diligence; and there
are still extant his themes, declamations, orations, and
poems of every kind, which he composed for the use of
his own pupils, and even of others. His attention was
also laudably and liberally directed to the restoration of
the credit of the university press, and to enable editors to
carry on their literary undertakings with diminished expence. With this view, he often prevailed upon Dr. Mather, Dr. Holmes, and other vice-chancellors, to order
new types; and, by the assistance of some noble friends,
he was so strenuous in behalf of the learned Hutchinson,
the editor of Xenophon, that no editors since that time
have had any delay or difficulty in obtaining the exemption from the duty on paper, which has been granted by
parliament to books printed at the Clarendon press. It was
also by Mr. Burton’s persuasion, that Mr. (afterwards lord)
Rolle gave WOl. to the university, for the purpose of lending it to editors; and that Dr. Hodges, provost of Orielcollege, bequeathed 200l. to the same use. In 1725,
when our learned tutor was pro-proctor and master of the
schools, he spoke, before the determining bachelors, a
Latin oration, entitled “Heli,
” which was both written
and published with a design of enforcing the salutary exercise of academical discipline. The same subject was still
more fully considered by him in four Latin sermons,
preached before the university; which, likewise, with appendices, were afterwards given to the public. Indeed,
the labour that Mr. Burton, during two years, cheerfully
went through, as master of the schools, was immense.
July 19, 1729, Mr. Burton was admitted to the degree of
B. D.; and in 1732, when the settlement of the colony of
Georgia was in agitation, being solicitous to give his assistance in promoting that undertaking, he preached a sermon
in its recommendation; and his discourse was afterwards
published, with an appendix concerning the state of the
colony. He was likewise, through his whole life, an ardent promoter of Dr. Bray’s admirable scheme of parochial
libraries.
st church, under the title “De Vita et moribus Johannis Burtoni,” 1771, addressed to Dr. Lowth, then bishop of Oxford, afterwards of London; and was translated the same
Dr. Burton is understood to have been the author, under
the name of “Phileleutherus Londinensis,
” of “Remarks
on Dr. King’s Speech before the University of Oxford, at
the Dedication of Dr. Radcliff’s Library, on the 13th of
April, 1749.
” This produced from Dr. King, “Elogium
Famæ inserviens Jacci Etonensis, sive Gigantis; or, The
Praises of Jack of Eton, commonly called Jack the Giant;
collected into English metre, after the manner of Thomas
Sternhold, John Hopkins, John Burton, and others. To
which is added, a dissertation on the Burtonian style. By
a Master of Arts.
” Dr. Burton’s Life was written in Latin
by Dr. Edward Bentham, his relation, and canon of Christ
church, under the title “De Vita et moribus Johannis Burtoni,
”
st church, in 1599, under the tuition (though only for form’s sake) of Dr. John Bancroft, afterwards bishop of Oxford. He took the degree of B. D. in 16 14, and was in
, author of the “Anatomy of Melancholy,
” the younger brother of William Burton, the
antiquary, the subject of the next article but one, was born
at Lindley, Feb. 8, 1576, and had his grammatical education
at Sutton-Colfield; after which, in 1593, he was admitted
a commoner of Brazen-nose college, and elected a student
of Christ church, in 1599, under the tuition (though only for form’s sake) of Dr. John Bancroft, afterwards bishop of
Oxford. He took the degree of B. D. in 16 14, and was
in that year admitted to the reading of the sentences. In
1616, the dean and chapter of Christ church presented
him to the Vicarage of St. Thomas in Oxford, in which
parish he always gave the sacrament in wafers; and George
lord Berkeley bestowed upon him the rectory of Segrave
in Leicestershire. Both these preferments he held till his
decease, which happened at Christ church, January 25,
1639—4O. He was a curious calculator of nativities, and
among others, of his own; and the time of his death answering exactly to his own predictions, it was whispered in the
college, that (to use Anthony Wood’s language), rather
than there should be any mistake in the calculation, he
sent up his soul to heaven through a slip about his neck; but
for this insinuation there appears little foundation. He was
a general scholar and severe student, of a melancholy yet
humourous disposition, and appears to have been a man of
extensive learning, which his memory enabled him to produce upon every subject. In his moral character, he was a
man of great integrity, plain-dealing, and chanty. He
was principally known as the author of a very celebrated
and popular work, entitled “The Anatomy of Melancholy,
”
published first in quarto, and which afterwards went through
several editions in folio, so that the bookseller acquired an
estate by it. This book was compiled by our learned writer
with a view of relieving his own melancholy; but it encreased to such a degree, that nothing could divert him
but going to the bridge foot, and hearing the ribaldry of
the bargemen, which seldom failed to throw him into a
violent fit of laughter. In the intervals of his vapours, he
was one of the most facetious companions in the university.
The “Anatomy of Melancholy
” is for the greater part a
cento, though a very ingenious one. The quotations,
which abound in every page, are pertinent; but if the
author had made freer use of his invention, and less of his
common -place book, his work, perhaps, would have been
more valuable. However, he generally avoids the affected
language, and ridiculous metaphors, which were common
in that age. On Mr. Burton’s monument in Christ church
is his bust, with his nativity, and this description by himself, put up by his brother: “Faucis notus, paucioribus
ignotus, hie jacet Democritusjunior, cui vitam dedit et mortem Melancholia. Obiit viii. Id. Jan. A. C. MDCXXXIX.
”
He left behind him a choice collection of books, many of
which he bequeathed to the Bodleian library, and that of
Brazen-nose college. He left also a hundred pounds, for
a fund to purchase five pounds’ worth of books, every year,
for the library of Christ church.
gn on earth a thousand years, &c.” Lond. 1643, 4to. The “Commentary on Antoninus” procured him, from bishop Kennett, the character of the best topographer since Camden.
, another antiquary of the seventeenth century, son of William Burton of Atcham in Shrop^
shire, was born in Austin Friars, London, educated in St.
Paul’s school, and became a student in Queen’s college,
Oxford, in 1625. When at the university, he was patronised by the learned Mr. Allen, of Glocester-hall, who appointed him Greek lecturer there. His indigence obliging
him to leave the university in 1630, after he had taken the
degree of bachelor of the civil law, he was for some time
usher to Mr. Thomas Farnaby, a famous schoolmaster in
Kent. He was afterwards master of the free grammarschool at Kingston upon Thames, in which station he continued till within two years of his death, when he retired
to London, where he died in 1657, and was buried in St.
Clement’s Danes, Strand. He published, 1. “Laudatio*
funebris in obitum D. Thomae Alleni,
” Oxon. Annotations on the first Epistle of Clement the Apostle to the Corinthians,
” Lond. Graecse Linguae Historia,
” ibid. Veteris Linguae Persicae Historia,
” with a recommendatory epistle by Langbaine. 4. “A Commentary on Antoninus’s Itinerary, or
Journey of the Roman Empire, so far as it concerneth Britain,
” Lond. The beloved city, or the Saints’ reign on
earth a thousand years, &c.
” Lond. Commentary on Antoninus
” procured him, from bishop
Kennett, the character of the best topographer since Camden.
, first bishop of Bristol, was born in 1490, and became a student at the university
, first bishop of Bristol, was born in 1490,
and became a student at the university of Oxford aboiU
1513, and five years after took the degree of B. A.
being then, Wood says, numbered among the celebrated
poets of the university. He afterwards became a brother
of the order called Bonhoms, and after studying some
time among the friars of St. Austin (now Wadham college)
he was elected provincial of his order at Edington in Wiltshire, and canon residentiary of Sarum. In that station he
lived many years, till at length king Henry VIII. being informed of his great knowledge in divinity and physic,
made him his chaplain, and advanced him to the newly
erected see of Bristol, to which he was consecrated June
25, 1542, at Hampton. Pits very erroneously says he
was made bishop of Bristol by Edward VI. partly with a
design to draw him from the ancient religion, and partly
because they could not find among the reformers any other
person of sufficient erudition. This author, however, allows that he denied the true faith by taking a wife, whom,
as an excuse, Pits turns into a concubine. In consequence of this connection he was, on the accession of
queen Mary, deprived of his dignity, and spent the remainder of his life in a private station at Bristol, where he
died in 1558. He was buried on the north side of the
choir of the cathedral, and a monument was afterwards
erected to his memory; his wife was also buried here in
1553. Pits, and after him a congenial lover of popery,
the late Mr. Cole, says, that he dismissed her of his own
accord; but that is improbable, as there could be no necessity for such dismission till queen Mary’s accession,
which happened in July 1553, and the bishop’s wife died
in October following.
Dr. Bush wrote, 1. “An exhortation to Margaret Burges, wife to John Burges, clothier, of Kingswuod, in the
county of Wilts,
” London, printed in the reign of Edward VI. 2. “Notes on the Psalms,
” London, Treatise in praise of the Crosse.
” 4. “Answer to
certain queries concerning the abuses of the Mass,
” in
Burnet’s History of the -Reformation, Records, No. 25.
5. “Dialogues between Christ and the Virgin Mary.
”
6. “Treatise of salves and curing remedies,
” 8vo. printed
by Redman, no date. 7. “A little Treatise in English,
called the Extirpation of Ignorancy, &c.
” in verse, printed
by Pinson, without date, 4to, and dedicated to the lady
Mary. 8. “Carmina diversa.
”
published, after his death, under the inspection of Mr. Challoner. He proposed writing the lives of bishop Fisher and Sir Thomas More, and had made copious collections
, author of the “Lives of the Saints,
”
the second son of Simon Butler, esq. of Appletree, in the
county of Northampton, was born in 1710, and educated
for a short time at a school in Lancashire, whence in his
eighth year he was sent to the English college at Douay,
where he applied himself with uncommon diligence to the
studies prescribed in that Roman catholic seminary, and
was admired for his early piety. After completing his
course, he was admitted an alumnus, and appointed professor of philosophy, in lecturing on which he followed the
Newtonian system, then gaining ground in the foreign
universities, in preference to the systems of Wolfe and
Leibnitz, in which he discovered some things irreconcileable with the opinions of the church. He was next appointed professor of divinity, and while at this college
published his first work, “Letters on the History of the
Popes, published by Mr. Archibald Bower,
” which were
written with ease and good humour, and shew various and
extensive learning. In 1745 he accompanied the late earl
of Shrewsbury, and the hon. James and Thomas Talbot, on
their travels through France and Italy. On his 1 return from
these travels, he was sent on the English mission, and
wished to be settled in London; where he might have access to literary society and the public libraries, with a view
to complete his “Lives of the Saints,
” on which he had
long been engaged; but the vicar apostolic of the middle
district claimed him, as belonging to that district, and appointed him, much against his will, to a mission in Staffordshire. Here, however, he did not remain long, being
appointed chaplain to Edward duke of Norfolk, and to
superintend the education of Mr. Edward Howard, his
nephew and presumptive heir, whom he accompanied
abroad, but who died soon. During his being at Paris, on
this occasion, he completed and sent to press his “Lives
of the Saints, which is said to have cost him the labour of
thirty years. At the finishing of it he gave, what hisbiographer very truly calls, a very edifying instance of
humility. The manuscript of the first volume having been,
submitted to Mr. Cnalloner, the vicar-apostolic of the
London district, he recommended the omission of all the
notes, that the work might be less expensive and more
useful. It is easy to suppose what it must have cost our
author to consign to oblivion the fruit of so much labour.
He obeyed, however, and to this circumstance it is owing,
that in the first edition the notes.are omitted. Some years
after, he published the
” Life of Mary of the Cross,“a
nun in the English convent of the poor Clatvs at Rouen,
not, strictly speaking, apiece of biography, but a vehicle for
instructions on religious life on Roman catholic principles.
Sometime after our author’s return to England from his
travels with Mr. Edward Howard, he was chosen president
of the English college at St. Omer’s, in which station he continued until his death. He had projected many works
besides those already mentioned, and among them, his
treatise on the
” Moveable Feasts,“which was published,
after his death, under the inspection of Mr. Challoner.
He proposed writing the lives of bishop Fisher and Sir
Thomas More, and had made copious collections for both,
some of which are in the hands of his biographer. He had
begun a treatise on
” Natural and revealed religion,“being dissatisfied with what Bergier had published on those
subjects. Three volumes of his
” Discourses“have been
published since his decease. As a preacher, however, we
are told, that he almost wholly failed. His sermons were
sometimes interesting and pathetic; but they were always
desultory, and almost always immeasurably long. His
” Short
life of Sir Toby Matthews,“has lately been published by
his biographer. His literary correspondence was very extensive, and among other correspondents of distinction,
may be mentioned the learned Lambertini, afterwards pope
Benedict XIV. and the late Dn Lowth, bishop of London;
and the assistance he afforded to English men of literature
has been liberally acknowledged by Dr. Kennicot, and
others. After a life spent in devotion to his profession,
and in various studies, he died May 15, 1773, in the sixtythird year of his age; and was interred in the chapel of
the English college at St. Omers, where a monument of
white marble was erected to his memory, with an elegant
Latin inscription. His
” Lives of the Saints," although
run free from the peculiarities of his predecessors in that
branch of biography, is a work of great value and research.
It was first published in 1745, 5 vols. 4to; and in 1779, or
1780, an edition was published at Dublin, in 12 vols. 8vo;
and in 1799 1800, at Edinburgh, in the same form, to
which his nephew, Charles Butler, esq. barrister at law,
prefixed a life, from which the preceding sketch is taken.
, late bishop of Hereford, was born at Hamburgh, probably of English parents,
, late bishop of Hereford, was born at Hamburgh, probably of English parents, Dec. 1717. In his early days he acted as private tutor in the family of Mr. Child the banker. He was then a popular preacher in London, and possessed of sound parts, indefatigable industry, a good figure, and agreeable manners. Being introduced to Mr. Bilson Legge, he assisted that gentleman in the political controversy with lord Bute^ and rendered him farther services in calculations on public finance. It was probably through this connection that Dr^Hayter, bishop of London, appointed Mr. Butler his first chaplain, who obtained also the living of Everley in Wiltshire, about the same time. On the recommendation of lord Onslow, he was constituted one of the king’s chaplains, and obtained a prebend in Winchester cathedral. Commencing a political writer, he espoused the cause of lord North in all the measures of administration, and particularly in that of the American war, which he endeavoured to justify in several pamphlets. In reward of these services, he was n^ade archdeacon of Surrey, and procured-a Lambeth degree of D. D. from the archbishop of Canterbury. His next promotion was to the see of Oxford, which was given him by the minister (lord North) in 1777, on the advancement of Dn Lowth to the bishoprick of London; and the living of Cuddesden was held by Dr. Butler at the same time, being annexed to the see of Oxford; but this preferment was rendered locally unpleasant from the circumstance of his not having been regularly graduated at either of the universities. He, however, retained it till 1788, when he was advanced to the bishopric of Hereford, over which he presided until his death at his palace at Hereford, Dec. 10, 1802. He was twice married. His first wife was the mistress of a boarding-school in Westminster; his second, the sister and one of the coheiresses of sir Charles Vernon, of Farnham in Surrey; but he had issue by neither. He underwent the operation of lithotomy at the age of sixty, which he long survived, although in his latter days he was kept alive by great care and attention. Although charitable and even munificent in his lifetime, he left a very considerable fortune to his executors and friends. He was an eloquent, pleasing, and impressive preacher, always from short-hand notes, and very distinct and audible in his delivery, although his voice was weak.
ndred near Wantage. With this gentleman, who was the. second son of Dr. William Talbot, successively bishop of Oxford, Salisbury, and Durham, Mr. Butler formed an intimate
, a prelate of the most distinguished
character and abilities, was born at Wantage in Berkshire,
in 1692. His father, Mr. Thomas Butler, who was a reputable shopkeeper in that town, observing in his son
Joseph an excellent genius and inclination for learning,
determined to educate him for the ministry, among the
protestant dissenters of the presbyterian denomination.
For this purpose, after he had gone through a proper
course of grammatical literature, at the free grammarschool of his native place, under the care of the rev. Mr.
Philip Barton, a clergyman of the church of England,
he was sent to a dissenting academy, then kept at Gloucester, but which was soon afterwards removed to Tewkesbury, the principal tutor of which was Mr. Jones, a man of
uncommon abilities and knowledge. At Tewkesbury, Mr.
Butler made an extraordinary progress in the study of divinity; of which he gave a remarkable proof in the letters
addressed by him, whilst he resided at Tewkesbury, to
Dr. Samuel Clarke, laying before him the doubts that
had arisen in his mind concerning the conclusiveness of
some arguments in the doctor’s “Demonstration of the
Being and Attributes of God.
” The first of these letters
was dated November the 4th, 1713; and the sagacity and
depth of thought displayed in it immediately excited Dr.
Clarke’s particular notice. This condescension encouraged Mr. Butler to address the doctor again upon the
same subject, which, ^likewise, was answered by him; and
the correspondence being carried on in three other letters,
the whole was annexed to the celebrated treatise before
mentioned, and the collection has been retained in all the
subsequent editions of that work. The management of
this correspondence was entrusted by Mr. Butler to his
friend and fellow-pupil Mr. Seeker, who, in order to
conceal the affair, undertook to convey the letters to the
post-office at Gloucester, and to bring back Dr. Clarke’s
answers. When Mr. Butler’s name was discovered to the
doctor, the candour, modesty, and good sense with which
he had written, immediately procured him his friendship.
Our young student was not, however, during his continuance at Tewkesbury, solely employed in metaphysical
speculations and inquiries. Another subject of his serious
consideration was, the propriety of his becoming a dissenting minister. Accordingly, he entered into an examination of the principles of non-conformity; the result of
which was, such a dissatisfaction with them, as determined
him to conform to the established church. This intention
was at first very disagreeable to his father, who endeavoured to divert him from his purpose; and with that view
called in the assistance of some eminent presbyterian divines; but finding his son’s resolution to be fixed, heat
length suffered him to be removed to Oxford, where he
was admitted a commoner of Oriel college, on the 17th of
March, 1714. At what time he took orders is uncertain,
but it must have been soon after his admission at Oxford,
if it be true, as is asserted, that he sometimes assisted Mr.
Edward Talbot in the divine service, at his living of Hendred near Wantage. With this gentleman, who was the.
second son of Dr. William Talbot, successively bishop of
Oxford, Salisbury, and Durham, Mr. Butler formed an
intimate friendship at Oriel college, which laid the foundation of all his subsequent preferments, and procured for
him a very honourable situation when he was only twentysix years of age. In 1718, at the recommendation of Mr.
Talbot and Dr. Clarke, he was appointed by sir Joseph
Jekyll to be preacher at the Rolls. This was three years
before he had taken any degree at the university, where
he did not go out bachelor of law till the 10th of June,
1721, which, however, was as soon as that degree could
statutably be conferred upon him. Mr. Butler continued
at the Rolls till 1726, in the beginning of which year he
published, in one volume 8vo, “Fifteen Sermons preached
at that Chapel.
” In the mean time, by the patronage of
Dr. Talbot, bishop of Durham, to whose notice he had
been recommended (together with Mr. Benson and Mr. Seeker) by Mr. Edward Talbot on his death-bed, our author had been presented first to the rectory of Haughton,
near Darlington, in 1722, and afterwards to that of Stanhope in the same diocese, in 1725, At Haughton there
was a necessity for rebuilding a great part of the parsonagehouse, and Mr. Butler had neither money nor talents for
that work. Mr. Seeker, therefore, who had always the
interest of his friends at heart, and had acquired a very
considerable influence with bishop Talbot, persuaded that
prelate to give Mr. Butler, in exchange for Haughton,
the rectory of Stanhope, which was not only free from any
such incumbrance, but was likewise of much superior
value, being indeed one of the richest parsonages in England. Whilst our author continued preacher at the Rolls
chapel, he divided his time between his duty in town and
country; but when he quitted the Rolls, he resided, during seven years, wholly at Stanhope, in the conscientious
discharge of every obligation appertaining to a good parish
priest. This retirement, however^ was too solitary for his
disposition, which had in it a natural cast of gloominess:
and though his recluse hours were by no means lost either
to private improvement or public utility, yet he felt at
times very painfully the want of that select society of
friends to which he had been accustomed, and which could
inspire him with the greatest chearfulness. Mr. Seeker,
therefore, who knew this, was extremely anxious to draw
him out into a more active and conspicuous scene, and
omitted no opportunity of expressing this desire to such as
he thought capable of promoting it. Having himself been,
appointed king’s chaplain in 1732, he took occasion, in a
conversation which he had the honour of holding with
queen Caroline, to mention to her his friend Mr. Butler.
The queen said she thought he had been dead. Mr.
Seeker assured her he was not. Yet her majesty afterwards asked archbishop Blackburne if he was not dead?
His answer was, “No, madam, but he is buried.
” Mr.
Seeker, continuing his purpose of endeavouring to bring
his friend out of his retirement, found means, upon Mr.
Charles Talbot' s being made lord chancellor, to have Mr.
Butler recommended to him for his chaplain. His lordship accepted and sent for him; and this promotion calling
him to town, he took Oxford in his way, and was admitted
there to the degree of doctor of law, on the 8th of December, 1733. The lord chancellor, who gave him also a
prebend in the church of Rochester, had consented that
he should reside at his parish of Stanhope one half of the
year.
ed to the later editions of the Sermons at the Rolls chapel. In 1746, upon the death of Dr. Egerton, bishop of Hereford, Dr. But> ler was made clerk of the closet to the
Dr. Butler being thus brought back into the world, his
merit and talents soon introduced him to particular notice,
and paved the way for his rising to those high dignities
which he afterwards enjoyed. In 1736, he was appointed
clerk of the closet to queen Caroline; and, in the same
year, he presented to her majesty a copy of his celebrated
treatise, entitled “The Analogy of Religion, natural and
revealed, to the constitution and course of Nature.
” His
attendance upon his royal mistress, by her especial command, was from seven to nine in the evening every day;
and though this was interrupted by her death in 1737, yet
he had been so effectually recommended by her, as well
as by the late lord chancellor Talbot, to his majesty’s favour, that, in the next year, he was raised to the highest
order of the church, by a nomination to the bishopric of
Bristol; to which see he was consecrated on the 3d of
December, 1738. King George II. not being satisfied with
this proof of his regard to Dr. Butler, promoted him, in
1740, to the deanry of St. Paul’s London; into which he
was installed on the 24th of May in that year, and finding
the demands of this dignity to be incompatible with his
parish duty at Stanhope, he immediately resigned that
rich benefice. Besides our prelate’s unremitted attention
to his peculiar obligations, he was called on to preach several discourses on public occasions, which were afterwards
separately printed, and have since been annexed to the
later editions of the Sermons at the Rolls chapel. In 1746,
upon the death of Dr. Egerton, bishop of Hereford, Dr. But>
ler was made clerk of the closet to the king; and in 1750, he
received another distinguished mark of his majesty’s favour,
by being translated to the see of Durham on the 16th of October in that year, upon the decease of Dr. Edward
Chandler. Our prelate, being thus appointed to preside
over a diocese with which he had long been connected,
delivered his first, and indeed his last charge to his clergy,
at his primary visitation in 1751. The principal subject
of it was, “External Religion.
” The bishop having observed, with deep concern, the great and growing neglect
of serious piety in the kingdom, insisted strongly on the
usefulness of outward forms and institutions, in fixing and
preserving a sense of devotion and duty in the minds of
men. In doing this, he was thought by several persons to
speak too favourably of pagan and popish ceremonies, and
to countenance, in a certain degree, the cause of superstition. 'Under that apprehension, an able and spirited
writer, who was understood to be a clergyman of the
church of England, published in 1752, a pamphlet, entitled “A serious inquiry into the use and importance of
External Religion: occasioned by some passages in the
right reverend the lord bishop of Durham’s Charge to the
Clergy of that diocese; humbly addressed to his lordship.
” Many persons, however, and, we believe, the greater
part of the clergy of the diocese, did not think our prelate’s
charge so exceptionable as it appeared to this author.
The charge, which was first printed at Durham, was afterwards annexed to Dr. Butler’s other works, by Dr. Halifax.
By his promotion to the see of Durham, our worthy bishop
was furnished with ample means of exerting the virtue of
charity, the exercise of which was his highest delight. But
this gratification he did not long enjoy. He had been but
a short time seated in his new bishopric, when his health
began visibly to decline; and having been complimented,
during his indisposition, upon account of his great resignation to the divine will, he is said to have expressed some
regret, that he should be taken from the present world so
soon after he had been rendered capable of becoming
much more useful in it. In his last illness, he was carried
to Bristol, to try the waters of that place; but, these proving ineffectual, he removed to Bath, where, being past
recovery, he died on the 16th of June, 1752. His corpse
was conveyed to Bristol, and interred in the cathedral
there, where a monument, with an inscription, is erected
to his memory. On the greatness of bishop Butler’s intellectual character we need not enlarge; for his profound
knowledge, and the prodigious strength of his mind, are
amply displayed in his incomparable writings. His piety
was of the most serious and fervent, and perhaps somewhat
of the ascetic kind. His benevolence was warm, generous,
and diffusive. Whilst he was bishop of Bristol, he expended, in repairing and improving the episcopal palace,
four thousand pounds, which is said to have been more
than the whole revenues of the bishopric amounted to,
during his continuance in that see. Indeed he used to say
that the deanery of St. Paul’s paid for it. Besides his
private benefactions, he was a contributor to the' Infirmary
at Bristol, and a subscriber to three of the Hospitals at
London. He was, likewise, a principal promoter, though
not the first founder, of the Infirmary at Newcastle, in
Northumberland. lu supporting the hospitality and
dignity of the rich and powerful diocese of Durham, he was
desirous of imitating the spirit of his patron, bishop Talbot. In this spirit, he set apart three clays every week for
the reception and entertainment of the principal gentry of
the country. Nor were even the clergy who had the
poorest benefices neglected by him. He not only occasionally invited them to dine with him, but condescended
to visit them at their respective parishes. By his will, he
left five hundred pounds to the society for propagating the
gospel in foreign parts, and some legacies to his friends
and domestics. His executor was his chaplain, the rev.
Dr. Nathaniel Forster, a divine of distinguished literature,
who was especially charged to destroy all his manuscript
sermons, letters, and papers. Bishop Butler was never
married. The bishop’s disposition, which had in it a natural ca’st of gloominess, was supposed to give a tincture
to his devotion. As a proof of this, and that he had even
acquired somewhat of a superstitious turn of mind, it was
alleged, that he had put a. cross in his chapel at Bristol.
The cross was a plain piece of marble inlaid. This circumstance, together with the offence which some persons had
taken at his charge delivered at Durham, might possibly
give rise to a calumny, that, almost fifteen years after his
death, was advanced concerning him, in an obscure and
anonymous pamphlet, entitled “The Root of Protestant
Errors examined.
” It was there said, that our prelate died
in the communion of the church of Rome. Of this absurd
and groundless charge, we shall take no other notice, than
to transcribe what the worthy and learned Dr. Porteus has
written concerning it, in his Life of Archbishop Seeker.
“This strange slander, founded on the weakest pretences
and most trivial circumstances that can be imagined, no
one was better qualified to confute than the archbishop;
as well from his long and intimate knowledge of bishop
Butler, as from the information given him at the time by
those who attended his lordship in his last illness, and
were with him when he died. Accordingly, by an article
in a newspaper, signed Misopseudes, his grace challenged
the author of that pamphlet to produce his authority for
what he had advanced; and in a second article defended
the bishop against him; and in a third (all with the same signature) confuted another writer, who, under the name
of ‘A real Protestant,’ still maintained that ridiculous
calumy. His antagonists were effectually subdued, and
his superiority to them was publicly acknowledged by a
sensible and candid man, who signed himself, and who
really was ‘A dissenting Minister.’ Surely, it is a very
unwise piece of policy, in those who profess themselves
enemies to popery, to take so much pains to bring the
most respectable names within its pale; and to give it the
merit of having gained over those who were the brightest
ornaments and firmest supports of the protestant cause.
”
in this book 5 so that, perhaps, “inopem ilium copia fecit.” The world have great obligations to the bishop of St. Asaph (Dr. Halifax) for an analysis of it, which must
His deep learning and comprehensive mind appear sufficiently in his writings, particularly in his work entitled
“The Analogy of Religion,
” in praise of which too much
cannot be said. The purity of the intention, the force of
reasoning, and the copiousness of illustration, render it
one of the greatest performances that the combination of
virtue with intelligence ever gave rise to. It is, however,
occasionally obscure from the nature of the subject, as
well as from the extreme pains its ingenious author took
to prevent its being so; the endeavouring (as he used to tell a friend of his) to answer, as he went along, every possible objection that might occur to any one against any
position of his in this book 5 so that, perhaps, “inopem
ilium copia fecit.
” The world have great obligations to
the bishop of St. Asaph (Dr. Halifax) for an analysis of it,
which must be of great use to young persons, and to men
not much inured to abstruse reasoning. It has, appended
to it, a very elegantly written account of his life, in which
he very ably defends him against the charge of popery
above mentioned. In the volumes of sermons published
by Butler himself, there are three that have a particular
relation to his larger work. These are analysed by Dr.
Halifax in his account of his life and writings, 1786.
Trinity college: this young and very amiable lady was afterwards married to Dr. Dennison Cumberland, bishop of Clonfert and Kilialoe, in Ireland, and was the mother of
His inclination to poetry appeared very early, but was
imparted principally to his friends and fellow-students.
The first production which brought him into general notice,
was probably written in his twenty-third year. At this
time the beautiful pastoral of “Colin and Phebe
” appeared
in the eighth volume of the Spectator; and was, as it continues to be, universally admired. The Phebe of this pastoral was Joanna, daughter of the celebrated Dr. Bentley,
master of Trinity college: this young and very amiable
lady was afterwards married to Dr. Dennison Cumberland,
bishop of Clonfert and Kilialoe, in Ireland, and was the mother of Richard Cumberland, esq. the well-known dramatic
writer. It has been asserted, but without any foundation,
that Byrom paid his addresses to Miss Bentley. His object
was rather to recommend himself to the attention of her
father, who was an admirer of the Spectators, and liLely to
notice a poem of so much merit, coming, as he would soon
be told, from one of his college. Byrom had before this
sent two ingenious papers on the subject of dreaming to
the Spectator; and these specimens of promising talent
introduced him to the particular notice of Dr. Bentley,
by whose interest he was chosen fellow of his college, and
soon after admitted to the degree of master of arts.
Amidst this honourable progress, he does not appear to
have thought of any profession, and as he declined going
into the church, the statutes of the college required that
he should vacate his fellowship. Perhaps the state of his
health created this irresolution, for we find that in 1716
it became necessary for him to visit Montpelier upon that
account; and his fellowship being lost, he returned no
more to the university.
d often harmonious, In his “Dialogue on Contentment,” and his poem “On the Fall of Man, in answer to bishop Sherlock,” he strongly reminds us of Pope in the celebrated
It is almost superfluous to add, that with such an attachment to rhime, he wrote with ease: it is more to his credit that he wrote in general with correctness, and that his
mind was stored with varied imagery and original turns of
thought, which he conveys in flowing measure, always
delicate and often harmonious, In his “Dialogue on
Contentment,
” and his poem “On the Fall of Man, in
answer to bishop Sherlock,
” he strongly reminds us of
Pope in the celebrated essay, although in the occasional
adoption of quaint conceits he appears to have followed
the example of the earlier poets. Of his long pieces, perhaps the best is “Enthusiasm,
” which he published in
175i , and which is distinguished by superior animation,
and a glow of vigorous fancy suited to the subject. He
depicts the classical enthusiast, and the virtuoso, with a
strength of colouring not inferior to some of Pope’s happiest portraits in his Epistles. His controversial and critical verses, it has already been hinted, are rather to be
considered as literary curiosities than as poems, for what
can be a poem which excludes the powers of invention, and
interdicts the excursions of fancy? Yet, if there be a
merit in versifying terms of art, some may also be allowed
to the introduction of questions of grammar, criticism, and
theology, with so much ease and perspicuity.
was a native of Cavaillon, in Provence, where he became a canon of the cathedral, archdeacon and bishop in 1334. He was also honoured with the rank of chancellor to
was a native of Cavaillon,
in Provence, where he became a canon of the cathedral,
archdeacon and bishop in 1334. He was also honoured
with the rank of chancellor to Sancha, queen of Sicily, by
her husband Robert, in 1341, and jointly with that princess
was regent during the minority of Joan her grand-daughter.
In 1366, he was appointed patriarch of Jerusalem, and
had the charge of the bishopric of Marseilles and at last
pope Urban V. raised him to the rank of cardinal, and
vicar-general spiritual and temporal in the diocese of
Avignon, and while the popes resided at Avignon, Gregory XI. made him superinterulant of the papal territory in
Italy. He died at Perugia in 1372. He wrote a treatise
“De Nugis Curie-ilium,
” some sermons, and two books on
the life and miracles of St. Mary Magdalen. Petrarch was
his particular friend, and dedicated to him his treatise on
a solitary life; and many of his letters are addressed to him.
He is likewise mentioned with high praise by other learned
contemporaries.
near the Tower. On the 22d of January, 1595, he was present at the confirmation of Richard Vaughan, bishop of Bangor, in the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, London. Upon kingJames’s
, a learned civilian, was born near
Tottenham, in Middlesex, in 1557. His father was Cæsar
Adelmar, physician to queen Mary and queen Elizabeth
lineally descended from Adelmar count of Genoa, and admiral of France, in the year 806, in the reign of Charles
the Great. This Cæsar Adelmar’s mother was daughter to
the duke de Cesarini, from whom he had the name of
Cæsar which name Mary I. queen of England, ordered
to be continued to his posterity and his father was Peter
Maria Dalmarius, of the city of Trevigio in Italy, LL. D.
sprung from those of his name living at Cividad del Friuli.
Julius, who is the subject of this article, had his education in
the university of Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A.
May 17, 1575, as a member of Magdalen hall. Afterwards
he went and studied in the university of Paris where, in
the beginning of 1581, he was created D. C. L. and had
letters testimonial for it, under the seal of that university,
dated the 22d of April, 1531. He was admitted to the
same degree at Oxford, March the 5th, 1583; and also
became doctor of the canon law. In the reign of queen Elizabeth, he was master of requests, judge of the high court
of admiralty, and master of St. Catherine’s hospital near
the Tower. On the 22d of January, 1595, he was present
at the confirmation of Richard Vaughan, bishop of Bangor,
in the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, London. Upon kingJames’s accession to the throne, having before distinguished
himself by his merit and abilities, he was knighted by that
prince, at Greenwich, May 20, 1603. He was also constituted chancellor and under- treasurer of the exchequer
and on the 5th of July, 1607, sworn of his majesty’s privy
council. January 16th, in the eighth of king James I. he
obtained a reversionary grant of the office of master of the
rolls after sir Edward Phillips, knight; who, departing this
life September 11, 1614, was succeeded accordingly by
sir Julius, on the 1st of October following; and then he
resigned his place of chancellor of the exchequer. In
1613 he was one of the commissioners, or delegates employed in the business of the divorce between the earl of
Essex and his countess; and gave sentence for that divorce.
About the same time, he built a chapel at his house, <on
the north side of the Strand, in London, which was consecrated, May 8, 1614. As he had been privy-counsellor
to king James I. so was he also to his son king Charles I.;
and appears to have been custos rotulorum of the county
of Hertford. We are likewise informed by one author,
that he was chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster. After
having thus passed through many honourable employments,
and continued in particular, master of the rolls for above
twenty years, he departed this life April 28, 1636, in the
seventy-ninth year of his age. He lies buried in the church
of Great St. Helen’s within Bishopgate, London, under
a fair, but uncommon monument, designed by himself;
being in form of a deed, and made to resemble a ruffled
parchment, in allusion to his office as master of the rolls.
With regard to his character, he was a man of great gravity and integrity, and remarkable for his extensive bounty
and charity to all persons of worth, or that were in want:
so that he might seem to be almoner-general of the nation.
Fuller gives the following instance of his uncommon charity
“A gentleman once borrowing his coach (which was as well known to poor people as any hospital in England)
was so rendezvouzed about with beggars in London, that
it cost him all the money in his purse to satisfy their importunity, so that he might have hired twenty coaches on
the same terms.
” He entertained for some time in hisr
house the most illustrious Francis lord Bacon, viscount
St. Alban’s. He made his grants to all persons double
kindnesses by expedition, and cloathed (as one expresses it) his very denials in such robes of courtship, that it was
not obviously discernible, whether the request or denial
were most decent. He had also this peculiar to himself,
that he was very cautious of promises, lest falling to an
incapacity of performance he might forfeit his reputation,
and multiply his certain enemies, by hisoiesign of creating
uncertain friends. Besides, he observed a sure principle
of rising, namely, that great persons esteem better of such
they have done great courtesies to, than those they have
received great civilities from; looking upon this as their
disparagement, the other as their glory.
f Nice, in a work entitled “Of the Power of the Pope;” and for his zeal upon this occasion, was made bishop of Cajeta. Then he was raised to the archiepiscopal see of Palermo;
, a cardinal, was born in 1469, at Cajeta, a
town in the kingdom of Naples. His proper name was
Thomas de Vio, but he took that of Cajetan from the place
of his nativity. He was entered of the order of Dominic,
of which he became an illustrious ornament; and having
taken a doctor’s degree when he was about twenty-two
years of age, he taught philosophy and divinity first at
Paris, and afterwards at Rome. He went regularly through
all the honours of his order, till he was made general of
it; which office he exercised for ten years. He defended
the authority of the pope, which suffered greatly at the
council of Nice, in a work entitled “Of the Power of
the Pope;
” and for his zeal upon this occasion, was made
bishop of Cajeta. Then he was raised to the archiepiscopal see of Palermo; and in 1517 was made a cardinal by
pope Leo X. The year after he was sent a legate into
Germany, to quell the commotions which Luther had
raised by his opposition to Leo’s indulgences: buJt Luther,
being under the particular protection of Frederic elector
of Saxony, set him at defiance; and though, in obedience
to the cardinal’s summons, he repaired to Augsburg, yet
he rendered his endeavours of no effect. Cajetan indeed
was the most improper person that could have been selected to oppose Luther, having nothing to advance hut
the arrogant dictates of mere authority. He was, however,
more advantageously employed in several other negotiations and transactions, being not only a man of letters,
but having a peculiar turn for business; and at length died,
in 1534, when he was sixty-five years old.
d take pupils, but he had no share in the government of the house. Dr. Felton, the pious and learned bishop of Ely, had so great a regard to his diligence in study, and
, an eminent nonconformist divine in the seventeenth century, was the sou of a citizen of London, and born there in February 1600. July 4, 1616, he was admitted of Pembroke-hall 5 in the university of Cambridge. In 1619, he took, the degree of bachelor of arts and in 1632, that of bachelor of divinity. He shewed himself very early no friend, to the Arminian party, which was the reason that he could not obtain a fellowship in that society, even when he seemed to be entitled to it from his standing, as well as from his learning and unblemished character. At last, however, he so far conquered all prejudices, that he was elected Tanquam Socius of that hall, which entitled him to wear the cap, and take pupils, but he had no share in the government of the house. Dr. Felton, the pious and learned bishop of Ely, had so great a regard to his diligence in study, and unaffected zeal for religion, that he made him his chaplain, and paid him, during his residence in his family, uncommon marks of respect. His lordship gave him likewise, as a farther mark of his favour, the vicarage of St. Mary’s in Swaffham- Prior, in Cambridgeshire, in which capacity he did much good, though he diid not reside on his cure by reason of its small distance from the episcopal place. But after the death of the bishop in 1626, Mr. Calamy being chosen one of- th$; lecturers of St. Edmund’s-Bury, in Suffolk, he resigned his vicarage, and applied himself wholly to the discharge of his function at Bury. He continued there ten years, and, as some writers say, was during the greatest part of that time a strict conformist. Others, and indeed himself, say the contrary. The truth seems to be, that he was unwilling to oppose ceremonies, or to create a disturbance in the church about them, so long as this might, in, his opinion, be avoided with a safe conscience; but when bishop Wren’s articles, and the reading of the book of sports, came to be insisted on, he thought himself obliged to alter his conduct, and not only avoid conforming for the future, but also to apologize publicly for his former behaviour. He caine now to be considered as an active nonconformist, and being in great favour with the earl of Essex, he presented him to the living of Rochford in Essex, a rectory of considerable value, and yet it proved a fatal present to Mr. Calamy; for, removing from one of the best and wholesomest airs in England, that of St. Edmund’sbury, into the hundreds of Essex, he contracted such an illness as broke his constitution, and left behind it a dizziness in his head, which he complained of as long as he Jived. Upon the death of Dr. Stoughton, he was chosen minister of St. Mary Aldermanbury, which brought him tip to London, 1639. The controversy concerning churchgovernment was tlu n at its greatest height, in which Mr. Calainy had a very large share. In the month of July 1639, he was incorporated of the university of Oxford, which, however, did not take him off from the party in which he was engaged. In 1640 he was concerned in writing that famous book, called Smectymnuus, which himself says, gave the first deadly blow to episcopacy, and therefore we find frequent references to it in all the defences and apologies for nonconformity which have been since published. In 1641 he was appointed by the house of lords a member of the sub-committee for religion, which consisted of very eminent divines, whose conduct, however, has been differently censured. He made a great figure in the assembly of divines, though he is not mentioned in Fuller’s catalogue, and distinguised himself both by his learning and moderation. He likewise preached several times before the house of commons, for which his memory has been very severely treated. He was at the same time one of the Cornhill lecturers, and no man had a greater interest in the city of London, in consequence of his ministerial abilities. He preached constantly in his own parish church for twenty years to a numerous audience, composed of the most eminent citizens, and even persons of great quality. He steadily and strenuously opposed the sectaries, and gave many pregnant instances of his dislike to those violences which were committed afterwards, on the king’s being brought from the Isle of Wight, He opposed the beheading of his sovereign king Charles I. with constancy ^ncl courage. Under the usurpation of Cromwell he was passive, and lived as privately as he could; yet he gave no reason to suspect that he was at all a well-wisher to that government. When the times afforded a favourable opportunity, he neglected not promoting the return of king Charles II. and actually preached before the house of commons on the day they voted that great question, which, however, has not hindered some from suggesting their suspicions of his loyally. After this step was taken, he, Mr. Ash, and other eminent divines were sent over to compliment the king in Holland, by whom they were extremely well received. When his majesty was restored, Mr. Calainy retained still a considerable share in his favour, and in June 1660, was appointed one of his chaplains in ordinary, and was offered the bishopric, of Coventry and Litchfield, which he refused. When the convocation came to be chosen, he and Mr. Baxter were elected, May 2, 1661, for London; but the bishop of that diocese having the power of chusing two out of four, or four out of six, elected within a certain circuit, Dr. Sheldon, who was then bishop, was so kind as to excuse both of them; which, perhaps, was owing to the share they had in the Savoy conference. After the miscarrying of that design, Mr. Calamy made use of all his interest to procure the passing of an act agreeable to the king’s declaration at Breda: but when this was frustrated, and the act of uniformity passed, he took a resolution of submitting to ejection, and accordingly preached his farewel sermon at Aldermanbury, August 17, 1662. He made, however, a last effort three days afterwards, by presenting a petition to his majesty to continue in the exercise of his ministerial office. This petition was signed by many of the London clergy, and Dr. Man ton and Dr. Bates assisted at the presenting it, when Mr; Calamy made a long and moving speech; but neither it nor the petition had any good effect, though the king expressed himself in favour of toleration. He remained, however, in his parish, and came constantly to church, though another was in the pulpit, which proved an occasion of much t;rouble to him for on December 28, 1662, the expected preacher not coming in time, some of the principal persons in the parish prevailed upon Mr. Calamy to supply his place, which, with some importunity, he did; but delivered himself with such freedom, that he was soon after, by the lord mayor’s warrant, committed to Newgate for his sermon. But the case itself being thought hard, and some doubt arising how far the commitment was legal, his majesty in a few days discharged him. He lived to see London in ashes, the sight of which broke his heart. He was driven through the ruins in a coach to Enfield, and was so shocked at the dismal appearance, that he could never wear off the impression, but kept his chamber ever after, and died October 29, 1666, within two naonths after this accident happened. He was, though a very learned man, yet a plain and practical preacher, and one who was not afraid to speak his sentiments freely of and to the greatest; men . He was twice married. By his first wife he had a son and daughter; and by his second seven children, some of whom we shall have occasion to mention in succeeding articles.
dfordshire, where he continued till 1707, when he was presented by his intimate friend Dr. Blackall, bishop of Exeter, to that of Cheriton-Bishops in Devonshire; and had
, son to Edmund Calamy, B. D. before-mentioned, by a second wife, and younger brother to Dr. Benjamin Calamy, of whom in the preceding article, was educated at Catherine-hall, in the university of Cambridge, where, in 1672, he took the degree of bachelor of arts; and in 1676, that of master. Having received holy orders, and being highly considered on account of his father’s reputation, he was presented to the rectory of Northill, in Bedfordshire, where he continued till 1707, when he was presented by his intimate friend Dr. Blackall, bishop of Exeter, to that of Cheriton-Bishops in Devonshire; and had at the same time a prebend in the church of Exeter bestowed on him. He was a man of great learning, but much greater modesty, which is the reason that he left nothing behind him in print, except his dedication of his brother’s sermons. He led a single life, and on December 14, 1714, was surprised by a sudden death.
Spencer, the famous earl of Sunderland, and his tutor Mr. Charles Trimnell, afterwards successively bishop of Norwich and of Winchester, with both of whom he kept up his
, a very eminent divine among the
nonconformists, grandson to Mr. Edmund Calamy, minister
of Aldermanbury, by his eldest son Mr. Edmund Calamy
(who was ejected out of the living of Moreton in Essex, on St. Bartholomew’s day, 1662), was born April 5, 1671.
Having made a considerable progress in grammar learning
at several private schools, and under Mr. Hartcliffe at Merchant Taylors, where he contracted a close friendship with
Mr. Dawes, afterwards sir William Dawes, and archbishop
of York, as also with Mr. Hugh Boulter, the primate of
Ireland, he went through a course of logic, natural philosophy, and metaphysics, under the tuition of Mr. Samuel
Craddock at the academy kept by him at Wickham Brook
in Suffolk. In March 1688, he went over to the university of Utrecht, where he studied philosophy under De
Vries, and civil law under Vander Muyden, and attended
Graevius’s lectures upon Sophocles and Puffendorf’s Introduction. His application to his studies at this place
was so great, that he spent one whole night every week
among his books; and his proficiency gained him -the
friendship of two of his countrymen at that university, who
rose afterwards to very high stations in church and state,
lord Charles Spencer, the famous earl of Sunderland, and
his tutor Mr. Charles Trimnell, afterwards successively
bishop of Norwich and of Winchester, with both of whom
he kept up his acquaintance as long as he and they lived.
Whilst he resided in Holland, an oiler of a professor’s chair
in the university of Edinburgh was made him by Mr. Carstairs, principal of that university, sent over on purpose to
find a person properly qualified lor such an office; which
he declined, and returned to England in 1691, bringing
with him letters from Graevius to Dr. Pocock, canon of
Christ-church, and regius professor of Hebrew, and to Dr.
Edward Bernard, Savilian professor of astronomy, who obtained leave for him to prosecute his studies in the Bodleian
library; and his resilience at Oxford procured him the acquaintance of the learned Mr. Henry Dodvvell. Having
resolved to make divinity his principal study, he entered
into an examination of the controversy between the conformists and nonconformists, and was led to join the latter.
Coming to London in 1692, he was unanimously chosen
assistant to Mr. Matthew Sylvester at Blackfriars; and oa
June 22, 1694, was ordained at Mr. Annesley’s meetinghouse in Little St. Helen’s, which was the first public transaction of the kind, after the passing of the act of uniformity, and was not undertaken without some timidity on
the part of the elder nonconformists, such as Mr. Howe
and Dr. Bates, who seemed afraid of giving offence to government. Six other young ministers were ordained at
the same time, and the ceremony lasted from ten o'clock
in the morning to six in the evening. He was soon after
invited to become assistant to Mr. Daniel Williams in
Hand-alley, Bishupsgate-street. Oct. 20, 1702, he was chosen
one of the lecturers at Salters’-lmll, and in 1703 succeeded
Mr. Vincent Alsop, as pastor of v. congregation in Westminster. He drew up the table of contents to Mr. Baxter’s
History of his life and times, which was sent to the press
in 1696, made some remarks on the work itself, and added
to it an index; and reflecting on the usefulness of the
book, he saw the expediency of continuing it, for Mr.
Baxter’s history came no lower than 1684. Accordingly
he composed an abridgment of it; with an account of many
others of those ministers who were ejected after the restoration of Charles II. their apology for themselves and their
adherents; containing the grounds of their nonconformity
and practice, as to stated and occasional communion witlx
the church of England; and a continuation of their history
till the year 1691. This work was published in 1702. The
following year Mr. Hoadly (afterwards bishop of
Winchckter) published the two parts of his “Reasonableness of
Conformity to the Church of England, &c. in answer to Mr.
Calamy’s Abridgement of Mr. Baxter’s history, &c.
” As a
reply to these treatises, Mr. Calamy published the same
year, “A Defence of moderate Nonconformity;
” and soon
after Mr. Hoadly sent abroad, “A serious admonition to
Mr Calamy,
” occasioned by the first part of his “Defence,
of moderate Nonconformity.
”
warmly opposed by many of the ministers, and particularly by David Calderwood, who, when James Law, bishop of Orkney, came to visit the presbyteries of the Merse and Teviotdale,
, a famous divine of the
church of Scotland, and a distinguished writer in behalf
of the presbyterians, was descended of a good family in
that kingdom, and born in 1575. Being early designed
for the ministry, he applied with great diligence to the
study of the scriptures in their original tongues, the works
of the fathers, the councils, and the best writers of church
history. He was settled, about 1604, at Crailing, not far
from Jedburgh, in the south of Scotland. James VI. of
that country, and the first of Great Britain, being desirous
of bringing the church of Scotland to a near conformity
with that of England, laboured earnestly to restore the
episcopal authority, and enlarge the powers of the bishops
in that kingdom; but this design was very warmly opposed
by many of the ministers, and particularly by David Calderwood, who, when James Law, bishop of Orkney, came
to visit the presbyteries of the Merse and Teviotdale, declined his jurisdiction, by a paper under his hand, dated
May 5, 1603. The king, however, having its success
much at heart, sent the earl of Dunbar, then high-treasurer of Scotland, Dr. Abbot, afterwards archbishop of
Canterbury, and two other divines, into that kingdom,
with instructions to employ every method to persuade both
the clergy and the laity, of his majesty’s sincere desire to
promote the good of the church, and of his zeal for the
Protestant religion, in which they succeeded. Calderwood, however, did not assist at the general assembly held at
Glasgow, June 8, 1610, in which lord Dunbar presided as
commissioner; and it appears from his writings, that he
looked upon every thing transacted in it as null and void.
Exceptions were also taken by him and his party, against
a great part of the proceedings of another general assembly >
held with much solemnity at Aberdeen, Aug. 13, 1616.
In May following, king James went to Scotland, and in
June held a parliament at Edinburgh; at the same time
the clergy met in one of the churches, to hear and advise with the bishops; which kind of assembly, it seems,
was contrived in imitation of the English convocation. Mr.
Calderwood was present at it, but declared publicly that
he did not take any such meetings to resemble a convocation; and being opposed by Dr. Whitford and Dr. Hamilton, who were friends to the bishops, he took his leave
of them in these words: “It is absurd to see men sitting
in silks and satins, and to cry poverty in the kirk, when
purity is departing.
” The parliament proceeded mean
while in the dispatch of business; and Calderwood, with
several other ministers, being informed that a bill was depending to empower the king, with advice of the archbishops, bishops, and such a number of the ministry as his
majesty should think proper, to consider and conclude, as
to matters decent for the external policy of the church,
not repugnant to the word of God; and that such conclusions should have the strength and power of ecclesiastical
laws: against this they protested for four reasons: 1. Because their church was so perfect, that, instead of needing
reformation, it might be a pattern to others. 2. General
assemblies, as now established by law, and which ought
always to continue, might by this means be overthrown.
3. Because it might be a means of creating schism, and
disturb the tranquillity of the church. 4. Because they
had received assurances, that no attempts should be made
to bring them to a conformity with the church of England.
They desired, therefore, that for these and other reasons,
all thoughts of passing any such law may be laid aside; but
in case this be not done, they protest, for themselves and
their brethren who shall adhere to them, that they can
yield no obedience to this law when it shall be enacted,
because it is destructive of the liberty of the church; and
therefore shall submit to such penalties, and think
themselves obliged to undergo such punishments, as may be
inflicted for disobeying that law. This protest was signed
by Archibald Simpson, on behalf of the members, who subscribed another separate roll, which he kept for his justification. It was delivered to Peter Hewet, who had a seat
in parliament, in order to be presented; and another copy
remained in Simpson’s hands, to be presented in case of
any accident happening to the other. The affair making
a great noise, Dr. Spotswood, archbishop of St. Andrew’s,
asked a sight of the protest from Hewet, one day at court
and, upon some dispute between them, it was torn. The
other copy was actually presented by Simpson to the
clerk register, who refused to read it before the states in
parliament. However, the protest, though not read, had
its effect; for although the bill before-mentioned, or, as
the Scottish phrase is, the article, had the consent of parliament, yet the king thought fit to cause it to be laid
aside; and not long after called a general assembly at St.
Andrew’s. Soon after, the parliament was dissolved, and
Simpson was summoned before the high commission court,
where the roll of names which he had kept for his justification, was demanded from him; and upon his declaring
that he had given it to Harrison, who had since delivered
it to Calderwood, he was sent prisoner to the castle of
Edinburgh; and Calderwood was summoned to appear before the high commission court at St. Andrew’s, on the 8th
of July following, to exhibit the said protest, and to answer for his mutinous and seditious behaviour.
“The Altar of Damascus,” and which is uncommonly rare. It concludes with noticing a rumour spread by bishop Spotswood, that Mr. Calderwood had turned Brownist, which rumour
July 12, the king came to that city in person, and soon
after Hewet and Simpson were deprived and imprisoned.
After this, Calderwood was called upon, and refusing to
comply with what the king in person required of him,
James, after haranguing at some length on his disobedience, committed him to prison; and afterwards the/
privy-council, according to the power exercised by them
at that time, directed him to banish himself out of the
king’s dominions before Michaelmas following, and not to
return without licence; and upon giving security for this
purpose, he was discharged out of prison, and suffered to
return to his parish, but forbid to preach. Having applied
to the king for a prorogation of his sentence without success, because he would neither acknowledge his offence,
nor promise conformity for the future, he retired to Holland in 1619, where his publications were securely
multiplied, and diffused through Scotland, particularly one
entitled “The Perth Assembly,
” which was condemned
by the council. In Altare Damascenum, seu ecclesiae Anolicanse politia, ecclesiae Scoticanae obtrusa a formalista quodam delineata, illustrata, et examinata,
” The writer of
the preface prefixed to Calderwood’s “True history of
the church of Scotland
” telis us, that “the author of this
very learned and celebrate 1 treatise (which is an answer to Lin wood’s ‘ Description of the Policy of the church of England’) doth irrefragably and unanswerably demonstrate
the iniquity of designing and endeavouring to model and
conform the divinely simple worship, discipline, and government of the church of Scotland to the pattern of the
pompously prelatic and ceremonious church of England;
under some conviction whereof it seems king James himself
was, though implacably displeased with it, when, being
after the reading of it somewhat pensive, and being asked
the reason by an English prelate standing by and observing
it, he told him he had seen and read such a book; whereupon the prelate telling his majesty not to suffer that to
trouble him, for they would answer it he replied, not
without some passion, < What would you answer, man
There is nothing here but scripture, reason, and the fathers’.
” This work was in fact an enlargement, in Latin, of
one which he wrote in English, and published in 1621,
under the title of “The Altar of Damascus,
” and which is
uncommonly rare. It concludes with noticing a rumour
spread by bishop Spotswood, that Mr. Calderwood had
turned Brownist, which rumour it denies in strong language,
and with the following intemperate and unbecoming threat:
“If either Spotswood, or his supposed author, persist in
their calumny after this declaration, 1 shall try if there be
any blood in their foreheads.
” Calderwood having in Altare Damascenum,
” with a design, as Calderwood believed, to have
dispatched him: but Calderwood had privately returned
into his own country, where he remained for several years.
Scot gave out that the king furnished him with the matter
for the pretended recantation, and that he only put it in
order.
be travelling;” the substance of which had been communicated to Mr. Caldwell by the late Dr. Percy, bishop of Dromore, as related to his lordship by Stewart himself. Of
, a literary gentleman of Ireland, was the son of Charles Caldwell, esq. an eminent solicitor, and was born in Dublin, 1732. He received part
of his education in one of the universities in Scotland, from
whence he removed to London; and after a residence of
about five years at the Temple, returned to Dublin, where
he was admitted to the bar in 1760; but his father being
possessed of a good estate, fully adequate to his son’s wishes,
he never paid much attention to the profession of the law,
and for several years before his death had entirely quitted
it. His studious disposition, and taste for the tine arts,
always afforded him sufficient employment, and he was a
liberal patron of those who excelled in any of the various
branches of art. He had studied architecture with particular attention; and about the year 1770, published, anonymously, some very judicious “Observations on the public buildings of Dublin,
” and on some edifices, which at
that time were about to be erected in that city at the expence of the state. The only other known production of
his pen that has been published, is a very curious “Account of the extraordinary escape of James Stewart, esq.
(commonly called Athenian Stewart) from being put to
death by some Turks, in whose company he happened to
be travelling;
” the substance of which had been communicated to Mr. Caldwell by the late Dr. Percy, bishop of
Dromore, as related to his lordship by Stewart himself.
Of this narrative, of which only a small number was printed
at London in 1304, for the use of the author’s friends, it
is believed not more than a dozen copies were distributed
in this country. Mr. Cald well’s love of literature naturally
led him to collect an ample library, which was particularly
rich in natural history. His manners were gentle and
pleasing, and his benevolence, various knowledge, and cultivated taste, endeared him to a very numerous circle of
friends. He died at the house of his nephew, major-general Cockburn, near Bray in the county of Wicklow, July
2, 1808, in the seventy-sixth year of his age.
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
, 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.
In 1660 he taught in the college du Bois, in Caen, and became there acquainted with Huet, afterwards bishop of Avranches, who acknowledged the assistance he derived from
, a celebrated French philosopher, was
a native of Mesnil-Hubert, near Argenton, in the diocese
of Seez. About 165.5, he studied philosophy at Caen,
and afterwards divinity at Paris, but philosophy was his
favourite pursuit, and the foundation of his fame. In
1660 he taught in the college du Bois, in Caen, and became there acquainted with Huet, afterwards bishop of
Avranches, who acknowledged the assistance he derived
from Cally in his studies. Their intimacy, however, was
interrupted by Cally’s avowal of adherence to ttie Cartesian system. CaJly was the first in France who had the
courage to profess himself a Cartesian, in defiance of the
prejudices and numbers of those who adhered to the ancient philosophy. He first broached his Cartesianism in
the way of hypothesis, but afterwards taught it more
openly, which procured him many enemies. Huet, although then very young, ventured to censure him; and
father Valois, the Jesuit, who was a contemporary professor of philosophy, attacked both Cally and his opinions
in a work which he published under the name of Louis de
la Ville, in 1680, entitled “Sentimens de M. Descartes,
touchant Pessence et les proprietes des corps, opposes a la
doctrine de Peglise, et conformesaux erreurs de Calvin sur
I'eucharistie.
” Cally, not thinking there was much in this,
did not answer it until pressed by his friends, when he
wrote an answer in Latin, which, however, was not at
this time published. When the duke de Montausier was
appointed by Louis XIV. to provide eminent classical
scholars to write notes on the classics published for the use
of the Dauphin, Cally was selected for the edition of
“Boethius de Consolatione,
” which he published, accordingly, in Institutio philosophica,
” 4to, which he
afterwards greatly enlarged, and published in 1695 under
the title “Universae philosophise institutio,
” Caen, 4 vols.
4to. In 1675 he was appointed principal of the college of
arts in Caen, on which he began a new course of philosophical lectures, and laid out ten or twelve thousand francs
on rebuilding a part of the college which had fallen into
ruin. In 1684 he was appointed curate of the parish of
St. Martin, in Caen, and the Protestants who were then
very numerous in that city, flocked to his sermons, and he
held conferences once or twice a week in his vestry, which
they attended with much pleasure, and we are told he 'made
many converts to the Popish religion. But this success,
for which every Catholic ought to have been thankful, excited the envy of those who had quarrelled with him before
on account of his Cartesianism, and by false accusations,
they procured him to be exiled to Moulins in 1686, where
he remained for two years. Finding on his return that the
Protestants were still numerous in Caen, and that they
entertained the same respect for him as before, he wrote for
their use a work entitled “Durand cornmente, ou Paccord
de la philosophie avec la theologie, tonchaut la transubstantialion.
” In this, which contained part of his answer
to father Valois, mentioned above, he revives the opinion
of the celebrated Durand, who said, if the church decided
that there was a transubstantiation in the eucharist, there
must remain something of what was bread, to make a difference between the creation and production of a thing
which was not, and annihilation or a thing reduced to
nothing. Cally sent this work in ms. to M. Basnage, who
had been one of his scholars, but received no answer. la
the mean time, unwilling to delay a work which he hoped
would contribute to the conversion of the Protestants, “he
engaged with a bookseller at Caen to print only sixty
copies, which he purposed to send to his friends at Paris,
and obtain their opinion as to a more extended publication.
The bookseller, however, having an eye only to his own
interest, undertook to assure Cally that the work would be
approved by the doctors of the Sorbonne, and he therefore
would print eight hundred. Cally unfortunately consented, and the work no sooner appeared, than he who
fondly hoped it would convert heretics, was himself treated
as a heretic. M. de Nesmond, then bishop of Bayeux,
condemned the work in a pastoral letter March 30, 1701,
and Cally in April following made his retractation, which
he not only read in his own church, but it was read in all
other churches; and he also destroyed the impression, so
that it is now classed among rare books. It was a small
vol. 12mo, 1700, printed at Cologne, under the name of
Pierre Marteau. Cally also published some of his sermons,
but they were too philosophical and dry for the closet, although he had contrived to give them a popular effect in
the pulpit. A work entitled
” Doctrine heretique, &c.
touchant la primauté du pape, enseignee par les Jesuites
dans leur college de Caen," is attributed to him, but as it
bears date 1644, he must have then been too young. He
died Dec. 31, 1709.
irmed his election, the cardinals proposed to his holiness that Calmet should also have the title of bishop in partibus infiddium, with power to exercise the episcopal
, a learned Benedictine of the
college of St. Vanncs, was born at Mesnil-la-Horgue, near
Commercy, Feb. 26, 1672, and was first educated in the
priory of Breuii. In 1687 he went to study at the
university of Pont-a-Mousson, where he was taught a course of
rhetoric. On leaving this class, he entered among the
Benedictines in the abbey of St. Mansuy, in the fauxbourg
of Toul, Oct. 17, 1688, and mad,e profession in the same
place Oct. 23, 1689. He began his philosophical course
in the abbey of fcfe. Evre, and completed that and his theological studies in the abbey of St. Munster. At his leisure
hours he studied the Hebrew language with great attention
and success, and likewise improved his knowledge of the
Greek. In 1696 he was sent with some of his companions
to the abbey of Moyenmoutier, where they studied the
Holy Scriptures under P. D. Hyacinthe Alliot. Two years
aftef, in 1698, Calmet was appointed to teach philosophy
and theology to the young religious of that monastery, an
employment which he filled until 1704, when he was sent,
with the rank of sub-prior, to the abbey of Munster. There
he was at the head of an academy of eight or ten religious,
with whom he pursued his biblical studies, and having,
while at Moyenmoutier written commentaries and dissertations, on various parts of the Bible, he here retouched and
improved these, although without any other design, at this
time, than his own instruction. During a visit, however,
at Paris, in 1706, he was advised by the abbe Duguet, to
whom he had been recommended by Mabillon, to publish
his commentaries in French, and the first volume accordingly appeared in 1707. In 1715 he became prior of Lay,
and in 1718 the chapter-general appointed bim abb 6 of
St. Leopold, of Nancy, and the year following he was
made visitor of the congregation. In 1728 he was chosen
abbe* of Senones, on which occasion he resigned his priory
of Lay. When pope Benedict XIII. confirmed his election, the cardinals proposed to his holiness that Calmet
should also have the title of bishop in partibus infiddium,
with power to exercise the episcopal functions in those
parts of the province which are exempt from the jurisdiction of the ordinary; but this Calmet refused, and wrote
on the subject to Rome. The pope in Sept. 1729, addressed a brief to him, accepting of his excuses, and some
time after sent him a present of his works, in 3 vols. fol.
Calmet took possession of the abbey of Senones, January
3, 1729, and continued his studies, and increased the library and museum belonging to the abbey with several
valuable purchases, particularly of the medals of the deceased M. de Corberon, secretary of slate, and of the
natural curiosities of M, Voile. Here be died Oct. 25, 1757,
respected by all ranks, Roman catholics and Protestants,
for his learning and candour, and by his more particular
friends and those of his own order, for his amiable temper
and personal virtues. His learning, indeed, was most extensive, as the greater part of his long life was devoted to
study, but amidst such vast accumulation of materials, we
are not surprized that he was sometimes deficient in selection, and appears rather as a collector of facts, than as
an original thinker. His principal works are, 1. “Commentaire litteral sur tous les livres de l'Aneten et da Nouyeau Testament,
” Dissertations and Prefaces
” belonging to his commentary,
published separately with nineteen new Dissertations,
Paris, 1720, 2 vols. 4to. 3. “Histoire de PAncien et du
Nouveau Testament,
” intended as an introduction to Fleury’s “Ecclesiastical History,
” 2 and 4 vols. 4to; and 5 and
7 vols. 12mo. 4. “Dictionnaire historique, critique, et
chronologique de la Bible.
” Paris, Histoire ecclesiasiique et civile de la Lorraine,
” 3 vols.
fol. reprinted 1745, in 5 vols. fol. 6. “Bibliotheque des
Ecrivains de Lorraine,
” fol, Histoire
universelle sacrée et profane,
” 15 vols. 4to. This Calmet did not
live to finish, and in other respects it is not his best work.
7. “Dissertations sur les apparitions des Anges, des Demons,
et des Esprits, et sur les Revenans et Vampires de Hongrie,
”
Paris, 1754, 2 vols. 4to. 10.
” De la Poesie et Musique des anciens Hebreux," Amst. 1723, 8vo. His conjectures on this subject, Dr. Burney thinks, are perhaps as
probable as those of any one of the numerous authors who
have exercised their skill in expounding and defining what
some have long since thought involved in Cimmerian darkness. Calmet also left a vast number of manuscripts, or
rather manuscript collections, as it had long been his practice to copy, or employ others to copy, whatever he found
curious in books. In 1733, he deposited in the royal
library, a correct transcript of the Vedam, a work which
the natives of Hiudostan attribute to their legislator Brama,
who received it, according to their tradition, from God
himself. This copy came into Calmet' s possession by means
of a bramin who had been converted by the Jesuit missionaries. Calmet’s life was written by Dom Fange, his
nephew and successor in the abbey of Senones, and published in 8vo. It was afterwards translated into Italian by
Benedetto Passionei, and published at Rome in 1770.
decem tribuum, conversione Judaeorum et mens. Ezekielis,” Lond. 1672, 4to. This book he dedicated to bishop Wilkins, on whom he waited at Scarborough Spaw, together with
, the son of Robert Calvert, a grocer and sheriff of York, was born on the Pavement in that
ancient city. He was educated at Clare-hall, Cambridge,
where he was contemporary with the famous archbishop
Tillotson. He was bred up under Mr. David Clarkson,
and was a graduate in the university. He had been for
several years at Topcliff, when he was silenced by the act
of uniformity after which he retired to York, lived privately, but studied hard; and there it was that he wrote
his learned book concerning the ten tribes, entitled “Naphthali, seu colluctatio theologica de reditu decem tribuum,
conversione Judaeorum et mens. Ezekielis,
” Lond.
hings, by the answer which he wrote in 1539, to the beautiful but artful letter of cardinal Sadolet, bishop of Carpentras, inviting the people of Geneva to return into
, one of the chief reformers of the
church, was born at Noyon in Picardy, July 10, 1509. He
was instructed in grammar at Paris under Maturinus Corderius, to whom he afterwards dedicated his Commentary
on the first epistle of the Thessalonians, and studied philosophy in the college of Montaigu under a Spanish professor. His father, uho discovered many marks of hitf
early piety, particularly in his reprehensions of the vices of
his companions, designed him for the church, and got him
presented, May 21, 1521, to the chapel of Notre Dame
de la Gesine, in the church of Noyon. In 1527 he was
presented to the rectory of Marteville, which he exchanged
in 1529 fortlie rectory of Pont I‘Eveque near Noyon. His
father afterwards changed his resolution, and would have
him study law; to which Calvin, who, by reading the
scriptures, had conceived a dislike to the superstitions of
popery, readily consented, and resigned the chapel of Gesine and the rectory of Pont l’Eveque in 1534. He had
never, it must here be observed, been in priest’s orders, and
belonged to the church only by having received the tonsure.
He was sent to study the law first under Peter de l'Etoile
(Petrus Stella) at Orleans, and afterwards under Andrew
Alciat at Bourges, and while he made a great progress in
that science, he improved no less in the knowledge of divinity by his private studies. At Bourges he applied to the
Greek tongue, under the direction of professor Wolmar.
His father’s death having called him back to Noyon, he
staid there a short time, and then went to Paris, where he
wrote a commentary on Seneca’s treatise “De dementia,
”
being at this time about twenty- four years of age. Having
put his name in Latin to this piece, he laid aside his surname Cauvin, for that of Calvin, styling himself in the
title-page “Lucius Calvinus civis Romanus.
” He soon
made himself known at Paris to such as had privately embraced the reformation, and by frequent intercourse with
them became more confirmed in his principles. A speech
of Nicholas Cop, rector of the university of Paris, of which
Calvin furnished the materials, having greatly displeased
the Sorbonne and the parliament, gave rise to a persecu^
tion against the protestants; and Calvin, who narrowly escaped being taken in the college of Forteret, was forced to
retire to Xaintonge, after having had the honour to be introduced to the queen of Navarre, who allayed this first storm
raised against the protestants. Calvin returned to Paris in
1534. This year the reformed met with severe treatment,
which determined him to leave France, after publishing a
treatise against those who believe that departed souls are
in a kind of sleep. He retired to Basil, where he studied
Hebrew; at this time he published his “Institutions of the
Christian Religion,
” a work well adapted to spread his fame,
though he himself was desirous of living in obscurity. It
is dedicated to the French king, Francis I. This prince
being solicitous, according to Beza, to gain the friendship
of the Protestants in Germany, and knowing that they
were highly incensed by the cruel persecutions which their
brethren suffered in France, he, by advice of William de
Bellay, represented to them that he had only punished
certain enthusiasts, who substituted their own imaginations
in the place of God’s word, and despised the civil magistrate. Calvin, stung with indignation at this wicked evasion, wrote this work as an apology for the Protestants who
were burnt for their religion in France. The dedication to
Francis I. is one of the three that have been highly admired: that of Thuanus to his history, and Casaubon’s to
Polybius, are the two others. But this treatise, when first
published in 1555, was only a sketch of a larger work.
The complete editions, both in Latin and in French, with
the author’s last additions and corrections, did not appear
till 1558. After the publication of this work, Calvin went
to Italy to pay a visit to the duchess of Ferrara, a lady of
eminent piety, by whom he was very kindly received.
Prom Italy he came back to France, and having settled his
private affairs, he purposed to go to Strasbourg, or Basil,
in company with his sole surviving brother Antony Calvin;
but as the roads were not safe on account of the war, except through the duke of Savoy’s territories, he chose that
road. “This was a particular direction of Providence,
”
says Bayle; “it was his destiny that he should settle at
Geneva, and when he was wholly intent on going farther,
he found himself detained by an order from heaven, if I
may so speak.
” William Farel, a man of a warm enthusiastic temper, who had in vain used many entreaties to
prevail with Calvin to be his fellow-labourer in that part of
the Lord’s vineyard, at last solemnly declared to him, in
the name of God, that if he would not stay, the curse of
God would attend him wherever he went, as seeking himself and not Christ. Calvin therefore was obliged to
comply with the choice which the consistory and magistrates of Geneva made of him, with the consent of the,
people, to be one of their ministers, and professor of divinity. It was his own wish to undertake only this last
office, but he was gbliged to take both upon him in August
1536. The year following he made all the people declare,
upon oath, their assent to a confession of faith, which contained a renunciation of Popery: and because this reformation in doctrine did not put an entire stop to the immoralities that prevailed at Geneva, nor banish that spirit of
faction which had set the principal families at variance,
Calvin, in concert with his colleagues, declared that they
could not celebrate the sacrament whilst they kept up their
animosities, and trampled on the discipline of the church.
He also intimated, that he could not submit to the regulation which the synod of the canton of Berne had lately
made *. On this, the syndics of Geneva summoned an assembly of the people; and it was ordered that Calvin,
Farel, and another minister, should leave the town in two
days, for refusing to administer the sacrament. Calvin'
retired to Strasbourg, and established a French church in
that city, of which he was the first minister; he was also
appointed to be professor of divinity there* During his
stay at Strasbourg, he continued to give many marks of
his affection for the church of Geneva; as appears, amongst
other things, by the answer which he wrote in 1539, to the
beautiful but artful letter of cardinal Sadolet, bishop of
Carpentras, inviting the people of Geneva to return into
the bosom of the Romish church. Two years after, the
divines of Strasbourg being very desirous that he should
assist at the diet which the emperor had appointed to be
held at Worms and at Ratisbon, for accommodating religious differences, he went thither with Bucer, and had a
conference with Melancthon. In the mean time the people
of Geneva (the syndics who promoted his banishment being now some of them executed, and others forced to fly their country for their crimes), entreated him so earnestly to
return to them, that at last he consented. He arrived at
Geneva, Sept. 13, 1541, to the great satisfaction both of
the people and the magistrates; and the first measure ha
adopted after his arrival, was to establish a form of church,
discipline, and a consistorial jurisdiction, invested with,
the power of inflicting censures and canonical punishments,
lion. Charles Yorke, Mr. Wray, and Mr. Edwards. To these he afterwards added lord Anson, Dr. Atwell, bishop Benson, sir Charles Williams, Mr. Henry Fox, Mr. William Whitehead,
Mr. Cambridge survived the publication of this work above forty years, but appeared no more before the public as an author. Many of the smaller pieces in his works were written as amusements for his friends, and circulated only in private. The long remainder of his life passed in the enjoy nient of all that elegant and polished society could yield. Most of the friendships of his youth were those of his advanced age, and they were contracted with such men as are not often found within the reach of a’stationary individual. At Eton he became acquainted with Bryant, Gray, West, Walpole, Dr. Barnard, and Dr. Cooke; at Lincoln’s Inn he found Mr. Henry Bathurst, afterwards lord chancellor, the lion. Charles Yorke, Mr. Wray, and Mr. Edwards. To these he afterwards added lord Anson, Dr. Atwell, bishop Benson, sir Charles Williams, Mr. Henry Fox, Mr. William Whitehead, Villiers lord Clarendon, lord Granville, lord Lyttelton, Mr. Grenville, lord Chesterfield, Mr. Pitt, lord Bath, lord Egremont, Soame Jenyns, lord Hardwicke, admiral Boscawen, lord Barrington, James Harris, Andrew Stone, bishop Egerton, lord Camelford, Welbore Ellis, lord North, Garrick, Dr. Johnson, Dr. Porteus, late bishop of London, and the illustrious navigators Byron, Wallis, Carteret, Phipps, Cook, and Vancouver. In the company of these, some of whom were long his neighbours at Twickenham, he delighted to increase his knowledge by an interchange of sentiment on topics of literature and common life. His conversation was enriched by various reading, and embellished by wit of the most delicate and unobtrusive kind. His temper made him universally beloved. It was uniformly cheerful, mild, and benevolent.
the records of that house being destroyed in the fire of London, the date of his admission is lost. Bishop Gibson treats his admission at Christ’s hospital as a fiction,
, one of the most eminent English
antiquaries, was born in the Old Bailey, London, May 2,
1551. His father, Samson Camden, was a native of Lichfield, whence he was sent very young to London, where
he practised painting, and settling in London, became a
member of the company of Puinter-stainers. The inscription on the cup left by his son to the company calls him
Pictor Londinensis, which may refer either to his profession or to his company. His mother was of the ancient
family of the Curwens of Workington in Cumberland.
Their son received his first education at Christ’s hospital,
which was founded the year after his birth by king Edward
VI.; but the records of that house being destroyed in the
fire of London, the date of his admission is lost. Bishop
Gibson treats his admission at Christ’s hospital as a fiction,
because not mentioned by himself; but as it is by Wheare,
who pronounced his funeral oration very soon after his
death, it seems to have some foundation, especially if we
consider the lowness of his circumstances, and his dependence on Dr. Thornton at Oxford. Dr. Smith (his biographer) says, some infer from hence, that he had lost his father, and was admitted as an orphan; but it is certain
Wheare does not give it that turn. Being seized with the
plague in 1563, he was removed to Islington, or perhaps
was seized with it there, “peste correptus Islingtonue
”
but on his recovery, he completed his education at St.
Paul’s school; where under Mr. Cook or Mr. Malin, he
made such progress in learning as laid the foundation of
his future fame.
belonging to that college perfected himself in grammar learning under Dr. Thomas Cooper, afterwards bishop of Lincoln and Winchester; but being disappointed of a demi’s
From this school he was removed when about fifteen, years old, in 1566, to Oxford, and entered as a servitor at Magdalen college; and in the school belonging to that college perfected himself in grammar learning under Dr. Thomas Cooper, afterwards bishop of Lincoln and Winchester; but being disappointed of a demi’s place, he removed to Broadgate-hall, now Pembroke college, by the invitation of Dr. Thomas Thornton, canon of Christ church, his patron and tutor, and who had the honour to be tutor both to Camden and to sir Philip Sidney. Camden left behind him in Broadgate-hall a signal mark of the respect paid him by his contemporaries in the short Latin graces composed by him, which were used many years after by the scholars of this society. Three years after he removed from hence to Christ church, on the promotion of Dr. Thornton to a canon ry there. This kind patron provided for him during the rest of his continuance at the university, and he lived in his patron’s lodgings. At this time his acquaintance commenced with the two Carews, Richard and George; the latter of whom was by James I. created baron Clopton, and by Charles I. earl of Totness; and it has been supposed, as they were both antiquaries, their conversation might give Mr. Camden a turn to that study, which he himself informs us he had strongly imbibed before he left school, and improved at Oxford. He was also acquainted with John Packington, Stephen Powel, and Edward Lucy, knights.
a prebend of the church of Salisbury, and had been bestowed on him that year by Dr. John Piers, then bishop of that see and his intimate friend; and he had been installed
As each new edition received large corrections and improvements from its author, he took a journey into Devon in 1589, and in June that year was, as he tells us in his diary, at Ilfracomb, which is a prebend of the church of Salisbury, and had been bestowed on him that year by Dr. John Piers, then bishop of that see and his intimate friend; and he had been installed into it by proxy Feb. 6. This preferment he held till his death; and when bishop Abbot held his general visitation at Whitsuntide in 1617, he excused himself from attending on account of his age, being then seventy, and was allowed to appear by proxy. The expence of this and other journies was defrayed by his friend Mr. Godfrey Goodman. In 1590 he visited Wales in company with the famous Dr. Godwin, afterwards bishop of Landatf‘and Hereford. On Oct. 23, 1592, he was attacked with a quartan ague, which, for a long while, baffled the help of physic, and brought him very low. During this illness, Dr. Edward Grant, who had been head master of Westminster school upwards of twenty years with great reputation, worn out with fatigue, resigned that place Feb. 1592-3; and in March following was succeeded by Camden. Mr. Wheare, Dr. Smith, and bishop Gibson, all assign this vacancy to the death of Dr. Grant; and Wood, though in two articles he expresses himself doubtfully, in another affirms that he resigned about February 1592, and was succeeded by William Camden. He adds, that Dr. Grant died in 1601, and was buried in Westminster abbey, where his epitaph, now defaced, but preserved in Mr. Camden’ s account of this abbey-church, dates his death Aug. 3, 1601.
ll many years after the fourth edition of the Britannia; but he had framed his materials soon after. Bishop Gibson ascribes this attack to envy of Mr. Camden’s promotion
It was not till next year that Mr. Camuen perfectly recovered from his ague; and soon after published the fourth
edition of his Britannia,' with great enlargements and improvements by his own care, and tliat of his friends. But
all his attention could not defend him from the violent
and indecent attack from Ralph Brooke (more properly Brookesmouth), York Herald, exposing certain mistakes
which he pretended to have discovered in the pedigrees of
the earls of each county, and which he fancied might be
attended with circumstances dishonourable to many of the
most ancient and noble families in this kingdom. Brooke’s
book did not appear till many years after the fourth edition
of the Britannia; but he had framed his materials soon
after. Bishop Gibson ascribes this attack to envy of
Mr. Camden’s promotion to the place of Clarencieux king
at arms, in 1597, which place Brooke expected for himself. But though the piece is undated, it appears by the
address to Maister Camden prefixed to it, that Camden
was not then king at arms, and he was created Richmond
herald but the day before. The truth is, that Mr. Camden
in his first editions touched but lightly on pedigrees, and
mentioned but few families whereas in the fourth he enlarged so much upon them, that he has given a particular
index of Barones et illustriores famili<e, and recited near
250 noble houses. This Brooke, with the mean jealousy
of a man whose livelihood was connected with his place,
considered as an invasion on the rights of the college.
This put him on examining these pedigrees, and on wishing
to have them corrected, as Mr. Camden appears to have
been ever ready to have his mistakes set right. Brooke
tells us, indeed, that what he offered him for the fifth edition did not meet with that favourable reception he expected even before Camden professed himself an herald
officially, and that foreigners, misled by his former editions,
had blundered egregiously. He complains too, that he
had been disturbed in writing, and much more in printing
it, by Mr. Camden’s friends. That this was rather owing
to a jealousy of his profession than of his promotion, appears further from hence, that though Mr. Camden himself
in his answer to Brooke does not indeed take notice of his
promotion, and the disgust it might have given him, yet
this was after he had published his “Discoverie,
” and he
shews throughout that disdain of his adversary’s abilities,
which Brooke complains of, never once admitting him to
be right, or his corrections worth regarding, though in the
fifth edition he wisely made use of them; and whoever
peruses Brooke’s book carefully will find, that'what stung
him most was, that a schoolmaster should meddle with
descents and families, and at the same time treat heralds
with so little respect.
tes in the churches and chapels there, which Wood says he had seen in the author’s hand-writing; and bishop Gibson speaks of fragments of them as still remaining. In 1597
As soon as Camden found his health re-established, he
made a journey to Salisbury and Wales, and returning by
Oxford, spent some time in that city, taking notes in the
churches and chapels there, which Wood says he had seen
in the author’s hand-writing; and bishop Gibson speaks of
fragments of them as still remaining. In 1597 he had a
fresh illness, from which he recovered by the care of one
Mrs. Line, wife of Cuthbert Line, to whose house he removed. This year he published his Greek grammar for
the use of Westminster school, entitled “Grammatices
Graecoe institutio compendiaria in usum regias scholas Westmonasteriensis,
” London, 8vo, which, when Dr. Smith
published his life, in 1691, had run through forty impressions. Dr. Grant had composed one before, but Mr.
Camden thought it deficient and inconvenient. Wood says
he contracted it.
t having first been a herald, he was Oct. 22, created Richmond herald, and the next day Clarencieux. Bishop Gibson remarks, that lord Burleigh was offended with Camden
At this time he probably entertained no thoughts of quitting a post in which he was universally esteemed and respected. He refused the place of master of requests, offered him probably by lord treasurer Burleigh. But before the end of the year he quitted it for one in the Heralds’ college. Richard Leigh, Clarencieux king at arms, dying Sept. 23, sir Fulk Greville, Camden’s intimate friend, solicited that office for him, which was immediately granted. But, because it was not usual for a person to rise to that dignity without having first been a herald, he was Oct. 22, created Richmond herald, and the next day Clarencieux. Bishop Gibson remarks, that lord Burleigh was offended with Camden for obtaining this preferment by any other interest than his; but, on Mr. Camden’s representing it to be the free thought of sir Fulk Greville, he was reconciled to him, and continued his patronage during the remainder of his life.
Somerset herald, and W. D. gent, are proofs of its value, notwithstanding the slight put upon it by bishop Nicolson. It is a kind of common place from his Britannia, and
Camden’s next publication is entitled “Remaines of a
greater work concerning Britain, the inhabitants thereof,
their language, names, surnames, empresses, wise speeches,
poesies, and epitaphs,
” London, the outcast rubbish of a greater
and more serious work;
” so that Dr. Smith mistakes when
he dates its publication 1604, contrary to the express note
of its author in his Diary. The number of the editions it
has run through (not less than seven), and the additions
made to it in 1636, or earlier, by sir John Philipot, Somerset herald, and W. D. gent, are proofs of its value, notwithstanding the slight put upon it by bishop Nicolson.
It is a kind of common place from his Britannia, and has
preserved a number of curious things. Many other of his
lesser essays have been printed by Hearne in his “Collection of curious discourses,
” and more were added to the second edition of that work in 177 1; which may be considered
as the earliest transactions of the Society of Antiquaries, of
which Mr. Camden was a distinguished member.
touches to put the author in mind of greater matters,” or rather memoranda for private use. He adds, bishop Hacket stole, and Dugdale borrowed and transcribed them, as
From this time he seems to have lived in retirement at
Chiselhurst, declining the solicitations of his friend Saville,
to make his house at Eton his own, and to have amused
himself with entering memoranda of events as they happened,- which have been printed at the end of his epistles
by Dr. Smith, and called “Apparatus annalium regis Jacobi I.
” These are called by Wood “A skeleton of a history of James I. or bare touches to put the author in mind
of greater matters,
” or rather memoranda for private use.
He adds, bishop Hacket stole, and Dugdale borrowed and
transcribed them, as did sir Henry St. George, Clarencieux,
both incorrectly. The original is in Trinity college, Cambridge, and Dr. Smith printed these and parts of an English Diary.
hstanding this disposition of his books and papers, Dr. John Williams, then dean of Westminster, and bishop of Lincoln, afterwards archbishop of York, procured all the
In his last testament, after a devout introduction, and bequeathing eight pounds to the poor of the parish in which
he should happen to die, he bequeaths to sir Fulke Grevile,
lord Brooke, who preferred him gratis to his office, a piece
of plate of ten pounds; to the company of painter stainers
of London, he gave sixteen pounds to buy them a piece of
plate, upon which he directed this inscription, “Gul. Camdenus Clarenceux filius Sampsonjs, Pictoris Londinensis,
dono dedit;
” he bestowed the sum of twelve pounds on the
company of cordwainers, or shoemakers of London, to
purchase them a piece of plate, on which the same inscription was to be engraved. Then follow the legacies to his
private friends. As to his books and papers, he directs
that sir Robert Cotton of Conington, should take out such
as he had borrowed of him, and then he bequeaths to him
all his printed books and manuscripts, excepting such as
concern arms and heraldry, which, with his ancient seals,
he bequeaths to his successor in the office of Clarenceux,
provided, because they cost him a considerable sum of
money, he gave to his cousin John Wyat, what the kings
at arms Garter and Norroy for the time being should
think fit, and agreed also to leave them to his successor.
But notwithstanding this disposition of his books and papers,
Dr. John Williams, then dean of Westminster, and bishop
of Lincoln, afterwards archbishop of York, procured all
the printed books for the new library erected in the church
of Westminster. It is understood, that his collections in
support of his History, with respect to civil affairs, were
before this time deposited in the Cotton library; for as to
those that related to ecclesiastical matters, when asked for
them by Dr. Goodman, son to his great benefactor, he declared he stood engaged to Dr. Bancroft, archbishop of Canterbury. They came afterwards to archbishop Laud, and are
supposed to have been destroyed when his papers fell into the
hands of Mr. Prynne, Mr. Scot, and Hugh Peters; for upon
a diligent search made by Dr. Sancroft, soon after his promotion to that see, there was not a line of them to be found,
as we have already mentioned. His body was removed to
his house in London, and on the 19th of November, carried
in great pomp to Westminster abbey, and after a sermon
preached by Dr. Christopher Sutton, was deposited in the
south aile, near the learned Casaubon, and over against
Chaucer. Near the spot was erected a handsome monument of white marble, with an inscription, erroneous as to
his age, which is stated to be seventy-four, whereas he
wanted almost six months of seventy-three. At Oxford,
Zouch Townley, of Christ Church, who was esteemed a
perfect master of the Latin tongue in all its purity and elegance, was appointed to pronounce his funeral oration in
public, which is printed by Dr. Smith. The verses written
on his death were collected and printed in a thin quarto,
entitled “Insignia Camdeni,
” Ox.
Carnden’s personal character is drawn by bishop Gibson in few words: that he was “easy and innocent in his
Carnden’s personal character is drawn by bishop Gibson
in few words: that he was “easy and innocent in his conversation, and in his whole life even and exemplary.
” We
have seen him unruffled by the attacks of envy, which his merit and good fortune drew upon him. He seems to have studied that tranquillity of temper which the love of letters generally superinduces, and to which one may, perhaps, rationally ascribe his extended life. The point of view in
which we are to set him, is as a writer; and here he stands
foremost among British antiquaries. Varro, Strabo, and
Pausanias, among the ancients, fall short in the comparison; and however we may be obliged to the two latter for
their descriptions of the world, or a small portion of it, Camden’s description of Britain must be allowed the pre-eminence, even though we should admit that Leland marked
out the plan, of which he filled up the outlines. A crowd
of contemporaries, all admirable judges of literary merit,
and his correspondents, bear testimony to his merit. Among
these may be reckoned Ortelius, Lipsius, Scaliger, Casaubon, Merula, De Thou, Du Chesne, Peiresc, Bignon,
Jaque Godefre, Gruter, Hottoman, Du Laet, Chytraeus,
Gevartius, Lindenbrogius, Mercator, Pontanus, Du Puy,
Rutgersius, Schottus, Sweertius, Liinier, with many others
of inferior note. Among his countrymen, dean Goodman
and his brother, lord Burleigh, sir Robert Cotton, Dr.
(afterwards archbishop) Usher, sir Philip Sidney, and archbishop Parker, were the patrons of his literary pursuits, as
the first two had befriended him in earliest life: and if
to these we add the names of Allen, Carleton, Saville,
Stradling, Carew, Johnston, Lambarde, Mathews, Spelroan, Twyne, Wheare, Owen, Spenser, Stowe, Thomas
James, Henry Parry, afterwards bishop of Worcester,
Miles Smith, afterwards bishop of Gloucester, Richard
Hackluyt, Henry Cuff, Albericus Gentilis, John Hanmer,
sir William Beecher, Dr. Budden, Dr. Case, sir Christopher Hey don, bishop Godwin, Richard Parker, Thomas
Ryves, besides others whose assistance he acknowledges
in the course of his Britannia, we shall find no inconsiderable bede-roll of associates, every one of them more or
less eminent in the very study in which they assisted Mr.
Camden, or were assisted by him.
Bodleian library, expressly cautions the reader to hold only his “Latin copy for autentiq,” but this bishop Gibson denies; but in a later edition of his translation, 1637,
The first edition of his Britannia was in 1586, 8vo, and
not 4to, as Mr. Gough, probably by a slip t)f the pen, has
noted; and the sixth and last was in 1607, fol. This was
the first with maps. There were also several editions
printed abroad. The first translation of it was in 1610, by
Philemon Holland, who was thought to have consulted
Mr. Camden himself, and therefore great regard has been
paid by subsequent editors to his additions and explanations. Mr. Camden’s ms supplement to this edition of
1610, in the Bodleian library, expressly cautions the reader to hold only his “Latin copy for autentiq,
” but this
bishop Gibson denies; but in a later edition of his translation, 1637, fol. Holland has taken unwarrantable liberties.
Mr. Wanley supposes this second edition was published
after Holland’s death in 1636, the title being like a bookseller’s; and that he made the translation without consulting Camden.
The Britannia was translated in 1694 by bishop Gibson, and published in folio, with large additions at the
The Britannia was translated in 1694 by bishop Gibson,
and published in folio, with large additions at the end of
each county; others are inserted in the body of the book,
distinguished from the original, and Holland’s most material notes placed at the bottom of each page. As this was
grown scarce, and many improvements were communicated
to the editor, he published a new edition 1722, 2 vols. fol.
and additions, greatly enlarged, incorporated with the
text, distinguished by hooks. This edition was reprinted
1753, 2 vols. fol. and again in 1772, with a few corrections and improvements from his lordship’s ms. in his own
copy, by his son-in-law, George Scot, esq. of Wolstonhall, near Chigwell, Essex, who died 1780. A first volume of a translation, by W. O. (William Oldys), esq. was
printed in 4to, but, as Mr. Gough thinks, was never
finished or dated. A manuscript most erroneous translation of it, without acknowledgment, by Richard Butcher,
author of the “Antiquities of Stamford,
” is in St. John’s
college library, Cambridge, with a few immaterial additions. The last and most complete translation of the Britannia, by such an antiquary as Camden would have chosen,
the late learned and excellent Richard Gough, esq. was
published in 1789, 3 vols. fol. of which we shall speak
more at large in his article. Some years afterwards he had
made preparations for a new edition, of which he superintended only the first volume, and announced that fact in
a public advertisement, which did not, however, prevent
an attempt to pass off the whole of a recent edition as his.
Of Mr. Cough’s Life of Camden we have here availed
ourselves, as far preferable to the ill-digested compilation
in the Biog. Britannica.
ickle’s translation will be considered in his life. It was translated into Latin by Thomas de Faria, bishop of Targa in Africa; who, concealing his name, and saying nothing
Camoens wrote a variety of poetical compositions, some
of which have been lately very elegantly translated into
English by lord viscount Strangford, who has also prefixed
a life of the author, from which we have extracted some
remarks. According to the researches his lordship has
made into the character of Camoens, he appears to have
possessed a lofty and independent spirit, with a disposition to gallantry which may probably have involved him in
difficulties. His genius, however, appears principally io
the “Lusiad,
” the subject of which is the first discovery of
the East Indies by Vasco de Gama the poem is conducted
according to the epic plan: both the subject and the in r
cidents are magnificent, but the machinery is perfectly
extravagant. Not only, says Blair, is it formed of a singular mixture of Christian ideas and pagan mythology,
tout it is so conducted, that the pagan gods appear to be
the true deities, and Christ and the blessed Virgin, to be
subordinate agents. One great scope of the Portuguese
expedition, our author informs us, is to propagate the
Christian faith, and to extirpate Mahometanism. In this
religious undertaking, the great protector of the Portuguese is Venus, and their great adversary is Bacchus,
whose displeasure is excited by Vasco’s attempting to rival
his tame in the Indies. Councils of the gods are held, in
which Jupiter is introduced, as foretelling the downfall of
Mahometanism, and the propagation of the gospel Vasco,
in a great distress from a storm, prays most seriously to
God; implores the aid of Christ and the Virgin; and begs
for such assistance as was given to the Israelites, when they
were passing through the Red Sea; and to the apostle
Paul, when he was in hazard of shipwreck. In return to
this prayer, Venus appears, who, discerning the storm to
be the work of Bacchus, complains to Jupiter, and procures the winds to be calmed. Such strange and preposterous machinery, shews how much authors have been
misled by the absurd opinion, that there could be no epic
poetry without the gods of Homer. Towards the end of
the work, indeed, the author gives us an awkward salvo for
his whole mythology: making the goddess Thetis inform
Vasco, that she, and the rest of the heathen deities, are no
more than names to describe the operations of Providence.
There is, however, says the same judicious critic, some
fine machinery of a different kind in the Lusiad. The genius of the river Ganges, appearing to Emanuel king of
Portugal, in a dream, inviting that prince to discover his
secret springs, and acquainting him that he was the destined monarch for whom the treasures of the East were
reserved, is a happy idea. But the noblest conception of
this sort is in the fifth canto, where Vasco is recounting to
the king of Melinda all the wonders which he met with in
his navigation. He tells him, that when the fleet arrived
at the Cape of Good Hope, which never before had been
doubled by any navigator, there appeared to them on a
sudden, a huge and monstrous phantom rising out of the
sea, in the midst of tempests and thunders, with a head
that reached the clouds, and a countenance that filled them
with terror. This was the genius, or guardian, of that
hitherto unknown ocean. It spoke to them with a voice
like thunder: menaced them for invading those seas which
he had so long possessed undisturbed, and for daring to
explore those secrets of the deep, which never had been
revealed to the eye of mortals; required them to proceed
no farther: if they should proceed, foretold all the successive calamities that were to befall them: and then, with
a mighty noise, disappeared. This is one of the most solemn and striking pieces of machinery that ever was employed, and is sufficient to show that Camoens is a poet,
though of an irregular, yet of a bold and lofty imagination.
The critical student will find a more severe censure of Canioens in Rapin, Dryden, and Voltaire. But the Lusiad
lias generally been considered as a poem of very superior
merit, and has been often reprinted and translated into
several languages, once into French, twice into Italian,
four times into Spanish; and lately, with uncommon excellence, into English, by Mr. Mickle; but it had beea
translated in the 17th century by sir Richard Fanshaw.
Mickle’s translation will be considered in his life. It was
translated into Latin by Thomas de Faria, bishop of Targa
in Africa; who, concealing his name, and saying nothing
of its being a translation, made some believe that the Lusiadas was originally in Latin. Large commentaries have
been written upon the Lusiadas; the most considerable of
which are those of Emanuel Faria de Sousa, in 2 vols. folio,
Madrid, 1639. These commentaries were followed the
year after with the publication of another volume in folio,
written to defend them; besides eight volumes of observations upon the miscellaneous poems of Camoens, which
this commentator left behind him in manuscript.
through Perugia in his way to the council of Mantua, he bestowed his patronage on him, and made him bishop of Crotona, and secondly of Teramo. Enjoying the same favour
, an Italian poet and prelate, was born in 1427 at Cavelli, a village of Campania, of parents so obscure that he bore no name but that of his country, and was employed in his early years as a shepherd, in which situation an ecclesiastic discovering some promise of talents in him, sent him to Naples, where he studied under Laurentius Valla. He went afterwards to Perugia, where he rose to be professor of eloquence, and filled that chair with so much reputation, that when, in 1459, pope Pius II. happened to pass through Perugia in his way to the council of Mantua, he bestowed his patronage on him, and made him bishop of Crotona, and secondly of Teramo. Enjoying the same favour under pope Paul II. this pontiff sent him to the congress of Ratisbon, which assembled for the purpose of consulting on a league of the Christian princes against the Turks. Sixtus IV. who had been one of his scholars at Perugia, made him successively governor of Todi, of Foligno, and of Citta di Castello; but the pope having thought proper to besiege this last named city, because the inhabitants made some scruple about receiving his troops, Campano, touched with the hardships they were likely to suffer, wrote to the pope with so much freedom and spirit as to enrage his holiness, and provoke him to deprive him of his government, and banish him from the ecclesiastical states. Campano on this went to Naples, but not rinding the reception he expected, he retired to his bishopric at Teramo, where he died July 15, 1477, of chagrin and disappointment. His works, which were first printed at Rome in 1495, fol. consist of several treatises on moral philosophy, discourses, and funeral orations, and nine books of letters, in which there is some curious information with respect both to the political and literary history of his times. This volume contains likewise, the life of pope Pius II. and of Braccio of Perugia, a famous military character, and lastly, of eight book of elegies and epigrams, some of which are rather of too licentious a nature to accord with the gravity of his profession. These, or part of them, were reprinted at Leipsic in 1707, and in 1734. Campano was at one time a corrector of the press to Udalric, called Gallus, the first printer of Rome, and wrote prefaces to Livy, Justin, Plutarch, and some other of the works which issued from that press.
’s plot; as he did likewise, with great zeal and warmth, for the bill of pains and penalties against bishop Atterbury. In 1724, he defended the mutiny-bill; and, it appears,
On the 10th and 16th of April he spoke in the house of
peers in defence of the bill for repealing the triennial act,
and rendering parliaments septennial. But soon after this
his grace seems to have conceived some disgust against the
court, or some dislike was taken at his conduct there, for
in June following he resigned all his places. The particular grounds of his dissatisfaction, or of his being removed
from his offices, are not mentioned; but we now find him
in several instances voting against the ministry. In February 1717-18, he spoke against the mutiny-bill, and
endeavoured to shew, by several instances drawn from the
history of Great Britain, that “a standing army, in the
time of peace, was ever fatal, either to the prince or the
nation.
” But on the 6th of February 1718-19, he was
made lord-steward of the household; and, after that event,
we again find his lordship voting with administration;
which he generally continued to do for many years afterwards. On the 30th of April, 1718, he was advanced to
the dignity of a duke of Great Britain, by the title of duke
of Greenwich. His grace opposed, in 1722, the bill “for
securing the Freedom of election of Members to serve for
the Commons in Parliament:
” and promoted the resolution of the house for expunging the reasons that were
urged by some of the lords in their protest against the rejection of the bill. He also supported a motion made by
the earl of Sunderland, for limiting the time for entering
protests: and he spoke in favour of the bill for suspending
the habeas corpus act for a year, on occasion of the discovery of Layer’s plot; as he did likewise, with great zeal
and warmth, for the bill of pains and penalties against
bishop Atterbury. In 1724, he defended the mutiny-bill;
and, it appears, that his grace had not the same fears of a
standing army now, as when he was out of place a few
years before.
facility; and the style of his works, which had been formed upon the model of that of the celebrated bishop Sprat, was perspicuous, easy, flowing, and harmonious. Should
Let us now advert a little to Dr. Campbell’s personal
history. May 23, 1736, he married Elizabeth, daughter
of Benjamin Vobe, of Leominster, in the county of Hereford, gentleman, with which lady he lived nearly forty
years in the greatest conjugal harmony and happiness. So
wholly did he dedicate his time to books, that he seldom
went abroad: but to relieve himself, as much as possible,
from the inconveniencies incident to a sedentary life, it
was his custom, when the weather would admit, to walk in
his garden; or, otherwise, in some room of his house, by
way of exercise. By this method, united with the strictest
temperance in eating, and an equal abstemiousness in
drinking, he enjoyed a good state of health, though his
constitution was delicate. His domestic manner of living
did not preclude him from a very extensive and honourable acquaintance. His house, especially on a Sunday
evening, was the resort of the most distinguished persons
of all ranks, and particularly of such as had rendered themselves eminent hy their knowledge, or love of literature.
He received foreigners, who were fond of learning, with
an affability and kindness, which excited in them the
highest respect and veneration; and his instructive and
cheerful, conversation made him the delight of his friends
in general. On March 5, 1765, Dr. Campbell was
appointed his majesty’s agent for the province of Georgia, in
North America, which employment he held till his decease. His last illness was a decline, the consequence of
a life devoted to severe study, and which resisted every
attempt for his relief that the most skilful in the medical
science could devise. By this illness he was carried off,
at his house in Queen-square, Ormond-street, on Dec. 28,
1775, when he had nearly completed the 68th year of his
age. His end was tranquil and easy, and he preserved the
full use of all his faculties to the latest moment of his life.
On Jan. 4th following his decease, he was interred in the
new burying- ground, behind the Foundling-hospital, belonging to St. George the Martyr, where a monument,
with a plain and modest inscription, has been erected to
his memory. Dr. Campbell had by his lady seven children, one of whom only survived him, but is since dead.
Dr. Campbell’s literary knowledge was by no means confined to the subjects on which he more particularly treated
as an author. He was well acquainted with the mathematics, and had read much in medicine. It has been with
great reason believed, that, if he had dedicated his studies
to the last science, he would have made a very conspicuous
figure in the physical profession. He was eminently versed
in the different parts of sacred literature; and his acquaintance with the languages extended not only to the
Hebrew, Greek, and Latin among the ancient, and to the
French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Dutch, among
the modern; but, likewise, to the oriental tongues. He
was particularly fond of the Greek language. His attainment of such a variety of knowledge was exceedingly assisted by a memory surprisingly retentive, and which, indeed, astonished every person with whom he was conversant. A striking instance of this has been given by the
honourable Mr. Daines Barrington, in his tract, entitled,
“The probability of reaching the north pole discussed .
”
In communicating his ideas, our author had an uncommon
readiness and facility; and the style of his works, which
had been formed upon the model of that of the celebrated
bishop Sprat, was perspicuous, easy, flowing, and harmonious. Should it be thought that it is sometimes rather
too diffusive, it will, notwithstanding, indubitably be allowed, that it is, in general, elegant.
, an eminent cardinal of the Romish church, and an English bishop, was a native of Bologna, the son of John Campegio, a learned
, an eminent cardinal of the Romish church, and an English bishop,
was a native of Bologna, the son of John Campegio, a learned
lawyer, and was himself professor of law at Padua. After
the death of his wife, he went into the church, and in
1510 became auditor of the Rota, and in 1512 bishop of
Feltria. Being afterwards, in 1517, created cardinal, he
was sent as pope’s legate into England in the following
year. His chief business at the English court was to persuade Henry VIII. to join the confederation of Christian
princes against the Turks. He was very favourably received on this occasion, and had several spiritualities bestowed upon him, among which was the bishoprick of Salisbury, but not having been able to accomplish the business of his mission, he returned to Rome. When the controversy respecting Henry’s divorce began, in 1527, -cardinal Campegio was sent a second time into England, to
call a legantine court, where he and his colleague cardinal
Wolsey were to sit as judges. Having arrived in London
Oct. 1528, the first session began at Blackfriars, May 31,
1529, and the trial lasted until July 23, when the queen
Catherine appealing to the pope, the court was adjourned
until Sept. 28, and was then dissolved. Afterwards Campegio was recalled to Rome, the king making him considerable presents upon his departure; but a rumour being
spread, that he carried along with him a treasure belonging to cardinal Wolsey, whose downfall was at this time
contrived, and who, it was suspected, intended to follow
him to Rome, he was pursued by the king’s orders, and
overtaken at Calais. His baggage was searched, but nothing being found of the kind suspected, he complained
louilly of this violation of his sacred character. In this,
however, he obtained no redress, and when king Henry
understood that the see of Rome was not disposed to favour
him with a divorce from his queen, he deprived Campegio
of his see of Salisbury. He died at Rome in August 1539,
leaving the character of a man of learning, and a patron of
learned men, and much esteemed by Erasmus, Sadolet,
and other eminent men of that time. His letters only remain, which contain many historical particulars, and were
published in “Epistolarum miscellanearum, libri decem,
”
Basil,
, a most pernicious Jesuit.” Afterwards, having been found guilty of high treason in adhering to the bishop of Rome, the queen’s enemy, and in coming to England todisturb
, an ingenious Roman catholic
writer, was born in London in 1540, and educated at
Christ’s hospital. Being a boy of great parts, he was selected while at school, to make an oration before queen
Mary at her accession to the crown; and from thence
elected scholar of St. John’s college in Oxford by Thomas
White, the founder of it, in 1553. He took his degrees
of B. and M. A. regularly, and afterwards went into orders.
In 1566, when queen Elizabeth was entertained at Oxford, he made an oration before her, and also kept an act
in St. Mary’s church, with very great applause from that
learned queen. In 1568, he went into Ireland, where he
wrote a history of that country in two books; but being
then discovered to have embraced the popish religion, and
to labour for proselytes, he was seized and detained for
some time. He escaped soon after into England; but in
1571 transported himself into the Low Countries, and settled in the English college of Jesuits at Doway, where he
openly renounced the protestant religion, and had the degree of B. D. conferred upon him. From thence he went
to Rome, where he was admitted into the society of Jesuits in 1573; and afterwards sent by the general of his
order into Germany. He lived for some time in Brune,
and then at Vienna where he composed a tragedy, called
“Nectar and Ambrosia,
” which was acted before the emperor with great applause. Soon after he settled at Prague
in Bohemia, and taught rhetoric and philosophy for about
six years in a college of Jesuits, which had been newly
erected there. At length being called to Rome, he was
sent by the command of pope Gregory XIII. into England,
where he arrived in June 1580. Here he performed all
the offices of a zealous provincial, and was diligent in propagating his religion by all the arts of conversation and
Writing. He seems to have challenged the English clergy
to a disputation, by a piece entitled “Rationes decem oblati certaminis in causa fidei, redditse academicis Angliae,
”
which was printed at a private press in Edmund Campian, a most pernicious Jesuit.
” Afterwards, having been
found guilty of high treason in adhering to the bishop of
Rome, the queen’s enemy, and in coming to England todisturb the peace and quiet of the realm, he was hanged
and quartered, with other Romish priests, at Tyburn, December 1, 1581.
try; where he married mademoiselle de Maniban, sister of the first president of Toulouse, and of the bishop of Mirepoix, afterwards archbishop of Bourdeaux; and there he
, was born at Toulouse
in 1656, and shewed an early taste for poetry, whichwas
improved by a good education, and when he came to
Paris, he took Racine for his guide in the dramatic career.
But, though it may be allowed that Campistron approached
his merit in the conduct of his pieces, yet he could never
equal him in the beauties of composition, nor in his enchanting versification. Too feeble to avoid the defects of
Racine, and unable like him to atone for them by beautiful strokes of the sublime, he copied him in his soft manner of delineating the love of his heroes, of whom, it must
be confessed, he sometimes made inamoratos fitter for the
most comic scenes than for tragedy, in which passion
ought always to assume an elevated style. Racine, while
he was forming Campistron for the drama, was not inattentive to promote the fortune of the young* poet. Having
proposed him to the duke de Vendome for the composition
of the heroic pastoral of “Acis and Galatea,
” which he designed should be represented at his chateau of Anet, that
prince, well satisfied both with his character and his talents, first made him secretary of his orders, and then secretary general of the gallies. He afterwards got him
made knight of the military order of St. James in Spain,
commandant of Chimene, and marquis of Penange in Italy.
The poet, now become necessary to the prince, by the
cheerfulness of his temper and the vivacity of his imagination, attended him on his travels into various countries.
Campistron, some time after his return, retired to his own
country; where he married mademoiselle de Maniban,
sister of the first president of Toulouse, and of the bishop
of Mirepoix, afterwards archbishop of Bourdeaux; and
there he died May 11, 1723, of an apoplexy, at the age
of 67. This stroke was brought on by a fit of passion excited by two chairmen who refused to carry him on account of his great weight. Campistron kept good company, loved good cheer, and had all the indolence of a
man of pleasure. While secretary to the duke de Vendome, he found it a more expeditious way to burn the letters that were written to that prince than to answer them.
Accordingly, the duke, seeing him one day before a large
fire, in which he was casting a heap of papers: “There
its Campistron,
” said he, “employed in answering my
correspondents.
” He followed the duke even to the field
of battle. At the battle of Steinkerque, the duke seeing
him always beside him, said, “What do you do here,
Campistron?
” “Mon seigneur,
” answered he, “I am
waiting to go back with you.
” This sedateness of mind in
a moment of so much danger was highly pleasing to the
bero. His plays, 1750, 3 vols. 12mo. have been nearly
as often printed as those of Corneille, Racine, Crebillon,
and Voltaire. The most popular of them are his “Andronicus,
” “Alcibiades,
” “Acis and Galatea,
” “Phocion,
”
“Adrian,
” “Tiridates,
” “Phraates,
” and “Jaloux Desabuseé.
”
, was born at Amiens Jan. 31, 1643, of very poor parents. Serroni, bishop of Mende, took him from the Dominican convent of the fauxbourg
, was born at Amiens Jan. 31, 1643, of very poor parents. Serroni, bishop of Mende, took him from the Dominican convent of the fauxbourg St. Germain, in Paris, provided for his education, and made him his secretary. This prelate also gave him the priory at Flore, obtained for him the abbey of St. Marcel, the coadjutorship of Glandeves, and lastly the bishopric of Pamiers. But not able to obtain his bulls from Rome, on account of his bad conduct, he had by way of compensation the abbey of Signy. He is the author of several dissertations on medals, on the history of France, on the title of Most Christian given to the kings of France, on the guard of these monarchs, on the daughters of the house of France given in marriage to heretical or pagan princes, on the nobility of the royal race, on the heredity of the grand fiefs, on the origin of ensigns armorial, on the hereditary dignities attached to titled estates, &c. all which were published in the Paris Mercuries for 1719, 1720, 1722, and 1723. His cabinet was rich in medals; the celebrated Vaillant published the most curious of them accompanied with explications. Abbe de Camps died at Paris in 1723, aged 81. He was learned and laborious, and his investigations have been of great use to the historians that have come after him.
ainst the monks; were it not for that, I would canonize you.“”I wish that may come to pass,“said the bishop,” “for then we should both have our wish; you would be pope,
, an exemplary French prelate,
was born at Paris in 1582, and on account of his excellent
character and talents, was nominated to the bishopric of
Bellay by Henry IV. in 1609, before he was of age, but
having obtained the pope’s dispensation, he was consecrated
on Dec. 30th of the same year. From this time he appears to have devoted his time and talents to the edification
of his flock, and of the people at large, by frequent preaching, and more frequent publication of numerous works calculated to divert their attention to the concerns of an immortal life. In his time romances began to be the favourite
books with all who would be thought readers of taste; and
Camus, considering that it would not be easy to persuade
them to leave off such books without supplying them with
some kind of substitute, published several works of practical piety with a mixture of romantic narrative, by which
he hoped to attract and amuse the attention of romancereaders, and draw them on insensibly to matters of religious
importance. He contrived, therefore, that the lovers, in
these novels, while they encountered the usual perplexities,
should be led to see the vanity and perishable nature of all
human enjoyments, and to form resolutions of renouncing
worldly delights, and embracing a religious life. Among
these works we find enumerated, 1. “Dorothee, ou recit
de la pitoyable issue d'une volorite violentee,
” Paris, Alexis,
” 1^22, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. L'Hyacinte, histoire
Catalane,“ibid. 1627, 8yo. 4.
” Alcime, relation funeste,
&c.“ibid. 12mo, 1625, &c. But the principal object of
his reforming spirit was the conduct of the rnonks, or mendicant friars, against whom he wrote various severe remonstrances, and preached against them with a mixture
of religious fervour and satirical humour. Among the
works he published against them are, 1.
” Le Directeur
desinteresse,“Paris, 1632, 12mo. 2.
” Desappropriation
claustrale,“Besangon, 1634. 3.
” Le Rabat-joy e du triomphe monagal.“4.
” L'anti-Moine bien prepare,“1632,
&c. &c. These monks teazed the cardinal Richelieu to
silence him, and the cardinal told him,
” I really find no
other fault with you but this horrible bitterness against
the monks; were it not for that, I would canonize you.“”I wish that may come to pass,“said the bishop,
” “for
then we should both have our wish; you would be pope,
and I a saint.
” Many of his bons-mots were long in
circulation, and show that he had the courage to reprove
vices and absurdities among the highest classes. In 1620
he established in the city of Bellay a convent of capuchins,
and in 1622 one for the nuns of the visitation, instituted
by St. Francis de Sales. In 1629 he resigned his bishopric
that he might pass the remainder of his days in retirement,
in the abbey of Cluny in Normandy, but the archbishop of
Rouen, unwilling that so active a member of the church
should not be employed in public services, associated him
in his episcopal cares, by appointing him his grand vicar.
At length he finally retired to the hospital of incurables in
Paris, where he died April 26, 1652. Moreri has enumerated a large catalogue of his works, the principal of
which, besides what we have enumerated, are, “L' Esprit
de S. Frangois de Sales,
” 6 vols. 8vo, reduced to one by a
doctor of the Sorbonne; and “L'Avoisinement des Protestans avec TEglise Romaine,
” republished in Moyens de reunir les
Protestans avec l'Eglise Romaine.
” Simon asserted, that
Bossuet’s exposition of the catholic faith was no more than
this work in a new dress.
is scholars, the celebrated Andrew Dudith of Buda. At length he attached himself to William du Prat, bishop of Clermont, in whose service he died at Auvergne in 1557. He
, a learned scholar of the sixteenth century, was a native of Anghiari in Tuscany, where
he acquired great reputation by his knowledge, not only
of the Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, but of the Syriac and
other oriental languages, which he taught at Venice, Padua, Bologna, Rome, and Spain. From Spain he came
to France in 1550, accompanied by father Simon Guichard,
then superior of the* order of the Minims; and at Paris, he
had for one of his scholars, the celebrated Andrew Dudith
of Buda. At length he attached himself to William du
Prat, bishop of Clermont, in whose service he died at
Auvergne in 1557. He was the author of some works
which have not appeared, but among those published was
a very valuable Greek grammar, entitled “Hellenismus,
”
and a book of instructions in the oriental languages, entitled “Institutiones linguarum Syriacte, Assyriacae, et
Thalmudicae, una cum jEthiopicae et Arabics collatione,
”
Paris,
on. Canus appeared also with great distinction at the council of Trent, under Paul III. and was made bishop of the Canary Islands 1552. He resigned his bishopric afterwards,
, a Spanish divine, was a native of
Taranzo, in the diocese of Toledo. He was Francis Victoria’s pupil, and succeeded him in the theological chair at
Salamanca, where he taught with reputation. Canus appeared also with great distinction at the council of Trent,
under Paul III. and was made bishop of the Canary Islands
1552. He resigned his bishopric afterwards, and was appointed provincial of the province of Castile. He died 1560,
at Toledo. His treatise “de locis Theologicis,
” published
at Padua 1727, 4to, is very elegantly written, and is justly
esteemed a master- piece. He is also supposed the author
of “Praelectiones de Penitentia.
” He appears to have
been a man of more liberality than might have been expected from his age and profession. Dr. Jortin quotes
some instances of this in his “Remarks on Ecclesiastical
History,
” vol. II. p. 316. His whole works were printed
at Venice in 1759, 4to.
the lord Russel, of the fanatic plot, and sent prisoner to the Tower in the beginning of July, 1683. Bishop Burnet says, that a party of horse was sent to bring him up
, eldest son and heir of the preceding, became his successor, and notwithstanding the sufferings of his father, his estate was under sequestration; but
at the restoration, he was, by Charles II. advanced to the
title and dignity of viscount Maiden, and earl of Essex,
on April 20, 1661. He also was constituted lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county of Hertford, on
July 7, 1660; and lord lieutenant of the county of Wilts,
during the minority of the duke of Somerset, on April 2,
1668. In the year 1670, he was sent ambassador to Christian V. king of Denmark, whence he returned with high,
favour for having vindicated the honour of the British flag:
and upon testimonies of his courage, prudence, and
abilities, was sworn of the privy- council in 1672, and
made lord-lieutenant of the kingdom of Ireland which
high office he exercised in that kingdom to the general
satisfaction of the people. After his return, he, in 1678,
with Halifax, and the duke of Buckingham, had the chief
political influence among the lords; yet, when they moved
an address to the king to send the duke of York from
court, the majority was against them. In 1679, he was
appointed first and chief commissioner of the treasury:
and his majesty choosing a new council, he ordered sir
William Temple to propose it to the lord chancellor Finch,
the earl of Sunderland, and the earl of Essex, but to one
after another; on which, when he communicated it to the
earl of Essex, he said, “It would leave the parliament
and nation in the dispositions to the king, that he found at
his coming in.
” Accordingly he was sworn of that privycouncil on April 21, 1679, being then first lord commissioner of the treasury; and his majesty valued himself on
it so, that the next day he communicated it by a speech
to the parliament, which was agreeable to both houses:
but not concurring with the duke of York in his measures,
his majesty, on November 19 following, declared in council, that he had given leave to the earl of Essex to resign
his place of first commissioner of the treasury; yet intended that he should continue of his privy-council. Nevertheless, soon after, being a great opposer of the court
measures, and on Jan. 25, 1680-1, delivering a petition
against the parliament’s sitting at Oxford, he was accused,
with the lord Russel, of the fanatic plot, and sent prisoner to the Tower in the beginning of July, 1683. Bishop Burnet says, that a party of horse was sent to bring
him up from his seat in Hertfordshire, where he had been
for some time, and seemed so little apprehensive of danger, that his lady did not imagine he had any concern
on his mind. He' was offered to be conveyed away, but
he would not stir: his tenderness for lord Russel was the
cause of this, thinking his disappearing might incline the
jury to believe the evidence the more. Soon after his
commitment, he was found with his throat cut, on July
13, 1683. The cause of this is variously represented,
some imputing it to himself in a fit of despondency, and
some to the contrivance of his enemies. From the evidence examined in the Biog. Britannica, a decision seems
difficult. See “Bp. Burnet’s late History charged with
great partiality,
” by Mr. Braddon,
to be read in all churches, he refused, and resigned his rectory. He then obtained licence from the bishop of Gloucester to practise physic, which he did with much success
, son of Christopher Capel, an alderman of Gloucester, was born 1586 in that city, and
after being educated there in grammar, became a commoner of Aiban hall, Oxford, in 1601, and soon after was
elected demy of Magdalen-college. In 160.9 he was made
perpetual fellow, being then M. A. the highest degree
which he took at the university. While there, Wood says,
“his eminence was great, and he was resorted to by noted
men, especially of the Calvinist persuasion,
” and was tutor
to several young men who afterwards rose to high reputation, particularly Accepted Frewen, archbishop of York,
Will. Pemble, &c. He left college on obtaining the rectory of Eastington in Gloucestershire, and became highly
popular as a plain and practical preacher, and a man of
exemplary life and conversation. In 1633, when the Book
of Sports on the Lord’s day was ordered to be read in all
churches, he refused, and resigned his rectory. He then
obtained licence from the bishop of Gloucester to practise
physic, which he did with much success for some years,
residing at Pitchcomb, near Stroud, where he had an
estate. In the commencement of the rebellion, he was
called to be one of the assembly of divines, but did not
accept the offer. Wood thinks he was restored to his benefice at this time, or had another conferred upon him,
which we believe was Pitchcomb, where he died Sept. 21,
1656, and was buried in the church there. Clarke informs
us that for some time he attended the court of James I.
until the death of sir Thomas Overbury, who was his particular friend. His principal works are, 1. “Temptations,
their nature, danger, and cure, &c.
” Lond. Apology
” against some exceptions, Remains, being an useful Appendix to the former,
”
Tentamen medicum de variolis,
” and some other tracts.
al languages in the university of Saumur; and so very deeply skilled in the Hebrew, that our learned bishop Hall calls him “magnum Hebraizantium oraculurn in Gallia,” the
, an eminent French
protestant and learned divine, was born at Sedan, a town
in Champagne, about 1579. He was professor of divinity
and of the Oriental languages in the university of Saumur;
and so very deeply skilled in the Hebrew, that our learned
bishop Hall calls him “magnum Hebraizantium oraculurn
in Gallia,
” the great oracle of all that studied Hebrew in
France. He was the author of some very learned works;
but is now chiefly memorable for the controversy he had
with the younger Buxtorf concerning the antiquity of the
Hebrew points. Two opinions have prevailed concerning
the true date and origin of these points both of which
have been very warmly espoused. The first is, that the
points are coeval with the language, and were always in
use among the Jews: the second, that the points were not
known to the Jews before their dispersion from Jerusalem,
but invented afterwards by modern rabbis to prevent the
language, which was every day decaying, from being utterly lost; viz. that they were invented by the Masoreth
Jews of Tiberias, about 600 years after Christ . This
opinion of their late invention was taken up by Capellus,
who defended it in a very excellent and learned treatise
entitled “Arcanum punctuationis revelatum,
” &c. which
work, after being refused a licence in France and at Geneva, was printed in Holland, and caused a great clamour
among the protestants, as if it had a tendency to hurt their
cause. It is, however, certain, that Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius, and others, had espoused the same notion as well as
the Scaligers, Casaubons, Erpenius, Salmasius, Grotius,
and the Heinsii; and therefore it could not be said, that
Capellus introduced any novelty, but only more solidly
established an opinion, which had been approved of by the
most learned and judicious protestants. The true reason,
perhaps, why the German protestants in general so warmly
opposed Capellus’s opinion, was, that they had been accustomed to follow that of the two Buxtorfs, whom they
considered as oracles in Hebrew learning. Buxtorf the
father had written a little treatise in defence of the antiquity of the points; and as Buxtorfs credit was justly
great among them, they chose rather to rely upon his authority than to examine his arguments, in so abstruse an
inquiry. Buxtorf the son wrote against Capellus, and
maintained his father’s opinion. Capellus, however, has
been generally supposed to have put the matter beyond
any father dispute; on which account his scholars Bochart,
Grotius, Spanheim, Vossius, Daille, and almost all the
learned in Hebrew since, have very readily acceded to
his opinion.
and 1694 he studied the Oriental languages in the college of Ave-Maria, and in the latter year, the bishop of his diocese sent him to the community of St. George d' Abbeville
, an eminent classical scholar and Greek professor, was born at Mondidier, a small town in Picardy, May 1, 1671. For some time his father, who was a tanner, employed him in that business, but he early contracted a fondness for reading, and even taught himself, at his leisure hours, the elements of Latin. About the beginning of 1685, Charles de St. Leger, his uncle, a Benedictine of the abbey of Corbie, happening, on a visit to Mondidier, to discover his nephew’s predilection, advised his parents to send him to the college of Mondidier, where the Benedictines of Cluny then taught Latin. There Capperonnier studied for eighteen months, and by an un% common effort of diligence combined the study of Greek with Latin, two languages which he considered as mutually aiding each other, and which he made the subject of all his future researches. In 1686 he continued his education at Amiens among the Jesuits, for two years, under father Longuemare, who observing his application to be far more incessant than that of his fellow-scholars, gave him private lessons in Greek. In 1688 he came to Paris, where at the seminary of the Trente-trois, he entered upon a course of philosophy and theology, during which he never failed to compare the fathers of the church with the ancient Greek and Roman philosophers. In 1693 and 1694 he studied the Oriental languages in the college of Ave-Maria, and in the latter year, the bishop of his diocese sent him to the community of St. George d' Abbeville to assist the ecclesiastical students in the Greek language, and in 1695 to that of St. Valois cle Monstreuil to teach humanity and philosophy; but the sea air and his excessive application disagreeing with his health, he returned to Paris in 1696, took the degree of master of arts, and followed the business of education until he found that it interfered too much with his studies. Contenting himself, therefore, with the small profits arising from giving a few lessons, he took up his abode, in May 1697, in one of the colleges, and when he had taken his bachelor’s degree in divinity went to Amiens to take orders. Returning to Paris, he became a licentiate, and obtained the friendship and patronage of cardinal Rohan, the abbe Louvois, and other persons of note. At this time, some lessons which he gave in the Greek, and a chapel ry of very moderate income in the church of St. Andr6 des Arcs, were his only resources, with which he lived a life of study and temperance, defrayed the expences of his licentiate, and even could purchase books. Mr. Colesson, however, a law- professor, and who from being his scholar had become his friend, seeing with what difficulty he could maintain himself, made him an offer of his house and table, which, after many scruples, he consented to accept. He went to his new habitation in 1700, and in the following year resigned his duty in the chapel, the only benefice he had, because it took up that time which he thought completely lost if not employed in study. In 1706, M. Viel, then rector of the university of Paris, and M. Pourchot, t.he syndic, admiring his disinterested spirit, procured him a pension of four hundred livres on the faculty of arts, to which no other condition was annexed than that he should revise the Greek booksused in the classes. M. Capperonnier expressed his gratitude on this occasion in a Greek poem, which was printed with a Latin translation by M. Viel, 4to, a pamphlet of six pages.
, as well as by the king of Naples, in several negotiations of importance, and was made successively bishop of Aquino, of Lecce*, and of Aquila. After more than fifty years’
, often
called Hobertus de Licio, from Leze“or Lecce
”, where
he was born in 1425, descended probably from the illustriou; family of Caraccioli, and became one of the most celebrated preachers of his time. Having an early inclination to the church, he entered the order of the Franciscans,
but finding their discipline too rigid, he removed to the
Conventuals, and according to Erasmus, lived with more
iVi-eJoin. He was. however, distinguished for talents, and
occupied some honourable offices, and was appointed professor oi divinity. His particular bias was to preaching,
which he cultivated with such success, as to incline all his
brethren to imitate one who, throughout all Italy, was
bailed as a second St. Paul. He displayed his pulpit eloquence not only in the principal cities of Italy, Assisa,
Florence, Venice, Ferrara, Naples, &c. but before the
popes, and is said to have censured the vices and luxury
of the Roman court with great boldness and some quaint
humour. This, however, appears not to have given serious offence, as he was employed by the popes, as well as
by the king of Naples, in several negotiations of importance, and was made successively bishop of Aquino, of
Lecce*, and of Aquila. After more than fifty years’ exercise of his talent as a preacher, he died at his native place
May 6, 14-y 5. Of his sermons eight volumes have been often
printed. 1. “Sermones de adventu,
” Venice, De Quadragesima,
” Cologne, De
Quadragesima, seu Quadragesimale perutilissimum de Pcenitentia,
” Venice, De Tempore, &c. Sanctorum,
” Naples, De Solemnitatibus totius
anni,
” Venice, De Christo,
” &c. Venice,
De timorejudiciorum Dei,
” Naples, De amore divinorum officiorum,
” ibid. Roberti de Licio Sermones,
” Leyden,
ian monk, born at Madrid in 1606, was at first abbot of Melrose, in the Low Countries, then titulary bishop of Missi; afterwards, by a singular turn, engineer apd intendant
, a Cistercian monk, born at Madrid in 1606, was at first abbot of Melrose, in the Low Countries, then titulary bishop of Missi; afterwards, by a singular turn, engineer apd intendant of the fortifications in Bohemia, from having served as a soldier. The same capricious and inconstant humour which made him lay down the crozier to take up the halberd, now led him from being engineer to, become bishop again. He had successively the bishoprics of Konigsgratz, of Campano, and of Vigevano, in which lastmentioned town he died in 1682, aged 76. He was a man of the most unbounded mind, and of whom it was said, that he was endowed with genius to the eighth degree, with eloquence to the fifth, and with judgment to the second. He wrote several works of controversial theology and a system of divinity in Latin, 7 vols. folio.
, bishop of Tortosa, in Catalonia, was a native of Valencia, in Spain,
, bishop of Tortosa, in Catalonia, was a native of Valencia, in Spain, of which cathedral he was made a canon. He went to Rome, with
great fame for learning, during the pontificate of Gregory
XIII. and was promoted to the bishopric of Elne, a town
of Roussillon, the seat of which see was afterwards removed
to Perpignan. He was then translated to the bishopric
of Vich; and lastly to that of Tortosa where he died, in
1590. In 1587 he published at Tarracona a quarto volume, containing, 1. “De regia Sancti Laurentii Bibliotheca.
” 2. “De Bibliothecis (ex Fulvio Ursino) et De
Bibliotheca Vaticana (ex Onuphrii Scedis.
”) 3. “De expurgandis haereticorum propriis nominibus.
” 4. “De
Dyptichis.
” Of these, the first, in which he treats of collecting all manner of useful books, and having able librarians, and in which he strongly exhorts Philip II. to put
the Escurial library into good order, is of considerable
value to bibliographers. His treatise “De Dyptichis,
”
those ancient public registers, is also very curious. Copies, if we may so speak, of these registers, are still -to be
seen in France, at Sens, Dijon, and Besangon, the latter
of which has been well described by M. Coste, the librarian
of that city.
urchard king of Leinster, in 1171, and which had been turned into French verse by a friend of Regan. Bishop Nicolson describes this history as extant in the duke of Chandos’s
* In a biographical account of the Carew, which was without his knowfamily placed on the back of a picture ledge and consent, and intended to
of lord Totness, in the possession of disinherit her but, upon an accidental
his descendant, the late Boothby Clop- conversation with captain Carew, found
ton, esq. this lady’s name is Anne, and him a gentleman of superior genius
not Joyce: and it is added, that Mr. and fine address, *nd settled his estate,
Clopton was extremely displeased with which was very considerable, upon him
his daughter’s marriage with captain and his dmjghter.
library: and made collections, notes, and extracts for writing The History of the reign of king Henry V. which were
inserted in J. Speed’s Chronicle. Sir James Ware says, that
the earl of Totness translated into English “A History of
the affairs of Ireland,
” written by Maurice Regan, servant
and interpreter to Dermot, son of Murchard king of Leinster, in 1171, and which had been turned into French
verse by a friend of Regan. Bishop Nicolson describes
this history as extant in the duke of Chandos’s library,
under the title of “Mauritii Regani, servi et interpretis
Dermitii, filii Murchardi, &c. Historian de Hibernia fragmentum Anglice redditum a D. Georgio Carew, Memoniae preside sub Elizabetha;
” and Mr. Harris mentions
another ms copy among the bishop of Clogher’s Mss. in
the college library, Dublin. Nicolson also informs us that
this learned nobleman wrote forty-two volumes relating to
the affairs of Ireland, which are in the Lambeth library,
and four more of collections from the originals in the Cotton library.
n the fifteenth century. He is said to have been a native of Barcelona, and was related to Corvinus, bishop of Massa, who was also a member of the academy of Naples. Of
, whose family name has been lost in his
poetical appellation, was a distinguished literary ornament
of Naples in the fifteenth century. He is said to have
been a native of Barcelona, and was related to Corvinus,
bishop of Massa, who was also a member of the academy
of Naples. Of his friendly intercourse w:th the first scholars and chief nobility of Naples, and even with the individuals of the reigning family there, his works afford innumerable instances, whilst in those of Sanazzarius and Pontanus, he is frequently mentioned with particular affection
and commendation. His writings, which are wholly in
the Italian tongue, were collected and published by his
surviving friend Peter Summontc, at Naples, 1509, 4to;
but before this were published “Sonetti e Canzoni del
Chariteo intitolati Endimione a la Luna,
” Naples, 1506,
4to; Venice, 1507,8vo; and in 1519, appeared “Opera
nuova, e amorosa composta, &c.
” 8vo, a very rare book. His
writings are characterised by a vigour of sentiment, and a
genuine vein of poetry; and without rivalling the elegance of the Tuscan poets, they possess a considerable
share of ease and harmony. One of his Canzone may be
seen in our authority.
r with the court than it had done in the preceding session. The lord treasurer Weston, and Dr. Laud, bishop of London, were become as great objects of national dislike
The king was now determined to give the seals of secretary of state to lord Dorchester; and as the measure^ was taken, though not yet divulged, of making peace as soon as possible both with France and Spain, he judo-ed it of the utmost consequence to have one in that department, whose judgment and skill in negotiation had been exercised in a long course of foreign employment. Lord Conway had for several years discharged that great trust, according to the earl of Clarendon’s expression, with notable insufficiency, and as old age and sickness were now added to his original incapacity, the court and nation must with great satisfaction have seen him succeeded by so able a minister as lord Dorchester, but the parliament, when it Inet on the day appointed, agreed no better with the court than it had done in the preceding session. The lord treasurer Weston, and Dr. Laud, bishop of London, were become as great objects of national dislike as Buckingham had ever been, while the commons shewed their aversion to Weston in the state, and to Laud in the church, by warm remonstrances against the illegal exaction of tonnage and poundage, and the increase of Popisb and Arminian doctrines; on which account the king dissolved the house on the lOth of March. According to some writers, lord Dorchester hi this parliament proposed the laying an excise upon the nation, which was taken so ill, that though he was a privy counsellor, and principal secretary of state, he with difficulty escaped being committed to the Tower. Of this story, which we believe originated in Howel’s letters, and is referred to in Lloyd’s StateWorthies, we find no traces in the parliamentary history, or in thejords and commons journals. It is, however, generally inferred from the authority of the earl of Clarendon, that lord Dorchester was better acquainted with the management of foreign affairs, than with the constitution, laws and customs of his own country. In his capacity of secretary of state, he was a chief agent in carrying on and completing the treaties with France and Spain; and besides these, he directed in the course of the years 1629 and 1630, the negociations of sir Henry Vane in Holland, and sir Thomas Roe in Poland and the maritime parts of Germany. The former was sent to the Hague, to explain to the States the motives of our treaty with Spain, and to sound their dispositions about joining- in it; and the latter was employed as mediator between the kings of Sweden and Poland after which he was very instrumental in persuading the heroic Gustavus Adolphus to undertake his German expedition. Lord Dorchester appears, likewise, to have kept up a private correspondence with the queen of Bohemia, who rising superior to her misfortunes, he used the best offices in his power to prevent misunderstandings between her and the king her brother; and he gave her advice, when the occasion required it, with the freedom and sincerity of an old friend and servant.
, a learned bishop in the seventeenth century, son of Guy, second son of Thomas
, a learned bishop in the seventeenth century, son of Guy, second son of Thomas Carleton, of Carleton-hall, in Cumberland, was born at Norham,
in Northumberland, of whose important castle his father
was then governor. By the care of the eminent Bernard
Giipin, he was educated in grammar-learning and when
tit for the university, sent by the same generous person to
Edmund-hall in Oxford, in the beginning of the year
1576, and was by him chiefly maintained in his studies.
On the 12th of February 1579-80, he took his degree of
B. A. at the completing of which, he exceeded all that
performed their exercises at that time. The same year
he was elected probationer fellow of Merton-college, and
remained in that society above five years before he proceeded in his faculty, not taking the degree of M. A. till
June the 14th, 1585. While he remained in college, he
was esteemed a great orator and poet, and in process of
time became a better disputant in divinity, than he had before been in philosophy. What preferments he had, is not
mentioned, nor does it appear that he was possessed of anv
dignity in the church till he became a bishop. After
having continued many years in the university, and taken,
the degree of B. D. May 16, 1594, and that of Doctor,
December 1, 1613, he was advanced to the bishopric of
Landaff, to which he was confirmed July 11, 1613, and
consecrated at Lambeth the next day. The same year he
was sent by king James T. with three other English divine*,
Dr. Hail, afterwards bishop of Exeter, Dr. Davenant, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, and Dr. Ward, master of
Sidney-college, Cambridge, and one from Scotland, Dr.
W T alter Balcanqual, afterwards dean of Durham, to the
synod of Dort; where he stood up in favour of episcopacy,
and behaved so well in every respect to the credit of our
nation, that after his return he was, upon the translation,
of Dr. Harsnet to Norwich, elected to succeed him in
the see of Chichester, September 8, 16 19, and confirmed
the 20th of the same month. He departed this life in May
1628, and was buried the 27th of that month in the choir
of his cathedral church at Chichester, near the altar. He
was a person uf solid judgment, and of various reading;
well versed in the fathers and schoolmen; wanting nothing
that could render him a complete divine; a bitter enemy
to the Papists, and in the point of Predestination a rigid
Calvinist. “I have loved him,
” says Mr. Camden, “for
his excellent proficiency in divinity, and other polite parts
of learning.
” Echard and Fuller also characterize him in
very high terms.
on, 1651. 9. “Examination of those things wherein the Author of the late Appeal (Montague afterwards bishop of Chichester) holdeth the Doctrine of Pelagians and Arminians,
He perhaps wrote upon a greater variety of subjects
than any other clergyman of his time. Among his works
are enumerated: 1. “Heroici characteres, ad illustriss.
equitem Henricum Nevillum,
” Oxon. Bodleiomnema,
” and in other books. 2. “Tithes examined, and
proved to be due to the Clergy by a Divine Right,
”- Lond.
Jurisdiction Regal, Episcopal,
Papal: Wherein is declared how the Pope hath intruded upon
the jurisdiction of Temporal Princes,and of the Church, &c.
”
Lond. Consensus Ecclesiae Catholicse contra Tridentinos, de Scripturis, Ecclesia, fide, & gratia,
”
&c. Lond. A thankful! Remembrance of
God’s Mercy. In an Historicall Collection of the great
and mercifull Deliverances of the Church and State of
England, since the Gospel began ne here to flourish, from
the beginning of queene Elizabeth,
” Loud. 1614; the
third edition came out in 1627, and the fourth in 16 Jo.
The historical part is chiefly extracted from Camden’s
Annals of queen Elizabeth; and the latter editions are
adorned at the beginning of each chapter, with figures engraved in copper, representing the most material things
contained in the ensuing description. 6. “Short Directions to know the true Church,
” Loud. Oration made at the Hague before the prince of
Orange, and the Assembly of the high and mighty lords,
the States General,
” Lond. Astrologimania or, the Madness of Astrologers or, an Examination of sir Christopher Heydon’s
book entitled ' A Defence of judicial Astrology 1
” written
about the year Examination of those things wherein the Author of the late
Appeal (Montague afterwards bishop of Chichester)
holdeth the Doctrine of Pelagians and Arminians, to be
the Doctrines of the Church of England,
” Lond. A joynt Attestation, avowing that
the Discipline of the Church of England was not impeached by the Synod of Dort,
” Lond. Vita Bernardi Gilpini, viri sanctiss. farnaque apud Anglos
aquilonares celeberrimi,
” Lond. The Life of
Bernard Gilpin, a man most holy and renowned amongthe Northerne English,
” Lond. Testimony concerning the Presbyterian discipline
in the Low-countries, and Episcopal government in England,
” printed several times in 4to and- 8vo, and at London in particular, in 1642, in one sheet. 13. Latin Letter
to Mr. Camden, containing some Notes and Observations
on his Britannia. Printed by Dr. Smith amongst “Camdeni Epistolae,
” N 80. 14-. Several Sermons. 15. He
had also a hand in the Dutch Annotations, and in the new
translation of the Bible, undertaken by order of the Synod
of Dort, but not completed and published till 1637. Two
of hU letters to sir Dudley Carleton, are in lord
Hardwicke’s publication of sir Dudley’s correspondence. By
his first wife, Anne, daughter of sir Henry Killegrew, knt.
and widow of sir Henry Neville, of Billingbere, in Berkshire, he had a son, Henry, who was chosen representative
for Arundel, in Sussex, in the short parliament which met
at Westminster on the 13th -of April 1640. Mr. Henry
Carleton embraced the cause of the house of commons in
the civil war with king Charles the First, accepted a captain’s commission in the parliamentary army, and in other
respects did no honour to his father.
on-Tyne, chancellor of Carlisle, professor of Arabic in the university of Cambridge, chaplain to the bishop of Durham, and F. R. S. E. was born at Carlisle in 1759, where
, B. D. vicar of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, chancellor of Carlisle, professor of Arabic in the university of Cambridge, chaplain to the bishop of Durham, and F. R. S. E. was born at Carlisle in 1759, where his father was a physician, and after receiving his early education at the grammar-school of his native city, was in 1775 entered of Christ’s-col'ege, Cambridge, whence after two years he removed to Queen’s, took his bachelor’s degree in 1779, and was elected a fellow. Besides an industrious and successful application to the usual branches of study, he entefed upon that of the Arabic language with unusual avidity, availing himself of a very fine collection of Arabic writings in the university library, and assisted by David Zamio, who, Mr. Carlyle informs us, was born at Bagdad, and resided with him some time at Cambridge. Mr. Carlyle, after taking his master’s degree in 1783, left college, married, and obtained some church preferment in his native city. In 1793 he took his degree of B. D. and succeeded Dr. Paley (by resignation) in the chancellorship of Carlisle. In 1794 he was elected Arabic professor in the university of Cambridge.
l and part of Germany, and landed in England in Sept. 1801. After his return he was presented by the bishop of Carlisle to the living of Newcastleupon-Tyne, which he did
In 1799, he was appointed chaplain of lord Elgin’s embassy to Constantinople, an office which afforded him an
opportunity of inspecting the libraries of that city, and
afterwards of travelling through Asia Minor, and through
countries generally unknown to Europeans; and before
his return he made a tour through the principal parts of
Italy, and through Tyrol and part of Germany, and landed
in England in Sept. 1801. After his return he was presented by the bishop of Carlisle to the living of Newcastleupon-Tyne, which he did not long enjoy. His health had
probably been injured by the fatigues of his travels, and
he laboured for a considerable time under a painful and
distressing malady, which proved fatal April 12, 1804.
He was known to the learned world by, 1. “Maured Allatafet Jemaleddini Filii Togri-^ardii, seu rerum Ægyptiacarum Annales, ab anno Christi 971 usque ad annum
1453. E codice ms Bibliothecae Acad. Cantab.
” Arab, et
Lat. 4to, 1792, a work which unquestionably evinced a
laudable desire in Mr. Carlyle to revive the study of Arabic
literature, but in itself contains little information, and
throws very little light on a period darkened by ignorance
and superstition. 2. “Specimens of Arabic poetry, from
the earliest time to the extinction of the Khalifs; with
some account of the authors,
” 4to. In this too the commendable industry of the author is perhaps more apparent than his
success, in persuading his readers to an equal admiration
of Arabic poetry. The work, however, is amusing, the
accounts of the authors constitute a very useful part, and
the translator’s skill in selection has been allowed by those
who are acquainted with the original. Since his death has
been published, “Poems, suggested chiefly by scenes in
Asia-Minor, Syria, and Greece; with prefaces extracted
from the author’s journal, embellished with two views of
the source of the Scamander, and the aqueduct over the
Simois,
”
at Dublin in 1635, according to Fuller, or in 1628, according to Wood. Dr. Robert Usher, afterwards bishop of Kildare, and brother to the archbishop, preached his funeral
1 Gen. Diet. Biog. Brit. Richardsoniana, p. 259. See also an account of
his conduct in Scotland in “A true relation of the Pursuit of the Rebels in the
North, and of their Surrender at Preston to lieutenant-general Carpenter, commanding in chief his majesty’s forces there,
” joined to a plan published under
this title, “An exact Plan of the Town of Preston, with the barricades of the
Rebels, and the disposition of the king’s forces, under the command of lieutenant-general Carpenter and major-general Wills.
” See likewise “The
Poltarchbishop Usher, then at Oxford, who admired his talents
and piety, took him with him to Ireland, and made him
one of his chaplains, and tutor to the king’s wards in
Dublin. These king’s wards were the sons of Roman catholics who had fled for their religion, leaving them in
their minority; and Mr. Carpenter’s charge was to bring
them up in the protestant religion. Soon after he came
to Ireland he was advanced to a deanery, but what deanery
is not mentioned. He died at Dublin in 1635, according
to Fuller, or in 1628, according to Wood. Dr. Robert
Usher, afterwards bishop of Kildare, and brother to the
archbishop, preached his funeral sermon, and gave a high
character of him, which seems to be confirmed by all his
contemporaries. He published, 1.
” Philosophia libera,
triplici exercitationum decade proposita,“Francfort, 1621,
under the name of Cosmopolitanus London, 1622, 8vo,
with additions, Oxford, 1636, 1675. This was considered
as a very ingenious work, and one of the earliest attacks
on the Aristotelian philosophy. Brucker, who has given
our author a place among the
” modern attempters to
improve natural philosophy/* adds, that he has advanced
many paradoxical notions, sufficiently remote from the received doctrines of the schools. 2. “Geography,
” in
two books, Oxford, Achitophel or the picture of a wicked Politician, in three parts,
”
Dublin, The scene,
” says the
writer in a dedication to archbishop Usher, “wherein I
have bounded my discourse, presents unto your grace a
sacred tragedy, consisting of four chief actors, viz. David,
an anointed king; Absalom, an ambitious prince Achitophel, a wicked politician and Cushay, a loyal subject
a passage of history, for variety pleasant, for instruction
useful* for event admirable.
” He inveighs in general
against the inordinate ambition and subtle practices of
courts and courtiers. Mr. Malone takes more pains than
necessary to prove that Dry den adopted no hint from it
for his “Absalom and Achitophel.
” 4. “Chorazin and
Bethsaida’s woe and warning,
” Oxford, Treatise of Optics,
” of which there were some
imperfect copies in Mss. but the original was by some
means lost.
1612, 8vo. 2.” A Pastoral Charge, faithfully given and discharged at the triennial visitation of W. Bishop of Exon, at Barnstaple, Sept. 7, 1616, on Acts xx. 28.“London,
, confounded by Langbaine
with the former, but a divine of a very different character,
and prior in order of time, was a Cornish man, and became
a batler in, Exeter college in Oxford, in 1592, and four
years after fellow of that house, being then B. A. By
the advice and direction of the rector, Dr. Holland, he applied himself to theological studies, and, in a few years,
proved a learned divine and an excellent preacher. In
1611 he was admitted to the reading of the sentences; and
about that time was made rector of Slierwill, and of Loxhore adjoining, in Devonshire; and afterwards obtained
the benefice “of Ham near Sberwill. He died Dec. 18,
1627, aged fifty-two, and was bnried in the chancel of the
church of Loxbore. He published some sermons 1.
” “The
Soul’s Centinel,
” preached at the funeral of sir Arthur
Acland, knt. Jan. 9, loll, on Job xiv. 14.“Lomi. 1612, 8vo.
2.
” A Pastoral Charge, faithfully given and discharged at
the triennial visitation of W. Bishop of Exon, at Barnstaple, Sept. 7, 1616, on Acts xx. 28.“London, 1616, 8vo.
3.
” Christ’s Larum-bell of Love resounded,“&c. on John
xv. 12. Lond. 1616,8vo. 4.
” The conscionable Christian,"
&c. being three assize sermons at Tan n ton aud Chard in
Somersetshire, 162O, on Acts xxiv. 16. Lond. 1623, 4to.
imself officiated for a time as curate of the same place; after which, he was some time secretary to bishop Atterbury. This connexion threw him into fresh difficulties:
In 1712 be made the tour of Europe with a nobleman,
and on his return entered into orders, and was appointed
render of the Abbey-church at Bath; where he preached
a sermon on Jan. 30, 171 J-, in which he took occasion to
vindicate Charles I. from aspersions cast upon his memory
with regard to the Irish rebellion. This drew Mr. Carte
into a controversy with Mr. (afterwards the celebrated Dr.)
Chandler, and gave rise to our historian’s first publication,
entitled “The Irish Massacre sot in a clear light,
” &c.
which is inserted in lord Sotners’s Tracts. ‘ Upon the accession of George I. Mr. Carte’s principles not permitting
him to take the oaths to the new government, he assumed a
lay-habit, and at one time assisted the celebrated Jeremiah
Collier, who preached to a non’} tiring congregation in a
house in Broad-street, London, and on a Sunday he used
to put on his gown and cassock, and perform divine service
in his own family. What particular concern he had in the
rebellion of 1715 does not appear; but that he had some
degree of guilt in this respect, or, at least, that he was
strongly suspected of it by administration, is evident, from
the king’s troops having orders to discover and apprehend
him. He had the good fortune to elude their search, by
concealing himself at Coleshili, Warwickshire, in the house
of Mr. Badger, then curate of that town. Mr. Carte himself officiated for a time as curate of the same place;
after which, he was some time secretary to bishop Atterbury. This connexion threw him into fresh difficulties:
so deeply was he thought to he engaged in the conspiracy
ascribed to that eminent prelate, that a charge of high
treason was brought against him; and a proclamation was
issued, Aug. 13, 1722, offering a reward of 1000l. for
seizing his person. He was again successful in making his
escape, and fled into France, where he resided several
years, under the borrowed name of Philips. Whilst Mr.
Carte continued in that country, he was introduced to the
principal men of learning and family, and gained access to
the most eminent libraries, public and private, by which
means he was enabled to collect large materials for illustrating an English edition of Thuanus. The collection was
in such forwardness in 1724, that he consulted Dr. Mead r
at that time the great patron of literary undertakings, on the
mode of publication. The doctor, who perceived that the
plan might he rendered more extensively useful, obtained
Mr. Carte’s materials at a very considerable price, and engaged Mr. Buckley in the noble edition completed in 17^3,
in 7 vols. fol. Mr. Carte would probably himself have
been the principal editor, if he had not been an exile
at the time the undertaking commenced, but we find that
the Latin address to Dr. Mead, prefixed to that work, and
dated from the Inner-temple, Jan. 1733, is signed Thomas
Carte. Whilst this grand work was carrying on, queen
Caroline, whose regard to men of letters is well known,
received such favourable impressions of Mr. Carte, that
she obtained permission for his returning to England in
security; which he did some time between the years 1728
and 1730. He had not long been restored to his own country
before he engaged in one of the most important of his
works, “The history of the life of James duke of Ormonde,
from his birth, in 1610, to his death, in 1688,
” 3 vols. fol.
The third volume, which was published first, came out in
1735, and the first and second volumes in 1736. From a
letter of Mr. Carte’s to Dr. Swift, dated Aug. 11, 1736, it
appears, that in writing the life of the duke of Ormonde,
he had availed himself of some instructions which he had
derived from the dean . In the same letter he mentions
his design of composing a general history of England and
finds great fault, not only with Rapin, but with Ilymer’s
Fcedera; but his accusations of that noble collection are in
several respects erroneous and groundless.
duke of Newcastle asked him if he was plied with “A Coach, your Revenot a bishop?” No, my Lord Duke,“rence!” “No, honest friend,” anreplied Mr.
duke of Newcastle asked him if he was plied with “A Coach, your Revenot a bishop?
” No, my Lord Duke,“rence!
” “No, honest friend,
” anreplied Mr. Carte, “there are no hi- swered Carte,
” this is not a reign for
t of their mutual happiness: and in addition to this, it procured a friendship with Dr. Seeker, then bishop of Oxford, and afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, with whom
In 1739, she translated “The Critique of Crousaz on
Pope’s Essay on Man;
” and in the same year gave a translation of “Algarotti’s Explanation of Newton’s Philosophy
for the use of the Ladies.
” These publications extended
her acquaintance among the literati of her own country
and her fame reached the continent, where Baratier bestowed high praises on her talents and genius. In 1741
she formed an intimacy with Miss Catherine Talbot, niece
to the lord chancellor Talbot, and a young lady of considerable genius and most amiable disposition. This was an
important event of Miss Carter’s life on many accounts.
The intimacy of their friendship, the importance of their
correspondence, and the exalted piety of both, made it the
main ingredient of their mutual happiness: and in addition
to this, it procured a friendship with Dr. Seeker, then
bishop of Oxford, and afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, with whom Miss Talbot resided, which extended
her knowledge of the world, cherished her profound learning, and exercised the piety of her thoughts. To this
event is to be traced her undertaking and completing the
work by which her fame has been most known abroad, and
will longest be remembered by scholars at home, her
“Translation of Epictetus.
” It was not, however, till the
beginning of
In 1763, Mrs. Carter accompanied lord Bath, and Mr. and Mrs. Montague, with Dr. Douglas (afterwards bishop of Salisbury, but then lord Bath’s chaplain) to Spa. They landed
In 1763, Mrs. Carter accompanied lord Bath, and Mr.
and Mrs. Montague, with Dr. Douglas (afterwards bishop of Salisbury, but then lord Bath’s chaplain) to Spa. They
landed at Calais June 4; and after visiting Spa, made a
short tour in Germany; and then proceeded down the
Rhine into Holland; whence through Brussels, Ghent,
Bruges, and Dunkirk, they came again to Calais, and returned to Dover Sept. 19. Lord Bath’s health seemed
improved by this tour; but appearances were fallacious,
for he died in the summer of 1764. His death gave Mrs.
Carter deep concern. In August 1768, she had an additional loss in the death of her revered friend and patron
archbishop Seeker. Two years after she sustained a more
severe deprivation in the loss of her bosom friend Miss
Talbot, of whom, among other praises dictated by sense
and feeling, she says, “Never surely was there a more
perfect pattern of evangelical goodness, decorated by all
the ornaments of a highly-improved understanding; and
recommended by a sweetness of temper, and an elegance
and politeness of manners, of a peculiar and more engaging kind than in any other character I ever knew.
”
lot, spoke in favour of suspending the habeas corpus act for one year; acquainted the house with the bishop of Rochester’s, lord NortU and Grey’s, and the earl of Orrery’s
, earl Granville, one of the most distinguished orators and statesmen of the last century, was born on the 22d of April, 1690. His father was George lord Carteret, baron Carteret, of Hawnes in the county of Bedford, having been so created on the 19th of October 1681, when he was only fifteen years of age and his mother was lady Grace, youngest daughter of John earl of Bath. He succeeded his father when only in his fifth year. He was educated at Westminster school, from which he was removed to Christ-church Oxford in both which places he made such extraordinary improvements, that he became one of the most learned young noblemen of his time; and he retained to the last his knowledge and love of literature. Dr. Swift humorously asserts, that he carried away from Oxford, with a singularity scarcely to be justified, more Greek, Latin, and philosophy, than properly became a person of his rank; indeed, much more of each, than most of those who are forced to live by their learning will be at the unnecessary pains to load their heads with. Being thus accomplished, lord Carteret was qualified to make an early figure in life. As soon as he was introduced into the house of peers, which was on the 25th of May, 1711, he distinguished himself by his ardent zeal for the protestant succession, which procured him the eariy notice of king George 1. by whom he was appointed, in 1714, one of the lords of the bed-chamber in 1715, bailiff of the island of Jersey and in 1716, lord lieutenant and custis rotulorum of the county of Devon which last office he held till August 1721, when he resigned it in favour of Hugh lord Clinton. His mother also, lady Grace, was created viscountess Carteret and countess Grai>ville, by letters patent, bearing date on the first of January, 1714-15, with limitation of these honours to her son John lord Carteret. His lordship, though still young, became, from the ea.ly part of king George the First’s reign, an eminent speaker in the house of peers. The first instance of the display of his eloquence, was in the famous debate on the bill for lengthening the duration of Parliaments, in which he supported the duke of Devonshire’s motion for the repeal of the triennial act. On the 18th of February, 17 t 7- 18, he spoke in behalf of the bill for punishing mutiny and desertion; and in the session of parliament which met on the llth of November following, he moved, for the address of thanks to the king, to congratulate his majesty on the seasonable success of his naval forces; and to assume him, that the house would support him in the pursuit of those prudent and necessary measures he had taken to secure the trade and quiet of his dominions, and the tranquillity of Europe. In Jan. 1718-19 he was appointed ambassador extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to the queen of Sweden, with whom his first business was to, remove the difficulties which the British subjects had met with* Jo their commerce in the Baltic, and to procure satisfaction for the losses they had sustained; and in both he completely succeeded. On the 6th of November, 1719, lord Carteret first took upon him the character of ambassador extraordinary ana plenipotentiary; at which time, in a private audience, he offered his royal master’s mediation t<v make peace between Sweden and Denmark, and between Sweden and the Czar; both of which were readily accepted by the queen. A peace between Sweden, Prussia, and Hanover, having been concluded by lord Carteret, it was proclaimed at Stockholm on the 9th of March, 1719-L'O. This was the prelude to a reconciliation between Sweden and Denmark, which he also effected, and the treaty was signed July 3, 1720. In August his lordship was appointed, together with earl Stanhope and sir Robert Siutcm, ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary at the congress of Cambray but whether he acted in this capacity does not appear. From Denmark, however, he arrived in England Dec. 5, and a few weeks after took a share in the debates on the state of the national credit, occasioned by the unfortunate and iniquitous effects of the South-Sea scheme, maintaining that the estates of the criminals, whether directors or not directors, ought to be confiscated. Whilst this affair was in agitation, he was appointed ambassador extraordinary to the court of France, and was on the point of setting out, when the death of secretary Craggs induced his majesty to appoint lord Carteret his successor, May 4, 1721, and next day he was admitted into office, and sworn of his majesty’s most honourable privy council. Whilst lord Carteret was secretary of state, he not only discharged the general duties of his employment to the satisfaction of his royal master, but ably defended in parliament the measures of administration. This he did in the debate concerning Mr. Law, the famous projector of the Mississippi scheme, whose arrival in England, in 1721, by the connivance, as it was thought, and even under the sanction of the ministry, excited no small degree of disgust; and he also took a part on the side of government, in th debate on the navy debt, and with regard to the various other motions and bills of the session. In the new parliament, which met on the llth of October, 1722, his lordship, on occasion of Layer’s plot, spoke in favour of suspending the habeas corpus act for one year; acquainted the house with the bishop of Rochester’s, lord NortU and Grey’s, and the earl of Orrery’s commitment to the Tower; and defended the motion for the imprisonment of the duke of Norfolk. In all the debates concerning this conspiracy, and particularly with regard to Atterbury, lord Carteret vindicated the proceedings of the tectart; as he did, likewise, in the case of the act for laying an extraordinary tax upon papists. On the 26th of May, 1723, when the king’s affairs called him abroad, his lordship was appointed one of the lords justices of the kingdom; but notwithstanding this, he went to Hanover, in conjunction with lord Townshend, the other secretary; and both these noblemen, in their return to England, had several conferences at the Hague, with the principal persons of the Dutch administration, on subjects of importance. In the session of parliament, January, 1723-4, lord Carteret, in the debate on the mutiny bill, supported the necessity of eighteen thousand men being kept up, as the number of land- forces, in opposition to lord Trevor, who had moved that the four thousand additional men, who had been raised the year before, should be discontinued., Not many days after this debate, several alterations took place at court. Lord Carteret quitted the office of secretary of state, in which he was succeeded by the duke of Newcastle; and on the same day, being the third of April, 1724, he was constituted lord -lieutenant of Ireland, and in October arrived at Dublin, where he was received with the usual solemnity. The Irish were at that time in a great ferment about the patent for Wood’s halfpence, which makes so signal a figure in the life and writings of Dr. Swift. One of the first things done by the lord-lieutenant was to publish a proclamation, offering a reward of three hundred pounds for a discovery of the author of the Drapier’s Letters. When he was asked, by Dr. Swift, howhe could concur in the prosecution of a poor honest fellow, who had been guilty of no other crime than that of writing three or four letters for the good of his country, his excellency replied, in the words of Virgil,
nt;” to which were annexed, A letter from Beza to the earl of Leicester, and another from Gualter to bishop Parkhurst, recommending a reformation of church discipline.
Very severe measures had now been adopted for several
years against the puritans; on whose behalf a piece was
published, intituled, “An admonition to the parliament;
”
to which were annexed, A letter from Beza to the earl of
Leicester, and another from Gualter to bishop Parkhurst,
recommending a reformation of church discipline. This
work contained what was called the “platform of a
church;
” the manner of electing ministers; their several
duties; and arguments to prove their equality in government. It also attacked the hierarchy, and the proceedings
of the bishops, with much severity of language. The admonition was concluded with a petition to the two houses,
that a discipline more consonant to the word of God, and
agreeing with the foreign reformed churches, might be established by law. Mr. Field and Mr. Wilcox, authors of the
admonition, and who attempted to present it to parliament,
were committed to Newgate on the second of October
1572. Notwithstanding which, Mr. Cartwright, after his
return to England,“wrote
” a second admonition to the
parliament,“with an humble petition to the two houses,
for relief against the subscription required by the ecclesiastical commissioners. The same year Dr. Whitgift published
an answer to the admonition: to which Mr. Cartwright
published a reply in 1573; and aboat this time a proclamation was issued for apprehending him. In 1574 Dr.
Whitgift published, in folio,
” A defence of the answer to
the admonition, against the reply of T. C.“In 1575
Mr. Cartwright published a second reply to Dr. Whitgift;
and in 1577 appeared,
” the rest of the second reply of
Thomas Cartwright, against master Doctor Whitgift’s
answer, touching the church discipline.“This seems to have
been printed in Scotland; and it is certain, that before its
publication Mr. Cartwright had found it necessary to leave
the kingdom, whilst his opponent was raised to the bishopric
of Worcester. Mr. Cartwright continued abroad about
five years, during which time he officiated as a minister to
some of the English factories. About the year 1580
James VI. king of Scotland, having a high opinion of his
learning and abilities, sent to him, and offered him a professorship in the university of St. Andrew’s; but this he
'thought proper to decline. Upon his return to England,
officers w.e re sent to apprehend him, as a promoter of sedition,
and he was thrown into prison. He probably obtained his li* berty through the interest of the lord treasurer Burleigh, and
the earl of Leicester, by both of whom he was favoured: and
the latter conferred upon him the mastership of the hospital
which he had founded in Warwick. In 1583 he was earnestly persuaded, by several learned protestant divines, to
write against the Rhemish translation of the New Testament.
He was likewise encouraged in this design by the earl of
Leicester and sir Francis Walsingham: and the latter sent
him a hundred pounds towards the expences of the work.
He accordingly engaged in it; but after some time received
a mandate from archbishop Whitgift, prohibiting him from
prosecuting the work any farther. Though he was much
discouraged by this, he nearly completed the performance;
but it was not published till many years after his death in
1618, fol. under the title
” A Confutation of the Rhemish
Translation, Glosses, and Annotations on the New Testament.“It is said, that queen Elizabeth sent to Beza,
requesting him to undertake a work of this kind; but he
declined it, declaring that Cartwright was much more capable of the task than himself. Notwithstanding the high
estimation in which he was held, and his many admirers,
in the year 1585 he was again committed to prison by
Dr. Aylmer, bfshop of London; and that prelate gave some
offence to the queen by making use of her majesty’s name
on the occasion. When he obtained his liberty is not
mentioned: but we find that in 1590, when he was at
Warwick, he received a citation to appear in the starchamber, together with Edmund Snape, and some other
puritan ministers, being charged with setting up a new
discipline, and a new form of worship, and subscribing
their names to stand to it. This was interpreted an
opposition and disobedience to the established laws. Mr. Cartwright was also called upon to take the oath ex officio; but
this he refused, and was committed to the Fleet. In May
1591 ije was sent for by bishop Ay liner to appear before
him, and some others of the ecclesiastical commissioners,
at that prelate’s house. He had no previous notice given
him, to prevent any concourse of his adherents upon the
occasion. The bishop threw out some reproaches against
him, and again required him to take the oath ex officio.
The attorney general did the same, and represented to him
” how dangerous a thing it was that men should, upon the
conceits of their own heads, and yet under colour of conscience, refuse the things that had been received for laws
for a long time.“Mr. Cartwright assigned sundry reasons
for refusing to take the oath; and afterwards desired to be
permitted to vindicate himself from some reflections that
had been thrown out against him by the bishop and the
attorney general. But to this bishop Aylmer would not
consent, alleging,
” that he had no leisure to hear his
answer,“but that he might defend himself from the public
charges that he had brought against him, by a private letter
to his lordship. With this Mr. Cartwright was obliged to
be contented, and was immediately after again committed
to the Fleet. In August 1591 he wrote a letter to lady
Russel, stating some of the grievances under which he
laboured, and soliciting her interest with lord Burleigh to
procure him better treatment. The same year king James
wrote a letter to queen Elizabeth, requesting her majesty
to shew favour to Mr. Cartwright and his brethren, on account of their great learning and faithful labours in the
gospel. But he did not obtain his liberty till about the
middle of the year 1592, when he was restored to his
hospital at Warwick, and was again permitted to preach:
but his health appears to have been much impaired by his
long confinement and close application to study. He died
on the 27th of December 1603, in the 68th year of his age,
having preached a sermon ou mortality but two days before.
He was buried in the hospital at Warwick. He was pious,
learned, and laborious; an acute disputant, and an admired
preacher; of a disinterested disposition, generous and
charitable, and particularly liberal to poor scholars. It is
much to be regretted that such a man should have incurred
the censure of the superiors either in church or state; but
inuovations like those he proposed, and adhered to with
obstinacy, could not be tolerated in the case of a church
establishment so recently formed, and which required every
effort bf its supporters to maintain it. How far, therefore,
the reflections which have been cast on a the prelates who
prosecuted him are just, may be safely left to the consideration of the reader. There is reason also to think,
that before his death Cartwright himself thought differently
of his past conduct. Sir Henry Yelverton, in his epistle to
the reader, prefixed to bishop Moreton’s
” Episcopacy justified,“says that the last words of Thomas Cartwright, on his
death-bed, were, that he sorely lamented the unnecessary
troubles he had caused in the church, by the schism, of
which he had been the great fomenter; and that be wished
he was to begin his life again, that he might testify to the
world the dislike he had of his former ways In tnis opinion, says sir Henry, he died; and it appears certain, that
he abated something of the warmth of his spirit towards
the close of his days. When he had obtained his pardon,
of the queen, which, as sir George Paule asserts, was at
the instance of aichbishop Whitgilt, Cartwright, in his
letters of acknowledgment to that prelate, vouchsafed to
stile him a
” Right Reverend Fatner in God, and his Lord
the Archbishop’s Grace of Canterbury.“This title of
Grace he often yielded to Whitgift in the course of their
correspondence. Nay, the archbishop was heard to say,
that if Mr. Cartwright had not so far engaged himself as
he did in the beginning, he verily thought tnat he would,
in his letter time, have been drawn to conformity: for
when he was freed from his troubles, he often repaired to
the archbishop, who used him kindly, and was contented
to tolerate his preaching at Warwick for several years,
upon his promise that he would not impugn the laws, orders,
and government of the church of England, but persuade
and procure, as much as he could, both publicly and privately, the estimation and peace of the same. With these
terms he complied; notwithstanding which, when queen
Elizabeth understood that he preached again, though in
the temperate manner which had been prescribed, she
would not permit him to do it any longer without subscription; and was not a little displeased with the archbishop,
for his having connived at his so doing. Sir George Paule
farther adds, that, by the benevolence and bounty of his
followers, Mr Cartwright was said to have died rich. Besides the pieces already mentioned, Mr. Cartwright was
author of the following works: 1.
” Commentaria practica
in totam historiam evangelicam, ex quatuor evangelistis
harmonice concinnatam,“1630, 4to. An elegant edition
of this was printed at Amsterdam, by Lewis Elzevir, in
1647, under the following title:
” Harmonia evangelica
commentario analytico, metaphrastico, practice, illustrata,“&c. 2.
” Commentarii succincti & dilucidi in proverbia
Salomonis,“Amst. 1638, 4to. 3.
” Metaphrasis & homiliae in librum Salomonis qui inscribitur Ecclesiastes,“Amst. 1647, 4to. 4.
” A Directory of Church Government,“1644, 4to. 5.
” A Body of Divinity," Lond. 1616,
4to.
, bishop of Chester, and supposed to be grandson to the preceding, was
, bishop of Chester, and
supposed to be grandson to the preceding, was born at
Northampton, Sept. 1, 1634. His father was for some
time master of the endowed school of Brentwood, in Essex,
and he appears to have been educated in the religious principles which prevailed among the anti-episcopal party.
He was entered of Magdalen hall, Oxford, but was soon
removed to Queen’s college by the power of the parliamentary visitors in 1649; and after taking orders, became
chaplain of that college, and vicar of Walthamstow in
Essex. In 1659, he was preacher at St. Mary Magdalen’s,
Fish-street. After the restoration, he recommended himself so powerfully by professions of loyalty, as to be made
domestic chaplain to Henry duke of Gloucester, prebendary of Twyford, in the church of St. Paul; of Chalford,
in the church of Wells; a chaplain in ordinary to the
king, and rector of St. Thomas Apostle, London, and was
created D. D. although not of standing for it. To these,
in 1672, was added a prebend of Durham; and in 1677,
he was made dean of Rippon. He had likewise a hard
struggle with Dr. Womack for the bishopric of St. David’s;
but in the reign of James II. in 1686, he succeeded to
that of Chester, for boldly asserting in one of his sermons,
that the king’s promises to parliament were not binding.
The most remarkable event of his life, was his acting as
one of the commissioners in the memorable attempt which
his infatuated master made to controul the president and
fellows of Magdalen college, Oxford, when they rejected
a popish president intruded upon them by the king. Upon
the revolution he fled to France, where he officiated as
minister to the protestant part of the king’s household;
and upon the death of Dr. Seth Ward, became titular
bishop of Salisbury. He afterwards accompanied the abdicated monarch to Ireland, where he died of a dysentery,
April 15, 1689, and was sumptuously interred in the choir
of Christ-church, Dublin. The report by Richardson, in
his edition of Godwin, of his having died in the communion of the church of Rome, seems doubtful; but on his
death-bed his expressions were certainly equivocal. His
“Speech spoken to the society of Magdalen college,
” his
examination of Dr. Hough, and several occasional sermons,
enumerated by Wood, are in print. He appears to have
been a man too subservient to the will of James, to act
with more prudence or principle than his master, who, it
is said, looked upon him as neither protestant nor papist,
and had little or no esteem for him.
right were of consequence enough to be admitted as specimens of university preaching. The others are bishop Andrews’, bishop Hall’s, the presbyterian and independent “ways
, an English poet of the
seventeenth century, was born at Northway near Tewkesbury, in Gloucestershire, Sept. 1611. His father, after
spending a good estate, was reduced to keep an inn at
Cirencester; at the free-school of which town his son was
educated under Mr. William Topp. Being chosen a king’s
scholar, he was removed to Westminster school, under
Dr. Osbaldiston, and thence elected a student of Christ
church, Oxford, in 1628. After pursuing his studies, with
the reputation of an extraordinary scholar and genius,
he took his master’s degree in 1635, and in 1638 went
into holy orders, becoming “a most florid and seraphical
preacher in the university.
” One sermon only of his is in
print, from which we are not able to form a very high
notion of his eloquence; but whdn Mr. Abraham Wright,
of St. John’s, Oxford, compiled that scarce little book,
entitled “Five Sermons in five several styles, or ways of
Preaching,
” it appears that Dr. Maine and Mr. Cartwright
were of consequence enough to be admitted as specimens
of university preaching. The others are bishop Andrews’,
bishop Hall’s, the presbyterian and independent “ways
of preaching.
”
In 1642, bishop Duppa, with whom he lived in the
strictest intimacy, bestowed on him the place of succentur
of the church of Salisbury. In the same year he was one
of the council of war or delegacy, appointed by the university of Oxford, for providing for the troops sent by the
king- to protect the colleges. His zeal in this office occasioned his being imprisoned by the parliamentary forces
when they arrived at Oxford, but he was bailed soon after.
In 1643, he was chosen junior proctor of the university,
and was also reader in metaphysics. “The exposition of
them,
” says Wood, “was never better performed than by
him and his predecessor Thomas Barlow, of Queen’s college.
” Lloyd asserts that he studied at the rate of sixteen
hours a day. From such diligence and talents much might
have been expected, but he survived the last- mentioned
appointments a very short time, dying on December 23,
1643, in the thirty-second year of his age, of a malignant
fever, called the camp disease, which then prevailed at
Oxford. He was honourably interred towards the upper
end of the south aile of the cathedral of Christ church.
nly understood Greek and Latin, but French and Italian, as perfectly as his mother tongue. Dr. Fell, bishop of Oxford, said of him, “Cartwright is the utmost man can come
Few men have ever been so praised and regretted by
their contemporaries, who have left so little to perpetuate
their fame. During his sickness, the king and queen,
who were then at Oxford, made anxious inquiries about
the progress of his disorder. His majesty wore black on
the day of his funeral, and being asked the reason, answered that since the muses had so much mourned for the
loss of such a son, it had been a shame that he should not
appear in mourning for the loss of such a subject. His
poems and plays, which were published in 1651, are preceded by fifty copies of verses by the wits of the time, and
all in a most laboured style of panegyric. His other encomiasts inform us that his person was as handsome as his
mind, and that he not only understood Greek and Latin,
but French and Italian, as perfectly as his mother tongue.
Dr. Fell, bishop of Oxford, said of him, “Cartwright is
the utmost man can come to;
” and Ben Jonson used to
say, “My son Cartwright writes all like a man.
”
he Papacy,” &c. 1673, 4to. 8. “A Letter to Dr. Beale, master of St. John’s College, Cambridge.” From bishop Barlow’s Remains, p. 329, we learn that he assisted Chillmgworth
Lord Falkland wrote, 1. “A Speech on ill Counsellors
about the king.
” 2. “Speech against the Lord Keeper
Finch and the Judges.
” 3. “A Speech against the Bishops,
Feb. 9, 1640.
” 4. “A draught of a speech concerning
Episcopacy,
” found among his papers, printed at Oxford
A Discourse on the Infallibility of the Church
of Rome,
” Letter to a young gentleman lately entered into holy
orders,
” informs us, that lord Falkland, in some of his
writings, when he doubted whether a word were perfectly
intelligible, used to consult one of his lady’s chambermaids, and by her judgment was guided whether to receive
or reject it. 6. “A View of some exceptions made against
the preceding discourse,
” A Letter to F. M.
anno 1636,
” printed at the end of Charles Gataker’s (his chaplain’s) “Answer to five captious questions, propounded
by a factor for the Papacy,
” &c. A Letter to Dr. Beale, master of St. John’s College, Cambridge.
”
From bishop Barlow’s Remains, p. Religion of Protestants;
”
and he wrote some verses on the death of Ben Jonson,
published in the collection called “Jonsonus Virbius.
”
Some other verses are mentioned by Mr. Park, but they
cannot be allowed much praise.
, a Spaniard, and the illustrious bishop of Chiapa, was born at Seville in 1474; and, at the age of nineteen,
, a Spaniard, and the illustrious bishop of Chiapa, was born at Seville in 1474;
and, at the age of nineteen, attended his father, who went
with Christopher Columbus to the Indies in 1493. Upon
his return he became an ecclesiastic, and a curate in the
isle of Cuba; but quitted his cure and his country -in order
to devote himself to the service of the Indians, who were
then enslaved to the most ridiculous superstitions, as well
as the most barbarous tyranny. The Spanish governors
had long since made Christianity detested by their unheardof cruelties, and the Indians trembled at the very name of
Christian. This humane and pious missionary resolved to
cross the seas, and to lay their cries and their miseries at
the feet of Charles V. The affair was discussed in council;
and the representations of Casas so sensibly affected the
emperor, that he made ordinances, as severe to the persecutors as favourable to the persecuted. But these ordinances were never executed the Spanish governors, or
rather tyrants, continued to plunder and murder; and
they had a doctor, one Sepulveda, who undertook even to
justify these outrages by human and divine laws, and by
the examples of the Israelites who conquered the people
of Canaan. This horrible book was printed at Rome, but
proscribed in Spain; and Casas, now become bishop of
Chiapa, refuted this apology for tyranny and murder. His
treatise, entitled, “The Destruction of the Indians,
” and
translated into most European languages, is full of details
which shock humanity. Soto, the emperor’s confessor,
was appointed arbiter of the difference between Casas, a
bishop worthy of the first ages of the church, and Sepulveda, a doctor and advocate for principles which would
not have been adopted by an heathen: and the result of
all this was laid before Charles V. who, however, had too
many affairs upon his hands to pay a due attention to it;
and the governors continued to tyrannize as usual. Casas
employed above fifty years in America, labouring with
incessant zeal, that the Indians might be treated with
mildness, equity, and humanity: but, instead of succeeding, he drew upon himself endless persecutions from the
Spaniards; and, though he escaped with his life, might
properly enough be called a martyr to the liberty of the
Indians. After refusing several bishoprics in America, he
was constrained to accept that of Chiapa in 1544. He reided there till 1551, when the infirm state of his health
obliged him to return to his native country; and he died
at Madrid in 156G, aged ninety-two. Besides his “Destruction of the Indians,
” and other pieces on the same
subject, there is a very curious Latin work of his upon
this question “Whether kings or princes can in conscience, by any right, or by virtue of any title, alienate
citizens and subjects from their natural allegiance, and
subject them to a new and foreign jurisdiction?
” Ail his
writings shew a solid judgment, and profound learning and
piety.
ppointed one of the judges on the protestants’ side, at the conference between James Davy du Perron, bishop of Evreux, afterwards cardinal, and Philip du Plessis-Mornay
, a very learned critic, was born at
Geneva, February 18, 1559, being the son of Arnold Casaubon, a minister of the reformed church, who had taken
refuge in Geneva, by his wife Jane Rosseau. He was
educated at first by his father, and made so quick a progress in his studies, that at the age of nine he could speak
and write Latin with great ease and correctness. But his
father being obliged, for three years together, to be absent
from home, on account of business, his education was
neglected, and at twelve years of age he was forced to
begin his studies again by himself, but as he could not by
this method make any considerable progress, he was sent
in 1578 to Geneva, to complete his studies under the professors there, and by indefatigable application, quickly
recovered the time he had lost. He learned the Greek
tongue of Francis Portus, the Cretan, and soon became so
great a master of that language, that this famous man
thought him worthy to be his successor in the professor’s
chair in 1582, when he was but three and twenty years of
age. In 1586, Feb. 1, he had the misfortune to lose his
father, who died at Dil, aged sixty- three. The 28th of
April following he married Florence, daughter of Henry
Stephens the celebrated printer, by whom he had twenty
children. For fourteen years he continued professor of
the Greek tongue at Geneva; and in that time studied
philosophy and the civil law under Julius Pacius. He also
learned Hebrew, and some other of the Oriental languages,
but not enough to be able to make use of them afterwards.
In the mean time he began to be weary of Geneva; either
because he could not agree with his father-in-law, Henry
Stephens, who is said to have been morose and peevish;
or that his salary was not sufficient for his maintenance;
or because he was of a rambling and unsettled disposition.
He resolved therefore, after a great deal of uncertainty, to
accept the place of professor of the Greek tongue and polite literature, which was offered him at Montpelier, with
a more considerable salary than he had at Geneva. To
Montpelier he removed about the end of 1596, and began,
his lectures in the February following. About the same
time, the city of Nismes invited him to come and restore
their university, but he excused himself, and some say he
had an invitation from the university of Franeker. At his
first coming to Montpelier, he was much esteemed and
followed, and seemed to be pleased with his station. But
this pleasure did not last long; for what had been promised
him was not performed; abatements were made in his
salary, which also was not regularly paid, and upon the
whole, he met there with so much uneasiness that he was
upon the point of returning to Geneva, when a journey he
took to Lyons in 1598, gave him an opportunity of taking
another, that proved extremely advantageous to him. Having been recommended by some gentlemen of Montpelier
to M. de Vicq, a considerable man at Lyons, this gentleman took him into his house, and carried him along with
him to Paris, where he caused him to be introduced to the
first- president de Harlay, the president de Thou, Mr.
Gillot, and Nicolas le Fevre, by whom he was very civilly
received . He was also presented to king Henry IV.
who being informed of his merit, requested him to leave
Montpelier for a professor’s place at Paris. Casaubon
having remained for some time in suspense which course
to take, went back to Montpelier, and resumed his lectures. Not long after, he received a letter from the king,
dated January 3, 1599, by which he was invited to Paris
in order to be professor of polite literature, and he set out
the 26th of February following. When he came to Lyons,
M. de Vicq advised him to stay there till the king’s coming,
who was expected in that place. In the mean while, some
domestic affairs obliged him to go to Geneva, where he
complains that justice was not done him with regard to the
estate of his father-in-law. Upon his return to Lyons,
having waited a long while in vain for the king’s arrival, he
took a second journey to Geneva, and then went to Paris;
though he foresaw, as M. de Vicq and Scaliger had told
him, he should not meet there with all the satisfaction he
at first imagined. The king gave him, indeed, a gracious
reception; but the jealousy of some of the other professors,
and his being a protestant, procured him a great deal of
trouble and vexation, and were the cause of his losing
the professorship, of which he had the promise. Some
time after, he was appointed one of the judges on the
protestants’ side, at the conference between James Davy
du Perron, bishop of Evreux, afterwards cardinal, and
Philip du Plessis-Mornay f. As Casaubon was not favourable to the latter, who, some think, did not acquit himself
well in that conference, it was reported that he would
soon change his religion; but the event showed that this
report was groundless. When Casaubon came back to
Paris, he found it very difficult to get his pension paid, and
the charges of removing from Lyons to Paris, because M.
de Rosny was not his friend; and it was only by an express
order from the king that he obtained the payment even of
three hundred crowns. The 30th of May 1600, he returned to Lyons, to hasten the impression of his “Athenseus,
” which was printing there; but he had the misfortune of incurring the displeasure of his great friend M. de
Vicq, who had all along entertained him and his whole
family in his own house when they were in that city, because he refused to accompany him into Switzerland. The
reason of this refusal was, his being afraid of losing in the
mean time the place of library-keeper to the king, of
which he had a promise, and that was likely soon to become vacant, on account of the librarian’s illness. He
returned to Paris with his wife and family the September
following, and was well received by the king, and by many
persons of distinction. There he read private lectures,
published several works of the ancients, and learned Arabic; in which he made so great a progress, that he undertook to compile a dictionary, and translated some books
of that language into Latin. In 1601 he was obliged, as
he tells us himself, to write against his will to James VI.
king of Scotland, afterwards king of England, but does
not mention the occasion of it. That prince answered him
with great civility, which obliged our author to write to
him a second time. In the mean time, the many affronts
and uneasinesses he received from time to time at Paris,
made him think of leaving that city, and retiring to some
quieter place, but king Henry IV. in order to fix him,
made an augmentation of two hundred crowns to his pension: and granted him the reversion of the place of his
library-keeper. He took a journey to Dauphine in May
1603, and from thence to Geneva about his private affairs;
returning to Paris on the 12th of July. Towards the end
of the same year he came into possession of the place of
king’s library-keeper, vacant by the death of Gosselin.
His friends of the Roman catholic persuasion made now
frequent attempts to induce him to forsake the protestant
religion. Cardinal du Perron, in particular, had several
disputes with him, after one of which a report was spread
that he had then promised the cardinal he would turn Roman catholic: so that, in order to stifle that rumour, the
ministers of Charenton, who were alarmed at it, obliged
him to write a letter to the cardinal to contradict what was
so confidently reported, and took care to have it printed.
About this time the magistrates of Nismes gave him a second invitation to their city, offering him a house, and a
salary of six hundred crowns of gold a year, but he durst
not accept of it for fear of offending the king. In 1609
he had, by that prince’s order, who was desirous of gaining
him over to the catholic religion, a conference with cardinal du Perron, but it had no effect upon him.
ccordingly, it was inserted in the edition of that king’s works, published in 1619, by Dr. Montague, bishop of Winchester. Cardinal du Perron undertook to give an answer
His writings are 1 “In Diogenem Laertium Notae
Isaaci Hortiboni,
” Morgiis, He should like better one note of his upon the holy Scriptures, than all the
pains he could bestow upon profane authors.
” These
potes of Casaubon were inserted in the editions of Diogenes
Laertius, printed by H. Stephens in 15l>4 and 1598, in
8vo, and in all the editions published since. The name of
Hortibonus, which Casaubon took, is of the same import
as Casaubon, i. e. a good garden; Casait, in the language
of Dauphiné, signifying a garden, and bon, good. 2.
“Lectiones Theocriticæ,
” in Crispinus’s edition of Theocritus, Genev. 1S84, 12mo, reprinted several times since.
3. “Strabonis Geographiae Libri XVII. Grsece & Latine,
ex Guil. Xylandri Interpretatione,
” Genevae, 1587, fol.
Casaubon’s notes were reprinted, with additions, in the
Paris edition of Strabo in 1620, and have been inserted
in all other editions since. 4. “Novurn Testamentum.
Grace urn,
” Geneva;, Critici
Sacri.
” V. “Animadversiones in Dionysium Halicarnassensem,
” in the edition of Dionysius Halicarnassensis,
published by our author with Æmilius Portus’s Latin version, Genev. 1588, fol. These were written in haste, and
are of no great value. 6. “Polyseni Stratagematum,
”
Libri VIII.“Lugduni, 1589, 16to. Casaubon was the
first who published the Greek text of this author. The
Latin version, joined to it, was done by Justus Vulteius,
and first published in 1550. 7.
” Dicsearchi Geographica
quaedam, sive de Statu Grascise; ejusdem descriptio
Grrcciae versibus Greeds jambicis, ad Theophrastum; cum
Isaaci Casauboni & Henrici Stephani nods,“Genevac,
1589, 8vo. 8.
” Aristotelis Opera Grasce, cum variorum
Interpretatione Latina, & variis Lectionibus & Castigationibus Isaaci Casauboni,“Lugduni, 1590, fol.; Genevae,
1605, fol. These notes are only marginal, and were composed at leisure hours. 9.
” C. Plinii Caec. Sec. Epist.
Lib. IX. Ejusdem & Trajani imp. Epist. amcebaea?. Ejus* clem Pi. & Pacati, Mamertini, Nazarii Panegyrici. Item
Claudiani Panegyrici. Adjunctae sunt Isaaci Casauboni
Notae in Epist.“Geneva, 1591, 12mo; ibid. 1599, 1605,
1610, and 1611, 12mo. These notes are but very short.
10.
” Theophrasti Characteres Ethici Grasce & Latine,“Lugduni, 1592, 12mo, and 1612, 12mo. This latter edition is the most exact of the two, being revised by the
author. Casaubon’s edition of Theophrastus is still highly
esteemed, and was one of those works which procured him
most reputation. Joseph Scaliger highly extols it. 11.
” L. Apuleii Apologia,“Typis Commeiini 1593, 4to. In
this edition he shewed himself as able a critic in the
Latin, as he had done before in the Greek tongue. It is
dedicated to Joseph Scaliger. 12.
” C. Suetonii Tranquilli Opera,“Genevas, 1595, 4to, and Paris, 1610, an
enlarged edition. 13.
” Publii Syri Mimi, sive sententiae
selectae, Latine, Graece versas, & Notis illustrate per Jos.
Scaligerum; cum prefatione Isaaci Casaubon i,“Lugd.
Batav. 1598, 8vo. 14.
” Athenaei Deipnosophistarmn,
LibriXV. Graece Latine, Interprete JacoboDalechampio,
cum Isaaci Casauboni Animadversion um Libris XV.“Geneva, 1597, 2 vols. fol.; ibid. 1612, 2 vols. fol Casaubon’s notes take up the second volume, and are copious and learned, and constitute the most valuable part
of this edition. 15.
” Historiae Augustae Scriptures, “Paris,
1603, 4to, reprinted at Paris in 1620, with Saiivmsius’s
Commentaries on the same autnors, fol. and at Leyden,
in 1670, 2 vols. 8vo. 16.
” Diatnba ad Dionis Chrysostomi Orationes,“published in the edition of that author
by Frederick Morel, at Paris, 1604, fol. 17.
” Persii
Satyrae ex recensione &- cum Commentar.“Pans, 1605,
8vo; Lond. 1647, 8vo. These notes upon Persius ar
Lectures he had formerly read at Geneva. They were
enlarged in the edition of 1647. Scaliger used to say of
them,
” That the sauce was better than the fish.“18.
” De Satyrica Graecorum Poesi, & llomanorum Satyra
Libri duo,“Paris, 1605, 8vo. In this work Casaubon
affirms, that the satire of the Latins was very different from
that of the Greeks, which Daniel Heinsius contradicts in
his two books,
” De Satyra Horatiana,“Lugd. Batava.
1629, 12mo. But the learned Ezekiel Spanheim, after
having examined the arguments of these two learned men,
declares for Casaubon. Crenius has inserted this tract
of Casaubon, in his
” Musceum Philologicum & Historicom,“Ludg. Batav. 1699, 8vo; and also the following
” piece, which was published by our author at the end of
his two books, “De Satyrica Poesi,
” &c. 19. “Cyclops
Euripidis Latinitate donata a Q. Septimio Florente.
” 20.
“Gregorii Nysseni Epistola ad Eustathiam, Ambrosiam, &
Basilissam, Gr. & Lat.
” Paris, De
Libertate Ecclesiastica Liber,
” Collectanea de Monarchia S. Imperil,
” torn. I. p. Inscriptio vetus dedicationem fundi continens, ab Herode
rege facta, cum notis.
” This small piece, published in
Musoeum.
Phiiologicum.
” Casaubon’s notes are short, but learned;
however, he appears to have been mistaken in ascribing
the inscription on which they were made to Herod king
of Judaea, instead of Herodes the Athenian. 23. “Polybii Opera Gr. & Lat. Accedit Æneas Tracticus detoleranda obsidione, Gr. & Lat.
” Paris, Josephi Scaligeri Opusculavaria,
” Paris, Ad Frontonem Ducseum
Epistola, de Apologia, Jesuitarum nomine, Parisiis edita,
”
Londini, la Reponse Apologetique a I'Anti-coton, par Francois Bonald.
” Au Pont,
1611, 8vo. 26. “Epistola ad Georgium Michaelem Lingelshemium de quodam libello Sciopii,
” Epistola ad Cardinalem Perronium,
” Londini, Ad Isaacum Casaubonum Paraenesis,
”
Racoviae, De Rebus sacris & Ecclesiasticis Exercitationes xvi. Ad Cardinalis Baronii Prolegomena in
Annales, & primam eorum partem, de Domini nostri Jesu
Christi Nativitate, Vita, Passione, Assumtione,
” Londini,
that he had materials ready for that purpose.
” Accordingly, king James
employed him in that work, which was finished in eighteen
months’ time. Niceron thinks that Casaubon was not equal
to this work, because he had not sufficiently studied divinity, chronology, and history, and was not conversant
enough in the fathers, and is charged with having committed more errors than Baronius in a less compass. Besides, as he comes no lower than the year 34 after Christ,
he is said to have pulled down only the pinnacles of Baronius’ s great building. It appears from letter 1059th of
our author, that Dr. Richard Montague, afterwards bishop
of Norwich, had undertaken to write against Baronius at
the same time with himself; and he threatens to complain
of him to the king, who had engaged him in that work.
29. “Ad Polybii Historiarum Libruni primum Commentarius,
” Paris, Isaaci Casauboni Epistohp,
” Hagie Comin. Is. Casauboni Epistolae,
” &c. Curante
Theodore Janson ab Almeloveen,“Roterodami, 1709, foL
The letters in this volume are 1059 in number, placed
according to the order of the time in which they were
written; and 5 1 without dates. Niceron finds in them
neither elegant style, nor fine thoughts; and censures, as
very disagreeable, the mixture of Greek words and expressions that are dispersed throughout; affirming besides,
that they contain no particulars tending to the advancement of learning, or that are of any great importance. In
the
” Sorberiana“it is said that there is in them the history of a man of probity and learning; but nothing otherwise very remarkable, excepting the purity of the language,
and the marks of a frank and sincere mind. Argonne,
however, in his
” Melanges d'Histoire,“assures us that
they are all perfectly beautiful; and makes no scruple to
compare them to those of Grotius and Scaligerwith regard to
learning; and to assert that they exceed them for the easiness and purity of the style, which is entirely epistolary,
and not at all affected. 31.
” Casauboniana," Hamburg!,
1710, 8vo. There is nothing very material in this collection.
titled, “Vindicatio Patris, &c.” 1624, 4to. About that time he was collated by Dr. Lancelot Andrews, bishop of Winchester, to the rectory of Bledon in Somersetshire; and
, son of the preceding, was born
at Geneva, August 14, 1599, and had the name of Meric
from Meric de Vicq, a great friend and benefactor to his
father. His first education he received at Sedan, but
coming to England with his father, in the year 1610, he
was instructed by a private master till 1614, when he was
sent to Christ Church, Oxford; and being put there under
a most careful tutor, Dr. Edward Meetkirk (afterwards Regius Hebrew professor), was soon after elected a student
of that house. He took the degree of bachelor of arts,
May 8, 1618, and that of master, June 14, 1621, being
even then eminent for his extensive learning; and the
same year, though he was but two and twenty, he published a book in defence of his father, against the calumnies of certain Roman catholics, entitled “Pietas contra
maledicos, &c.
” Loud. Vindicatio Patris, &c.
” Exercitations against Baronius’s Annals,
” but was diverted
by some accident. At length, when he came to maturity
of years for such a work, and had acquainted archbishop
Laud, his great friend and patron, with his design, who
was very ready to place him conveniently in Oxford or
London, according to his desire, that he might be furnished
with books necessary for such a purpose, the rebellion
broke out in England. Having now no fixed habitation, he
was forced to sell a good part of his books; and, after
about twenty years’ sufferings, became so infirm, that he
could not expect to live many years, and was obliged to
relinquish his design. Before this, however, in June
1628, he was made prebendary of Canterbury, through
the interest of bishop Laud; and when that prelate was
promoted to the archbishopric of Canterbury, he collated
him, in Oct. 1634, to the vicarage of Minster, in the Isle
of Thanet; and in the same month, he was inducted into
the vicarage of Monckton, in that island. In August 1636,
he was created doctor in divinity, by order of king
Charles I. who was entertained at the same time, with his
queen, by the university of Oxford. About the year 1644,
during the heat of the civil wars, he was deprived of his
preferments, abused, fined, and imprisoned. In 1649,
one Mr. Greaves, of Gray’s inn, an intimate acquaintance
of his, brought him a message from Oliver Cromwell, then
lieutenant-general of the parliament forces, desiring him to
come to Whitehall, on purpose to confer with him about
matters of moment; but his wife being lately dead, and
not, as he said, buried, he desired to be excused. Greaves
came again afterwards, and Dr. Casaubon being somewhat
alarmed, desired him to tell him the meaning of the matter; but Greaves refusing, went away the second time.
At length he returned again, and told him, that the lieutenant-general intended his good and advancement; and
his particular errand was, that he would make use of his
pen to write the history of the late war; desiring withal,
that nothing but matters of fact should be impartially set
down. The doctor answered, that he desired his humble
service and hearty thanks should be returned for the great
honour done unto him; but that he was uncapable in several respects for such an employment, and could not so
impartially engage in it, as to avoid such reflections as
would be ungrateful, if not injurious, to his lordship.
Notwithstanding this answer, Cromwell seemed so sensible
of his worth, that he acknowledged a great respect for him;
and, as a testimony of it, ordered, that upon the first demand there should be delivered to him three or four hundred pounds, by a bookseller in London, whose name was
Cromwell, whenever his occasions should require, without
acknowledging, at the receipt of it, who was his benefactor.
But this ofter he rejected, although almost in want. At
the same time, it was proposed by Mr. Greaves, who belonged to the library at St. James’s, that if our author
would gratify him in the foregoing request, Cromwell
would restore to him all his father’s books, which were then
in the royal library, having been purchased by king James;
and withal give him a patent for three hundred pounds a
year, to be paid to the family as long as the youngest sou
of Dr. Casaubon should live, but this also was refused.
Not long after, it was intimated to him, by the ambassador
of Christiana, queen of Sweden, that the queen wished
him to come over, and take upon him the government of
one, or inspection of all her universities; and, as an encouragement, she proposed not only an honourable salary
for himself, but offered to settle three hundred pounds a
year upon his eldest son during life: but this also he
waved, being fully determined to spend the remainder of
his days in England. At the restoration of king Charles II.
he recovered his preferments; namely, his prebend of
Canterbury in July 1660, and his vicarages of Monckton
and Minster the same year: but, two years after, he exchanged this last for the rectory of Ickham, near Canterbury, to which he was admitted Oct. 4, 1662. He had a
design, in the latter part of his days, of writing his own
life; and would often confess, that he thought himself
obliged to do it, out of gratitude to the Divine Providence,
which had preserved and delivered him from more hazardous occurrences than ever any man (as he thought) besides
himself had encountered with; particularly in his escape
from a fire in the night-time, which happened in the house
where he lived, at Geneva, while he was a boy: in his recovery from a sickness at Christ Church, in Oxford, when
he was given over for dead, by a chemical preparation administered to him by a young physician: in his wonderful
preservation from drowning, when overset in a boat on the
Thames near London, the two watermen being drowned,
and himself buoyed up by his priest’s coat: and in his
bearing several abuses, fines, imprisonments, &c. laid
upon him by the republicans in the time of his sequestration: but this he did not execute. He died July 14, 1671,
in the seventy-second year of his age, and was buried in the
south part of the first south cross aile of Canterbury cathedral. Over his grave was soon after erected a handsome
monument with an inscription. He left by will a great
number of manuscripts to the university of Oxford. His
character is thus represented. He was a general scholar,
but not of particular excellence, unless in criticism, in
which probably he was assisted by his father’s notes and
papers. According to the custom of the times he lived in,
he displays his extensive reading by an extraordinary mixture of Greek and Latin quotations and phrases. He was
wont to ascribe to Descartes’s philosophy, the little inclination people had in his time for polite learning. Sir William Temple very highly praises his work, hereafter mentioned, on “Enthusiasm;
” and unquestionably it contains
in any curious and learned remarks; buthisbeingamaintainer
of the reality of witches and apparitions, shews that he was
not more free from one species of enthusiasm than most of
his contemporaries. In his private character he was eminent for his piety, charity to the poor, and his courteous
and affable disposition towards scholars. He had several
children, but none made any figure in the learned world;
one, named John, was a surgeon at Canterbury .
, which is poorly excused by his biographer telling us of his having been ejected from his living by bishop Wren. When in London he wasthe institutor of the Morning Exercise,
, an eminent nonconformist divine, the
son of George Case, vicar of Boxley in Kent, was born
there in 1598 or 1599, and became student of Christ church,
Oxford, upon the recommendation of Toby Mathew, archbishop of York, in 1616. After taking his degrees in arts,
he went into the church, and preached for some time in
Oxfordshire and Kent, and held the living of Erpingham in
Norfolk, from which he was ejected for nonconformity. In
1641, he joined in principle and practice with the parliament, and about that time was minister of St. Mary Magdalen, Milk-street, London, in the room of a sequestered
loyalist. One of the party jour nafs of the time informs us
that in administering the sacrament, he used to say, instead
of “Ye that do truly and earnestly repent, &c.
” “Ye that
have freely and liberally contributed to the parliament,
&c.;
” but this was probably the squib of the day. Case,
with all his republican zeal, was a man of real piety but
the former certainly betrayed him into extreme violence in
his discourses, which is poorly excused by his biographer
telling us of his having been ejected from his living by
bishop Wren. When in London he wasthe institutor of
the Morning Exercise, which was kept up in the city many
years after, and produced some of the ablest sermons of
the nonconformist clergy. From the living of Milk-street
he was turned out, for refusing the engagement, and was
afterwards lecturer at Aldermanbury and St. Giles’s Cripplegate. He was imprisoned six months in the Tower,
for being implicated in Love’s plot, but Love only was
made a sacrifice, and Mr. Case and his fellow-prisoners
Mr. Jenkyn, Mr. Watson, &c. were released and restored
to their livings. He was afterwards rector of St. Giles’s in
the Fields. In 1660, he was one of the ministers deputed
to wait on the king at the Hague; and in 1661, one of the
commissioners at the fruitless Savoy conference. He appears to have retained his living in Milk-street after the
restoration, as it was from that he was finally ejected. He
died May 30, 1682, and was buried in Christ church, Newgate-street. Dr. Jacomb, who preached his funeral sermon, gives him an excellent and probably a just character:
and it is certain that he lived to repent of the intemperance
of his harangues at the commencement of the rebellion.
This led him to subscribe the two papers declaring against
the proceedings of the parliament in 1648, and the bringing king Charles to a trial. His works consist chiefly of
sermons preached on public occasions, before the parliament and at funerals, enumerated by Calamy.
, a gentle^ man of the same family, who lived here in England, under the patronage of Edmund Gibson, bishop of London. The Italian is printed with it; and before the whole
Besides his incomparable book the “Courtier,
” he
composed many Latin and Tuscan poems; which, with some
of his letters, are placed at the end of the English version
of the “Courtier,
” published at London in
s now determined on a divorce, and upon consulting them, all the prelates of England, except Fisher, bishop of Rochester, unanimously declared that they deemed his marriage
, Queen Of England, and first consort of Henry VIII. was the fourth daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, king and queen of Castile and Arragon. She was born in 1485. In the sixteenth year of her age, Nov. 14, 1501, she was married to Arthur, prince of Wales, son of Henry VII. who died a few months after. The king, either from political reasons, or, as some think, because he was unwilling to restore Catherine’s dowry, which was 200,000 ducats, obliged his second son Henry, whom he created prince of Wales, and who was then in his twelfth year, to be contracted to the infanta. The prince resisted this injunction to the utmost of his power; but the king was invincible, and the espousals were at length, by means of the pope’s dispensation, contracted between the parties. Immediately after the accession of Henry VIII. to the crown, in 1509, the king began to deliberate on his former engagements, to which he had many objections, but his privy council, though contrary to the opinion of the primate, gave him their advice for celebrating the marriage. Even the prejudices of the people were averse to an union betwixt such near relations as Henry and his brother’s widow; and the late king is thought to have had an intention to avail himself of a proper opportunity of annulling the contract. In 1527 several circumstances occurred which combined to excite scruples in the king’s mind concerning the lawfulness of his marriage, but probably the chief were what arose from his own passions. The queen was six years older than the king; and the decay of her beauty, together with particular infn-mities and diseases, had contributed, notwithstanding her blameless character and deportment, to render her person unacceptable to him. Though she had borne him several children, they all died in early infancy, except one daughter, Mary; and it was apprehended, that if doubts of Mary’s legitimacy concurred with the weakness of her sex, the king of Scots, the next heir, would advance his pretensions, and might throw the kingdom into confusion. But most of all, Anne Boleyn had acquired an entire ascendant over his affections, and he was now determined on a divorce, and upon consulting them, all the prelates of England, except Fisher, bishop of Rochester, unanimously declared that they deemed his marriage unlawful. In this they were supported by cardinal Wolsey, who had political purposes to answer in breaking off the match with Catherine, although he was no friend to Anne Boleyn. Accordingly Henry determined to apply to the pope, Clement VII. for a divorce, who, though at first disposed to favour Henry’s application, and had actually concerted measures for its successful issue, was overawed by the interference of the emperor, Charles V. Catherine’s nephew; and when the negociation was protracted to such a length as to tire Henry’s patience, the pope, importuned by the English ministers, put into their hands a commission to Wolsey, as legate, in conjunction with the archbishop of Canterbury, or any other English prelate, to examine the validity of the king’s marriage, and of the late pope’s dispensation. He also granted them a provisional dispensation for the king’s marriage with any other person; and promised to issue a decretal bull, annulling the marriage with Catherine; but he enjoined secrecy, and conjured them not to publish these papers, or to make any farther use of them, till his afflxirs with regard to the emperor were in such a train as to secure his liberty and independence. After considerable hesitation and delay, the legates, Campeggio and Wolsey, to whom the pope had granted a new commission for the trial of the king’s marriage, opened their court in London, May 31, 1529, and cited the king and queen to appear before it. They both presented themselves, and the king answered to his name, when called; but the queen, instead of answering to her’s, threw herself at the king’s feet, and appealed to his justice, declaring that she would not submit her cause to be tried by the members of a court who depended on her enemies; and making the king a low reverence, she departed, and never would again appear in that court.
is said that he even persuaded Francis to follow his example, in withdrawing his obedience from the bishop of Rome, and administering ecclesiastical affairs without having
Upon her departure, the king, after acknowledging that she had ever been a dutiful and affectionate wife, and that the whole tenor of her behaviour had been conformable to the strictest rules of probity and honour, insisted on his own scruples with regard to the lawfulness of their marriage; and craved a sentence of the court agreeable to the justice of his cause. The legates, after citing the queen anew, declared her contumacious, notwithstanding her appeal to Rome, and then proceeded to the examination of the cause; but while the king was all impatience for a sentence, Campeggio suddenly prorogued the court to a future day. This threw the king into the utmost perplexity, from which he was relieved by Dr. Cranaaer, who suggested, that the readiest way, either to quiet Henry’s conscience, or to extort the pope’s consent, would be to consult all the universities of Europe. If they agreed to approve of the king’s marriage with Catherine, his remorse would naturally cease; if they condemned it, the pope would find it difficult to resist his majesty’s solicitations. In consequence of this application several of the foreign universities gave an opinion in the king’s favour; as did Oxford and Cambridge, although subsequently, and with more reluctance; and the convocations both of Canterbury and York, pronounced the king’s marriage invalid, and contrary to the law of God. But pope Clement, still subject to the influence of the emperor, continued to summon the king to appear, either by himself or proxy, before his tribunal at Rome; and the king, apprized that no fair trial could be expected there, refused to submit to such a condition, and would not admit of any citation, which he regarded as a high insult, and a violation of his royal prerogative. In the progress of this business, the queen’s appeal was received at Rome. The king was cited to appear; and several consistories were held to examine the validity of their marriage. The king retained his purpose of not sending any proxy to plead his cause before this court, and alleged, that the prerogatives of his crown must be sacrificed if he allowed appeals from his own kingdom. For the purpose of adding greater security to his intended defection from Rome, he procured an interview with Francis at Boulogne and Calais, and renewed his alliance with that monarch; and it is said that he even persuaded Francis to follow his example, in withdrawing his obedience from the bishop of Rome, and administering ecclesiastical affairs without having further recourse to that see. In the mean time he privately celebrated his marriage with Anne Boleyn, Nov. 14, 1532; and in April of the following year he publicly owned it, and prepared measures for declaring, by a formal sentence, the invalidity of his marriage with Catherine. Catherine, however, did not quit the kingdom; but fixed her abode for some time at Ampthill, in Bedfordshire, where, after several preliminary steps, Cranmer pronounced a sentence which annulled the king’s marriage with her. Catherine still continued obstinate in maintaining the validity of her marriage; and she would admit no person to her presence who did not approach her with the customary formalities. Although Henry employed menaces against such of her servants as complied with her commands in this particular, he was never able to make her relinquish her title and pretensions.
' The queen being absolutely guided by the counsels of the duke of Norfolk, her uncle, and Gardiner bishop of Winchester, used all the power she had over the king to support
, queen of England, and fifth wife of Henry VIII. was daughter of lord Edmund Howard (third son of Thomas duke of Norfolk, and grandson of John first duke of Norfolk), by Joyce, daughter of sir Richard Culpepper, of Holingbourne in Kent, knight. Her mother dying while she was young, she was educated under the care of her grandmother, the duchess dowager of Norfolk; and when she grew up, the charms of her person soon captivated the affections of Henry VIII, who, upon his divorce from Anne of Cleves, married her, and shewed her publicly as queen, Aug. 8, 1540, But this marriage proved of the utmost prejudice to the cause of the reformation, which had begun to spread itself in the kingdom. ' The queen being absolutely guided by the counsels of the duke of Norfolk, her uncle, and Gardiner bishop of Winchester, used all the power she had over the king to support the credit of the enemies of the protestants, In the summer of 1541, she attended his majesty to York, to meet his nephew the king of Scotland, who had promised to give him an interview in that city, but was diverted by his clergy, and a message from the court of France, from that resolution; and during that progress she gained so entire an ascendant over the king’s heart, that at his return to London, on All-Saints day, when he received the sacrament, he gave public thanks to God for the happiness which he enjoyed by her means and desired his confessor, the bishop of Lincoln, to join with him in the like thanksgiving. But this proved a very short-lived satisfaction, for the jiext clay, archbishop Cranmer came to him with information that the queen had been unfaithful to his bed. By the advice of the lord chancellor and other privy counsellors, the archbishop wrote the particulars on a paper, which he delivered to the king, being at a loss how to open so delicate a matter in conversation. When the king read it, he was much confounded, and his attachment to the queen made him at first consider the story as a forgery, but having full proof, the persons with whom the queen Jiad been guilty, Dierham and Mannoch, two of the duchess dowager of Norfolk’s domestics, were apprehended, and not only confessed what was laid to their charge, but revealed some other circumstances, which placed the guilt of the queen in a most heinous light. The report of this struck the king so forcibly, that he lamented his misfortune with a flood of tears. The archbishop and some other counsellors were sent to examine the queen, who at first denied every thing, but finding that her crime was known, confessed all, and subscribed the paper. It appeared likewise, that she had intended to continue in that scandalous course of life; for as she had brought Dierham into her service, she had also retained one of the women, who had formerly been privy to their familiarities, to attend upon her in her bed-chamber; and while the king was at Lincoln, by the lady Rochford’s means, one Culpepper was brought to her at eleven at night, and stayed with her till four next morning; and at his departure received from her a gold chain. Culpepper being examined, confessed the crime: for which he, with Dierham, suffered death on the 1 Oth of December.
d on Jan. 16, 1541-2, in which the archbishop, the duke of Suffolk, the earl of Southampton, and the bishop of Winchester, were appointed to examine the queen; which they
This unfortunate affair occasioned a new parliament to be summoned on Jan. 16, 1541-2, in which the archbishop, the duke of Suffolk, the earl of Southampton, and the bishop of Winchester, were appointed to examine the queen; which they did on the 28th of that month. Their report is recorded only in general, that she confessed; but no particulars are mentioned. Upon this the parliament passed an act in the form of a petition, in which, after desiring the king not to be grieved at this misfortune, they requested, that the queen and her accomplices, with her procuress the lady Rochford, might be attainted of high treason; and that all those, who knew of the queen’s Vicious course before her marriage, and had concealed it, as the duchess dowager of Norfolk her grandmother, the countess of Bridgwater, the lord William Howard her uncle, and his kidy, with the four other men and five women, who were already attainted by the course of common law (except the duchess of Norfolk and the countess of Bridgwater), might be attainted of misprision of treason. It was enacted also, that whoever knew any thing of the incontinence of the queen for the time being, should reveal it with all possible speed, under the pains of treason: and that if the king, or his successors, should incline to marry any woman, whom they took to be a virgin, if she, not being so, did not declare the same to the king, it should be high treason; and all, who knew it, and did not reveal it, were guilty of misprision of treason: and if the queen, or the prince’s wife, should procure any person, by messages or words, to have criminal conversation with her; or any other, by messages or words, should solicit them; they, their counsellors and abettors, were to be adjudged guilty of high treason.
ife before marriage, which had brought her to this fatal end; but protested to Dr. White, afterwards bishop of Winchester, that she took God and his angels to be her witnesses,
This remarkable act being passed, the queen and the
lady llochford were beheaded on Tower-hill on the 12tli
of February, about seventeen months after she had been
married to the king. The queen confessed the miscarriages of her former life before marriage, which had
brought her to this fatal end; but protested to Dr. White,
afterwards bishop of Winchester, that she took God and
his angels to be her witnesses, upon the salvation of her
soul, that she was guiltless of the charge of defiling her
sovereign’s bed. Yet the unbounded looseness of her
former course of living inclined the world to believe the
most scandalous things that could be reported. But all
observed the judgment of Heaven upon the lady Rochford, who had been the principal instrument in the death
of queen Anne Boleyn, her sister-in-law, and that of her
own husband; and her appearing now so enormously profligate tended much to raise their reputations again, in
whose fall her malice and artifices had so great a share. It
was thought, however, extremely cruel to shew such extraordinary severity against the queen’s kindred for not
discovering her former ill life, since the making such a
discovery would have been a very hard instance of duty.
The duchess dowager of Norfolk being her grandmother,
had educated her from a child; and it was said, that for
her to have acquainted the king with her grand-daughter’s
lewd behaviour, when he intended to marry her, as it was
an unheard-of thing, so the not doing it could not have
drawn so high a punishment from any but a prince of the
king’s temper. However he pardoned her, and most of
the rest, though some continued in prison after others
were discharged. That other proviso, which obliged a
young lady to discover her own frailties, if his majesty
should please to make love to her, seemed likewise a
strange piece of tyranny; since if a king, especially one
of so imperious a disposition as Henry VIII, should design
such an honour to any of his subjects, who had failed in,
their former life, they must either disgrace themselves by
publishing so odious a secret, or run the hazard of being
afterwards attainted of high treason. Upon this, some
persons, who were inclined to rally the sex, took occasion
to say, “that after such a regulation, no one, reputed a
virgin, could be induced to marry the king; and therefore
it was not so much choice as necessity, that caused him to
marry a widow two years after.
” But this part of the act
was afterwards repealed in the first parliament of king Edward VI.
se and confinement added to his natural impatience of contradiction, and when in the presence of the bishop of Winchester and others of the popish faction, she had been
, sixth and last queen to Henry
VIII. celebrated for her learning, whose perfections,
though a widow, attracted the heart of this monarch, and
whose prudence preserved her from the effects of his
cruelty and caprice, was the daughter of sir Thomas Parr,
and was married first to Edward Burghe, and secondly to
John Neville, lord Latimer, whose widow she was when
king Henry cast his affections on her. She was early educated in polite literature, as was the fashion of noble
women at that time in England, and in her riper years was
much given to reading and studying the Holy Scriptures.
Several learned men were retained as her chaplains, who
preached to her every day in her privy chamber, and often
touched such abuses as were common in the church. The
king approved of this practice, and often permitted her to
confer with him on religious subjects. But when disease
and confinement added to his natural impatience of contradiction, and when in the presence of the bishop of Winchester and others of the popish faction, she had been
urging her old topic of perfecting the reformation, the
king broke out into this expression after she was retired,
“A good hearing it is, when women become such clerks
and a thing much to mycomfort, to come in mine old age to
be taught by my wife
” Winchester failed not to improve
this opportunity to aggravate the queen’s insolence, to
insinuate the danger of cherishing such a serpent in his
bosom, and to accuse her of treason cloaked with heresy;
and the king was prevailed upon to give a warrant to draw
lip articles to touch her life. The day and hour was appointed, when she was to be seized: but the design being
accidentally discovered to her, she waited upon the king,
who received her kindly, and purposely began a discourse
about religion. She answered, <* That women by -their
creation at first were made subject to men; that they,
being made after the image of God, as the women were
after their image, ought to instruct their wives, who were
to learn of them: and she much more was to be taught of
his majesty, who was a prince of such excellent learning
and wisdom.*' “Not so, by St. Mary,
” said the king,
“you are become a doctor, Kate, able to instruct us and
not to be instructed by us.
” To which she replied, “that
it seemed he had much mistaken her freedom in arguing
with him, since she did it to ejigage him in discourse, to
amuse this painful time of his infirmity, and that she might
receive profit by his learned discourse; in which last point
she had not missed of her aim, always referring herself in
these matters, as she ought to do, to his majesty.
” “And
is it even so, sweetheart?
” said the king, “then we are
perfect friends again.
”
divinity, and became very eminent; appeared with great distinction at the council of Trent, was made bishop of Minori 1547, and archbishop of Conza 1551. He died 1553,
, a celebrated divine of the
sixteenth century, was born in 1487 at Sienna, and taught
law, till the age of thirty, under the name of Lancelot
Politi, but took that of Catharinus upon turning Dominican
in 1515. He then applied to the study of divinity, and became very eminent; appeared with great distinction at the
council of Trent, was made bishop of Minori 1547, and
archbishop of Conza 1551. He died 1553, aged 70, leaving several works, printed at Lyons, 1542, 8vo and at
the end of his “Enarrationes in Genesim,
” Rome, Commentaries on St. Paul’s,
”
and the other canonical epistles, Venice, Remedio alia pestilente Dottrina d'Ochino,
”
Rome,
Antiquitates Christianas,' or the Life and Death of Holy Jesus,” written by Jeremy Taylor, afterward bishop of Down and Connor, Lond. 1676, fol. 4. “Apostolici, or the
, a very learned divine, was born at
Pickwell, in Leicestershire, of which parish his father was
rector, Dec. 30, 1637. On the 9th of May, 1653, he was
admitted into St. JohnVcollege, in Cambridge, where he
took the degree of B. A. in 1656, and that of M. A. in 1660.
In August 1662, he was admitted to the vicarage of Islington, in Middlesex-, and some time after became chaplain
in ordinary to king Charles 11. He took the degree of
D. D. in 1672, and on the 16th of September, 1679, was
collated by the archbishop of Canterbury to the rectory of
Allhallows the Great, in Thames-street, London. In July
1681, he was incorporated D. D. at Oxford, and in
November 1684, he was installed canon of Windsor, upon
the death of Mr. John Rosewell; about which time, as
Mr. Wood tells us r he became rector of Hasely, in Oxfordshire; but that seems to be a mistake, as the rectory
of Hasely is annexed to the deanery of Windsor. He
resigned his rectory of Allhallows in 1689, and the vicarage of Islington in 1691; but on the 19th of November
before, namely, in 1690, he was admitted to the vicarage
of Isleworth, in Middlesex, which being a quiet and retired place, probably suited best his most studious temper.
He published: 1. “Primitive Christianity; or the Religion of the ancient Christians in the first ages of the Gospel,
” London, Tabulae Ecclesiastics,
” tables of the ecclesiastical
writers, Lond. Antiquitates Apostolicae:
or the history of the lives, acts, and martyrdoms of the
holy apostles of our Saviour, and the two evangelists, St.
Mark and St. Luke. To which is added an introductory
Discourse concerning the three great dispensations of the
church, Patriarchal, Mosaical, and Evangelical. Being a
continuation of `Antiquitates Christianas,' or the Life and
Death of Holy Jesus,
” written by Jeremy Taylor, afterward bishop of Down and Connor, Lond. 1676, fol. 4.
“Apostolici, or the History of the lives, acts, deaths, and
martyrdomsof those who were contemporaries with or
immediately succeeded the Apostles as also of the
most eminent of the primitive fathers for the first three
hundred years. To which is added, a Chronology of the
three first ages of the Church,
” Lond. A
Sermon preached before the right honourable the lordmayor, aldermen, and citizens of London, at St. Mary-leBuw, on the fifth of November, M.DC.LXXX.
” London,
1680, 4to. 6. “A Dissertation concerning the Government of the Ancient Church, by bishops, metropolitans,
and patriarchs. More particularly concerning the ancient
power and jurisdiction of the bishops of Rome, and the
encroachments of that upon other sees, especially the see
of Constantinople;
” Lond. Ecclesiastic!,
or the History of the lives, acts, deaths, and writings of
the most eminent Fathers of the Church that flourished in
the fourth century. Wherein, among other things, an
account is given of the rise, growth, and progress of
Arianism, and all other sects of that age descending from
it. Together with an Introduction, containing an historical account of the state of Paganism under the first
Christian emperor,
” Lond. 1682, fol. 8. “A Sermon
preached before the king at Whitehall, on Sunday, January 18, 1684-5, on Psalm iv. 7. Publisheo 1 by his majesties special command,
” Lond. Chartopbylax Ecclesiasticus,
” Lond. Tabulae Ecclesiastics,
” above-mentioned, and a kind of abridgment of the “Historia Literaria,
” and contams a short account of most of the ecclesiastical writers from the birth of Christ to 1517. 1O.
“Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Historia Literaria i. e. A
Literary History of Ecclesiastical Writers, in two parts,
”
fol. the first printed at Lond. A Serious Exhortation, with some important advices
relating to the late cases about Conformity, recommended
to the present dissenters from the Church of England.
” It
is the twenty-second in the “London Cases.
” This very
learned person died at Windsor, on the 4th of August,
1713, and was buried in Islington church, where a monument was erected to his memory. He was an excellent
pud universal scholar, an elegant and polite writer, and a
florid and very eloquent preacher. He was thoroughly
acquainted with the history and constitution of the Christian church. His works, particularly his Lives of the
apostles, Lives of the fathers, and Primitive Christianity,
evince his great knowledge of antiquity, and are justly esteemed the best books written upon those important subjects. Yet the “Historia Literaria
” is perhaps the work
on which his fume will now be thought principally to depend. This very useful work was reprinted at Geneva, in
1705 and 1720, but the best edition is that printed at the
Clarendon press, by subscription, in 2 vols. fol, 1740—
1743, which contains the author’s last corrections and additions, and additions by other hands. What share Mr.
Henry Wharton had in this work will be noticed in our life
of that writer. From a manuscript letter of Cave’s in our
possession, it appears that he had much reason to complain
of Wharton. During the last twelve years of his life Cave
had repeatedly revised this history, and made alterations
and additions equal to one third part of the work, all which
were carefully incorporated in the new edition. The copy
thus improved, he left in the hands of his executors, the
lord chief justice Reeve, and the rev. Dr. Jones, canon of
Windsor, but they both dying soon after the work went
to press, Dr. Daniel Waterland undertook the care of it.
The venerable Dr. Watson, bishop of Llandaff, observes,
that “Casimiri Oudini Commentarius de Scriptoribus Ecclesix, &c.
” Leipsic, Historia Literaria,
” and other works of
the same kind.
equal spirit, dignity, and delicacy. 1. “An Ode on the Death of queen Mary.” 2. “An allusion to the bishop of Cambray’s supplement to Homer.” He married the lady Mary,
In the case of sir John Fenwick, though he had a conviction of his guilt, yet he was so averse to any extraordinary judicial proceedings, that he opposed the bill, as
he did likewise another bill for the resumption of the forfeited estates in Ireland. At the accession of queen Anne,
he was confirmed in all his offices. April 1705 he attended her majesty to Cambridge, and was there created
LL. D. In 1706, himself and his son the marquis of
Harrington were in the number of English peers appointed
commissioners for concluding an union with Scotland; this
was the last of his public employments. He died August
18, 1707. His mien and aspect were engaging and commanding: his address and conversation civil and courteous
in the highest degree. He judged right in the supreme
court; and on any important affair his speeches were
smooth and weighty. As a statesman, his whole deportment came up to his noble birth and his eminent stations:
nor did he want any of what the world call accomplishments. He had a great skill in languages; and read the
Roman authors with great attention: Tacitus was his
favourite. He was a true judge of history, a critic in
poetry, and had a fine hand in music. He had an elegant
taste in painting, and all politer arts; and in architecture
in particular, a genius, skill, and experience beyond any
one person of his age; his house at Chatsworth being a
monument of beauty and magnificence that perhaps is not
exceeded by any palace in Europe. His grace’s genius for
poetry shewed itself particularly in two pieces that are published, and are allowed by the critics to be written with
equal spirit, dignity, and delicacy. 1. “An Ode on the
Death of queen Mary.
” 2. “An allusion to the bishop of
Cambray’s supplement to Homer.
” He married the lady
Mary, daughter of James duke of Ormond, by whom he
had three sons and a daughter.
preserved in manuscript, which Gibber says were once in the possession of Mr. Thomas Richardson and bishop Willis. In 1676, a folio volume was printed containing “letters
The following is a list of her works, almost all of which
are now very scarce, and in considerable demand by the
collectors of literary curiosities: 1. “The World’s Olio,
”
Lond. Nature Picture, drawn by
fancy’s pencil to the life. In this volume there are several feigned stories of natural descriptions, as comical,
tragical, and tragicomical, poetical, romancical, philosophical, and historical, both in prose and verse, some all
verse, some all prose, some mixt, partly prose and partly
verse. Also there are some morals, and some dialogues;
but they are as the advantage loaf of bread to the baker.'s
dozen, and a true story at the latter end, wherein there is
no feigning,
” London, Orations of
divers sorts, accommodated to divers places,
” Lond. Plays,
” Lond. Philosophical and
Physical Opinions,
” Lond. Observations
upon Experimental Philosophy: to which is added, the
Description of a new World,
” Lond. Philosophical Letters or Modest
Reflections upon some opinions in Natural Philosophy,
maintained by several famous and learned authors of this
age, expressed by way of letters,
” Lond. Poems and Phancies,
” Lond. CCXI Sociable Letters,
” Lond. 1664, fol. 10. “The
Life of the thrice noble, high, and puissant Prince William Cavendishe, duke, marquiss, and earl of Newcastle,
&c.
” Lond. De Vita & rebus
gestis nobilissimi illustrissimique Principis Gulielmi, Ducis Novo-Castrensis, commentarii: Ab excellentissima
principe Margareta, ipsius Uxore sanctissima conscripti,
et ex Anglico in Latinum conversi,
” Lond. Plays, never before printed,
” Lond. The unnatural Tragedy,
” is a
whole scene written against Camden’s Britannia! Three
more volumes in folio, of her poems, are preserved in manuscript, which Gibber says were once in the possession of
Mr. Thomas Richardson and bishop Willis. In 1676, a
folio volume was printed containing “letters and poems in
honour of the incomparable princess Margaret duchess of
Newcastle.
” These, says Mr. Park, consist of such inflated eulogies on her grace’s parts, from the rector magnificus of Leyden, and the academical caputof Cambridge,
to the puffs of Tom Shadwell, that it must have been
enough to turn any brain previously diseased with a
cacocthes scribendi.
ts, at which time professor Leusden’s certificate was read publicly. In 1661, he was ordained by the bishop of Oxford; and in 1662, he published the “Life of his Father.”
, son of the above, was born at
Wivenhoe, about the year 1637, his father being then
minister of the place. The first rudiments of learning he
received from his father, whom he attended in his banishment, and lived with him several years in Holland, where
he studied the oriental languages under Mr. Robert Sheringham, at Rotterdam, with equal diligence and success.
About the year 1656, he was sent to the university of
Utrecht, where he distinguished himself by his extraordinary skill in the oriental languages, in such a manner as
did honour to his country. On the 14th of December,
1657, he maintained a thesis in relation to the Syriac version of the New Testament, and printed his discourse, as
he did some time after another dissertation on the usefulness of the Hebrew language in the study of theoretic philosophy, Utrecht, 1637, 4to; which treatises sufficiently
shew both the extent of his learning, and the solidity of his
judgment. When he left Utrecht, the celebrated professor.
Leusden subscribed an ample testimonial in his favour, and
expresses a great regard for his person, as well as his talents.
Ou his return to England, he went to Oxford, and was
entered of Merton college, for the sake of M,r. Samuel
Clark, famous for his thorough knowledge of the oriental
languages. Our author shewed his loyalty by writing a
copy of Hebrew verses on his majesty’s restoration, having
been pretty early in the year 1660, admitted to the degree
of bachelor of arts, at which time professor Leusden’s certificate was read publicly. In 1661, he was ordained by
the bishop of Oxford; and in 1662, he published the
“Life of his Father.
” In all probability he might have
obtained very considerable preferment, if his principles
had not led him to nonconformity. When he retired from
the university, he was taken into the family of sir Anthony
Irbj a of Lincolnshire, where b officiated for some years
as chaplain; but the air of that country disagreeing with
him, and the family going down thither on account of the
plague in 1665, he was obliged to quit it, and lived afterwards with the lady Armin till about the year 1670, when
he gathered a congregation of dissenters in the city of
Westminster, to whom be preached with some interruption
from the severities of the government, for about seven
years, tiil falling into a bad state of health, he died of 4
gradual decay, April 10, 1677, being then about forty years
of age. He was buried in the New church in. Tothil-street
Westminster, at which time his friend and fellow-collegian,
Mr. Henry Hurst, preached his funeral sermon; as did also
>lr. Nath. Vincent in another place. He was a man whose
learning rendered him admired, and his virtues beloved by
all parties. Anthony Wood, speaking of the praises bestowed upon him by Mr. Hurst in his discourse, t>ives them
also his sanction; “they were,
” he -ays, “deservedly
spoken.
” His congregation followed the advice he gave
them on his death-bed; for he told them that he knew
none so proper to be his successor, as a certain Northamptonshire minister, who wrote against Dr. Sherlock, Mr.
Vincent Alsop, whom they accordingly chose. The
changes of religious opinion in this congregation may be
estimated by those who are acquainted with the character
of Mr. Alsop’s successors, Dr. Calamy, Mr. Samuel Say,
Dr. Obadiah Hughes, and the late Dr. Kippis. The only
publication of Mr. Cawton’s, besides those mentioned, was
a single sermon entitled “Balaam’s Wish,
” London,
Low Countries, and taken up his residence in the vicinity of Westminster-abbey, vhen Thomas Milling, bishop of Hereford, held the abbctship of St. Peter’s in commendam;
There is no account whatever of the typographical labours of Caxton from the year 1471 to 1474; although it is
extremely probable that a curious and active mind like his,
just engaged in the exercise of a newly-discovered and important art, would have turned its attention to a variety of
objects for publication. Of the exact period of his return
to his native country no information has yet been obtained,
and what Oldys and Lewis have advanced on this subject
amounts to mere conjecture: still less credit is to be given
to the fabricated story of Henry VI. paving sent a person
to Holland who brought si way Frederick Corsellis, a vorkxnan, and that Caxton had a hand in this seduction. All
that is certainly known is, that previously to the year
1477, Caxton, after printing there the three works nentioncd, had quitted the Low Countries, and taken up his
residence in the vicinity of Westminster-abbey, vhen
Thomas Milling, bishop of Hereford, held the abbctship
of St. Peter’s in commendam; and he had no doubt brought
over with him all the necessary implements and materials
of his trade. The particular spot where Caxton first sxercised his business, if we may credit Stowe, was an old
chapel about the entrance of the abbey, and Oldys, somewhat whimsically, concludes that the name of chapel, which
is sometimes given to a printing room, is derived from this
circumstance; but what is called a chapel, in a printing-office, is not a building, but a convocation of journeymenprinters, to inquire into and punish certain faults in each
other. Where the place occurs in any of Caxton’s publications, Westminster is mentioned generally, but the
greater number of the productions of his press specify only
the. date of their execution. According to Bagford, Caxton’s ofHce was afterwards removed into King-street, but
whereabouts is not known; and we have yet to regret, as of
more importance, that the precise period of his first essay
in the art of printing is a matter of conjecture. Mr, Dibdin
has summed up the evidence with precision and judgment;
and to his valuahle work we must refer the reader, as well
as for a chronological detail of the works which issued from
the Caxton press. Exclusive of the labours attached to
the working of Caxton’s press, as a new art, he contrived,
though “well stricken in years,
” to translate no fewer
than 5000 closely printed folio pages; and, as Oldys expivsses it, “kept preparing copy for the press to the very
last.
” From the evidence of Wynkyn de Worde, in the
colophon of his edition of the “Vitas Patrum,
” translated
out of French into English by William Caxton, of Westminster, late dead,
” and that he finished it “at the last
day of his life.
” He might have chosen this work as his
final literary effort, from a consideration, according to
Oldys, that “from the examples of quiet and solemn retirement therein set forth, it might farther serve to wean
his mind from all worldly attachments, exalt it above the
solicitudes of this life, and inure him to that repose and
tranquillity with which he seems to have designed it.
”
philologist, was born at Verona in 1541, and was brought to France in his infancy, by John Fregosa, bishop of Agen: here he was educated, and for some time served in the
, a learned philologist, was born
at Verona in 1541, and was brought to France in his infancy, by John Fregosa, bishop of Agen: here he was
educated, and for some time served in the army, after
which his patron sent him to Rome, with a view to the ecclesiastical life. Ceruti, however, being disinclined to
this, returned to his native country, and married. He
afterwards opened a school at Verona, in which he had
great success, and along with Guarinoni was at the head
of the academy of the Moderati. In 1585 he published an
edition of Horace at Verona, with a paraphrase, 4to, and
in 1597 an edition of Juvenal and Persius, 4to. He also
wrote commentaries on some parts of Cicero, and on the
Georgics of Virgil, but it does not appear that they were
printed. His other published works are, two Letters in
the “Amphotides Scioppiana;
” a “Dialogus de Comcedia,
” Verona, De recta adolescentulorum institutione,
” and a collection of Latin
poems in
ried in St. Andrew’s church. He appears to have been related to Dr. William Cha-derton, successively bishop of Chester and Lincoln, of whom some account is given by Peck
, first master of Emanuel-college, Cambridge, and a benefactor to that house, was
born of an ancient family at Chatterton, in Lancashire, in
1546. His parents were papists, and educated him in that
religion, sending him afterwards to study law in one of the
inns of court, but in the twentieth year of his age, he renounced this pursuit, and went to Cambridge, where his
talents and industry recommended him to a scholarship in
Christ’s-college. His father, enraged at this, sent him a
bag with a groat in it, and told him he might beg, as he
meant to disinherit him, and afterwards executed his threat.
Young Chaderton, however, persisted in his studies, and
in 1567, when B.A., was chosen fellow of his college. In
1578 he commenced B, D. and in the same year preached
a sermon at St. Paul’s cross, which he afterwards printed.
He was then chosen lecturer of St. Clement’s church,
Cambridge, where he preached for about sixteen years,
much followed and admired. Such was his reputation for
learning and piety, that when sir Walter Mildmay refounded Emanuel college, in 1584, he chose Chaderton
for the first master, and on his expressing some reluctance,
declared that if Chaderton would not be master, the foundation should not go on. In the beginning of the reign
of James I. he was one of the four divines for the conference at Hampton-court, and the same year was chosen
one of the translators of the Bible, and was one of the
Cambridge divines who translated from Chronicles to Canticles inclusive. In 1612, when the prince elector palatine
visited Cambridge, he requested Mr. Chaderton to commence D. D. with which he complied; and having regretted
that the founder of Emanuel had provided for only three
fellows, he made such application among his friends, as to
make provision for twelve fellows, and above forty scholars,
and procured some church livings for the college. Towards the close of his life, when Arminian doctrines became prevalent, dreading lest he might have an Arminian
successor, he resigned in favour of Dr. Preston, but survived him, and lived also to see Drs. Sancroft and Holdsworth masters. He was a man of acknowledged piety,
benevolence, and learning, and lived in great respect for
many years after his resignation. He died Nov. 1640,
aged about ninety-four, and was buried in St. Andrew’s
church. He appears to have been related to Dr. William
Cha-derton, successively bishop of Chester and Lincoln,
of whom some account is given by Peck in the preface to
his “Desiderata.
” Besides the sermon noticed above,
Dr. L. Chaderton wrote a treatise on Justification, which
Anthony Thysius, professor of divinity at Leyden, published with other tracts on the same subject; and some of
his Mss. are still in the public libraries, particularly in
the Brit, Mus, among the Harleian Mss. Moreri says his
“Life
” was published by William Dillingham, at Cambridge, in 1700, but this we have not seen.
his great address, his wit, and love of letters, made him almost universally known: and in 1663, the bishop of Bayeux introduced him to cardinal Mazarine, who shewed him
, a Jesuit of uncommon abilities, and confessor to Lewis XIV. was born in the chateau
of Aix, in 1624, of an ancient but reduced family. He
gave early indications of talents when at school, and performed his philosophical exercises under father de Vaux,
who was afterwards advanced to the highest employments in
his order. When he was arrived at a proper age, he was
ordained priest; and became afterwards professor of divinity in the province of Lyons, and rector and provincial of
a college there. He spent at several seasons a good deal
of time in Paris, where his great address, his wit, and love
of letters, made him almost universally known: and in
1663, the bishop of Bayeux introduced him to cardinal
Mazarine, who shewed him many marks of favour, and
offered him his patronage. In 1665, he presented la
Chaise to the king, as a person of whose great abilities
and merit he was well convinced, and afterwards got him
admitted into the council of conscience, which indeed was
no less than to make him coadjutor to the confessor, and
when the cardinal died, he was made, in 1675, confessor
to the king; and about ten years after, was the principal
adviser and director of his marriage with madame de Maintenon. The king was then arrived at an age when confessors have more than an ordinary influence: and la Chaise
found himself a minister of state, without expecting, and
almost before he perceived it. He did business regularly
with the king, and immediately saw all the lords and all
the prelates at his feet. He had made himself a master in
the affairs of the church; which, by the disputes that often
arose between the courts of France and Rome, were become affairs of state.
Yet, in spite of all his address and the influence which
he had gained over the king, he was sometimes out of
favour with his master, and in danger of being disgraced.
Provoked at the ill success of the affair concerning the
electorate of Cologn in 1689, the king shewed his displeasure to the confessor, by whose counsels he had been influenced. La Chaise excused himself, by laying the blame
upon the marquis de Louvois; but the king told him with
some indignation, “that an enterprise suggested by Jesuits
had never succeeded; and that it would be better if they
would confine themselves to teaching their scholars, and
never presume to meddle in affairs of state.
” La Chaise
was very solicitous to establish an interest with madam e de
Maintenon; but does not appear to have done it effectually, till that favourite found herself unable, by all her
intrigues and contrivances, to remove him from the place
of confessor. The Jesuit, it has been said, had not religion enough for this devout lady. He loved pleasures,
had a taste for magnificence, and was thought too lukewarm in the care of his master’s conscience. The jealousy
and dislike with which she regarded him were expressed in
her letters; but her unfavourable representations of his
temper and character were counteracted by those of the
duke of St. Simon, who describes him as mild and moderate, humane and modest, possessed of honour and probity, and though much attached to his family, perfectly
disinterested. La Chaise died Jan. 1709, and possessed
to the very last so great a share of favour and esteem with
the king, that his majesty consulted him upon his death-bed about the choice of his successor.
Italian. He enjoyed great intimacy with the most considerable men in England, with sir Henry Savile, bishop Andrews, sir Thomas Boclley, sir Thomas Edmondes, sir Dudley
, esq. was born about the middle of January 1552, and was educated at Cambridge. To the knowledge of the learned languages, which he cultivated there, he added that of the French and Italian. He enjoyed great intimacy with the most considerable men in England, with sir Henry Savile, bishop Andrews, sir Thomas Boclley, sir Thomas Edmondes, sir Dudley Carleton, and sir Ralph Win wood. In the confidence of the last of these he had a very great share, while that honest and able minister was secretary of state, and the character of the latter appears in a very advantageous light in the letters of Mr. Chamberlain. Having a fortune sufficient to satisfy a quiet and unambitious temper, he enjoyed the satisfactions of private life in the society of his friends till a good old age, dying after the year 1626, and before April 1631, for his name does not appear among those of the commissioners for the repairing of St. Paul’s, in the second commission dated the 10th of that month, though he had been appointed a commissioner in the first. His correspondence is in the British Museum.
nce abroad, in his capacity as secretary to the society for promoting Christian knowledge. By one of bishop Atterbury’s letters it appears that he once endeavoured to obtain
, son to the preceding, was
admitted into Trinity college, Oxford, 1685; but it does
not appear that he took any degree. He continued his
father’s “Angliae Notitia,
” or “Present State,
” as long
as he lived, and it was continued after his death until 1755,
which, we believe, is the last edition. He translated, 1.
from French and Spanish, “The manner of making Tea,
Coffee, and Chocolate, London,
” A Treasure of Health,
” London,
The Arguments of the books
and chapters of the Old and New Testament, with practical observations written originally in French, by the rev.
Mr. Ostervald, professor of divinity, and one of the ministers of the church at Neufchatel in Swisserland, and by
him presented to the society for promoting Christian
knowledge,
” Lond. The Lives of
the French Philosophers, translated from the French of M.
de Fontenelle, republished since in 1721, under the title
of
” Memoirs of the Royal Academy of Sciences in Paris,
epitomized, with t[ie lives of the late members of that society,“8vo. 5.
” The Religious Philosopher; or, the
right use of contemplating the works of the Creator, &c.
translated from the original Dutch of Dr. Nieuwentyt,“Lond. 1713, &c. 3 vols. 8vo, reprinted several times since
in 8vo, and once in 4to. 6.
” The History of the Reformation in and about the Low Countries, translated from the
Dutch of Gerrard Brandt,“Lond. 1721, &c. 4 vols. fol.
7.
” The Lord’s Prayer in Dissertations historical, critical, theological, and moral, on the most memorable events of the
Old and New Testaments; wherein the spirit of the sacred
writings is shewn, their authority confirmed, and the sentiments of the primitive fathers, as well as the modern,
critics, with regard to the difficult passages therein, considered and compared; vol. I. comprising the events related
in the Books of Moses to which are added, chronological
tables, fixing the date of each event, and connecting the
several dissertations together,
” one Chamberlayne, secretary to the
reformers, and to the committee for propagating religion
in the Indies.
” There are some of tylr. Chamberlayne’s
letters in bishop Nicolson’s “Epistolary Correspondence
”
lately published. The bishop wrote a preface to Mr. Chamberlayne’s “Lord’s Prayer in 100 Languages.
”
and gives the inventor an honourable rank among the improvers of art. In 1723 we find him attending bishop Atterbury in the Tower, in lieu of Dr. Freind, who was himself
, an eminent man-midwife,
was grandson to Dr. Peter Chamberlen, who, with his
fathers and uncles, were physicians to the kings James I.
Charles I. and II. James II. William, and queen Anne.
He was born in 1664, and educated at Trinity college,
Cambridge, where he took his master’s degree in 1683,
and that of M. D. in 1690. He has a Latin poem in the
“Hymenæus Cantabrigiensis,
” on the marriage of prince
George of Denmark with the princess Anne, 1683. He, his
father, and brothers, invented among them an obstetric
forceps, with which they were enabled to deliver women with
safety in cases where, before this discovery, the child was
usually lost. In 1672 he went to Paris, but happening to
be unsuccessful in a case there, he thought it adviseable to
remove to Holland, where he is said to have succeeded
better. Here he imparted his secret to two eminent practitioners, and received a considerable reward. On his
return to London he had great practice, and realized a handsome fortune. In 1683 he published his translation of
“Mauriceau’s Midwifery,
” a work in great request, and
republished as late as 1755. Mauriceau mentions him
often in some of his works, but always with the littleness
of jealousy. Chamberlen’s forceps, improved by Smellie
and some other practitioners, continues in use, and gives
the inventor an honourable rank among the improvers of
art. In 1723 we find him attending bishop Atterbury in
the Tower, in lieu of Dr. Freind, who was himself a prisoner. He died at his house in Covent-garden, June 17,
1728; and a very fine marble monument was erected to his
memory in Westminster-abbey at the expence of Edmund,
duke of Buckingham. The long Latin epitaph, the production of bishop Atterbury, records, besides his skill, his
benevolence, liberality, and many other amiable personal
characteristics. Dr. Chamberlen was thrice married; and
his widow, the daughter of sir Willoughby Aston, bart.
was afterwards married to sir Thomas Crew, of Utkinton,
in Cheshire, knight, who also left her a widow, but she
died suddenly, April 6, 1734, and that year Dr. Chamberlen’s library was sold by Fletcher Gyles.
overnment des princesses aux empires et royaumes.” Machenzie gives a full analysis of all these, but bishop Nicolson has not so high an opinion of the soundness of the
, a Scotch historian, priest, and lawyer, was born in the shire of Ross
about the year 1530, and educated in the university of
Aberdeen. From thence he went to France and Italy,
and continued some time, particularly at Bologna, where
in 1556 he was a pupil of Marianus Sozenus. After his
return to Scotland he was appointed by queen Mary, parson of Suddy, and chancellor of Ross. He was soon after
employed in digesting the laws of Scotland, and was principally concerned in publishing the acts of parliament of
that kingdom by authority in 1566, which, from the type,
were commonly called the “Black Acts.
” Not long after
this he was appointed one of the lords of session, by the
title of lord Ormond, and continued attached to the queen
until the decline of her power, when he and her other adherents were obliged to go abroad. He then went into
Spain, and to France, in both which countries he was
kindly received by their respective sovereigns, Philip and
Charles IX. to which last in 1572 he presented his “Abridgment of the History of Scotland, France, and Ireland.
” He
died at Paris in Histoire abrege de tous les Roys c'e France, Angleterre, et
Escosse.
” 2. “La recherche des singularitez plus remarkables concernant le estat d'Ecosse.
” 3. “Discours
de la legitime succession des femmes aux possessions de
leurs parens, et du government des princesses aux empires
et royaumes.
” Machenzie gives a full analysis of all these,
but bishop Nicolson has not so high an opinion of the
soundness of the author’s principles. Dempster and others
highly extol his learning and character.
ate as their own talents were conspicuous. At Oxford, he enjoyed the intimacy of Thurlow, afterwards bishop of Durham: and his Vinerian lectures were attended by many pupils,
, for several years chief justice of the supreme court of judicature in Bengal, a man of too exalted merit to be passed with a slight notice, was born in 1737, at Newcastle on Tyne, the eldest son of Mr. Robert Chambers, a respectable attorney of that town. He was educated, as well as his brothers, at the school of Mr. Moises in Newcastle, which had also the honour of training his younger friends sir William Scott and the present lord chancellor, whose attachment to him, thus commenced almost in infancy, was continued not only without abatement, but with much increase, to the very end of his life. Mr. Chambers, and the Scotts afterwards, went to Oxford without any other preparation than was afforded by this Newcastle school, but his abilities soon rendered him conspicuous; and in July 1754 he was chosen an exhibitioner of Lincoln college. He afterwards became a fellow of University college, where he was again united with the Scotts, and with other eminent men, among whom it may suffice to mention sir Thomas Plomer and the ]ate sir William Jones. In January 1762, Mr. Chambers was elected by the university Vinerian professor of the laws of England; a public testimony to his abilities, of the strongest and most unequivocal nature. In 1766, the earl of Lichfield, then chancellor of Oxford, gave him the appointment of principal of New-inn hall; which office, as it required no residence or attendance, he continued to hold through life. He was now advancing honourably in the practice of the law, and was employed in many remarkable causes, in which his professional abilities were evinced. About the same period, and probably by the same means, he attracted the notice and lasting friendship of the ablest men of the time, many of whose names have since been absorbed in well-earned titles of nobility. Among these may be mentioned, the earls Bathurst, Mansfield, Liverpool, and Rosslyn, lords Ashburton, Thurlow, Auckland, and Alvanley; to which list we may add the names of Johnson, Burke, Goldsmith, Garrick, and others of that class, whose judgment of mankind was as accurate as their own talents were conspicuous. At Oxford, he enjoyed the intimacy of Thurlow, afterwards bishop of Durham: and his Vinerian lectures were attended by many pupils, who have since done honour to the profession of the law, or to other public situations. It is a strong proof that his knowledge and talents were highly estimated at an early period, that in 1768, when he was only thirty-one years old, he was offered the appointment of attorney-general in Jamaica, which, from various considerations, he thought proper to decline. From this time he continued the career of his profession, and of his academical labours, till, in 1773, another situation of public trust and honour was proposed to him, which he was more easily induced to accept. This was the appointment of second judge to the superior court of judicature in Bengal, then first established. On this occasion, the esteem, and regard of the university of Oxford for their Vinerian professor was fully evinced. The convocation allowed three years for the chance of his return, from ill health or any other cause: during which interval his office was held for him, and his lectures read by a deputy. Immediately before his departure for the East Indies, Mr. Chambers married Miss Wilton, the only daughter of the celebrated statuary of that name, and his mother, Mrs. Chambers, a woman of uncommon virtues, talents, and accomplishments, undertook the voyage with them, and continued an inmate in their family till her death, which happened in 1782. They sailed for India in April, 1774; and the climate not proving unfriendly, the Vinerian professorship was in due time resigned.
vent, and, as generally supposed, was the first public professor of scholastic divinity. He was made bishop of Chalons in 1113, and died in Jan. 1121. None of his works
, in Latin Campellensis,
was a native of the village of Champeaux near Melun, in
the province of Brie, and flourished in the eleventh and
twelfth centuries. After studying law under Ansehn, dean
of the cathedral church of Melun, he was ordained
archdeacon of Paris, and appointed to read lectures on logic in
the schools of that church. Some time after he retired
with some of his pupils to a monastery, in which was St.
Victor’s chapel, near Paris, and there founded the abbey
of regular canons. He continued to teach in that convent,
and, as generally supposed, was the first public professor of
scholastic divinity. He was made bishop of Chalons in
1113, and died in Jan. 1121. None of his works are extant, for the “Dialogue between a Christian and a Jew,
”
printed under his name in the “Bibliotheca Patrum,
”
belongs to Gilbert of Westminster. It is thought that he
wrote a book of sentences before Peter Lombard, of which
a ms copy was in the library of Notre-dame at Paris. He
maintained the doctrine of the Realists, who held that all
individual things partake of the one essence of their species, and are only modified by accident. He had the appellation of the Venerable Doctor. Brucker has given a
Jong account of his disputes with Abelard, who was one of
his scholars, and who ventured to question the opinions of
his master, and leaving him, opened a school of his own at
Melun, where the splendour of his superior talents in disputation attracted general admiration, and eclipsed the fame
of Champeaux.
where at the age of twenty-five, he commenced M. A. was ordained priest, and made chaplain to Lloyd, bishop of Winchester, in 1693. He was prebendary of Pipa Minor, April
, a learned English prelate, was
the son of Samuel Chandler, esq. of the city of Dublin,
by his wife Elizabeth, whose maiden name was Calvert.
Our prelate was probably born in that city, but received
his academical education at Emanuel college, Cambridge,
where at the age of twenty-five, he commenced M. A. was
ordained priest, and made chaplain to Lloyd, bishop of
Winchester, in 1693. He was prebendary of Pipa Minor,
April 27, 1697, and afterwards canon of Lichfield and
Worcester. He was nominated to the bishopric of Lichfield, Sept. 5, 1717, and consecrated at Lambeth, Nov. 17.
From that see he was translated to Durham, Nov. 5, 1730;
and it was then publicly said that he gave 9000l. for that
opulent see, which is scarcely credible. He was, it is universally acknowledged, a prelate of great erudition, having
rendered himself justly valued and esteemed as a worthy
father of the church of England, and patron of the truth,
by his learning and convincing writings, particularly “A
Defence of Christianity from the prophecies of the Old
Testament, wherein are considered all the objections
against this kind of proof advanced in a late Discourse on
the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion,
” London, The Scheme of Literal Prophecy considered,
” and
this occasioned a second answer from the learned bishop,
entitled “A Vindication of the Defence of Christianity,
from the prophecies of the Old Testament,
” published in
Chronological Dissertation
” prefixed to Arnald’s Ecclesiasticus, and a preface to a
posthumous work of Dr. Ralph Cudworth’s, entitled “A
Treatise concerning eternal and immutable MotaKty.
” He
died at his house in Grosvenor-square July 20, 1750, of
the stone, several large ones being found in his body,
when opened, and was buried at Farnham Royal, in the
county of Bucks. Whilst he was bishop of Durham, he
gave 50l. towards augmenting Monkwearmouth living, also
200l. to purchase a house for the minister of Stockton, and
2000l. to be laid out in a purchase for the benefit of clergymen’s widows in the diocese of Durham; and it is recorded, much to his honour, that he never sold any of his
patent offices.
, biblical, and oriental learning. Among the pupils of Mr. Jones, were Mr. Joseph Butler, afterwards bishop of Durham, and Mr. Thomas Seeker, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury,
, an eminent dissenting minister, was born at Hungerford, in Berkshire, in 1693, where his father was then pastor of a congregation of protestant dissenters. He early discovered a genius for literature, which was carefully cultivated; and being placed under proper masters, he made a very uncommon progress in classical learning, and especially in the Greek tongue. As it was intended by his friends to bring him up for the ministry, he was sent to an academy at Bridgewater; but was sbort removed to Gloucester, that he might become a pupil to Mr. Samuel Jones, a dissenting minister of great erudition and abilities, who had opened an academy in that city, afterwards transferred to Tewkesbury. Such was the attention of that gentleman to the morals of his pupils, and to their progress in literature, and such the skill and discernment with which he directed their studies, that it was a singular advantage to be placed under so able and accomplished a tutor. Chandler made the proper use of so happy a situation, applying himself to his studies with great assiduity, and particularly to critical, biblical, and oriental learning. Among the pupils of Mr. Jones, were Mr. Joseph Butler, afterwards bishop of Durham, and Mr. Thomas Seeker, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, with whom he contracted a friendship that continued to the end of their lives, notwithstanding the different views by which their conduct was afterwards directed, and the different situations in which they were placed.
on was soon followed by another, entitled “A Vindication of a passage of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London, in his second Pastoral Letter, against the misre
Dr. Chandler’s other works were: 1. “Reflections on
the Conduct of the Modern Deists, in their late writings
against Christianity,
” A Vindication of the
Antiquity and Authority of Daniel’s Prophecies,
” History of the Inquisition,
” A large
introduction, concerning the rise and progress of persecution, and the real and pretended causes of it.
” This
was attacked by Dr. Berriman, in a pamphlet entitled
“Brief Remarks on Mr. Chandler’s Introduction to the
History of the Inquisition.
” Our author published, in the
form of a letter, an answer to these “Remarks,
” which
engaged Dr. Berriman to write “A Review of his Remarks,
” to which Mr. Chandler replied in “A second
Letter to William Berriman, D. D. &c. in which his Review of his Hemarks on the Introduction to the History of
the Inquisition is considered, and the Characters of St.
Athanasius, and Martyr Laud, are farther stated and supported.
” This publication was soon followed by another,
entitled “A Vindication of a passage of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London, in his second Pastoral
Letter, against the misrepresentations of William Berriman, D. D. in a Letter to his Lordship;
” and here the
controversy ended. 4. “The Dispute better adjusted
about the proper time of applying for a repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts,
” &c.“1732, 8vo. 5.
” A Paraphrase and critical Commentary on the prophecy of Joel,“1735, 4to. This was part of a commentary on the whole
of the prophets, which he did not live to finish. 6.
” The
History of Persecution,“1736, 8vo. 7.
” A Vindication
of the History of the Old Testament,“in answer to Morgan’s
” Moral Philosopher,“1741, 8vo. 8.
” A Defence
of the Prime Ministry and Character of Joseph,“1742, 8vo.
9.
” The Witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ
re-examined, and their Testimony proved consistent,“1744, 8vo. 10.
” The Case of Subscription to explanatory articles of faith, &c. calmly considered,“1748, 8vo.
11.
” A Letter to the rev. Mr. John Guyse, occasioned by
his two sermojis on Acts ix. 20. in which the scripture notion of preaching Christ is stated and defended, and Mr.
Guyse’s charges against his brethren are considered and
proved groundless,“1729, 8vo. 12.
” A second Letter
to the rev. Mr. John Guyse, in which Mr. Guyse’s latitude
and restrictive ways of preaching Christ are proved to be
entirely the same; the notion of preaching Christ is farther cleared and defended; the charge alledged against
'him of defaming his brethren is maintained and supported;
and his solemn arts in controversy are considered and exposed,“1730, 8vo. 13.
” A Letter to the right hon. the
Lord Mayor; occasioned by his lordship’s nomination of
five persons, disqualified by act of parliament, as fit and
proper persons to serve the office^ of Sheriffs, in which the
nature and design of the corporation act is impartially considered and stated,“1738, 8vo. 14.
” An Account of
the Conferences held in Nicholas-lane, Feb. 13, 1734,
between two Romish priests and some protestant divines;
with some remarks on a pamphlet entitled The Conferences, c. truly stated/ 7 1735, 8vo. 15. “Cassiodori
Senatoris Complexiones in Epistolas, Acta Apostolorum,
& Apocalypsin, e vetustissimis Canonicorum Veronensium
membranis nuper erutee. Editio altera ad Florentinam
fideliter expressa, opera & cura Samuelis Chandleri,
”
A short and plain Catechism, being
an explanation of the Creed, Ten Commandments, and
the Lord’s Prayer, by way of question and answer,
” Great Britain’s Memorial against the Pretender and Popery; to which is annexed, the method of
dragooning the French protestants after the revocation of
the edict of Nantes,
” Many occasional sermons.
”
Dr. Chandler also wrote about fifty papers in the weekly
publication called “The Old Whig, or Consistent Protestant.
” In A Paraphrase and Notes
on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians,
with doctrinal and practical Observations; together with
a critical and practical Commentary on the two Epistles of
St. Paul to the Thessalonians.
” In this there are some
valuable criticisms, but all are not entitled to that praise.
Dr. Chandler also left in his interleaved Bible, a large
number of critical notes, chiefly in Latin, and which were
intended to be published; but the design has not yet been
executed, and the four gentlemen to whom they were intrusted, Dr. Kippis, Mr. Farmer, Dr. Price, and Dr. Savage, are all dead, nor have we heard in what manner they
disposed of the copy.
at our Saviour’s crucifixion. In 1738 Dr. Chapman published a sermon preached at the consecration of bishop Mavvson, and four other single sermons, 1739, 1743, 1748, and
, D. D. was the son of the rev. William Chapman, rector of Stratfield-say in Hampshire,
where he was probably born in 1704. He was educated at
King’s college, Cambridge, A. B. 1727, and A. M. 1731.
His first promotion was the rectory of Mersham in Kent,
and of Alderton, with the chapel of Smeeth; to which he
was appointed in 1739 and 1744, being then domestic
chaplain to archbishop Potter. He was also archdeacon
of Sudbury, and treasurer of Chichester, two options.
Being educated at Eton, he was a candidate for the provostship of that college, and lost it by a small majority,
and after a most severe contest with Dr. George. Among
his pupils he had the honour to class the first lord Camden, Dr. Ashton, Horace Walpole, Jacob Bryant, sir W.
Draper, sir George Baker, and others who afterwards attained to considerable distinction in literature. His first
publication was entitled “The Objections of a late anonymous writer (Collins) against the book of Daniel, considered/' Cambridge, 1728, 8vo. This was followed by his
” Remarks on Dr. Middleton’s celebrated Letter to Dr.
Waterland,“published in 1731, and which has passed
through three editions. In his
” Eusebius,“2 vols. 8vo,
he defended Christianity against the objections of Mor-gan, and against those of Tindal in his
” Primitive Antiquity explained and vindicated.“The first volume of
Eusebius, published in 1739, was dedicated to archbishop
Potter; and when the second appeared, in 1741, Mr.
Chapman styled himself chaplain to his grace. In the
same year he was made archdeacon of Sudbury, and was
honoured with the diploma of D. D. by the university of
Oxford. He is at this time said to have published the
” History of the ancient Hebrews vindicated, by Theophanes Cantabrigiensis,“8vo but this was the production
of Dr. Squire. He published two tracts relating to
” Phlegon,“in answer to Dr. Sykes, who had maintained
that the eclipse mentioned by that writer had no relation to
the wonderful darkness that happened at our Saviour’s crucifixion. In 1738 Dr. Chapman published a sermon
preached at the consecration of bishop Mavvson, and four
other single sermons, 1739, 1743, 1748, and 1752. In a
dissertation written in elegant Latin, and addressed to
Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Tunstall, then public orator of the
university of Cambridge, and published with his Latin
epistle to Dr. Middleton concerning the genuineness of
some of Cicero’s epistles, 1741, Dr. Chapman proved that
Cicero published two editions of his Academics; an original thought that had escaped all former commentators,
and which has been applauded by Dr. Ross, bishop of Exeter, in his edition of Cicero’s
” Epistolse ad familiares,“1749. In 1744 Mr. Tunstall published
” Observations on
the present Collection of Epistles between Cicero and M.
Brutus, representing several evident marks of forgery in
those epistles,“&c. to which was added a
” Letter from
Dr. Chapman, on the ancient numeral characters of the
Roman legions.“Dr. Middleton had asserted, that the
Roman generals, when they had occasion to raise new
legions in distant parts of the empire, used to name them
according to the order in which they themselves had raised
them, without regard to any other legions whatever. This
notion Dr. Chapman controverts and confutes. According
to Dr. Middleton there might have been two thirtieth legions in the empire. This Dr. Chapman denies to have
been customary from the foundation of the city to the time
when Brutus was acting against Anthony, but affirms nothing of the practice after the death of Brutus. To this
Dr. Middleton made no reply. In 1745 Dr. Chapman was
employed in assisting Dr. Pearce, afterwards bishop of
Rochester, in his edition of
” Cicero de Officiis.“About
this time Dr. Chapman introduced Mr. Tunstall and Mr.
Hall to archbishop Potter, the one as his librarian, the
other as his chaplain, and therefore had some reason to
resent their taking an active part against him in the option
cause, though they both afterwards dropped it. Dr. Chapman’s above-mentioned attack on Dr. Middleton, which he
could not parry, and his interposition in defence of his
much-esteemed friend Dr. Waterland, provoked Dr. Middleton to retaliate in 1746, by assailing him in what he
thought a much more vulnerable part, in his Charge to the
archdeaconry of Sudbury, entitled <e Popery the true bane
of letters.
” In would wash him as white
as snow.
” Thinking his case partially stated by Dr. Burn,
in his “Ecclesiastical Law,' 1 vol. I. (article Bishops), as
it was taken from the briefs of his adversaries, he expostulated with him on the subject by letter, to which the doctor
candidly replied,
” that he by no means thought him criminal, and in the next edition of his work would certainly
add his own representation." On this affair, however, Dr.
Hurd passes a very severe sentence in his correspondence
with Warburton lately published. Dr. Chapman died the
34th of October, 1784, in the 80th year of his age.
, 1760, in his forty-third year, and was interred in the chapel of Magdalen college. “He died,” says bishop Hurd, “in the flower of his life and fortune; I knew him formerly
, D. D. the son of John Chapman, of Billingham, in the county of Durham, was born at
that place in 1717, and educated at Richmond school in
Yorkshire. He afterwards entered of Christ college,
Cambridge, where he took his degrees of A. B. 1737, A.M.
174-J, and obtained a fellowship. In 1746 he was chosen
master of Magdalen college, and had the degree of LL. D.
conferred on him in 1748, and that of D. D. in 1749. In
1748 he served the office of vice-chancellor, and was appointed one of his majesty’s chaplains. In 1749, he was
rector of Kirby-over-blower in Yorkshire. In 1750 he was
presented by the king to a prebendal stall in the cathedral
of Durham; and in 1758, was appointed official to the
dean and chapter. He died at Cambridge, June 9, 1760,
in his forty-third year, and was interred in the chapel of
Magdalen college. “He died,
” says bishop Hurd, “in the
flower of his life and fortune; I knew him formerly very well.
He was in his nature a vain and busy man.
” Dr. Chapman is now known only by his “Essay on the Roman Senate,
” Observations, &c.
” published in
, a very learned and pious divine, bishop of Cork, Cloyne, and Ross, in Ireland, was descended, as he
, a very learned and pious divine,
bishop of Cork, Cloyne, and Ross, in Ireland, was descended, as he himself tells us, from parents in narrow
circumstances, and was born at Lexington, in Nottinghamshire, Dec. 10, 1512. He was sent to a grammar-school at Mansfield, in the same county; and thence, at
the age of seventeen, removed to Christ’s-college, in Cambridge; of which, after having taken his degrees of B. and
M. A. he was elected fellow in 1607. He became a very
eminent tutor, and was also remarkable for his abilities as
a disputant, concerning which the following anecdotes are
recorded. In 1624 king James visited the university of
Cambridge, lodged in Trinity-college, and was entertained with a philosophical act, and other academical performances. At these exercises Dr. Roberts of Trinity-college was respondent at St. Mary’s, where Chappel as
opponent pushed him so hard, that, finding himself unable
to keep up the dispute, he fainted. Upon this, the king,
who valued himself much upon his skill in such matters,
undertook to maintain the question, but with no better
success than the doctor; for Chappel was so much his superior at these logical weapons, that his majesty openly
professed his joy to find a man of great talents so good a
subject. Many years after this, sir William St. Leger
riding to Cork with the popish titular dean of that city,
Chappel, then dean of Cashel, and provost of Dublin, accidentally overtook them; upon which sir William, who
was then president of Munster, proposed that the two
deans should dispute, which, though Chappel was not
forward to accept, yet he did not decline. But the
popish dean, with great dexterity and address, extricated himself from this difficulty, saying, “Excuse me,
sir; I don't care to dispute with one who is wont to kill
his man.
”
he would have spent his days in college, if he had not received an unexpected offer from Laud, then bishop of London, of the deanery of Cashel, in Ireland; which preferment,
It is probable that he would have spent his days in college, if he had not received an unexpected offer from Laud, then bishop of London, of the deanery of Cashel, in Ireland; which preferment, though he was much disturbed at Cambridge by the calumnies of some who envied his reputation, he was yet very unwilling to accept. For being a man of a quiet easy temper, he had no inclination to stir, nor was at all ambitious of dignities; but he determined at length to accept the offer, went over to Ireland accordingly, and was installed August 20, 1633. Soon after he was made provost of Trinity-college, Dublin, by Laud, then archbishop of Canterbury, and chancellor of the university of Dublin, who, desirous of giving a new form to the university, looked upon Chappel as the fittest person to settle the establishment that was proposed. Chappel took great pains to decline this charge, the burden of which he thought too heavy, and for this purpose returned to England in May 1634, but in vain. Upon this he went down to Cambridge, and resigned his fellowship; which to him, as himself says, was the sweetest of earthly preferments. He also visited his native country, and taking his last leave of his ancient and pious mother, he returned to Ireland in August. He was elected provost of Trinity-college, and had the care of it immediately committed to him; though he was not sworn into it till June 5, 1637, on account of the new statutes not being sooner settled and received. The exercises of the university were never more strictly looked to, nor the discipline better observed than in his time; only the lecture for teaching Irish was, after his admission, wholly waved. Yet, that he might mix something of the pleasant with the profitable, and that young minds might not be oppressed with too much severity, he instituted, as sir James Ware tells us, among the juniors, a Roman commonwealth, which continued during the Christmas vacation, and in which they had their dictators, consuls, censors, and other officers of state in great splendour. And this single circumstance may serve to give us a true idea of the man, who was remarkable for uniting in his disposition two very different qualities, sweetness of temper, and severity of manners.
fered by the troubles in Ireland; and some lines in this piece give great grounds to conjecture that bishop Chappel was the author. March 3, 1734.” Thus we see this prelate,
In 1638 his patrons, the earl of Strafford, and the archbishop of Canterbury, preferred him to the bishoprics of
Cork, Cloyne, and Ross; and he was consecrated at St.
Patrick’s, Dublin, Nov. 11, though he had done all he
could to avoid this honour. By the king’s command he
continued in his provostship till July 20, 1640; before
which time he had endeavoured to obtain a small bishopric
in England, that he might return to his native country, as
he tells us, and die in peace. But his endeavours were
fruitless; and he was left in Ireland to feel all the fury of
the storm, which he had long foreseen. He was attacked
in the house of commons with great bitterness by the puritan party, and obliged to come to Dublin from Cork,
and to put in sureties for his appearance. June 1641,
articles of impeachment were exhibited against him to the
house of peers, consisting of fourteen, though the substance
of them was reduced to two; the first, perjury, on a supposed breach of his oath as provost; the second, malice
towards the Irish, founded on discontinuing the Irish lecture during the time of his being provost. The prosecution was urged with great violence, and, as is supposed,
for no other reason but because he had enforced uniformity
and strict church discipline in the college. This divine’s
fate was somewhat peculiar, for although his conduct was
consistent, he was abused at Cambridge for being a puritan, and in Ireland for being a papist. Yet as we find the
name of archbishop Usher among his opponents in Ireland,
there seems reason to think that there was some foundation
for his unpopularity, independent of what was explicitly
stated. While, however, he laboured under these troubles,
he was exposed to still greater, by the breaking out of the
rebellion in the latter end of that year. He was under a
kind of confinement at Dublin, on account of the impeachment which was still depending; but at length obtained
leave to embark for England, for the sake of returning
thence to Cork, which, from Dublin, as things stood, he
could not safely do. He embarked Dec. 26, 1641, and
the next day landed at Milford-haven, after a double
escape, as himself phrases it, from the Irish wolves and
the Irish sea. He went from Milford-haven to Pembroke,
and thence to Tenby, where information was made of him
to the mayor, who committed him to gaol Jan. 25. After
lying there seven weeks, he was set at liberty by the interest of sir Hugh Owen, a member of parliament, upon
giving bond in 1000l. for his appearance; and March 16,
set out for Bristol. Here he learnt that the ship bound
from Cork to England, with a great part of his effects, was
lost near Minehead; and by this, among other things, he
lost his choice collection of books. After such a series of
misfortunes, and the civil confusions increasing, he withdrew to his native soil, where he spent the remainder of
his life in retirement and study; and died at Derby, where
he had some time resided, upon Whitsunday, 1649.
He published the year before his death, “Methodus
concionandi,
” that is, the method of preaching, which for
its usefulness was also translated into English. His “Use
of Holy Scripture,
” was printed afterwards in ’Tis
certain ‘The whole Duty of Man’ was written by one who
suffered by the troubles in Ireland; and some lines in this
piece give great grounds to conjecture that bishop Chappel
was the author. March 3, 1734.
” Thus we see this
prelate, as well as many other great and good persons,
comes in for part of the credit of that excellent book; yet
there is no explicit evidence of his having been the author
of it. It appears indeed to have been written before the
death of Charles I. although it was not published till 1657,
and the manner of it is agreeable enough to this prelate’s
plain and easy way of writing; but then there can be no
reason given why his name should be suppressed in the
title-page, when a posthumous work of his was actually
published with it but a few years before.
ver there should be occasion to reprint it with the full right and property of them to his executor, bishop (afterwards archbishop) Tenison, who bequeathed them to the
, an eminent oriental scholar,
of whom we regret that our information is so scanty, was
born in 1683, and educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he took his bachelor’s degree in 1712, his
master’s in 1716, and that of B. D. in 1723. To his other
studies he united an uncommon application to oriental
languages, in which such was his reputation, that he was
chosen to succeed the learned Simon Ockley in 1720, as
Arabic professor. He held also a fellowship in his college,
until they bestowed on him the livings of Great and Little
Hormead, in Hertfordshire. To this fellowship he was
chosen in 1717, in the room of a Mr. Tomkinson, one of
the nonjuror-fellows ejected at that time by act of parliament. The celebrated Mr. Baker was another, and always
afterwards designated himself “Socius ejectus.
” In February De Legibus Hebraeorum Ritualibus.
” Spencer, after the first publication of this capital
work in 1685, had continued to make improvements in it,
and by will left such of his papers and writings as were
perfect, to be added in their proper places, if ever there
should be occasion to reprint it with the full right and
property of them to his executor, bishop (afterwards archbishop) Tenison, who bequeathed them to the university of
Cambridge, after having caused them to be prepared for
the press, with fifty pounds towards the expences of
printing. These the senate, by grace, gave leave to Mr.
Chappelow to publish, and as an encouragement, bestowed
upon him the archbishop’s benefaction likewise. The work
was accordingly executed in 1727, 2 vols. fol. by a subscription of two guineas the small, and three guineas the
large paper, begun in 1725. B en e't college, on this occasion, was at the expence of prefixing an elegant engraving of the author, as a small testimony of gratitude to
their munificent benefactor. In 1730, he published “Elementa Linguae Arabicae,
” chiefly from Erpenius.
d “Two Sermons concerning the State of the Soul on its immediate separation from the body written by bishop Bull, together with some extracts relating to the same subject;
Mr. Chappelow' s next publication, at a considerable distance of time, was “A Commentary on the book of lob, in
which is inserted the Hebrew text, and English translation
with a paraphrase from the third verse of the third chapter,
where it is supposed the metre begins, to the seventh verse
of the forty-second chapter, where it ends,
” The Traveller; an
Arabic poem, entitled Tograi, written by Abu Ismael;
translated into Latin, and published with notes in 1661,
by Dr. Pocock, and now rendered into English in the same
Iambic measure as the original; with some additional notes
to illustrate the poem,
” 4to. This, although ably executed, is rather a paraphrase than a translation, but well
expresses the sense of the original. In 1765 he published
“Two Sermons concerning the State of the Soul on its immediate separation from the body written by bishop Bull,
together with some extracts relating to the same subject;
taken from writers of distinguished note and character.
With a preface,
” 8vo. This preface is all that belongs to
Mr. Chappelow, and is very short. He coincides with
bishop Bull’s opinion, that the final state of man is determined at death, and he supports it by extracts from Tillotson, Whitby, Lightfoot, Stanhope, Smalridge, and
Limborch. His last publication was entitled “Six Assemblies; or Ingenious Conversations of learned men among
the Arabians, &c. formerly published by the celebrated
Schultens, in Arabic and Latin, with large notes and observations, &c.
”
agdalen Hall in Lent term 1635, where he became the pupil of the famous Dr. John Wilkins, afterwards bishop of Chester, under whom he made great progress in logic and philosophy,
, a very learned physician,
and voluminous writer, the son of the rev. Walter Charleton, M. A. some time vicar of Ilminster, and afterwards
rector of Shepton Mallet, in the county of Somerset,
was born at Shepton Mallet, February 2, 1619, and was
first educated by his father, a man of extensive capacity,
though but indifferently furnished with the goods of fortune. He was afterwards sent to Oxford, and entered of
Magdalen Hall in Lent term 1635, where he became the
pupil of the famous Dr. John Wilkins, afterwards bishop
of Chester, under whom he made great progress in logic
and philosophy, and was noted for assiduous application
and extensive capacity, which encouraged him to aim at
the accomplishments of an universal scholar. But as his
circumstances confined him to some particular profession,
he made choice of physic, and in a short time made as
great a progress in that as he had done in his former studies.
On the breaking out of the civil war, which brought the
king to Oxford, Mr. Charleton, by the favour of the king,
had the degree of doctor of physic conferred upon him in
February 1642, and was soon after made one of the physicians in ordinary to his majesty. These honours made
him be considered as a rising character, and exposed him
to that envy and resentment which he could never entirely
conquer. Upon the declension of the royal cause, he came
up to London, was admitted of the college of physicians,
acquired considerable practice, and lived in much esteem
with the ablest and most learned men of the profession;
such as sir Francis Prujean, sir George Ent, Dr. William
Harvey, and others. In the space of ten years before the
Restoration, he wrote and published several very ingenious
and learned treatises, as well on physical as other subjects,
by which he gained great reputation abroad as well as at
home; and though they are now less regarded than perhaps they deserve, yet they were then received with almost universal approbation. He became, as Wood tells
us, physician in ordinary to king Charles II. while in exile,
which honour he retained after the king’s return; and,
upon the founding of the royal society, was chosen one of
the first members. Among other patrons and friends were
William Cavendish, duke of Newcastle, whose life Dr.
Cliarleton translated into Latin in a very clear and elegant
style, and the celebrated Hobbes, but this intimacy, with:
his avowed respect for the Epicurean philosophy, drew
some suspicions upon him in regard to his religion, notwithstanding the pains he had taken to distinguish between
the religious and philosophical opinions of Epicurus in his
own writings against infidelity. Few circumstances seem
to have drawn more censure on him than his venturing to
differ in opinion from the celebrated Inigo Jones respecting
Stonehenge, which Jones attributed to the Romans, and
asserted to be a temple dedicated by them to the god Coelus, or Coelum; Dr. Charleton referred this antiquity to
later and more barbarous times, and transmitted Jones’s
book, which was not published till after its author’s death,
to Olaus Wormius, who wrote him several letters, tending
to fortify him in his own sentiment, by proving that this
work ought rather to be attributed to his countrymen the
Danes. With this assistance Dr. Charleton drew up a
treatise, offering many strong arguments to shew, that this
could not be a Roman temple, and several plausible reasons why it ought rather to be considered as a Danish monument; but his book, though learned, and enriched with
a great variety of curious observations, was but indifferently
received, and but coldly defended by his friends. Jones’s
son-in-law answered it with intemperate warmth, and many
liberties were taken by others with Dr. Charleton’s character, although sir William Dugdale and some other eminent antiquaries owned themselves to be of our author’s
opinion; but it is now supposed that both are wrong.
Notwithstanding this clamour, Dr. Charleton’s fame was
advanced by his anatomical prelections in the college
theatre, in the spring of 1683, and his satisfactory defence
of the immortal Harvey’s claim to the discovery of the
circulation of the blood, against the pretence that was set
up in favour of father Paul. In 1689 he was chosen president of the college of physicians, in which office he continued to the year 1691. A little after this, his circumstances becoming narrow, he found it necessary to seek a
retreat in the island of Jersey; but the causes of this are not
explained, nor have we been able to discover how long he
continued in Jersey, or whether he returned afterwards to
London. All that is known with certainty is, that he died
in the latter end of 1707, and in the eighty-eighth year
of his age. He appears from his writings to have been a
man of extensive learning, a lover of the constitution in
church and state, and so much a lover of his country as to
refuse a professor’s chair in the university of Padua. In
his junior years he dedicated much of his time to the study
of philosophy and polite literature, was as well read in
the Greek and Roman authors as any man of his time, and
he was taught very early by his excellent tutor, bishop
Wilkins, to digest his knowledge so as to command it readily
when occasion required. In every branch of his own
profession he has left testimonies of his diligence and his
capacity; and whoever considers the plainness and perspicuity of his language, the pains he has taken to collect
and produce the opinions of the old physicians, in order
to compare them with the moderns, the just remarks with
which these collections and comparisons are attended, the
succinctness with which all this is dispatched, and the
great accuracy of that method in which his books are
written, will readily agree that he was equal to most of his
contemporaries. As an antiquary, he had taken much pains
in perusing our ancient historians, and in observing their
excellencies as well as their defects. But, above all, he
was studious of connecting the sciences with each other,
and thereby rendering them severally more perfect; in
which, if he did not absolutely succeed himself, he had at
least the satisfaction of opening the way to others, of showing the true road to perfection, and pointing out the
means of applying and making those discoveries useful,
which have followed in succeeding times. There is also
good reason to believe, that though we have few or none
of his writings extant that were composed during the last
twenty years of his life, yet he was not idle during that
space, but committed many things to paper, as materials
at least for other works that he designed. There is now a
large collection of his ms papers and letters on subjects of
philosophy and natural history in the British Museum.
(Ayscough’s Catalogue.) His printed works are, 1 . “Spiritus
Gorgonicus vi sua saxipara exutus, sive de causis, signis,
et sanatione Lithiaseos,
” Leyden, The darkness
of Atheism discovered by the light of nature, a physicotheological treatise,
” London, The Ephesian and Cimmerian Matrons, two remarkable examples of
the power of Love and Wit/ 7 London, 1653 and 1658, 8vo.
4.
” Physiologia Epicuro-Gassendo-Charletoniana: or a
fabric of natural science erected upon the most ancient
hypothesis of atoms,“London, 1654, in fol. 5.
” The Immortality of the human Soul demonstrated by reasons natural,“London, 1657, 4to. 6.
” Oeconomia Animalis novis Anatomicorum inventis, indeque desumptis modernorum Medicorum Hypothesibus Physicis superstructa et
mechanice explicata,“London, 1658, 12mo; Amsterdam,
1659, 12mo; Leyden, 1678, 12mO; Hague, 1681, 12mo.
It is likewise added to the last edition of
” Gulielmi Cole
de secretione animali cogitata.“7.
” Natural history of
nutrition, life, and voluntary motion, containing all the
new discoveries of anatomists,“&c. London, 1658, 4to.
8.
” Exercitationes Physico-Anatomicse de Oeconomia Animali,“London, 1659, 8vo printed afterwards several
times abroad. 9.
” Exercitationes Pathologicæ, in quibus
morborum pene omnium natura, generatio, et causae ex
novis Anatomicorum inventis sedulo inquiruntur,“London,
160, and 1661, 4to. 10.
” Character of his most sacred
Majesty Charles II. King of Great Britain, France, and
Ireland,“London, 1660, one sheet, 4to. 11.
” Disquisitiones duae Anatomico-Physica? altera Anatome pueri de
ccelo tacti, altera de Proprietatibus Cerebri humani,“London, 1664, 8vo. 12.
” Chorea Gigantum, or the most
famous antiquity of Great Britain, vulgarly called Stonehenge, standing on Salisbury Plain, restored to the Danes,“London, 1663, 4to. 13.
” Onomasticon Zoicon, plerorumque animalium differentias et nomina propria pluribus
linguis exponens. Cui accedunt Mantissa Anatomice, et
quiedam de variis Fossilium generibus,“London, 1668 and
1671, 4to; Oxon. 1677, fol. 14.
” Two Philosophical
Discourses the first concerning the different wits of men
the second concerning the mystery of Vintners, or a discourse of the various sicknesses of wines, and their respective remedies at this day commonly used, &c. London, 1663, 1675, 1692, 8vo. 15. “De Scorbuto Liber
singularis. Cui accessit Epiphonema in Medicastros,
”
London, Natural
History of the Passions,
” London, Enquiries into Humane Nature, in six Anatomy-prelections in
the new theatre of the royal college of physicians in London,
” London, Oratio Anniversaria habita in Theatro inclyti Collegii Medicorum Londinensis 5to
Augusti 1680, in commemorationem Beneficiorum a
Doctore Harvey aliisque præstitorum,
” London, 1680, 4to.
19. “The harmony of natural and positive Divine Laws,
”
London, Three Anatomic Lectures concerning, l.The motion of the blood through the veins and
arteries. 2. The organic structure of the heart. 3. The
efficient cause of the heart’s pulsation. Read in the 19th,
20th, and 21st day of March 1682, in the anatomic theatre
of his majesty’s royal college of Physicians in London,
”
London, Inquisitio Physlca de causis
Catameniorum, et Uteri Rheumatismo, in quo probatur
sanguinem in animali fermentescere nunquam,
” London,
Gulielmi Ducis Novicastrensis vita,
”
London, A Ternary of Paradoxes, of the
magnetic cure of wounds, nativity of tartar in wine, and
image of God in man,
” London, The
errors of physicians concerning Defluxions called Deliramenta Catarrhi,
” London, Epicurus his Morals,
” London, The Life
of Marcellus,
” translated from Plutarch, and printed in the
second volume of “Plutarch’s Lives translated from the
Greek by several hands,
” London,
he Roman catholic is the only true church. This work procured him the acquaintance of M. de Sulpice, Bishop and count of Cahors, who sent for him and offered him the places
, was born at Paris in 1541. Though
his parents were in narrow circumstances, yet discovering
their son’s capacity, they were particularly attentive to his
education. After making a considerable proficiency in
grammar-learning, he applied to logic, metaphysics, moral
and natural philosophy, and afterwards studied civil and
common law at the universities of Orleans and Bourges,
and commenced doctor in that faculty. Upon his return
to Paris, he was admitted an advocate in the court of parliament. He always declared the bar to be the best and
most improving school in the world; and accordingly attended at all the public hearings for five or six years: but
foreseeing that preferment in this way, if ever attained at
all, was like to come very slow, as he had neither private
interest, nor relations among the solicitors and proctors of
the court, he gave over that employment, and closely applied to the study of divinity. By his superior pulpit
eloquence, he soon came into high reputation with the
greatest and most learned men of his time, insomuch that
the bishops seemed to strive which of them should get him
into his diocese; making him an offer of being theological
canon or divinity lecturer in their churches, and of other
dignities and benefices, besides giving him noble presents.
He was successively theologal of Bazas, Aqcs, Lethoure,
Agen, Cahors, and Condom, canon and schoolmaster in
the church of Bourdeaux, and chanter in the church of
Condom. Queen Margaret, duchess of Bulois, entertained him for her preacher in ordinary; and the king,
though at that time a protestant, frequently did him the
honour to be one of his audience. He was also retained
by the cardinal d'Armagnac, the pope’s legate at Avignon,
who had a great value for him; yet amidst all these promotions, he never took any degree or title in divinity, but
satisfied himself with deserving and being capable of the
highest. After about eighteen years absence from Paris,
he resolved to end his days there; and being a lover of
retirement, vowed to become a Carthusian. On his arrival
at Paris, he communicated his intention to the prior of the
order, but was rejected, notwithstanding his most pressing
entreaties. They told him that he could not be received
on account of his age, then about forty-eight, and that the
order required all the vigour of youth to support its austerities. He next addressed himself to the Celestines at
Paris, but with the same success, and for the same reasons:
in this embarrassment, he was assured by three learned
casuists, that as he was no ways accessary to the non -performance of his vow, it was no longer binding; and that
he might, with a very safe conscience, continue in the
world as a secular. He preached, however, a course of
Lent sermons at Angers in 1589. Going afterwards to
Bourdeaux, he contracted a very intimate friendship with
Michael de Montagne, author of the well known Essays,
from whom he received all possible testimonies of regard;
for, among other things, Montagne ordered by his last
will, that in case he should leave no issue-male of his own,
M. Charron should, after his decease, be entitled to bear
the coat of arms plain, as they belonged to his noble
family, and Charron, in return, made Montagne’s brotherin-law his residuary legatee. He staid at Bourdeaux from
1589 to 1593; and in that interval composed his book,
entitled, “Les Trois Verge’s,
” which he published in
books of Wisdom.
” Whilst he was thus
employed, the bishop of Condom, to draw him into his
diocese, presented him with the chaptership in his church;
and the theologal chair falling vacant about the same time,
made him an offer of that too, which -Charron accepted,
and resolved to settle there. In 1601 he printed at Bourdeaux his books “of Wisdom,
” which gave him a great
reputation, and made his character generally known.
October 1603, he made a journey to Paris, to thank the
Bishop of Boulogne; who, in order to have him near himself, had oifered him the place of theologal canon. This
he was disposed to accept of; but the moisture and coldness of the air at Boulogne, and its nearness to the sea,
not only made it, he said to a friend, a melancholy and
unpleasant place, but very unwholesome too; adding, that
the sun was his visible god, as God was his invisible sun.
At Paris he began a new edition of his books “of Wisdom,
”
of which he lived to see but three or four sheets printed,
dying Nov. 16, 1603, of an apoplexy. The impression of
the new edition of his book “of Wisdom,
” with alterations
by the author, occasioned by the offence taken at some
passages in the former, was completed in 1604, by the
care of a friend; but as the Bourdeaux edition contained
some things that were either suppressed or softened in the
subsequent one, it was much sought after by the curious.
Hence the booksellers of several cities reprinted the book
after that edition; and this induced a Paris bookseller to
print an edition, to which he subjoined all the passages of
the first edition which had been struck out or corrected,
and all those which the president Jeannin, who was employed by the chancellor to examine the book, judged
necessary to be changed. This edition appeared in 1707.
There have been two translations of it into English, the
last by George Stanhope, D. D. printed in 1697. Dr.
Stanhope says, that M. Charron “was a person that feared
God, led a pious and good life, was charitably disposed,
a person of wisdom and conduct, serious and considerate;
a great philosopher, an eloquent orator, a famous and
powerful preacher, richly furnished and adorned with the
most excellent virtues and graces both moral and divine;
such as made him very remarkable and singular, and deservedly gave him the character of a good man and a good
Christian; such as preserve a great honour and esteem for
his memory among persons of worth and virtue, and will
continue to do so as long as the world shall last.
” From
this high praise considerable deductions may surely be
made. Charron’s fame has scarcely outlived his century;
his book on “Wisdom
” certainly abounds in ingenious
and original observations on moral topics, but gives a
gloomy picture of human nature and society. Neither is
it free from sentiments very hostile to revealed religion,
but so artfully disguised as to impose on so orthodox a divine as dean Stanhope.
Having an inclination to visit Italy, the bishop of Auxerre, who was going there in a diplomatic character, took
Having an inclination to visit Italy, the bishop of Auxerre, who was going there in a diplomatic character, took him with him, but at Rome he found little enjoyment except in contemplating the remains of antiquity. The corruption of morals at the court of Rome appeared so atrocious in his eyes, that for many years afterwards he could not speak on the subject without indignation, and appears indeed to have conceived as bad an opinion of the court of Rome as any of the reformers, and expressed himself with as much severity. From Rome he went to Venice, and was induced to accept the office of teaching polite literature in the island of Cyprus, with a pension of two hundred crowns, and there he read lectures for two years with great success. He afterwards went into Egypt, Jerusalem, and Constantinople, and on his return home, the French ambassador at the Porte gave him letters of strong recommendation to Francis I. who appointed him his reader; and entertained him with the utmost familiarity. Chatel availed himself of this favour to procure advantages to learning and learned men; but although his sentiments were so far liberal as to admit that the church wanted reforming, he supported the catholic religion, and even assisted the inquisitors and informers. He was also averse to capital punishments for heresy, and involved himself in danger by pleading for some pretended heretics, who, it was reported, were to be put to death. He likewise appeased the king’s wrath against the Waldenses before the slaughter of Cabrioles and Merindol, and once delivered Dolet out of prison. His zeal for maintaining the rights of the Gallican church against the pretensions of the court of Rome, rendered him odious there, and the doctors of the Sorbonne were not less displeased with him for the protection he granted in 1545, to Robert Stephens, the celebrated printer. These were favourable symptoms of liberality, at least, if not of an inclination to befriend the cause of the reformation, and soften the rigours of persecution. But Chatel wanted firmness, and withdrawing his protection from Stephens, the latter was forced to retire into another country. Chatel was perhaps influenced by the favours heaped upon him by Francis T. who made him bishop of Tulle in 1539, and afterwards bishop of Macron. He is said never to have appeared to more advantage as a divine and a man of eloquence than when he prepared Francis I. for death, and delivered his funeral oration. Yet in this oration, by hinting that the soul of Francis had immediately gone to heaven, he alarmed the doctors of the Sorbonne, who complained that he was heretic enough to oppose the doctrine of purgatory. A more valid objection, perhaps, might have been his high praise of Francis I. whose character was not that of perfect purity.
opponents were Mr. Tyrwhitt, Horace Walpole, the two Wartons, Dr. Johnson, Mr. Steevens, Dr. Percy ( bishop of Dromore), Mr. Gibbon, Mr. Jones, Dr. Farmer, Mr. Colman,
With regard to the controversy occasioned by the publications attributed to Rowley, it is unnecessary to enter upon it, although it has lately been attempted to be revived, but without exciting much interest. Whether the object of this controversy was not disproportioned to the warmth it excited, and the length of time it consumed, the reader may judge from a perusal of the whole of Chatterton’s productions. The principal advocates for the existence of Rowley, and the authenticity of his poems, were Mr. Bryant, Dean Milles, Dr. Glynn, Mr. (now Dr.) Henley, Dr. Langhorn (in the Monthly Review), and Mr. James Harris. Their opponents were Mr. Tyrwhitt, Horace Walpole, the two Wartons, Dr. Johnson, Mr. Steevens, Dr. Percy (bishop of Dromore), Mr. Gibbon, Mr. Jones, Dr. Farmer, Mr. Colman, Mr. Sheridan, Dr. Lort, Mr. Astle, Mr. (sir Herbert) Croft, Mr. Hayley, lord Camden, Mr. Gough, Mr. Mason, the writer of the Critical Review, Mr. Badcock (in the Monthly Review), the Reviewers in the Gentleman’s Magazine, and various Correspondents in the same Miscellany. To these may be added, Mr. Malone, who lived to detect another forgery by a very young impostor, in the history of which the reader will probably recollect many corresponding circumstances; and will be inclined to prefer the shame of Chatterton, fatal as it was, to the unblushing impudence and unnatural fraud of one who brought disgrace and ruin on a parent.
ectly drawn up by Mr. Dart, and corrected and enlarged by Mr. William Thomas; and from another, that bishop Atterbury prompted Urry to this undertaking, but “did by no
There is an interleaved copy of Urry’s edition in the British Museum, presented by Mr. William Thomas, a brother of Dr. T. Thomas, who furnished the preface and glossary, and upon whom the charge of publishing devolved after Mr. Urry’s death. This copy has many manuscript notes and corrections. From one of them we learn that the life of Chaucer was very incorrectly drawn up by Mr. Dart, and corrected and enlarged by Mr. William Thomas; and from another, that bishop Atterbury prompted Urry to this undertaking, but “did by no means judge rightly of Mr. Urry’s talents in this case, who though in many respects a most worthy person, was not qualified for a work of this nature.” Dr. Thomas undertook to publish it, at the request of bishop Smalridge. In the Harleian collection is a copy of an agreement between William Brome, executor to Urry, the dean and chapter of Christ Church, and Bernard Lintot the bookseller. By this it appears that it was Urry’s intention to apply part of the profits towards building Peckwater quadrangle. Lintot was to print a thousand copies on small paper at 1l. 10s. and two hundred and fifty on large paper at 2l. 10s. It does not appear that this speculation succeeded. Yet the edition, from its having been printed in the Roman letter, the copiousness of the glossary, and the ornaments, &c. continued to be the only one consulted, until the publication of the “Canterbury Tales” by Mr. Tyrwhitt, in 1775. This very acute critic was the first who endeavoured to restore a pure text by the collation of Mss. a labour of vast extent, but which must be undertaken even to greater extent, before the other works of Chaucer can be published in a manner worthy of their author. Mr Warton laments that Chaucer has been so frequently considered as an old, rather than a good poet; and recommends the study of his works. Mr. Tyrwhitt, since this advice was given, has undoubtedly introduced Chaucer to a nearer intimacy with the learned public, but it is not probable that he can ever be restored to popularity. His language will still remain an insurmountable obstacle with that numerous class of readers to whom poets must look for universal reputation. Poetry is the art of pleasing; but pleasure, as generally understood, admits of very little that deserves the name of study.
contains the epitaph of sir Thomas More, written by himself; the captivity and martyrdom of Fibber, bishop of Rochester; and the same of sir Thomas More; and of other
, whose name we find sometimes spelt Chamney, Chancy, and Channy, was a monk of
the Charter-house, London, and with many others of the
same order, was imprisoned in the reign of Henry VIII.
for refusing to own his supremacy. When the monastery
was dissolved, and several of his brethren executed in
1535, Chauncy and a few others contrived to remain
unmolested partly in England and partly in Flanders, until
the accession of queen Mary, when they were replaced at
Shene near Richmond, a monastery formerly belonging to
the Carthusians. On the queen’s death, they were permitted to go to Flanders, under Chauncy, who was now
their prior. The unsettled state of the reformation there
obliged them to remove from Bruges to Doway, and from
Doway to Louvain, where they remained until a house was
prepared for them at Nieuport, and there at length they
obtained a settlement under the crown of Spam, Chauncy, however, died at Bruges July 15, 1581, highly respected by those of his own order. Of his works one only
is worth mentioning, entitled “Historia aliquot nostri
saeculi Martyrum, cum pia, turn lectu jucunda, nuuqua.ni
antehac typis excusa,
” printed at Mentz,
e into England with William the conqueror. He was born in 1632, and had his grammatical education at Bishop’s Stortford school, under Mr. Thomas Leigh; and in 1647, was
, knt. author of the “Historical Antiquities of Hertfordshire,
” which bears a higher
price than any other topographical volume, was descended
from a family which came into England with William the
conqueror. He was born in 1632, and had his grammatical education at Bishop’s Stortford school, under Mr.
Thomas Leigh; and in 1647, was admitted in Gonvil and
Caius college in Cambridge. He removed, in 1649, to
the Middle-Temple; and in 1656, was called to the bar.
In 1661, he was constituted a justice of peace lor aie
county of Hertford; made one of the benchers of the Middle-Temple in 1675, and steward of the Burgh-coujt in
Hertford; and likewise, in 1680, appointed by charter,
recorder of that place. In 1681, he was elected reader of
the Middle-Temple; and on the 4th of June, the same
year, received the honour of knighthood at Windsor-castle,
from king Charles II. He was chosen treasurer of the
Middle-Temple in 1685. On the llth of June, 1688, he
was called to the degree of a serjeant at law, and the same
year advanced to be a Welsh judge, or one of his majesty’s
justices for the counties of Glamorgan, Brecknock, and
Radnor, in the principality of Wales. He married three
wives; 1. Jane, youngest daughter of Francis Flyer, of
Brent-Pelham, in Hertfordshire, esq. by whom he had
seven children. She died December 31, 1672. 2. Elizabeth, the relict of John Goulsmith, of Stredset, in Norfolk,
esq one of the coheirs of Gregory Wood, of Risby, in
Suffolk, gent. By her he had no issue. She died
August 4, 1677. 3. His third wife was Elizabeth, the second
daughter of Nathaniel Thruston, of Hoxny, in Suffolk, esq.
by whom he had two children. He died April 1719, and
May 1, was buried at Tardley-Bury. He published “The
Historical Antiquities of Hertfordshire,
” Speculum Britanniae,
” published in
m and restore the original pronunciation of it, but met with great opposition from Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, chancellor of the university, and their correspondence
, a learned writer of the sixteenth
century, descended from an ancient family in the Isle of
Wight, was born at Cambridge, June 16, 1514, being the
son of Peter Cheke, gent, and Agnes, daughter of Mr.
Dufford of Cambridgeshire. After receiving his grammatical education under Mr. John Morgan, he was admitted
into St. John’s college, Cambridge, in 1531, where he
became very eminent for his knowledge in the learned
languages, particularly the Greek tongue, which was then
almost universally neglected. Being recommended as such,
by Dr. Butts, to king Henry VIII. he was soon after made
kind’s scholar, and supplied by his majesty with money
for his education, and for his charges in travelling into
foreign countries. While he continued in college he introduced a more substantial and useful kind of learning
than what had been received for some years; and encouraged especially the study of the Greek and Latin languages, and of divinity. After having taken his degrees
in arts he was chosen Greek lecturer of the university.
There was no salary belonging to tnat place: but king
Henry having founded, about the year 1540, a professorship of the Greek tongue in the university of Cambridge,
with a stipend oi forty pounds a year, Mr. Cheke, though
but twenty-six years of age, was chosen the first professor.
This place he held long after he left the university, namely,
till October 1551, and was highly instrumental in bringing
the Greek language into repute. He endeavoured
particularly to reform and restore the original pronunciation of
it, but met with great opposition from Stephen Gardiner,
bishop of Winchester, chancellor of the university, and
their correspondence on the subject was published. Cheke,
however, in the course of his lectures,- went through all
Homer, all Euripides, part of Herodotus, and through
Sophocles twice, to the advantage of his hearers and his
own credit. He was also at the same time universityorator. About the year 1543 he was incorporated master
of arts at Oxford, where he had studied some time. On
the 10th of July 1544 he was sent for to court, in order to
be school- master, or tutor, for the Latin tongue, jointly
with sir Anthony Cooke, to prince Edward and, about
the same time, as an encouragement, the king granted
him, being then, as it is supposed, in orders, one of the
canonries in his new- founded college at Oxford, now Christ
Church but that college being dissolved in the beginning
of 1545, a pension was allowed him in the room of his
canonry. While he was entrusted with the prince’s education, he made use of all the interest he had in promoting
men of learning and probity. He seems also to have
sometimes had the lady Elizabeth under his care. In
1547, he married Mary, daughter of Richard Hill, serjeant of the wine-cellar to king Henry VIII. When his
royal pupil, king Edward VI. came to the crown, he rewarded him for his care and pains with an annuity of one
hundred marks; and also made him a grant of several
lands and manors . He likewise caused him, by a mandamus, to be elected provost of King’s college, Cambridge,
vacant by the deprivation of George Day, bishop of Chichester. In May 1549, he retired to Cambridge, upon
some disgust he had taken at the court, but was the same
Summer appointed one of the king’s commissioners for
visiting that university. The October following, he was one
of the thirty-two commissioners appointed to examine the
old ecclesiastical law books, and to compile from thence a
body of ecclesiastical laws for the government of the
church; and again, three years after, he was put in a new
commission issued out for the same purpose. He returned
to court in the winter of 1549, but met there with great
uneasiness on account of some offence given by his wife
to Anne, duchess of Somerset, whose dependent she was.
Mr. Cheke himself was not exempt from trouble, being of
the number of those who were charged with having suggested bad counsels to the duke of Somerset, and afterwards betrayed him. But having recovered from these
imputations, his interest and authority daily increased, and
he became the liberal patron of religious and learned men,
both English and foreigners. In 1550 he was made chief
gentleman of the king’s privy -chamber, whose tutor he
still continued to be, and who made a wonderful progress
through his instructions. Mr. Cheke, to ground him well
in morality, read to him Cicero’s philosophical works, and
Aristotle’s Ethics; but what was of greater importance, instructed him in the general history, the state and interest,
the laws and customs of England. He likewise directed
him to keep a diary of all the remarkable occurrences that
happened, to which, probably, we are indebted for the
king’s Journal (printed from the original in the Cottonian library) in Burnett’s History of the Reformation. In October, 1551, his majesty conferred on him the honour of
knighthood; and to enuhle him the better to support that
rank, made him a grant, or gift in fee simple (upon consideration of his surrender of the hundred marks abovementioned), of the whole manor of Stoke, near Clare, exclusively of the college before granted him, and the appurtenances in Suffolk and Essex, with divers other lands,
tenements, &c. all to the yearly value of 145l. 19$. 3d.
And a pasture, with other premises, in Spalding; and the
rectory, and other premises, in Sandon. The same year
he held two private conferences with some other learned
persons upon the subject of the sacrament, or transubstantiation. The first on November the 25th, in -secretary
Cecil’s house, and the second December 3d the same year,
at sir Richard Morison’s. The auditors were, the lord
Russel, sir Thomas Wroth of the bed-chamber, sir Anthony Cooke, one of the king’s tutors, Throgmorton,
chamberlain of the exchequer, Mr. Knolles, and Mr. Harrington, with whom were joined the marquis of Northampton, and the earl of Rutland, in the second conference.
The popish disputants for the real presence were, Feckenham, afterwards dean of St. Paul’s, and Yong; and at the
second disputation, Watson. The disputants on the other
side were, sir John Cheke, sir William Cecil, Horn, dean
of Durham, Whitehead, and Grindal. Some account of
these disputations is still extant in Latin, in the library of
Mss. belonging to Bene't college, Cambridge and from
thence published in English by Mr. Strypein his interesting
Life of sir John Cheke. Sir John also procured Bucer’s
Mss. and the illustrious Leland’s valuable, collections for
the king’s library but either owing to sir John’s misfortunes, or through some other accident, they never reached
their destination. Four volumes of these collections were
given by his son Henry Cheke, to Humphrey Purefoy, esq.
one of queen Elizabeth’s council in the north, whose son,
Thomas Purefoy, of Barvvell in Leicestershire, gave them
to the famous antiquary, William Burton, in 1612 and he
made use of them in his description of Leicestershire.
Many years after, he presented them to the Bodleian library at Oxford, where they now are. Some other of these
collections, after Cheke’s death, came into the hands of
William lord Paget, and sir William Cecil. The original
of the “Itinerary,
” in five volumes, 4to, is in the Bodleian library; and two volumes of collections, relating to
Britain, are in the Cottonian.
of the church of England, was born about 1740 in Westminster, and educated at Westminster school, on bishop Williams’ s foundation. From that school he went to St. John’s
, D. D. a learned divine of the
church of England, was born about 1740 in Westminster,
and educated at Westminster school, on bishop Williams’ s
foundation. From that school he went to St. John’s college,
Cambridge, but did not continue long there; as Dr. Freind,
one of the canons of Christ church, gave him a studentship
in that celebrated college. Here he resided for many
years, taking his master’s degree in 1762, that of bachelor
of divinity in 1772, and that of D. D. in 1773. It has been
said he was for some time usher at Westminster school;
but this is doubtful. At Oxford he entered into orders in.
1.762, and was presented to the college curacy of Lathbury
near Newport Pagnel, and to the benefice of Badger in
Shropshire, by Isaac Hawkins Browne, esq, His other
and chief preferment, was the rectory of Droxford in
Hampshire, given him by Dr. North, bishop of Winchester,
whose chaplain he was. His learning was extensive; and
his manners, though somewhat austere, were yet amiable.
Bad health, however, created an unequal flow of spirits,
which injured the powers of his mind towards the close of
his life. He died in 1801, and was buried at Droxford.
Besides some fugitive pieces without his name, and a tew
occasional sermons, he wrote one of the ablest series of
“Remarks on Gibbon’s Roman History,
” Reply to Mr. Gibbon’s Vindication,
” Remarks
” was
the second, published in Olla
Podrida,
” and to have published an “Essay on the History
of Mezzotinto.
” As an amateur of the fine arts, he made a
valuable collection of prints and gems, especially Tassie’s
imitations, to whom he was an early and zealous patron.
James II. prebend of Wells rector of Broad Rissington, Gloucestershire archdeacon of York nominated bishop of Bristol by king James, just before his abdication; went afterwards
The following particulars concerning Dr. Chetwood
are found in one of Baker’s Mss. in the British Museum,
(ms. Harl. 7038), “Knightley Chetwode, extraordinarie
electus, born at Coventry, came into the place of Tho.
Brinley [as fellow of King’s-college] chaplain to the lord
Dartmouth, to the princess of Denmark, and to king
James II. prebend of Wells rector of Broad Rissington,
Gloucestershire archdeacon of York nominated bishop
of Bristol by king James, just before his abdication; went
afterwards chaplain to all the English forces [sent] into
Holland under the earl of Marlborough 1689; commenced
D.D. 1691; dean of Gloucester.
”
ad taken the degree of B. A. he was, by the interest of his mother, at that time the widow of Abbot, bishop of Salisbury, elected probationer fellow of Merton college in
, a nonconformist of some note, the son of John Cheynell a physician, was born at Oxford in 1608; and after he had been educated in grammar learning, became a member of the university there fri 1623. When he had taken the degree of B. A. he was, by the interest of his mother, at that time the widow of Abbot, bishop of Salisbury, elected probationer fellow of Merton college in 1629. Then he went into orders, and officiated in Oxford for some time; but when the church began to be attacked in 1640, he took the parliamentarian side, and became an enemy to bishops and ecclesiastical ceremonies. He embraced the covenant, was made one of the assembly of divines in 1643, and was frequently appointed to preach before the members of parliament. He was one of those who were sent to convert the university of Oxford in 1646, was made a visitor by the parliament in 1647, and the year after took possession by force of the Margaret professorship of that university, and of the presidentship of St. John’s college. But being found an improper man for those places, he was forced to retire to the rectory of Petworth in Sussex, to which he had been presented about 1643, where he continued an useful member to his party till the time of the restoration, when he was ejected from that rich parsonage.
faith:” in all which he is supposed to have related nothing but what was true. For he is allowed by bishop Hoadly to have been as sincere, as honest, and as charitable
Dr. Cheynell (for he had taken his doctor’s degree) was
a man of considerable parts and learning, and published a
great many sermons and other works; but now he is chiefly
memorable for his conduct to the celebrated Chillingworth,
in which he betrayed a degree of bigotry that has not been
defended by any of the nonconformist biographers. In
1643, when Laud was a prisoner in the Tower, there was
printed by authority a book of Cheynell’s, entitled “The
rise, growth, and danger of Socinianism,” and unquestionably one of his best works. This came out about six
years after Chillingworth' s more famous work called “The
Religion of Protestants,
” &c. and was written, as we are
told in the title-page, with a view of detecting a most
horrid plot formed by the archbishop and his adherents
against the pure Protestant religion. In this book the
arcfrbishop, Hales of Eton, Chillingworth, and other eminent divines of those times, were strongly charged with
Socinianism. The year after, 1644, when Chillingworth
was dead, there came out another piece of CheyneJPs with
this strange title, “Chillingworthi Novissima; or, the sickness, heresy, death and burial of William Chillingworth.
”
This was also printed by authority and is, as the writer
of Chillingworth’s life truly observes, a most ludicrous
as well as melancholy instance of fanaticism, or religious
madness. To this is prefixed a dedication to Dr. Bayly,
Dr. Prideaux, Dr. Fell, &c. of the university of Oxford,
who had given their imprimatur to Chillingworth’s book;
in which those divines are abused not a little, for giving
so much countenance to the use of reason in religious matters, as they had given by their approbation of Chillingworth’s book. After the dedication follows the relation
itself; in which Cheynell gives an account how he came
acquainted with this man of reason, as he calls Chillingworth; what care he took of him; and how, as his illness
increased, “they remembered him in their prayers, and
prayed heartily that God would be pleased to bestow saving
graces as well as excellent gifts upon him; that He would
give him new light and new eyes, that he might see and
acknowledge, and recant his error; that he might deny
his carnal reason, and submit to faith:
” in all which he is
supposed to have related nothing but what was true. For
he is allowed by bishop Hoadly to have been as sincere, as
honest, and as charitable as his religion would suffer him
to be; and, in the case of Chillingworth, while he thought
it his duty to consign his soul to hell, was led by his humanity to take care of his body. Chillingworth at length
died; and Cheynell, though he refused, as he tells us, to
bury his body, yet conceived it very fitting to bury his
book. For this purpose he met Chillingworth' s friends at
the grave with his book in his hand; and, after a short
preamble to the people, in which he assured them “how
happy it would be for the kingdom, if this book and
all its fellows could be so buried that they might never rise
more, unless it were for a confutation,
” he exclaimed,
“Get thee gone, thou cursed book, which has seduced so
many precious souls: get thee gone, thou corrupt rotten
book, earth to earth, and dust: to dust get thee gone into
the place of rottenness, that thou mayest rot with thy
author, and see corruption.
”
esiastical preferments and dignities, for some at least of which he was indebted to Richard Metford, bishop of Salisbury. This valuable friend he had the misfortune to
, archbishop of Canterbury, and founder of All Souls college, Oxford, was born, probably in 1362, at Higham-Ferrars in Northamptonshire, of parents who, if not distinguished by their opulence, were at least enabled to place their children in situations which qualified them for promotion in civil and political life. Their sons, Robert and Thomas, rose to the highest dignities in the magistracy of London; and Henry, the subject of this memoir, was, at a suitable age, placed at Winchester school, and thence removed to New college, where he studied the civil and canon law. Of his proficiency here, we have little information, but the progress of his advancement indicates that he soon acquired distinction, and conciliated the affection of the first patrons of the age. From 1392 to 1407, he can be traced through . various ecclesiastical preferments and dignities, for some at least of which he was indebted to Richard Metford, bishop of Salisbury. This valuable friend he had the misfortune to lose in the last mentioned year; but his reputation was so firmly established, that king Henry IV. about this time employed him on an embassy to pope Innocent VII. on another to the court of France, and on a third to pope Gregory XII. who was so much pleased with his conduct as to present him to the bishopric of St. David’s, which happened to become vacant during his residence at the apostolic court in 1408. In the following year he was deputed, along with Hallum, bishop of Salisbury, and Chillingdon, prior of Canterbury, to represent England in the council of Pisa, which was convoked to settle the disputed pretensions of the popes Gregory and Benedict, both of whom were deposed, and Alexander V. chosen in their room, who had once studied at Oxford.
ed much litigation, as the on an application to Cornwallis, archfarther the time is removed from his bishop of Canterbury, as visitor, he age, the difficulty of ascertaining
* This part of the founder’s statutes puted and disputable claims. In 1776,
has occasioned much litigation, as the on an application to Cornwallis, archfarther the time is removed from his bishop of Canterbury, as visitor, he
age, the difficulty of ascertaining con- decreed that the number of fellows to
sanguinity becomes almost insupera- be admkted on claim of kindred should
ble. According- to the “Stemmata be limited to twenty. In 1792, on the
Chicheleana,
” published in
rchdeaconry of Salisbury, and in June 1664 to the prebend of Yatminster prima in the same church, by bishop Earle, who valued him as a learned and pious divine, and a great
, a divine and natural philosopher, was born in 1623, and educated at Rochester,
whence he removed to Magdalen-college, Oxford, in
1640. and became one of the clerks of the house, but appears to have left the university on the breaking out of
the rebellion. When Oxford was surrendered to the
parliamentary forces, he returned and took his bachelor’s
degree, but two years after was expelled by the parliamentary visitors. He then subsisted by teaching school
at Feversham, in Kent, although not without interruption
from the republican party; but on the restoration, he was
made chaplain to Henry lord Herbert, was created D. D.
and had the rectory of Upway, in Dorsetshire, bestowed
upon him. Jn Jan. 1663, he was collated to the archdeaconry of Salisbury, and in June 1664 to the prebend
of Yatminster prima in the same church, by bishop Earle,
who valued him as a learned and pious divine, and a great
virtuoso. He died at Upway, Aug. 26, 1670, and was
buried in the chancel of his church. He published, 1. a
pamphlet entitled “Indago Astrologica,
” Syzygiasticon instauratum, or an Ephemerisof the places
and aspects of the Planets, &c.
” Lond. Britannia Baconica, or the natural rarities,
of England, Scotland, and Wales, historically related, ac$ording to the precepts of lord Bacon,
” &c.“Lond. 1661,
8vo. It was this work which first suggested to Dr. Plot his
” Natural History of Oxfordshire."
reasons which had engaged him to embrace the Romish religion. But his godfather, Laud, who was then bishop of London, hearing of this affair, and being extremely concerned
In order to secure his conquest, Fisher persuaded him
to go over to the college of the Jesuits at Doway; and he
was desired to set down in writing the motives or reasons
which had engaged him to embrace the Romish religion.
But his godfather, Laud, who was then bishop of London,
hearing of this affair, and being extremely concerned at
it, wrote to him; and Chillingworth’s answer expressing
much moderation, candour, and impartiality, that prelate
continued to correspond with him, and to press him with
several arguments against the doctrine and practice of the
Romanists, This set him upon a new inquiry, which had
the desired effect. But the place where he was not being
suitable to the state of a free and impartial inquirer, he
resolved to come back to England, and left Doway in
1631, after a short stay there. Upon his return, he was
received with great kindness and affection hy bishop Laud,
who approved his design of retiring to Oxford, of which
university that prelate was then chancellor, in order to
complete the important work he was then upon, “A free
Enquiry into Religion.
” At last, after a thorough examination, the protestant principles appearing to him the most
agreeable to holy scripture and reason, he declared for
them; and having fully discovered the sophistry of the
motives which had induced him to go over to the church
of Rome, he wrote a paper about 1634 to confute them,
but did not think proper to publish it. This paper is now
lost; for though we have a paper of his upon the same
subject, which was first published in 1687, among his additional discourses, yet it seems to have been written on
some other occasion, probably at the desire of some of
his friends. That his return to the church of England 'was
owing to bishop Laud, appears from that prelate’s appeal
to the letters which passed between them; which appeal
was made in his speech before the lords at his trial, in order
to vindicate himself from the charge of popery.
his book, recommended the revisal of it to Dr. Prideaux, professor of divinity at Oxford, afterwards bishop of Worcester; and desired it might be published with his approbation
As, in forsaking the church of England, as well as in
returning to it, he was solely influenced by a love of truth,
so, upon the same principles, even after his return to protestantism, he thought it incumbent upon him to re-examine the grounds of it. This appears from a letter he
wrote to Sheldon, containing some scruples he had about
leaving the church of Rome, and returning to the church
of England; and these scruples, which he declared ingenuously to his friends, seemed to have occasioned a report that he had turned papist a second time, and then
protestant again. It would have been more just, perhaps,
to conclude that his principles were still unsettled, but, as
his return to the protestant religion made much noise, he
became engaged in several disputes with those of the
Homish; and particularly with John Lewgar, John Floyd
a Jesuit, who went under the name of Daniel, or Dan. a.
Jesu, and White. Lewgar, a great zealot for the church
of Rome, and one who had been an intimate friend of our
author, as soon as he heard of his return to the church of
England, sent him a very angry and abusive letter; to which
Chillingvvorth returned so mild and affectionate an answer,
that Lewgar could not help being touched with it, and
desired to see his old friend again. They had a conference
upon religion before Skinner and Sheldon and we have a
paper of Chillingworth printed among the additional discourses above-mentioned, which seems to contain the abstract or summary of their dispute. Besides the pieces
already mentioned, he wrote one to demonstrate, that
“the doctrine of infallibility is neither evident of itself,
nor grounded upon certain and infallible reasons, nor warranted by any passage of scripture.
” And in two other
papers, he shews that the church of Rome had formerly
erred; first, “by admitting of infants to the eucharist,
and holding, that without it they could not be saved;
” and
secondly, “by teaching the doctrine of the millenaries,
viz. that before the world’s end Christ shall reign upon the
earth 1000 years, and that the saints should live under him
in all holiness and happiness;
” both which doctrines are
condemned as false and heretical by the present church of
Rome. He wrote also a short letter, in answer to some
objections by one of his friends, in which he shews, that
“neither the fathers nor the councils are infallible witnesses of tradition and that the infallibility of the church
of Rome must first of all be proved from Scripture.
” Lastly,
he wrote an answer to some passages in the dialogues published under the name of Rush worth. In 1635 he was
engaged in a work which gave him a far greater opportunity to confute the principles of the church of Rome, and
to vindicate the religion of protestants. A Jesuit called
Edward Knott, though his true name was Matthias Wilson,
had published in 1630 a little book called “Charity mistaken, with the want whereof catholics are unjustly charged,
for affirming, as they do with grief, that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation.
” This was answered by Dr.
Potter, provost of Queen Vcollege, Oxford, in 1633, in
a tract entitled “Want of Charity justly charged on all
such Romanists as dare without truth or modesty affirm,
that protestancy destroyeth salvation.
” The Jesuit in
Mercy and Truth, or
Charity maintained by catholics with the want
whereof they are unjustly chargetl, for affirming that
protestancy destroyeth salvation.
” Knott being informed of Chillingworth’s intention to reply to this,
resolved to prejudice the public both against the author
and his book, in a pamphlet called “A Direction to be
observed by N. N. if he means to proceed in answering
the book entitled Mercy and Truth, &c. printed in 1636,
permissu superiorum:
” in which he makes no scruple to
represent Chillingworth as a Socinian, a charge which has
been since brought against him with more effect. Chillingworth’s answer to Knott was very nearly finished in
the beginning of 1637, when Laud, who knew our author’s
freedom in delivering his thoughts, and was under some
apprehension he might indulge it too much in his book,
recommended the revisal of it to Dr. Prideaux, professor
of divinity at Oxford, afterwards bishop of Worcester; and
desired it might be published with his approbation annexed
to it. Dr. Baylie, vice-chancellor, and Dr. Fell, lady
Margaret’s professor in divinity, also examined the book;
and at the end of the year it was published, with their approbation, under this title: “The religion of Protestants
a safe way to Salvation: or, an answer to a book entitled
Mercy and Truth, or Charity maintained by Catholics,
which pretends to prove the contrary.
” It was presented
by the author to Charles I. with a very elegant dedication i
from whence we learn this remarkable circumstance, that
Dr. Potter’s vindication of the protestant religion against
Knott’s books was written by special order of the king 5
and that, by giving such an order, that prince, besides
the general good, had also some aim at the recovery of
Chillingworth from the danger he was then in by the change
of his religion. This work was received with general applause; and what perhaps never happened to any other
controversial work of that bulk, two editions of it wer6
published within less than five months: the first at Oxford,
1638, in folio; the second at London, with some small
improvements, the same year. A third was published
in 1664 to which were added some pieces of Chillingworth a fourth in 1674; a fifth in 1684, with the
addition of his Letter to Lewgar, mentioned above. In
1687, when the nation was in imminent danger of popery,
and this work was in its Cull popularity, Dr. John Patrick,
at the request of the London clergy, published an abridgment of it in 4to, with the additional pieces, which we
have taken notice of already. The sixth edition of the
original appeared in 1704, with the “Additional Discourses,
” but full of typographical errors; the seventh
edition in 1719; the eighth in ———; and the ninth in
1727. This last edition was prepared from that of 1664,
carefully examined and compared with the two preceding
editions. The various readings of these editions are. taken
notice of at the bottom of each page, with the words Oxf,
or Lond. after them. The tenth and last edition is of the
year 1742, with the “Life of Mr. Chillingworth,
”by Dr. Birch',
which life was copied into the General Dictionary, 10 vols.
fol. The Jesuit Knott, as well as Floyd and Lacy, Jesuits,
wrote against Chillingworth; but their answers were soon
forgotten.
London with the garrison, he obtained leave to be conveyed to Chichester; where he was lodged in the bishop’s palace; and where, after a short illness, he died. We have
In the mean time he had refused preferment, which was
offered him by sir Thomas Coventry, keeper of the great
seal, because his conscience would not allow him to subscribe the thirty-nine articles. Considering that, by subscribing the articles, he must not only declare, willingly,
and ex animo, that every one of the articles is agreeable
to the word of God, but also that the book of common
prayer contained nothing contrary to the word of God;
that it might lawfully be used; and that he himself would
use it: and conceiving at the same time that, both in the
articles and in the book of common prayer, there were
some things repugnant to the scripture, or which were
not lawful to be used, he fully resolved to lose for ever all
hopes of preferment, rather than comply with the subscriptions required. One of his chief objections to the
common prayer related to the Athanasian dreed, the
damnatory clauses of which he lodked upon as contrary to
the word of God. Another objection concerned the fourth
corttmantlmentj which, by the prayer subjoined to it,
f; Lord, have mercy updn us,“&c. appeared to him to be
mfcde a part of the Christian law, and consequently to bind
Christians to the observation of the Jewish sabbath. These
scruples of but authoi'j about subscribing the articles, furnished his antagonist Knott with an objection against him,
as an improper champion for the protestant caw&e. To
which he answers in the close of his preface to the
” Religion of Protestants.“He expresses here not only his
readiness to subscribe, but also what he conceives to be
the sense and intent of such a subscription; that is, a subscription of peace or union, and not of belief or assent, as
he formerly thought it was. This was also the sense of
archbishop Laud, with which he could not then be unacquainted; and of his friend Sheldon, who laboured to
convince him of it, and was, no doubt, the person that
Brought him at last into it. For there is in Des Maizeaux’s
Account, a letter which he wrote to Sheldon upon this occasion; and it seems there passed several letters between
them upon this subject. Such at least is the apqjqgy which
his biographers have offered for his ready subscription,
after it had appeared to every impartial person that his objections were insurmountable. The apology we tiring as
weak, as his subscription was strong and decisive, running
in the usual language,
” omnibus hisce articulis et singulis
in iisdem contentis volens, et ex animo subscribe, et conspnsum meum iisdem praebeo.“The distinction, after such
a declaration, between peace and union, and belief and
assent, is, we fear, too subtle for common understandings.
When, by whatever means, he had got the better of his
scruples, he was prompted to the chancellorship of Salisbury, with the prebend of Bri$wqrth, in Northamptonshire,
annexed and, as appears from the subscription-book of
the church of Salisbury, upon July 20, 1638, complied
with the usual subscription, in the manner just related.
About the same time he was appointed master of Wigston’s
hospital, in Leicestershire
” both which,“says Wood,
” and perhaps some other preferments, he kept to his
dying day.“In 1646 he was deputed by the chapter of
Salisbury their proctor in convocation. He was likewise
deputed to the convocation which met the same year with
the new parliament, and was opened Nov. 4. In 1642 he
was put into the roll with some others by his majesty, to
be created D. D.; but the civil war breaking out, he never
received it. He was zealously attached to the royal party,
and at the siege of Gloucester, begun Aug. 10, 1643, was
present in the king’s army, where he advised and directed
the making certain engines for assaulting the town, after
the manner of the Roman testudines cum pluteis, but which
the success of the enemy prevented him from employing.
Soon after f having accompanied the lord Hopton, general
of the king’s forces ip the west, to Arundel castle, in Sussex,
and choosing to repose himself in that garrison, on account
of an indisposition, occasioned by the severity of the season, he was taken prisoner Dec, 9, 1643, by the parliament forces under the command of sir William Waller,
when the castle surrendered. But his illness increasing,
and not being able to go to London with the garrison, he
obtained leave to be conveyed to Chichester; where he
was lodged in the bishop’s palace; and where, after a short
illness, he died. We have a very particular account of
his sickness and death, written by his great adversary, Mr.
Cheynell, in his
” Chillingworthi Novissima, or the
sickness, heresy, death, and burial, of William Chillingworth, &c.“London, 1644, 4to. Cheynell accidentally
met him at Arundel castle, and frequently visited him at
Chichester, till he died. It was indeed at the request of
this gentleman, that our author was removed to Chichester;
where Cheynell attended him constantly, and behaved to
him with as much compassion and charity as his bigotted
and uncharitable principles would suffer him. There is no
reason, however, to doubt the truth of Cheynell’s account,
as to the most material circumstances, which prove that
Chillingworth was attended during his sickness, and provided with all necessaries, by one 1 lieutenant Golledge,
and his wife Christobel, at the command of the governor
of Chichester; that at first he refused the assistance of sir
William Waller’s physician, but afterwards was persuaded
to admit his visits, though there were no hopes of his recovery; that his indisposition was increased by the abusive
treatment he met with from most of the officers who were
taken prisoners with him in Arundel castle, and who looked
upon him as a spy set over them and their proceedings;
and that during his whole illness he was often teased by
Cheynell himself, and by an officer of the garrison of Chichester, with impertinent questions and disputes. And on
the same authority we may conclude that lord Clarendon
was misinformed of the particulars of his death for, after
having observed that he was taken prisoner in Arundel
castle, he adds
” As soon as his person was known, which
would have drawn reverence from any noble enemy, the
clergy that attended that army prosecuted him with all
the inhumanity imaginable; so that by their barbarous
usage, he died within a few days, to the grief of all that
knew him, and of many who knew him not, but by his
book, and the reputation he had with learned men."
From this it appears that the noble historian did not know,
or had forgot, that he was sent to Chichester, but believed
that he died in Arundel castle, and within a few days after
the taking of it by sir William Waller. Wood tells us
also, that the royal party in Chichester looked upon the
impertinent discourses of Cheynell to our author, as a
shortening of his days. He is supposed to have died Jan.
30, though the day is not precisely known, and was buried, according to his own desire, in the cathedral church
of Chichpster, Cheynell appeared at his funeral, and gave
that instance of bigotry and buffoonery which we have related
already under his article.
iscopacy,” 1644, 4to. It was also added to an edition of a tract on the same subject, by Dr. Morton, bishop of Durham, entitled “Confessions and proofs of protestant divines,”
Besides the works already noticed, there are extant of
Mr. Chillingworth’s, “Nine Sermons on occasional subjects,
” The Apostolical
Institution of Episcopacy,
” Confessions and proofs of
protestant divines,
”
ontains a collection of inscriptions made by consul Sherard, Dr. Picenini, and Dr. Lisle, afterwards bishop of St. Asaph, which was deposited in the earl of Oxford’s library,
One of his, first publications in these sciences appeared in
1721, and was entitled, “Inscriptio Sigæa antiquissima
Βουστροφηδον exarata. Commentario earn HistoricoGrammatico-Critico illustravit Edmundus Chishull, S.T.B.
regiae majestati à sacris,
” folio. This was followed by
“Notarum ad inscriptionem Sigaeam appendicula; addita
a Sigaeo altera Antiochi Soteris inscriptione,
” folio, in
fifteen pages, without a date. Both these pieces were
afterwards incorporated in his “Antiquitates Asiaticae.
”
When Dr. Mead, in Dissertatio de Nummis quibusdam a Smyrnseis in Medicorum honorem percussis,
” which gave rise to a controversy very interesting to the professors of the medical art,
and amusing to the learned world in general. The question was, whether the physicians of ancient Rome were not
usually vile and despicable slaves, or whether there were
not some, at least, among them, who enjoyed the privileges
of a free condition, and the respect due to their services.
The history of this controversy will be found in the articles of
Mead and Middleton; but Mr. Chishull has not been deemed
happy in all his explanations of the Smyrnsean inscriptions.
In 1728 appeared in folio, his great work, “Antiquitates Asiaticoe Christianam Æram antecedentes ex primariis Monumentis Graecis descriptae, Latine versae, Notisque et Commentariis illustratae. Accedit Monumentum
Latinum Ancyranum.
” Dr. Mead contributed fifty-one
guineas, Dr. William Sherard twenty, and Dr. Lisle five
guineas towards this book, which was published by
subscription, at one guinea the common copy, and two o-uineas the royal paper. The work contains a collection of
inscriptions made by consul Sherard, Dr. Picenini, and
Dr. Lisle, afterwards bishop of St. Asaph, which was deposited in the earl of Oxford’s library, and is now in the
British Museum. Mr. Chislmll added to the “Antiquitates
Asiatics;
” two small pieces which he had before published,
viz. “Conjectaneade Nummo Ckhiii inscripto,
” and “her
Asite Poeticum,
” addressed to the rev. John Horn. Our
author not having succeeded in his explication of an inscription to Jupiter Ourios, afterwards cancelled it, and
substituted a different interpretation by Dr. Ashton, which
was more satisfactory; but our author did not submit in,
this case with so good a grace as might have been wished,
and was reasonably to be expected. He added also, at the
same time, another half sheet, with the head of Homer, of
which only fifty copies 'were printed. He had formed the
design of publishing a second volume, under the title of
“Antiquitates Asiatics? pars altera diversa, diversarum
Urbium inscripta Marmora complectens,
” and the printing
was begun; but the author’s death put a stop to the progress of it, and the manuscript was purchased at Dr. Askew’s sale in 1785 for the British Museum, for about 60l.
It is to be regretted that the learned Thomas Tyrwhitt declined being the editor of this second volume. Mr. ChishulPs printed books were sold by a marked catalogue by
Whiston in 1735. In 1731, Mr. Chishull was presented
to the rectory of South-church in Essex. This preferment
he did not long live to enjoy; for he departed the present
life at Walthamstow, on the 18th of May, 1733. Mr.
Clarke, of Chichester, writing to Mr. Bowyer, says, “I was
very sorry for Mr. Chishull' s death as a public loss.
” That
our author sustained an excellent character, as a clergyman and a divine, cannot be doubted. Two letters, written by him to his friend Mr. Bowyer, and which Mr.
Nichols has preserved, are evident proofs both of the piety
and benevolence “of his disposition. With respect to his
literary abilities, Dr. Taylor styles him
” Vir celeberrimus
ingenii acumine et literarum peritia, quibus excellebat
maxime;“and Dr. Mead has bestowed a high encomium
upon him, in the preface which introduces Mr. ChishulPs
Dissertation on the Smyrnxan Coins. The same eminent
physician testified his regard to the memory of his learned
friend, by publishing in 1747 our author’s
” Travels in
Turkey, and back to England," fol. They were originally
published at a guinea, in sheets, and in 1759, the remaining copies, which were numerous, were advertised by the
proprietors at fourteen shillings bound.
Paul V. On his return to Liege, he received some promotion in the church; and Ferdinand of Bavaria, bishop and prince of Liege, made him vicar-general of his diocese,
, the brother of Erasmus
de Surlet, lord of Chokier (one of the ablest lawyers of his time, who died in 1625), was born at Liege Jan. 14, 1571,
of an ancient and noble family. He studied law at the
university of Lovaine, and especially the Roman history
and antiquities under Lipsius. After taking the degree of
doctor in canon and civil law at Orleans, he went to Rome,
and was introduced to pope Paul V. On his return to
Liege, he received some promotion in the church; and
Ferdinand of Bavaria, bishop and prince of Liege, made
him vicar-general of his diocese, and one of his counsellors. Chokier was not more esteemed for his learning than
for his benevolence, which led him to found two hospitals,
one for poor incurables, and the other for female penitents.
He died at Liege, either in 1650 or 1651; but his biographers have not specified the particular time, although
they notice that he was buried in the cathedral of Liege,
under a magnificent tomb. Among his works, are, 1.
“Notae in Senecse libellum de tranquillitate animi,
” Leige,
Thesaurus aphorismorum politicorum,
seu commentarius in Justi-Lipsii politica, cum exemplis,
notis et monitis,
” Rome, Specimen candoris Heidemanni,
” Liege, Notae
et dissertationes in Onosandri strategicum,
” Gr. and Lat.
Aphorismi.
” 4. “Tractatus de permutationibus beneficiorunV 1616, 8vo, and afterwards Rome, 1700, folio,
with other treatises on the same subject. 5.
” De re numjnaria prisci sevi, collata ad aestimationem monetae presentis,“Cologne, 1620, 8vo, Liege, 1649. Another title of
this work we have seen is
” Monetae antiquae diversarum
gentium maxime Romanae consideratio et ad nostram hodiernam reductio.“He published some other works on
law subjects and antiquities of the courts of chancery, the
office of ambassador, &c. and some of controversy against
the protestants, and one against the learned Samuel Marets, entitled ff Apologeticus adversus Samuel Maresii
librum, cui titulus, Candela sub modio posita per clerum
Romanum,
”
, a learned English bishop, was a Lancashire man by birth, and educated in St. John’s college,
, a learned English bishop,
was a Lancashire man by birth, and educated in St. John’s
college, Cambridge. He was one of the first fellows of
Trinity college after its foundation by Henry VIII. in 1546,
and shortly after became master of it; and in 1554 was
made dean of Norwich. In the reign of Edward VI. he
lived abroad in a state of banishment, in which, as he tells
us in the preface to his translation of Philo Judxus, he
was all the while supported by his college; but upon
queen Mary’s succeeding to the crown, returned, and was
made bishop of Chichester. He is said to have died a
little before this queen in 1558. He translated Philo Judaeiis into Latin, Antwerp, 1553, 4to, and also the ecclesiastical histories of Eusebius, Socrates, Sozomen, Evagrius,
and Theodoret, Louvain, 1570, 8vo; Cologn, 1570, fol.
hut his translations are very defective. Valesius, in his
preface to Eusebius, says, that compared with Rufinus and
Musculus, who had translated these historians before him,
he may be reckoned a diligent and learned man; but yet
that he is very far from deserving the character of a good
translator: that his style is impure, and full of barbarism;
that his periods are long and perplexed: that he has frequently acted the commentator, rather than the translator;
that he has enlarged and retrenched at pleasure; that he
has transposed the sense oftimes, and has not always preserved the distinction even of chapters. The learned Huet
has passed the same censure on him, in his book “De Interpretatione.
” Hence it is that all those who have followed
Christopherson as their guide in ecclesiastical antiquity,
and depended implicitly upon his versions, have often
been led to commit great faults; and this has happened
not seldom to Baronius among others.
the principles of the Christian religion, was afterwards baptized by Meletius, and ordained by that bishop to be a reader in the church of Antioch, where he converted
, one of the most learned and
eloquent of the fathers, was born at Antioch, of a noble family, about the year 354. His father, Secundus, dying when
he was very young, the care of his education was left to
his mother, Anthusa. He was designed at first for the bar,
and was sent to learn rhetoric under Libanius; who had
such an opinion of his eloquence, that when asked who
would be capable of succeeding him in the school, he answered, “John, if the Christians had not stolen him from
us.
” He soon, however, quitted all thoughts of the bar,
and being instructed in the principles of the Christian religion, was afterwards baptized by Meletius, and ordained
by that bishop to be a reader in the church of Antioch,
where he converted his two friends, Theodorus and Maximus. While he was yet young, he formed a resolution of
entering ugon a monastic life, and in spite of all remonstrances from his mother, about the year 374, he betook
himself to the neighbouring mountains, where he lived four
years with an ancient hermit; then retired to a more secret part of the desert, and shut himself up in a cave, in which
situation he spent two whole years more; till at length,
worn out almost by continual watchings, fastings, and other
severities, he was forced to return to Antioch, to his old
way of living.
an, in which office he acquitted himself with so much reputation, that, upon the death of Nectarius, bishop of Constantinople, in the year 397, he was unanimously chosen
He was ordained deacon by Meletius, in the year 381, and now began to compose and publish many of his works. Five years after, he was ordained a priest by Flavian, in which office he acquitted himself with so much reputation, that, upon the death of Nectarius, bishop of Constantinople, in the year 397, he was unanimously chosen to fill that see. The emperor Arcadius, however, was obliged to employ all his authority, and even to use some stratagem, before he could seduce Chrysostom from his native Antioch, where he was held in so much admiration and esteem. He sent in the mean time, a mandate to Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, to consecrate Chrysostom bishop of Constantinople; which was done in the year 398, notwithstanding the secret and envious attempts of Theophilus to prevent it. But Chrysostom was no sooner at the head of the church of Constantinople, than that zeal and ardour, for which he was afterwards famous, was employed in endeavouring to effect a general reformation of manners. With this disposition, he begun with the clergy, and next attacked the laity, but especially the courtiers, whom he soon made his enemies; and his preaching is said to have been eminently successful among the lower classes. Nor was his zeal confined altogether within the precincts of Constantinople; it extended to foreign parts, as appears from his causing to be demolished some temples and statues in Phoenicia; but all writers are agreed that his temper, even in his best duties, was violent, and afforde'd his enemies many advantages.
ned in that church. But while he was here, a conspiracy was formed against him at home, by Severian, bishop of Gabala, to whom Chrysostom had committed the care of his
In the year 400, he went into Asia, at the request of
the clergy of Ephesus; and by deposing thirteen bishops
of Lydia and Phrygia, endeavoured to settle some disorders
which had been occasioned in that church. But while he
was here, a conspiracy was formed against him at home,
by Severian, bishop of Gabala, to whom Chrysostom had
committed the care of his church in his absence, and who
endeavoured to insinuate himself into the favour of the nobility and people, at Chrysostom’s expence. He had even
formed a confederacy against him with his old adversary,
Theophilus of Alexandria, which the empress Eudoxia encouraged, for the sake of revenging some liberties which
Chrysostom had taken in reproving her. By her intrigues,
chiefly, the emperor was prevailed upon to call Theophilus
from Alexandria, and he, who wanted an opportunity to
ruin Chrysostom, came immediately to Constantinople,
and brought several Egyptian bishops with him. Those of
Asia, also, whom Chrysostom had deposed for the tumults
they raised at Ephesus, appeared upon this occasion at
Constantinople against him. Theophilus now arrived, but
instead of taking up his quarters with his brother Chrvsostom, as was usual, he had apartments in the empress’s
palace, where he called a council, and appointed judges.
Chrysostom, however, with much spirit, excepted against
the judges, and refused to appear before the council; declaring that he was not accountable to strangers for any
supposed misdemeanour, but only to the bishops of his
own and the neighbouring provinces. Notwithstanding
this, Theophilus held a synod of bishops, to which he
sumtnoned Chrysostom to appear, and answer to various articles of accusation. But Chrysostom sent three bishops
and two priests to acquaint Theophilus and his synod, that
though he was very ready to submit himself to the judgment of those who should be regularly assembled, and have
a legal right to judge him, yet he absolutely refused to be
judged by him and his synod; and having persisted in this
refusal four several times, he was in consequence deposed in the beginning of the year 403. The news of his
deposition was no sooner spread about Constantinople,
than all the city was in an uproar, and when the emperor
ordered him to be banished, the people determined to
detain him by force. In three days, however, to prevent
any further disturbance, he surrendered himself to those
who had orders to seize him, and was conducted by them
to a small town in Bithynia, as the residence of his banishment. His departure made the people more outrageous
than ever: they prayed the emperor that he might be recalled; they even threatened him; and Eudoxia was so
frightened with the tumult, that she herself solicited for it.
A numerous synod, assembled at Constantinople, now rescinded all former proceedings, and Chrysostom was recalled in triumph; but his troubles were not yet at an
end. The empress about the latter end of this year had
erected her own statue near the church; and the people,
to do honour to her, had celebrated the public games before it. This Chrysostom thought indecent; and the fire
of his zeal, far from being extinguished by his late misfortunes, urged him to preach against those who were concerned in it. His discourse provoked the empress, who
still retained her old enmity to him; and made her resolve
once more to have him deposed from his bishopric. He
irritated her not a little, as soon as he was apprized of her
machinations against him, by most imprudently beginning
one of his sermons with these remarkable words: “Behold
the furious Herodias, insisting to have the head of John
Baptist in a charger!
” We are not to wonder, therefore,
that a synod of bishops was assembled, who immediately
deposed him, alleging that he stood already deposed, by
virtue of the former sentence given against him; which,
they said, had never been reversed, nor himself re-established in hk see, in that legal and orderly manner which
the canons required. In consequence of that judgment, the emperor forbade him to enter the church
any more, and ordered him to be banished. His followers
and adherents were now insulted and persecuted by the
soldiery, and stigmatized particularly by the name of Johannites. He had, indeed, a strong party among the
people, who would now have armed themselves in his defence; but he chose rather to spend the remainder of his
days in banishment, than be the unhappy cause of a civil
war to his country; and therefore surrendered himself a
second time to those who were to have the care of him.
He set out in June 404, under a guard of soldiers, to
Nicca, where he did not make any long stay, but pursued
his jourrjey to Cucusus, the destined place of his banishment, at which he arrived in September. It is remarkable
that the very day Chrysostom left Constantinople, the
great church was set on fire and burnt, together with the
palace, which almost adjoined to it, entirely to the ground.
The same year there fell hail-stones of an extraordinary
size, that did considerable damage to the town; which
calamity was also followed by the death of the empress
Eudoxia, and of Cyrinus, one of Chrysostom’s chief enemies. All these were considered by the partisans of Chrysostom, as so many judgments from heaven upon the
country which thus persecuted Chrysostom.
divided about him; the former holding him in great veneration, while the latter considered him as a bishop excommunicated. But the death of Arcadius happening about five
Cucusus was a city of Armenia, whose situation was remarkably barren, wild, and inhospitable; so that Chrysostom was obliged to change his place of residence frequently, on account of the incursions which were made by the barbarous nations around him. He did not, however, neglect his episcopal functions; but sent forth priests and monks to preach the gospel to the Goths and Persians, and to take care of the churches of Armenia and Phoenicia. This probably provoked his enemies, not yet satiated with revenge, to molest him even in this situation, wretched as it was, and they prevailed with the emperor to have him sent to a desert region of Pontus, upon the borders of the Euxine sea. But the fatigue of travelling, and the hard usage he met with from the soldiers, who were conducting him thither, had such an effect upon him, that he was seized with a violent fever, and died in a few hours, at Comanis, in Armenia, in the year 407. Afterwards, the western and eastern churches were divided about him; the former holding him in great veneration, while the latter considered him as a bishop excommunicated. But the death of Arcadius happening about five months after, the eastern churches grew softened by degrees and it is certain, that about thirty years after, his bones were removed to Constantinople, and deposited in the temple of the holy apostles, with all pomp and solemnity. It was from his eloquence, that the name of Chrysostomns, or goldenmouth, was given to him after his death, his usual name being only John.
o his own profound respect for Chubb, this writer also unites the “admiration” of Dr. Samuel Clarke, bishop Hoadly, Dr. John Hoadly, archdeacon Rolleston, and Mr. Harris;
He left behind him two volumes of posthumous works,
which he calls “A Farewell to his readers,
” from which we
may fairly form this judgment of his opinions: “that he
had little or no belief of revelation; that indeed he plainly
rejects the Jewish revelation, and consequently the Christian, which is founded upon it; that he disclaims a future
judgment, and is very uncertain as to any future state of existence; that a particular providence is not deducible from
the phenomena of the world, and therefore that prayer
cannot be proved a duty, &c. &c.
” With such a man we
may surely part without reluctance. The wonder is that
he should have ever drawn any considerable portion of
public attention to the reveries of ignorance, presumption,
and disingenuous sophistry. Like his legitimate successor,
the late Thomas Paine, he was utterly destitute of that
learning and critical skill which is necessary to the explanation of the sacred writings, which, however, he tortured
to his meaning without shame and candour, frequently
bringing forward the sentiments of his predecessors in
scepticism, as the genuine productions of his own unassisted
powers of reasoning. His writings are now indeed probably
little read, and his memory might long ago have been consigned to oblivion, had not the editors of the last edition of
the Biographia Britannica brought forward his history and
writings in a strain of prolix and laboured panegyric. By
what inducement such a man as Dr. Kippis was persuaded
to admit this article, we shall not now inquire, but the
perpetual struggle to create respect for Chubb is evidently
as impotent as it is inconsistent. While compelled to admit
his attacks upon all that the majority of Christians hold
sacred, the writer tells us that “Chubb’s views were not
inconsistent with a firm belief in our holy religion,
” and in
another place, he says that “Chubb appears to have had
very much at heart the interests of our holy religion.
” To
his own profound respect for Chubb, this writer also unites
the “admiration
” of Dr. Samuel Clarke, bishop Hoadly,
Dr. John Hoadly, archdeacon Rolleston, and Mr. Harris;
but he does not inform us in what way the admiration of
these eminent characters was expressed; and the only evidence he brings is surely equivocal. He tells us that
“several of his tracts, when in manuscript, were seen by
these gentlemen but they never made the least correction in them, even with regard to orthography, in which
Chubb was deficient.
” Amidst all these efforts to screen
Chubb from contempt, his biographer has not suppressed
the character of him given by Dr. Law, bishop of Carlisle,
in his “Considerations on the theory of religion,
” and
which, from the well-knowncandour of that prelate, may
be adopted with safety. “Chubb,
” says Dr. Law, “notwithstanding a tolerably clear head, and strong natural
parts, yet, by ever aiming at things far beyond his reach,
by attempting a variety of subjects, for which his narrow
circumstances, and small compass of reading and knowledge, had in a great measure disqualified him; from a
fashionable, but a fallacious kind of philosophy, (with which he set out, and by which one of his education might very easily be misled), fell by degrees to such confusion
in divinity, to such low quibbling on some obscure passages
in our translation of the Bible, and was reduced to such
wretched cavils as to several historical facts and circumstances, wherein a small skill either in the languages or
sciences, might have set him right; or a small share of
real modesty would have supplied the want of them, by
putting him upon consulting those who could and would
have given him proper assistance; that he seems to have
fallen at last into an almost universal scepticism; and quitting that former serious and sedate sobriety which gave
him credit, contents himself with carrying on a mere farce
for some time; acts the part of a solemn grave buffoon;
sneers at all things he does not understand; and after all
his fair professions, and the caveat he has entered against
such a charge, must unavoidably be set down in the seat
of the scorner.
” Every point in this charge is fully proved
in the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of Dr. Leland’s
View of Deistical Writers.
ght qualify himfor the church, and at the customary age he received deacon’s orders from Dr. Willes, bishop of Bath and Wells, and in 1756 was ordained priest by Dr. Sherlock,
The reason of his abandoning the university may have been an attachment which he formed while at Westminsterschool, and which ended in a clandestine marriage at the Fleet. This was a severe disappointment to his father’s hopes, but he wisely became reconciled to what was unavoidable, and entertained the young couple in his house about a year, during which his son’s conduct was irreproachable. In 1751 he retired to Sunderland, in the north of England, where he applied himself to such studies as might qualify himfor the church, and at the customary age he received deacon’s orders from Dr. Willes, bishop of Bath and Wells, and in 1756 was ordained priest by Dr. Sherlock, bishop of London. He then exercised his clerical functions at Cadbury in Somersetshire, and at Rainham, his father’s living, but in what manner, or with what display of abilities, is not remembered. A story was current some time after his death that he received a curacy of 30l. a year in Wales, and kept a public house to supply his deficiencies, but for this there appears to have been no other foundation than what the irregularities of his more advanced life supplied. So regardless was he of character, that his enemies found ready credit for any fiction at his expence. While at Rainham, he endeavoured to provide for his family by teaching the youth of the neighbourhood, an occupation which necessity rendered eligible, and habit might have made pleasing; but in 1758 his father’s death opened a more flattering prospect to him in the metropolis, where he was chosen his successor in the curacy and leetureship of St. John’s. For some time he performed the duties of these offices with external decency at least, and employed his leisure hours in the instruction of some pupils in the learned languages, and was also engaged as a teacher at a ladies’ boarding-school.
r opposed the king, while he was forming this project, has been disputed by historians. According to bishop Burnet, “he very prudently declined meddling much in business,
In June, being then lieutenant-general of his majesty’s
forces, he was ordered into the west to suppress Monmouth’s rebellion; which he did in a month’s time, with
an inconsiderable body of horse, and took the duke himself prisoner. He was extremely well received by the king
at his return from this victory; but soon discerned that it
only served to confirm the king in an opinion that, by
virtue of a standing army, the religion and government of
England might easily be changed. How far lord Churchill
concurred with or opposed the king, while he was forming
this project, has been disputed by historians. According
to bishop Burnet, “he very prudently declined meddling
much in business, spoke little except when his advice was
asked, and then always recommended moderate measures.
”
It is said he declared very early to lord Galway, that if
his master attempted to overturn the established religion,
he would leave him; and that he signed the memorial
transmitted to the prince and princess of Orange, by which
they were invited to fill the throne. Be this as it will, it is
certain that he remained with the king, and was entrusted
by him, after the prince of Orange was landed in 1688.
He attended king James when he marched with his forces
to oppose the prince, and had the command of 5000 men;
yet the earl of Feversham, suspecting his inclinations, advised the king to seize him. The king’s affection to him
was so great, that he could not be prevailed upon to do it;
and this left him at liberty -to go over to the prince, which
accordingly he did, but without betraying any post, or carrying off any troops. Whoever considers the great obligations lord Churchill lay under to king James, must naturally conclude, that he could not take the resolution of
leaving him, and withdrawing to the prince of Orange,
but with infinite concern and regret; and that this was
really the case, appears from a letter, which he left for
the king, to shew the reasons of his conduct, and to express his grief for the step he was obliged to take.
im down stairs, swore at him bitterly, and was going to tear oft’ his perriwig. Dr. Hoadly, the late bishop of Winchester, was present at this scene. Disappointed ambition,
It is well known that Pope’s character of Atossa was designed for her; and when these lines were shewn to her
grace, as if they were intended for the portrait of the
duchess of Buckingham, she soon stopped the person that
was reading them to her, and called out aloud—“I cannot
be so imposed upon—I see plainly enough for whom they
are designed;
” and abused Pope for the attack, though she
was afterwards reconciled to, and courted him. The violence of the duchess of Marlborough‘ s temper, which is so
strongly painted in the character of Atossa, frequently
broke out into wonderful and ridiculous indecencies. In
the last illness of the great duke her husband, when Dr.
Mead left his chamber, the duchess, disliking his advice,
followed him down stairs, swore at him bitterly, and was
going to tear oft’ his perriwig. Dr. Hoadly, the late bishop
of Winchester, was present at this scene. Disappointed
ambition, great wealth, and increasing years, rendered her
more and more peevish. She hated courts, says lord Hailes,
over which she had no influence, and she became at length
the most ferocious animal that is suffered to go loose a
violent party-woman. In the latter part of her life she
became bed-ridden. Paper, pens, and ink were placed by
her side, and she used occasionally to write down either
what she remembered, or what came into her head. A selection from these loose papers was made in the way of
diary, by sir David Dalryraple, lord Hailes, under the title
of “The Opinions of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough,
published from the original Mss.
” 1788, 12mo, which
Mr. Park, who has given a specimen, very properly characterises as the effusions of caprice and arrogance. This
lady died Oct. 18, 1744.
his private virtuesand public services are spoken of by all his contemporaries in the highest terms. Bishop Burnet ranks him among those worthy and eminent men whose lives
, eldest son of the preceding,
was born at St. Edmundsbury, in Suffolk, September 14,
1646, and educated in the free-school there, under the
care of Dr. Thomas Stephens, author of the notes on Statius’s Sylvse, who took very early notice of the promising
parts of his scholar. Before he was full thirteen years of
age, he was admitted a pensioner in Emanuel-college, in
Cambridge, September 5, 1659, under the tuition of Mr.
Thomas Jackson, where he took his degree of A. B. 1663,
A.M. 1667, and commenced D. D. in 1683. He was
then chosen one of the preachers of St. Edmundsbury,
which office he discharged for seven years with universal
reputation. From thence, at the instance of some considerable men of the long robe, whose business at the assizes there gave them opportunities of being acquainted
with his great worth and abilities, he was thought worthy
by the society of Gray’s-inn, to succeed the eminent Dr.
Cradock, as their preacher, which he continued to be all
the remaining part of his life, much to the satisfaction of
the society. He was also presented by the lord keeper
North (who was his wife’s kinsman) to the rectory of Farnham-royal, in Buckinghamshire, into which he was instituted May 14, 1683; but what he most valued next to his
preacher’s place at Gray’s-inn, was the lectureship of St.
Michael Bassishaw, to which he was elected by that parish
about two years before his death. He was also chaplain in
ordinary to his majesty. He was cut off, however, in the
prime of life. He was seized with the small-pox on a
Sunday evening, March the 16th, after having preached
at St. Martin in the Fields, in his Lent course there; and
died March 28, 1638. He was buried in a vault under part
of the church of St. Michael Bassishaw, in the grave
with his wife, Mrs. Thornasin North, a most virtuous and
accomplished woman, who died eighteen days after him,
of the same disease. We are assured by the testimony of
Dr. Sharp, that no man of a private condition, in the last
age, died more lamented, and his private virtuesand
public services are spoken of by all his contemporaries in
the highest terms. Bishop Burnet ranks him among those
worthy and eminent men whose lives and labours in a great
measure rescued the church from those reproaches that
the follies of others drew upon it; nor ought it to be forgotten, that he was one of those excellent divines who
made that noble stand against popery in the reign of king
James II. which will redound to their immortal honour.
The several things published by Dr. Clagett, are as follows: 1. “A Discourse concerning the Operations of the
Holy Spirit; with a confutation of some part of Dr. Owen’s
book upon that subject,
” Part I. Lond. A Reply to a pamphlet called
The Mischief of Impositions, by Mr. Alsop, which pretends to answer the dean of St. Paul’s (Dr. Stillingfleet’s)
Sermon concerning the Mischief of Separation,
” Lond.
An Answer to the Dissenters’ Objections
against the Common Prayers, and some other parts of the
divine service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of
England,
” Lond. The Difference of the
Case between the Separation of Protestants fromthe
Church of Rome, and the Separation of Dissenters from
the Church of England,
” Lond. The
State of the Church of Rome when the Reformation began, as it appears by the advices given to pope Paul III.
and Julius III. by creatures of their own.
” 6. “A Discourse concerning the Invocation of the Blessed Virgin
and the Saints,
” Lond. A Paraphrase,
with notes, upon the sixth Chapter of St. John, shewing
that there is neither good reason, nor sufficient authority
to suppose that the Eucharist is discoursed of in that
chapter, much less to infer the doctrine of Transubstantiation from it.
” Lond. 1686, 4to. Reprinted in 1689,
8vo, at the end of his second volume of sermons. 8. “Of
the Humanity and Chanty of Christians. A Sermon
preached at the Suffolk Feast, at St. Michael, Cornhill,
London, November 30, 1686.
” 9. “A Discourse concerning the pretended Sacrament of Extreme Unction,
&.c.
” in three parts. “With a letter to the Vindicator of
the bishop of Condom,
” Lond. A second letter to the Vindicator of the bishop of Condom,
”
Lond. Authority of Councils, and the
Rule of Faith, with an answer to the Eight Theses laid
down for the Trial of the English Reformation.
” The first
part, about Councils, by Hutchinson, esq. the rest
by Dr. Clagett, 4to. 12. “Notion of Idolatry considered
and confuted,
” Lond. Cardinal Bellarmine’s
seventh note, of the Union of the Members among themselves, and with the Head.
” 14. “His twelfth note, Of
the Light of Prophecy, examined and confuted.
” 15. “A
View of the whole Controversy between the Representer
and the Answerer; in which are laid open some of the
methods by which Protestants are misrepresented by Papists,
” Lond. An Answer to the Representer’s Reflections upon the State and View of the Controversy. With a Reply to the Vindicator’s full Answer;
shewing that the Vindicator has utterly ruined the new
design of expounding and representing Popery,
” London,
Several captious Queries concerning
the English Reformation, first in Latin, and afterwards by
T. W. in English, briefly and fully answered,
” Lond.
A Preface concerning the Testimony of
Miracles, prefixed to The School of the Eucharist established upon the miraculous respects and acknowledgements,
which Beasts, Birds, and Insects, upon several occasions,
have rendered to the Sacrament of the Altar.
” Translated
by another hand, from the original French of F. Toussain
Bridoul, a Jesuit," Lond. 1687, 4to. Besides these, after
his decease, his brother, Mr. Nicolas Clagett, published
four volumes of his sermons: the first in 1689, contained seventeen sermons; one of which was greatly admired by
queen Mary, who desired to have it read more than once
during her last illness: Text, Job ii. 10. The second
volume, printed in 1693, contained eleven sermons; a Paraphrase and Notes upon the first, second, third, fourth, fifth,
seventh, and eighth Chapters of the Gospel of St. John.
The Paraphrase, and Notes on the sixth Chapter, which had
been published before: A Discourse of Church- Unity, with
Directions now, in this divided State of Christendom, to keep
within the Unity of the Church A Discourse of Humanity
and Charity And a Letter concerning Protestants Charity
to Papists published by Dr. Clagett. The third and fourth
volumes did not come out till 1720, at so great a distance
of tune from the two former volumes, that the booksellers
would not call them the third and fourth volumes, but the
first and second volumes, as well as the former; only notice was given, that they were never before published.
the first of February, 1683, he was instituted to the rectory of Thurlo parva. Dr. John Moore, then bishop of Norwich, who was well acquainted with his merit and abilities,
, younger brother to the preceding, was born in May 1654, and educated in the freeschool of Bury St. Edmund’s, under Mr. Edward Leeds,
a Greek scholar of considerable eminence. He was admitted of Ciirist’s-college, Cambridge, January 12, 1671,
under the tuition of Dr. Widdrington, and regularly took
his degrees in arts, and in 1704 commenced D. D. Upon
his brother’s removal to Gray’s- inn, he was elected in his
room, March 21, 1680, preacher at St. Mary’s, in St. Edmundsbury. In this station, which he held near forty-six
years, he was a constant preacher, and diligent in every
other part of his ministry. On the first of February, 1683,
he was instituted to the rectory of Thurlo parva. Dr. John
Moore, then bishop of Norwich, who was well acquainted
with his merit and abilities, collated him on the 14th of
June, 1693, to the archdeaconry of Sudbtfry; and in March
1707, he was instituted to the rectory of Hitchain, in Suffolk. This eminent divine, extremely valued and respected on account of his exemplary charity and other
virtues, died January 27, 1726-7, in the seventy-third
year of his age, and was buried in the chancel of the
parish church of St. Mary’s, in St. Edmundsbury. Among
other children, he had Nicolas, afterwards bishop of Si.
David’s, and of Exeter, who died Dec. 8, 1746. Dr.
Clagett published some occasional sermons, a pamphlet
entitled “A Persuasive to an ingenuous Trial of Opinions
in Religion,
” Lond. Truth defended, and Boldness in Error rebuked or,
a Vindication of those Christian Commentators who have
expounded some Prophecies of the Messias not to be meant
only of him. Being a Confutation of part of Mr. Whiston’s
book, entitled, The Accomplishment of Scripture Prophecies; wherein he pretends to disprove all duplicity of
sense in prophecy. To which is subjoined, an Examination of his hypothesis, That our Saviour ascended up into
Heaven several times after his Resurrection. And in both,
there ar,e some remarks upon other Essays of the said
author, as likewise an Appendix and a Postscript. With
a large Preface,
” Lond. 1710, 8vo.
a suit commenced against him. under the Stat. 1 Jac. 1. for teaching school without license from the bishop of the diocese. The cause came to be tried in the court of
, a writer of eminence among
the Quakers, was born at Farmborough, in Warwickshire,
in 1649, and after school-education, in which he made considerable proficiency, was entered of Balio-college, Oxford, in 1666, but removed to St. Mary-hall, where he
took his bachelor’s degree in 1670. He soon after received
ordination, and in 1673 was presented to the rectory of
Peopleton, in the county of Worcester, although it does
not appear that he took his master’s degree until 1676.
At Peopleton he lived in good esteem, and was accounted
an energetic preacher, but after several years, he entertained
many serious scruples, not only on the subject of personal
religion, which he was afraid he had recommended to
others, while a stranger to it himself, but also respecting
certain doctrines and ceremonies of the church of England;
and these scruples dwelt so strongly on his mind, that after
much deliberation, he voluntarily resigned his benefice in
1691, a step which must have been conscientious, as his
living was of considerable emolument, and after quitting
it, he does not appear to have possessed any certain income. The same year he joined himself in communion
with the Baptists, after submitting to their mode of initiation. An incident on this occasion made a lasting impression on his mind. Immediately after the ceremony of
baptism, while his wet clothes were still upon him, a person
accosted him thus, “You are welcome, sir, out of one
form into another.
” But, although this struck him forcibly at the time, it led to no sudden alteration, and he
continued for some years in connection with the baptists;
till at length his desires after what he conceived to be
greater spirituality in religion, induced him to leave their
communion; and having adopted the principles of the
Quakers, he became one of their society about 1697. With
the Quakers he continued in religious fellowship the remainder of his life, and was a well-approved minister
amongst them. In 1700 he removed from London, where
he had some time resided, to Barking, in Essex. At
Barking, and afterwards at Tottenham, in Middlesex, he
kept a boarding-school for several years, but in the latter
place he met with difficulty from a suit commenced against
him. under the Stat. 1 Jac. 1. for teaching school without
license from the bishop of the diocese. The cause came
to be tried in the court of king’s-bench, before lord chief
justice Holt, who at the same time that he discountenanced
the prosecution, declined determining whether the defendant was within the reach of the Act, and directed the
jury to return a special verdict; upon which the adverse
party thought proper not to proceed any further, and Claridge continued his useful occupation unmolested. In
1713, finding his health decline, and having a competency
for his subsistence, he gave up the employment of schoolkeeping, and returned into London, where he appears to
have passed serenely, but not inactively, the remainder
of his time, and where he died, in 1723, in the seventyfourth year of his age. In his last illness, which was short,
“he expressed,
” says his biographer, “his peace and satisfaction of soul, and an humble resignation to the will
of God.
” He left some descendants, the children of a
daughter who died before him.
, the fourth daughter of Charles Trimnell, rector of Abbots Riptou in Hampshire, and a sister of the bishop of Winchester of that name. He was born in 1696; and alter receiving
, an English divine, who deserves to be recorded among the benefactors of mankind, was the son of Alured Clarke, gent, by Ann, the fourth daughter of Charles Trimnell, rector of Abbots Riptou in Hampshire, and a sister of the bishop of Winchester of that name. He was born in 1696; and alter receiving his early education at St. Paul’s school, was admitted pensioner in Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, April 1, 1713, where after taking the degree of A. B. he was made fellow in 1718, and proceeded A.M. two years after. At this early age he became a candidate with Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Ward, for the professorship of rhetoric in Gresham college, but without success. In May 1723, he was collated to the rectory of Chilbolton in Hampshire, and installed prebendary of Winchester on the 23d of that month. He was appointed one of the chaplains in ordinary to king George I. and continued in the same dignity in the subsequent reign, when George II. on his visit to Cambridge in April 1728, honoured him with the degree of D. D. and promoted him to a prebend in the church of Westminster, in which he was installed May 8, 1731; being then one of the deputy clerks of the closet. As a farther mark of the royal favouiy his majesty advanced him to the deanery of Exeter May 12, 1740; but he did not enjoy this long, being always of an infirm and weak constitution, which was worn out before he had completed his forty-sixth year. He died May 31, 1742, and was interred without any monument in Westminster.
sure of Dr. Buggs, who held the two principal livings in Coventry, and who prosecuted him before the bishop, Dr. Morton. After this, by the influence of Robert earl of
, a very industrious and useful
writer of the seventeenth century, less known than his
services deserved, and particularly entitled to notice in a
work of this kind, was born Oct. 10, 1599, at Woolston,
in the county of Warwick, of which place his father had
been minister for upwards of forty years. Under his tuition he remained until he was thirteen years old, when he
was sent to school under one Crauford, an eminent teacher
at that time. Here he informs us that he fell into loose
practices from keeping bud company, but occasionally
felt the reluctance which a pious education usually leaves.
At the end of four years he was sent to Cambridge, and
entered of Emanuel, which was then, according to his account, the Puritan college. After taking his bachelor’s
degree, his father recalled him home, and he was for
some time employed as a family-tutor in Warwickshire,
after which, being now in orders, he was invited into
Cheshire, as assistant to Mr. Byrom, who had the living of
Thornton, and with whom he continued almost two years,
preaching twice every Sunday during that time. Some
scruples respecting the ceremonies occasioned him much
trouble, and. he had an intention of removing to London;
but happening to receive a pressing invitation from the inhabitants of Wirrall, a peninsula beyond West Chester,
he consented to settle among them at Shotwick, where no
regular service had been performed, and became here very
useful as a preacher, and very popular through an extensive district. After, however, five years’ quiet residence
here, a prosecution was instituted against him for the
omission of ceremonies (what they were he does not inform us) in the Chancellor’s court; and while about to leave
Shotwick in consequence of this, the mayor, aldermen, and
many of the inhabitants of Coventry, invited him to preach
a lecture in that city, which he accepted, and carried on
for some time; but here likewise he excited the displeasure of Dr. Buggs, who held the two principal livings in
Coventry, and who prosecuted him before the bishop, Dr.
Morton. After this, by the influence of Robert earl of
Warwick, he was enabled to preach at Warwick, and
although complained of, was not molested in any great
degree. Soon after, lord Brook presented him to the
rectory of Alcester, where he officiated for nine years,
and, as he informs us, “the town, which before was called
* drunken Alcester,' was now exemplary and eminent for
religion.
” When the et c<etcra oath was enjoined, the
clergy of the diocese met and drew up a petition against
it, which Mr. Clarke and Mr. Arthur Salway presented to
his majesty at York, who returned for answer, that they
should not be molested for refusing the oath, until the
consideration of their petition in parliament. This business afterwards requiring Mr. Clarke to go to London, he
was chosen preacher of the parish of St. Bennet Fink, a
curacy which is said to have been then, as it is now, in
the gift of the canons of Windsor. Walker, from having
included this among the livings sequestered by the parliamentary reformers, would seem to intimate that Mr. Clarke
must have succeeded to it at the expence of the incumfyent; but the fact is, there was no incumbent at the time.
We learn from Clarke’s dedication of his “Mirror
” to
Philip Holman, esq. of Warkworth in. Northamptonshire,
a native of St. Bennet Fink, and a great benefactor to it,
that for many years before this time (probably before 1646)
the parish had little maintenance for a minister; theif
tithes, being impropriated, went another way. They had
no stock, no land, no house for the minister, no lecture,
nor any one gift sermon in the year. This Mr. Holman,
however, had furnished a house for the curate and settled
it upon feoffees in trust, and had promised to add something towards his further maintenance. Such was the
situation of the parish when Mr. Clarke was elected, and
he remained their preacher until the restoration. During
the whole of this period, he appears to have disapproved
of the practices of the numerous sectaries which arose, and
retained his attachment to the constitution and doctrines of
the church, although he objected to some of those points
respecting ceremonies and discipline, which ranks him
among the ejected non-conformists. Most of his works appear to have been compiled, as indeed they are generally
dated there, at his house in Threadneedle- street, and it
was the sole business of his future life, to enlarge and republish them. In 1660, when Charles II. published a declaration concerning ecclesiastical affairs, the London clergy
drew up a congratulatory address, with a request for the
removal of re-ordination and surplices in colleges, &,c,
Vol. IX. D D
which Mr. Clarke was appointed to present. In the following year he was appointed one of the commissioners
for revising the book of Common Prayer, but what particular share he took we are not informed; nor are we told
more of his history, while in the church, than that he was
seven or eight years a governor, and two years president
of Sion college. When ejected for non-conformity, such
was his idea of schism and separation, that he quietly submitted to a retired and studious life. From the church,
which he constantly attended as a hearer, he says, he
dared not to separate, or gather a private church out of a
true church, which he judged the church of England to
be. In this retirement he continued twenty years, partly
at Hammersmith, and partly at Isleworth, revising what
he had published, and compiling other works, all of which
appear to have been frequently reprinted, notwithstand*ig their size and price. He died Dec. 25, 1682, universally respected for his piety, and especially for his moderation in the contests which prevailed in his time.
in the Greek, and the primitive Christian writers. Having taken orders, he became chaplain to Moore bishop of Norwich, by the introduction of the celebrated Whiston, then
Afterwards, in order to fit himself for the sacred function, he studied the Old Testament in the Hebrew, the
New in the Greek, and the primitive Christian writers.
Having taken orders, he became chaplain to Moore bishop
of Norwich, by the introduction of the celebrated Whiston,
then chaplain to the bishop, who in 1698, being collated
to the living of Lowestoff in Suffolk, resigned his chaplainship, and was succeeded by Clarke. In this station Clarke
lived for near twelve years, with all the freedom of an
equal rather than as an inferior to the bishop, who esteemed
him highly while he lived, and at his death gave him a
striking proof of confidence, by leaving solely in his hands
all the concerns of his family: a trust which Clarke executed very faithfully, and to the entire satisfaction of every
person concerned. In 1699 he published two treatises:
one entitled, “Three practical essays on Baptism, Confirmation, and Repentance;
” the other, “Some reflections
on that part of a book called Amyntor, or a defence of
Milton’s life (written by Toland), which relates to the
writings of the primitive fathers, and the canon of the New
Testament. In a letter to a friend.
” This was published
without a name, but was afterwards added to his letter to
Dodwell, &c. In 1701 he published a paraphrase upon
the gospel of St. Matthew; which was followed in 1702 by
the paraphrases upon the gospels of St. Mark and St, Luke,
and soon after by a third volume upon St. John; afterwards often printed together in 2 vols. 8vo. He had begun a paraphrase upon the Acts of the Apostles, and was
to have extended his labours to the remaining books of the
New Testament, but something accidentally interrupted
the execution, which he himself used to say, was made
Jess necessary by the labours of several worthy and learned
persons since the appearance of his work upon the four
gospels.
Meanwhile bishop Moore, his patron, gave him the rectory of Drayton near Norwich,
Meanwhile bishop Moore, his patron, gave him the
rectory of Drayton near Norwich, and procured for him a
parish in that city; and these he served himself in that
season when the bishop resided at Norwich. His preaching was without notes, until he became rector of St.
James’s. In 1704 he was appointed to preach BoyieV
lecture; and the subject he chose was, “The Befog and
Attributes of God.
” He succeeded so well in this, and
gave such high satisfaction, that he was appointed to preach
the same lecture the next year; when he chose for his
subject, “The 1 Evidences of natural and revealed Religion.
”
These sermons were first printed in two distinct volumes:
the former in 1705, the latter in 1706. They have since
been printed in one volume, and have passed through several editions. In the fourth or fifth were added several
letters to Clarke from Butler, afterwards bishop of Durham, relating to the demonstration of the being and attributes, with the doctor’s answers. In the sixth edition was
added, a discourse concerning the connection of the prophecies in the Old Testament, and the application of them
to Christ: and an answer to a seventh letter concerning
the argument a priori. It may not be amiss to observe,
that Clarke’s sermons concerning the being and attributes
of God occasioned a controversy, but we dp not find that
Clarke himself ever appeared in it *.
s Origin of Evil,' and verted upon by Mr. Edmund Law, the some other objections together with a late bishop of Carlisle, in his Notes Compendium of a Demonstration of the
* This controversy produced several sidered the najture of Space, Duration,
pieces for and against Dr. Clarke’s and necessary Existence: being an an‘ Demonstration of the Being and At- swer to a late book entitled, ’ A Transtributes of Gorl.“It was animad- lat ion of Dr. King’s Origin of Evil,' and
verted upon by Mr. Edmund Law, the some other objections together with a
late bishop of Carlisle, in his Notes Compendium of a Demonstration of the
upon archbj*hop King’s Essay on the Being and Attributes of God,
” London,
Origin of Kvil,“translated from the 1732, 8vo. Mr. Law vindicated his
Latin. This occasioned a piece enti- Remarks in a
” Postscript“to the setled,
” A Defence of Dr. Clarke’s De- cond edition of Dr. King’s Essay which
inonstrationof the Being and Attributes oecasioned, "A second Defence of Dr.
of Cod wherein is particularly con- Clarke’s Demonstration of the
About this time, Whiston tells us, he discovered tha'6
Clarke had been looking into the primitive writers, and
suspected that the Athanasian doctrine of the Trinity was
not the doctrine of those early ages. Mr. Whiston adds,
that he heard him say, that he never read the Athanasian
creed in his parish, at or near Norwich, but once; and that
was. only by mistake, at a time when it was not appointed
by the rubric. In 1706 he published a letter to Mr. Dodweil, as an answer to all the arguments in his epistolary
discourse against the immortality of the soul, and representing the judgment of the fathers, to whom Mr. Dodweli
had appealed, concerning that matter. This appears to
have given universal satisfaction, but the controversy did
not stop here; for the celebrated Collins, as a second to
Dodweil, went much farther into the philosophy of the
dispute, and indeed seemed to produce all that could possibly be said against the immateriality of the soul, as well
as the liberty of human actions. This enlarged the scene
of the dispute; into which our author entered, and wrote
with such a spirit of clearness and demonstration, as at
once shewed him greatly superior to his adversaries in metaphysical and physical knowledge; and made every intelligent reader rejoice, that such an incident had happened
to provoke and extort from him that copious and strong
reasoning and perspicuity of expression, which were indeed very much wanted upon this intricate and obscure
subject. Clarke’s letter to Dodweil was soon followed by
four defences of it, in four several Letters to the author of a
Letter to the learned Mr. Henry Dodweil; containing some
This same year also, bishop Moore procured for him the rectory of St. Bennet’s, Paul’s Wharf,
This same year also, bishop Moore procured for him the
rectory of St. Bennet’s, Paul’s Wharf, London; and soon
after carried him to court, and recommended him to the
favour of queen Anne. She appointed him one of her
chaplains in ordinary; and, in consideration of his great
merit, and at the request of the bishop, presented him to
the rectory of St. James’s Westminster, in 1709. From
this time he left off preaching without notes, and wrote his
sermons at length, with much care and fit for the press,
in which state they were found at his death. Upon his
advancement to St. James’s rectory, he took the degree of
D. D.; when the public exercise which he performed for it
at Cambridge was much admired. The questions which
he maintained were these: 1. “Nullum fidei Christiana?
dogma, in sacris scripturls traditum, est rectse rationi dissentaneum:
” that is, No article of the Christian faith, delivered in the holy scriptures, is discordant to right reason.
2. “Sine action am humanarum libertate nulla potest esse
religio:
” that is, Without the liberty of hunpan actions
there can be no religion. His thesis was upon the first of
these questions; which being thoroughly sifted by that
most acute disputant professor James, he made an extempore reply in a continued discourse for near half an hour,
with so little hesitation, that many of the auditors declared,
that if they had not been within sight of him, they should
have supposed him to have read every word of it from a
paper. After this, through the course of the syllogistical
disputation, he guarded so well against the arts which the
professor was a complete master of; replied so readily to
the greatest difficulties such an objector could propose;
and pressed him so close and hard with clear and intelligible ausvyers, that perhaps there never was such a
flict heard in those schools. The professor, who was a
man of humour as well as learning, said to him at the end
of the disputation, “Profecto me probe exereuisti,' 7 that
is,
” On my word, you have worked me sufficiently;“and
the members of the university expressed their astonishment
that a man even of Clarke’s abilities, after an absence of
so many years, should acquit himself as if this sort of academical exercise had been his constant employment; and
with such fluency and purity of expression, as if he had
been accustomed to no other language in conversation but
Latin. The same year, 1709, he revised and corrected
Whiston’s translation of the
” Apostolical Constitutions"
into English, at the author’s particular request.
l. and afterwards in 1720, 8vo. It was dedicated to the great duke of Marlborough, “at a time,” says bishop Hoadly, “when his unequalled victories and successes had raised
In 1712 he published a most beautiful and splendid edition of “Caesar’s Commentaries,
” adorned with elegant
engravings. It was printed in 1712, fbl. and afterwards in
1720, 8vo. It was dedicated to the great duke of Marlborough, “at a time,
” says bishop Hoadly, “when his
unequalled victories and successes had raised his glory to
the highest pitch abroad, and lessened his interest and
favour at home.
” In the publication of this book, the
doctor took particular care of the punctuation. In the annotations, he selected what appeared the best and most
judicious in former editors, with some corrections and
emendations of his own interspersed.
be misunderstood in some particulars, he caused an explanation, dated July 5, to be presented to the bishop of London, the next time the upper house met: setting forth,
After this paper had been before the upper house, being
apprehensive that, if it should be published separately, as
afterwards happened, without any true account of the preceding and following circumstances, it might be misunderstood in some particulars, he caused an explanation, dated
July 5, to be presented to the bishop of London, the next
time the upper house met: setting forth, “That whereas
the paper laid before their lordships the Friday before,
was, through haste and want of time, not drawn up with
sufficient exactness, he thought himself indispensably
obliged in conscience to acquaint their lordships, that he
did not mean thereby to retract any thing he had written,
but to declare that the opinion set forth at large in his
Scripture Doctrine, &c. is, that the Son was eternally begotten by the eternal incomprehensible power and will of
the Father, &c. and that, by declaring he did not intend
to write any more concerning the doctrine of the Trinity,
he did not preclude himself from a liberty of making any
inoffensive corrections in his former books, if they should
come to another edition, or from vindicating himself
against any misrepresentations or aspersions, which might
possibly hereafter be cast upon him, on occasion of this
controversy.
” After the delivery of this explanation, the
upper house resolved, July 5,. to proceed no farther upon
the extract, laid before them by the lower house and ordered Dr. Clarke’s papers to be entered in the acts of that
house. But the lower house, not so satisfied, resolved,
July 7, that the paper subscribed by Dr. Clarke, and communicated to them by the bishops, does not contain in it
any recantation of the heretical assertions and offensive
passages complained of in their representation, and afterwards produced in their extract; nor gives such satisfaction for the great scandal occasioned thereby, as ought to
put a stop to any farther examination and censure thereof.
Thus ended. this affair; the most authentic account of which
we have in a piece entitled, “An Apology for Dr. Clarke,
containing an account of the late proceedings in convocation, upon his writings concerning the Trinity, 1714, 8vo,
”
written, Whiston tells us, by a clergyman in the country,
a common friend of his and Dr. Clarke’s, with the knowledge and assistance of the latter. The “Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity,
” as we have observed, was first published in from the time of publishing this book to
the day of his death, he found no reason, as far as he was
able to judge, to alter the notions which he there professed.
” Mr. Whitaker, in his “Origin of Arianism disclosed,
” has taken uncommon pains to support the truth of
chevalier Ramsay’s assertion, that Dr. Clarke greatly repented of his ever having published his work upon the
Trinity. The testimonies on the other side of the question
Mr. Whitaker endeavours to reconcile, by supposing that
the doctor occasionally avowed his repentance, and yet
continued his practices. He avowed fully “to Mr. Ramsay
what he was too timid to avow to his son, to a Hoadly, or
to an Emlyn; and what he even took pains to conceal
from them, in a seeming continuance of opinion, and in
an actual perseverance of conduct.
” All this, however,
has been most confidently denied by Dr. Clarke’s friends.
hed by any legal authority, ecclesiastical or civil, in this he had not offended. Robinson, however, bishop of London, so highly disliked this alteration, that he thought
A considerable number of these “Select Psalms and Hymns
”
having been dispersed by the Society for promoting Christian knowledge, before the alteration of the doxologies
was taken notice of, he was charged with a design of imposing upon the society, whereas it was answered that the
edition of them had been prepared by him for the use of
his own parish only, before the society had thoughts of
purchasing any of the copies: and as the usual forms of
doxology were not established by any legal authority, ecclesiastical or civil, in this he had not offended. Robinson, however, bishop of London, so highly disliked this
alteration, that he thought proper to publish a letter to
the incumbents of all churches and chapels in his diocese,
against their using any new forms of doxology. The letter
is dated Dec. 26, 1718, and begins thus: “Reverend
brethren, there is an instance of your care and duty, which
I conceive myself at this time highly obliged to offer, and
you to regard, as necessary for the preservation of the very
foundations of our faith. Some persons, seduced, I fear,
by the strong delusions of pride and self-conceit, have
lately published new forms of doxology, entirely agreeable
to those of some ancient heretics, who impiously denied a
trinity of persons in the unity of the Godhead, I do therefore warn and charge it upon your souls, as you hope to
obtain mercy from God the Father through the merits of
Jesus Christ our Lord, and by the sanctification of the
Holy Ghost, three persons and one God blessed for ever,
that you employ your best endeavours to prevail with your
several flocks, to have a great abhorrence for the abovementioned new forms, and particularly that you do not
suffer the same to be used, either in your churches, or in
any schools, where you are to prevent that most pernicious
abuse, &c.
” This letter was animadverted upon by Whiston, in “A Letter of Thanks to the right reverend the lord
bishop of London, for his late letter to his clergy against
the use of new forms of Doxology, &c.
” Jan. 17, 1719;
and in a pamphlet entitled “An humble apology for St.
Paul and the other apostles; or, a vindication of them and
their doxologies from the charge of heresy. By Cornelius
Paets,
” A Defence of the Bishop of London, in answer to
Winston’s Letter of Thanks, &c. addressed to the archbishop of Canterbury. To which is added, a Vindication
of Dr. Sacheverell’s late endeavour to turn Mr. Winston
out of his church.
” Winston’s Letter of Thanks occasioned likewise the two following pieces; viz. “The lord
bishop of London’s Letter to his Clergy vindicated, <kc.
by a Believer, 1719;
” and “A seasonable review of Mr.
Winston’s account of primitive Doxologies, &c. by a
Presbyter, &c. 1719.
” This presbyter was supposed to be
Dr. William Berriman. To the latter Whiston replied in
a second letter to the bishop of London; and the author
of “The seasonable Review, &c.
” answered him in a second Review, &c. As to Clarke’s conduct in this affair,
we are not surprised to find Whiston declaring it to be one
of the most Christian attempts towards somewhat of reformation, upon the primitive foot, that he ever ventured
upon: but he adds,“that the bishop of London, in the way
of modern authority, was quite too hard for Dr. Clarke, in
the way of primitive Christianity.
”
e Latin version is almost entirely new; and annotations are added to the bottom of the pages. Homer, bishop Hoadly tells us, was Clarke’s admired author, even to a degree
In 1728 was published, “A Letter from Dr. Clarke to
Mr. Benjamin Hoadly, F. R. S. occasioned by the controversy relating to the proportion of velocity and force in
bodies in motion,
” and printed in the Philosophical Transactions, No. 401; and in 1729, he published the twelve
first books of “Homer’s Iliad,
” in 4to, and dedicated to
the duke of Cumberland. The Latin version is almost entirely new; and annotations are added to the bottom of
the pages. Homer, bishop Hoadly tells us, was Clarke’s
admired author, even to a degree of something like enthusiasm, hardly natural to his temper; and that in this he
went a little beyond the bounds of Horace’s judgment, and
was so unwilling to allow the favourite poet ever to nod,
that he has taken remarkable pains to find out and give a
reason for every passage, word, and tittle, that could create
any suspicion. It has however so long and so justly been
the popular edition of Homer, that it would be unnecessary
to expatiate on its merits in this place. Whiston informs
us, that he had begun this work in his younger years; and
that “the notes were rather transcribed than made new.
”
The twelve last books of the Iliad were published in 1732,
in 4to, by our author’s son, Samuel Clarke; who informs
us in the preface, that his father had finished the annotations to the three first of those books, and as far as the
359th verse of the fourth; and had revised the text and
version as far as verse 510th of the same book.
The character of Dr. Clarke has been thus drawn by Dr. Hare, bishop of Chichester, and by bishop Hoadly. Dr. Hare, in his pamphlet
The character of Dr. Clarke has been thus drawn by
Dr. Hare, bishop of Chichester, and by bishop Hoadly.
Dr. Hare, in his pamphlet entitled “The difficulties and
discouragements which attend the study of the Scripture, in
the way of private judgement,
” says that he is “a man who
has all the good qualities that can meet together to recommend him. He is possessed of all the parts of learning
that are valuable in a clergyman, in a degree that few possess any single one. He has joined to a good skill in the
three learned languages a great compass of the best philosophy and mathematics, as appears by his Latin works;
and his English ones are such a proof of his own piety, and
of his knowledge in divinity, and have done so much service to religion, as would make any other man, that was
not under the suspicion of heresy, secure of the friendship
and esteem of all good churchmen, especially of the clergy.
And to all this piety and learning, and the good use that
has been made of it, is added a temper happy beyond expression: a sweet, easy, modest, inoffensive, obliging behaviour adorns all his actions; and no passion, vanity, insolence, or ostentation, appears either in what he writes
or says: and yet these faults are often incident to the best
men, in the freedom of conversation, and writing against
impertinent and unreasonable adversaries, especially such
as strike at the foundation of virtue and religion. This is
the learning, this the temper of the man, whose study of
the scriptures has betrayed him into a suspicion of some
heretical opinions.
”
Bishop Hoadly writes thus of Clarke: “He was a person of a natural
Bishop Hoadly writes thus of Clarke: “He was a person
of a natural genius, excellent enough to have placed him in
the superior rank of men without the acquirements of learning; and of learning enough to have rendered a much less
cdmprehensive genius very considerable in the ways of the
world. But in him they were both united to such a degree, that those who were of his intimate acquaintance
'knew not which to admire most. The first strokes of
knowledge, in some of its branches, seemed to be little
less than natural to him: for they appeared to lie right in
his mind, as soon as any thing could appear; and to be
the very same, which afterwards grew up with him into
perfection, as the strength and cultivation of his mind increased. He had one happiness very rarely known among
the greatest men, that his memory was almost equal to his
judgment, which is as great a character as can well be
given of it.
” Then, after observing how great the doctor
was in “all branches of knowledge and learning, he goes on
thus:
” If in any one of these many branches he had
excelled only so much as he did in all, this alone would justly
have entitled him to the name of a great man. But there
is something so very extraordinary, that the same person
should excel, not only in those parts of knowledge which
require the strongest judgment, but in those which want
the help of the strongest memory also; and it is so seldom
seen, that one who is a great master in theology, is at the
same time skilfully fond of all critical and classical learning, or excellent in the physical and mathematical studies,
or well framed for metaphysical and abstract reasonings;
that it ought to be remarked, in how particular a manner,
and to how high a degree, divinity and mathematics, experimental philosophy and classical learning, metaphysics
and critical skill, all of them, various and different as they
are amongst themselves, united in Dr. Clarke.“Afterwards the bishop informs us, how earnestly his acquaintance
and friendship was sought after by the greatest lovers of
virtue and knowledge; what regard was paid to him by the
chief persons of the law; and, above all, what pleasure her
late majesty queen Caroline took in his conversation and
friendship: for
” seldom a week passed, says he, “in
which she did not receive some proof of the greatness of
his genius, and of the force of his superior understanding.
”
“If any one should ask,” continues the bishop, “as it is natural to do, how it came to pass that this great
“If any one should ask,
” continues the bishop, “as it is
natural to do, how it came to pass that this great man was
never raised higher in the church? I must answer, that it
was neither for want of merit, nor interest, nor the favour
of some in whose power it was to have raised him. But he
had reasons within his own breast, which hindered him
from either seeking after, or accepting any such promotion. Of these he was the proper, and indeed the only
judge: and therefore I say no more of them.
” The truth
is, his scruples about subscription were very great; as we
are informed by Sykes, who observes, in his eulogium of
Clarke, printed at the end of Whiston’s Historical Memoirs, that "the doctor would often wish, that those things
which were suspected by many, and judged unlawful by
some, might be seriously considered, and not made terms
of communion. He thought it would be the greatest happiness to see the occasions of good and learned men’s
scruples removed out of the public forms of divine service,
and the doctrines of Christianity reduced to the New Testament only; and that it would be right to have nothing
required from the preachers of the gospel, but what was
te transact their important affairs with greater ease and freedom from disturbances.“Upon the whole, bishop Hoadly makes no scruple to declare, that” by Dr. Clarke’s death,
Vol. IX,
purely primitive. This he thought to be the only means
of making the minds of sincere Christians easy and quiet.
This he believed would make men much more charitable
to one another: and make the governors of the church and
state transact their important affairs with greater ease and
freedom from disturbances.“Upon the whole, bishop
Hoadly makes no scruple to declare, that
” by Dr. Clarke’s
death, the world was deprived of as bright a light, and
masterly a teacher of truth and virtue, as ever yet appeared
amongst us and,“says he in the conclusion of his account,
” as his works must last as long as any language remains to
convey them to future times, perhaps I may flatter myself
that this faint and imperfect account of him may be transmitted down with them. And I hope it will be thought
a pardonable piece of ambition and self-interestedness, if,
being fearful lest every thing else should prove too weak
to keep the remembrance of myself in being, I lay hold on
his fame to prop and support my own. I am sure, as I
have little reason to expect that any thing of mine, without such an assistance, can live, I shall think myself greatly
recompensed for the want of any other memorial, if my
name may go down to posterity thus closely joined with
his; and I myself be thought of, and spoke of, in ages to
come, under the character of The Friend of Dr. Clarke.“' On the other hand, Whiston, who wrote his Life, and
held him in as high estimation as either Dr. Hare or Dr.
Hoadly, candidly mentions those failings, some of which,
perhaps, may occur to the reader in perusing the preceding
pages, and considerably lessen our opinion of his consistency. In the lirst place, he blames Clarke for subscribing
the articles, at a time when he could not, with perfect
truth and sincerity, assent to the Athanasian parts of them;
namely, at his taking the degree of doctor in divinity. Mr.
Whiston, then professor of mathematics at Cambridge, endeavoured to dissuade him from it; and, when he could
not prevail on that head, he earnestly pressed him to declare openly, and in writing, in what sense he subscribed
the suspected articles: but he could not prevail on this
head neither. Upon this occasion, professor James, who
suspected Dr. Clarke of an inclination to heretical pravity,
said to him, upon his subscribing the articles,
” he hoped
he would not go from his subscription.“The doctor replied,
” He could promise nothing as to futurity, and
eould only answer as to his present sentiments*“However,
Mr.Whiston acknowledges, that Dr. Clarke, for many
years before he died, perpetually refused all, even the
greatest preferments, which required subscription, and
never encouraged those who consulted him to subscribe.
In the next place, he objects to Dr. Clarke his not acting
sincerely, boldly, and openly, in the declaration of his true
opinions, and his over-cautious and over-timorous way of
speaking, writing, and acting, in points of the highest
consequence. When Mr. Whiston gave him frequent and
vehement admonitions upon this head, his general answer,
he tells us, was, who are those that act better than I do
” Very few of which,“says he,
” I could ever name to
him though I did not think that a sufficient excuse.“Lastly, Mr. Whiston is greatly displeased with Dr. Clarke’s
conduct in relation to the affair of the convocation, and
concludes the account of that affair with these words
” Thus ended this unhappy affair unhappy to Dr. Clarke’s
own conscience unhappy to his best friends and above
all unhappy as to its consequences, in relation to the opinion unbelievers were hereupon willing to entertain of him,
as if he had prevaricated all along in his former writings
for Christianity."
utation which he acquired when young was such, that he was chosen to be chaplain to Dr. Adam Ottley, bishop of St. David’s: but this prelate dying in 1723, he does not
, a learned divine and antiquary,
was horn at Haghmon abbey, in Shropshire, in the year
1696, and was educated at Shrewsbury school, under the
care of Mr. Lloyd, for whom he always entertained the
greatest regard. From Shrewsbury he was removed to
St. John’s college, in the university of Cambridge, where
he became a fellow, Jan. 22, 1716-17. His election at
so early a period of life was owing to a number of vacancies, occasioned by the removal of several non-juring fellows, in consequence of an act of parliament. He commenced B. A. 1715; in 1719 became M. A.; and the reputation which he acquired when young was such, that he
was chosen to be chaplain to Dr. Adam Ottley, bishop of
St. David’s: but this prelate dying in 1723, he does not
appear to have received any advantage from the appointment. He was afterwards domestic chaplain to Thomas
Holies, duke of Newcastle; in which situation he did not
continue long, as in 1724, he was presented by archbishop
Wake to the rectory of Buxted, in Sussex, without any solicitation of his own, partly on account of his extraordinary
merit, and partly from a regard to the special recommendation of the learned Dr. William Wotton, whose
daughter he married. In 1738, he was made prebendary
and residentiary of the prebend of Hova Villa in the cathedral church of Chichester, Some years before this he had
given to the public a specimen of his literary abilities, in a
preface to his father-in-law Dr. Wotton’s “Leges Walliae
Ecclesiastical,
” Discourse on the Commerce of the Romans,
” which was
highly extolled by Dr. Taylor, in his “Elements of the
Civil Law,
” came either from his hand or from that of his
friend Mr, Bowyer. It is reprinted in that gentleman’s
“Miscellaneous Tracts,
” and in “The Progress of Maritime Discovery,
” by Mr. Clarke’s grandson. But Mr.
Clarke’s chief work was “The Connexion of the Roman,
Saxon, and English Coins; deducing the antiquities,
customs, and manners of each people to modern times; particularly the origin of feudal tenures, and of parliaments:
illustrated throughout with critical and historical remarks
on various authors, both sacred and profane,
” 1767, 4to,
dedicated to the duke of Newcastle. It had been perused
in manuscript by Arthur Onslow, esq. speaker of the house
of commons, who honoured him with some useful hints
and observations: but he was chiefly indebted to Mr.
Bowyer, who superintended the publication, drew up several of the notes, wrote part of the dissertation on the
Roman sesterce, and formed an admirable index to the
whole. By this work our author acquired great reputation. Mr. Pinkerton, in his Essay on Medals, says that a
student cannot begin with a better book in this science.
ng which are some volumes of excellent sermons, the best of which were given to the late Ashburnham, bishop of Chichester, and at his death were inadvertently burnt with
In 1768 Mr. Clarke obtained from archbishop Cornwallis
permission to resign the rectory of Buxted (after having held it more than thirty-four years), to his son Edward,
through the unsolicited interest of the late marquis Cornwallis, who recollected on this occasion the intimacy that
had subsisted between himself and the rev. Edward Clarke
in the island of Minorca. In June 1770, he was installed
chancellor of the church of Chichester, to which office the
rectories of Chittingley and Pevensey are annexed; and in
August that year was presented to the vicarage of Amport.
These preferments he did not long enjoy, as he died Oct. 21,
1771. In the “Anecdotes of Bowyer
” are many letters
and extracts of letters, written to that learned printer and
other persons, by Mr. Clarke, which exhibit him to great
advantage as a man of piety, a friend, and a scholar. Besides the writings already mentioned, Mr. Clarke joined
with Mr. Bowyer in the translation of Trapp’s Lectures on
poetry, and in annotations on the Greek Testament; and
was the author of several of the notes subjoined to the
English version of Bleterie’s Life of the Emperor Julian.
He left behind him a considerable number of manuscripts,
among which are some volumes of excellent sermons, the
best of which were given to the late Ashburnham, bishop
of Chichester, and at his death were inadvertently burnt
with some other papers. Bishop Bagot had strongly recommended the publication of a selection of Mr. Clarke’s
sermons.
by the trouble he took in regulating the library of the cathedral to which he belonged. He persuaded bishop Mavvson to bestow a considerable sum towards repairing the room
Although antiquities were the favourite study of Mr.
Clarke, he was a secret, and by no means an unsuccessful
votary of the muses. He wrote English verse with ease,
elegance, and spirit. Perhaps there are few better epigrams in our language than that which he composed on
seeing the words Domus ultima inscribed on the vault belonging to the dukes of Richmond in the cathedral of Chichester. Among the happier I'ittle pieces of his sportive
poetry, there are in the Life of Bowyer some animated
stanzas, describing the character of the twelve English
poets, whose portraits, engraved by Vertue, were the favourite ornament of his parlour: but he set so modest and
humble a value on his poetical compositions, that they were
seldom committed to paper, and are therefore very imperfectly preserved in the memory of those, to whom he sometimes recited them. His taste and judgment in poetry appears, indeed, very striking in many parts of his learned
and elaborate “Connexion of Coins.
” His illustration of
Nestor’s cup, in particular, may be esteemed as one of the
happiest examples of that light and beauty, which the
learning and spirit of an elegant antiquary may throw on a
cloudy and mistaken passage of an ancient poet. He gave
a very beneficial proof of his zeal for literature, by the
trouble he took in regulating the library of the cathedral to
which he belonged. He persuaded bishop Mavvson to bestow a considerable sum towards repairing the room appropriated to this purpose. He obtained the donation of many
valuable volumes from different persons; and by his constant and liberal attention to this favourite object, raised an
inconsiderable and neglected collection of books, into a
very useful and respectable public library.
de Duras desired to hear. This lady would not forsake her religion till she had heard Claude and the bishop of Meaux dispute in her presence; and they accordingly disputed
Claude, as we have observed, was elected minister of the church of Montauban, about 1662; but four years after he was forbid by the court to exercise his functions there, which obliged him to go a second time to Paris, where he continued near nine months, without being able to remove the obstacles of his return to Montauban. During this interval, he was invited to the church of Bourdeaux; but the congregation of Charenton, being unwilling to lose a person of Claude’s abilities, gave him also an invitation in 1666. From that time to the revocation of the edict of Nantz, he did very great service to the cause of the French protestants by his excellent works, and by the minute attention he paid to the affairs which the deputies of provinces communicated to him. No man was ever better qualified to head either a consistory or a synod, or to manage a personal dispute. He discovered this latter talent in the last conference, which Mad. de Duras desired to hear. This lady would not forsake her religion till she had heard Claude and the bishop of Meaux dispute in her presence; and they accordingly disputed at the countess de Roie’s, her sister’s, the 1st of March, 1678. Each disputa'nt wrote the relation of his conference, and ascribed the victory to himself. These relations were at first only handed about in ms. but at last the bishop of Meaux published his in 1682, and that of Claude followed soon after. Claude was distinguished from the rest of the ministers, by the manner in which the court ordered him to leave the kingdom. He, like them, had a fortnight allowed him to leave it: but the Romish clergy found means to shorten even that time. For, Oct. 22, 1685, the day on which the revocation of the edict of Nantz was registered at Paris, Claude at ten in the morning was ordered to leave France in twenty-four hours. He obeyed with the utmost submission; and set out, attended by one of the king’s footmen, who was ordered to conduct him to the frontiers of France; and who, though he executed his orders faithfully, yet treated him with civility. He travelled in the Brussels coach; and his fame flying before him, procured him much kind and hospitable attention during his journey. He passed through Cambray, where he lay; and was there presented with some refreshments by the Jesuits. Even their rector paid him a visit, which Claude returned; and the difference of religion did not interrupt this interchange of civilities.
ned contain “An answer to a treatise on the Sacrament,” supposed to be written by cardinal le Camus, bishop of Grenoble; Four Letters on the same subject; an “Essay on
Claude married in 1648 Elizabeth de Malcare, by whom
he had a son, Isaac Claude, born March 5, 1653, of whom
he was very fond, and bred him to the ministry. He
studied in the universities of France; after which he returned to his father, who completed his education for the
pulpit. He was examined at Sedan in 1678, and approved;
he was invited by the congregation of the church of Clermont in Beauvoisis; and his father had the satisfaction to
impose his hands on him in 1678, and to see him minister
of the Walloon church at the Hague, when he retired to
Holland in 1685. He died at the Hague, July 29, 1695,
after having published many excellent works of his deceased father, particularly 5 vols. 12mo of posthumous
theological and controversial treatises, Amst. 1689.Lavocat, a Roman catholic writer, allows that his works are
written in a manly, exact, elegant and close style, discover great genius and learning, and an uncommon talent
for employing all the subtleties of logic. So candid a
critic may be forgiven for adding, “happy had he not
talents by writing against the catholic church.
”
These volumes just mentioned contain “An answer to a
treatise on the Sacrament,
” supposed to be written by
cardinal le Camus, bishop of Grenoble; Four Letters on
the same subject; an “Essay on the composition of a Serinon;
” a “Body of Christian Divinity;
” expositions of
parts of Scripture, Letters, &c. His Life, written by
M. de la Devaize, was translated into English by G. P. and
published Lond. 1688, 4to. His “Historical Defence of
the Reformation
” was published in English by T. B. Lond.
Essay on the Composition of a Sermon,
” which he wrote about the year
Claude, Bishop of Turin. See Claudius.
Claude, Bishop of Turin. See Claudius.
, or, as some add, Claudius Clemens, bishop of Turin in the ninth century, and one of the earliest reformers
, or, as some add, Claudius Clemens,
bishop of Turin in the ninth century, and one of the earliest reformers of popish superstitions, was a native of Spain,
and in his youth a disciple of Felix bishop of Urgel, whom
he accompanied into France, Italy, and Germany, but
whose errors he afterwards renounced, and obtained access
to the court of Lewis le Debonnaire, emperor and king of
France. Lewis admitted him among his almoners and
chaplains, and having preached before the court, a thing
very rare in those days, he was much admired as an expounder of the Scriptures, of which Fleury assures us he
had great knowledge. On this account Lewis, who perceived the ignorance of a great part of Italy, and was willing to provide the churches of Piedmont with one who
might stem the growing torrent of image worship, promoted Claudius to the see of Turin, about the year 817, in
which he fully answered his expectations, and both in his
preaching and writings successfully combated the prevailing
superstitions. His commentaries on several parts of the Old
and New Testaments are still extant in manuscript, in various French libraries; but his “Commentary on the Galatians,
” Paris, prefaces
” to the book of Leviticus
and to the Epistle to the Ephesians, which father Mabillon
published; an abridged “Chronicle
” which father Labbe
attributes to him; and a letter addressed to the emperor
Charlemagne on the two eclipses of the year 8 10, which is
in the tenth vol. of D'Acheri’s collection. In his commentary on the Galatians, he every where asserts the equality
of all the apostles with St. Peter, and owns Jesus Christ as
the proper head of the church. He inveighs against the
doctrine of human merits, and against raising traditions to
a height of credibility equal to that of the divine word.
He maintains salvation by faith alone, admits the fallibility
of the church, exposes the futility of praying for the dead,
and of the idolatrous practices then supported by the Roman see. These tenets involved him in a controversy with
a recluse named Dungal, and with Jonas, bishop of Orleans;
and created many more dangerous enemies, from whom,
however, he appears to have been protected by the French
court, and died in peace in the year 339.
college, where he became fellow, D, D. about 1507, and held several valuable benefices. In 1516-17, bishop Fox, the founder of Corpus Christi college, requested him to
, one of the presidents of Magdalen college, Oxford, and nr>t president of Corpus Christ! college, in that university, was born at Frampton, in Lincolnshire, of parents who, although not opulent, were enabled to afford him a liberal education. He was first sent to a grammar-school in Oxford, and then entered of Magdalen college, where he became fellow, D, D. about 1507, and held several valuable benefices. In 1516-17, bishop Fox, the founder of Corpus Christi college, requested him to become president of that new foundation, and, as it was inferior in value to that of Magdalen, bestowed on him the rectory of Cleeve, in Gloucestershire, Claymond presided above twenty years, and died in 1537, and was buried in the chapel of Corpus. He left a considerable part of his property, in scholarships and other benefactions, to Brazen-nose, Magdalen, and Corpus Christi colleges He appears from his manuscripts, some of which are in the library of Corpus, to have been a classical scholar, and acquainted with natural history, his works consisting of commentaries on Aulua Gellius and Plautus, and notes and observations on Pliny. From these, likewise, we learn that he was the correspondent of Grynaeus, Erasmus, and other learned men of his time. With Erasmui he became personally acquainted at Oxford, and Erasmus afterwards dedicated to him some tracts of Chrysostom.
, bishop of Clogher, was born at Dublin in 1695, a descendant of the
, bishop of Clogher, was born at Dublin in 1695, a descendant of the Claytons of Fulwood, in Lancashire, whose estate he became possessed of, by right of inheritance. His father, Dr. Clayton, minister of St. Michael’s, Dublin, and dean of Kildare, sent him to Westminster-school, under the private tuition of Zachary Pearce, afterwards bishop of Rochester, with whom he held a lasting friendship. From Westminster school Dr. Clayton removed his son to Trinity college, Dublin, of which, in due time, he became a fellow, and afterwards made the tour of Italy and France. From whom Mr. Clayton received holy orders, what preferments he had before he was raised to the episcopacy, and when he took his degrees, we are not informed; only we find that he was become D. D. in 1729. In 1728, having come into the possession of an affluent estate, in consequence of his father’s decease, he married Catharine, daughter of lord chief baron Donnellan, and gave her fortune, which was not considerable, to her sister. He behaved with the same generosity to his own three sisters, and gave to each of them the double of what had been bequeathed to them by their father’s will.
who shewed the manuscript to his lordship, but had not the courage to print it in his own name. The bishop, with what is called a romantic generosity, conveyed it to the
Soon after Dr. Clayton’s marriage, he went with his
lady to England, and while at London, a person in distressed circumstances applied to him for assistance, with
the testimony of Dr. Samuel Clarke for a recommendation, upon which, instead of the usual donation on such
occasions, he gave to the necessitous man the sum of three
hundred pounds, which was the whole that he wanted to
make him easy in the world. This circumstance introduced him to Dr. Clarke, and the result of their acquaintance was, Dr. Clayton’s embracing the Arian principles,
to which he adhered during the remainder of his life. Dr.
Clarke having carried to queen Caroline an account of Dr.
Clayton’s remarkable beneficence, it made a powerful
impression on her majesty’s mind in favour of his character; which impression was strongly enforced by her
bed-chamber woman, Mrs. Clayton, afterwards lady
Sundon. Such a powerful interest procured an immediate
recommendation to lord Carteret, then chief governor of
Ireland, for the very first bishopric tbat should become
vacant, and accordingly, he was advanced to that of
Killala, January 1729-30. In this situation he continued
till November 1735, when he was translated to the see of
Cork, and in 1745 to that of Clogher. Excepting a letter
written to the royal society upon a subject of no great
consequence, his first publication was an “Introduction
to the History of the Jews,
” which was afterwards translated into French, and printed at Leyden. His next work
was “The Chronology of the Hebrew Bible vindicated: the
facts compared with other ancient histories, and the difficulties explained, from the flood to the death of Moses;
together with some conjectures in relation to Egypt during
that period of time; also two maps, in which are attempted
to be settled the journeyings of the children of Israel,
”
Dissertation on Prophecy,
” in which he endeavoured to shew, from a joint comparison of the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Revelation of St. John, that
the final end of the dispersion of the Jews will be coincident with the ruin of the popedom, and take place about
2000. This was followed by an “Impartial Enquiry into
the time of the coming of the Messiah,
” in two letters to
an eminent Jew, printed first separately, and then together,
in 1751. In the same year (1751), appeared the “Essay
on Spirit,
” a performance which excited very general attention, and was productive of a fruitful controversy. Its
object was to recommend the Arian doctrine of the inferiority of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and to prepare
the way for suitable alterations in the Liturgy. His biographer, who is at the same time his warm panegyrist,
allows that in this performance he has indulged too freely
in imagination and conjecture; and that he might have
confined the question with greater advantage to the direct
and simple standard of Scripture. The work, after all, was
not Dr. Clayton’s, but one of his adoption, the real authoi
being a young clergyman in his diocese, who shewed the manuscript to his lordship, but had not the courage to print it in
his own name. The bishop, with what is called a romantic generosity, conveyed it to the press, and managed the affair in
such a manner, that the treatise was universally ascribed to
him in all the attacks to which it was exposed, and the sentiments certainly were his. One effect of this conduct was,
his being prevented from rising higher in the church. In
1752, he was recommended by the duke of Dorset, then
viceroy of Ireland, to the vacant archbishopric of Tuam,
but this was refused, solely on account of his being regarded as the writer of the Essay.
ythology of the ancient heathens.” Dedicated to the Society of Antiquaries, London, 4to and 8vo. The bishop, having become possessed of the original Journal from Grand
The next appearance of Dr. Clayton from the press,
was in a work undoubtedly his own, “A Vindication of the
Histories of the Old and New Testament; in answer to the
Objections of the late Lord Bolingbroke; in two letters to
a young nobleman,
” A Journal from Grand Cairo to Mount
Sinai, and back again. Translated from a manuscript
written by the Prefetto of Egypt, in company with the
Missionaries de propaganda Fids at Grand Cairo. To which
are added, some remarks on the origin of hieroglyphics,
and the mythology of the ancient heathens.
” Dedicated
to the Society of Antiquaries, London, 4to and 8vo. The
bishop, having become possessed of the original Journal
from Grand Cairo to Mount Sinai, and which had been
mentioned by Dr. Pococke in his Travels through the East,
communicated this translation of it to the Society of Antiquaries, with a view of exciting them to make some inquiry
into certain ancient characters, which, as appears from
the Journal, are discovered in great numbers in the Wilderness of Sinai, at a place well known by the name of
Gebel el Mokatah, or the Written Mountains. It does
not appear that any measures were taken by the Society of
Antiquaries; but the celebrated Mr. Edward Wortley Montagu, who went from Cairo to the Desert of Sinai, with,
the express purpose of seeing and describing the objects
proposed by the bishop, was greatly disappointed, and
convinced that the characters were not written by the
Israelites; and we believe the researches of more recent
travellers have been equally unsuccessful.
In 1754, the bishop of Clogher favoured the literary world with the second part
In 1754, the bishop of Clogher favoured the literary
world with the second part of his “Vindication of the
Histories of the Old and New Testament,
” but written
with more ingenuity than judgment. His account of the
formation of the earth and of the deluge, was successfully
attacked by Mr. Alexander Catcott. Our prelate’s next
publication was in 1755, and consisted only of some letters
which had passed between his lordship, when bishop of
Cork, and Mr. William Penn, on the subject of baptism,
in which he contended that the true Christian baptism is
to continue to the end of the world; whereas the baptism
of the Holy Ghost ceased with the ceasing of miracles.
We have already noticed that his object in publishing the
“Essay on Spirit
” was to recommend Arianism, and consequently, alterations in the Liturgy. He now determined
to avow the same sentiments in his legislative capacity;
and accordingly, on Monday the 2d of February, 1756, he
proposed in the Irish house of lords, that the Nicene and
Athanasian Creeds should for the future be left out of the
Liturgy of the church of Ireland. The speech which our
prelate delivered upon this occasion being taken down in
short-hand, was afterwards published, and passed through
several editions. Though so declared and avowed an attack upon the establishment was regarded in a very unfavourable light, no measures were taken for calling Dr.
Clayton to an account for it till he had published the third
part of his “Vindication of the Histories of the Old and
New Testament,
” My lord,
” he
answered, “I believe you will.
” “Sir,
” he replied, “you
have given me a stroke I'll never get the better of.
” What
followed is surely very inconsistent with the story reported
by his biographer, namely, that after he had delivered hi$
speech in the house of lords, the bishop declared “that
his mind was eased of a load which had long lain upon it
and that he now enjoyed a heart- felt pleasure, to which he
had been a stranger for above twenty years before.
”
share of his fortune fell to Dr. Barnard, who married his niece. Some interesting' anecdotes of the bishop are given in Burdy’s Lite of the rev. Philip Skelton, to whom
Our prelate left behind him several works in manuscript in the possession of his executor, Dr. Barnard, dean of Derry, but these have not been thought worthy of publication. Dr. Clayton was a member of the royal society, and of the society of antiquaries. He maintained a regular correspondence with several gentlemen of eminent literature in this country; and, among the rest, with the learned printer, Mr. Bowyer, to whom he made a present of the copy-right of all his works published in England. His Lancashire estate he bequeathed to his nearest male heir, Richard Clayton, esq. chief justice of the common pleas in Ireland; but the greatest share of his fortune fell to Dr. Barnard, who married his niece. Some interesting' anecdotes of the bishop are given in Burdy’s Lite of the rev. Philip Skelton, to whom he was neither a liberal nor impartial patron.
ht aid and assist this apostle in founding the church at Rome. It is certain, that he was afterwards bishop of that see; but when he was made so, cannot be clearly determined.
is said to have been born at
Rome, where he probably became the companion and
fellow labourer of St. Paul; and was one of those, as it is
generally imagined, whom St. Paul mentions as having
their “names written in the book of life.
” Origen calls
him a disciple of St. Peter; and it is not unlikely that he
might aid and assist this apostle in founding the church at
Rome. It is certain, that he was afterwards bishop of that
see; but when he was made so, cannot be clearly determined. Some follow the authority of Tertullian and Eusebius, that Clemens was consecrated by St. Peter, but admitted at first to preside over that part only of the church
which comprised the Jewish converts; and that he did not
come into the full possession and administration of his
office till the death of Linus, who had been ordained by
St. Paul, bishop of the Gentile church, and of Anacletus,
who succeeded him: and this has been fixed to the year
93. Others have contended, that Clemens succeeded to
the care of the whole church in the year 64 or 65, and that
he held it to the year 81, or, as others again will have it,
83; but all this, with the other circumstances of this father’s life, are matters of conjecture.
exandrines, by way of distinguishing him from Clemens Romanus. When Pantsenus was sent by Demetrius, bishop of Alexandria, to preach the gospel to the Indians, at th6 request
, an eminent father of the church in the end of the second and beginning of the third century, was an Athenian, or according to others an Alexandrian on which account he is usually called Clemens Alexandrines, by way of distinguishing him from Clemens Romanus. When Pantsenus was sent by Demetrius, bishop of Alexandria, to preach the gospel to the Indians, at th6 request of their ambassadors, about the year 191 Clemens succeeded him in the catechetical school. He acquitted himself admirably well in this employment, and had many eminent pupils, as Origen and Alexander bishop of Jerusalem. Clemens’s method of instructing the catechumens is said to have been this. He pointed out to them, and explained all that was good in the pagan philosophy; and then led them on insensibly to Christianity. In his philosophic character, which he too much preserved, he was an eclectic; that is, not attached to any particular sect of philosophers, but a selector of what he thought good and sound in them all.
e. He then went to Jerusalem, and took up his abode for some time with Alexander, who was soon after bishop of that see. During his stay there he was of great service to
After holding the office of catechist, Clemens was raised
to the priesthood, probably at the beginning of the emperor Severus’s reign; since Eusebius, in his history of the
evert ts of the year 195, gives Clemens the title of priest.
About this time he undertook a defence of Christianity
against pagans and heretics, in a work entitled “Stromata,
”
on account of the variety of matter of which it treats—
Stromata signifying discourses abounding with miscellaneous matter. In this work he has made so great a collection of heathen learning, for the sake of shewing the conformity there is between some opinions which the Christians and the philosophers held in common, as shews that
his reading must have extended to almost everything that
had been written. When Severus began a persecution
against the Christians, for which he pleaded a rebellion of
the Jews (for the pagans had not as yet learned to distinguish Jews and Christians), Clemens left Egypt to escape
the violence of it; and upon this occasion drew up a discourse, to prove the lawfulness of flying in times of persecution: for this expedient, though explicitly allowed and
even enjoined in the gospel, had been rejected by some
early converts, especially Tertullian, as a base desertion
of the cause. He then went to Jerusalem, and took up his
abode for some time with Alexander, who was soon after
bishop of that see. During his stay there he was of great
service to the 'church, as appears from a letter of Alexander to the church of Antioch, which Clemens himself
carried: in which Alexander says, that “Clemens was a
man of great virtue, as the church of Antioch knew already,
and would know better when he came among them; and
that having been at Jerusalem, he had, by God’s blessing,
greatly confirmed and strengthened that church.
”
From Antioch he returned to Alexandria; but we know
not how long he lived. He appears to have survived Pantoenus at least some years, and was not old when he composed his “Stromata;
” for he tells us, that he had made
that collection with a view of its serving him in his old age,
when his faculties should fail him. His memory appears
to have been highly reverenced at Alexandria, as we learn
from an extract of a letter from Alexander to Origen, preserved by Eusebius. Among several works which Clemens
wrote, there are only three considerable ones remaining:
, one of the popes so called, whose proper name was Bertrand de Gouth, or de Goth, was appointed bishop of Comminges, then archbishop of Bourdeaux by Boniface VIII.
, one of the popes so called, whose proper
name was Bertrand de Gouth, or de Goth, was appointed
bishop of Comminges, then archbishop of Bourdeaux by
Boniface VIII. and afterwards elected pope at Perugia,
June 5, 1305. The ceremony of his coronation was performed at Lyons, Sunday, November 10, but interrupted
by a wall giving way, from being overloaded with spectators: by which accident John II. duke of Bretany was
^killed, the king wounded, and the tiara thrown from the
pope’s head. This accident was considered as a presage of
the misfortunes which afflicted Italy and all Christendom
during the pontificate of Clement V. He was the first pope
who resided at Avignon. In 1311, he held the general
council of Vienne, appropriated to himself the first year’s
revenue of all the English benefices, which was the origin
of first fruits, abolished the order of templars, and made
the collection of what are called the “Clementine Constitutions
” of which there are some scarce editions; Mentz,
rote verses but on particular occasions. Thus, in 1689, having translated into French two sermons of bishop Burnet, preached before king William, on account, he says, of
, brother to the preceding, a celebrated writer, and universal scholar, was born at Geneva, March 19, 1657. He was sent to a grammar-school at eight years of age; where he soon discovered an insatiable inclination to books, and such a genius for poetry, that he flattered himself, if he had duly cultivated it, he would probably have gained no small reputation. But the more serious studies, to which he applied himself, made him entirely neglect poetry, and he never wrote verses but on particular occasions. Thus, in 1689, having translated into French two sermons of bishop Burnet, preached before king William, on account, he says, of the friendship which subsisted between himself and that prelate, he subjoined to the one a small poem in heroic, and to the other an epigram in elegiac verse, upon England restored to liberty.
s work, Le Clerc published various others. In the years 1687 89, he published French translations of bishop Burners “Reflections upon Varillas’s History,” &c. and of some
In the same year, we find him better employed in writing
his “Bibliotheque universelle et historique,
” a literary
journal of great utility. The first eight and part of the
ninth volume he wrote in conjunction with de la Crose
the tenth is Le Clerc’s, and the 11th La Grose’s; the rest
to the 19th Le CHerc’s, and the remainder to the 25th,
which is the last, were written by Mr. Bernard. While
employed on this work, Le Clerc published various others.
In the years 1687 89, he published French translations
of bishop Burners “Reflections upon Varillas’s History,
”
&c. and of some of his sermons and in Lives of the Philosophers,
” translated into
Latin, with notes. The same year he revised and corrected the sixth edition of Moreri’s Dictionary; and wrote
a French letter to Jurieu, vindicating the character of Episcopius, whom Jurieu had classed among Socinians. Besides these labours, he continued to read regular lectures,
as professor of philosophy and the belles-lettres, at Amsterdam; and in 1691, published his “Logic, Ontology,
and Pneumatology,
” which, in order to complete the
course, were followed in 1695, by his “Natural Philosophy.
” These were all written in Latin, and were reprinted, in a fourth edition, Amst. 1710, 4 vols. 8vo, to
which was subjoined also in Latin, his life, written by
himself, 1711, which makes a fifth volume, and in 1712
was translated into English, and published at London. In
1693 he published the first volume of his “Commentary
on the Bible,
” a work he had long projected, and for which
he had been long collecting materials. He published the
remainder, at different times, until 1731, when the Commentary on the Prophets appeared, but it was still left incomplete, owing to that decay of his faculties which
interrupted all his labours in the latter part of his life.
dealing; the first and second to Tenison, archbishop of Canterbury; the third and fourth to Burnet, bishop of Salisbury; and the fifth and sixth to Lloyd, bishop of Worcester.
In 1696 he published the two first volumes of what is
said to have been his Favourite work, his “Ars Critica,
” to
which he added, in Epistolae Criticae & Ec
clesiasticae,
” as a third volume. The censures he passes
upon Quintus Curtius at the end of the second volume,
involved him in a controversy with certain critics; and
Perizonius in particular. His third volume is employed
chiefly in defending himself against exceptions which had
been made by the learned Dr. Cave to some assertions in
the tenth volume of his “Bibliotheque Universelle,
” and
elsewhere, Le Clerc had said, that Cave, in his “Historia
Literaria,
” had concealed many things of the fathers, for
the sake of enhancing their credit, which an impartial
historian should have related; and that, instead of lives of
the fathers, he often wrote panegyrics upon them; Le
Clerc had also asserted the Arianism of Eusebius. Both
these assertions Cave endeavoured to refute, in a Latin
dissertation published at London, in 1696, which, with a
defence of it, was reprinted in the second edition of his
“Historia Literaria.
” To this dissertation Le Clerc’s
third volume is chiefly an answer and the first six letters,
containing the matters of dispute between him and Cave,
are inscribed to three English prelates, to whom Le Clerc
thought fit to appeal for his equity and candid dealing;
the first and second to Tenison, archbishop of Canterbury;
the third and fourth to Burnet, bishop of Salisbury; and
the fifth and sixth to Lloyd, bishop of Worcester. The
seventh, eighth, and ninth, are critical dissertations upon
points of ecclesiastical antiquity; and the tenth relates to
an English version of his additions to Hammond’s annotations on the New Testament; wherein the translator, not
having done him justice, exposed him to the censure of
Cave and other divines here. At the end of these epistles,
there is addressed to Limborch, what he calls an ethical
dissertation, in which this question is debated, “An semper respondendum sit calurnniis theologorurn;
” but the
previous question should undoubtedly have been whether
the answers of his opponents deserved the name of calumnies? The fourth edition of the “Ars Critica,
” which
had been corrected and enlarged in each successive edition, was printed at Amsterdam in 1712.
earning: to whom his funeral sermon was preached by his intimate friend Dr. John Pearson, afterwards bishop of Chester, author of the Exposition of the Creed.
, or rather Cleiveland (for so he and his family spelt their name) (John), a noted loyalist
and popular poet in the reign of Charles I. was the eldest
son of the rev. Thomas Cleiveland, M. A. some time vicar
of Hinckley, and rector of Stoke, in the county of Leicester. He was born in 1613, at Loughborough, where his
father was then assistant to the rector; but educated at
Hinckley, under the rev. Richard Vynes, a man of genius
and learning, who was afterwards as much distinguished
among the presbyterian party as his scholar was among the
cavaliers. In his fifteenth year our poet was removed to
Cambridge, and admitted of Christ’s college, Sept. 4,
1627, where he took the degree of B. A. in 163 1 He was
thence transplanted to the sister foundation of St. John’s
college in the same university, of which he was elected
fellow March 27, 1634, and proceeded to the degree of
M. A. in 1635. Of this society he continued many years a
principal ornament, being one of the tutors, and highly
respected by his pupils, some of -whom afterwards attained
to eminence. By the statutes of that college, he should
have taken orders within six years after his being elected
fellow: but he uas admitted on the law line (as the phrase there is) November 2, 1640, and afterwards on that of
physic, January 31, 1642, which excused him from complying with this obligation; though it does not appear that
he made either law or physic his profession: for, remaining at
college, he became the rhetoric reader there, and was usually
employed by the society in composing their speeches and
epistles to eminent persons (of which specimens may be seen in his works), being in high repute at that time for
the purity and terseness of his Latin style. He also became celebrated for his occasional poems in English, and,
at the breaking out of the civil wars, is said to have been
the first champion that appeared in verse for the royal
cause; which he also supported by all his personal influence: particularly by exerting his interest in the town of
Cambridge, to prevent Oliver Cromwell (then an obscure candidate, but strongly supported by the puritan partv)
from being elected one of its members. Cromwell’s
stronger genius in this, as hi every other pursuit, prevailing, Cleveland is said to have shown great discernment,
by predicting at so early a period, the fatal consequences
that long after ensued to the cause of royalty. Cromwell
got his election by a single vote, which Cleveland declared
“had ruined both church and kingdom.
” The parliament
party carrying all before them in the eastern counties,
Cleveland retired to the royal army, and with it to the
king’s head quarters at Oxford, where he was much admired and caressed for his satirical poems on the opposite
faction, especially for his satire on the Scottish covenanters, entitled “The Rebel Scot.
” In his absence he was
deprived of his fellowship, Feb. 13, 1644, by the earl of
Manchester, who, under the authority of an ordinance of
parliament, for regulating and reforming the university of
Cambridge, ejected such fellows of colleges, &c. as refused to take the solemn league and covenant. From Oxford Cleveland was appointed to be judge-advocate in the
garrison at Newark, under sir Richard Willis the governor,
and has been commended for his skilful and upright conduct in this difficult office, where he also distinguished his
pen occasionally, by returning smart answers to the
summons, and other addresses to the garrison. Newark, after
holding out the last of all the royal fortresses, was at
length, in 1646, by the express command of the king
(then a prisoner in the Scots army), surrendered upon
terms, which left Cleveland in possession of his liberty,
but destitute of all means of support, except what he derived from the hospitality and generosity of his brother
loyalists, among whom he lived some years, obscure and
unnoticed by the ruling party, till, in November 1655,
he was seized at Norwich, as “a person of great abilities,
”
adverse and dangerous to the reigning government; and
being sent to Yarmouth, he was there imprisoned for some
time, till he sent a petition to the lord-protector, wherein
the address of the writer has been much admired, who,
while he honestly avows his principles, has recourse to
such moving topics, as might sooth his oppressor, and procure his enlargement: in which he was not disappointed,
for the protector generously set him at liberty, disdaining
to remember on the throne the opposition he had received
in his canvass for parliament as a private burgess. Cleveland thence retired to London, where he is said to have
found a generous Maecenas; and, being much admired
among all persons of his own party, became member of a
club of wits and loyalists, which Butler, the author of Hiir
dibras, also frequented. Cleveland then lived in chambers
at Gray’s-inn (of which Butler is said to have been a member), and, being seized with an epidemic intermitting
fever, died there on Thursday morning, April 29, 1659.
His friends paid the last honours to his remains by a splendid funeral: for his body was removed to Hunsdon -house,
and thence carried for interment, on Saturday May 1, to
the parish church of St. Michael Royal, on College-hill,
London, followed by a numerous attendance of persons
eminent for their loyalty or learning: to whom his funeral
sermon was preached by his intimate friend Dr. John Pearson, afterwards bishop of Chester, author of the Exposition of the Creed.
r, who died in 1794; and four daughters, whereof the youngest was grandmother of Dr. Percy, the late bishop of Dromore in Ireland, who wrote the poet’s life for the last
One of the poet’s brothers, William, was rector of Oldbury and Quat, near Bridgnorth in Shropshire, and dying 1666, left a son, who was grandfather of the rev. William Cleiveland, M. A. late rector of All-saints parish in Worcester, who died in 1794; and four daughters, whereof the youngest was grandmother of Dr. Percy, the late bishop of Dromore in Ireland, who wrote the poet’s life for the last edition of the Biographia Britannica. A sister of theirs, Elizabeth, married Mr. W r illiam II iff, of Hinckley, from whom are descended a respectable family, to which by marriage is allied the Historian of Leicestershire, in whose collection of Poems are many written by his ancestor, and many curious anecdotes of the author.
untess’s funeral sermon was preached on the 14-th of April, 1676, at Appleby, by Dr. Edward Rainbow, bishop of Carlisle. The text chosen by him, in reference to the numerous
The countess’s funeral sermon was preached on the 14-th
of April, 1676, at Appleby, by Dr. Edward Rainbow,
bishop of Carlisle. The text chosen by him, in reference
to the numerous works of architecture in which she was
perpetually employed, was from the Proverbs of Solomon
“Every wise woman buildeth her house.
” The bishop has
entered very largely into her character, and in describing
the extent of her understanding, informs us, that Dr.
Donne said to her ladyship, in her younger years, “That
she knew well how to discourse of all things, from predestination to slea-silk.
” Her munificence and spirit in building were very conspicuous. One of her first structures
was a pillar, in the highway, at the place where she and
her mother last parted, and took their final farewell; and
besides a monument to her tutor Samuel Daniel, the poetical historian, and another to Spenser, she founded two
hospitals, and repaired or built seven churches and six
castles.
, where he took the degrees of B. and D. D. July 6 of that year. He became early in life chaplain to bishop Gibson, to whose patronage he was indebted for the following
, D. D. and a chaplain in ordinary
to George II. was educated at Trinity college, Oxford,
where he took his bachelor’s degree, but appears to have
removed to King’s college, Cambridge, where he took his
master’s degree, in 1713. In 1723 we find him again at
Trinity college, Oxford, where he took the degrees of
B. and D. D. July 6 of that year. He became early in
life chaplain to bishop Gibson, to whose patronage he was
indebted for the following preferments; viz. the united
rectories of St. Austin and St. Faith, in London, with that
of Acton, in Middlesex, a prebend in St. Paul’s, another
at Lincoln, and the archdeaconry of London, in which last
he succeeded Dr. Tyrwhitt in July 1742. His whole works
were collected by himself, in 1757, under the title of
“Discourses and Essays, in prose and verse, by Edward
Cobden, D. D. archdeacon of London, and lately chaplain
to his majesty king George II. above twenty-two years, in
which time most of these discourses were preached before
him. Published chiefly for the use of his parishioners,
”
one large 4to volume, divided in two parts. Of this volume 250 copies only were printed, 50 of which were appropriated to a charitable use.
In 1748 he preached a sermon before the king at St.
James’s, entitled “A Persuasive to Chastity,
” which was
not a virtue exemplified at that time in the highest place,
and he is said to have lost his situation of chaplain by it.
Among his works is his “Concio ad Clerum, xi cal. Mail,
1752,
” and three sermons preached after the noted one
on “Chastity.
” The last time he preached hefore the
king was Dec. 8, 1751. He resigned his warrant for chaplain Nov. 23, 1752, after having delivered into his majesty’s hands his reasons in writing for so doing. His
income, he says, was hut moderate (all his preferments together not exceeding S50l. per annum clear, which, he added, was as much as he desired, and more than he deserved. This income, frugality and moderation converted into plenty, and contentment into happiness);
but about this time he met with losses amounting to above
2000l. which reduced his substance very low. In 1762,
Dr. Cobden lost his wife; whom he survived little more
than two years, dying April 22, 1764, aged more than
eighty. He appears to have been a good and conscientious man, but with a mixture of oddity in his character
as well as style, and not so wholly free from ambition as
"he would make us believe. His poetical talents, which
he was fond of gxercising, are not of the first rate.
that elaborate discourse, and transmitted her manuscript to Mr. Warburton, afterwards the celebrated bishop of Gloucester, who published it in 1747, under the title of
When Dr. Rutherforth’s “Essay on the Nature and Obligations of Virtue
” appeared, it soon engaged the attention of Mrs. Cockburn, who undertook to write a confutation of that elaborate discourse, and transmitted her manuscript to Mr. Warburton, afterwards the celebrated bishop
of Gloucester, who published it in 1747, under the title
of “Remarks upon the Principles and Reasonings of Dr.
Rutherforth’s Essay on the Nature and Obligations of Virtue,
in vindication of the contrary principles and reasonings,
enforced in the writings of the late Dr. Samuel Clarke.
”
In the preface to this confutation of Dr. Rutherforth, Mr.
Warburton says, that “it contains all the clearness of expression, the strength of reason, the precision of logic,
and attachment to truth, which makes books of this nature
really useful to the common cause of virtue and religion.
”
The merit of this performance, and the general reputation
of her writings, at length induced her friends to propose to
her an edition of them by subscription, but she did not
live to discharge the office of editor; which, in consequence of her death, was afterwards undertaken by Dr.
Birch. She lost her husband on the 4th of Jan. 1748-9,
in“the seventy-first year of his age; and did not long survive the shock. She died on the llth of May, 1749, in
her seventy-first year, after having long supported a painful disorder, with the utmost patience and resignation.
Her memory and understanding continued unimpaired, till
within a few days of her death. She was interred, near
her husband and youngest daughter, at Long-Horseley,
with this short sentence on their tomb:
” Let their works
praise them in the gates," Prov. xxxi. 31.
, a learned Dominican, and bishop of Dardania in partibus, was born at St. Calais on the Maine,
, a learned Dominican, and
bishop of Dardania in partibus, was born at St. Calais on
the Maine, in 1574. He rose by his merits to the first
charges of his order, and died in 1623, after having been
named to the bishopric of Marseilles, by Lewis XIII. He
was eloquent in his sermons, and wrote ^Hh purity, considering the age. His principal pieces are a Roman history from Augustus to Constantine, folio, which was read
with pleasure in the seventeenth century. It was published
in 1647, fol. He translated Florus, and was chosen by
Henry IV. of Francej at the recommendation of cardinal du
Perron, to answer the book which James I. of England had
published; and at the instance of Gregory XV. he wrote
against Duplessis Mornay, and Marc. Anton, de Dominis,
archbishop of Spalatro his answer to the latter was entitled
“Pro sacra monarchia ecclesiae catholic^, &c. libri quatuor
Apologetici, adversus Rempublicam M. A. de Dominis,
&c.
” Paris,