John Earle or Earles, 1601–1665, entered at Merton Coll., Oxford, 1620, became chaplain and tutor to Prince Charles, and accompanied him in his exile. On the Restoration he was made Dean of Westminster, consecrated Bishop of Worcester in 1662, and transferred to Salisbury in 1663. “Microcosmographie; or, A Peece of the World discovered in Essayes and Characters,” Lon., 1628, 8vo; 6th ed., 1630, 12mo; 10th ed., Salisbury, 1786. New ed. (78 characters) with Notes and Appendix, by Philip Bliss, Lon., 1811, sm. 8vo. This ed. contains a Catalogue of the various Writers of Character to the year 1700…. “An Elegy upon Francis Beaumont,” by Bishop Earle, will be found printed at the end of Beaumont’s Poems, 1640. He trans. into Latin the Eikon Basilike, (Hague, 1649), and Hooker’s “Ecclesiastical Polity;” the last was destroyed by the carelessness of his servants. The character of Bishop Earle was most exemplary.

Personal

  Doctor Earles was at that Time Chaplain in the House to the Earl of Pembroke, Lord Chamberlain of his Majesty’s Household, and had a Lodging in the Court under that Relation: He was a Person very notable for his Elegance in the Greek and Latin Tongues; and being Fellow of Merton College in Oxford, and having been Proctor of the University, and some very witty, and sharp Discourses being published in Print without his Consent, though known to be his, He grew suddenly into a very general Esteem with all Men; being a Man of great Piety and Devotion; a most eloquent and powerful Preacher; and of a Conversation so pleasant and delightful, so very innocent, and so very facetious, that no Man’s Company was more desired, and more loved. No man was more negligent in his Dress, and Habit, and Mien; no Man more wary, and cultivated, in his Behaviour, and Discourse; insomuch as He had the greater Advantage when He was known, by promising so little before He was known. He was an excellent Poet both in Latin, Greek, and English, as appears by many Pieces yet abroad: though He suppressed Many More himselfe, especially of English, incomparably good, out of an Austerity to those Sallies of his Youth…. He was amongst the few excellent Men who never had, nor never could have an Enemy, but such a one, who was an Enemy to all Learning, and Virtue, and therefore would never make himselfe known.

  He was the man of all the Clergy for whom the King had the greatest esteem. He had been his sub-tutor, and had followed him in all his exile with so clear a Character, that the King could never see or hear of any one thing amiss in him. So he, who had a secret pleasure in finding out any thing that lessened a man esteemed eminent for piety, yet had a value for him beyond all the men of his order.

General

  Perhaps the most valuable collection of characters, previous to the year 1700, is that published by Bishop Earle, in 1628, under the title of “Microcosmography,” and which may be considered as a pretty faithful delineation of many classes of characters as they existed during the close of the sixteenth, and commencement of the seventeenth century.

  In some of these short characters, Earle is worthy of comparison with La Bruyère; in others, perhaps the greater part, he has contented himself with pictures of ordinary manners, such as the varieties of occupation, rather than of intrinsic character, supply. In all, however, we find an acute observation and a happy humor of expression. The chapter entitled the Sceptic is best known: it is witty, but an insult throughout on the honest searcher after truth, which could have come only from one that was content to take up his own opinions for ease or profit. Earle is always gay, and quick to catch the ridiculous, especially that of exterior appearances: his style is short, describing well with a few words, but with much of the affected quaintness of that age. It is one of those books which give us a picturesque idea of the manners of our fathers at a period now become remote; and for this reason, were there no other, it would deserve to be read.

  Earle is preserved from pedantry by the liveliness of his wit, while his wit itself has in it a salt nobler than the Attic—the savour of pure and unaffected piety.

  The one strain in character which throughout afflicts him most, and for which he reserves his most distilled contempt, is the strain of unreality—the affectation whose sin is always to please, and which fails so singularly of its object. Hypocrisy, pretension, falseness—against everything which has that lack of simplicity so fatal to true life he sets his face. For the rest he can hardly read the enigma; he only states it reverently.