« AnteriorContinuar »
the standard authors in all the different departments of literature, he can only be said to have made himself master of comparatively a very few of them. We doubt whether he thoroughly knew the works even of the great masters of English prose eloquence. Of both the history of our poetry, and the works of our poets, ancient and modern, he has left a thousand proofs of his utter ignorance. He was certainly not deeply versant in any department of English antiquities. The more recent portion of the history of his own country he had probably studied about as attentively as the generality of literary men, and not more so. We do not know that he had made himself by any means so familiar with the history of other modern countries as he might have done, even without a knowledge of their languages. Upon the subject of mental philosophy he had read, we believe, nearly all that had been written in English; but we must be excused from subscribing, for all that, to the eulogies pronounced by his admirers, on either his knowledge of the history of metaphysical opinion, or his skill in metaphysical investigations. This was a study for which, we apprehend, he had far too little subtlety. Of the professional pursuits of law and medicine it was not, of course, to be expected that he should know much. His learning, in truth, lay merely in the departments of classical literature and theology. In these, although not in all respects perfect, it was certainly of extraordinary extent and accuracy. His ignorance of the Oriental and Continental languages necessarily deprived him of access to many most important sources of information in regard to both his favourite studies; and he was too little conversant besides, we apprehend, with the literature of the middle ages, and the writings of the schoolmen, to entitle us to consider him as having been a complete master even of the less recent history of theology, while his unacquaintance with the fine arts, on the other hand, must have nearly shut him out from one important corner in the field of classical antiquities. But he had carefully read, not only all the productions that have come down to us from ancient Greece and Rome, including those of the first five centuries of the Christian era, but, we believe, nearly all the more remarkable works written in Greek or Latin, that have appeared in any of the countries of Europe since the era of the revival of letters, especially those belonging to the departments of theology, poetry, criticism, and grammar. Of his reading on the subject of politics we say nothing, as in this country that is a science which every body studies. Dr. Parr's political reading, however, it is right to remark, was confined altogether to the lighter and less scientific parts of the subject. He knew nothing either of political economy or statistics, although he had, no doubt, perused with much attention all the more interesting party pamphlets that had been published in his time.
Such is, we think, a pretty fair statement of the amount of Dr. Parr's scholarship. In the two departments of classical literature
and controversial theology, it was in some respects probably unequalled by that of any of his contemporaries; as to all other subjects, it was but of very moderate extent and depth. He had made himself what he was, chiefly by his memory and his industry. If it was a great matter, as in one sense it certainly was, to know perfectly the meanings and uses of every term in the Greek and Latin languages, and to have half the works written in them by heart, Dr. Parr was entitled to compete in this species of erudition with any man of his time. The mere phraseology at least of the Greek and Roman writers was as familiar to him as that of his native tongue; or rather his learning was infinitely more minute and profound in regard to the two dead languages than in regard to the living one -with the sources and earlier history of which he was certainly but very superficially acquainted, however great a command he may have obtained over a part of its vocabulary. Although a most learned grammarian, however, in so far as the classic tongues were concerned, we cannot allow that he had any pretensions to a philosophical knowledge of the structure even of these tongues. As a conclusive evidence of his extreme ignorance and incompetency in this department, we would refer merely to his famous dissertation on the origin and import of the Latin prefix sub, which he wrote in reference to some remarks of Mr. Dugald Stewart on the common etymology of the term sublimis, and which that gentleman has printed at the end of his Philosophical Essays. Doctor Hunter, of St. Andrews, the individual who, of all the great scholars of our time, presents us with the rarest combination of erudition and philosophy, has recently published a reply to this very absurd and pompous effusion, in the form of a note to an Edition of Virgil, which we have no hesitation in characterising as one of the most perfect philological demonstrations that have ever appeared. We recommend it very earnestly to those of our readers who are given to such pursuits. We observe, by the bye, from a letter which Dr. Johnstone has printed in one of the volumes before us, that one of Dr. Parr's correspondents, the present very learned and talented bishop of Llandaff, had caught for a moment a glimpse of the truth as to this matter-which he very soon lost, however, amid the din and obscuration of his dogmatic friend's thundering quotations and lumbering logic. His Lordship and others who have been in the same manner imposed upon by the swagger and rhodomontade of the original paper, will be amply repaid, we can assure them, for their trouble, by the perusal of Dr. Hunter's quiet, but most beautiful and triumphant refutation.
By far the most interesting part of the present publication are the three volumes which comprise the Memoirs and Correspondence of Dr. Parr-the former being written, and the latter selected by his very able friend and executor, the editor of the work. The life is scarcely perhaps so regular, or in some respects so satisfactory a narrative to those who may have been previously quite
unacquainted with the incidents of Dr. Parr's history, as that compiled by Mr. Field; but it has the advantage of supplying us with a good deal of interesting information as to other points, from sources of authority not accessible to that gentleman, few of whose materials, indeed, were not in possession of the public before he wrote, although not so generally known until he had collected and arranged them. To those who know any thing of Dr. Johnstone, we need not say that he has produced a very different work from that of Mr. Barker, which we had so lately occasion to notice. His performance is, upon the whole, by far the most entertaining, as well as the ablest to which the death of the great scholar has given birth; and we are glad, therefore, for the sake of his reputation, to see it occupying the place it does. From the materials of which it is composed, and the good sense by which it is generally marked, as well as from the form and auspices under which it appears, it has every claim to be received as the record of authority in regard to Dr. Parr's life and actions.
After the length at which we have of late on more occasions than one entered into the particulars of Dr. Parr's biography, it is not our intention to attempt another regular review of it. This is almost more, indeed, than Dr. Johnstone himself can fairly be said to do; for his memoir is not so much an elaborate and continuous history, as a series of sketches, embracing only the more remarkable events in his late friend's life, and composed, as appears to us, with a laudable anxiety to present his readers only with such information as is likely to be new to them. With this view the author has avoided almost entirely those voluminous extracts from magazines and newspapers, in which his predecessors have found the principal materials of their compilations; and at the hazard even of leaving a good many circumstances unnoticed, the knowledge of which is perhaps, strictly speaking, necessary to a complete understanding of some of the events and transactions referred to, has made up his relation principally from the hitherto unpublished letters of Dr. Parr himself, and his friends. If he has in this way made his account a somewhat less complete one than it otherwise would have been, he has rendered it, we are sure, much more lively and interesting than he could have done by any other method-more especially as he has taken care to keep it tolerably free, upon the whole, from those wretched effusions of ignorance, vanity, and absolute imbecility in which Mr. Barker's book is so rich. It is certainly, in our opinion, as we shall probably have occasion to state more particularly before we conclude, written in some parts in a tone of altogether extravagant admiration and panegyric, in reference to the good Doctor; but the author has, for all that, greatly too much shrewdness and good sense to commit himself to the same extent in that direction with Mr. Barker and his collaborateurs. His eulogy is that of a warm heart, carried away by too blind an affection for his distinguished friend-not
that of a weak head, vain of the great scholar's acquaintance, and chiefly led to form a lofty estimate of his talents and genius, because his good nature or bad taste had been so far misled as to praise or patronize its own shallow capacity or feeble literary toils.
Among the documents referring to Dr. Parr's childhood, which our author has printed, is an interesting letter from his only sister, Miss Bowyear-a short extract from which will amuse our readers.
His earliest study, and longest cherished delight, next to Mother Goose, was the History of the Seven Champions of Christendom. From the age of nine or ten he evinced a strong inclination for the clerical profession; insomuch, that he was accustomed, when our cousins from Eton were with us during their vacations (they, together with myself, forming the congregation), to read the Church service (after the due tolling of a bell tied to the bannisters by those who officiated as clerk), and sometimes he preached, and we youngsters often thought him prolix enough. He made one sermon for Christmas day (when under twelve years of age), which was shewn to the vicar of Harrow, who said it was so good and appropriate a composition, that no clergyman need have been ashamed to deliver it. He substituted for a surplice a shirt of my father's, taken from the press. This reaching the ears of Mr. Saunders, the vicar, he had a gown and cassock made for him, with which my brother was highly delighted. So enwrapped was he in his predilection, as even (notwithstanding my father's remonstrances) to persist in reading the Burial Service over dead birds, kittens, &c. Another of his amusements was bell-ringing. With a set of his shoolfellows he frequently assembled to ring a peal, and he was proud of being able to raise the tenor, which the joint efforts of two of his companions were unable to effect. He was likewise fond of exhibiting his strength, to the great horror of my father, in the strange exploit of knocking down oxen in the slaughter-house. But he was, nevertheless, remarkably attached to animals; and seldom from his childhood read in comfort without a pet cat seated on his table. The only battle I recollect hearing of his fighting, throughout his schoolboy days, was with Lord Mountstuart, in defence of a worried cat. His attachments of all kinds were very strong. His earliest favourite was his cousin, Tom Parr, who died early; and to him succeeded Frank Parr, Tom's brother, who was captain of Eton School before he was fifteen years of age, and who also died early. They were younger brothers of Mr. Parr, of Norwich. He always assumed authority among his playmates at home, making his cousins call him uncle. He was, I think, between twelve and thirteen, when, together with Sir William Jones and Dr. Bennet (Bishop of Cloyne), he wrote and acted a play; whether tragedy or comedy, I do not recollect. It was performed in our parlour. The theatre was not very spacious, but it was thronged, and the youthful trio were much applauded. When I spoke of recollecting the turbans and flowing robes worn by the characters in the play that was represented in my father's parlour, I forgot to say there was a female character in it, which was personated by Dr. Bennet, who must have been very small for his age, for he wore my best shoes, and burst them, to my sorrow. was the darling of his mother; and her death (which happened in 1762) was severely and lastingly felt. She was indeed but too indulgent to
him; every wish and whim was attended to, and his appetite so consulted, as to have hot meat suppers prepared for him from early childhood. I remember, when he was lying under the heavy attack of small-pox, that left its marks upon him till death, in the first note he wrote to me, on recovering sight from a blindness of three weeks, his expressing extreme pleasure in the assurance he felt, that if the disease were to reach me, I should not suffer as he was suffering, because I had not been indulged in hot suppers. Before this seizure, in about his twelfth year, he was very fair and regular-featured. I recollect well, on my being taken down to him (he was nursed in a distant part of the village), my feeling, in the midst of my joy at seeing him getting better, something akin to satisfaction, on finding that the prettiness which had attracted so much notice was completely spoiled.'-vol. i. pp. 16-17.
For a person who at no period of his life was ever piously given, in any remarkable degree, young Parr's predilection for the profession of a churchman is extraordinary enough-unless we are to account for it, as we probably ought, by a strong taste he always had for the mere pomp and circumstance of religion, and perhaps by an ambition of that dignified and lettered leisure which our national establishment affords to so many of her members. Be this as it may, he seems from his earliest years to have set his heart upon this destination. Dr. Gabriel,' says our author, tells an anecdote in one of his letters, from the personal authority of Dr. Allen, who saw Parr when a boy of nine years of age, sitting on the churchyard gate at Harrow, looking grave and serious, whilst his school-fellows were playing about, "Sam, why do you not play with the others?" cried Allan. Parr looked at him with seriousness and earnestness, and in a solemn tone replied, “Do not know, Sir, that I am to be a parson?" So when, after having taken orders, he had established himself in his school at Stanmore, he used to amuse the neighbourhood, we are told, by riding in high prelatical pomp through the streets, on a black saddle, having in his hand a long cane or wand, such as women used to have, with an ivory head like a crosier, which was probably the reason why he liked it.' And that the love of this ecclesiastical show and solemnity remained with him till the very latest period of his life, was sufficiently evidenced by a thousand peculiarities in matters both trivial and more important. Latitudinarian as his theological opinions always were, or at least had latterly become, according even to his own confession, he seems to have been the strictest of the Pharisees in his observance of the ceremonies of the altar, and quite a high churchman in his zeal about every thing appertaining to the outward splendour of its ministers. When his wife died he insisted upon his only remaining daughter, although at the time in the last stage of consumption, following the hearse along with himself in funeral procession from Devonshire to Hatton- and having towards the close of his own life at last attained that affluence to which, during the greater part of it he had been a stranger,