Body lately found at Reading not that of Henry I. the intolerable conduct of the parliament forces at Coventry; who, before hoftilities were commenced on the fide of the monarch, fhot his fervants at the gates of the city. Charles was deter mined not to go to war without a caufe, and was contemplating the moft probable measures of making a reconciliation betwixt himself and his people, whilft his parliament were eagerly and refolutely preparing to defeat him. I MR. URBAN, R. D. Dec. 16. WAS much furprized, in reading your left Magazine, to find a letter from one of your correfpondents, who figns himself F. Figott, in which he laments a facrilege committed on the fuppofed bones of K. Henry I. which were, fome time fince, dug up amidst the ruins of Reading Abbey. I have hitherto been with held from troubling you with my remarks on that circumftance, by a confcioufnefs of the little fkill I poffefs in antiquarian researches: nor fhould I now have ventured to affert my opinion against one fo much my fuperior both in years and knowledge as Mr. P. did not that gentleman's mifinformation, and his mis-statement of facts, arifing probably from that caufe, render fome anfwer indifpenfably neceffary. Mr. P. informs us, that, "in digging a foundation for a houfe of correction on the fpot where the old abbey ftood, a vault was discovered, the only one there, and which was of curious workmanship; that in the vault was a leaden. coffin almoft devoured by time; that a perfect skeleton was contained therein, which undoubtedly was the king's, from the diftinguished appearance of the coffin, and the vault in which it was interred, and more particularly from feveral fragments of rotten leather found in the coffin, the body of that king being faid to have been wrapped in tanned ox-hides." If it should be proved that thefe affertions of Mr. P. are well founded, and that it really was the body of the king, no one, I trust, will hefitate to join with him in condemning the facrilege he mentions; but if, on the contrary, it should appear that there is every reafon to believe them groundless, there will be little need for those lamentations which Mr. P. has fo liberally poured forth. A leaden coffin was indeed dug up about 18 inches beneath the furface. But no appearance whatever of a vault, was difcovered. I was my felf at Reading a few days after, and faw the fpot where it was taken up. The whole breadth of the chafm could not be more than two feet, and there was nothing which could lead to a fuppofition that there ever had been a vault. This intelligence is confirmed by a friend, whe was himself a fpectator, and who has fince, at my requeft, made particular enquiries on the spot. As Mr. P. has adduced the vault as an argument that it really was the body of Henry I. if no vault was difcovered, the argument will at least be of equal force, that it was not his body. All writers agree that he was buried with great ftate. "Corpus regium de Normannia ad Radingum allatum eft, et aromatibus conditum, et poft tres menfes folenniter in eadem ecclefia, quam ipfe a fundamen tis conftruxerat, venerabilem fepulturam, quam vivus pofuit, præfente rege Stephano cum multis magnatibus, accepit." Matth. Wefminf. p. 35, fol. Lond. 1570. "Cadaver regis apud 66 Radingum, in ecclefia, quam ipfe fundaverat, regaliter eft fepultum, præfentibus archiepifcopis, epifcopis, et magnatibus regni." Math. Paris. p. 74, ed. Wats. Lond. 1640. Corpus deportatur ad Redyngium oppidum, magnaque funerali pompa fepulturæ datur." Polydore Vergil, p. 193, ed. Bafil. 1534. It is not therefore improbable, as fo much ceremony was used in his funeral, that it fhould be extended alfo to the place, and that he should be laid in fomething better than a common grave, efpecially as we find mention made of his tomb: Pat. 21 Ric. II. p. 3. m. 16, "confirm. libertatum, modo abbas intra unum annum honefte repararet tumbam et imaginem regis Henrici fundatoris ibidem humati." Tann. Notitia Monaftica, p. 15, Lond. 1744. There is another circumftance which makes ftill more against it. He is faid, by writers of good authority, to have been buried in the church. "His bodie was conveied into England, and buried at Reading within the abbey church which he had founded." Holinjb. Chron. vol. III. p. 45. "This town King Henry I. moft ftately beautified with a rich monaftery, where, in the collegiate church of the abbey, himself and queene (who both lay veiled and crowned), with their daughter Maud the empreffe, called the lady of England, were interred, as the private history of the place avoucheta, though others bes 12 Body lately found at Reading not that of Henry I. flow the bodies of thefe two queenes elfewhere." Speed's Theatre of the Emp. of Great Britain, p. 27, ed. Lond. 1614. One writer fpecifies the fpor as before the altar: Corpus itaque Radingas delatum cum honore debito in ipfa ecclefia ante altare fepultum eft." Gervafe of Cant. v. Hiftoriæ Angliæ Scriptores Decem, p. 1340, ed. I ond. 1652. From thefe evidences, and from other conclufions, there appears every reafon to believe that he was buried there. Now, by the plan of this church, ingeniously and accurately traced by Sir Henry Englefield, bart. v. Archæologia, vol. VI. p. 61, it appears, that the extreme boundary on the eastern fide is at the diftance of about 180 feet from the piece of wall, against which a fmall houfe is built. The diftance of the spot where the coffin was dug up from the abovementioned piece of wall is about 240 feet towards the caft, and about 24 towards the fouth, which can never have been within the limits of the church. The account of the fragments of rotten leather, I own, ftumbled me much. I found your correfpondent's information, that Henry I. was wrapped in tanned ox-hides, confirmed by almoft every writer who has mentioned his death. This appeared to carry much weight with it, and, of circumstantial evidences, was indeed one of the ftrongeft that could be adduced. I accordingly ap plied to a friend on the fpot to fend me the most minute intelligence with refpect to the leather; and from his let ter, which is now before me, it is plain they can have no authority in the prefent queftion. I will give you his own words: "So far from the pieces of leather giving an indication of its being Henry I. that the plumber affured me thofe pieces were the remnants of an old flipper, which, though perfect when difcovered, crumbled to pieces as foon as touched, and left nothing of its hape and form but the flitches, which were very difcernible." His account of the coffin is, that it was about & feet Jong, 7 inches high, rooted at the top, the nidge Auted, and remarkably thick with lead; that the lid was ornamented with a few ftuds in form of diamonds; that there was an infcription in brafs, which was fent to the Antiquarian Society, undiftinguishable except the two initial letters, which the plumber does not now recollect. He further adds, that the fkull was examined by a very iful and experienced furgeon of Readna who gave it as his opinion, that it was of a young perfon under 30 years of age; and that the plumber affured him he had not the leaft idea that it could be the coffin of Henry I. from the ftate of the lead, which was caft in the modern manner, as they had not at that time attained to fo great perfection in cafting it. There feems, therefore, every reafon to fuppofe that it was not the body of Henry I. It is probable he was buried in a vault; but no vault was here difcovered the fpot where the coffin was found by no means agrees with the place of his burial, mentioned by hiftorians; the fragments of rotten leather, the only argument which feemed to be of weight, are proved to have no authority; and, from other appearances, there are evident marks both of a later date, and of a younger perfon. Perhaps alfo the length of the coffin may be fome proof against it, as Henry is faid to have been of middling ftature. But there is another circumftance, which, if true, will put the matter paft all doubt. It is expressly faid by Sandford, that, at the Reformation, his tomb was deftroyed, and his bones thrown out." But well might the memory thereof (his monument) perish, and be buried in the rubbish of oblivion, when the bones of this prince could not enjoy repofe in his grave (not more happy in a quiet fepulchre than the two Norman Williams, his father and brother), but were (upon the fuppreffion of the religious houfes in the reign of K. Henry VIII.) thrown out, to make room for a stable of borfes, and the whole monaftery converted to a dwelling-house. He then quotes thefe verfes, which are alfo in Camden. "Hæccine fed pietas? heu! dira piacula, primum Neuftrius Henricus fitus hic inglorius urna, Nunc jacet eje&us, tumulum novus advena quærit Fruftra; nam regi tenues invidit arenas Auri facra fames, regum metuenda fepul chris." Sandford's Geneal. Hift. p. 28. Lond. 1683. Camden, p. 143, ed. Gibfon, Lond. 1695. We know how the intolerant zeal of the Reformers operated, when the most ftately abbies, and the moft venerable remains of antient architecture, were laid without diftinction in the general ruin. The abbey of Reading in particular bears marks of the most unwearied induftry employed in its deftruc tion. Tomb of Henry I. demolisbed,--Anecdotes of Dr. Cooper. tion. One of the principal charges against the Duke of Somerfet, under whom others relate this abbey was deftroyed, is his fury in the demolition of tombs. Several writers exprefsly confirm the fact of the demolition of that of Henry I. It is not, therefore, probable that the rage of the deftroyers would ftop here; that they would fpare the bones of him whofe tomb they were demolishing, and whofe edifices they were levelling in the duft. In difcoveries like the prefent, where any thing curious is expected, it is im poffible to reftrain the minds of the common people, who will infallibly take thofe fteps by which most money may be obtained. It is not therefore wonderful if many of the-bones were taken away, with the hopes of felling them as valuable remains, and the coffin immediately difpofed of. Your correfpondent, however, may reft fatisfied with this affurance, that, as foon as the thing was known, there was an immediate order from the mayor that no bones fhould be carried away, and that they were most of them peaceably depofited again with the reft that were dug up. As to the coffin, as it had nothing remarkable in it, its lofs is not much to be lamented. The end of all antiquities feems to be, by collecting the remains of our ancestors, to obtain more certain information concerning them, to mark their progrefs in arts and science, and, by an attentive furvey of their productions, to ftrike out improve. ments for the benefit of the living. Thofe antiquities, therefore, which are regarded merely for their antiquity, are of little intrinsic value. If they elucidate no point in hiftory, if they tend not to afcertain the ftate of antient manners or of antient art, mankind will be little the better for them. They may at first be regarded with fome degree of enthufiafm, but that will be confined to the antiquary himself, and with him it will foon fubfide, when the mind is at leifure to confider their ufelefsnefs. I readily agree with your correfpondent in his encomiums on the late Mr. Spicer; but he is much mistaken if he thinks there are not ftill many gentlemen in Reading, who would be equally active in preventing any thing that bore the appearance of the facrilege he mentions. Mr. P. is guilty of a little mistake in mentioning Henry the Firft's death as on the 2d of September. He will find corrected in the note at the bottom of 13 t; page 199, vol. I. of Rapin, ed. Lond," 1732. John Brompton, Matthew of Paris, Henry of Huntingdon, and Roger Howeden, fay December the ift Matthew of Weftminster, and Gervafe of Canterbury, Dec. 2. The fact is, he died at midnight, Dec. 1, which might eafily occafion this variation. "Calendas Decembris qua nocte deceffit." William of Malmesbury. Vide Rerum Angl. Script. poft Bedam, p. 100, ed. Lond. 1596. JUVENIS. Yours, &c. Mr. URBAN, Oxford, Dec. 12. ing attempted, in various periodical publications, to wound the eputation of the rev. Miles Cooper, LL.D. who died at Edinburgh laft March, it induced me to draw up the following sketch of his life and character. In 1762, Dr. Cooper being a fellow of Queen's College. Oxford, diftinguifhed for virtue and learning, Archbishop Secker, the great ornament to human nature, piety, and literature, appointed him prefident of King's College at New York. On his arrival in America, and taking poffeffion of the college, he was arraigned (according to the cuftom of that country) before tribunals of deacons, faints, mobs, and gospel minifters, to difcover whether he was a man of grace or a man of fin; and, in the courfe of fifteen years, they found a verdict against him, viz. Dr. Myles Cooper is guilty of five capital crimes, vix integrity, univerfal benevolence, a faithful veneration for the church of England and the house of Hanover, a friendship for polite literature, a diflike of pure licentious liberty, and the American vine planted in the bowling wilderness by St. Oliver and the heroic regicides of the last century. Thofe tryers convicted the Doctor alfo of being ignorant of the Proteftant and Gofpel meaning of pure liberty, confcience, conftitution, whiggifin, and Magna Charta; they also cenfured him for the fin of hospitality, and for entertaining gentlemen with an elegant dinner and a glass of wine ;—in fhort, the Doctor was found to be a polite and generous Englishman, without any figns of true American grace, and, therefore, an impure innovator of cuftoms not known among the gospel minifters, nor in the colleges of New-England. In the year 1775, the faints decreed to wreak their vengeance on Cooper's $4 Anecdotes of Dr. Cooper.-Bowing at the Name of Jefus, Governor Tryon, Dr. Cooper, and other loyalifts, faved their lives by taking fhelter on board of his Majefty's fhips of war; while the mobs, deacons, faints, and gofpel minifters, fpoiled their goods, drank up their liquors, and stole Cooper's library, worth 600l. fterling, for the fake of the vine. They alfo ftole the library of King's College, which was given by Lord Bute, the bishops, the univerfities of England and Ireland, and many lords and gentlemen, on account of the amiable character and literary fame of Prefident Cooper. In 1775, Dr. Cooper having been robbed of his library and effects, he came to England, and was chofen preacher at the royal epifcopal chapel in Edinburgh, where attends one of the moft polite and learned congregations in Europe, from whom the Doctor received every attention and mark of civility, as well as from the established clergy of the antient and learned kingdom of Scotland. Yet, notwithstand ing, the ulcerated and feceding confcience of Ximenes, whofe religious and political tenets accord with thofe of his brethren in America, led him to fill up the grave of Dr. Cooper with perfecution, malice, and fcandal; and we have reafon to believe he acted upon the ig noble maxim of his Proteftant judge of New-York, who fays, "a prudent hiftorian is always a coward, and will never give fire till death protects him from the ftroke of his enemy." SASSICUS. The university of Oxford, in particular, prefented a copy of every work printed at their prefs. EDIT. Mr. URBAN, ACCEPT a few miscellaneous obfer vations*. I fhould be glad to know for what reafon our Reformed church retains the cuftom of bowing at the name of JESUS; and when, and by whom, the obfervance was established. It tends, I am convinced, to no good, and therefore I fhould rejoie if it were abolished. I refpect the church into which I have been received, and with her liberated from follies and fopperies which disfigure and difgrace her. 1 St. Paul fays, 1 Cor. xiv. 26, "Let all things be done to edifying." This exclufive worthip we pay the SoN, to the neglecting his Almighty FATHER, is, I doubt, neither well nor devoutly managed. It is reported of the great Boyle, that he never mentioned the name of GOD, without manifefting by his attitude his veneration for his Maker, And fuch piety was pure, rational, and edifying." But to pafs by the " King Immortal," and transfer to the Exalted what is due to the Exalter, I fear this "is not done to edifying." I know it has been replied, that this bowing does not, neither is it meant to fignify any fuch exclufive worship of the SON as I have above objected to; that its intention is to exprefs merely our ready acknowledgement of JESUS and his authority; that by fo doing we de clare ourselves his faithful difciples and fubmiffive fubjects; that he is our maf ter, and claims our adoration, But neir ther will these anfwers be univerfally agreed to, nor will they bear the teft of examination. They will even fhrink from our artempt to fubject them to it. Outward demonftrations of devotion refpect our brethren and ourselves. In the first inftance, their defign is unifor mity. To the end "that all things being done decently, and in order;" diftraction and contrariety disturb us not. For the GoD we worship" is not the author of confufion, but of peace." And on this I need fcarcely expatiate. They operate, fecondly, in confe. quence of the intimate connection between certain actions and certain trains of thought. The power and laws of mental affociation have been frequently explained, and are now well known. If the mind governs the body, the body in *We have ufed the liberty given us by this correfpondent, whofe favours have always been esteemed. EDIT. its On the Ceremonies of the Church.-Mr. Davis.-A Meteor. its turn, influences the mind. Attitudes which at one time express our pious feel. ings, may, at another time, excite them. As, when we pray, we generally kneel, fo when we kneel we may often be in duced to pray. And hence arifes the utility of fuch obfervances, if rightly understood, and their danger if perverted. And that this mifapprehenfion and perverfion may eafily take place, is evident from the example of our neighbours, who wander ignorantly in the mifts of Roman Catholic fuperftition. Some may thus bow to JESUS only, till they forget HIM that railed up from the dead, and at whole right hand JESUS fitteth. But they urge again, this difcriminates us as Chriftians. So there is great need, they think, of this in a Chriftian country, and in Chriftian churches? It diftinguishes us from Socinians and free ibinkers, who deny the divinity of Christ, the jecond perfon in the Godhead. But thofe you mention reject allo the third. Yet you bow not to him. Is he no perfon? The Athanafian will hardly fay fo. Anfwer me then, "how is it done to edifying?" Though not exactly the fame, I have as ftrong objections to the amen, as fo frequently and lifelessly repeated, and to the turning about at the Creed, to ridiculously practifed in our churches. Not long ago I was in a congregation where a clergyman at the altar, another in the defk, the clerk, and the charity children, turned each different ways. 1 aik, what kind of impreffion mut this make on weak minds, too prone already to take the fhadow for the fubftance? A good and proper one? Surely not. No one, that knows me or my principles, will even bint that I am for doing away of all ceremonies; for it is my firm, and I believe well-grounded, cpinion, that they frequently produce in us, as well as evidence, the quiet affurance of GOD's prefence, and refigned proftration of ourfelves before HIM, which HE regards favourably. The fhrinking inward, and, as it were, accumulation of ourfelves, which kneeling promotes, is a filent yet ftriking expreffion of contrite humility, and a beautiful emblem of that earneft meditation on, and retired enjoy. ment of, and devout fubmiflion to, the Divine Grace, which is the fruit of a true and living faith. Let us, therefore, bow before the aweful Majefty of Heaven, and fall trembling before our Judge, when we plead for mercy. Yet iet not our honourings be merely mouth-ho 15 nourings, left, while we appear to draw nigh unto HIM with our lips, we be far from HIM in our hearts; nor unprofit able mortifications, left, while we afflict the body, the fpirit remain ftill unchaftened; nor yet partial or unmeaning rewerences, left, while we court the SON, the anger of the FATHER be kindled against us, or our worship be accounted foolishness. Your humane and gentlemanlike correfpondent C. L. (fee Magazine for laft May, p. 348), fhould recollect that I never abufed Mr. Davis, nor his book, till they had been cried up to the prejudice of Mr. Gibbon. Of Mr. Davis's publication my opinion is fill the fame, unfavourable: of his perfonal character, what it always was, a good one. ver intended to infult his memory, and if I have, I am forry. Yet he was then, as he is now, much above my praise; and equally above my cenfure. I ne What Vindex has faid weighs nothing' with me; for it is affertion without proof, and railing without argument. I would recommend it to this gentleman to publish a new fpelling-book, for I fe he has done me the honour to correct mine. Sept. 24, near Walthamstow, I obferved a fmall meteor moving very quickly in almott the fame direction with thofe of the year 1782. It was of very fmall fize, ct much larger than a pea, but exceeding bright. It vanished ioon after it had paffed the zenith. The time, as near as I can recolle&t, about 20 minutes before teven; the evening clear and warm. Its duration not above 39 or 40 feconds. The following epigram was written by a young gentleman of Oxford, and repeated to me fome time ago by a friend fince dead. I think it is worth preferving. While fo many the favours of Fortune poliefs, Why does Prudence fo feldom her followers blefs? The reafon is this, we may fafely conclude, |