Ramists in England. In 1580 he replied in print to an impeachment of Ramus's position by Everard Digby (fl. 1590) [q. v.] Adopting the pseudonym of Franciscus Mildapettus of Navarre (Ramus had studied in youth at the Parisian College de Navarre), he issued a tract entitled 'Francisci Mildapetti Navarreni ad Everardum Digbeium Anglum admonitio de unica P. Rami methodo reiectis caeteris retinenda,' London (by Henry Middleton for Thomas Mann), 1580. The work was dedicated to Philip Howard, first earl of Arundel, whose acquaintance Temple had made while the earl was studying at Cambridge. Digby replied with great heat next year, and Temple retorted with a volume published under his own name. This he again dedicated to the Earl of Arundel, whom he described as his Maecenas, and he announced to him his identity with the pseudonymous 'Mildapettus.' Temple's second tract bore the title, 'Pro Mildapetti de unica Methodo Defensione contra Diplodophilum [i.e. Digby] commentatio Gulielmi Tempelli e regio Collegio Cantabrigiensi.' He appended to the volume an elaborate epistle addressed to another champion of Aristotle and opponent of Ramus, Johannes Piscator of Strasburg, professor at Herborn. Temple's contributions to the controversy attracted notice abroad, and this volume was reissued at Frankfort in 1584 (this reissue alone is in the British Museum). Meanwhile in 1582 Temple had concentrated his efforts on Piscator's writings, and he published in 1582 a second letter to Piscator with the latter's full reply. This volume was entitled 'Gulielmi Tempelli Philosophi Cantabrigiensis Epistola de Dialecticis P. Rami ad Joannem Piscatorem Argentinensem una cum Joannis Piscatoris ad illam epistolam responsione,' London (by Henry Middleton for John Harrison and George Bishop), 1582. Meanwhile, on 11 July 1581, Temple had supplicated for incorporation as M.A. at Oxford (Foster, Alumni Oxon.), and soon afterwards he left Cambridge to take up the office of master of the Lincoln grammar ' school. In 1584 he made his most valuable contribution to the dispute between the Ramists and Aristotelians by publishing an annotated edition of Ramus's 'Dialectics.' It was published at Cambridge by Thomas Thomas, the university printer, and is said to have been the first book that issued from the university press (Mullinger, Hist. of Cambridge University, ii. 405). The work bore the title, 'P. Rami Dialecticae libri duo scholiis G. Tempelli Cantabrigiensis illustrati.' A further reply to Piscator was appended. The dedication was addressed by Temple from Lincoln under date 4 Feb. to Sir Philip Sidney. In the same year Temple contributed a long preface, in which he renewed with spirit the war on Aristotle, to the 'Disputatio de prima simplicium et concretorum corporum generatione,' by a fellow Ramist, James Martin [q. v.] of Dunkeld, professor of philosophy at Turin. This also came from Thomas's press at Cambridge: it was republished at Frankfort in 1589. In the same place there was issued in 1591 a severe criticism of both Martin's argument and Temple's preface by an Aristotelian, Andreas Libavius, in his 'Quaestionum Physicarum controversarum inter Peripateticos et Rameos Tractatus' (Frankfort, 1591). Temple's philosophical writings attracted the attention of Sir Philip Sidney, to whom the edition of Ramus's 'Dialectics' was dedicated in 1584, and Sidney marked his appreciation by inviting Temple to become his secretary in November 1585, when he was appointed governor of Flushing. He was with Sidney during his fatal illness in the autumn of the following year, and his master died in his arms (17 Oct. 1586). Sidney left him by will an annuity of 30l. Temple's services were next sought successively by William Davison [q. v.], the queen's secretary, and Sir Thomas Smith [q. v.], clerk of the privy council (Birch, Memoirs of Elizabeth, ii. 106). But about 1594 he joined the household of Robert Devereux, second earl of Essex, and for many years performed secretarial duties for the earl in conjunction with Anthony Bacon [q. v.], Henry Cuff [q. v.], and Sir Henry Wotton [q. v.] In 1597 he was, by Essex's influence, returned to parliament as member for Tamworth in Staffordshire. He seems to have accompanied Essex to Ireland in 1599, and to have returned with him next year. When Essex was engaged in organising his rebellion in London in the winter of 1600-1, Temple was still in his service, together with one Edward Temple, whose relationship to William, if any, has not been determined. Edward Temple knew far more of Essex's treasonable design than William, who protested in a letter to Sir Robert Cecil, written after Essex's arrest, that he was kept in complete ignorance of the plot (Brit. Mus. Addit. MS. 4160, No. 78; Spedding, Bacon, ii. 364). No proceedings were taken against either of the Temples. William Temple's fortunes were prejudiced by Essex's fall. Sir Robert Cecil is said to have viewed him with marked disfavour. Consequently, despairing of success in political affairs, Temple turned anew to literary study. In 1605 he brought out, with a dedi-
