« НазадПродовжити »
short, I will know whether you will recant any more, ere I
talk with you or believe you.” "
SMITH (RicharD), another Roman catholic champion, was born in Lincolnshire in 1566, and studied for some time at Trinity-college, Oxford; but afterwards went to Rome, where he was a pupil of Bellarmin. Having concluded his studies in Spain, he took his doctor's degree at Valladolid, and in 1603 arrived in England as a missionary. His proceedings here were not much different from those of other popish propagandists, except that he appears to have been frequently at variance with those of his own communion, and particularly with Parsons the celebrated Jesuit. In 1625, he was appointed bishop of Chalcedon. He happened at this time to be at Paris, but returned immediately to England “to take upon him the government of the English catholicks,” and remained unmolested until he had a quarrel with the regulars of his own church, which made his character known; and a reward being offered for apprehending him, he escaped to France, where he died March 18, 1655. He wrote various works in defence of popery, as well as of himself, in his dispute with the regulars. The former were answered by bishop Martin, Dr. Hammond, and Dr. Daniel Featley, in whose works, as his name occurs, this brief sketch has been thought necessary.”
SMITH (Richard), one of the earliest book-collectors upon record, and the Isaac Reed of his time, was the son of Richard Smith, a clergyman, and was born at Lillingston Dayrell, in Buckinghamshire, in 1590. He appears to have studied for some time at Oxford, but was removed thence by his parents, and placed as clerk with an attorney in London, where he spent all the time he could spare from business in reading. He became at length secondary of the Poultry counter, a place worth 700l. a year, which he enjoyed many years, and sold it in 1655, on the death of his son, to whom he intended to resign it. He now retired to private life, two thirds of which, at least, Wood says, he spent in his library. “He was a person,” adds the same author, “infinitely curious and inquisitive after books, and suffered nothing extraordinary to escape him
' Ath. Ox. vol. 1. new edit.—Dodd's Ch. Hist. vol. II.-Strype's Cranmer passim, &c.—Lives of Ridley and Latimer.
i i. Ox. vol. II.-but a more full and accurate account in Dodd's Ch. Hist. wei. l II.
that fell within the compass of his learning; desiring to be master of no more than he knew how to use.” If in this last respect he differed from some modern collectors, he was equally indefatigable in his inquiries after libraries to be disposed of, and passed much of his time in Little Britain and other repositories of stall-books, by which means he accumulated a vast collection of curiosities relative to history, general and particular, politics, biography, with many curious MSS. all which be carefully collated, compared editions, wrote notes upon them, assigning the authors to anonymous works, and, in short, performing all the duties and all the drudgery of a genuine collector. He also occasionally took up his pen, wrote a life of Hugh Broughton, and had a short controversy with Dr. Hammond on the sense of that article in the creed “He descended into hell,” published in 1684. He also wrote some translations, but it does not very clearly appear from Wood, whether these were printed. He died March 26, 1675, and was buried in St. Giles's Cripplegate, where a marble monument was soon afterwards erected to his memory. In 1682 his library was sold by Chiswell, the famous bookseller of St. Paul's Church-yard, by a printed catalogue, “to the great reluctance,” says Wood, “ of public-spirited men.” His “Obituary,” or “catalogue of all such persons as he knew in their life,” extending from 1606 to 1674, a very useful article, is printed by Peck in the second volume of his “Desiderata.” o SMITH (Robert), the very learned successor of Bentley as master of Trinity college, Cambridge, was born in 1689, and educated at that college, where he took his degrees of A. B. in 1711, A. M. in 1715, L. L. D. in 1723, and D. D. in 1739. Very little, we regret to say, is on record, respecting Dr. Smith, who has so well deserved of the learned world. He was mathematical preceptor to William duke of Cumberland, and master of mechanics to his majesty, George II. It appears that he was maternal cousin of the celebrated Roger Cotes, whom he succeeded in 1716, as Plumian professor at Cambridge, and afterwards succeeded Bentley as master of Trinity. He published some of the works of his cousin Cotes, particularly his “Hydrostatical and Pneumatical Lectures,” 1737, 8vo; also a collection of Cotes's pieces from the Philosophical Transactions, &c. 1722, 4to. His own works, which sufficiently evince his scientific knowledge, were his “Complete system of Optics,” 1728, 2 vols, 4to ; and his “Harmonics, or the philosophy of Musical Sounds,” 1760. He died in 1768, in the seventy-ninth year of his age. The late Mr. Cumberland, who was under him at Trinity college, says, Dr. Smith was a strict examiner into the proficiency of the students, and led himself the life of a student, abstemious and recluse, his family consisting only of an unmarried sister advanced in years, and a niece. He was of a thin habit, the tone of his voice shrill and nasal, and his manner of speaking such as denoted forethought and deliberation." SMITH (SAMUEL), one of the most popular writers of pious tracts in the seventeenth century, and whose works are still in vogue, was the son of a clergyman, and born at or near Dudley, in Worcestershire, in 1588, and studied for some time at St. Mary Hall, Oxford. He left the university without taking a degree, and became beneficed at
* Ath. Ox. vol. II.-Peck's Desiderata, vol. II.-Sae some of his MSS. in Ayscough's Catalogue.
Prittlewell, in Essex, and afterwards, as Wood says, in
his own country, but, according to Calamy, he had the perpetual curacy of Cressedge and Cound, in Shropshire. On the breaking out of the rebellion he came to London, sided with the presbyterians, and became a frequent and popular preacher. On his return to the country he was appointed an assistant to the commissioners for the ejection of those they were pleased to term “scandalous and igno
rant ministers and schoolmasters.” At the restoration he
was ejected from Cressedge, but neither Wood nor Calamy have ascertained when he died. The former says “he was living an aged man near Dudley in 1663.” His works are, 1. “David's blessed man; or a short exposition upon the first Psalm,” Lond, 8vo, of which the fifteenth edition, in 12mo, was printed in 1686. 2. “The Great Assize, or the Day of Jubilee,” 12mo, which before 1684 went through thirty-one editions, and was often reprinted in the last century. 3. “A Fold for Christ's Sheep,” printed thirty-two times. 4. “The Christian's Guide,” of which
there were numerous editions. He published some other
tracts and sermons, which also had a very numerous class of readers.”
* Hutton's Dict. new edit –Cumberland's Life.—Cambridge Graduates. * Ath. Ox. vol. II.—Calamy.
SMITH (Sir Thomas), a very learned writer and statesroan, in the reigns of Edward VI. and Elizabeth, was born March 28, 1514, at Saffron-Walden in Essex. He was the son of John Smith, a gentleman of that place, who was much inclined to the principles of the reformation, which had then made but a very small progress. After attending a grammar school, Thomas was sent about 1528 to Queen's college, Cambridge, where he greatly distinguished himself, and had a king's scholarship at the same time with the celebrated John Cheke. Queen's college was one of those which favoured the opinions of Erasmus and Luther, and many of the members used to confer privately together about religion, in which they learned to detect the abuses of the schools, and the superstitions of popery. In such conferences Mr. Smith probably took his share, when of sufficient standing to be admitted, which was very soon, for in 1531 he was chosen a fellow of the college. In the mean time he had formed a strict friendship with Cheke, and they pursued their classical studies together, reading Cicero, Plato, Demosthenes, and Aristotle: and such was Smith's proficiency, that about 1533 he was appointed Greek professor in the university.
About this time he and Cheke introduced a new mode of reading Greek, being dissatisfied with the corrupt and vicious pronunciation which then prevailed. As this was accounted an innovation of the most important, and even dangerous tendency, and exhibits a curious instance of the manners and sentiments of the times, we shall give a more particular account of it in the plain language of honest Strype. According to this biographer, it appears that “custom had established a very faulty manner of sounding several of the vowels and diphthongs; for, l, n, v, ei, o, vi, were all pronounced as ióra ; “nihil fere aliud,” says Smith, “haberet ad loguendum, nisi lugubres sonos et illud flebile išta.” He conferred therefore with Cheke upon this point, and they perceived that the vulgar method of pronouncing Greek was false; since it was absurd, that so many different letters and diphthongs should all have but one sound. They proceeded to search authors for the determination of this point: but the modern writers little availed them; they had not seen Erasmus's book, in which he excepted against the common way of reading Greek. But though both of them saw these palpable errors, they could not agree among themselves, especially concerning the letters #ra and #4acy. Soon after, having procured Erasmus's book, and Terentianus “de literis et syllabis,” they began to reform their pronunciation of Greek privately, and only communicated it to their most intimate friends. When they had sufficiently habituated themselves to this new method of pronunciation, with which they were highly pleased, on account of the fullness and sweetness of it, they resolved to make trial of it publicly ; and it was agreed that Smith should begin. He read lectures at that time upon Aristotle “de Republică,” in Greek, as he had done some years before: and, that the novelty of his pronunciation might give the less offence, he used this artifice, that in reading he would let fall a word only now and then, uttered in the new correct sound. At first no notice was taken of this; but, when he did it oftener, his auditors began to observe and listen more attentively; and, when he had often pronounced n and ot, as s and ot, they, who three years before had heard him sound them after the old way, could not think it a slip of the tongue, but suspected something else, and laughed at the unusual sounds. He again, as though his tongue had slipped, would sometimes correct himself, and repeat the word after the old manner. But, when he did this daily, some of his friends came to him, and told him what they had remarked in his lectures : upon which he owned that he had been thinking of something privately, but that it was not yet sufficiently digested and prepared for the public. They, on the other hand, prayed him not to conceal it from them, but to acquaint them with it frankly; and accordingly he promised them that he would. Upon this rumour many resorted to him, whom he desired only to hear his reasons, and to have patience with him three or four days at most; until the sounds by use were made more familiar to their ears, and the prejudice against their novelty worn off. At this time he read lectures upon Homer's “Odyssey,” in his own college; and there began more openly to shew and determine the difference of the sounds : Cheke likewise did the same in his college. After this, many came to them, in order to learn of them how to pronounce after the new method; and it is not to be expressed with what greediness and affection this was received among the youth. The following winter there was acted in St. John's college, Aristophanes's “Plutus,” in Greek, and one or two more of his comedies, without the least dislike or opposition from