who was known to have a wife still living. He might not think himself too at liberty as before, while his wife continued obstinate; for his most plausible argument for divorce proceeds upon a fuppofition, that the thing be done with mutual confent.

After his wife's return, his family was increased not only with children, but also with his wife's relations'; her father and mother, her brothers and fisters, coming to live with him in the general distress and ruin of the royal party; and he was so far from refenting their former ill treatment of him, that he generoufly protected them, and entertained them very hofpitably, till their affairs were accomodated through his interest with the prevailing faction. Upon their removal, and the death of his own father, his house looked again like the house of the Muses. But his studies had like to have been interrupted by a call to public business: For about this time there was a defign of constituting him Adjutant-General in the army under Sir William Waller; but the new-modelling of the army foon following, that design was laid aside. Not long after, his great house in Barbican being now too large for his family, he quitted it for a smaller in High Holburn, which opened backward into Lincoln's-inn Fields where he profecuted his studies till the King's trial and death; when the Prefbyterians declaiming tragically against the King's execution, and asserting that his person was facred and inviolable, provoked him to write The tenure of kings and magistrates, prov ing that it is lawful to call a tyrant to account, and to depose or put him to death; and that they who of late fo much blame depofing, are the men who did it themselves. This book he published in the beginning of 1649, to fatisfy and compose the minds of the people. Not long after he wrote his Obfervations on the articles of peace between the Earl of Ormond and the Irish rebels. In these and all his writings, whatever others of different parties may think, he thought himself an advocate for true liberty; for ecclesiastical liberty in his treatises against the bishops, for domestic liberty in his books of divorce, and for civil liberty in his wri

D

tings against the King, in defence of the parliament zand people of England.

After this he retired again to his private studies; and thinking that he had leisure enough for fuch a work, he applied himself to the writing of a history of England, which he intended to deduce from the earliest accounts down to his own times. He had finithed four books of that history, when, neither courtwing nor expecting any fuch preferment, he was invited by the council of state to be their Latin secretary for foreign affairs. And he served in the fame capacity under Oliver, and Richard, and the Rump, till the restoration; and without doubt a better Latin pen could not have been found in the kingdom. For the republic and Cromwell scorned to pay that tribute to any foreign prince, which is usually paid to the French King, of managing their affairs in his language: They thought it an indignity and meanness, to which this or any free nation ought not to fubmit; and took a noble resolution, neither to write any letters to any foreign states, nor to receive any answers from them, but in the Latin tongue, which was.common to them all. And it would have been well, if fucceeding princes had followed their example; for, in the opinion of very wife men, the univerfality of the French language will make way for the univerfality of the French monarchy.

But it was not only in foreign dispatches that the government made use of his pen. He had discharged the business of his office a very little time, before he was called to a work of another kind. For foon after the King's death was published a book under his name, intitled, Εικων βασιλική, or, The royal image. This book, like Cæfar's last will, making a deeper impreffion, and exciting greater commiferation in the minds of the people, than the King himself did while alive, Milton was ordered to prepare an answer to it; which was published by authority, and intitled, Εικονοκλάσης, or, The Image-breaker; the famous firname of many Greek Emperors, who in their zeal against idolatry broke all fuperftitious images to pieces. This piece

was

1

was tranflated into French; and two replies to it werepublished, one in 1651, and the other in 1692, upon the reprinting of Milton's book at Amsterdam.

But his moft celebrated work in profe is his Defence of the people of England against Salmafius; Defensio pro populo Anglicano contra Claudii anonymi, alias Salmafii, defenfionem regiam. Salmafius, by birth a Frenchman, fucceeded the famous. Scaliger as honorary Profeffor of the university of Leyden; had gained great reputation by his Plinian exercitations on Solinus, and by his critical remarks on several Latin and Greek authors; was generally esteemed one of the greatest and most confummate scholars of that age; and is com-mended by Milton himself in his Reason of church-government, and called the learned Salmafius. Befides" his great learning, he had extraordinary talents in railing. "This prince of scholars," as fome body faid of him," seemed to have erected his throne up

on a heap of ftones, that he might have them at "hand to throw at every one's head who passed by." He was therefore courted by Charles II. as the most able man to write a defence of the late King his father, and to traduce his adversaries; and a hundred jacobufes were given him for that purpose. His book was published in 1649, under the title of Defenfio regia pro Carolo I. ad Carolum II. No sooner did this piece appear in England, but the council of state unanimoufly appointed Milton, then present, to answer it. He performed the talk with amazing spirit and vigour, though his health at that time was such, that he could hardly endure the fatigue of writing; and being weak in body, he was forced to write by piece-meal, and to break off almost every hour. This neceffarily occafioned some delay; fo that his Defence of the people of England was not made public till the beginning of 1651. They who cannot read the original, may yer have the pleafure to read the English tranflation by Mr. Washington of the Temple, which was printed in 1692, and is inferted among Milton's works in the two last editions. It was somewhat extraordinary, that Salmafius, a penfioner to a republic, should pre

D2

tend

tend to write a defence of monarchy: But the states showed their difapprobation by publicly condemning his book, and ordered it to be suppreffed. On the other hand, Milton's book was burnt at Paris, and at Thoulouse, by the hands of the common hangman: But this served only to procure it the more readers. It was read and talked of every where; even they who were of different principles, could not but acknowledge that he was a good defender of a bad cause, Salmafius's book underwent only one impreffion, while Milton's passed through feveral editions. On the first appearance of it, he was visited or invited by all the foreign ministers at London, not excepting even those of crowned heads; and was particularly honoured and esteemed by Adrian Paaw, ambassador from the States of Holland. He was likewife highly complimented by letters from the most learned and ingenious persons in France and Germany; and Leonard Philaras, an Athenian born, and ambassador from the Duke of Parma to the French king, wrote a fine encomium of his defence, and sent him his picture. And what gave him the greatest fatisfaction, the work was highly applauded by those who had defired him to undertake it; and they made him a prefent of 1000 1. which in those days of frugality was reckoned no inconfiderable reward for his performance. But the cafe was far otherwise with Salmafius. He was then in high favour at the court of Christina Queen of Sweden, who had invited thither feveral of the most learned men of all countries: But when Milton's Defence was brought to Sweden, and was read to the Queen at her own defire, he sunk immediately in her esteem, and the opinion of every body; and though he talked big at first, and vowed the destruction of Milton and the parliament, yet finding that he was looked upon with coldness, he thought proper to take leave of the court; and he who came in honour, was dismissed with contempt. He died sometime afterwards at Spa in Germany, and it is faid more of a broken heart than of any diftemper; leaving a posthumous reply to Milton, which was not published

published till after the restoration, and was dedicated to-Charles II. by his fon Claudius: But it has done no great honour to his memory, abounding with abufe much more than argument.

Ifaac Voffius, who was at Stockholm, when Milton's book was brought thither, in fome of his letters to Nicholas Heinfius, says, that he had the only copy of Milton's book, that the Queen borrowed it of him, was very much pleased with it, and commended Milton's wit and manner of writing; and that Salmafius was very angry, and very busy in preparing his answer, wherein he abused Milton as if he had been one of the vilest catamites in Italy, and also criticised his Latin poems. Heinfius writes again to Voffius from Holland, that he wondered that only one copy of Milton's book was brought to Stockholm, when three were fent thither, one to the Queen, another to Voffius, and the third to Salmafius; that the book was in every body's hands, and there had been four editions in a few months, befides the English one; that a Dutch tranflation was handed about, and a French one was expected. Afterwards he writes from Venice, that Holstenius had lent him Milton's Latin poems; that they were nothing, compared with the elegance of his Apology; that he had offended fre. quently against profody, and here was a great opening for Salmafius's criticism: But as to Milton's ha. ving been a catamite in Italy, he says, that it was a mere calumny; on the contrary, he was disfliked by the Italians, for the feverity of his manners, and for the freedom of his discourses against Popery. In o thers of his letters Heinfius mentions how angry Salmafius was with him for commending Milton's book; and says, that Grafwinkelius had written something against Milton, which was to have been printed by Elzevir, but it was fuppreffed by public authority.

The first reply was published in 1651, intitled, An apology for the King and people, &c. Apologia pro rege ét populo Anglicano, contra Johannis Polypragmatici (alias Miltoni Angli) defenfionem destructivam regis

D33

et popul Anglicani.

: