DR. JORTIN TO THE REV. MR. WARBURTON.

[JOHN JORTIN was born in London in 1698, and educated at the Charter-house. He was admitted a pensioner of Jesus College, Cambridge, in 1715; B. A. 1718-19; Fellow of his College soon after; M. A. 1721-2. He was patronised by Archbishop Herring; and his principal preferments were the rectory of St. Dunstan's-in-the-East, given him by that prelate in 1751; and that of Kensington, and the Archdeaconry of London, which he received from Bishop Osbaldiston, the former in 1762, the latter in 1764. He died in 1770, aged 72.

His works were various and extensive; and he enjoyed a high reputation both as a scholar and as a divine.

He is characterised by Dr. Knox as distinguished by simplicity of manners, inoffensive behaviour, universal benevolence, candour, modesty, and good sense.— -Nichols's Lit. Anecd.

A long intimacy had subsisted between him and Bishop Warburton; he having for three years, from 1747, been the Bishop's occasional assistant as preacher at Lincoln's Inn. But their friendship seems to have been ill-assorted; the cool and reserved temper of Jortin being little in unison with the frank and ardent temperament of Warburton; and, like other unequal friendships, it did not stand the test of time and chance. The following letters allude to jealousies and misgivings, which appear to have cooled, if not alienated, the kindly feelings of these two eminent persons from one another.-EDIT.]

DEAR SIR,

London, Aug. 12, 1749.

By John of Antioch I meant no other than the most Rev. Bishop Chrysostom, who was of Antioch, and went amongst Pagans and Christians by the

name of plain John or Jack, before he got the surname of Chrysostom: so Zosimus calls him, &c.

Lowth was a scholar: we have of him "Commentaries on the Prophets;" though I remember I thought them not extraordinary; a modest Reply to the five Letters on Inspiration; and Notes on Josephus and the Ecclesiastical Historians. Reading, in his edition, has added to the Notes of Valesius remarks which he had gleaned principally from our divines, Usher, Pearson, Ball, &c. and some notes of Lowth, amongst which is that which I mentioned to you. So that it stands in a pretty conspicuous place, and may perhaps be seen by some of our London divines. Whether you will take notice of it or no, you must judge for yourself.

I wish we had Philostorgius entire: his heterodoxy would make him the more valuable as an historian. It is good to have writers of different sects, audi et alteram partem. Eunomius is delivered down to us by the orthodox as a silly fellow; but his writings, some of which are extant, shew the contrary, and prove that he was a man of ability. He was accused of Manicheism, from which he was as remote as Athanasius was from Arianism. Titus Bostrensis lived in the time of Julian, and died under Valens. He wrote three books against the Manicheans, which are in the Biblioth. Patrum, ou il parle des tremblements de terre arrivez depuis peu, lorsque Julien vouloit

renouveller l'erreur de l'idolatrie, says Tillemont, vii. p. 383. Whether Titus meant the earthquake at Jerusalem I know not. However, there are vouchers enough without him.

But pray is this Work of yours in the press, and when may we expect to see it? I shall despatch that part of my remarks in few words, and refer the readers to my friend. I cannot help harbouring some suspicions concerning the testimonies of Rabbi Gants and Rabbi Gedalia, in Wagenseil. Did not Gedalia take his account from some Christian chronicon ? When did these

Jewish worthies live? You have more perseverance in study than I can pretend to. An indifference to all things seizes me; I desire nothing more than to forget and be forgotten.

The dead ass came into my mind verily and truly, but I rejected him.

I shall be glad of Mr. Forster's acquaintance, for whom I have had a great esteem; and to whom perhaps I have done such little service as lay in my poor power, by speaking well of him before Archbishops, &c. There was a rumour here once that he was to attack Middleton; but I suppose there was nothing in it. There are some academics here, my juniors, who know so little of me as to think my acquaintance worth the seeking. I am much obliged to them; for, if I get not a few young friends, I shall not know how the learned world goes on, and what is in fashion.

I need not tell you that I love to correspond with you, my letter will inform you of it; for you see I scribble on without wit and without end; but you will excuse all such imperfections in, Dear Sir,

Your most humble servant,

J. JORTIN.

Rufinus is come to wait upon you, and hopes that you will treat him better than Jerom did. He desired me to intimate so much.

Copy of a Letter to Mr. Whiston, Bookseller, but directed to Dr. Jortin on the superscription.

MR. WHISTON,

Sept. 30, 1758.

I have read over Dr. Jortin's Life of Erasmus with great pleasure. If all his readers like it as well, as I do not doubt they will, you will find your account in it.

I perceive myself indebted to him here and there, as particularly in note d, p. 552. I have only one difficulty about it, which is (as he thinks me mistaken in the sense of Princeps) how it happened he did not tell me of it professed a friendship for me.

during the time he He will say, per

haps, I should not have had it now, but for the joke at the end of it. As to that, the joke has been

so much worn, by its frequent application to many of my betters, that it might have been left at rest.

However, he will give me leave to requite his kindness, and in that way I should have been contented to receive his, in observing to him, and to him only, that where, at p. 114, he translates the words of Bembus, apud Inferos pœna, by the pains of Hell, I think it should have been the pains of Purgatory, and not of Hell as Bembus's apud Inferos contained both a Hell and a Purgatory.

But these are trifles. There is another thing more worth his attention (for it can hardly have escaped his knowledge), that, from the first moment of my acquaintance with him to the last that he would allow me to call him friend, I had the vanity to be always recommending him to those of the first quality whom I knew; some of whom are yet living, and ready to do me justice in this particular. I will go further, that from that time to this day, I never wrote a line or a word reflecting on him (unless he so interprets my vindication of my sentiment concerning Socrates' behaviour at his death), nor did I ever instigate any other to do so, nor was I ever privy to any thing so done. I have indeed been foolishly enough officious, formerly, to ridicule some of his slanderers in a public paper. As to his own conduct during the same period, I leave that to his own reflections. It is a pleasure to me, though it should be none to him, that he is