beneath him to facilitate the progress of children, in acquiring the rudiments of speech, or to assist older scholars in gaining a knowledge of the art of reasoning. His Accidence commenced Grammar was published in 1661; and the Artis Logica Institutio,* in 1672. The History of his own country, to the Norman conquest, appeared in 1670. On this History,' says Dr. Johnson, the licenser again fixed his claws; and before he would transmit it to the press, tore out several parts.' He had been too free in the expression of his opinions; and the chaplain of the archbishop of Canterbury' could plainly see a maskIed lampoon upon the modern clergy in Milton's censures of the old Saxon monks. A copy of the unlicensed pages was given to the earl of Anglesea; and he gave them to the world eleven years after the publication of the original work. In 1673, Milton reprinted his juvenile poems, with his treatise on education; and published a new book upon True Religion, Heresie, Schism, Toleration, and what best means may be used to prevent the growth of Popery. Here is certainly a declaration, sufficiently explicit, of the author's hostility to the "Catholic religion; and Mr. Todd does not fail to load Titus Oates with two opprobrious names, for saying, not long afterwards, that Milton was the frequenter of a Popish club.† As Oates, in English * It was adapted to the method of Ramus; and Dr. Johnson, infected a little with the spirit of the licenser, 'knows not whether even in this book, the author did not intend an act of hostility against the universities; for Ramus was one of the first oppugners of the old philosophy, who disturbed with innovations the quiet of the schools. Every one has his day. Dr. Johnson himself has since been accused of assailing Milton in his Dictionary, because, under the article sonnets, he adduced, as an instance, the poet's lines upon the abuse of his Tetrachordon. Mr. Haley might have produced, from the preface, a proof of hostility still more apparent. After deriving height from high, he adds, that Milton, in zeal of ana. logy, writes (the first) highth; quid te exempta juvat spinis de pluribus una? To change all would be too much, and to change one is nothing.' Todd, vol. i. p. 125. history, is only another name for falsehood, Mr. Todd would have little difficulty in persuading his own countrymen, that this story is altogether without foundation; but he should have reflected, that, in those days, whatever was not on the side of the established church, was considered as under the banners of popery; and that, in another place, he has himself admitted Milton to have instituted a club, for the express purpose of opposing Dr. Hammond and other divines of the church of England.'* We are amused with Mr. Godwin's mode of treating this subject. He had read Mr. Todd's Life; and, notwithstanding what we have just seen, he says, none of the biographers of the poet have stained their pages with the mention of this title." Resolving, therefore, to stain his own pages as little as possible, he throws the matter into a note, and handles it thus: "I know not whether it is proper to notice a scurrilous imputation upon Milton, contained in a silly pamphlet, called the Secret History of the Calves Head Club, published in 1703, and that has since been many times reprinted, in which the author of Paradise Lost is expressly named as the founder of this club.' Here is a part of the logic, by, which this tale is to be disproved. In the first place, Milton was the author of Paradise Lost;" and, secondly, Mr. Godwin adds, Milton was a man of too much taste, refinement, and humanity,' to take part in any such transactions. We ought, in justice, to observe, that Mr. Todd and Mr. Godwin are at variance as to the object of the club. The former says, it was to oppose the liturgy; and the latter tells us, it was to commemorate the day on which Charles I. was beheaded. It may have been for both purposes; and we might suggest to Mr. Godwin, that the man, who was so forward to justify * Todd, vol. i. p. 158. † Godw. p. 279, note. the condemnation of a king,* would not be very slack in celebrating the anniversary of his death. In 1674, Milton published his Familiar Letters in Latin, Academical Exercises, and a translation of the Latin Declaration of the Poles, in favour of their sovereign, John III. He wrote, also, a Brief His tory of Muscovy, and some other countries eastward of Russia, which was printed in 1682; a System of Theology, and an Answer to a libel upon himself; both of which seem to have perished. Several other works have been asserted to be his; but Mr. Todd has made us suspect the authenticity of all, except an Argument on the militia question, published in 1642. We are now on the last stage of our journey. Milton died of the gout, on Sunday, the 8th of November, 1674. He had no pain or struggles; and the attendants in the room knew not when he breathed his last. Toland says, his funeral was attended by 'all his learned and great friends in London, not without a friendly concourse of the vulgar.' He was buried by the side of his father in the chancel of St. Giles, Cripplegate; but, when the steps to the communion table were raised in 1679, his grave stone was removed; and, though it may now be impossible to find him, 'I ghesse,' says Aubrey, Jo. Speed and he lie together.' In 1790, a body was actually dug up and exhibited as Milton's; but it seems to have been proved, that the skeleton,—so far from belonging to the poet,— was not even of his own sex.§ Milton was a man of about the middle stature; rather spare ; and, though well proportioned, so delicate as to have merited the imputation of effe * See above, p. .47 an antiquarian takes notes. The reader may be amused to see how 'He was,' says Aubrey, 'scarce so tall as I am. [Qu. quot feet tall am I? Resp. of middle stature." minacy. His face was oval; and his light brown hair parted on his forehead, and fell down upon his shoulders. His eyes were grey; his features regular; and his skin so fine and fresh, that, as he tells us himself, strangers generally took him to be ten years younger than he was. He has spoken of his own honest haughtiness and self-esteem;' and his biographers tell us, that his deportment was at once affable, erect, and manly. It has been even thought worth while to trace a history of his portraits. The first was a half-length, taken by Cornelius Jansen, in 1619. It was left in the possession of Milton's widow; but afterwards fell into the hands of Mr. Charles Stanhope; and, at the sale of that gentleman's pictures in June, 1760, was purchased by Mr. Thomas Hallis. Mr. Stanhope bought it of the widow's executors, for twenty guineas: Mr. Hallis gave thirty; and was so elated with his bargain, that, when lord Harrington applied to have the lot returned, he said, 'his lordship's whole estate should not repurchase it.' His lodgings in Covent Garden afterwards took fire; and, without attempting to rescue any other part of his furniture, he took this picture under his arm, and, as if his all was saved, walked calmly out of the house. Mr. Warton thinks, it is now in the possession of Mr. Band Hallis. J. B. Cipriani engraved it in 1769. There was another picture in the possession of the widow, which, says Mr. Warton, some have suspected not even to have been a portrait of Milton. If it be the one mentioned by Aubrey, it is, notwithstanding this suspicion of the connoiseurs, the only good likeness ever taken. Vertue, who engraved the picture, says, it was drawn at the age of twentyone; and Mr. Warton acknowledges, that 'the ruf is much in the neat style of painting rufs, about and before 1628.** Milton was at the university in 1628; and Aubrey tells us, that 'his widow has his picture drawn (very well and like) when a Cambridge scholar;-which,' he adds, ought to be engraven; for the pictures before his books are not at all like him.' He says afterwards, that Milton wrote his name on his picture with his widow to preserve;' and Mr. Warton quotes this passage, without seeming to be aware, that a more conclusive disproof of his opinion could not well be imagined. The next portrait, by Marshall, was prefixed to the author's juvenile poems, published in 1645. It seems to have been no likeness; or, at any rate, Milton was angry with it. The fourth was drawn in crayons by Farthorne, in 1670; and, as the likeness was attested by the poet's youngest daughter, it is now considered as the only faithful portrait. When Peck was about to publish his New Memoirs of Milton, in 1740, he obtained a portrait from Sir John Meres, of Leicestershire, and asked Vertue, if he thought it was a likeness. Vertue did not think it was. 'I'll have a scraping from it, however,' answered Peck; and let posterity settle the difference.' Posterity has considered it as an easy task. Peck said, the likeness was taken when Milton was twenty-five; and yet, that the whole transaction might be of a piece, his 'scraping' represents the poet with his hand on Paradise Lost. This was the forerunner of a long line of scrapings; and even Sir Joshua Reynolds bought, in 1784, a picture for Milton, which, to the no small confusion of the artist, was generally pronounced to be a good likeness of Selden. But, as Sir Joshua had once thought it to be Milton's, and had moreover given a hundred guineas for his purchase, he was not to be Ap. Todd, vol. i. p. 142, note. All the learning on the subject may be found in this note. +Aub. ap. Godw. p. 337. + Ibid. p. 345 |