Finally reference may be made to a _Letter_, because stated to have been previously unpublished, which may be found in the “Eastern Counties Collectanea,” in which he exhaustively discusses the nature of _a large fish-bone_ dug up at Cunnington, and which had been sent to him for his opinion upon it. To sum up—Sir Kenelm Digby writes to Sir T. Browne, of the _Religio Medici_ as “Your excellent piece, . . . of so weighty subjects, and so strongly penned.” Dr. Johnson says of him “There is no science of which he does not discover some skill; and scarce any kind of knowledge profane or sacred, obstruse or elegant, which he does not appear to have cultivated with success.” Carlyle says “The conclusion of the essay on urn burial is absolutely beautiful; a still elegiac mood, so soft, so solemn and tender, like the song of some departed saint flitting faint under the everlasting canopy of night—an echo of deepest meaning from the great and mighty nations of the dead. Browne must have been a good man.” Evelyn, as I have already quoted, writes of him as “That famous scholar and physician.” And to come nearer home, the late Captain Blakiston, in a paper read before the Archæological Institute, in Norwich, in 1847, writes of him as a “Great Antiquarian and eminent citizen; . . . a quaint and original thinker;” and as “Leaving behind him a shining reputation.” By general consent Sir Thomas Browne was recognised, not only as a “curious thinker,” but as a man of remarkable and original talent even in his lifetime, and the same reputation continued after his death. His works have always been regarded as those of a strong and original thinker, and they have never been held in higher estimation than at the present time. And I think I may fairly repeat that the more his writings are studied the more does their learning and power impress itself upon our understanding. With many faults, with many shortcomings—as judged by the standard of the present day—they yet remain the monument of genius, and worthy to be classed amongst the highest productions of great and cultivated intellects. Norwich may be well proud of so great a citizen—of one whose memory is held in higher and yet higher esteem, and who is justly regarded as one of the greatest of her literary men. Perhaps the only drawback to our satisfaction is the fact that he was not a native of Norwich. And in this sense we cannot claim him as our own, as we are proud to claim so many of our citizens, who have distinguished themselves in literature, in science, in botany, in departments of natural history, in medicine, and in painting. But Norwich can look upon him with pride as an adopted son, as one who elected to live the whole of his working life in this city; and who identified himself so absolutely with it, that his name is inseparable from it, and who will be known for all time as Sir Thomas Browne, of Norwich. * * * * *